1943-03-01

[Stage Direction]
TABLING OF CHART OF DEPARTMENTAL ORGANIZATION *
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: I desire to lay on the table the chart of organization of the Department of Munitions and Supply, and for the convenience of members wrhen discussing the departmental bill I would ask that the chart be published in the Votes and Proceedings.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: If I might be permitted, Mr. Speaker, the chart is on a substantial scale and if it is incorporated in Votes and Proceedings it would have to appear on a very small scale. Could the minister have photostatic copies made so that each member might receive a copy on a separate sheet?


Clarence Decatur Howe: On a previous occasion the chart was published in Votes and Proceedings as a folder. I presume the printing bureau did exactly what my hon. friend now suggests.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It would be more convenient to have it on a separate sheet.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I can bring in the desired number of sheets in that form, if my hon.. friend so wishes.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbuiy):: Thank you.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. ESLING:: 1.	Since the operation of the soldier settlement board in 1919, down to December 31, 1942, what sums of money have been placed at the disposal of the soldier settlement board for the purchase of lands?
2.	How many separate parcels of land were purchased during that period?
3.	To how many parcels of land does the board now retain title?
4.	How many parcels of land are actually-occupied and producing returns to the board?

Questions
5.	What sum, on account of such parcels, was returned to the board in 1942?
6.	.Since the operation of the act, what is the total amount written off for (a) revaluation, (b) reduction under Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, (e) bonuses?
7.	From 1918 to December 31, 1942, what is the total received from settlers by way of principal payments?
8.	What is the total sum received by way of interest?
9.	Since the operation of the board what is the aggregate sum paid in salaries for administration and what is the total amount incurred for expenses other than salaries?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	The sum of $61,205,617.92 has been disbursed for the purchase of lands.
2 and 3. Records are not maintained in a manner to answer these questions in the specific form asked. From 1918 to 1924-the active loaning period of soldier settlement operations-17,456 loans were made to purchase properties; 2,463 loans were made on security of first mortgage; 4,229 loans were made to settlers on dominion lands, the security being a first charge on such lands. As at December 31, 1942, there were 14,429 active loans of all classes, as follows: 6,824 soldier settlers; 6.338 civilian purchasers; 1,142 British family settlers; 125 New Brunswick family scheme settlers. There were 1,528 properties on hand for resale.
4.	As at December 31, 1942, there were 15,742 active loans and properties leased. 215 properties, were unoccupied.
5.	The total repayments in 1942 were $2,595,366.29.
6.	Since the operation of the Act the following total amounts have been written off to December 31, 1942:
(a)	Revaluation, $7,479,344.75; (b) Reduction under Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, $13,233,393.13; (c) Bonuses, $5,321,414.98.
7.	The total received by way of principal payments to December 31, 1942, was $43,264,734.84.
8.	The total sum received by way of interest to December 31, 1942, was $24,056,711.45.
9.	Since the operation of the Board the
aggregate sum paid in salaries for administration was-	.
Salaries, $20,325,246.85 to December 31/42; Expenses other than salaries, $10,243,534.48 to December 31/42. Total, $30,568,781.33.


GENERAL ENGINEERING COMPANY
Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	Are land, buildings and equipment of the fuse filling plant at Scarboro, Ontario, owned by the government?
2.	If so, does it operate on a cost-plus basis?
3.	Who supplied the land, and at what cost?
4.	Who supplied the buildings, and at what cost?
5.	Who supplied the machinery?
6.	Who operates the cafeteria?
7.	What salaries are paid in this plant at or in excess of $3,000 per annum, and to whom are they paid?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	This plant is operated by the General Engineering Company (Canada) Ltd. on a management-fee basis.
3.	The land was acquired by expropriation on January 27th, 1941, April 1st, 1941, and additional land on December 17th, 1941, totalling 272 acres. It was acquired from seven proprietors, as follows:
Total Price
A. S. Crichton	 $27,000
E. A. Burke Estate	 11,000
L. G. Hough	 2,500
W. C. Hough	 6,500
Hough Estate	 10,000
Harris Estate	 23,180
Settlement on a small parcel of about 8J acres is still pending.
4.	The British government supplied the buildings at a cost of $4,462,692.35 for new buildings.
5.	The machinery was procured through Citadel Merchandizing Company from various machine tool contractors with funds supplied jointly by Canadian and British governments.
6.	The government through its project management contractors, the General Engineering Company (Canada) Ltd.
7.	No information.
WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD-ENFORCEMENT l	DIVISION
Mr. BENCE.
1.	What are the names of the administrators and other officials of the enforcement division of the wartime prices and trade board situated in the city of Ottawa?
2.	What were the addresses and occupations of such administrators and officials immediately prior to their appointments to this branch?
3.	What is the salary and other remuneration of the said administrators and officials?


Mr. ILSLEY:: F. A. McGregor, enforcement administrator, permanent official of the Department of Labour, Ottawa, no additional remuneration; H. M. Brown, deputy enforcement administrator, permanent official of the Department of Labour, Ottawa, no additional remuneration; P. J. Macdonald, enforcement counsel, Ottawa Region, formerly in private legal practice, Ottawla, salary $3,300 per annum.
Questions


POSTAL SERVICE-&quot;LONDON ECHO&quot;
Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: 1.	On what date and under what authority and regulations did the periodical known as
. the London Echo qualify as a newspaper for the postal rate of one cent per four ounces?
2.	On what date and to whom was a copy of this periodical submitted for inspection, as required by section 47 of the Canada Official Postal Guide?
3.	Is this periodical being addressed to local subscribers as required by section 40 of the Canada Official Postal Guide?
4.	What is the annual subscription rate of this newspaper?
5.	Is this newspaper being delivered by letter carriers to subscribers only or is it being delivered to householders on the carriers' route?
6.	What extra weight does the delivery of this newspaper by letter carrier add, on the average, to the burden each letter carrier is required to deliver?


Mr. MULOCK:: 1.	In 1879. Section 22 of the Post Office Act of 1875. Records destroyed many years ago.
2.	1879. Postmaster General. Exact date not available. Case reviewed in 1937, by the then Postmaster General, who decided that the Echo should be considered a bona fide newspaper under the provisions of the Post Office Act.
3.	Owing to the depleted Post Office staffs and the difficulty of finding replacements, it is considered undesirable to insist on the technical requirements of individual addressing. The absence of addresses greatly facilitates Post Office handling by eliminating entirely, the time ordinarily occupied in reading addresses in the usual process of sortation. This saves time and work for sortation clerks and letter carriers. Copies for delivery in the city of London not addressed to local subscribers are distributed to non subscribers and postage charged thereon at the rate applicable to such copies.
4.	$1.
5.	Householders. See answer to No. 3.
6.	Approximately 85| pounds spread over two and sometimes three deliveries. To reduce weight to be taken out by the carriers, papers are put up in several bundles which are distributed by truck to strategic points, where they are picked up by letter carriers in the course of delivery.



ST. HYACINTHE, QUE., NAVY BUILDINGS CONTRACT

Mr. BENCE:: 1.	Have contracts been awarded for navy buildings at St. Hyaeinthe, Quebec?
2.	If so, what is or will be the total cost thereof?
IMr. Ilsley.]
3.	When was construction commenced?
4.	If construction has not been completed when is it anticipated that it will be?
5.	Why was St. Hyaeinthe selected for the erection of such building?


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: 1.	Yes. A contract for part of the proposed establishment at St. Hyaeinthe has been let.
2.	The contract let is in the amount of 8612,514, and the total cost of the construction will be $2,624,000 (estimated).
3.	Construction was commenced on the initial contract on January 5, 1943.
4.	It is expected that the construction on the initial contract will be completed June 30, 1943. Plans and specifications for the remaining programme are now in the course of preparation, and tenders are expected about May 1, with the completion of this remaining programme on January 31, 1943.
5.	The Naval signal school was moved from Halifax to St. Hyaeinthe in October 1941 because buildings under the jurisdiction of the army were available in St. Hyaeinthe and no other suitable accommodation could be found in eastern Canada. It is necessary to increase the capacity of the school from 800 to 2,600 and it is more economical to add to the existing plant than to build afresh in a new place.



RADIO BROADCASTING-&quot;OUR CANADA&quot;

Mr. GAUTHIER:: 1.	Is the dominion government responsible for or author of the sketch "Our Canada" broadcast over the French network of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation?
2.	Is the same sketch broadcast in the other provinces over the English network, and if so, what is its title?
3.	On what day is the English version broadcast?
4.	If the government is not responsible for the sketch what is the name of the author?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	"Our Canada" is a programme of the national war finance committee broadcast over a French network.
2.	Similar programmes under the title "Nazi Eyes on Canada" were broadcast over an English network, but have been replaced by another programme.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	The basis of the programme is a translation of the book by Colin Ross.



VETERANS' LAND SETTLEMENT ACT

Mr. LEADER:: 1.	WTiat action is the government taking towards setting up a working arrangement with

Questions
the municipalities in selecting lands for the reestablishment of our returned soldiers under the Veterans' Land Settlement Act?
2.	How many veterans have made application for settlement under the Veterans' Land Settlement Act?
3.	What number in each of the several provinces?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	The Veterans' Land Act 1942 and regulations made thereunder provide for the appointment of regional advisory committees in all provinces to advise the director in such matters as the selection of lands and the qualification of veterans. There will be several regional committees in each of the larger provinces. These committees will establish working contacts with municipalities and other agencies. In addition, each province has been invited to set up a small committee headed by its minister of agriculture to serve as a working contact with the director and his officers in such matters as areas suitable for veteran settlement.
2.	668.
3. British Columbia, 92; Alberta, 64; Saskatchewan, 41; Manitoba, 22; Ontario, 243; Quebec, 120; New Brunswick, 39; Nova Scotia, 42; Prince Edward Island, 5.



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE-RADIO TECHNICIANS

Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	Has the Minister of National Defence for Air formulated any plans for the recognition, by way of promotion for merit, of radio technicians of the R.C.A.F. who are serving overseas?
2.	If so, when will they be put into force?


Mr. MARSHALL:: In view of the explanation made a day or so ago by the minister, I ask that this question be dropped.
Question dropped.



RATION BOOKS

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What action has the government taken with regard to new rationing books so as to secure an improvement in the complex system now in vogue ?
2.	Has the government consulted or secured advice from experts of public utilities or large industrial heads as to adopting a system of books to cover all rationing?
3.	What is the estimated cost of mailing the new books as formerly, instead of having them picked up, and how are they now to be distributed?
4.	What, if any, practical experience in the food industry have those who prepare these orders ever had?
5.	What has been the practical experience, if any, in the food business, of those who prepare these orders?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	The wartime prices and trade board is continually working towards the simplification of its rationing machinery. The new ration book embodies certain changes but only of minor character, as ration book 1 was essentially about as simple as any ration book could be.
2.	The ration administration has been continually in touch with the trades who deal in rationed commodities. It has consulted not only the heads of these trades but also various technical men engaged in them as well as practical men who come into actual contact with the rationing machinery. Discussions and views respecting rationing are urged and sought from the various trade organizations and large and small units in the various industries.
3.	The estimated cost of distributing the new ration books (approximately 13 million) by mail is 8500,000 on the basis of one cent for the postcard and three cents for the book. Local ration boards now functioning in approximately 500 key communities across Canada have set up thousands of distribution centres where people may call for their ration book No. 2.
4 and 5. The ration administration is in continual close contact with representatives of the food industry and their advice is sought in the preparation of ration orders. These orders are prepared under the supervision of the senior solicitor of the wartime prices and trade board who consults with representatives from the Department of Agriculture. These representatives are thoroughly trained in the problems of the food industry.



DISPOSITION OF NAVAL OFFICERS

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What percentage of naval officers are,
(a)	at sea, (b) at headquarters, Ottawa, (c) on shore duty at Halifax, (d) on shore duty at Esquimalt, (e) on shore duty at training divisions?


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: 1.	(a) 38 per cent wholly employed at sea;
(b)	9 per cent at N.S.H.Q.; (c) 22 per cent are based at Halifax, many of whom have both sea and shore duty; (d) 8 per cent are based at Esquimalt, many of whom have both sea and shore duty; (e) 6 per cent training divisions. The remaining 17 per cent of officer personnel are based at other shore points. Many of these have both sea and shore duties.
Questions



OLD-AQE PENSIONS-REQUESTS FOR INCREASE OF MONTHLY PAYMENTS

Mr. REID:: 1.	Have any representations been made by any of the provinces in regard to increasing the amount of twenty dollars per month under the provisions of the Old Age Pension Act?
2.	If so, what province or provinces have made such request or representation during the year 1942, and to date in the present year?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Ontario. (Alberta 1941).



MINESWEEPERS

[Stage Direction]
Mr. O'BRIEN:
1.	How many minesweepers have been built?
2.	How many are now under construction?
3.	How many are now in commission?
Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: A somewhat similar question was put the other day by another hon. member and I agreed to give him the information privately. I can do that in this case, if it will be satisfactory to my hon. friend.
Mr. O'BRIEN: That will be quite satis-iactory. I would ask that this question and the next one be dropped.
Question dropped.



CORVETTES

[Stage Direction]
Mr. O'BRIEN:
1.	How many corvettes have been built in Canada?
2.	How many are now under construction?
3.	How many are now in commission?
Question dropped.

Mr. ADAMSON:: 1.	Have any oil tankers been built in Canada?
2.	If so, how many?
3.	What was the capacity of each?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	One 10,000-ton cargo vessel, built under the supervision of Wartime Merchant Shipping Limited, was converted into an oil tanker and delivered in August, 1942. Four more 10,000-ton vessels are now in process of being converted.
Contracts have recently been awarded for three 3,700-ton oil tankers.
Eight or more vessels have been built or converted as oil tankers by private companies since 1939.
2 and 3. Answered by 1.



CARGO SHIPS

[Stage Direction]
Mr. O'BRIEN:
1.	How many cargo ships and of what capacity have been delivered to the government, giving dates of delivery?
2.	How many are now in commission?
3.	How many cargo ships are now under construction in Canada?
4.	What is the gross tonnage in each case?
5.	What is the net tonnage or cargo carrying capacities of each?
Mr.   IIOWE@: I.	97 cargo ships of 10,350 tons deadweight carrying capacity each have been delivered to the government, the dates of deliveries being as follows:-
1.	SS. Fort Ville Marie, December 21, 1941.
2.	SS. Fort St. James, January 29, 1942.
3.	SS. Fort Churchill, February 21, 1942.
4.	SS. Fort Qu'Appelle, March 21, 1942.
5.	SS. Fort Nipigon, April 8, 1942.
6.	SS. Fort George, April 9, 1942.
7.	SS. Fort Tadoussac, April 18, 1942.
8.	SS. Fort Fraser, April 25, 1942.
9.	SS. Fort Louisburg, April 27, 1942.
10.	SS. Fort Chambly, April 28, 1942.
II.	SS. Fort Good Hope, May 9, 1942.
12.	SS. Fort McLoughlin, May 20, 1942.
13.	SS. Fort La Maune, May 25, 1942.
14.	SS. Fort Abitibi, May 26, 1942.
15.	SS. Fort Alexandria, May 27, 1942.
16.	SS. Fort Camosun, June 2, 1942.
17.	SS. Fort Ellice, June 4, 1942.
18.	SS. Fort Chilcotin, June 6, 1942.
19.	SS. Fort Augustus, June 13, 1942.
20.	SS. Fort Lac la Ronge, June 18, 1942.
21.	SS. Fort Babine, June 26, 1942.
22.	SS. Fort McLeod, June 30, 1942.
23.	SS. Prince Albert Park, June 30, 1942.
24.	SS. Fort La Reine, July 8, 1942.
25.	SS. Fort Chipewyan, July 9, 1942.
26.	SS. Fort Bourbon, July 15, 1942.
27.	SS. Fort Pine, July 19, 1942.
28.	SS. Gatineau Park, July 22, 1942.
29.	SS. Fort Confidence, July 27, 1942.
30.	SS. Fort Pitt, July 28, 1942.
31.	SS. Fort Battle River, July 29, 1942.
32.	SS. Fort Stikine, July 31, 1942.
33.	SS. Fort Senneville, August 3, 1942.
34.	SS. Fort Pembina, August 6, 1942.
35.	SS. Fort Douglas, August 8, 1942.
36.	SS. Fort A-la-Corne, August 13, 1942.
37.	SS. Kootenay Park, August 17, 1942.
38.	SS. Fort Kootenay, August 18, 1942.
39.	SS. Point Pelee Park, August 18, 1942.
40.	SS. Fort Pelly, August 26, 1942.
41.	SS. Mount Robson Park, August 27,
1942.
42.	SS. Fort McMurray, August 28, 1942.
43.	SS. Banff Park, September 3, 1942.
44.	SS. Fort Maurepas, September 4, 1942.

Questions
45.	SS. Fort Rae, September 9, 1942.
46.	SS. Fort Simpson, September 11, 1942.
47.	SS. Fort Liard, September 14, 1942.
48.	SS. Fort Fork, September 19, 1942.
49.	SS. Fort Norman, September 22, 1942.
50.	SS. Jasper Park, September 24, 1942.
51.	SS. Fort Gibraltar, September 26, 1942.
52.	SS. Fort Reliance, September 29, 1942.
53.	SS. Fort Rupert, October 5, 1942.
54.	SS. Fort Vermillion, October 8, 1942.
55.	SS. Fort Slave, October 10, 1942.
56.	SS. Fort Paskoyac, October 14, 1942.
57.	SS. Fort Wedderburne, October 16,
1942.
58.	SS. Fort Cataraqui, October 22, 1942.
59.	S<S. Fort Thompson, October 24, 1942.
60.	SS. Fort Hudson Hope, October 26,
1942.
61.	SS. Fort Souris, October 27, 1942.
62.	SS. Fort La Montee, October 29, 1942.
63.	SS. Fort Poplar, October 31, 1942.
64.	SS. Fort Howe, November 11, 1942.
65.	SS. Fort Brule, November 15, 1942.
66.	SS. Fort Steele, November 16, 1942.
67.	SS. Fort Concord, November 16, 1942.
68.	SS. Fort IJalkett, November 20, 1942.
69.	SS. Fort Frederick, November 28, 1942.
70.	SS. Port Royal Park, November 28, 1942.
71.	SS. Fort Livirigstone, November 29, 1942.
72.	SS. Fort Franklin, December 1, 1942.
73.	SS. Fort Yale, December 8, 1942.
74.	SS. Fort Longueuil, December 8, 1942.
75.	SS. Fort Tremblant, December 11, 1942.
76.	SS. Cedar Lake, December 12, 1942.
77.	SS. Fort Mumjord, December 12, 1942.
78.	SS. Fort St. Francois, December 14,
1942.
79.	SS. Fort Lajoie, December 16, 1942.
80.	SS. Fort La Traite, December 18, 1942.
81.	SS. Fort Anne, December 24, 1942.
82.	SS. Fort Drew, December 29, 1942.
83.	SS. Fort Lawrence, January 5, 1943.
84.	SS. Fort Finlay, January 6, 1943.
85.	SS. Fort Gaspereau, January 13, 1943.
86.	SS. Fort Fairjord, January 15, 1943.
87.	SS. Fort Jemseg, January 22, 1943.
88.	SS. Fort Rampart, January 23, 1943.
89.	SS. Fort Meductic, January 30, 1943.
90.	SS. Fort Walsh, January 31, 1943.
91.	SS. Fort Frobisher, February 3, 1943.
92.	SS. Fort Nashwaak, February 7, 1943.
93.	SS. Fort Remy, February 15, 1943.
94.	SS. Fort Chamisay, February 16, 1943.
95.	SS. Fort Stager, February 17, 1943.
96.	SS. Fort Grahame, February 19, 1943.
97.	SS. Fort Buckingham, February 23
1943.
One cargo ship of 4,700 tons deadweight carrying capacity was delivered to the government on February 15, 1943, as follows:
SS. Rockwood Park, delivered February 15, 1943.
2.	All ships mentioned in No. 1 are in commission, with the exception of those which have been lost at sea.
3.	There are now in various stages of construction in Canada 58 ships of 10,350 tons deadweight each and 12 ships of 4,700 tons deadweight each.
4 and 5. A ship of 10,350 tons deadweight measures 7,134 tons gross; 4,243 tons net.
A ship of 4,700 tons deadweight measures 2,877 tons gross; 1,655 tons net.
The total deadweight tonnage of the ships delivered is 1,008,650 tons, and the total deadweight tonnage of the ships under construction is 656,700 tons.



HYDRO-ELECTRIC POWER

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What is the estimated total of hydroelectric power available in Canada?
2. How much, by provinces, is developed so far, (a) for all the year around use, (b) for seasonal use?
3.	What action has been taken by the government to inaugurate a national hydro-electric policy for Canada since the debate on the Calgary bill of 1941 and the debates of 1923 and since on this matter?
4.	How much direct current is now available in each province of Canada from developed hydro-electric power, (a) under public ownership, (b) under private ownership?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	The total water-power resources of Canada are estimated at 25,439,000 horsepower under conditions of ordinary minimum flow or 39,511,000 horse-power at flows ordinarily available for six months of the year. Based upon past practice these resources would support a total installed turbine capacity of approximately 51,350,000 horse-power.
2.	(a), (b). The latest completed census of the central electric station industry in Canada, for the calendar year 1941, shows the installed capacity of hydro-electric stations by provinces as follows:
Province	Installed h.p.
British Columbia and Y.T. ..	.... 637,837
Alberta 		.... 68,180
Saskatchewan 		.... 87,500
Manitoba 		.... 420,800
Ontario 		.... 2,284,389
Quebec 		.... 4,076,552
New Brunswick 		.... 105,760
Nova Scotia 		.... 102,990
Prince Edward Island		.... 392
Canada 		.... 7,784,400
Questions

No definite statistics are available of the extent to which the foregoing installations are utilized (a) for all the year around use, (b) for seasonal use. This varies with seasonal and yearly stream flow and also in accordance with changing power demands.
3.	The ownership, control and administration of the water power resources, except in
the Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory and in national parks, belongs to the provinces. The dominion is continuing its policy of cooperation with the provinces in securing the basic water power records which are fundamentally necessary in the planning, development and operation of water power projects throughout Canada.
4.	(a), (b).
For the calendar year 1941
Under public ownership Under private ownership
		Hydro-electric		Hydro-electric
Hydro-	energy	Hydro-	energyelectric	generated	electric	generatedinstalled	kilowatt hours	installed	kilowatt hoursProvince	capacity h.p.	(thousands)	capacity h.p.	(thousands)British Columbia and Yukon	9,770	14,610	628.067	2.410.087Alberta 	....	68.180	169,578Saskatchewan 	87.500 1	Manitoba 	155,000	582,854	265,800 |	1,337,218Ontario 	1,741,660	7,243,250	542.729	2.390,243Quebec 	30.710	86.088	4,045,842	17,649,252New Brunswick	12,860	19,200	92.900	414,980Nova Scotia	81,250	232.868	21.740	77,889Prince Edward Island	392	451Canada 	2,031,250	8,178,870	5,753,150	24,449,628



CANADIAN NAVY-OFFICERS AND RATINGS

Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	What are the percentages of R.C.N., R.C.N.R., and R.C.N.Y.R. officers and ratings .presently in the navy?
2.	Is it the intention of the navy board to grant these reserve officers and ratings representation by appointing one of tbeir officers to the navy board?


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: 1.	The percentages of officers and ratings in the navy as of the 15th February, 1943, are as follows (W.R.C.N.S. not included):
R.C.N.-officers 10 per cent-ratings 7 per *cent.
R.C.N.R.-officers 16 per cent-ratings 10 per cent.
R.C.N.V.R.-officers 74 per cent-ratings 83 per cent.
2.	The secretary, naval board is an officer of the R.C.N.V.R.



MERCHANT SEAMEN-INCOME TAX

Mr. ISNOR:: Are merchant seamen subject to income tax,
(a)	when in port, (b) when acting in conjunction with convoys and ships carrying supplies to or through a theatre of war area?
TMr. Crerar.]


Mr. GIBSON:: (a) yes; (b) yes.



TRANSPORT CONTROL-SKI TRAINS

Mr. STOKES:: 1.	How many ski trains have been operated by the railways since January 1, 1943?
2.	Is authority for the operation of such trains secured from the transport controller?


Mr. MICHAUD:: 1.	No special ski trains have been operated by the railways since January 1, 1943.
2.	No permits have been issued for any such trains by the transport controller.



PAN-AMERICAN UNION

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	Has Canada been asked to join the panAmerican union? If so, when?
2.	What country or countries have asked Canada to join?
3.	Are there any negotiations under way between Canada and any other country or countries regarding the pan-American union?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1
3.	No.

Questions



DOMINION INDUSTRIES LIMITED-TRANSCONA CORDITE PLANT

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Has the government approved the paying -of cash awards to employees of the Transeona [DOT]cordite plant of Dominion Industries Limited, who make suggestions the adoption of which may result in the reduction of operating expenses?
2.	If so, has the government ruled as to what ranks are entitled to receive such awards?
3.	If such a ruling has been made, what ranks are so entitled?
4.	How is the amount of such cash awards determined?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Canadian government approval has not been given to the paying of cash awards to employees in war industries who make suggestions which may result in' lower operating costs, but the Department of Munitions and Supply have approved of a plan to award war savings certificates or victory bonds to such employees.
2.	Under the government plan, all employees are eligible for such reward except those whose regular duties fall in the line of creative work such as engineering, processing, tool designing, production planning and supervision. Such ideas for improvement have always been considered part of their regular duties.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	Suggestions on which labour savings are affected are rewarded as follows:
(a)	l/16th of the annual savings on the employee's own job plus 1/12 of the annual savings on other jobs, subject to a maximum award of S750 (purchase value).
(b)	Suggestions resulting in improving the quality of production or matters not directly concerned with a productive operation; a direct award, determined by the committee according to its judgment in each individual case, ranging from $5 to 825 in war savings certificates (maturity value).



