1944-03-24

Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the annual report of the Canadian Wheat Board for the crop year 1942-43. I suggest that the report be referred to the committee on agriculture.



INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to table three copies in English and three copies in French of the Mutual Aid agreement between Canada and China on the principles applying to the provision by Canada of Canadian war supplies to China under the War Appropriation (United Nations Mutual Aid) Act of Canada, 1943, signed at Ottawa, March
fMr. Chevrier.]
22, 1944. The principles embodied in this agreement between China and Canada are similar to those that are embodied in the agreements I tabled last week between Canada and the United Kingdom and Canada and Russia. The text of this agreement is to all intents and purposes the same as that of the United Kingdom agreement.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Are there any more
agreements to be tabled?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There will be, at least, one more, yes.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (Minister of Transport) :: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the report to parliament of George A. Touche and Company, auditors of the Canadian National Railway system, for the year ended December 31, 1943, and the financial budget of the Canadian National Railways and Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited for the calendar year 1944. I move:
That this report and the financial budget he referred to the standing committee on railways and shipping owned, operated and controlled by the government.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: Does the motion include the auditor's report?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It should be in the motion.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The auditor's report is to parliament.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It ought to be referred to the committee as well.


Mr. SPEAKER:: The motion will read:
That the financial budget of the Canadian National Railways and Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships Limited for the calendar year 1944, also copy of the auditor's report, be referred to the standing committee on railways and shipping owned, operated and controlled by the government.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. L. R. LaFLECHE (Minister of National War Services): Mr. Speaker, may I table copy of order in council P.C. 2120 of March 24, 1944, appointing Mr. Bernard Keble Sandwell a governor of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

Army-Reversion of Owccrs
Gordon Graydon: Is Mr. Sandwell to be the new chairman of the board of governors?
Mr. LaFLEC'HE:	I cannot answer that
question.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 39, respecting the New Brunswick Railway Company.-Mr. Emmerson.
Bill No. 40, respecting Gore District Mutual Fire Insurance Company.-Mr. Homuth.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Pensions and National Health): Yesterday the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) asked me a question in regard to certain resolutions passed at a recent conference of war widows. I understand these were meant for preliminary discussion, and are to be forwarded to me by the secretary.
In regard to the second part of my hon. friend's question, I may state that all representations made receive careful consideration, and government policies in regard to them are being and will be announced from time to time.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I desire to direct this question to the Prime Minister:	have all nine
provinces accepted the invitation of the government to attend the projected dominion-provincial conference at Ottawa, and, if so, when does the Prime Minister expect to be in a position to announce the date of the conference?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: All the provinces have
accepted the invitation of the dominion government for a dominion-provincial conference. I am not able at the moment to say at what particular date the conference will be held. There is a good deal of preparatory work to be done, and it is proceeding at the present time. Up to the present it has not been possible to find a date which would be acceptable to all the provinces. But the government is doing its best to have the conference brought into being at the earliest convenience of the provinces generally.
.	UNITED NATIONS
RELIEF AND REHABILITATION-INQUIRY AS TO THE DATE AND PLACE OF MEETING OF COUNCIL On the orders of the day:


Gordon Graydon: Reports in the press yesterday would appear to indicate that Canada is to be the second meeting place of the united nations relief and rehabilitation administration and that the meeting is to take place in the month of June. Will the Prime Minister inform the house as to whether or not Canada is to be honoured with such a meeting and, if so, when and where it is likely to be convened?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The government has
cordially welcomed the proposal that the council of the united nations relief and rehabilitation administration should hold its next meeting in Canada. I understand that the next meeting is to be held in the month of June, but I am not in a position to say at the moment at what particular date or place the meeting will be held. The council itself will decide that and would be, I think, the appropriate body to make the announcement.



CANADIAN ARMY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: I desire now to answer the question of the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Green), who inquired yesterday with regard to the retirement of officers in the Pacific command.
The statement that "500 officers are being retired from the active force in the Pacific command" is not accurate. The number from October 1 to February 29 was 115, and the number pending at that time was 35.
Officers are not being returned in groups to reserve force status. Each case is dealt with individually and on its merits.
There have, from October 1 to February 29, been retired 639 officers. That does not include 225 officers who have been retired since July 1943 as being over 60 years of age. The house will understand that this includes those retired from the Pacific command and all others as well. Some have been returned to reserve status at their own request; some have been returned as over age for overseas service, some as below medical category for overseas service. Others are returned to reserve status because no suitable employment can be found for them in the Canadian army.
Maple Products

Officers' survey and classification boards have been set up to deal with the disposal of officers. Each officer to be returned to reserve status -except those returned at their own request- gets notice of the intention to return him to reserve status, with the reasons upon which the recommendation is based. The notice is given to him by his commanding officer. He is advised that he may, if he so wishes, submit a statement within a period of 14 days from the notice, setting forth any reasons he might have why such recommendation should not be carried into effect. He is also advised by the notice that, if no such statement is received from him by his commanding officer within the 14 days, his commanding officer will forward his recommendation through the usual channels to national defence headquarters. It is also stated in the notice that, if the officer does not wish to submit any reasons against the recommendation, he should state so in writing.
Before notice of the intention to recommend return to reserve status is sent to the particular officer, he will probably have been interviewed by the officers' survey and classification board. If he has not, and expresses the wish to appear before them, he is given an opportunity of doing so and of giving the board all the reasons he can to show why he should not be returned to reserve status. The board has no authority to dispose of an officer. The board simply puts in a recommendation to the district officer commanding or the general officer commanding concerned.
All officers who are returned to reserve status under the procedure by notice which has just been described are paid rehabilitation grant.



MAPLE PRODUCTS

[Stage Direction]
RATIONING-USE FOR PRESERVING PURPOSES On the orders of the day:
James Layton Ralston: May I make an answer to the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Bruce), who in a question he asked yesterday inquired whether consideration would be given to the immediate removal of restrictions on the purchase of maple syrup and maple sugar.
The answer is that when rationing became necessary for preserves and sweeteners because of greatly increased demands and definite shortages of some items such as canned fruits, it was necessary that the general pool of sweeteners be dealt with as a whole and that each consumer be given an equal claim upon it. It would have been discrimination in favour of consumers of maple syrup if they had been able to purchase their maple syrup [DOT]without coupons and still have all their coupons to purchase other sweeteners or the alternative of sugar. In dealing with rationed commodities it is the policy of the wartime prices and trade board to treat all parts of Canada equally and to avoid discrimination in favour of any particular section or group of consumers. Accordingly as at present advised it is not the intention to remove maple syrup or maple sugar from the preserves ration.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If I am in order, I should like to address a question to the minister in connection with the statement he has just made. It is represented to me from my constituency, which is a substantial producer of maple sugar products, that the rationing has had the effect of reducing production because people are not willing to give up their sugar coupons for maple sugar. I should like to have that situation investigated. I may say that I took it up with the wartime prices and trade board and they tried to laugh me out of court, but I cannot be laughed out of court so easily.



HOSPITALS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Yesterday the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Graydon) asked me if I could give figures of the number of patients in the hospital institutions of this country. I have broken down the statement into four divisions: public hospitals; mental hospitals; private hospitals; tubercular sanatoria. The figures are for the years 1939, 1940, 1941 and 1942, and are as follow:
1939	1940	1941	1942Public hospitals	
885,819	985,897	1,057,553	1,116,602Mental hospitals	
56,657	56,823	58.341	59,943Private hospitals	
36,766	42,479	47,361	48,225Tubercular sanatoria	
19,425	21,002	21,847	21,997The figures for 1943 are not available yet, It will be noted that the increase in the and those I have given do not include	three years from 1939 was: for public hospitals,dominion government hospitals.	230,783, or 27 per cent; for mental institutions,

Labour Conditions
3,286; or slightly under 6 per cent; for private hospitals, 11,459, or 31 per cent; and for tubercular sanatoria 2,572 or about 13 per cent.
With regard to days' stay, the average for the public hospitals is 12-2 days, but owing to more scientifc care of patients and generally improved accommodation this average is showing a gradual drop. The averages for the other hospitals are: mental, 5 to 6 years; private, 16-6 days; tubercular, 226 days.


Gordon Graydon: That explains the increase in personnel.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is what I tried to point out to my hon. friend.