AIR-CONDITIONING OF TANKS

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: Is there any provision made to air-condition any of our tanks for use in hot climates?


Mr. RALSTON:: The fabrication of tanks, including air-conditioning for use in any climate, is under continuous study by the proper technical officers, but details of the
methods in use would be of value to the enemy and cannot be disclosed.



TAX ON BEER AND SPIRITS

Mr. FAIR:: 1.	What is the amount of tax levied and collected in the calendar year 1942 on (a) beer,
(b)	hard liquors?
2.	What amount was spent in 1942 on (a) heer, (b) hard liquors?


Mr. GIBSON:: 1.	Excise duty collected on malt used in beer produced and on matured spirits, during the calendar year 1942:
(a)	Malt in beer $33,372,828.40 - dutiable beer 8561,278.09.
(b)	Matured spirits 832,610,964.80.
2.	No information.



TAX ON CIGARS, CIGARETTES AND TOBACCO

Mr. FAIR:: 1.	What is the total amount of tax levied and collected on (a) cigars, (b) cigarettes,
(c)	smoking tobacco, during the year 1942?
2.	What is the amount of tax levied and collected on account of additional tax levied on June 23 last, from date of levy to December 31, 1942, on (a) cigars, (b) cigarettes, (c) smoking tobacco?


Mr. GIBSON:: 1.	Excise duty collected on cigars, cigarettes and manufactured tobacco during the year 1942:
(a)	Cigars	$	604,625.11(b)	Cigarettes	
61,842,971.89(c)	Manufactured tobacco..	10,033,362.662.	Excise taxes collected on cigars, cigarettes and manufactured tobacco, from June 23 to December 31, 1942:(a)	Cigars	S 221,400.57(b)	Cigarettes	
12,350,440.32(c)	Manufactured tobacco..	3,371,844.99



GLENCOE, N.S., IRON ORE DEPOSITS

Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	Did the Department of Munitions and Supply make an investigation into the possibility of developing the iron ore deposits at Glencoe, Inverness county, Nova Scotia? If so, what were the results?
2.	How did the ore found there compare with the ore being brought from Newfoundland?
3.	What steps are being taken to develop this field?
Questions


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	The Department of Munitions and Supply requested the Department of Mines and Resources to have this deposit investigated and the reports showed that there is no proven tonnage of ore of commercial interest. From the information available, and from previous exploration and development work, and from the geological associations of the ore, the probability of proving any attractive tonnage of commercial ore appears poor.
2.	Thus far the exploration made does not indicate an ore body as chemically suitable as Newfoundland ore for the production of iron, nor in quantities which would be reliable and economic as a source of supply.
3.	Answered by 1 and 2.



OPENING OF COAL MINE IN INVERNESS COUNTY, NOVA SCOTIA

Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	Is the government making a grant to a prospective coal operator, to open a coal mine in Inverness county, Nova Scotia? If so, what is the name of the operator?
2.	What is the amount of the grant?
3.	What agreement, if any, is there between those proposing to open this mine and the government?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1. No.
2 and 3. Answered by No. 1.
labrador


Mr. ROY:: 1.	Does the government consider the advisability of inviting the British government, in compensation for merchandise supplied by Canada, to secure the return to the dominion of that portion of Labrador which was awarded to Newfoundland by the decision of the privy council ?
2.	If so, (a) what action has been taken in that direction; (b) upon what date were the first representations made; (c) what progress has been made in the negotiations?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: With respect to the first part of this question, the answer of course would be that the matter is one of government policy which would be disclosed in due course. I rise not to answer the question in any way, but rather to say to my hon. friend that I am inclined to believe the citizens of Newfoundland rather resent the idea that Labrador belongs to the British government; they regard Labrador as belonging to Newfoundland. Should it come to a question
[Mr. Gillis.l
of our dominion seeking at any time to secure Labrador, I am sure the people of Newfoundland would expect that the negotiations in the first instance would be with their government rather than with the British government. I mention this because quite a little in the way of editorial comment and opinion expressed in the papers of Newfoundland has been brought to my attention.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Answered.



UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ON SOUTH SHORE OF ST. LAWRENCE

Mr. ROY:: 1.	Is there a detachment of the United States air force stationed on the south shore of the river St. Lawrence?
2.	If so, (a) what are the concessions, privileges, obligations and conventions under which the arrangements were made between the two governments in this matter; (b) in this connection has Canada granted to the United States any of its territories, and if so, in what form and under what conditions?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There are on the order paper two consecutive questions by the hon. member which, I submit, should neither be answered nor should they have appeared on the order paper, because even if unanswered they might be interpreted as disclosing information which it would certainly be in the interests of the enemy to have and which would be against our national security.
The first question is, "Is there a detachment of the United States Air Force stationed on the south shore of the river St. Lawrence? The first part of the next question is, "Has the government of the United States constructed certain establishments or bases on the shores of the Saguenay?" There are other questions which arise out of these two, but I think my hon. friend will see that, were I to answer either question in the affirmative, assuming it was correct so to do, I would be disclosing information which should not be disclosed.
* However, to relieve the minds of hon. members I shall make the following statement in regard to what the hon. member has in mind.
As a matter of fact there is no detachment of the United States Air Force stationed on the south shore of the St. Lawrence river, but from time to time and as occasion requires detachments of United States aircraft and personnel operate at various points in Canada with the consent and cooperation of the Cana-

Questions
dian government. The Canadian authorities have cooperated in making Canadian air facilities available to such United States detachments, as part of the agreed arrangements for our own defence. In a number of instances lands have been acquired by the Canadian government for the development of air fields by the United States government for military use under war conditions. In no case has any territory been ceded under any form or under any conditions. The text of our agreement with the United States government for the return at the close of hostilities of facilities in Canada which have been acquired or constructed by the United States during the prosecution of the war was tabled in the House of Commons on February 1 and may be found in the Votes and Proceedings for that date.



UNITED STATES ESTABLISHMENTS OR BASES ON SAGUENAY RIVER

Mr. ROY:: 1.	Has the government of the United States constructed certain establishments or bases on the shores of the Saguenay?
2.	If so, (a) what conventions were agreed to prior to the arrangement under which the American government commenced the works, (b) has Canada ceded any of its territory; in what form, and under what conditions?


Thomas Vien: Answered by the reply to the previous question.



WABANA IRON ORE WORKS

Mr. McGARRY:: Has it come to the attention of the Minister of Munitions and Supply that the Wabana Iron Ore Works has closed down, and will this closure be investigated?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Answered by the minister February 22, 1943, Hansard, page 575.



PRODUCTION OF MILITARY VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT IN RELATION TO SHIPBUILDING

Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	Have plans been made for slowing down production of military vehicles, tanks, guns and other fighting equipment coincidental with the expansion of production of ships?
2.	If so, when does this go into effect?
3.	Will it result in releasing man-power for other work?
4.	If so, how much?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps I can answer this verbally. The question implies that one programme is being slowed down to release manpower for another programme. That is not the case. Certain programmes are being slowed down, for the reason that initial equipment has been provided and the demands are less than formerly. Each programme is being dealt with separately from any other programme. Therefore the answer is:
1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.



R.C.A.F.-NON-FLYING LIST COMMISSIONS

Mr. HOBLITZELL:: 1.	How many categories of non-flying list commissions are there in the Royal Canadian Air Force?
2.	What are these categories?


Mr. POWER:: 1.	Twenty-three.
2.	Accountant Officer, Administrative Officer, Aeronautical Engineer, Armament Officer, Chaplain Officer, Educational Officer, Equipment Officer, Provost and Security Service Officer, Marine Craft Officer, Medical Officer, Non-pilot Air Navigation Instructor, Nursing Sister, Photographic Officer, Signals Officer, Works and Buildings Officer, Link Trainer Instructor, Regional Control Officer, Aerodrome Control Officer, Intelligence Officer, Radio Officer, P.T. and Drill Officer, Equipment Messing Officer, Auxiliary Services Officer.



IMMIGRANTS FROM EUROPE SINCE 1938

Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	How many Europeans who were residents in or citizens of any of the following countries, namely, Germany, Czechoslovakia, Austria or Poland, have been admitted to Canada since January 1, 1938, as immigrants?
2.	What were their respective races?
3.	What were their respective religions?
4.	What were their sexes?
5.	How many of them were over twenty-one years of age?
6.	How many of them were under such age?
Questions


Mr. CRERAR:: *1 and 2. Immigration to Canada, from April 1, 1937, to March 31, 1942, showing German, Czechoslovakian, Austrian and Polish nationality by racial origin:
Nationality
Czecho-
Racial origin	German	Slovakian	Austrian	Polish	TotalsAlbanian 	
Bohemian	
Croatian 	
Czech 	
Dutch 	
French 	
German 	334 3 578 1 1 671 415 1	59 8	3 6 9 90 332 724	3 341 12 669 2 1Hebrew	Italian 	1 201 158Jugoslav 	
Magyar	
Moravian 	201 146 63 q	5	....	Norwegian 	
Polish 	....	1 1,476 332 4,498 2,661Russian	
Ruthenian 	8 401 2,656 1	321	Slovak 	Swiss 	....	....	....	1Totals 	5,483	72	7,057	13,7393. No statistics	are kept of the religious persuasion of immigrants.	
4, 5 and 6. The following gives the sexes of persons of German, Czechoslovakian, Austrian-and Polish citizenship. Information is not available as to the number twenty-one years of age or over but the number under eighteen is shown:
(April 1, 1937, to March 31, 1942)
Adult	Adult	Children underMales	Females	EighteenGerman 	457	284Czechoslovakian 	1,839	2,379Austrian 	31	28Polish 	2,296	3,482Totals 	4,623	6,173
While not an exact answer, is the nearest possible from immigration statistics.
INTERNMENTS-CAMILLIEN HOTJDE Mr. LACOMBE:
1.	Has the Minister of Justice ordered under certain circumstances, the liberation of any individuals detained under the defence of Canada regulations in internment camps or common jails, without such persons having presented a petition to an advisory committee competent to deal with such requests?
2.	If so, who were the persons so liberated?
3.	What is the maximum penalty under the defence of Canada regulations, which may be imposed by the tribunals having jurisdiction in such cases?
4.	How many years and months has Mr. Camillien Houde, former mayor of Montreal, and member of the legislature of Quebec, been interned under the defence of Canada regulations?

5.	Does the period of internment of Mr. Houde conform with the terms fixed by the regulations for the defence of Canada?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	Not.since December, 1940. Prior to that date there were seven cases in which the Minister of Justice made an order for release, in urgent circumstances, before an objection to detention was made to an advisory committee.
2.	It is not considered to be in the public interest to disclose the names of the seven persons referred to in the answer to question 1.
3.	Under regulation 63 of the Defence of Canada regulations, every person who has contravened any of these regulations is liable on.

Questions
summary conviction of having been guilty of such contravention to a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months, or to both fine and imprisonment. Or if such person is prosecuted upon indictment and convicted, such person is liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or to both fine and imprisonment. Under regulation 21 of the said regulations, if the Minister of Justice is satisfied that with a view to preventing any particular person from acting in the future in any manner prejudicial to the public safety or the safety of the state it is necessary so to do, he may direct that such person be detained in such place and under such conditions as the Minister of Justice may from time to time determine.
4.	Since August 5th, 1940.
5.	Yes.



CENSORS

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	How many censors are employed at each of the following places, (a) Halifax, (b) Montreal,
(c)	Toronto, (d) Winnipeg, (e) Vancouver?
2.	What is the number of working hours in effect at each of the above places?
3.	Has each of the above places a chief censor? If so, give name, age and salary?
Mr. LaFLECHE:
1.
Postal Telegraph Censorship of Censorship Censorship Publications
Halifax ..	31	15	1Montreal .	14	27	2Toronto ..	11	8	2Winnipeg .	3	1	0Vancouver	60	8	22. Postal	censorship:	7i- hours per day.	Telegraph	censorship	: These offices i	
cept Winnipeg) operate 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. The working hours per week vary slightly with the intensity of the particular day and the change-over of shift from week to week. They range from 40-48 hours per week. Senior censors are on call over much longer periods in addition to regular hours at the office.
Censorship of publications: Regional offices are staffed from 12 to 15 hours a day depending on newspaper and news service requirements, but censors are required to hold themselves available for telephone calls at any time in the 24 hours.
3.	Postal censorship:	No. General supervision exercised by district director of postal services.
Telegraph censorship: No. The only chief cable or telegraph censor is located in Ottawa.
Censorship of publications: No. Chief censors are stationed in Ottawa.



ROOT AND VEGETABLE SEED

Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	What was the total amount of money paid to the various provinces under P.C. 1/4937 for the production of root and vegetable seed?
2.	Were grants made to individual growers and to seed houses?
3.	If so, to whom, for what amounts, and for what varieties of seeds?
4.	What is the proposed distribution by provinces of the grant under P.C. 1/1050?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	The following amounts were paid to the growers of root and vegetable seeds in the * various provinces; British Columbia, $296.60; Ontario $223.24; Quebec $95.18.
2.	No.
3.	See answer to No. 2.
4.	No money is paid as grants under these orders in council. Under the authority of the orders, growers grow seeds of specified kinds under contract at a guaranteed price which is below current market price. Growers sell this contract seed in Canada through usual commercial channels, and any surplus not sold in this way is purchased by the government. The object is to assure that sufficient seed of the kinds likely to be in short supply is grown. Comparatively small quantities of seed have had to be purchased by the government to date.
nationalization of breweries


Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	Is it the intention of the government to nationalize the breweries of Canada?
2.	If so, what are the reasons to justify the government in adopting such a course?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: This question concerns a matter of policy which will be made known in due course.



INTERNMENT-ERNST HANFSTAENGL

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: At whose request, by whose authority and under what conditions, was Ernst Hanfstaengl released from a Canadian civil internment camp and transferred to the custody of the United States, and was the assent of the British government obtained before this prisoner W'as transferred?


James Layton Ralston: I would point out to my hon. friend that other allied governments are interested in this matter. It has been carefully considered and the conclusion has been come to that it is not in the public interest, at least at the present time, to give the information asked for.
Questions



YARROW SHIPYARDS-FRIGATES

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	Are the "frigates" under construction in the Yarrow shipbuilding yards at Victoria being built on the cost-plus contract system?
2.	Is work on the said "frigates" hindered by shortages of material ?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	The contract was placed on a cost basis with a bonus covering reduction of costs under a target estimate on direct labour and material, and also on a time bonus for quick delivery, the total not to exceed a fixed amount per vessel.
2.	There has been no hold-up in the work of the shipyard due to shortages of material. The schedule of work was arranged to conform to the delivery of components to the shipyard.



R.C.A.F.-NON-FLYING LIST COMMISSIONS

Mr. HOBLITZELL:: 1.	What are the qualifications for appointment to a non-flying list commission in the Royal Canadian Air Force as an (a) administrative officer, (b) aeronautical engineer, (c) armament officer, (d) accountant, (e) chaplain, (f) educational officer, (g) equipment officer, (h) marine craft officer, (i) guard and discipline officer, (j) medical officer, (k) non-pilot air navigation instructor, (1) nursing sister, (m) photographic officer, (n) signals officer, (o) works and buildings officer, (p) link trainer instructor, (q) regional control officer, (r) aerodrome control officer, (s) intelligence officer, (t) radio officer, (u) equipment messing officer, (v) auxiliary service officer, (w) P.T. and drill officer?
2.	Are appointments ever given to persons who do not meet these qualifications?
3.	If so, under what circumstances?


Mr. POWER:: (a) ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age, i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be SO years.
(b)	Senior Matriculation.
(c)	Proven record of executive ability.
(d)	Previous service with Air Force or Army preferred.
2.	Yes.
3.	If candidate has previously held a commission senior matriculation is not absolutely necessary.
(d) ACCOUNTANT OFFICER
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be 50 years.
(b)	Chartered accountant's degree preferred; *absolute minimum Senior Matriculation if combined with Accountant's Course and practical experience; successful accounting experience essential.
fMr. Ralston.]
2.	Yes.
3.	Candidates under 32 years of age may be appointed if unfit for flying duties and possessors of exceptionally high professional qualifications.
(e) CHAPLAIN
1.	(a) Minimum age to be 28 years. Maximum age to be 50 years.
(b)	Ordained clergyman or priest.
(e)	(i) Has approval and recommendation of the head of his church; (ii) Successful record as a clergyman.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
(/) EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be 50 years.
(b)	University degree and certificates to qualify for teaching of higher mathematics or radio.
(c)	Proven record of successful teaching.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
(ff) EQUIPMENT OFFICER
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal
flying age i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be 50 years.	*
(b)	Senior Matriculation or its equivalent.
(c)	Executive experience in large business concern, with knowledge of purchasing requirements, distribution, stock control, etc. Knowledge of engineering desirable.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
(h) MARINE CRAFT OFFICER
1.	(a) Maximum age to be 50 years.
(b)	Board of Trade Coastal Masters Certificate.
(c)	Two full years recent deep sea or coastal merchant marine service.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
(l) GUARD AND DISCIPLINE OFFICER (Now Called PROVOST AND SECURITY SERVICES OFFICER)
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age, i.e., 32 years. Maximum age to be 50 years.
(b)	Senior Matriculation.
(c)	Previous military service. ,
(d)	Preferably previous police service.
2.	Yes.
3.	If previously commissioned, Senior Matriculation not demanded.

Questions



O') MEDICAL OFFICER

[Stage Direction]
1.	(a) Maximum age 50 years.
(b)	Licentiate of Medical College of Canada or a registered practitioner in one of the provinces.
Note: Both of these require graduation from a recognized medical college.
(c)	Two years civilian practice preferred.
Note:	Ail candidates must satisfy the
Principal Medical Officer of the Command as to their qualifications.
2.	Yes.
3.	If exceptionally qualified maximum age may be up to 55 years.
(k) NON-PILOT AIR NAVIGATION INSTRUCTOR
1.	(a) Minimum age to be 23 years. Maximum age to be 45 years.
(b)	University degree in engineering or mathematics and physics, or a qualified land surveyor well versed in mathematics and astronomy.
(c)	Must be good physique.
Note: Though categorized as non-flying list, these officers are required to do considerable flying.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
(i) NURSING SISTER
1.	(a) A woman-under 45 years of age.
(b) A graduate of a school of nursing accredited by the Canadian Nurses Association and registered in a Provincial Registered Nurses Association.
Note: All candidates must be interviewed and recommended by the Principal Medical Officer of the Command.
2.	No.
'3. Not applicable.
(to) photographic officer
1.	(a) Minimum age to be 35 years, i.e., three years above the normal flying age limit. Maximum age to be 50 years.
(b)	Senior Matriculation and specialized training in photography.
(c)	Production work in camera or photographic supply manufacturing company; or experience in chemistry or photography; or knowledge of modern aerial photographic technique.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
Note: No photographic officers have been given direct entry commissions for approximately one year. It is not proposed to make any further direct entry appointments.
(o)	WORKS and buildings officer
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age i.e. 32 years.
(b)	University degree in civil or mechanical engineering.
(c)	Major construction experience.
(d)	Ability to organize personnel and knowledge of engineering office routine.
Note: Appointments in this branch are of two types, works and buildings officer, and buildings engineer officer, qualifications for which are the same.
2.	Yes.
3.	(a) Minimum age may be 23 years. Maximum age may be 60 years, if possessor of special qualifications.
(b) Practical experience on specialized general construction or engineering work over a period of years, would qualify.
(p)	link trainer instructor
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be 50 years.
(b)	Junior matriculation.
(c)	Previous flying experience and possession of pilot's flying badge preferable.
2.	Yes.
3.	If previously commissioned, educational standard not essential.
Note: No link trainer officers have been given direct entry commissions for approximately one year. It is not proposed to make any further direct entry appointments.
(q)	regional control officer
1.	(a) Minimum age to be 28 years. Maximum age to be 40 years.
Note:	Candidates under the maximum
flying age of 32 years will not be appointed unless physically unfit for flying duties.
(b)	Some university training preferred; absolute minimum junior matriculation.
(c)	Actual flying experience preferable.
(d)	Very high standard of visual acuity and good speaking voice required by all applicants.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
Note: No regional control officers have been given direct entry commissions for approximately one year. It is not proposed to make any further direct entry appointments.
(r)	AERODROME CONTROL OFFICER
1. (a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age, i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be
[Stage Direction]
Questions
[Stage Direction]
50 years, (b) Senior Matriculation, (c) Exwar pilots or observer preferable, (d) Clear speaking voice essential.
2.	Yes.
3.	If formerly commissioned, educational standard may be lowered.
(1) RADIO OFFICER
1.	(a) Minimum age to be 18 years. Maximum age to be 50 years, (b) University degree in Communication or Electrical Engineering plus considerable experience in radio.
2.	Yes.
3.	If sufficiently experienced in radio, Junior Matriculation may be accepted-these appointees must be either: (i) Amateurs who have passed a government test and been allotted a call sign, or (ii) Radio Engineers or service men with extensive experience.
(w) equipment messing officer
1.	(a) A woman-minimum age to be 21 years-maximum age to be 40 years, (b) Degree in Household Science or Household Economics recognized by the Canadian Dietetics Association, (c) Practical experience.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
(v)	auxiliary services officer
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age, i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be 50 years, (b) Possessor of high degree of intelligence, resourcefulness and energy, and above all tact, (c) Successful experience in welfare work.
2.	Yes.
3.	If exceptionally highly qualified may be accepted even if of low medical category.
(w)	P.T. AND DRILL OFFICER
1.	(a) Minimum age to be over the normal flying age, i.e. 32 years. Maximum age to be 50 years, (b) Junior Matriculation, (c) Proven record of success as physical director or long experience in athletics, (d) Former P.T. and Drill Officers or N.C.Os. preferred.
2.	Yes.	'
3.	If previously commissioned, educational standard may be lowered.
Note: The qualifications given above are for direct entry commissions. It is not proposed, at the moment, to make any further direct entry appointments in the following categories:	administrative, aerodrome control,
equipment, physical training and drill, provost and security services, works and buildings and radio.
fMr. Power.!

Mr. GREEN:: 1.	What public holidays have been cancelled by the government since the outbreak of the present war?
2.	What were the respective dates of the cancellation of each of these holidays and on what authority were they cancelled?
3.	What public holidays are recognized by the government at the present time?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: By order in
council P.C. 8682 of September 25, 1942, passed under authority of the War Measures Act, it was provided that the following statutory holidays and these holidays only should be observed by employers and employees during the present war, namely: (a) New Year's day; (b) Good Friday; (c) the first Monday in July; (d) Labour day; (e) Christmas day;
(f)	Thanksgiving day.
The order in council does not specifically cancel other statutory holidays by name, but has the effect of limiting observance to those specified in the order.
An additional order in council, P.C. 1181, of February 15, 1943, was passed, amending the Bills of Exchange Act, to make the observance of statutory holidays under that Act correspond as nearly as possible with that authorized in the order in council P.C. 8682.



* ST. HYACINTHE, QUE., NAVAL ESTABLISHMENT

Mr. McGREGOR:: In connection with the naval establishment
at St. Hyacinthe, Quebec, (a) is the hon. Minister for Highways in the province of Quebec (Mr. Damien Bouchard) in any way connected with the contractors who are erecting these buildings; (b) was Damien Bouchard or his associates owner of this property at any time?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The government has no information on this subject. The best information we have is that the answer is No.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


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, 1942, 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?
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?

Questions as Orders jor Returns
4.	What number of such speeches were printed and distributed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and at what cost?


ALBERTA IRRIGATION, DRAINAGE AND STORAGE
Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	What is the total amount which has been expended for irrigation, drainage and water storage in the province of Alberta since the commencement of such projects?
2.	What is the total amount expended for such purposes during each fiscal year since such projects were first undertaken?
3.	What is the total amount, by fiscal years, which has been expended for, (a) construction, giving in each case the name of the project, and (b) for subsidies or other similar assistance, giving in each case the name of the project?


MOBILIZATION ACT-RECRUITS AS OF JANUARY 1
Mr. PURDY:: 1.	As at January 31, 1943, and by the military districts in which they first reported, how many recruits called under the provisions of the National Resources Mobilization Act were in the armed forces and not available for service anywhere ?
2.	Since full-time service has become effective, how many recruits have been requisitioned under the National Resources Mobilization Act from each military district, and how many have reported from each of such districts?
12.	How many officers on the strength of, (a) air force headquarters, (b) command headquarters who flew more than 100 hours in the years, (i) 1941, (ii) 1942?
13.	What are the names of said officers?


RATION OFFICES
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	How many ration offices have been set up in Canada?
2.	Where are they located?
3.	How many men and women are on the staff of each office?


SALVATION ARMY CHAPLAINS
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	Are there any Salvation Army chaplains in the armed forces?
2.	If not, why not?


OIL CONTROL-WINNIPEG BRANCH-PROSECUTIONS
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	Is Mr. Slocomb employed with the oil controller's branch in Winnipeg? If so, in what capacity?
2.	If not, when did he cease to be, and for what reason?
3.	Have divisional oil controllers the authority to launch prosecutions for infractions of the regulations?
4.	How many prosecutions did he recommend and how many were proceeded with?