Gordon Graydon: Of course you did not do anything of the kind.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. R. ADAMSON (York West):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Labour, notice of which I sent him. The question arises from a telegram received from the secretary of Local 129 of the United Automobile Workers, C.I.O., which states that trained aircraft workers are being laid off at Clark Ruse Aircraft Limited, Dartmouth, N.S., and that the operations of the local selective service officials are extremely inefficient; further, that inadequate provision is being made for the proper reemployment of skilled workers who are being given unskilled work. The question I would like to ask the minister is this: Are aircraft workers being laid off at Clark Ruse Aircraft Limited? If so, how many, and further, what steps are being made to reemploy these skilled workers at their specialized trade?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Secondly, would it be possible, if the operation in question is closing down, to send these men to plants in Ontario where a shortage of skilled labour currently exists?


Thomas Vien: Order. The question is one that should be placed on the order paper.


Humphrey Mitchell: I am not taking the hon. gentleman's word that the selective service is inefficient in this particular case.


Gordon Graydon: The question asked by the hon. member for York West remains unanswered by the Minister of Labour. I was rising to ask the minister why it is not answered.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Thomas Vien: The question must be
placed on the order paper.



EDMONTON COAL MINES-QUESTION AS TO CONTINUANCE OF SUBSIDY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. E. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. In this morning's Journal it is reported that 500 miners have been dismissed from the Edmonton coal mines because the dominion government has given no definite assurance that the coal subsidy will be continued after March 31.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Charles Edward Johnston: Is the government prepared to give immediate employment to these miners?


Thomas Vien: I have already called attention to the fact that questions arising out of editorials or statements in newspapers are not such as should be asked on the orders of the day. They should be put on the order paper so that answers can be given properly.


Charles Edward Johnston: I am not quoting anything from a newspaper. I am stating facts.


Thomas Vien: The question is one that should be put on the order paper.



WHEAT BOARD


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):: May I direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce? Has any action been brought in the courts against the Canadian wheat board for an accounting? If so, by whom was such action brought, on what date and in what province? If action has been brought, has any judgment been rendered, and what is the effect of that judgment?


James Angus MacKinnon: The question may
stand as notice.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. K. FRASER (Peterborough West):: May I ask the Postmaster General a question. As air mail rates from the United States to Canada are being increased from six to eight cents per ounce, starting Saturday night, will there be a change in the rates from Canada to the United States?
Hon. W. P. M U L 0 C K (Postmaster General): That is a question of government policy. If any change is contemplated the house will be so advised in due course.
War Appropriation-Supplies



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, March 23, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money for the carrying out of measures consequent upon the existence of a state of war- Mr. Ilsely-Mr. Bradette in the chair.

Mr. ESLING:: At the sitting of yesterday the member for York West referred to tungsten. I would like to ask the minister a few questions for the purpose of general information on the subject. I do not expect the replies to-day but I hope' he will note the questions and bring down the answers at his convenience. Tungsten has been a mineral of very great importance, particularly in the early part of 1942, so much so that there was general publicity in all mining papers as well as in all newspapers advising prospectors and miners to be on the lookout for scheelite ore from which tungsten is taken.
I speak on this matter for the reason that the Emerald mine in my district was looked upon as one of the most promising tungsten properties in the dominion. The owner was a resident of the United States. Negotiations for the purchase of this mine were entered into, with the result that the owner asked the government $1,750,000. I suppose that was what one might call wet weight, because the government expropriated the property and took it over at dry weight of $424,000 payable in United States funds. That is quite a difference.
The metals reserve corporation apparently proceeded to develop the property, although the property is in the name of the government. That property produced 132 tons of high-grade tungsten and 267 tons of low-grade tungsten concentrates.
I wanted to ask the minister first of all: Does the property remain in the name of the Canadian government? Has it been fully paid for, and in view of the fact that the mine has closed, that operations have ceased, that there is no more demand for tungsten, will the minister first note the question as to why this lack of need for tungsten has come about in such a short time? Was there not sufficient research work to determine whether there would be an oversupply in the United States, or was there not sufficient research work to tell whether there would be any specific amount required in Canada? I ask this because the advertisements in the public press encouraged