R.C.A.F.-ADMINISTRATION
Mr. HOBLITZELL:: 1.	How many administrative officers are there in the Royal Canadian Air Force?
2.	In what proportion is the total of question 1 to, (a) general list officers, (b) all other branches of the non-flying list?
3.	How many administrative officers are, (a) permanent or auxiliary forces, (b) direct entry, (c) commissioned from ranks?
4.	How many direct entry administrative officers are serving (a) overseas or in home war units in Canada, Alaska and Newfoundland, (b) in training units, command H.Q., and A.F.H.Q.?
5.	How many administrative officers are, (a) over the accepted aircrew age of 32, (b) under the age of 32?
6.	How many administrative officers have, (a)
graduated from university, (b) graduated from igh school, (c) less education than high school?
7.	What percentage held positions in civilian life entailing administrative duties?
8.	How many, (a) are veterans of the last war, (b) could have served in the last war on the basis of age, (c) have served in the reserve forces of three armed services since the last war, and are veterans of the last war, (d) have transferred from the other active services?
9.	How many branches of the R.C.A.F. comprise the non-flying list?
10.	How many administrative officers are there in the R.C.A.F (W.D.), (a) in all other branches of the W.D.?
11.	Is there a general list in the R.C.A.F. (W.D.) ?



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many men, by provinces, military districts and/or administrative divisions have been discharged as medically unfit since the commencement of this war?
2.	Of these, how many served (a) overseas, (b) in Canada?
3.	Of these, how many were (a) members of the active army, (b) men called under the provisions of the National Resources Mobilization Act?
4.	(a) How many men so discharged are in receipt of a pension; (b) how many cases remain undecided?



OIL CONTROL-PROSECUTIONS

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many prosecutions, by provinces, have been (a) recommended by divisional controllers or other officials for infringement of oil regulations since the 15th day of July, 1942; (b) proceeded with?
2.	How many convictions, by provinces, have been secured?
3.	What have been the highest and lowest penalties imposed?



WAR SAVINGS STAMPS AND CERTIFICATES

Mr. CASSELMAN:: 1. How much have the people of Canada invested monthly in war savings stamps and certificates since February 28, 1942?

Questions as Orders jor Returns
2.	What amount have the citizens of each province so invested?
3.	What amount of war savings certificates have been redeemed monthly since February 28, 1942?
4.	What amount of unredeemed war savings stamps are in the hands of the public?



LIFE INSURANCE

Mr. FAIR:: 1.	What is the amount of life insurance written in Canada in the calendar years 1937, 1938, 1939, 1940, 1941 and 1942, by (a) Canadian companies, (b) British companies, (c) other companies?
2.	What is the amount of premiums paid on the above policies during each of these years?
3.	How many policies have lapsed or been surrendered for cash surrender value during the above period?
4.	What is the value of such lapsed or surrendered policies?



WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD-INCREASE IN PRICE OF TEA AND COFFEE SERVED IN RESTAURANTS

Mr. FAIR:: 1.	What are the names of the members of the wartime prices and trade board?
2.	How many of these men have a direct or indirect interest in the catering or restaurant business?
3.	Were any requests received by the board for an increase in the price of tea and coffee served with (a) meals, (b) without meals?
4.	If so, how many, and from whom?
5.	Were restaurant operators given the benefit of the subsidy on tea and coffee recently announced by the Minister of Finance?
6.	Has the board given authority to increase the price of milk as a beverage with meals?
7.	If so, when was such authority given?
8.	What percentage of the increased cost of meals is distributed among restaurant employees?
9.	Will the increase in the cost of meals be reflected in the cost-of-living index?
10.	Will the government provide a cost-of-living bonus of $4.50 per month to offset the increased cost of meals?
11.	Does the government consider this increase inflationary?



*ENEMY ALIEN STUDENTS IN CANADIAN UNIVERSITIES

Mr. BOUCHER:: 1.	How many enemy alien students are in attendance at Canadian universities?
2.	Are these aliens required to take the oath of allegiance before joining the C.O.T.C. and wearing the King's uniform?
3.	Is the enemy alien who broke parole requirements in Toronto and was picked up by the authorities still in attendance at the University of Toronto and wearing the King's uniform?
4.	Are these enemy alien students attending various Canadian universities permitted to work in munitions plants or on farms during vacation?

5.	How many students are there in each of the Canadian universities taking arts courses? How many of these are 18 years of age or over?
6.	Do students enrolled in these courses receive instructions which enable them to give greater assistance in the war effort?
7.	Are such students subject to call under the National Resources Mobilization Act, and if so, are they granted postponement?
8.	In eases where such postponement is given, for what period is deferment granted?


James Layton Ralston: In connection with this question, which should be made an order for return, I want to point out that some of the information is not in the hands of the government; and of course the order for return will be subject to this, that only information officially in the hands of the government will be produced.


Richard Burpee Hanson: A previous question, relating to Salvation Army chaplains, has been made an order for return, and it has to do with only one department.


James Layton Ralston: I did not say "one department"; my hon. friend misunderstood me. I point out that one question is, "How many students are there in each of the Canadian universities taking arts courses? How many of these are eighteen years of age or over?" These are not matters which are within the knowledge of the government or the departments. The same applies to paragraph 6. I was reserving on these questions and on any other question in respect of which the government has not information the right to decline to furnish that information even though the order passes.



ATLANTIC FISHERIES EXPERIMENTAL STATION

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	Is there a branch of the fisheries department located in Halifax known as the Atlantic fisheries experimental station? If so, state,
(a)	location, (b) when built, (c) cost of construction, (d) cost of the equipment, (e) the purpose for which it was constructed, (f) how long has it been in operation, (g) is it considered essential to the development of the fishing industry of the Atlantic coast?
2.	Has the Department of National Defence under consideration plans to take over this building? If so, for what purpose?
3.	Has the Department of National Defence property and buildings on, (a) the south side adjacent to the fisheries building, (b) on the north side old unused buildings and vacant land?
4.	What steps have been taken towards using the vacant lands and buildings north of the experimental station instead of taking over the fisheries property?
5.	Has permission been requested by the Department of National Defence from the Department of Fisheries to use the before-mentioned experimental station's property? If so, has the fisheries department given approval and authority?

Questions as Orders for Returns



NAVAL SERVICES-MEDICAL SERVICE

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	Is it obligatory for naval men while in port
requiring medical service to obtain same from the port doctor?	_
2.	Are men of the naval service directed to such special doctor and, if so, by whom?
3.	Who appoints such port doctor or person to give medical treatment to men in the naval service?
4.	Why are the other doctors residing and practising in such ports not permitted to share in this medical wartime work?
5.	Does the port doctor who provides medical service for men in the naval service receive a salary or is he paid fees, stating the amount and basis of payment?
6.	From what fund or appropriation are such payments made for account of, (a) Canadian naval service, (b) British naval service, (c) United States naval service?



NATIONAL RESOURCES MOBILIZATION

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many (i) single men or widowers without children, (ii) married men or widowers with children, between the ages of 18 and 45 are there in, (a) each province, (b) each military district, (c) each national services administrative division?
2.	How many men by provinces, military districts and/or administrative divisions have been, (a) called up for service under the National Resources Mobilization Act; (b) found unfit after medical examination; (c) applied for postponement of military training;
(d)	granted postponement of military training;
(e)	actually accepted for service at basic training centres; (f) how many notices for medical examination have been sent out; (g) how many have been returned uncalled for; (h) how many notices of call have been sent out; (i) how many have been returned uncalled for?
3.	(a) How many prosecutions have been laid in each administrative division for infractions of the regulations of the National Resources Mobilization Act; (b) how many convictions have taken place?
4.	What is the number of transfers registered with the different registrars of the administrative divisions?


Mr. MITCHELL:: I ask that this question stand as an order for return. I think my hon. friend will agree that the ramifications of the question are such that it would entail a great deal of work to have it answered. He can rest assured that it will be completed as quickly as is humanly possible to prepare the return.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: I would point out that the question was answered last year, covering the period up to June 1. There is no reason why this information should not be available.


Humphrey Mitchell: I am not objecting.


Thomas Vien: In the meantime, stands.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It ought to be answered.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Order for return.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why an order for return?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: Because we want it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is not according to the rules of the house.


Thomas Vien: Did the minister say
"order for return"?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No.


Thomas Vien: Order for return.



OCEAN-COING VESSELS-WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION

Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	Do men employed on ocean-going vessels come under the workmen's compensation laws of the province in which the vessel is registered?
2.	Regardless of nationality, are these employees entitled to such benefits, if any?
3.	Who pays for their hospitalization in case of marine accident?
4.	In cases of accident, is there any provision for dependents?
5.	Would unemployment insurance take the place of pension in case of incapacity from marine accident?



PURCHASE OP VESSELS

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	How many privately owned merchant and other vessels have been purchased by the government since the outbreak of war?
2.	What was the price paid in each case and from whom were the vessels purchased?



INCOME TAX-FARMERS

Mr. FAIR:: 1.	How many farmers paid income tax each year since 1930 to date?
2.	What is the amount of such tax paid each year during the above period?
3.	How many farmers operated at a loss during the period 1930 to 1942?
4.	How many farmers were forced to leave their farms during the above years?



SOLDIER SETTLEMENT

Mr. FAIR:: 1.	How many soldier settlers under the soldier settlement board scheme have signed quit claim deeds during the years 1930 to 1942, inclusive?
2.	How many parcels of land are held for sale or-rent at the present time by the soldier settlement board?
3.	How many soldier settlers acquired title to their farms during the period 1930 to 1942 inclusive ?
4.	What is the amount of, (a) principal,
(b)	interest paid by soldier settlers during the above period?

Questions as Orders jor Returns
5.	What is the cost of administration of the board during each of the years referred to above ?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: This question cannot be answered without taking some little time to get the data together. I would remind the house again that the soldier settlement board is working to-day under considerable pressure. I cannot tell my hon. friend when the information will be brought down, but it will be brought down in due course.


Mr. FAIR:: I am asking for this information because, as I think the minister understands, the soldier settlers have been working under pressure for a considerable number of years and I think we ought to do something to relieve that pressure.



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-SNOW CLEANING

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Were men of his majesty's forces ordered to assist in the clearing of snow from the yards of the Canadian Pacific Railway, in the city of Winnipeg, in the early part of February, 1943?
2.	If so, by whose authority?
3.	What amount, if any, was paid by the Canadian Pacific Railway to the Department of National Defence for the services thus rendered?
4.	On what basis was this amount, if any, determined?
5.	Was additional remuneration given to the men who did this work and, if so, on what basis was it determined?
6.	Have men of his majesty's forces been ordered on any other occasion to assist private companies at particular tasks?
7.	What is the policy of the Department of National Defence in this matter?



RATION OFFICES-SALARIES

Gordon Knapman Fraser: _ What are the salaries of the men and women in each ration office in Canada?



SOLDIERS STATIONED AT CANADIAN LEGATION IN WASHINGTON

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	Are there any soldiers stationed at the Canadian legation in Washington?
2.	If so, how many are there and what are their ranks?
3.	What are their duties?
4.	Do they receive any remuneration in addition to their pay of rank?
5.	If so, how much do they receive?
6.	Are there any deductions made from the extra remuneration? If so, what for?



PROCEDURE IN QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS

['I shall try to do so to-morrow or next day.']
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, a number of questions have been allowed to stand to-day as
fMr. Fair.]
orders for returns. For instance, the first question, which has to do with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, strikes me as one which should not have been passed as an order for return. It is a simple question, the answer to which could have appeared in Hansard in a form which would be readable. Others that have been answered to-day seem to me to come under an entirely different category. A question having to do with the investments monthly in war savings stamps and certificates was passed as an order for return. In all fairness to us in the opposition we ought to have on Hansard the answers to questions which are not of the type which obviously would be subject to the restricted limitations of Hansard, or which must be answered by several departments. I ask the government to reconsider the whole matter of orders for returns, because at the moment much of this information is being given in that form and is therefore buried in an office here, so that it is sometimes difficult to get the information.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I do not think there is any intention on the part of the government to answer questions in a manner which will result in the information being buried before it reaches the questioner. The government must decide itself in what form it wishes to answer a question. It is, of course, open to criticism if it uses a form which it cannot defend, but as to answering a question by an immediate answer or by an order for return, that is entirely within the discretion of the government and always has been. There are occasions when a question should be answered immediately rather than have it stand as an order for return. There is one question on the order paper to-day concerning which I made inquiry as to why it could not be answered at the moment. I found that the reply related to two different departments of the government. Each department had a separate order in council to consider before the answer could be made. If the information is not available at once, the choice lies between leaving a question on the order paper, or having it made as an order for return, the information to be brought down at the earliest opportunity.
Perhaps if hon. members would frame their questions a little differently it would be possible to have more information placed upon Hansard than is sometimes the case. Where a question covers nearly a page of Hansard it is natural that the government would wish to have a careful survey made of the matters that have to be looked into before the question can be answered. So far as the government is concerned it is usually a matter of employing

Motions jor Papers
the method which is regarded as being the more expeditious. That is what has governed thus far.
My attention has been drawn to one question to which my hon. friend referred, which reads:
1.	How much have the people of Canada invested monthly in war savings stamps and certificates since February 28, 1942?
2.	What amount have the citizens of each province so invested?
3.	What amount of war savings certificates have been redeemed monthly since February 28, 1942?
4.	What amount of unredeemed war savings stamps are in the hands of the public?
Calculations have to be made to answer a question of this kind. All I wish to say at the moment is that while there may be reasons why hon. gentlemen opposite wish to have replies made immediately rather than later in the form of orders for return, if they will take care to have their questions so framed as to permit of an immediate answer, the answer will probably be given in that form.


Gordon Graydon: Some of these questions which we think might properly be passed as orders for returns are answered in the usual way, while others which we felt could be answered at once and go into Hansard are passed as orders for returns. There does not seem to be much reason why the question as to war savings stamps and certificates should not stand so that the department would have opportunity of answering and the answer could appear in Hansard, because it would come much more quickly than on an order for return.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not at all sure that the questions asked there are not questions which should be asked when the committee on radio broadcasting meets.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is no reason why it should not be asked here. We are not all on the committee.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: But the information can be brought out before the committee appointed to inquire into the affairs of a corporation which is a separate organization and not a part of a government department.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is it or is it not a government organization?


Gordon Graydon: May I point out that one of the ministers who appeared to know something about the corporation stated last year in committee that it was an emanation of the crown, and being an emanation of the crown I do not think the Prime Minister's argument in this respect is on very solid ground.



Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: For a copy of all correspondence between Mr. A. S. Nicholson, who recently retired as timber controller, and the Prime Minister, the Minister of Munitions and Supply, Minister of Finance, deputy timber controller or his successors as timber controller, during the years 1941 and 1942.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I point out that correspondence between Mr. Nicholson and the minister and his officers during the period in which he was an officer of the Department of Munitions and Supply is obviously privileged. He may have written a letter to the minister after he resigned from the department. As to correspondence with the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, there is none that we can find. I suggest that this motion should not pass.


Thomas Vien: Dropped.


Percy Chapman Black: Before it is dropped may I ask the minister whether there was any correspondence between Mr. Nicholson and himself subsequent to or at the time of his resignation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: There was one letter, I think. I shall be glad to bring that letter down, if the order can pass with the reservation that anything which is privileged will not be brought down.


MARKETING AND HANDLING OF 1942-43 AND 1943-44 GRAIN CROPS
Mr. PERLEY:: For a copy of any agreements entered into by the Canadian wheat board with (a) elevator companies, interior or terminal, (b) mills, (c) pools, (d) exporters, (e) brokers, with respect to the marketing and handling of the 1942-1943 and 1943-1944 crops.


James Angus MacKinnon: Return tabled.


WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-PERMANENT HOUSES
Mr. NICHOLSON:: For a copy of specifications and plans of the proposed permanent houses to be built by Wartime Housing Limited at Hamilton, Ontario.


Clarence Decatur Howe: These plans and specifications are documents of the department. The houses were not built and will not be built so far as present plans go, and I think these are hardly documents to be brought down in the House of Commons. The same remarks apply to the next motion.
Motions for Papers


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: If the taxpayers' money is spent preparing these plans I see no reason why members of the house should not have a chance to examine them.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The fact that the taxpayers'
money was spent preparing plans does not make them available to any individual who may apply for them. They are the property of the federal government, prepared for the government's use.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Parliament is entitled to see them.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I doubt it very much.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If the
minister takes that stand I think there will be trouble. The minister denies access to a public document?


Clarence Decatur Howe: As a consulting engineer in
pa^t years, I have prepared plans for this government that I consider my property, as well as the property of the government. If they had been given to any member of the house who applied for them I would have had legitimate ground for protest.


Thomas Vien: Dropped?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Dropped.


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


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Aye.


Thomas Vien: Those against please say "nay".


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Nay.


Thomas Vien: In my opinion the nays have it.
Motion negatived.
WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-ST. CATHARINES women's HOSTEL


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: For a copy of plans, specifications, and all other documents in possession of Wartime Housing Limited in connection with the erection of the proposed women's hostel at St. Catharines.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Dropped.


Gordon Graydon: Does the position that the minister is taking in connection with both these matters mean that the house is to be denied the right to see the plans and specifications of any building erected by Wartime Housing Limited?


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend is putting foward quite a different situation. Neither of these buildings was erected or will be erected. The plans are the property of the government. Of course they can be seen by 
anyone who wishes to see them in the office where they were prepared, but I see no reason why they should be made a public document, so that anyone can use them for a building. They are prepared for the purposes of the government, not the purposes of members of parliament.


Mr. COLDWELL:: The minister raises the point that these plans are the property of the government. If they are the property of the government a member has the right to ask that they be tabled in this house. If they are not the property of the government, the situation is different. I should like to be clear on that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: They are the property of the government; nevertheless I hardly think they can be taken out in this house and possibly copied. They are something that cost a good deal of money, and they can be easily copied. Let them stay in the government vaults. My hon. friend has been many times to the office of Wartime Housing Limited; he can see them there.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I see no reason why a member of the house should be put to the expense of travelling to Toronto to examine plans and specifications paid for by the taxpayers of Canada. The men who prepared them are on the payroll of Wartime Housing Limited and we are going to pay for them.


Thomas Miller Bell: There is a principle involved.


Humphrey Mitchell: It is understood that the material will be tabled with the exception of documents that are
Abbott
Bertrand (Prescott) Blair
Blanchette Bradette Brunelle Casselman, Mrs.
(Edmonton East) Corman Crerar Dechene Donnelly Douglas (Queens) Edwards Evans
Fournier (Hull)
Furniss
Gardiner
Gershaw
Gibson
Gladstone
Golding
Goulet
Graham
Grant
Gregory
Hanson (Skeena)
Henderson
Howden
Howe
Hurtubise
Ilsley
Isnor
King, Mackenzie
Kinley
LaFleche
Leger
McCann
McCuaig
McCubbin
McCulloch
Macdonald
(Brantford City) Macdonald (Halifax) Macdonald
(Kingston City)
McDonald (Pontiac)
MeGarry
McGibbon
Mellraith
Mclvor
MacKenzie (Neepawa) Mackenzie
(Vancouver Centre) MacKinnon
(Edmonton West) McKinnon (Kenora-Rainy River) McLarty
McLean (SimcoeEast) McNiven
(Regina City) Martin Matthews Mayhew Michaud Mitchell Mulock Neill O'Neill Pinard Pottier Power Purdy Ralston Reid Rennie Roebuck
Ross (Calgary East) Ross (Moose Jaw)
St. Laurent
Sissons
Taylor
Telford
Tripp
Turgeon
Turner
Veniot
Ward
Weir
Whitman
Winkler-85.
correspondence or privileged.
(York-Sunbury):	What
Mr. HANSON would they be? What privilege could possibly attach to answers to that letter? The minister placed the original letter on record. I happen to have seen a copy of one of the replies, which was most constructive, and I cannot see that there is any privilege attaching to this at all.


Humphrey Mitchell: If there is not, then of course they will all come down.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Thomas Miller Bell: For a statement showing the names and locations of all plants in which labour-management committees are functioning in Canada to-day.


Humphrey Mitchell: As my hon. friend is aware, these committees are on a voluntary basis. Since there are over a hundred thousand firms in Canada, he will appreciate the difficulty of getting the information he desires. Recently I had a check made of the number of committees of this kind functioning to-day, and there would be some difficulty, I should imagine, in getting all the information he would like, and I would like, in this connection. He can rest assured, however, that I will do the best I can.


WAIN WRIGHT, ALTA., POSTMASTERSHIP
Robert Fair: For a copy of all applications, letters, telegrams, references and any other correspondence or documents in the possession of the Post Office Department, the civil service commission, or any other department of government dated from January, 1941, to the present, in connection with the appointment of postmaster at Wainwright, Alberta.


SASKATCHEWAN STOCK WATERING AND IRRIGATION PROJECTS
Thomas Miller Bell: The minister was good enough a few days ago to give the number of such committees. I thought it would be a simple matter for him also to give the names, even if the locations were not given. That is all I wish.


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall try to get it.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. QUELCH:: For a copy of recent reports or surveys made with regard to, (a) the William Pearce stock watering project or any modification thereof,
(b)	the raising of the level of Buffalo lake,
(c)	a dam site in connection with either of the above projects on the Red Deer river.


MOBILIZATION ACT INTERPRETATIVE LETTER NO. 1
John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, correspondence, and other documents received by the 72537-50


APPEAL OF TORONTO GROCERS FOR RESTORATION OF HALF-POUND RATION
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: The Minister of Finance will recall that on Friday I made an inquiry with respect to a press dispatch appearing in the Ottawa Journal under date of February 25, stating that Toronto grocers had on the previous day appealed to Ottawa in connection with a butter sutplus. I asked the minister to

Butter Rationing

make a statement at that time, and he was good enough to indicate that he would do so a little later.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I had a statement I intended to bring to the house, but I did not bring it. Would tomorrow be all right?


Gordon Graydon: Yes, unless the minister would like to speak from memory.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why not send for it?


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is several paragraphs in length, and I am afraid I do not remember all that is in it.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps the minister
would be good enough to get it to-day some time. I do not wish to press him, though, because I know he has been busy with his budget.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I shall get it before six o'clock.


James Lorimer Ilsley: 
MADAM CHIANG KAI-SHEK PEOPOSED VISIT TO CANADA-POSSIBILITY OF ADDRESS TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley) :: I should like to ask a question of the Prime Minister. I must apologize for not having put my question in writing, but my stenographer is away to-day and no one else can read my writing. I am particularly interested in this matter, and I believe it is urgent. Could the Prime Minister give us any information as to whether Madam Chiang Kai-Shek will address this house?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The hon. member is most courteous. No apology is required for his question. I must however apologize to him for not being able to answer it in exact terms. It is our hope and expectation that Madam Chiang Kai-Shek will visit Canada before she returns to China. If she visits Canada it will be, I think, toward the end of this month or the early part of April. An effort is being made to persuade Madam Chiang Kai-Shek to make not only the one address I understand she has promised to give in Canada, but also if possible to address the members of both houses of parliament when she visits this city. Whether or not Madam Chiang Kai-Shek will be able to meet the latter request, I cannot say. I very much hope she may be able to do so.


RATIONING
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day
Mr. D. K. HAZEN (St. John-Albert):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance. I have in my hand a clipping taken last week from the Ottawa Journal, which reads:
A prices board spokesman said last night a recent board order permits public caterers to charge five cents extra for cups of tea or coffee or glasses of milk where these beverages are ordered with meals.

Armed Forces-Death oj Private
Will the minister inform the house what purpose this order is intended to serve?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I shall try to do so to-morrow or next day.



SUBSIDIES TO MAINTAIN SUPPLY-REPORT AS TO APPOINTMENT OF SUBSIDIES OFFICER

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
["Exactly, and you\nwould think that any one with common sense could see that. Our problem is the problem of discovering where to sell the goods.\nOn motion of Mr. Blackmore the debate was adjourned.\nIt being two minutes after eleven o'clock the house . adj ourned without question put.\nTuesday, March 2, 1943"]
Ernest Edward Perley: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Agriculture, based on a report in the Regina Leader-Post of February 24. It bears the heading, in large type, "Farm Subsidy Coming Soon", and is as follows:
Ottawa, February 24, creation of subsidy machinery to serve the farmers of Canada and maintain the nation's war programme on the food front is actually under way and soon will be completed, officials of the federal Department of Agriculture said Tuesday.
It says further:
Departmental sources stated that a subsidies officer would probably be named within the agricultural department to supervise all agricultural aid. The possibility of the appointment to this post of Dean A. M. Shaw, head of the agricultural supplies board, was suggested.
And further:
It was further stated that the recent Washington conference of Canadian and United States agricultural officials had succeeded in fully integrating the 1943 food programme of both nations.
Why was this policy announced by officials in the minister's department rather than by the minister himself to members of the House of Commons? Further, when will the minister make a statement to the house with respect to this very important new programme?


Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture):: I shall be making a statement in due course.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is not good enough.


Ernest Edward Perley: Why did an official in the minister's department make the announcement, rather than the minister?


James Garfield Gardiner: I would want to make inquiries first, and find out whether it was made.


Ernest Edward Perley: Has the minister no confidence in the Leader-Post press report? It is the mouthpiece of this government in Saskatchewan.
72537-50J



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. L. O'BRIEN (Northumberland, N.B.): I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance. In view of the announcement in to-day's press by the wartime prices and trade board that an increase of $4 per ton has been allowed on newsprint, will the minister state what provision, if any, has been made so that the independent primary producers of pulpwood may be permitted to participate, covering wood held by the mills as inventory?
James Lorimer Ilsley: (Minister of Finance): I suggest that a question such as this should be placed upon the order paper.