everybody to go after scheelite ore. I asked what expenditures had been made on the Emerald mine, and1 the reply was $829,000 for development. I took it for granted that $424,000 would be added to that for the expropriation of the mine. I wish to ask the minister if the $829,000 includes the cost of erecting the mill, because the development of the mine could not be proceeded with unless there was a mill. It is a very up-to-date mill.
We now have $829,000 and $424,000 of United States funds in the property while 267 tons of low grade concentrates, which yielded $70,000, have been shipped out. There are 132 tons of high grade concentrates left. What is the assay of the high grade concentrates? What will be the approximate value of them? What is the government going to do with these high grade concentrates, and what is the government going to do with the high grade concentrates from the various mines across the country which have been producing tungsten? They all went to considerable expense to get production under way.
In September last all operations at this Emerald mine ceased and the mill closed in October. Can the government not arrange to use that mill as a customs mill for prospectors of lead and zinc ores in the West Kootenay district? It may be necessary to have some alterations made, but as development cost $829,000 and the property $424,000, plus the cost of the mill, which is unknown, it represents a very large investment.
I should like to turn to the matter of publicity and the encouraging of prospectors to make a thorough search for the then much-needed tungsten, which to-day is' not needed at all. Is that situation brought about because the production in the United States is so greatj or the price of mining so much less. I wish to cite to the minister the case of a local prospector. A letter in reference to that case went to the Department of Mines four or five days ago, to which there has been no reply. I stress the Department of Mines because all the newspaper publicity urged prospectors to be on the lookout for scheelite and to send their samples to the Department of Mines. They were told if they did that they would get full information not only as to procedure but as to the names of the firms in the United States to which the tungsten concentrates could be shipped. I cite this case purely as a matter of justice in view of the publicity given.
This man was employed during the day. He had a property on which he thought there were scheelite indications. At his own expense he bought a mineral lamp and proceeded to mine his scheelite ore with the result
1S05

War Appropriation-Supplies
that he took out four tons of concentrates containing tungsten. He sent samples to the Department of Mines at Victoria. Apparently the provincial government and the federal government were acting in unison; however, most of his correspondence had been with the Department of Mines at Ottawa. As I say, he sent his samples to Victoria. He had them assayed and sent to the Minister of Mines. Apparently he did not get very much general information from Ottawa, but he directed another letter to the Minister of Mines in January, after information was received that there was no use for tungsten in Canada; that the Emerald mine had closed along with the mill. He asked the Minister of Mines where he could ship his concentrates. He had been told in those printed advertisements and publications from the Department of Mines-I suppose it applied to the federal and provincial departments-that when a man had tungsten concentrates which reached a specific assay the department would advise him to what firm in the United States to ship them, and he would be paid fifty per cent cash and the balance upon receipt of the concentrates and an assay by the United States firm to which they had been shipped. However, the Department of Mines told him there was no longer any use for concentrates. After the first of January he wrote to the Minister of Mines and asked whether it was worth while to proceed with the purchase of additional mining equipment in order that he might locate the main body of ore on his property. The Minister of Mines replied that a tungsten property is always of great value but at the present time there is no place to ship the concentrates.
Visualize a man putting in an eight hour shift and responding to the plea of the government to hunt for scheelite to produce tungsten concentrates. He puts in an eight hour shift at his everyday work. He was employed in the smelter. He wrote to the management of the mill of the Emerald mine, which is not over thirty or forty miles away, and the mill manager replied that he was unable to mill his Concentrates unless he could secure the permission of the Minister of Mines. He must have meant the federal Minister of Mines, because the property belongs to the federal government. Before he could get a reply the mill had closed. He then proceeded to break up the four tons of ore himself. It is a very hard job to break up four tons of ore. He put in his time in the evenings and on Sundays, and, as I said, he got out the high grade concentrates and the low grade concentrates. He did not ask the government to accept the low grade concentrates, but he wanted to get some reimbursement for his high grade concentrates. Unfortunately there
is no place to which he can ship. My contention, my plea and my suggestion is that it is only a matter of justice for the government to take that man's two tons of concentrates and pay him for them. They undertook to pay him fifty per cent cash as soon as he got an assay, the balance to be paid upon analysis by the firm to whom it was shipped. It is only a matter of justice that that prospector, who has gone the whole way, done everything that the government asked him to do, should be repaid for his effort or a market found for his concentrates. They have a million and a half in this Emerald property, and the government would not know what to do with it to-day any more than they would know how to fly. Why could they not compensate that prospector for two tons of concentrates?
I want to come now to the Kootenay-Florence mine, which is on Kootenay lake, and belongs to a Canadian firm. The metals reserve corporation, through the metals control board, entered into an agreement with that company. I want to ask the minister the terms under which that property is being operated. I know the owners are receiving a royalty, but I want to know also the price they receive per ton for the lead and zinc concentrates being shipped to the United States. My main purpose, however, is to ask the minister if he will not make use of that mill. It is a lead and zinc mill. The Emerald mill is a tungsten mill which could be altered to accommodate lead and zinc concentrates, but the Florence mill is being operated already. I ask the minister if arrangements cannot be made for the use of the Florence mill by local mines. There must be a customs mill in the West Kootenay district; otherwise you will discourage, as you have been discouraging, the production and shipment of lead and zinc, which is urgently required.
What did the Consolidated Mining and Smelting company do? They entered into an agreement with the British government to sell all their lead and zinc during the period of the war, and they are receiving 3-6 cents per pound for zinc. To-day the quotation in St. Louis for lead is 6-35 cents and for zinc 8-25 cents. I mention these quotations particularly because I want to appeal to hon. members to my left, who never seem to have a kindly word for the Consolidated Mining and Smelting company, which they look upon as a corporation which has no regard for industrial relations. I can assure them that the industrial relations of this company are not equalled by those of any other concern in the Dominion of Canada. Further I want to say to hon. members to my left that by
War Appropriation-Supplies