CANADIAN ARMED FORCES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Layton Ralston: On Friday a question was asked by the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) with respect to the findings of the coroner's jury which inquired into the death on January 29, 1943, of Private John H. Somerville. This unfortunate happening took place when I was away from my office, and was dealt with in my absence. Immediately after the death, the chief coroner of Ontario was notified and on the same day an autopsy was performed by Doctor Erb, pathologist, at the coroner's direction.
A court of inquiry was convened on February 5, at which eighteen witnesses gave evidence, including Doctor Erb, whose evidence before the coroner's jury is quoted in the newspaper, and including also the medical officers who attended the deceased. A copy of the proceedings of the court of inquiry was sent to the attorney general of Ontario. The attorney general directed, an inquest, which was held; and the finding referred to by the hon. member was made on February 25. Copy of this finding was forwarded to me by the premier and attorney general of Ontario. The validity or otherwise of these findings cannot of course be appraised without a full examination of the evidence, the relevant circumstances, and competent opinion regarding appropriate treatment in the case referred to.
I immediately gave instructions to obtain a copy of the evidence taken before the coroner's jury. It is reported to me however that this evidence will not be transcribed by the court
Post-War Reconstruction

reporter until probably next Thursday. Meantime I had the director-general of medical services communicate personally with the chief coroner of Ontario, and the latter is cooperating by furnishing, as quickly as it is transcribed, a copy of the evidence taken before the coroner's jury, and also a copy of the report of the autopsy.
Just as soon as this material is received, the matter will have the most complete and thorough examination, with a view to whatever action may be found to be called for.


POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION   APPOINTMENT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON RECONSTRUCTION AND REESTABLISHMENT
[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, February 26, consideration of the motion of Mr. Mackenzie (Vancouver Centre) for the appointment of a select committee to study and report upon the general problems of reconstruction and reestablishment which may arise at the termination of the present war.
Mr. J. A. ROSS (Souris):: Mr. Speaker, we have yet to win this war in which we are now engaged. I agree with the hon. members for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) and Cariboo (Mr. Turgeon) when they say that our first duty should be to the members of our armed forces now overseas. It has been said, and we must realize, that many of those gallant people will not return to their civilian lives after the fray. Therefore the government should now be in a position to assure those in the armed forces that their dependents will be properly cared for in the future. Those who will come back should be now assured that every opportunity will be provided to make certain that they and their dependents will have a respectable standard of living in this country. If this is done it will do much to develop and maintain the morale of the armed forces and of people in Canada in these critical times.
I was deeply impressed on Friday, I believe it was, by the speech of the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power). I know something about the conditions which confronted many ex-service men after the last war. As the minister said, how different for the boys of the air force to-day, many of them still in their teens experiencing all the thrills of actual air combat. Many of these boys did not know what an occupation was when they left for overseas. How vastly different and more difficult it will be to find places for them, with their fine academic training, when this war is over. I trust that the speech which was made on this subject by

the Minister of National Defence for Air will be distributed by the wartime information board. It will do a great deal more good than much of the propaganda that has come from that board for circulation amongst the people.
I have never been one of those who think that the state owes a man or a woman a living whether he or she is prepared to work for it or not. But I have always considered that the state owes every man and every woman an opportunity to work for a respectable standard of living. Given that opportunity, coupled with certain social legislation respecting health and old age, I think that we should have a contented and prosperous people in a land so rich in resources as Canada is.
A great deal has been accomplished in reconstruction for agriculture during the past few years under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. This act was set up in 1935 by the late Hon. Robert Weir, and I am happy to say it has been carried on up to the present by successive governments. Under this act a great deal has been accomplished in water conservation, community pastures, regrassing, reclamation and reforestation, and matters of the kind. The possibilities for reforestation in many parts of Canada are immense. The operations which have been carried on under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act have made possible a greater diversified production in many sections of western Canada, which could not have been accomplished without the benefit of this act. I should like to quote from an article appearing in the magazine Canadian Business. It states:
Things have been looking up lately for the *western farmer, with good crops, good weather and a more diversified production. Cash income from sale of farm products in the four western provinces in 1941 was $418,700,000, the highest since 1929. If the various government bonuses are added, this means, according to a recent bulletin of the Country Guide, a cash income per farm of $1,447 or $255 more than the average for all Canada. Ontario had the highest income per farm, followed by Alberta, then Manitoba. But western Canada, with 44 per cent of the farms of the dominion, received over 51 per cent of the total farm income.
The picture is so much brighter in the west partly because of more diversified production. In the 20's, wheat represented over 70 per cent of the prairie farmers' cash income; last year it was only 43 per cent. Major factor is the increased interest in raising hogs, live stock and poultry, and no longer does the west consist only of acres of wheat fields. These provinces now have 51 per cent of the hogs in the dominion and 45 per cent of all the cattle. These are 1941 figures, but by June 1942 the percentage increase in the number of hogs was 41 per cent in Manitoba, 40 per cent in Saskatchewan, 23 per cent in Alberta. Eastern Canada in 1941 had an average of 7-6 hogs

Post-War Reconstruction
per farm; western Canada 10-1. Average number of cattle per farm was 11-6 in eastern Canada and 11-8 in western Canada. Hog and cattle production has been aided by a huge reserve of feed grains and the only limiting factor is lack of farm labour.
May I digress for a moment to say that the statement on farm labour made by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) on February 26 is far from satisfactory to the farmers. It just proves the lack of governmental coordination and continued muddling in our man-power policy, with agriculture taking what is left. We had during the fall of 1942 a movement of university students from eastern Canada to the west to assist with the harvest. This was far from satisfactory; yet according to a return brought down on February 15 last this undertaking cost the taxpayers approximately one-quarter of a million dollars-to be exact $235,521.99. This was the amount paid by the federal government to the railway companies in connection with the movement of students to the west. I quote further from the same article:
What about sheep and poultry production? In the raising of sheep, the west is definitely a leader; with 44 per cent of the total farms in Canada, it has 50 per cent of the sheep production, with an average of 5 per farm. In the east, the figure is 3 per farm. Bulk of sheep raising is done in Alberta (8-7 per farm), followed by British Columbia (5-7) and Quebec and Nova Scotia (3-2). Value of wool production in the four western provinces in 1941 was $1,563,000.
The article goes on to mention other branches of agriculture;
Poultry raising is another important industry, and Bale of poultry and eggs brought to the western farmer $29,673,000 in 1941. Forty-seven per cent of total poultry in the dominion is in the west-71-3 is the average number of poultry per farm in the west, and 63 in the east. British Columbia leads in this branch of farming, with 82-9 per farm, followed by Ontario, 80-1.
Other sources of income in 1941 were grains and hay, $200,864,000, and vegetables $4,900,000. Production of oats, barley and flax is still on the increase, as wheat acreage is more and more reduced.
This development has been made possible in many sections of the country solely through the work that was done under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. Canada has been prodigal of its agricultural resources, as has been pointed out by officials in charge of administering that act, and this is no less true of Ontario than it is of the prairies. In many parts of the east, ruthless cutting of timber from the watersheds of small streams has created conditions most serious to stable agriculture. Spring floods, it is also pointed out, have caused a serious problem in soil erosion
I quote from the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix of February 24, 1943:
In the west, P.F.R.A. has done a splendid job within the limits of its resources. Its restoration of grasslands, the construction of small dams and the few small irrigation projects it has undertaken have all paid dividends in better agriculture. But more important still, it has begun a real programme of soil conservation which must be a continuing campaign if this country is to maintain a prosperous agriculture.
Many other projects are possible under that act. I trust that the reconstruction committee will make a study of what has already been accomplished under the act and of its much wider application to agriculture throughout the dominion.
In the province of Manitoba we have an abundance of cheap electrical power. Over a year ago, I am happy to be able to say, the provincial government appointed a commission to investigate the possibility and feasibility of rural farm electrification throughout Manitoba. Since then the commission have issued their report recommending that immediately after the war, in cooperation with the federal authorities, this electrification be proceeded with.
Last year this house passed the Veterans' Land Act, which is a great improvement on the old soldier settlement acts. But before any veterans' land settlement undertaking or reconstruction scheme can be a success, we must all be in agreement on one point-that parity prices must be established and maintained for all products and services essential to the welfare of the human family.
May I quote just a sentence or two from the Commercial Intelligence Journal of February 27, 1943, which in an article headed "Agriculture" says:
The year 1942 is generally regarded as a good one for the agricultural community. This was due in no small degree to the increased dependence of the country as a whole on domestic output of various raw materials and foodstuffs. The government took numerous steps to encourage improved production of grains and other foods, such as the provision of seed, the issue of loans for the purchase of implements and fertilizers, the guaranteeing of minimum prices, and the outright purchase of certain crops. Prices of agricultural produce did not in general keep in pace with those of many consumer goods, and the farmer has suffered some loss in income.
It is estimated that the farmers of Canada, who compose 33 per cent of the population, will have received about 15 per cent of the national income for 1942. They received 30 per cent of the national income in the years 1915 to 1919. During the present war, farm prices in Canada have been substantially below prices obtaining in practically every one of the
Post-War Reconstruction

warring nations. Thus we have approximately one-third of the people of Canada actually engaged in farming and receiving under one-sixth of the national income. Agricultural' foodstuffs are now recognized by everyone as essential munitions of war, yet at present the lot of the farmer is not a particularly happy one. I suggest to the reconstruction committee that the recommendations of the Rowell-Sirois commission report be given careful and detailed study. Not only will many of the recommendations mean a great deal to the future of the provinces, but if put in operation they will affect in detail the future welfare and lives of many of the citizens of the dominion.
I trust that the report will receive the serious consideration of the committee, and that it will be favourably recommended in their report to this house.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Will my hon. friend permit a question? Will he tell us whether he believes that the implementation of the recommendations of the Sirois report would aid the provinces?


James Arthur Ross: Yes, I believe in many respects they would. I am not saying I agree entirely with all the recommendations in that report, but I ask that the committee study it in detail and that such recommendations as are considered to be of assistance to the provinces and to the citizens in general be commended to the house. I agree wholeheartedly with many of them.


John Horne Blackmore: Would my hon. friend mind telling us with which ones he agrees, and-?


James Arthur Ross: I do not intend to go at the present time into a detailed discussion such as the hon. member for Lethbridge proposes. I shall be glad to do so on some other occasion. There are many recommendations in that report which, he knows as well as I do, would be of distinct benefit to the citizens of this country.


John Horne Blackmore: On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, I do not know that any of them would do any good to the provinces.


James Arthur Ross: I do not think that the views expressed by the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) are any argument why the committee should not give favourable consideration to the report, and if they decide to recommend certain of its proposals, I trust that they will be implemented in the statutes of Canada.
Before those in the armed forces and those engaged in war industry are released, adequate training and suitable work must be provided
(Mr. J. A. Ross.]
for them. In doing this, we must keep uppermost in our minds at all times the fact that anything we decide upon must be based upon parity prices for all products and services. I have already pointed out that this is essential to the welfare of the human family, and if we follow that principle we shall not go very far astray.
I shall have more to say on the subject of reconstruction as it applies under the resolution for social security and health insurance, and with particular reference also to agriculture throughout the dominion, but I do not think I should take up more of the time of the house at this stage.


Mr. DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):: I wish to give, for the use of the minister and his committee when they get down to work, a few facts about the head of the lakes which I think they should have and which may be helpful in the reconstruction period.
The first fact is that at the head of the lakes we have hundreds of square miles of virgin timber, good for lumber, firewood, pulp and shipbuilding. I found out the other day that we have in the Thunder bay district the western white spruce picea glauca. Its existence there was not known until recently, because nobody had explored the full extent of our timber. A tree is of little value until it is cut down. I have not very much patience with those who want to revert to such primitive processes as the burning of peat, when we have all kinds of good coal and wood. So that the first point which should be borne in mind by the committee is that we have timber in abundance.
In the second place we are rich in mines. We have gold, silver, copper, zinc, chromium, and also iron in abundance, ready to be mined and put on the market. If the Department of Mines and Resources can make money out of the socialization of their muskrats, they can turn loose some of their experts in the Thunder bay district, and soon the rest of Canada will hum as a result of what we have in that section.
Remember also that we have an excellent harbour. It is well protected; it is needed for shipbuilding; when the minister and nis committee make as an outstanding factor in reconstruction the development of the St. Lawrence waterway, the dream of so many people at the head of the lakes will come true, and the head of the lakes will become the Chicago of the west. We shall have there a great distributing centre, which will mean much to the whole of Canada.
But the best thing to be found at the head of the lakes, and something which is perhaps

Post-War Reconstruction
not very well known, is our farming area. Some people think we have no farms, and thereby show their lack of knowledge. We have in the Port Arthur and Fort William districts 25,000 acres of farm land, of which 12,784 acres are assessed. This is a greater area than will be found round the city of Hamilton, which has only 9,694 acres, or Windsor, with 8,251 acres, or Sudbury, with 1,522 acres; and anyone who has gone through these districts and knows anything about soils and what they can produce will admit that ours is the coming farming district, not even second to Manitoba.
What are these farms capable of producing? All kinds of grain, apples and other fruits; in fact the best strawberries with the finest flavour of which I have any knowledge are grown in our district. This is on account of the cool atmosphere during the summer; they are not subject to frost as in some other places. The climate is damp and cool in summer because of our proximity to a great cold freshwater lake. This, too, is favourable to the growth of abundant grass, and the lakehead during the past years has become a feeding centre for fat cattle. The soil has been tested by the chamber of commerce and by our experts at the experimental farm substation, and has been found to be capable of producing sugar beet of a very high grade.
Our district is also distinguished by its ability to produce poultry and eggs. There are those who say that our hens can lay more and bigger eggs than any others. The climate is cool and the hens do not have to sweat at their job to the same extent as elsewhere. During the past week our poultry association passed a resolution asking that eggs from the head of the lakes be marked accordingly to show that they are better eggs and have more flavour.
We are also known for our fisheries. Lake Superior trout is known all over Canada and in some places in the United States. The only trouble is that there is not enough to go around. Fresh herring is just beginning to come into its own.
The municipal air field was taken over by the Department of National Defence when the war broke out. Originally this field was intended to be on a feeder line to the Trans-Canada Air Lines but it will now be on the Trans-Canada Air Lines when the war is over.
We have power at the head of the lakes. We do not have to depend upon Niagara falls because we have the Cameron falls ninety miles from Fort William. We also have the Ivakabeka falls which are known for their beauty and usefulness. We have a water system second to none. Loch Lomond is
situated 400 feet above the level of the lake. All that needed to be done was to put in a pipe and the water flowed down sweet and clean. In order to have the right type of development, we must have the right kind of laws. We must have progressive laws. There are men and women who want to use the talents that God has given to them and not hide them under the earth.
This committee should see to it that the right of free enterprise and the right of the worker to cooperate are continued. I have a legal adviser who sometimes comes to my room to give me some free advice. His advice is good, and he says that it would be a good thing if we could look down at the world from above, see ourselves as the good Lord sees us. That of course caused my mind to go back into the realm of the queen of sciences, namely, theology. There are two phases that are used a good deal in connection with the new social order. One is, "the banishment of fear" and the other is, "the banishment of poverty." I think of fear as one of the great blessings of mankind. There are men in this house who are afraid of their own conduct, afraid of their own speeches. Fear is often protective. It is a blessing to us from the time we first got burned by touching something we should not have touched.
There are those who will say that we should banish fear, but there is only one way to cure fear. Work cannot cure fear. Success is no cure for fear. Quite often the man who has the most money has the greatest fear that he will lose it or that someone will get the better of a deal with him. The only cure for fear must come from that great Teacher, who said:
But perfect love casteth out fear.
If you have not love of the right thing, then you are not going to get rid of fear. Poverty is a relative term. There are people on relief in Ottawa who in the days of King Tut would have been considered as living most luxuriously. But there will always be people at the bottom of the human way of living, people who will be called poor. Again I hear the Master Workman coming out with this clear statement:
For ye have the poor always with you.
He was one to whom the future was an open book.
This committee should obtain brief statements from the different reconstruction committees which have been set up across Canada. I can give the name of Alderman Fryer, who is head of our committee, to the minister. I am sure that Alderman Fryer will be able to provide some useful information because
Post-War Reconstruction

at the head of the lakes we have resources which, if put to proper use, would be a blessing to mankind.
Mr. WILFRID LaCROIX (Quebec-Mont-morency.) (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I wish to take advantage of this debate on post-war problems to voice my views and those of my electors on the financial burden which is being laid upon the wage-earners of this country and the effects of which will necessarily be felt after the war.
In this connection I desire to offer to the government a suggestion for the better apportionment of the taxes necessitated by our participation in the present world war, a participation which takes into account neither our population nor the limit of our possibilities. I feel that in the financing of our war effort, capital should be called upon to supply a substantial share of the required funds. Since the outbreak of this war, many wealthy people in this country have undoubtedly invested their money in securities or real estate so as to put their Capital outside the reach of the government.
In many cases, such investments produce no income, but the capital is protected for the future. The men who risk their lives on land, at sea and in the air are also fighting for the protection of those investors' property.
Here is what I would suggest for compelling those people to assume a greater share of our war effort. The government should decide to force them to lend the money needed by this country, even though they might say that they have none available. The government might thus say to those investors: "You own securities or real estate unmortgaged in a definite proportion. An act of parliament will compel you to file an application with the Bank of Canada, which will lend you the funds needed by the government for the war effort." They would give to the Bank of Canada, or to the latter's agents, a mortgage on their securities or real estate, and would file with those banks guarantees for the amount loaned, and they would lend to the dominion government the money thus obtained from the bank. In return they would receive a dominion bond which would be deposited with the Bank of Canada or its agents. After the war, the dominion government would, at a certain date fixed by them according to the development, the resources and the income of the country, say within about thirty years, redeem those bonds, the holders then paying back the banks.
Such a plan would enable the government to obtain billions of dollars for our war effort.

In order to protect modest fortunes, which will never be too numerous in this country since they ensure a better distribution of public wealth, only the owners of securities or real estate worth more than $25,000 would be called upon to lend money to the government according to the above plan.
The plan would not apply to properties used for religious, charitable or educational or hospitalization purposes. I may point out, Mr. Speaker, that this plan would not mean confiscation. For our war expenditures of 1943, 10 per cent of the value of all securities or real estate in Canada could be loaned, and should the war be still going on in 1944, another loan of 10 per cent might be required. Through such a plan the government could considerably reduce the income tax now being paid by the people in the lower and medium salary brackets, because the latter have no capital other than their salary, and it would enable us to honour their obligations, which they cannot do at the present time.
It should not be forgotten that the greater part of the revenue derived by the Canadian government from income tax is levied on the lower or medium salary brackets, as few people draw large salaries and the income tax on salaries is much higher here than in the United States. To my mind, it is not fair that a single generation should have to pay the whole cost of this war, because the benefits of peace will be enjoyed as much by future generations as by ourselves.
Our soldiers make great sacrifices and wealthy people have no right to elude the financial sacrifices that are necessary. The guarantee they would receive from the government is certainly greater than that given to the army as regards the opportunity of finding employment after the war. Such a plan would make billions of dollars available to the dominion treasury. One can imagine the meaning of a 10 per cent levy on all securities or real estate in Canada. One cause for strikes lies in the fact that so much money is now taken from the small wage earners because they find it difficult to make both ends meet and to cope with the cost of living, which notwithstanding what is said, shows a considerable increase.
Moreover, the banks would not take the slightest risk for it must not be forgotten that they have lent up to 75 per cent of the value of stock exchange securities which were certainly not worth as much as the guarantees to which I am referring.
To-day, Mr. Speaker, capitalists take advantage of the difficulties which beset the small land owner, to confiscate his properties. Here is an example. Lieutenant-Colonel Jack

Post-War Reconstruction
Price, of Quebec, has been a prisoner of war in Japan since the fall of Hong Kong. He was the owner of a property that cost him $75,000. His wife had to sell it for the amount of the mortgage, $13,000, because she did not have the money necessary to meet her obligations. So, while some of our men are making the supreme sacrifice on the battlefields of Africa, Europe or Asia, these greedy capitalists take advantage of this fact to confiscate properties, even though they be non-revenue bearing, so that, after the war, their capital will remain intact even if our dollar becomes devalorized. Every one knows, of course, that in the event of such a devalorization, the price of commodities and properties would increase in proportion to the decrease in value of the dollar. Mr. Speaker, I point out to the government that they are at present discriminating against the great majority of wage-earners. They force them to loan part of their salary without interest, while the capitalists who subscribe to a loan make sure that they will draw interest on their investment.
Often, the capitalist's subscription to a Victory Loan is nothing but a publicity stunt; as soon as the contribution has been publicly announced, he repairs to the bank to sell his bonds and buy more and more property. At the present time we are witnessing the monopolizing of real estate by the trusts and, at the close of hostilities, we shall be a country of unevenly distributed wealth, a condition favourable to the development of subversive ideas inviting communism.
It may be claimed that a reduction of taxes on salaries might very well provoke inflation, by virtue of the consequent increase in the purchasing power of the public. My answer is that the government has the necessary means of preventing this increased purchasing power. Indeed, they have, at the present time, let us not forget it, all the necessary power to control both prices and wages and the additional power to freeze at the 1942 level all production deemed as non-essential to the war effort, thereby preventing the purchasing power from exceeding that of 1942. The government is empowered to set a ceiling at the 1942 level, on the amount of goods obtainable by both retailers and wholesalers, at the same time preventing the consumer from buying more than he could buy in 1942. Thus, no increase in the purchasing power could provoke inflation by an increased demand for goods as a consequence of an increased supply of money. The exercise of the above powers by the government would necessarily compel the wage-earner to save money for the postwar period, for, let us not forget it, after the
war, this class will not have the same opportunities as the capitalists, their only capital, in most cases, being their salary.
The adoption of such a policy will prevent the worker from becoming a public liability. It is imperative, by a reduction of taxes on the small and medium salaries, to compel their recipients to accumulate savings for the post-war period and thus lighten the burden of the administration when the time comes for them to face this problem. The harder the wage-earner finds it to spend his earnings the lighter will be the burden of the government after the war.
We must not overlook the fact that, for 25 years, the capitalist has been in the position of increasing his holdings, because our soldiers gave their lives for him from 1914 to 1918, and that, in the course of most of these 25 years, the workers and a considerable proportion of the wage-earners have been unemployed, through the depression which we all remember, and that, only since the beginning of the war have they been able to afford the luxury of life insurance to protect their families and insure some degree of future social security for their children.
I have discussed this plan with a number of my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, and some have suggested that, by striking at capital I would alienate the Anglo-Canadian element of the population for, they said, they own most of the capital, the French Canadians making up the greater portion of the wage-earning class of our country.
My answer to them, Mr. Speaker, is that we, French Canadians, are not to blame for the fact that a certain group of Englishspeaking Canadians, especially those known as the "Two Hundred," in Toronto, have raised imperialism to the dignity of a dogma It is much more important that the same fair treatment be meted out to every one and the financial burden of the war be evenly distributed. Furthermore, let those who subscribe to the dogma of imperialism pay for the expensive consequences of their opinions to the benefit of the large class of wage-earners.
I know that, at the present time, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) is seriously considering this plan. Allow me, Mr. Speaker, to express the fond hope that it will be implemented, for we must remember that our professional and labouring classes are the main props of our nation and that their whole capital is the salary they draw every week or every month.


Mr. J. W. NOSEWORTHY (York South):: I hesitate to prolong this debate which has already run into the second or third day.
Post-M7ar Reconstruction

There is, however, one subject pertaining to reconstruction that I think deserves more attention than it has received to date, namely, the subject of education, and I shall confine my remarks this afternoon to the importance of education as part of our reconstruction programme. So far only one hon. member in this debate, the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) has made any reference to the importance of that subject.
First I should like to congratulate the government upon the Vocational Training Act that was passed in this house last year. In my opinion it is the most progressive piece of legislation in the field of education that has ever been passed in this house. It is far-reaching in its effect. I wish to congratulate the minister also. It is not very often that I have the opportunity' to congratulate the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) but I want to take this opportunity of congratulating him upon the committee that he has set up to advise him under the authority of last year's act.
That act, however, is limited in its scope to vocational training. It provides for the education of those who are being trained in our war emergency classes for some place in the armed forces, for the education of our men who return from overseas, and it makes possible cooperation with the provincial governments for education on the secondary school level after the war is over. I suggest that the special committee appoint a subcommittee, not for labour and education as was done last year, but to study the importance of education and its bearing on our post-war problems; and in the few moments at my disposal I should like to suggest four definite subjects which I think might very well come up for study by the committee.
In the first place I consider that there is need for a vocational guidance committee in the federal field. Under the Department of Labour we have employment offices and placement officers in all the important centres across this country. We have heard some criticism of these employment offices. It may be true that they are staffed with personnel who have had little training for their jobs, but if they could be staffed with well trained personnel, when the war is over these offices should be very important in preventing an employment muddle. At the same time we have tens of thousands of our boys and girls being trained in vocational schools, and I am satisfied that in view of the nature of employment, in view of the fact that employment and trade and commerce are national in their scope, only a committee which

can view this field from a national point of view can adequately advise our young people on the courses to study and provide them with guidance in securing employment. In England such offices were set up thirty years ago, and there is a place for the guidance of young people in the labour set-up there. The employment offices are staffed with trained personnel. Juvenile vocational councils have been established. Officers from those councils do not wait for boys and girls to come to them for guidance; they go into the schools and advise the young people on the courses they should follow, and assist the parents in placing these young people in employment after they have left school. One thing I fear we are likely to get in Canada after the war is a federal office of education superimposed upon and working independently of the present nine provincial departments of education. I believe it is important that some federal bureau or committee be set up which will coordinate or correlate the work being done in the educational field by the federal authorities with what is being done in the schools of the provinces, particularly in the field of vocational guidance.
A second matter which I think might well come before the committee-and I am passing over these points rapidly this afternoon in the hope that there may be an opportunity of discussing them in further detail with the committee-is the setting up of a federal bureau of education. In the United States, where education is a state matter as in Canada it is a provincial matter, a federal bureau of education has functioned since 1887, and never once during all those years has any question been raised as to its infringement upon the rights of the states. That bureau serves to coordinate all the educational research work being done throughout the nation. It serves as a clearing-house for information, and is regarded by educationists of that country as being of immense value. We have in Canada, under the bureau of statistics, an educational office which educational authorities across this country consider has done a remarkably good job. Almost every educational association and authority in this country has recommended from year to year that the services of this bureau should be extended. We now have an opportunity of extending the work being done by that office until it becomes something similar to the bureau of education which functions in the United States. There is no intention that such a committee or bureau should in any way usurp the authority of the provincial departments of education. Its function should be, as it is now, to

Post-War Reconstruction
correlate all the research work being done, to give some leadership in directing research work along educational lines, and to serve as a clearing-house for the dissemination of such research as has been carried out. We talk a great deal about Canadian unity, and its lack. Anything we can do through a central bureau that will enable the boys and girls of one province to become better acquainted with those in the schools of the other provinces; anything we can do that will enable the work being done in the schools of one province to be made known to the authorities of the other provinces-all will help in building Canadian instead of provincial citizenship.
A third field to which the committee should give some consideration is that of providing federal bursaries and scholarships at both secondary school and university levels. Today it is a fact that the educational opportunities accorded our young people are to a large extent determined by the economic status of the family. Recent research in the United States covering many hundreds of thousands of students has shown that more than fifty per cent of boys and girls who leave the secondary schools before completing their courses do so on account of economic reasons. They leave because their families cannot afford to keep them at school until they have finished. That is taking place continually in our Canadian schools. In a survey made a few years ago in Toronto and suburban areas it was found that more than fifty per cent of the brightest boys and girls in the schools in that section were forced out of school before completing their matriculation, or before graduating from secondary schools, as a result of lack of finances to keep them in school. It is a well known fact that a boy's opportunity of attending university to-day is to a large extent dependent upon the financial ability of his family to assist him. As a consequence we are losing in Canada some of the brightest of our young people. Thousands of them who could best profit by education have no opportunity of acquiring it. This incidentally is no innovation. In Great Britain and in other parts of the British empire scholarships such as I have mentioned are provided, at both secondary school and university levels, for capable but indigent pupils.
As a fourth matter for the study of the committee I would sugest a subject bristling with difficulty, namely, federal financial support to the provinces for primary and secondary education in the schools of the province. I suggest furthermore that such federal assistance must of necessity be given on the basis
of provincial needs. Any assistance which has heretofore been given in the field of education to the provinces has been given on a basis of population, or on a basis whereby the province contributed fifty per cent and the dominion the other 50 per cent. As a result, with regard to grants made for technical education in past years, only the wealthiest provinces were able to make adequate use of those grants within the time specified by the act. And even in those provinces only the larger urban centres could take advantage of the grants. The result is that to-day we have fairly adequate vocational education opportunities in our larger centres, but throughout the rural areas and in the smaller towns and villages we find inadequate opportunity for anything in the nature of vocational training.
Whatever else the Rowell-Sirois report revealed, it did reveal the great differences in the ability of the several provinces to bear their share, or to bear an adequate share of the cost of education and other social programmes. For instance, if Prince Edward Island were to provide from the provincial treasury an adequate system of education it would require the expenditure of nearly eighty per cent of the income of that provincial government. There are provinces which can provide out of provincial revenue an adequate educational programme, but there are others- and I have in mind the situation in Saskatchewan a few years ago-which find it simply impossible. So that if effective federal aid is to be given in respect of education, and if that aid is to serve the purpose for which it is given, it should be allocated on a basis of provincial need.
Speaking for the moment with regard to the need for federal support, may I remind hon. members that in Canada we began to finance education by a tax on real estate levied by small municipalities. We did that because in those days there was nothing else to tax. We have continued from that day to this to ask real estate in local communities to bear about SO per cent of the cost of education in Canada. We are the only part of the British empire where education is supported by a tax on municipal real estate. In every other part of the empire the cost of education is borne by governments corresponding with our provincial and federal governments. In every other instance throughout the empire not less than 50 per cent of the cost of education is borne by the central government.
Let us for a moment ask ourselves the result of our present method of financing education. The type of school a boy attends, the nature of equipment provided, the library facilities
Post-War Reconstruction

available, the qualifications of the teacher and in many instances even the length of time the school is open are determined to a great extent by the value of real estate assessment in a local municipality. The result is that a boy living on one side of a street, in one municipality, in many instances has an opportunity of gaining a much superior education than can be gained by another boy who may live on the opposite side of the same street, but who lives in another muncipality or another school section.
Surely the time has come in Canada when we must realize that education is a matter of vital national importance, and, being so, surely some means should be taken whereby the provinces and the federal government working in cooperation could be made to bear the major share of the cost. Granted, I know, that by the British North America Act education is a matter of provincial concern, there is no reason whatever why the federal government should interfere in any way with the programme of a provincial department of education, because the assistance would be by way of financial support.
The one great need from the federal point of view is to see to it that no boy or girl in Canada is deprived of an educational opportunity because his or her parents are poor. Under present conditions many boys and girls lack that opportunity, and that is a situation which should be remedied.
Subject to your approval, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Castleden) the following amendment:
That this motion be amended by inserting after the word "committees" in line 6 the following words: "including a subcommittee on education".


Mr. G. H. CASTLEDEN (Yorkton):: Mr. Speaker, as a member of the reconstruction committee of the house last year, I should like to make a few constructive observations. There are two or three fields in which I believe that committee failed to make sufficient progress. If reports and words would reconstruct Canada I feel as a result of the experience of that committee that the job would be pretty well done by now.
The purpose of the James committee and the work of the reconstruction committee and of its subcommittees has been to study problems which face Canada under the present set-up. It seemed to me that one of the first things we should have done was to make a study of why it was that Canada had not provided that life which she was capable

of providing in the years prior to the war But we were told rather bluntly in the committee that no such study was being made. We wanted to find out what had been wrong with our national set-up. Then possibly we could have found some basis from which to effect a cure. We have not, it seems, clarified our aims. We are pretty much in the position of a physician who has been called upon to administer treatment to a sick man, and who is unwilling to make a diagnosis in order to find out what is wrong with him. Very often I felt that we were trying to administer some sort of temporary palliative instead of getting down to the root of the evil and finding out what was really wrong. Canada in the past few decades has not made much progress. We have sunk to what I think could properly be termed a C 3 nation. Our living standards, our health and housing standards, our educational standards in most of the dominion have been low, and unemployment and insecurity have been our lot.
I believe that the committee would do well first to make a survey of the things which our twelve million people approximately, and we hope twenty million within a few years, require. Then it should make a survey of the resources and the materials we have in the dominion in the way of natural resources, machinery of production, labour, brains and ability, to provide our people with these things which they need. After we have made those two surveys our big problem will be to bring the two together. In other words, how can we so arrange our national -economy that our people who need those things, and are willing to make their contribution in the way of effort toward obtaining them, shall have them? Frankly, I find in the reports of the committee which have so far been submitted much which causes me to feel that we have not touched the real problem of making these services and goods available to the people.
One of the particular fields which I wish to discuss is agriculture. To-day agriculture is the forgotten industry in this land. It seems to be looked upon as the legitimate prey of business. We find that the grain exchanges are carrying on their gambling operations.
We find millers and packers waxing wealthy on the farmers' products, and we find money lenders who have loaned the farmers into debt. We find machinery companies and others charging what they like for what the farmer has to buy, and the prices he receives for his products bear no relation to the cost of production. The only attempt at freezing those prices has been to freeze them down at a level

Post-War Reconstruction
which can ultimately lead only to a sort of pauperized peasantry. The farmer now finds himself regulated almost to death.
The subcommittee set out to study something in the field of agriculture, and their studies led them into the field of trying to ascertain a proper balance between agricultural and industrial populations. They proposed to investigate the whole field of the industrial use of agricultural products, internal trade within Canada, and external trade between Canada and other parts of the world. A study of the external trade should include a careful gauging of the requirements of foreign markets and a planning of Canadian agriculture so that the surpluses we have can best be disposed of. We believe that the national marketing boards should to a certain extent take the place of grain exchanges and food exchanges, and through these boards there should be set up machinery for establishing a proper parity price within the dominion, and for effecting a proper exchange of goods within the various parts of the dominion.
In the foreign field we should be finding out what things Canada will require and how we can best provide the things which other nations will require and which we can offer in exchange. In both these fields we believe that the committee has failed to study properly the place for wholesale and retail cooperative organizations. In the internal economy of Canada there are many things which must startle us as we look at them. There is the fact that we in the west have such boundless abundance of grains and foodstuffs which seem to be lacking in other parts of the dominion.
I am glad that the committee is studying the field of nutrition. I have often considered, when thinking of the large wheat surpluses of western Canada, that it was shameful the way in which that grain with all its nutritive qualities had been changed in its manufacture until all the good was taken out of it and these nutritive properties were not made available to the people who should have them. Again, there is an abundance of fruit growing as in the Okanagan valley, but the children on the western prairies are unable to get fruit as a part of their necessary nutritive supply.
Another problem which is a part of the agricultural problem is that of debt. Agriculture cannot expect to be restored until there is a proper attack on this debt problem throughout the whole dominion. There can be no security until the people on the land are placed in a position of solvency and given an opportunity to provide themselves with security. I should like to recommend for the
committee's study the work of the farm security administration in the United States. Under the circumstances which exist in Canada to-day, the agricultural burden of debt deprives about eighty-five per cent of those engaged in agriculture of a decent livelihood, of health and of hope. We believe that the foundation of any good national life is the agricultural industry. In Canada that foundation is failing, as is evidenced by the movement of so many people in recent years from the farms into the cities. This is not just a war-time phenomenon; it has existed during the past forty years, being accelerated by the difficulties placed in the way of those who try to make a living by toiling on the land, so that to-day less than thirty-three per cent of our population is engaged in agriculture. That is not a healthy condition in any national economy.
The other field in which we are failing is that of education. On this subject I have the honour to second the amendment which is at present before the house. Sir William Beveridge in his report says, at page 6, that there are five giants to be overcome on the road to reconstruction. Want is only one of those; the others are disease, ignorance, squalour and idleness. Education is the first and the natural attack on that giant of ignorance. The attack on ignorance is the basis, we believe, for solving most of the other problems; and this amendment provides for a special subcommittee to devote its time to that vital phase of reconstruction.
We are of opinion that knowledge should be socialized across the whole of the dominion. We mean that it must be made available to everyone. The committee would be required to study education from the national viewpoint. We believe that education should be a national concern.


Mr. MacNICOL:: The British North America Act states that it belongs to the provinces.


George Hugh Castleden: If Canada had had a national educational policy, properly carried out, we would not have suffered from the degeneration which had been our lot for the past twenty years. We would not now be a C3 nation; we might have been able to make a greater contribution in the battle for freedom in which we are now engaged. We must be prepared to equal the social improvements which have been established in our sister dominion of New Zealand. Unless we have a national programme of training and education we cannot hope to make Canada one of the first nations of the world. I am doubtful whether we are likely to overtake some of the nations which are now leading the world
Post-War Reconstruction

in this direction, and which look upon the brains of the young people as being the greatest natural resource they have.
The committee could make a complete investigation of the educational needs of Canada, surveying the possibilities of federal assistance to provincial departments of education. I do not believe there is any necessity for interfering with the powers or authority of the provincial education departments. We propose merely to give federal assistance to those provinces which, on account of their economic condition, are unable to maintain a decently high and minimum standard of education. We believe that a federal educational programme assisting the provinces to maintain that minimum standard in respect of primary, secondary and adult education would benefit the whole dominion, and that we as a nation can no longer afford to neglect this problem. I cannot imagine a proposal of this kind being opposed excepting by those who fear real social reform.
In closing, I would just say that we believe Canadians must be trained in leadership so that they can develop confidence in themselves and be enabled to make their contribution in a society with a cooperative outlook, while maintaining that sturdy independence which is so essentially a part of the common man.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I submit that the amendment which has been moved is not in accordance with the established rule as set out in Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, paragraph 422, and in May, 13th edition, page 473. This committee has already the power to set up subcommittees as it may decide; and this is a specialized instruction from this house to a committee of this house not yet formed.


Thomas Vien: I have considered the
amendment which is moved by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) and seconded by the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Castleden):
That this motion be amended by inserting after the word "committees" in line 6 the following words: "including a subcommittee on, education".
The house will realize that the motion is:
That a select committee of the house be appointed to study and report upon the general problems of reconstruction and reestablishment which may arise at the termination of the present war, and all questions pertaining thereto; with power to such select committee to appoint, from among the members of the committee, such subcommittees as may be deemed advisable or necessary, to deal with specific phases of the problems aforementioned, with power to said

select committee and to such subcommittees as may be formed therefrom, to call for persons, papers and records, to examine witnesses under oath . . .
In the first place, the proposition as stated in the motion is general in its terms, and there is no power for the house to instruct a committee which has not yet been formed. It is only after the committee is formed that instructions can be given to a committee to deal with some matter which the house thinks ought to be included in the terms of reference to the committee.
In the second place, it seems to me that the inclusion of the amendment is only giving such powers as the committee shall have when the motion is adopted by the house. They will have the general power to study and report upon problems of reconstruction and reestablishment, and also the power to appoint subcommittees to deal with any specific matters which are included or could be considered as included within the general terms of "reconstruction and reestablishment." For that reason, if any hon. member wished, and the amendment was relevant, he could propose a subcommittee on agriculture, or a subcommittee on any other phase of our activities, and the house would then be directing the committee on matters which are already included and governed by the general terms of the motion which is before the house. Further, if in the committee some effort is made to have included within it a subcommittee on education, that is certainly a matter which can be raised within the committee, and if the committee so decide the subcommittee can then be appointed. If the hon. members of the committee are not satisfied or there is refusal of a request to appoint a subcommittee, there is nothing to prevent hon. members of the committee from bringing the matter back to the house, and then instructions might be given by the house to include among the subcommittees a subcommittee on education.
For these reasons I rule the amendment out of order.


Mr. NEIL (Comox-Alberni):: May I say a word? It is customary, Mr. Speaker, before you give your decision to ask members of the house if they wish to express their opinion. Your Honour did not follow that practice in this case. May I suggest that a few days ago the house was permitted to do something entirely similar to that to which objection is now being taken. At that time the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green) moved an amendment, almost identical with what has been moved to-day, and the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) accepted it.

Post-War Reconstruction
At that time the hon. member wished to add to the matters which a committee would be permitted to go into and the government accepted his suggestion.


Thomas Vien: The hon. member is perfectly correct in what he states with regard to the amendment moved by the hon. member for Vancouver South, but the house will also remember that I took exception from the Chair to that amendment. I did not think it was relevant to the matter then before the house, and I stated that I must not be bound by what the house did, and that it should not be considered as a precedent. The house agreed to it unanimously, but I am now faced with this amendment which involves the same principle that was contained in the amendment of several days ago. I am now asked to give my ruling, and I think if I had been called upon for a ruling at that time I would certainly have ruled it out of order, as I am doing in connection with this particular amendment.


Mr. R. W. MAYHEW (Victoria, B.C.):: Mr. Speaker, I do not apologize for rising at this time to speak on rehabilitation, although I realize it is not the unanimous opinion of the people of Canada that when we are in the throes of a struggle, the outcome of which no one can definitely foretell, is the time to talk of rehabilitation. However, I do not think time can be divided into compartments of war and peace. In peacetime we should try to plan for war, and in war we should plan for peace. If we had made adequate plans for peace and for the development of this country during the last war, we would not have been in the position we are in to-day. I think in all probability this war might have been postponed. Had we during the twenty years between the end of the last war and the beginning of this one planned for this war, fewer of our men and ships would now be at the bottom of the Atlantic.
I think we should plan for peace at the present time even though we are in the midst of the desperate struggle which I mentioned. Hope is about the only antidote for fear that we have. Unless we can plan for peace as earnestly and as sincerely as we are planning for war, unless we can assure those who are fighting our battles that they can look forward to something fairly definite when they come home, or to something fairly definite for their families should they not come home, I think we shall be making a great mistake.
I am glad the government is assuming this role. I am glad to be associated with a
government that is ready to put forth a programme which I consider necessary for Canada at the present time. I thought that the minister from British Columbia would be the man to head up this rehabilitation programme because he started it, but I understand now that it is to be a matter for the whole cabinet. I think that is a mistake. If we are to rebuild Canada as we want to rebuild it, this plan will require a driving force greater than has ever been presented to the government before.
This programme will not be completed by the building of a few public buildings here and there, although the building of such buildings may form part of the programme. It will not be sufficient to say that we will build some roads here and there, even though we complete the long dreamed of main highway from the Atlantic to the Pacific. That is necessary, but of itself it is only a means to an end. We must clear the slums from our cities; we must rebuild the homes on the prairies which are now quite inadequate and which I am sure make us all feel most uncomfortable when we pass through the prairies these cold wintry days. These things are necessary, but of themselves they are only items in the programme.
We shall need the construction of power dams, the creating of power from the Fraser river, the Thompson, the Mackenzie, the Saskatchewan, the Ottawa, the St. Lawrence and the Saguenay; these are all necessary, they may form part of the total plan, but they are not the total plan. I was glad to hear the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNieol) refer to the need of power in the west. We may be able to put electric lights into the homes and make power available to everyone in Canada at cheap rates, but that wull be only part of the plan. The electrification of our railways to use the power of which there is no end instead of oil which must be brought from the United States, should be another feature in this plan. The creation of a merchant marine will not be sufficient in itself, nor will the providing of adequate air transport. A proper foreign policy is also necessary, as wmll as an immigration policy. These undertakings constitute a programme which is a challenge to the people of Canada and to this government, a challenge which I hope they will be able to meet.
I have no intention of dealing with each of these items individually and telling the government what should be done. I was glad to hear the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) speak of education. I
Post-War Reconstruction

think that, too, has to come in on our general plan. The little red schoolhouse was red at one time; to-day we do not know what colour it is because they have not had enough money to give it a coat of paint. Unattractive schoolyards, poorly-paid teachers, all have to come in. The youth of this country is the rock on which the country will be built solidly, or it will perish. We must pay proper attention to the education of our children.
But there are four things that I rose specially to mention to-day. I mention these because they relate to war time as well as peace. One is our merchant marine. During peace time Canada had no merchant marine worthy of the name. Are we to have one when this war is over? I think the Minister of Transport (Mr. Michaud) should announce to the house before this session is over whether it is the policy of the government to have a merchant marine in Canada or not. I should like to ask him whether the present boats we are building are adequate to compete in marine service when this war is over, if our eight- or ten-knot boats will fill the bill, or if we shall need larger and faster boats to compete with other countries. Yesterday I picked up a little book published by the Swedish Traffic Association in which I find this statement:
At the turn of the century Sweden was still to a great extent dependent on intermediaries abroad for her foreign trade and regular Swedish shipping lines extended only to the Baltic, the North sea and down to the Mediterranean.
Conditions have changed with amazing rapidity. Nowadays about 45 per cent of the direct shipping between Sweden and other countries, which in 1937 comprised 47-4 million net tons (incoming and outgoing vessels), is accounted for by Swedish tonnage, and of the total tonnage of the Swedish mercantile marine about half is employed on transoceanic routes. There are now direct Swedish routes to all parts of the world, with regular sailings several times a month, and the extension of these shipping lines has led to the opening up of valuable new markets for Swedish wares. So the truth of the maxim "Trade follows the flag" has been confirmed once again by experience.
I wonder whether Canada's trade will follow Canada's flag or follow the flag of some other country. Are we to let this service be given to us by outside people or to conserve it for the boys who are risking their lives to get our goods to the other nations of the world? Before this session is over, the minister should announce some policy as to our merchant marine.
Another matter I would speak about is air transport. Here again I could quote from the same book telling what has been done in the way of air transport in the little country of Sweden. In 1937 they put us to shame. Here are we in Canada at the top of the world, the one place where we should be giving every

consideration to air transport. In peace days we were running our ships, the fastest we had, from the far east to connect with the fastest trains in Canada and pushing them across to the Atlantic to farther east, the shortest and fastest route. Are we to lose that trade, hand it over to someone else to develop, or to develop it for Canada and for the boys who are to-day learning to fly and defending us? This government should now appoint a committee to go into the whole matter of air transport and where we stand in connection with transport for the world.
I say the same thing about our navy. These things should be declared now, for the benefit and the encouragement of our young men. Are we to have a Canadian navy, and in what proportions? The boys serving in our navy to-day want to know whether it is to be their life work. They do not want to feel that when the war is over we are going to have a few skiffs on the east coast and a few on the west coast. No matter what the size of it, the policy should be announced now by the government as to whether there is to be a Canadian navy or whether we are still to be sheltered under the Monroe doctrine or by Great Britain. Canadians want to stand on their own feet and they have a right to do so. Out of our strength we should help the others. If we want to be a good neighbour to our two closest neighbours then Canada must be developed with the greatest possible optimism and energy. I would not want to be the hon. member who spoke just before me. I cannot understand a man who is young and looks so full of energy and strength being so pessimistic about Canada as I know it and see it. There never was a time in my life when I could not see fifty jobs to do for every time I had one to do. For any man to rise in his place here and say that we have not this, or we have not that, I cannot understand it. What is more, we shall never have it without cooperation, no matter who is heading up our programme.
The same announcement of policy should be made as far as our air force is concerned. Are we to have an air force in Canada? Our policy should be announced this year, to encourage the boys who want to stay in this kind of work. To those who say we should wait until the war is over before deciding these things, I say now is the time for us to decide on these policies. I know our foreign trade is something we have to develop, but Canadians have a good reputation for honest dealing, for good merchandise; we have something to build on. We can cultivate that spirit and go ahead building on it. I see only

Post-War Reconstruction
two obstacles in our way. The first obstacle to the development of our foreign policy is the growth of hatred between all nations.
I cannot see a world at peace for very long unless we can build on the foundation that all men are brothers. I cannot envision a world peace that will last very long if even to-day we are afraid to include our enemies. St. Paul said, "Feed thine enemies" and I think there is a good lesson in economics in that statement. I do not mean to say that we should do the foolish things we did after the last war, that we should give our enemies money hoping they will spend it on butter and allowing them to spend it on guns, but we can give to them out of the surpluses which we are sure to have, and see to it that they use it for butter and not for ammunition. The other obstacle in our way is perhaps our political prejudice in that we will not follow a lead when it is presented to us in all sincerity. The development of Canada should be our objective.


Alan Webster Neill: Mr. Speaker, I desire to express my hearty support of the purpose behind the appointment of this select committee which we are discussing now and which we discussed on Friday afternoon. He would be a poor politician and an unworthy citizen who would want to throw any obstacle in the way of discussing anything that would improve economic and financial conditions in the post-war period. Many of the speeches that have been made have been highly constructive, sensible and valuable. Perhaps some hon. members fell into the habit, inevitably, of picturing a utopia without telling us how to arrive at it. We all put forward our ideas of what the post-war world should be like, but we are all rather vague in describing the method of reaching that objective. I suppose it will be the purpose of the committee to endeavour to reconcile these divergent views as to what may be best for the future.
I should like to present a couple of ideas which I think may be useful to the committee, but before doing so I wish to voice a mild protest at the hide-bound party political machinery that is used, and has been used of late years, in the appointment of select committees. Perhaps for the benefit of any new members I might explain the difference between the standing committees of the house and these select committees. Ever since confederation, I suppose, there have been standing committees of the house appointed for the purpose of considering relevant matters which may be referred to them by the house. Those committees have been struck for this year, and they may be found set out at page
407 of Hansard. They number thirteen. I need not mention them all, but they include the banking and commerce committee, the public accounts committee, the committee on industrial and international relations, the committee on agriculture, the committee on marine and fisheries, the committee on mines and so on. That indicates the idea of the thing, does it not; and the procedure was that when specific matters came up in the house which should be discussed at greater length than was possible in this chamber, they were referred to the appropriate committees. Any hon. member who so demands may be placed upon one or more of these standing committees appointed under the rules of the house. In 1922, when I first came here, I had myself appointed to two committees; and since they dealt with various subjects I have been able through the years, I hope, to contribute some useful effort to the benefit of the district which I represent. But this has been changed by the government, not suddenly and violently, which would give one an opportunity to protest, but subtly and quietly. Of the thirteen standing committees of the house I think six or seven did not sit at all last year. Of the two to which I belong, one has not sat for four years and the other has not met for seven years. Standing committees, forsooth 1 They have just died a sort of natural death, or perhaps it could not be called natural; perhaps it was an inspired death. It was not that occasion did not arise from time to time when subjects came up which should have been sent to the appropriate committees. Not at all; the government simply did not refer matters to these committees, but began this system of select committees. I think that is a nice, appropriate word, too; they were selected by the various parties in this house, particularly the larger ones. What the idea is, I do not know; but if one wanted to be cynical-of course I would not-one might suggest that when a subject came up in the house which the government felt could not be safely entrusted to the proper standing committee, that committee was sidetracked and a special, hand-picked select committee was appointed solely by those on the government benches and desiring to stay there, and by those on this side of the house equally willing to take up the reins of office. But the common herd, to which I shall refer presently, did not come into the picture at all.
Look at the order paper. It contains five resolutions to appoint select committees to consider matters all of which could and should have been sent to standing committees. Take the first resolution on the
Post-War Reconstruction

order paper, dealing with social insurance. Could that not have gone and should it not have gone to the committee on industrial and international relations? Would it not have gone there ten years ago? That is the committee which always has dealt with anything of this kind. I remember spending weeks in that committee dealing with old age pensions, and later we considered the matter of family allowances in the province of Quebec, which was brought up by someone coming from that province. That was the appropriate place for a discussion of that kind; but that is not the case any more; this subject is to be sent to a special, handpicked select committee. What about the public accounts committee? Should that not have been the place to send matters in connection with the expenditures of the government? It always used to be. What about the radio investigation? Should that not have gone to the banking and commerce committee?
In my own case-and I am using this as an illustration only for the moment, because presently I want to give the broader application-in twenty-one years I have never had an' opportunity of serving on any of those select committees; and since the standing committees of which I was a member have not been meeting, I have been prohibited from serving in that way at all. It may be asked why I did not complain. Well, I remember that a president of the United States said something about being too proud to fight, and it might be that I was too proud to beg as a favour that which I could not demand as a right. Any hon. member can demand to be placed on a standing committee, but it is an entirely different story in connection with these select committees. To get on them you must have party pull.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Being Scotch you would not beg.


Alan Webster Neill: In any event it was only one man's grievance, and I was willing to pay that as part of the price for not being attached to any party; perhaps it was worth it. But now the situation is different; it is open to objection on broader lines. I want to refer to the aggregation of members-I cannot call them a group or a party-in the southeast corner; they are not all here now but perhaps they will read my remarks in Hansard. I do not speak for them, for I have no authority to do so; I have not consulted them nor have they instructed me to put forward their case, but since their case happens to be mine, since regrettably they find themselves in same situation, I will speak of them. They are being neglected in this matter

for the same reason, that they are not affiliated with any of the larger parties. My sympathies do not extend to the political doctrines of those gentlemen. I think one or two call themselves independent, while the others have given themselves titles more descriptive of their political views, but they are all independent in the sense that they are not attached to any of the larger parties. A great statesman once said to his opponent, I abhor your sentiments but I will fight to the death that you may have the privilege of expressing them. I do not abhor the sentiments of hon. gentlemen in the corner, though I do not agree with them; but I think they should be allowed to express their views and given an opportunity to share in the life of parliament. There has grown up in that corner what I might call a cave of Adullam.
To those hon. members who were not brought up on the Scotch shorter catechism I might mention that the cave of Adullam is a place to which David, when he was out of luck, retired. It was a dirty old cave, and of it the Scriptures say:
And every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over them: and there were with him about four hundred men.
In case it might be thought that I am reflecting upon that group I might remind them that David lived to be a very great king, the greatest of his times, and one who will always be remembered and respected as long as the Christian religion is taught. So that it is in no sense a reflection upon them if I refer to them as being a bunch of Adullamites; and if they will allow me I will include myself with them.
They number nine members in the house, a group about as large as that of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, or the Social Credit party. On the committee on social insurance to which I referred a moment ago there are two members of the Social Credit party, and two from the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation. Together those two groups number nineteen, but there are four of them on the committee, or twenty-one per cent. We Adullamites also number nine, but we have no representation on that committee. And we never shall have, for the reason I have already given.
After all, we were elected by the people. We are responsible only to them for the wisdom of our action, and to our God for the integrity of our motives. I do not think we should be held responsible to any political party with which we are not amalgamated, or to which we do not wish to be attached.

Post-War Reconstruction


John Ritchie MacNicol: The Adullamites have no leaders.


Alan Webster Neill: Did the British North America Act, when it formed Canadian confederation seventy years ago, contemplate that? Was that the idea of fhe democracy about which we talk so much? I do not believe it was. There would be no danger to the government if they put one or two of these Adullamites on a committee, because the government always keeps a huge majority-and quite properly. If they form a committee of twenty-five they would have eighteen members from the government side of the house. So that it would do no harm if they did recognize occasionally-and only occasionally, perhaps- the right of members of parliament to be members of parliament, and not just to be automatic recorders of the views of a party in office, or of another party which would very much like to be in office. The very fact that we have no hope of or aspiration to office suggests that it might be a good thing to have some of us on that committee, with the assurance that we at least would not be governed by party considerations.
It is notorious in committees of the house that politics is played. If there is an investigation of some alleged action by the government, government followers try to develop a clear record, and members of the opposition try to do the opposite. Of course they play politics. And when a report comes to be written one can see the political complexion of a committee. If that is not so, then why does the government insist upon having a majority on committees? So that if one or two of these political Adullamites who are not committed to any party were put on, it would not hamper the work of the committee. It might even have a good effect upon it; it might even prove beneficial. There are some good men in the group in the corner. One of them is new, and I am informed he is an able man. How is he to demonstrate his ability or gain experience if he is not allowed to sit on a committee? I suggest that the government should be more tolerant in dealing with those who are not attached to one of the larger parties.
I would advise those hon. members sitting in the corner seats to insist upon their rights; and to insist upon them now because-and I speak from experience-they will find, as time goes on, it is a great deal easier to lose a privilege in the house than to regain one.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Alan Webster Neill: Mr. Speaker, I now turn to the work of the reconstruction committee and I hope to make a couple of suggestions that may be worthy of their consideration.
I want to support strongly those members who have advocated that the government or the committee should consider and put into effect an increase in the old age pension and a reduction in the age limit. I need not reiterate the reasons for that because they have been often given to the house and are so obvious. The feeling seems to be almost unanimous both in this chamber and in the country in favour of an increased old age pension and a reduced age limit. The minister told us to-day that representations had been received from five of the provinces, through their legislatures, I presume, begging for action in connection with this increase. I am' surprised that the government does not realize the force of public opinion. It has become a positive demand for this legislation. I notice that in Great Britain the government is far more responsive to public feeling than it is here. Apparently here we need an impending general election or a vital defeat or something of that kind before the government of the day - I mean any government - realizes and responds to public feeling.
There is one angle that has not yet been touched upon which makes it important that this action should be taken and taken quickly. Several members have emphasized the point that this committee should take action quickly, recommend measures and have parliament pass them-pass them, they emphasized-in order that our soldiers at the front might see definitely in front of them some evidence that we were really in earnest, that we were not simply contenting ourselves with talking and making promises. They stressed that we should present our soldiers with an accomplished fact.
The hon. member for Brant (Mr. Wood) said the other night that it would be difficult for us to go very far with any post-war rehabilitation plans until peace was declared because we would not know into what scheme of general things we would have to fit our proposals. There is a great deal in that. Peace certainly will not be signed before six months and probably eighteen months after the armistice, and eighteen months is quite a long time. Also the peace treaty, when formulated and signed, will purely be a peace treaty. It will consist of an ultimatum laid down by the victorious allies telling the defeated nations what they have to do, and it will not go much
Post-War Reconstruction

beyond that. There might be some proposal of a general character for maintaining an international allied police force. But that treaty will not go into details of economic or social reform. So that this committee, if it is to wait until peace comes, will have to wait still longer before we can adopt any forwardlooking policy. A great deal of the policy we must adopt after the war will depend upon the treaties that will have to be made between us and other nations or possibly other groups of nations. It is upon the progress we make with them that our own changes in organization will depend. That will take a long time, and the boys at the front-they are not boys, they are men now-will be looking with very suspicious eyes upon any delays and saying, "What is this? Is it all talk?"
The question of the tariff, for instance, is a very large one. The government of the day is traditionally free trade in its outlook on the tariff, and when I say "free trade" I mean not bigotedly so. The Progressive Conservative party on this side have recently announced their very strong trend1 toward free trade, and I presume that they would go as far as they have announced. Many people believe in free trade, but many people believe that free trade would be fatal if it were not universal. Suppose that Canada went all-out for free trade and announced1 that she would throw down her tariff barriers, trade with the whole world and allow any imports to come in. Suppose our two big customers, Britain and the United States, decided in favour of the closed-door, putting up their barriers and keeping our goods out. It would be impossible in that event for us to adopt a policy of complete free trade. These things will not be expressed in the terms of a peace treaty. We shall have to make these treaties after the war with the different nations, and that again will take time. It is partly for that reason, and partly for the political advantage that would obviously accrue, that I would anticipate that the present government, when it goes to the country, as it will do this fall or next spring, would rather adopt the policy of dangling before the electors a pleasing platform of promised reforms, instead of putting them into legislative effect and presenting them as a fait accompli to the people. That is always more dangerous than to talk nicely in connection with promised reforms at election time. Will the men at the front accept such a course? Will they not say in regard to your promises, "Oh, heck; we have heard that before. Why don't you do something?"- They will ask us to deliver the goods. These men are used to the grim realities of life, of sorrow and of death, and I am 
afraid they will be at least impatient of measures that are only dangled before their eyes. They will be impatient of any talk that we shall do such and so when we can get around to it.
I know an action which can be taken, and it can be taken now. The expression has been used in connection with national debt of making a token payment. Suppose we take a token action now, and not attempt to carry out the whole policy of rehabilitation at once because that would be impossible now. But let us give the men at the front a token of our good faith. Here is something that will not require to be embodied in the terms of the peace treaty. Here is something that is not dependent upon other nations. Other nations have gone far ahead of us in this regard. Here is something we can do now, and therefore I say, let us pass legislation now, increasing the amount of the old age pension and lowering the age limit. If we did that now, the soldiers would say, "They have done what they could. They have given us an earnest of their good faith. It looks as though we could trust them." And they will trust us. But if we continue to try to beguile or cajole them with pleasinglooking programmes, they will lose faith in constitutional parliament and might go to lengths-for want of having any other place to go-that would1 be disastrous for Canada.
It is a notorious fact that any government that I have seen in these halls is ruled by expediency. First and last, expediency is the deciding factor. Very often it is expediency that has the final word in the decision as to what policy shall be carried out. But here is a case where justice, fairness and expediency would all go together. It certainly would be most expedient to give the men a guarantee that this thing is being done for the aged people about whom so much has been said, and would also be just and fair. Therefore I urge this committee to recommend this to the government-and that the government should implement the recommendation this session-an adjustment in the amount of the old age pension and in the age limit.
I have time to speak on one more subject, one on which I have discoursed so often in the last twenty years. I refer to the Jap situation, and I note that everything I have predicted1 has come true. What I suggest now

unlike the old age pension-must be written into the peace terms or it will not take place at all. I refer to the deportation of the Japs and a guarantee that there will be a total refusal to allow any more oriental immigration into Canada. I say it must be embodied in the terms of peace, for this

Post-War Reconstruction
reason. Do not believe when you are told -I have been told already, and I do not believe it-"Oh, well, this is a matter for after the war; win the war first and then we will deal with this question; we will be glad to take it up with you." It cannot be done after the war because it will then be too late. These people whom we want to deport are, or many of them are, British subjects ostensibly, and you cannot deport British subjects after the war. You can do so before the war is over or as part of the terms of peace.
No matter how slim the allegiance of these Japanese-British subjects may be to the British crown; no matter how obvious the fraudulence of their dual nationality-because they may be good British subjects and at the same time loyal Japanese subjects; that is their creed and custom and what they adhere to-no matter how designedly they were sent here-for it was not casual immigration; they were sent here by the Japanese government to start a system of infiltration into the most desirable province of Canada, from both climatic and geographical considerations, and as being useful for the purposes of aggression later on-yet they are ostensibly British subjects and cannot be deported. Therefore, if there is any deportation to be done it should be done as part of the terms of peace.
But we are told that big business interests, the big business men of whom it is said with bated breath that they are the spawn of the devil, or very near it, want these men because they want cheap labour. I have seen no evidence in recent years of anything of the kind so far as big business is concerned, and we must assume that big business is fairly shrewd or it would not maintain itself in these days of keen competition. And big business has seen within the last year that when cheap labour- if it was cheap labour

or labour of any kind was most needed, we lost it all because we had to take it away from the British Columbia coast for our own security. When we needed labour the most we lost it, and spent five million dollars in taking care of it; and before we have finished repairing boats, building houses, and paying for keeping these people idle, the cost will be twice as much. Call it anything you like, but do not call that cheap labour which disappears as soon as you need it, in case of war.
I have in my hand a copy of a bargain-or rather it was not a bargain, it was a benediction-made by the British Columbia security commission with the province of Alberta, under which they agreed to put a number of Japanese on farms in Alberta, under very stringent, named conditions. We talk about the
Jews being the favoured people of God; they could never have had a look-in with the Japs, in so far as the British Columbia security commission is concerned. The commission heaped favours on them. It guaranteed them transportation; it guaranteed that they would never go on relief; it guaranteed them medical services galore, even dental service; hospitalization, education, housing. Each house had to have a garden, and it had to be guaranteed that if the man went out of work temporarily he should not be disturbed in the possession of his house and his garden plot. This was much better than was done for our unemployed during the depression. I will quote section 10 of this remarkable document:
The commission agrees to remove or to have removed from the province, upon the termination of the state of war . . . the Japanese temporarily placed or maintained within the province pursuant to the terms of this agreement, as requested so to do by the province.
What about these people being British subjects? You cannot deport British subjects after the war is over; you cannot even move them from one province to another. The "British subject" status seems to have disappeared when it comes to the matter of their continuance in residence. I am no lawyer, but I should like to know if any government can delegate its sovereign powers to an outfit calling itself a security commission. It may delegate the commission to do certain things under its jurisdiction. But the commission apparently considers itself an independent state; it assumes it can take the Japs back or do anything it likes of that kind. I should like to see this question investigated. In addition, similar deals were made with Manitoba and Ontario before the Japs were allowed to go there, and they have all to go back to British Columbia. After the war we shall have twenty-four thousand Japanese unloaded on the people of British Columbia, who do not want one of them, any more than you do in Ontario, or anywhere else.
It may be, Mr. Speaker-it is no use my disguising facts-that in British Columbia there are a few who, from ignorance, or hopes of votes, or hopes of campaign funds, champion their "little brown brothers." Oh, they are very, very few, I can assure you. These enemies have to be given work when they come back, have they not, either by government authority, which is compulsion, or by a system of undercutting the white man-and they can easily do it, because their standard of living is much lower-and these jobs will either be given to or obtained by them in the manner I have indicated, at the expense of returned men. By that time our men or
Post-War Reconstruction


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Mr. Speaker, I quite agree with the hon. gentleman (Mr. Neill) who has just spoken. Something must be done at once. Theories are all right for the long-range plan, but we must act immediately. I am not sure that I understand the hon. gentleman correctly, but I believe he said that some suckers in Ontario might give the Japanese the vote. There are no suckers in Ontario because we shall not give them the vote. This afternoon the hon. member for Yorkton (Mr. Castleden) said that the people of Canada were sick and tired of being regimented. Since the hon. gentleman belongs to the socialist party, I am glad to hear him say that. If they ever get a chance, there will be nothing but regimentation in this country.
I rise to support the resolution. I was interested in the remarks made yesterday by the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power). He gave the public of Canada a real idea of the problems that will have to be faced when our boys come back to Canada. We shall have to be careful what is done with and for them. They deserve the best because we owe a great deal to them for what they have done in defence of the British isles. We can never repay them for that. Make no mistake about it; when they were defending the British isles they were defending Canada as well. However, I think there are many opportunities for them in this country. Much of Canada is still undiscovered. The spirit of enterprise shown by these young men will be the spirit that can be used to discover those great parts of Canada which have not yet been discovered.
The war is just beginning to be won. We must not relax one minute in the prosecution of the war. We must do everything we can to win this war, and we must not let talks of peace, talks of reconstruction and all that sort of thing take our thoughts away from the winning of this war. However, it is our duty to think of the future, to think of the period immediately after the war. These men expect us to be doing something like that. They expect that something will be ready for them when they are demobilized. My opinion is that it will take some little time to demobilize our forces. We should not let them go until we have something for them to go to. We shall have to have a gradual relaxation of the controls now exercised.
There is great hope for Canada. I am a believer in the future of Canada. For some time we have had an agricultural, an industrial and a scientific revolution going on in this country. The war has been responsible for the spurring on of this movement. Not only has there been a scientific revolution in agriculture and industry; it has occurred in the domestic field as well. Many new materials have been coming out. Science must not be overlooked in connection with reconstruction and planning for the future. In that connection I recommend a booklet containing a paper by J. K. Robertson on that very subject, read before the Royal Society of Canada. On page 10 he says:
According to the fourth clause in the Atlantic charter, the United States and the British commonwealth "will endeavour ... to further enjoyment by all states, great or small, victor and vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity."
Post-War Reconstruction

We certainly shall have to put a great deal of money into research and the scientific development of this country. Think of what is happening in Canada, new materials being developed from time to time in connection with the war, replacing old ones which were uneconomic. Increased use of forests and coal can be looked forward to; we shall have nylon and similar products made from coal, air and water; rayon and plastics replacing metals, plastic automobiles. To-day we have need for the plastic plumber, the installation of plastic pipes. All these things are new; why can we not develop new sources of raw materials to be used, for instance, to produce aluminum instead of importing material from British Guinea? Science will enter into the reduction of costs of production by scientific methods instead of by sweated labour. New methods, new materials will reduce the actual time necessary just to live, giving a more balanced day between work, study, recreation and sleep. All these things are possible. Science will influence the future prosperity of Canada more than anything else. Many times as much money will have to be diverted to research in conjunction with the industries of this country than has ever been spent before. That is where we have fallen down so badly in the past. When we think of what the national research council has already done in conjunction with industry, and in the prosecution of the war, we can easily see the need to increase this marvellous work of research in the future.
The post-war problem of Canada is not beyond solution, but all classes in the community must work together. Enlightened leaders of industry and intelligent labour leaders will have to cooperate in the solution of their problems. In the days to come I am sure that industrial leaders will welcome the organization of labour unions. It will be to their advantage to do that. It is only when people work together in organized fashion that they can bring to bear their potential strength most effectively on the solution of any problem. Our problem is so to gear our productive machinery and plan our national economy that we create and utilize our capacity to labour for the enrichment and enjoyment of our way of life. Many people look askance at the expression "planned economy", but I would point out that the oldest planned economy in the world was that of Egypt. Joseph was the first minister of agriculture in a capitalist country; he planned in the seven good years for the seven bad years. Every big corporation, every extensive enterprise makes its plans and plans

its campaigns months and even years ahead. Perhaps in the past there has not been enough of this planning in conjunction with the state. A planned economy does not mean regimentation or submission to bureaucracy; it is a way to give individual enterprise greater freedom of action and incentive for the exercise of its ingenuity and industiy. Organized industry and organized labour, each recognizing the rights and prerogatives of the other, should give leadership, guaranteeing freedom from want for all. They should encourage the government to assure at least a minimum of security for all. If the citizens of the country are strong, independent and secure, what follows is a strong but flexible government, strong enough to protect the people but not so powerful as to dominate them. The government does not own and drive every machine, but its function should be to regulate the flow of industry so as to avoid snarls and collisions. Free enterprise without constraint and without pressure will invite labour to take counsel with it in planning work so that there will be employment at all times and a decent level of income for all. But it is going to be a long time before plans can be put into effect, and "the best-laid schemes, o' mice an' men gang aft a-gley". The impact of the termination of the war may be sudden and great. Now is the time to plan for the day when the war ceases.
There is a solution in part as far as my own city is concerned. Many problems are facing it. A tremendous increase has taken place in the productive capacity of the city and in the population. Not only that, but the day-time population has increased very largely, and with that the problem of public services has become exceedingly acute. The question of sewage disposal is serious; the present plant was built with a capacity for less than two-thirds of the present population, and there is already a real danger to the health of the citizens and also to the other cities bordering on lake Ontario. Something will have to be done. It cannot be done very well while the war is on, although if the war lasts years more something will have to be done. At the present time raw sewage is going into the lake; the plant is not big enough to treat it. Water is being well filtered and treated; there is a fine system, *but any breakdown in that system would be very serious for the citizens of greater Toronto and of the other cities bordering on lake Ontario. The problem of supplying water is difficult at the present time, and the problem of transporting the people has also to be met. I must say that the Toronto transportation

Post-War Reconstruction

commission is doing a very good job, and if the service is not everything that might be wished it is no fault of that organization. The city must provide still more fire protection and police protection, more health services and so on. Again, at the present time we need two thousand houses; we could use that number in Toronto without any difficulty. To-day people living in Toronto are working in such places as Leaside, East York, Malton, New Toronto, Weston and other municipalities bordering on Toronto. Facilities other than public services are also severely taxed and private enterprise is doing its best to maintain such facilities.
The point I am coming to is this. How does this problem fit into the picture? Will our industries in Toronto be converted to the production of peace-time goods, and how quickly will that be done? Large investments in plant and equipment are involved, which no one wants to throw away; and if those plants are to be converted, as many will be, undoubtedly there will be many projects in connection with the services to which I have been referring which will have to be completed very quickly in order to bring those services up to reasonable requirements. Already the city of Toronto is planning for a rapid transit subway, and certain research work in that connection is being carried on at the present time. There are questions of new sewers, new streets, slum clearance, a new disposal plant, public and private housing, all of which will have to be constructed if these industries are to remain in the city of Toronto, for if we do not have the proper accommodation they will not remain.
All this will provide a great deal of work which will help take up the slack in whatever readjustment period may be necessary. The trouble is that in Toronto the tax rate is already so high that it is out of all proportion, and the assessment is high as well. These services will be required not only for Toronto; they will be required by those living in the metropolitan area and even further away. How do these projects fit into the picture of reconstruction? Well, these are matters that can be planned now. Certainly they will give employment to men at present in the army. Every class of worker will be required when these projects are carried out. Men would be given work in the manufacture of the equipment necessary for these undertakings as well as in the actual undertakings themselves. Almost every class of material, and no doubt new materials as well, will be required. The employment will be far-reaching, but then comes the question of financing. Funds will
have to be provided on an equitable basis by the dominion government, the provincial government, the city of Toronto and the municipalities in the metropolitan area, all of which will benefit. They are all interested, in many ways.
My suggestion is that this is a problem in connection with which we can make plans now, so that it may be started almost as soon as the materials can be made available. All these people should get together at once and lay plans which could be put into operation without delay when the war is over. It would be time and money well spent. I believe the question of financing is the only thing that stands in the way, and it is my opinion that the dominion government must give some assurance to the people of Toronto and district that it will be prepared to do a certain amount of financing in connection with that work, which certainly will provide a great deal of employment.


Mr. F. D. SHAW (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, one cannot approach the subject of rehabilitation and reconstruction without reflecting upon the fact that last year we had a committee of this house charged with the responsibility of looking into the various aspects of this subject. I was not so fortunate as to be a member of that committee, but I am informed that it held approximately sixteen meetings. From time to time interim reports were submitted to this house, but I am under the impression that all in all very little was accomplished by that committee. In fact I rather fancy, putting it in my own way, that our good ship reconstruction and rehabilitation, after passing through very stormy weather, foundered somewhere near the isle of nutrition. I was rather disappointed in that connection, but I trust that I shall not be disappointed with the result of the deliberations of the committee this year.
Before proceeding further may I say in all fairness that I have been impressed to some extent by the attitude of the Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie during this debate. He has not spoken, it is true, but he has been very patient. Whether or not he has absorbed what has been said we have no way of determining, but it is encouraging to see the apparent interest which he shows. I believe our plans for rehabilitation and reconstruction are predicated upon the assumption of an allied victory; there can be no question about that fact. Therefore I am inclined to the belief that any person who feels that we should not be discussing this subject at the present

Post-War Reconstruction

time has not very much faith in the outcome of the war. When we have achieved that victory we shall do honour to the men of our army, our navy-including the men of the merchant marine-and our air force; but I wonder if it is going to be more than lip-service, which is pleasant to hear but hardly adequate to meet the situation. We who are at home are expected to make Canada worthy of the high democratic ideals for which our boys are fighting, and any plan for rehabilitation must be determined in the light of their heroic achievements.
I am satisfied that we shall be chastised for devoting to this subject the time we are taking. A certain cross-section of the press has chastised us, and I know, too, that many others across this country consider that we have no business whatsoever in devoting our energies toward this subject at the present time. But I am not worried, and I believe hon. members will not be worried about the things which may be said about us for doing what we know to be right, and doing it at this time.
History records one very important fact, namely that the enormous expenditures entailed in the financing of a war invariably lead to business recession, industrial stagnation and general unemployment. History has proven that fact. Those conditions have been accepted in the past as being the inevitable outcome of these huge expenditures. But I say that under the present system, while they may be inevitable, the time has arrived when we, the Canadian people, must declare that we must remove those things which have made this condition inevitable. And when I speak of business recession or depression or panic, I am obliged to refer to a copy of a newspaper I have before me, in which I find this definition. It says:
A recession is a period in which you tighten up your belt. A depression is a time in which you have not a belt to tighten. When you have no pants to hold up it is a panic.
So that we want no recession, no depression and no panic.
Another point upon which I should like to lay emphasis is this: I have been appalled to have some of our men in uniform actually say to me that they hope the war will not end soon. There can be only one reason for any young man making an assertion of that kind, namely, that he fears the conditions which may prevail following the cessation of hostilities. That is not good morale, and I say it is our duty to do everything possible to stimulate the high degree of national morale essential for total war. Our boys in the
IMr. Shaw.]
fighting forces and our citizens engaged in producing the tools of war must be imbued with confidence regarding the democratic postwar order. That is essential. Any such proposal must reflect the will of the Canadian people, and not the will of someone or some group of people far removed from this fair dominion. I say, furthermore, that our plans for the post-war period must embody the desires of those fighting forces. We must lay the basis for a truly reconstructed democracy. If in establishing the basis for what some people believe may be a reconstructed democracy we infringe upon the democratic rights of our people, then I say we shall have failed, and failed most miserably.
For a moment or two I wish to deal with some of the suggestions which have been advanced during the debate by various hon. members. I was rather disappointed to-day when the hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Mayhew) had finished speaking, because during the course of his speech he stated that all of these local projects which have been enumerated by various members are fine, but that they are only part of a great scheme. But he left me in the air, because he did not tell us what the great scheme is that he has in mind.
Then just a few days ago the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) who, I am forced to conclude, is a faithful disciple of Clarence Streit, who advocates federal union, indicated his belief that we should establish a world police force. In fact he recommended, in my judgment, that Canada and this parliament be deprived of the sovereignty they now possess. I cannot tolerate that type of philosophy. Are we in Canada making the sacrifices we are making only to find, after the war, that some other government, somewhere, is dictating what we the Canadian people shall do in our own country? If that is the purpose of the war we might just as well quit to-day, because Adolf Hitler has a similar proposal in the back of his mind.
We then listened to the hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Turgeon) who is always a delightful speaker. I enjoy listening to him. However he made an admission to the effect that we, and we alone, are responsible for the deplorable conditions which prevailed during the depression. I am putting what he said in my own words, as I understood him. We agree. Social Crediters have been telling the house that ever since the first session they attended, in 1936. It was not new at all, namely, that we the Canadian people are responsible for the conditions which prevailed in Canada during that time. Unfortunately, however, the hon. member for Cariboo, who

Post-War Reconstruction
happens to be the chairman of the committee on reconstruction and rehabilitation, did not go far enough to indicate how we who are responsible might change our course of action so as to remove the shame which necessarily rests upon our shoulders, and not upon, the shoulders of others.
The hon. member for Brant (Mr. Wood) advanced some rich philosophy-and I use the word "rich" advisedly, coming from a farming community. As I interpreted it, the hon. member for Brant indicated that the million unemployed in Canada and the hundreds of thousands who secured wages enough only to meet the bare necessities might have had their whole condition corrected had they purchased annuities. Out of what, Mr. Speaker? Then he advanced a theory which was slightly more preposterous, namely, that if we remained in our own little bivouacs and produced sufficient for our own needs all the troubles which have confronted the Canadian people would automatically disappear.
I now move on to the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson), the former leader of the Conservative party, and a member, I understand of the Progressive Conservative party. But he did not show himself to be very progressive the other day. He said, Yes, I am in favour of reform, as long as you do not divorce yourselves from the status quo, and as long as you use as your course of instruction grandma's old book of etiquette.
That is all it amounts to. I want to retain everything, he intimated, and yet I want to change everything. But he will change nothing. That is the inevitable outcome of such a philosophy as he harbours.
There were others in the Progressive Conservative party who spoke who devoted a great deal of their time to local projects. All fine, I grant you, sir, but not one of those local projects will reconstruct Canada or rehabilitate the men who are coming back from overseas or are discharged from the armed services here in Canada.
I want to refer to a suggestion that was made by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis). I must confess that I am not completely in agreement with the hon. member inasmuch as I am thoroughly convinced that government monopoly can easily become much more vicious than private monopoly. Under a system of government ownership of the productive industries of the country I rather fancy that the government of the day might be motivated by political considerations unless, of course, opposition is eliminated. It is true that monopoly has developed during recent years; it is true that special privilege has developed; it is true that abuses have
72537-51J
developed; but I blame the government which permitted these things to come about far more than I blame those who are guilty of such vile practices. I say, further, that I am definitely opposed to a few, whether in this country or in any other, fattening themselves upon the poverty of a community. I do not believe that the individual has become utterly incapable of managing his own affairs; I do not believe that he has become utterly dishonest. I say, however, that we must eliminate the abuses that have been responsible for so much condemnation having been heaped upon the heads of those who are engaged in private enterprise.
I come now to the speech by the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch). I make this assertion, that he is the only speaker in this debate so far who has advanced a broad proposal to meet the whole situation as it will be faced by the committee. On reading over his speech I notice that he pointed to the tremendous increase in the productive capacity of Canada. I am told that our productive capacity has reached the staggering total of about 89,000,000,000. Furthermore, he asserted that it is not at all unreasonable to conclude that if we could produce nine billion dollars worth of real wealth in this country per year, much of which will be destroyed during the progress of war, it should also be quite possible to produce even nine billion dollars worth of consumers' goods. I think that is sound argument. He also laid stress upon the disastrous results that will ensue if industrial collapse is not prevented through the systematic con- ' version of our war industries to peace industries. He enumerated three definite facts that might be used as a foundation upon which this committee could begin its work. I would suggest that the committee start all over again this year, forgetting what was done last year. I hope you will pardon me, Mr. Speaker, if I read those three facts because I wish to add to them a fourth which will make the picture absolutely complete. The hon. member for Acadia asserted at page 715, February 25, 1943:
1.	That a complete survey should be made forthwith to ascertain the nature and volume of the products of industry which will be required by the Canadian people following the war to rehabilitate themselves, and to raise their standard of living to the level which our natural resources can consistently maintain.
2.	That a complete survey of Canadian war industries be made to determine the adaptability of each to the production of those peace-time requirements, and to plan and prepare the steps necessary to bring about that conversion in each case at the end of the war.
3.	That a survey be made of the possible foreign markets which may be available at the
Post-War Reconstruction

tices to be dishonest, continue to support them. When this war is over we shall still have the productive capacity of Canada. We shall no more than scratch the resources of this country even though we give Britain a billion dollars worth of goods, even though we blast billions of dollars worth of goods into eternity. The resources of this dominion are almost limitless. We are not going outside Canada to get the finances with which to finance this war. All the financing in existence came into existence here. It will still be here when the war is over because we do not shoot money at the enemy nor do we export our bills or our credit.
When this war is over, our boys will ask to be given an opportunity to have security with freedom. I lay emphasis on the words "with freedom." If we fail to grant them that which we are capable of granting, then I fear the outcome. Bloody revolutions are born out of such conditions, and I am not saying that I would ever want to see the day when we shall have revolution of a bloody nature in order to get a revolution of a purely democratic nature.
Not only that, but out of the vast abundance which we are capable of producing we shall have to export billions of dollars worth of our real wealth to help reestablish other countries in the world. We shall have to give them these goods. I should like to quote an article which appeared in the Journal this evening entitled "No gold or goods". It reads:
The house of representatives foreign affairs committee, recalling the international debt problems arising from the first great war, cautioned the country Saturday against expecting repayment in gold or goods when the time arrives for a post-war settlement of lend-lease aid.
There are only two ways of paying debts as between nations. One is by the exportation of goods and the other is by the exportation of gold. That committee recommended that neither practice be adopted, which would leave only one alternative-give your goods to the countries which require them and which must be rehabilitated. We must recognize that principle, and I hope we recognize it before it is too late.	.
Mr. T. J. O'NEILL (Kamloops):	Mr. Deputy Speaker, my first word in rising to take part in this debate must of necessity be to congratulate you upon your appointment to the office of Deputy Speaker. It is only fitting that one who is so fluent in both languages, one who is so experienced in parliamentary procedure, one who is so free from religious bigotry and racial prejudices, should occupy this high office. I am sure you will
[Mr. Shaw.l
discharge the duties of your high office with honour to yourself and credit to this house.
It seems to me that a discussion of this motion for the setting up of a committee on reconstruction and rehabilitation cannot be divorced from the question of the setting up of a committee to discuss social security. In many of the speeches which have been made much stress has been laid on private industry. I am in accord with private industry up to a certain extent, but when we have private industry that cannot pay wages which will provide a decent standard of living, then I say we have carried private industry too far. To-day when we are discussing wages, one of the considerations is whether the industry can afford to pay. I do not think that should be the influencing factor.
There are many things that could be done immediately that we are not doing. For instance, we ha%m not allowed the cost of living bonus to all those who labour. There is no reason why, when we pay the full cost of living bonus to the highest paid labour, this bonus should not be paid to all who labour. At present some do not receive a bonus at all, and others receive only sixty cents a week. Many of these inequalities must be eliminated now, not only after the war.
To-day we are told not to ride on the railways, because they want to conserve power for the handling of necessary freight. That is all to the good. We were asked not to ride on the trains until February 18; then the time was extended to the end of February, and now it is extended indefinitely. But we are hauling hundreds of thousands of carloads of steel from the middle of Ontario to British Columbia, and we are hauling hundreds of carloads of coal from Alberta to British Columbia. Yet there are untold millions of tons of coal to be mined in British Columbia. We have everything in British Columbia that is required for the establishment of steel mills and iron works. Surely we do not believe that when this war is over we shall continue along with a population of ten or twelve million people. Everyone within sound of my voice remembers General Hornby coming to this country and his appeal to have British settlers brought here. The province from which I come is one of the finest in Canada, if not the finest, in climatic conditions and with natural resources capable of providing as high a standard of living as exists anywhere in Canada to-day, for a population ten or twelve times our present population. Why are we not making some provision for these people while we still have a voice as to who they shall be?

Post-War Reconstruction
We should be setting up industry in British Columbia; why not now? We talk about all the things we are going to do after the war, but we are not attempting to do anything to-day. These things are crying out to be done at once. There are thousands of acres of land in British Columbia that will produce anything that can be grown anywhere else in Canada; all that is required is water. Water is there in abundance, but we must have power to get that water on the land for irrigation. The rivers-the Thompson, the Fraser, the Clearwater, the Adams and the Columbia- are capable of producing power in unlimited amounts which would make those acres that are now just range country the most productive gardens in North America. That can be done now. There is no reason why those things cannot be done. If you wish people to believe in your sincerity of purpose when you talk about setting up these different committees, you should be prepared to do some things now that you could do so easily.
Tor instance, why cannot we pay our old people a decent standard of living? Why do we keep them trying to exist on twenty dollars a month? When we provided the cost-of-living bonus we recognized that that was necessary in order to keep up with the increase in the cost of living. We gave that to men and women making anything from $150 to $300 a month. But our old people are told that they must continue to live on $20 a month; they cannot have even that small increase. No old people in this country should have to attempt to live on less than a dollar a day, and no one should be forced to work after sixty-five years of age. Industry says, you cannot work after sixty-five; they lay you off at sixty-five. But the government say that they will not pay the old age pension until you are seventy. Who is going to take up the slack between sixty-five and seventy? No provision is made. The old people of this country should be pensioned at sixty-five and should not be asked to live on less than a dollar a day.
Then in my province we have some of the last great west; some of the greatest stock farms in Canada are in British Columbia. Those stock farms could be made very much more productive if there were some system of storing water. The winter snow runs off with a great rush in the spring. If there were storage dams to collect and conserve and control that run-off, the range could be made a hundred times more productive than it is for feeding large herds of stock. These are things that can be done now. But we are not making any provision at all for them.
I do not think there is much more that I can add to the present debate at this time, but I would urge this committee that instead of talking all the time about what is to be done after the war they give some thought to these things that can be done and should be done now.


Thomas Miller Bell: Before this debate closes I should like to say something about the committee which is to be set up. I have been looking over the minutes and proceedings of the special joint meeting which w'as held in Ottawa on December 4, under the chairmanship of the Minister, of Pensions and National	Health	(Mr. Mackenzie). It included representatives of the provinces, the committee on reconstruction, the subcommittees of that committee, the research investigators.	Looking over
those minutes and seeing as I thought certain trends. I considered it might be wise to say something, not so much in a controversial spirit as to express a point of view to the minister and the committee which is about to be set up.
But before doing so, I should like to endorse what has just been said by the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. O'Neill). I think our honesty of purpose will be very largely judged by what we do now, whether we are able and willing during this war period to improve the condition of those whose condition needs improving. I have in my hand a letter which came to me this afternoon. I am placing it before the committee not in any criticism of the minister, because I am well aware that when I send this letter, as I shall to-morrow, to the Minister of Pensions and National Health, this case will receive his personal attention. But from time to time cases come to us which indicate that perhaps we are willing to do what we can as far as this house is concerned, but that somehow or another in the far hospitals and departments, where the eye of the minister and the house is not directly upon the people responsible, things are happening which I believe neither the house nor the minister would wish to have happen. It is because I feel that there should be a backing for the committee in regard to these matters that I bring this letter to the attention of the minister and the house to-night.
This letter is written from Wetaskiwin, Alberta, and reads in part as follows:
I was in England for tw'o years and eight months and returned to Canada September 9, 1942. I was discharged from the army for medical reasons and have been treated like an old worn-out tire, no more use, so have been discarded.
Post-War Reconstruction

I was admitted to the university hospital on September 25, 1942, and kept there till October 30, 1942, I was told that if I would consider an operation it would help my health. After waiting five weeks I had my operation and was discharged from hospital November 20, 1942. I was in worse condition than when I entered hospital. After being home a week I wrote the pension board to see if I could be returned to hospital. On December 14 I was admitted to hospital again. I left and come home for two weeks at Christmas and was admitted again on January 4, 1943. I was discharged again January 27, 1943. I am still quite unable to work. A pamphlet which was given to me at the time of my discharge promising the exsoldiers lots of things for rehabilitation does not seem to connect with the way I have been treated. I was truly given the $35 for clothes, one month's pay and allowances, but when I was discharged from hospital my wife's allowance was cut off and from the 21st November to the 21st December I received nothing, and then I was put on this welfare scheme of $13 a week. I have notice that my operation-[DOT]
I presume he means his injury.
-was caused in a theatre of actual war but was not serious enough for a pension.
Now if I am able to do any sort of work in the near future I am in no way financially able to get work clothes. What I want to know is how or where is the rehabilitation when I had to use the month's pay to live on after coming from hospital and if they treat the men who now come home like this, how will they ever take care of them when they all come back, and there will be plenty of them?
I read this letter because it is one of a few, fortunately as yet very few, such letters that I have received; and it seems to me that the sincerity of what we do in the future will be judged largely by what we do now. As the hon. member for Kamloops has just said, I suppose there is not a member of this house who has not files of letters in his office from old age pensioners, the contents of some of which, because we have had an unusually severe winter, would almost make one weep.
With regard to the committee to be set up, I notice of course that there has been a change in the status of the James committee, if I may call it that. Apparently now this is to be an advisory committee which will report directly to the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King). The committee consisting of the senior officials of the Department of Finance, and so on, will be actually the committee charged with the responsibility of devising ways and means of dealing with the post-war problem.
The point I particularly want to make tonight is this. I have noticed that through the papers submitted on December 4, which I have read with some care, there seemed to run the considered, unanimous opinion that what should be done was to wait until the war ends to see to what extent private industry

could cope with the situation in which we shall then find ourselves; and that if private industry were unable to cope with those conditions, then the government should adopt plans and devise schemes to supplement what industry might be able to do. If I may pay it this tribute, the committee, however, seemed to have an appreciation of the problem. I notice that Principal James stated:
The single central problem which the committee on reconstruction has faced from the day of its first meeting is that of attaining full employment of our population-of those able to work and desirous of working-at as high a standard of living as is possible in the light of our available resources and the optimum rate at which we can utilize them.
Then he went on to say that this was the central key to everything else in the picture. I would agree with that summary as to the target at which this reconstruction committee, this parliament and the government should aim at this particular time. The problem of finance, which was discussed a few moments ago by the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Shaw), was dismissed by Principal James in a few sentences. He said that in due course they would be called upon to propose to the cabinet certain suggestions regarding a fiscal and monetary policy designed to correct business depression, proposals that involved definite government expenditures at certain periods in a trade cycle. Evidently he was contemplating periods of prosperity and depression, periods of peaks and depressions, to which we have been accustomed in the past, and was referring to policies involving a definite and careful interrelationship of central banking policy, a taxation policy and a borrowing policy so that there might be developed in the community in all periods, through a combination of private and public expenditure, a demand for goods and services which would be adequate to maintain full employment. In other words, the committee apparently as yet has not given any serious consideration to the financial problem which is involved1 in the programme of rehabilitation which many of us believe will be necessary. He went on to say that the problem has been discussed in general terms but is a long way from being solved. Then he went on to add this, which I thought was interesting:
. . . we are not yet sufficiently far advanced in our practical studies of financial systems and our theoretical studies of monetary and fiscal policy to be able to lay down a definite prescription and swear that this is exactly the method that must be followed in a particular country.
In other words, the advisory committee seems to be as much at sea as ever in regard

Post-War Reconstruction
to the manner in which the programme, when it is instituted, can be financed. Yet the same document shows that the committee did have an appreciation of the tremendous problem which will face this country when the war ends. In the course of his remarks Doctor James sketched in a very few words the problem which will face Canada immediately after the war. He said:
There are approximately 600,000 men and women in the armed forces, and some 900,000 men and women in war industries, a total of a million and a half-
And I think this is important.
-which is roughly fifty per cent of the total number of people gainfully employed in Canada before this war began, or one-third of the total gainfully employed population in Canada at the present moment.
That gives us some indication of the tremendous problem which will face this country when the war ends, and which ought to be constantly before any reconstruction committee we set up now. Then the committee saw something else, in regard to putting these people into jobs when the war ' over. Doctor James said:
We cannot rely for this purpose on the immediate reorganization of industry with a view to producing peace-time consumers' goods. With the best will in the world, it takes considerable time for an industry to switch over from wartime to peace-time activity.
That is something which the committee should keep in mind. There are those who believe that the moment this war is over, there will be such a backlog of purchasing power and of needs that there will be such an upturn in business as will take care of the men and women dismissed from war industries and those who are gradually and progressively demobilized from the armed forces. But here we have the considered opinion of the advisory committee dealing with post-war reconstruction, to the effect that we cannot rely upon that.
Someone said the other day that we were preaching depression after the war. That is not true. Personally I do not believe that a depression after this war is necessary, if we take the essential steps to plan our industrial and economic life so that when this war ends we shall be able to carry forward with great projects both in industry and in the development of our resources. But there are those, and I share the view, who believe that unless we do something of that sort we shall face a very serious situation indeed. And the committee which is advising on reconstruction definitely also shares that view.
I was struck with this sentence in that connection used by Doctor James and found on page 12.


Mr. GRAHAM:: Is that the James' report from which the hon. member is reading, or the evidence of Doctor James?


Thomas Miller Bell: No; I am not reading from either. I am reading from the official proceedings of a meeting held on December 4, and I am giving some extracts from the papers presented at that meeting. At the moment I have Doctor James' comments before me. At page 12 of the proceedings Doctor James says:
During the period immediately after the conclusion of hostilities, a period that may last for months, or for years, we must face the problem of finding jobs for a million and a half men and women demobilized from the armed forces and munitions industries. And we shall have to find these jobs at the verv moment when the process of retooling will tend to reduce the demands of private industry for workers. This problem of the immediate post-war period must be met partly by social legislation, and partly by publicly financed construction projects.
To what extent one or the other will have to be used will have to be decided before this war ends. But I am convinced that this committee-and now I refer to the James committee-is too prone, as I shall attempt to show in a moment, to rely upon the ability of private industry to undertake the major reemployment problem when the war ends. He said this:
The activities of the committee on reconstruction that attempt to develop practical measures for the attainment of full employment, or the attempt to guarantee full employment, in the immediate post-war period are. first of all, the excellent work that the committee on employment opportunities, under Tom Moore, has been carrying on in regard to the training and recruitment of labour, and the work of the dominion employment service, which I mention briefly because you will have a fuller report on that this afternoon, as well as an opportunity to discuss it. Secondly, an attempt is being made to develop a programme of construction projects privately and publicly financed by the municipal, provincial and dominion governments.
The reason I refer to that statement in the report is that I am glad to note that on account of the illness of Mr. Tom Moore the government has appointed his successor to take his place. -I refer to Mr. Bengough. Throughout this report I find that except in one or two isolated instances, of which this is one, the cooperation of labour and of the farmer has been overlooked by the committee, and by the government which set up the committee. I noted this in the report, and I hope that more attention will be given

Post-War Reconstruction

to the representations of labour and the farming community, the two greatest producing groups in our country.
Something else we should like to emphasize is this, that Doctor James said that in the few words he had been able to put together that afternoon he had tried to sketch the committee's report on the immediate post-war problems of Canada. And then he used the expression, "which is concentrated and which is urgent", and added this significant sentence, "There is no possibility of delay in the tackling of this problem".
But as I said earlier, the committee has apparently come to the conclusion that it must rely largely on private industry to meet the needs of the situation, for he says this:
By and large hcnvever it is the unanimous opinion of the committee on reconstruction that the initial planning of industrial rehabilitation is a matter for industry itself rather than for any governmental committee.
I believe that statement is based upon quite a mistaken understanding of what the postwar condition is likely to be. To suggest that initial planning is the responsibility of private industry is wrong. We as a nation must undertake the planning of our industrial and economic effort when the wTar ends, if we are going to meet the needs of the situation which will develop. And Doctor James' own statement, the unanimous view of this committee, is discounted almost immediately in the words which follow in this report, when Doctor James states that up to the present time he knew of only two industrial groups that are actively at work in post-war planning. He knew of only two, and he gave the names. One of them is the pulp and paper industry. He goes on to point out that this has been undertaken not only by persons in the industry, but by the war-time controllers of the industry as well. The second group interested in post-war planning are the life insurance companies. The life insurance companies are not industries. Moreover, in Great Britain we have witnessed lately the opposition of the great life insurance companies to the social security plans embodied in the Beveridge report. And w'e may find that the same vested interests in our own country will oppose health insurance and other social service measures.
My belief is that in Great Britain the government will ultimately be compelled to take over at least the great industrial life insurance companies, and make them a part of the entire social security set-up of that country. The probability is that we shall have to do the same thing.
I thought that Doctor Wallace, president of Queen's university, who also contributed a

paper at this meeting of the committee, brought a realistic view to the committee's attention. He pointed out that if we were to deal successfully with our post-war problems we ought to be dealing with our fundamental natural resources, and their developments. He omitted agriculture, because that was the subject of a special paper. But he placed the other fundamental resources as being mining, forestry, power and fisheries. But even President Wallace overlooked the necessity of bringing into this picture the cooperation of labour. He referred to:
. . . conferences that represent the administration in the provinces, the industry, the bodies of a public nature that are concerned with these resources professionally, conservationally and otherwise, and private individuals who have a special interest in such resources.
It may be that in his opinion labour was covered by one of these other groups. But in my opinion we are overlooking the cooperation of the great producing masses which we sometimes separate into two groups, labour and farmers.
A w'ord of warning to those who think that by the development of our natural resources we can meet the needs of the post-war period. President Wallace said:
I think it would' be a mistake to base too much optimism on what we can do in our resources for the immediate employment of men returning from overseas, but there can be a much larger number than most people would expect possible before looking into the picture.
While assistance can be given through the development of our resources, it is not sufficient to meet in any big way the needs of our post-war requirements and the criticism which President Wallace makes of our former policies in regard to the exploitation of our natural resources should give us all food for thought. He says:
We have to a considerable measure neglected our resources as cropable assets. That applies more particularly to forestry, one of our great primary resources in Canada. . . . There are surveys needed in Canada, very much more extensive than anything that we are aware of, both with regard to forestry lands and also to our mining prospects. We find that in all our resources, and particularly forestry, we have an extraordinarily inadequate knowledge of the situation, and without the knowledge we cannot do very much in sound conservational procedure.
To my mind, in our post-war rehabilitation plans, we should pay a great deal of attention to forest conservation, reforestation, and the care of trees that grow naturally in great areas in this country. President Wallace pointed out that this neglect of our resources applies also in other fields, in mining and the geological and topographical surveys. He says:

Post-War Reconstruction
There, too, far more is needed than we yet have, in order soundly to develop our resources.
If I may say so, as many of us perhaps know, President Wallace is an outstanding man in the universities of Canada in this particular field. I hope that what he said in this regard, namely, that we are becoming conservation-conscious, is true. He said:
We are becoming conservation-conscious. We are recognizing that we are losing our resources very sadly in many places. Any one who keeps his eyes open can see it, and the end is disaster, unless we act, and at once. The time has come to begin to build up again. That applies to deforested land that is wasting away because it is not protected any longer.
I think those of us who have been to Vancouver island in particular and to other regions on the Pacific coast realize the truth of that statement. He criticizes, not this government, but all the governments of Canada, for, after all, much of this applies, of course, to the provincial governments as well:
Speaking from a government standpoint, I think we have done very little for our forests of Canada.
We have allowed these great resources to be exploited, denuded, and to a very large extent wasted.
A few days ago we had an interesting - discussion in the house on the importance of water conservation. This, too, was emphasized by the committee, and if I might lend my voice to others that have been raised in this house, I believe that the waters of our prairie rivers may yet prove to be a source of great wealth to this country. Several years ago I undertook to give an address in this house on an irrigation scheme for the dried-out areas of Saskatchewan. When we spoke of thirty or forty or fifty million dollars in those days for schemes of that kind or four hundred million dollars for the grandiose scheme that was spoken of at that time, there was a gasp almost of horror at the thought of spending such huge sums of money. But when this war is over, it strikes me that if we want to put a large area of western Canada on a really self-supporting basis we shall have to consider great irrigation projects, and in the great waters of the north and south branches of the Saskatchewan river we have the ways and means to do more, perhaps than most of us have thought possible.
I was, however, very much disappointed in the paper dealing with agriculture. It was submitted by a former minister of agriculture in the Bracken government of Manitoba, Mr. Donald G. McKenzie. He pointed out that the problem was a large one. He drew to 72537-52}
the attention of the committee, and I wish to draw to the attention of this house something which I believe is quite true.
There are now perhaps upwards of 200,000 men and women drawn from agriculture to the armed forces and war industry who normally, one would assume, would return to this occupation.
A very large percentage of the people who have been drawn from agriculture into the armed forces and into the war industries have come from the prairie provinces, and if I may interject this thought, I believe that the other provinces of Canada would be doing an injustice to the prairie regions, where war industries have not been established, but whose people have been drawn into the armed forces and into industry to a much larger percentage of our population than elsewhere, if the representation of the prairie provinces in this house were not kept as it is now for the next ten years. I think all fair-minded members of this house will agree with me.
Mr. McKenzie could see in the problem of agriculture apparently only two basic problems-the problem of markets and the problem of agricultural credits. True, these are two of the problems, but to my mind they are not the two fundamental problems. The fundamental problems go much deeper than the finding of markets and the provision of credits. They go into the whole basis of the land tenure and mortgage system of western Canada, and the manner in which the producers on the farm have been compelled to pay, through years past, higher prices on account of artificial conditions in the country in which we live and to receive unduly low prices for their products. So that we must look to more than two broad principles if we are going to find a remedy for the farm problem.
One other point that I noted in his paper was this, a fear that we cannot increase the consumption of agricultural products in our own domestic market. True, we must find export markets, but in my opinion we can increase the consumption of agricultural products in our own country. When we compare the prewar years and the per capita consumption of meat, for example, in Canada, with the per capita consumption in a much warmer country, Australia, where meat is not required in such large quantities, we find that our per capita consumption of meat is very much below that of Australia or New Zealand.
Then there is the possibility of widening the uses for our agricultural products. I hope the government will pay a good deal of at-
Post-War Reconstruction

tention to the scientific experiments now being carried on looking toward the utilization of agricultural products in other industries.


Mr. REID:: Would you increase the growing of wheat?


Thomas Miller Bell: I would answer, of
course, that our Canadian people cannot consume much more wheat than they are doing now, but I believe that when this war ends, every kernel of wheat we have stored will be useful to assist in feeding the starving people of the war-torn countries, and for a considerable time every cereal we can grow will be needed either in Europe or in Asia. I am not apprehensive about the amount of wheat we have; my only fear is that the farmers will not be able to cany it, unaided -largely-as they have to do to-day.
Problems of electrification, soil erosion, soil conservation ought to be considered by the committee as a part of a large general rehabilitation and reconstruction programme, not only because these would give work but because they would assist generally the coun-' try in the future. I was amazed to find in the statement presented by Mr. MacKenzie this suggestion: I am not. going to paraphrase it; I will read his words. He says:
If those folks are to be persuaded to go back to the farm, some means or other have to be found to persuade them to take a little lower income than they are now getting. So_we are looking at the problem and wondering if something could not be done that would provide a modest little home on the farm for a married couple, who would make their home there, perhaps with the use of half an acre of land and, say, with a cow or trvo to supply their needs, and who would educate their children and settle more permanently on the land than is now the case.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Is he another
schoolteacher?


An hon. MEMBER:: A lawyer?


Thomas Miller Bell: Well, I would imagine
that if we tried to put a family, with a couple of cows, on half an acre of land in the prairie provinces, we would have not only dead cows but the funeral of the man, his wife and the family in a very short time, because over a very large area of our country half an acre would not begin to keep half a cow.


James Garfield Gardiner: He must have meant
half a section.


Thomas Miller Bell: He must have meant
half a section? Well, he says, "half an acre." As the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) knows, although half a section is not quite so bad, there are places where it would not be sufficient.

I do not propose to refer more to this particular document, but I was interested in the trend of thought to be found-it runs through the other papers as well-that we must wait and see. We must wait and see if industry can undertake the job, and if industry cannot undertake the job then we must supplement it. I think we should have sufficient knowledge of what is going on in the world to-day to realize that industry will not be able to undertake this job, that the thing we must do is to decide on 'the plans we can formulate now so that we can provide the means of life for this large number of people to whom this report refers. Industry will have to assume some of the job, and in my opinion will be able to do so. Of course it will be said that we believe in taking all industry out of private hands. I have often said that this is not so. We believe that when industry becomes a monopolistic affair it is high time to take it out of private hands so that it shall not exploit the people. But, contrary to what most people think and say, we should like to see more Canadian people owning more homes and owning more property which they themselves and their families can use and enjoy. The only kind of property we do not want to see privately owned is that which is used to exploit other people. In other words, we want less public property privately owned and more personal property privately and personally owned, and the more that this ideal is kept before this house and the committee, the more likely are we to arrive at a plan to meet the postwar period.
I have spoken rather longer than I intended, but I wished to place a point of view before the house on this occasion and to deal specifically with the trends I found in the discussion as reported in the proceedings of the meeting on December 4. I believe that we are on the threshold of great changes. We must win this war, it is true. That is fundamental. We could not do any of these things if we did not win the war. I agree with that fundamental position. But we shall have lost what we are fighting for if we do not prepare, before this war ends, to organize our economy and our social life so that the men and the women who have fought and sacrificed, who have produced the goods in our war industries, who have produced the foods back on our farms, who have given of service to this nation and to the united nations in the time of need, shall have the kind of life to which they look forward and for which they fight.


Mr. BROOKE CLAXTON (St. Lawrence-St. George):: The war has now lasted three

Post-War Reconstruction
years, and if it lasts another three years and we do not do anything more in the next three years to prepare for the peace that we are going to win than we have done in the last three years, we shall not be ready for the peace.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is pretty hard on the government!


Brooke Claxton: The government has been occupied wdth something else more important, which comes first; namely, the winning of the war. But now a beginning has been made of that, and we can turn our attention more to the post-war period. Hon. members in all parts of the house have emphasized in this debate the importance of that subject, and equally they have recognized-every one of them, quite properly-that we have to win the war first, that we must put it first in our thoughts and that we must put it first in the national effort. But even in winning the war it will help us to think of the post-war period. That was expressed exceedingly well in one of the reports made in the United Kingdom, the Uthwatt report, in which it was said:
It is our firm belief that a vital incentive to the war effort is the presentation of a clear picture of a better world which lies ahead and which, if plans are drawn up and the essential preparations made in advance, can be achieved after this struggle is over. To delay planning and the legislation to carry the plans into effect until the time for action is upon us-at the end of the war-we believe to be a fatal error.
Already we have seen some of the signs of the first glimmer of victory over the eastern sky. No sooner had the 8th army begun to make some advance and the allies begun to operate together in north Africa than we saw some reactions in Canada to this first glimmer of victory. On one side there began to be a public clamour against government control. It was as though business felt that the war was beginning to be won, and that it had better prepare itself for the post-war period. On the other side there was agitation of a new character by various labour organizations. In both instances there was the unconscious feeling that the time had come when they should begin to look to the preparation of their own post-war position. The Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) warned this house and the country, not once but three times, that we had to wrin the war first. I think every hon. member agrees with him.
But that does not mean that we must leave all consideration of the post-war period to some other time. We can deal with both matters together. One thing that is important is that we should put ourselves in the place of industry and try to realize what is in their minds to-day. If you have been in conference
with those engaged in business and industry to-day you will realize that many of them are wondering what is going to happen after the war. If you are meeting labour groups; if you have been involved in labour disputes, you will find out that this is also in the back of their minds. I suggest that the more assurance we can give now of what will happen after the war, the better it will be for both those groups and for everyone else. If we cannot give an instalment of the post-war conditions to-day, at least we can give an earnest of it by indicating our seriousness by thinking and planning ahead and trying to anticipate and see just what will happen, trying to dovetail the various parts of this nation's effort, so that at the end of the war they will make a fighting team together to fight and win the victory of peace in the same way as they are making a fighting team to win the war.
It is easy enough to look ahead and see what labour wants. Labour does not want handouts; labour wants an opportunity to work. Agriculture wants an opportunity of selling its products at fair prices. Industry wants a chance to make a fair profit. It is that kind of thing we should have in our minds to-day. We should be trying to think of the conditions under which these three great elements in the country can work together so that we can make an attempt at the end of the war to face the problems of reconstruction. May I suggest that if we plan and put into this effort something of the spirit and the concentration of will and united purpose that we are putting into the war, we can look forward to the future with confidence. Speaking about the new order, the Prime Minister said at Toronto on March 24, 1941:
If that new order is not already on its way before the war is over, we may look for it in vain.
Of course he is right. The war is not going to come to a sudden end and then the millenium come in at the zero hour of victory. When peace does come we may find ourselves in somewhat the same position as that of the boy who has attained his twenty-first birthday; we shall be just one day older. In a large measure we are making our peace now. We are setting to-day the conditions that will make the conditions under which we shall have to work in peace. The kind of people who are in charge of our economy and our affairs will be the same people who will be in charge of our affairs then, or so many of us expect and hope. A year or two ago some people thought that there would be a millenium after we had won the victory. That is not likely.
Post-War Reconstruction

People have become more realistic. We know now that conditions will not be very much different except that the emphases will be changed and the purpose of all our activities will be changed. But there will be some differences. One difference will be the fact that there will be 2,000,000 people for whom work will have to be found. Another is the fact that something will have to be found to take the place of the $4,000,000,000 or more which the government has put into the Canadian economy for purposes of the war. Our economy may go back to the 1939 level unless that is done. We have those two challenges ahead of us-to find employment for something like 2,000,000 people and to get our economy at a level where, instead of a national income of something in the neighbourhood of $4,000,000,000, as it was in 1938, we shall have a national income of something like $8,000,000,000, as it probably is this year.
That cannot be done by private enterprise or private industry alone, nor can it be done by the government alone. It can be done only by the two getting together and working out plans in considerable detail in advance. Industry, labour and farmers; government, both dominion and provincial; engineers, lawyers, members of parliament; all the people who go to make up this nation must realize that unless they keep together, unless they work together at that time with the same united purpose as that which they have shown during the war, they can look forward only to a short-lived boom followed by a long and unpleasant depression. This point of view was put forth very well in the annual report of the Bank of Canada which was issued this month, when Mr. Graham Towers, governor of the bank, said:
[DOT]-the experience of the last four years has shown that government war expenditure on a sufficient scale can produce full employment.
He continued:
The government's willingness to spend the large amounts of money involved in the war programme has been a necessary and important feature but even more important has been the unity of national purpose which has produced such remarkable economic results over the past four years.
After the war is over, the present driving stimulus to maximum employment and production will be removed. If we are to maintain full employment in peace time, we must substitute other objectives for the current will to win the war. Broadly speaking our goals should be to provide a rising standard of living and to contribute to the establishment of a world economy which will remove the threat of war.
Notice what he said-the two-fold incentive that is necessary, the two-fold goal "to provide a rising standard of living and to contribute to
[Mr. Claxton.l
the establishment of a world economy which will remove the threat of war." He ends with these words:
If we are to achieve success, I feel that we must have the same broad measure of public support behind those objectives that is now back of our efforts to win the war.
Therefore it comes down to this: are the people of Canada willing to work and fight for the fruits of their victory, to fight for their best interests after the war with the united purpose they have shown during the war? Are we to do that, or are we to let the devil take the hindmost, stick our noses in the trough, and go back in a wild flight to normalcy, similar to that which we saw in 1919 after the end of the last war? That is the challenge which faces Canada. That is the challenge which faces all the civilized world.
All the countries in the world are thinking about it, and many of them have been thinking about it for a long time. In the United Kingdom, as I think hon. members know, they have not only the Beveridge but the Uthwatt and the Scott committees' reports. They have dozens of government agencies set up to study the post-war situation, and all the activities are coordinated under the general direction of the paymaster-general, Sir William Jowett. On December 1 and 2 they had two days debate on the subject of reconstruction when the work then under way was surveyed.
In Australia, which is in some ways similar to our own country in having a federal system and an economy that is largely dependent on exports and in being a great British dominion, they have already faced one part of the problem by calling together a constitutional convention in which the federal government sought for a term substantial powers from the states in order to carry out the purposes of the national government after the war. It was interesting to note that in putting this forward the attorney general of the commonwealth of Australia said that Australia was committed to a course of action under the Atlantic charter which she could not fulfil under the existing constitution. I think that should lead us to consider in Canada if it is possible for us to fulfil our obligations under the Atlantic charter and to the Canadian people under our existing constitution. The Atlantic charter to-day constitutes a treaty for Canada. It was signed on August 14, 1941, by Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Churchill, and paragraphs 4 and 5 read:
(4) They will endeavour, with due respect for their existing obligations, to further the enjoyment by all states, great or small, victor or

Post-War Reconstruction
vanquished, of access, on equal terms, to the trade and to the raw materials of the world which are needed for their economic prosperity.
The internal situation is dealt with in paragraph 5:
(5) They desire to bring about fullest collaboration between all nations in the economic field, with the object of securing for all improved labour standards, economic advancement and social security.
Of course, by the declaration of the united nations signed at Washington. January 1, 1942, Canada agreed to its preamble which said. "Having subscribed to a common programme of purposes and principles . . So that we see in the Atlantic charter a description in broad terms of the purposes to which our own government and, I am sure, all the Canadian people have subscribed. The question is, are we doing enough to-day in the internal sphere to get going the kind of machinery to study and plan for what is envisaged here and what is needed to turn our economy from a war basis to a peace-time basis; and in the second place, have we contributed as much as we can to set up the international machinery to bring that about between nations? My suggestion is that though Canada has done much we can still do a great deal more. Hence we all keenly support the resolution to set up this committee in order that it may get on with its work in close collaboration with all other government agencies.
The hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. O'Neill) said there was a great deal we could do to-day to deal with this post-war situation. I have one thing that I should like to bring before the reconstruction committee for its consideration which I do not think has yet been mentioned in the house or before the committee. It concerns the one Canadian industry which does not require re-tooling, which almost inevitably is due for a tremendous boom immediately after the war, and which can count on a steady period of growth and development indefinitely after the war if we only think about it to-day. That is an industry which has been all too infrequently mentioned in this house. I refer to the tourist industry.
Immediately after the war there will be in the United States millions of people demobilized from war services and industry with savings in their pockets. The strain of the war will be over; they will want to go, on a holiday and to go some place. They will not be able to go abroad because the ships of the world will be engaged in carrying food and supplies to the devastated areas and in bringing troops home. We may see in North America in the immediate post-war period the greatest boom in the travel business that the
world has ever seen. Canada may well expect to get a very considerable part of that business.
Hon. members may not realize what this means to Canada. In 1941 we had 13,968,088 Americans coming to Canada, and they spent somewhere in the neighbourhood of $150,000,000 here. They brought into Canada in that year more dollars than any other single industry brought, with the possible exception of gold mining. Here is something which can be considered as a post-war activity and on which we can work now. The kind of work I have in mind is well illustrated by the activities of the wartime prices and trade board. One might not expect it to be building to-day for our post-war reconstruction, but that is precisely what it did indirectly. When sugar rationing was introduced the official of the wartime prices and trade board in charge of rationing discussed with an officer of the foreign exchange control board how it should be introduced. This officer of the foreign exchange control board was interested in the tourist business on account of the United States dollars it had brought to Canada. He said, "Have you thought of the problem of rationing American householders in Canada?" The official of the prices board said, "I did not know there were very many; how many are there?" The foreign exchange control officer replied, "There are nine thousand. Instead of forcing these Americans to line up at Canadian offices to get their sugar ration cards after they come to Canada we should write every one of them an individual letter offering to send him by mail his ration card before he comes to Canada." Therefore a letter was sent addressed "Dear Neighbour." I suppose the letters must have cost easily $50 in postage and mimeographing and paper. They brought back thousands of replies. I have seen a number of them. One from East Orange says:
Thank you again for your courtesy in telling us how to take care of this matter. It is one more evidence of the unfailing courtesy and kindliness I have found each of the twelve summers I have spent in Canada.
Here is one from Toledo:
I am delighted beyond words with the thoughtfulness and courtesy of your circular letter. ... It will give me great pleasure to turn it over to one of our newspaper columns and believe it will receive some favourable publicity. I feel the entire United States admires Canada and the wonderful effort it is putting forth on behalf of us all.
One from Detroit:
I certainly appreciate the spirit of your letter. In fact it gave me quite a shock to find a government organization so far-sighted as to anticipate future requirements.
Post-War Reconstruction

*When I learned of this by accident it gave me quite a shock to find how far-sighted our officials had been. Later I went to the United States, and after speaking to audiences in Chicago, Cleveland and even in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, people came to me from the audience saying they had received such letters and expressed their appreciation. Then I felt that this was one of the most far-sighted, courteous acts I had ever heard of a public official doing, and I thought I would take the first available opportunity to mention it to the house in order that it might receive the commendation which I feel every hon. member would wish to express.
What I have just mentioned has a very definite post-war implication. It is building for the post-war period in the most practical way. It is creating good-will. It is leading our United States friends who own houses in Canada to look forward to the time when they may return to Canada. It is making every one of them an ambassador of good-will for us. I suggest that there are dozens of ways in which other agencies of various kinds, governmental and otherwise, can pave the way for this tourist business that we may have after the war. We should make sure that when tourists come to Canada after the war, they meet with good reception and carry back a good report. The first wave of tourists returning from Canada to the United States after the war will do more good or harm than all the publicity we could possibly buy. If . they meet with a good reception, then this highly important Canadian industry will be placed on a sound footing for years ahead. If they carry back a bad report, then all the publicity we can buy will do no good. The tourist business may seem out of the way, but it is the sort of thing which people with imagination, who are thinking ahead, can work on as a way to help make Canada's situation better after the war.
If it is possible to do this in connection with something so remote as the tourist business, there must be dozens of ways which our committee and all the interdepartmental committees and the members of this house and business associations can think of which will give them an opportunity to apply their brains and their industry when that effort is needed after the war. That is the sort of planning we need, so that we, a small nation, by the use of intelligence may make the most of our resources, and it does not take a great deal of intelligence to think of these things. All it requires is continuous attention, someone whose business it is to apply his mind to that sort of thing.
It is quite obvious that what we do in Canada in regard to the post-war situation will
[Mr. Claxton.1
affect us here very greatly. We can make conditions difficult for industry, for agriculture and for labour more than anything else by being uncertain, by preventing them from feeling any security as to their future. What they want above everything else is to know where they stand, to know what they can do, to know what they can plan for; and of course one of the things that should be indicated fairly soon is the kind of controls that will be necessary after the wrar ends, because we should remember that some controls will be required. Today we are short of certain food products, for instance milk products. I should think that immediately after the war we would be much shorter of milk products, because there will be a far greater number of people in the world who will need those products much more than we shall, and I should think the cry of suffering humanity would be responded to by Canadians. So that we may see a continuation of the rationing of certain milk products. Shipping will be short; there will have to be shipping control, and so on. Therefore I suggest that the sort of controls which will be needed for the kind of economy that will follow the war should be studied and worked out now and made popular, so that we shall not have a great clamour against every sort of control and against government bureaucracy, which will make it exceedingly difficult to get the public confidence so necessary to carry out what must be done at that time.
But when we have done everything in Canada that we can do, we must remember that we are part of the world. The result of what we do in Canada will depend in very large measure upon what happens outside Canada. We can plan and work in Canada, but unless after the war we get the kind of peace settlement, the kind of peace conditions, which will enable us to sell our wheat and other products abroad at fair prices, then we may be in for hard times. Every one of us in Canada, in the east as well as in the west, lawj'ers as well as farmers, should be concerned about the kind of peace settlement we have after the war. The sort of peace we get will depend a good deal upon the sort of war we fight. If we fight the war as united nations; if we develop instruments to carry out our united will; if we develop machinery and habits of co-operation during the war, then we may expect that cooperation to continue after the war. If on the other hand we do not develop those agencies and instruments and habits and that machinery during the war, then it would be expecting a miracle to hope that after the war they could be developed,

Post-War Reconstruction
when we would have lost the main thing holding us together, namely, the desire to beat the enemy.
Accordingly I suggest that we in Canada as individuals, and I hope as a government, can support the moves that are going on around the world to strengthen the united nations, to make their union real, and gradually to evolve the agencies, the instruments and the machinery of cooperation so that the nations will get into the habit of working together, a habit which will survive the peace.
In conclusion, may I just say that I agree with the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. O'Neill) that almost everything can be done to-day that will help us in the post-war period, and what cannot be done to-day must be planned to-day. Think of housing. Most of us, I believe, look forward to a great series of housing projects in Canada; yet our experience in the past with similar projects would indicate how technically difficult they are to work out, since they involve the cooperation of the municipalities, the provinces, the dominion and other agencies. We have discovered that if you want to get a housing project started a year from now, you must begin planning a year in advance. That is the sort of thing we can do to-day.
In connection with the committee I have only a word to say, namely, that in a matter of this importance the committee surely should be given every possible assistance by members of this house, by the public, by public bodies and especially by the government, which should not only make available to it the work done by other government agencies but make available research assistance of its own so that it could carry on its own work as well as listening to what other people are doing. Even to coordinate the results of the work of other people or to draw up any sort of well rounded report, it is necessary that the committee should have some full-time assistance. During the last three years of war it has been my privilege to attend perhaps five or six international conferences. I believe every one of those had a number of secretaries who spent weeks, months or perhaps even years preparing for those meetings which were unofficial and off the record. Not long ago I attended one such conference which lasted some ten days, to which some governments thought it worth while to send delegates some tens of thousands of miles by air. That conference was planned during two years. Perhaps more than twenty secretaries worked- on that occasion in planning the conference. Yet we have a committee of this house which has no secretary who can devote a full day's work to the committee. It is high time that we gave
parliamentary committees of that kind and of that importance some technical assistance. It would not require very many -[DOT] a full-time secretary, an economist and probably one or two other experts to consider representations, to organize the work, to prepare submissions and to draft reports. In this way the committee can do a job which will be far more useful than it could otherwise do.
Nothing comes without work. This is the most important work upon which any one of us could be engaged, apart from the actual winning of the war itself. Unfortunately most of us cannot take part in that; we are not physically fit, or we are too old or something of that kind. But here is one thing we can do, namely, to give the boys returning from overseas a fair chance for a useful life. That is all they want.


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Speaker, I have listened with great interest to the fine discussion which has been carried on since it was proposed to set up this committee. I have been really disappointed, though, by the extent to which every hon. member who has participated in the debate, from the three other groups in the house, has studiously avoided telling us about how all their fine dreams are to be achieved.
The hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Claxton) gave us a good speech. He, however, told us there were two million people to put to work, but he did not give us an iota of evidence as to how that is to be done. He told us that we should have to distribute in Canada the equivalent of four billion dollars, in order to keep our people up to a standard where they would have their present national income of eight billion dollars. Apparently he did not consider it important to suggest how that would be done, where the money was to come from, or how it was to be distributed.
That is the major flaw, the major deficiency in the whole debate, and in all the thinking going on to-day in the various nations which call themselves the united nations. Unless that problem is solved, all the discussion in this house and in other houses, all the efforts of this and other committees are going to be completely futile, a delusion and a snare. Let us get that in mind. I will challenge anybody to gainsay what I have said.
The emphasis of the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George seemed to be that we should have an international organization to settle this matter. I ask hon. members: What sort of international arrangement could have removed the unemployment situation which existed in 1935, when the United States, one
Post-War Reconstruction

of the united nations, had 23,500,000 people on relief; when Canada, another of the united nations, had about a million and half on relief; when Great Britain, another of the united nations, had a corresponding number on relief, and when a similar deplorable relief situation existed in every single one of those united nations? I ask this question: How could the binding of these nations together possibly have removed the unemployment which existed? Let us by all means in the house begin to face the facts. Let us not talk idle foolishness. There must be a device by which improvements can be achieved. Let us find that device, and discuss it.
In passing, I should like to deal with the various speeches which have come from the Liberal side of the house. It seems to me there has been a well-organized debating team performing before us from the Liberal benches, the object being to give us the impression that the Liberal party apparently wishes us to get. I wish to indicate how it seems to me they have endeavoured to convey the impression.
The hon. member for Cariboo (Mr. Turgeon) told us about the great changes which are to take place. But he took care not to indicate in the slightest degree the nature of those changes, how they were to be brought about, or whether the changes would make us better or worse.
Then the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) talked about changes, and indicated that one change Canada had to make was to bind herself hand and foot so that she would be utterly unable to do anything by herself, so that she would have to get the permission of Timbuktu in order to determine, for instance, what credit she would advance in northern Saskatchewan. If I have been unfair to the hon. member for Essex East I will appreciate his coming into the house tomorrow and asking me questions, and I promise him that when he asks me questions I will answer them. I will not do what he did when I asked him questions the other night. I will not say that I have no time to answer.
Both these hon. members spoke about free enterprise. They neglected utterly to tell us why it was that free enterprise failed us in 1929 and 1930. We had free enterprise then. Why did it fail us?. What was the reason? There was a reason; why not seek it out, and prescribe the remedy? I am not condemning free enterprise; I am saying there was something wrong either with it or with the environment in which free enterprise operated.
May I leave the Liberal side of the house now, and reflect for a moment or two on the proposals of my neighbours who sit next to

me in the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation. I believe I have not yet a correct interpretation of their stand. I once thought it meant government ownership, but after listening to-night to the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) I do not know just what they stand for.
I will just say this, that if the government took over industries from private enterprise, it would be faced with the all-important problem of selling its goods. It would be no easier for a government-owned shoe factory to sell its goods, than for a privately-owned factory. Let us bear that in mind.
The first great problem is to sell the goods. If we can establish in this Dominion of Canada a set-up under which private industry can sell its goods, private industry will carry on very successfully, provided we put a few regulations around it, so that it may not exploit us. If the government owned all the industries and the government were unable to sell its goods, will someone tell me how the government could employ men to work in those industries?


John Ritchie MacNicol: They could not employ
them.


John Horne Blackmore: Exactly, and you
would think that any one with common sense could see that. Our problem is the problem of discovering where to sell the goods.
On motion of Mr. Blackmore the debate was adjourned.
It being two minutes after eleven o'clock the house . adj ourned without question put.
Tuesday, March 2, 1943