selling to the British government for about 3-6 cents per pound instead of at the prices quoted in the United States, which prices are received by any producers who ship their concentrates to the United States, this company has saved the British government about $22,000,000 annually ever since the outbreak of the war. I would ask my hon. friends to have a generous thought for one company which does not seem to operate purely for the exploitation of the country.


Mr. HOWE:: I shall be very glad at the next sitting to answer the questions which have been asked by the hon. member for Kootenay West.
While I am on my feet I should like to refer, to two matters which were discussed last evening. The first was in connection with the ownership of Clark Ruse Aircraft Limited. The reason I mention this is that certain statements made in the house last evening were quoted in the press to-day. The directors of the company are: J. Clark Ruse, president; Ewart Angus, vice-president; Mel Angus, secretary-; Harold Jeffries; Hon. J. Earl Lawson.
The directors, with the single exception of the estate of Alfred R. Caldwell, are all the shareholders and own the total share capital. The estate of Alfred R. Caldwell is represented by Hon. J. Earl Lawson, who is the solicitor for the company; and it was through Mr. Lawson that the capital invested in the company was raised. I suggest that the hon. member for York-Sunbury might be a little careful in talking unjustly about the officers of my department.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I did not make any attack; what I asked-


Clarence Decatur Howe: You did not ask; you stated.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Just a moment; the minister has referred to me and I am rising to a question of privilege. I asked whether the capital investment in the plant was to be a loss to the country, or how it was to be treated.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You made a statement.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Perhaps the minister misunderstood the purport of my question.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There was no question. You made a statement about a member of my department which you asked to have expunged from Hansard, and I agreed to have it expunged.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I never asked to have it expunged. Someone else asked to have it expunged, and I agreed to it, if you want the bald truth.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Not myself.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Not myself, either. I did not ask for it, but I agreed to it. The minister is on the wrong track. I was asking about the capital expenditure in the plant at Dartmouth, and now that operations there are -being reduced I wanted to know if that was to be a capital loss to the country, or what use it was to be put to. I said nothing about the ownership of the company. The minister has sought to bring that in, and I welcome the information but I did not ask for it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You certainly made a statement about it, and I was answering that statement which, had it been true, would have caused a very serious situation in the department and in the country.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I will look it up in Hansard.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You will not find it in
Hansard, but you can find it in the typewritten sheets from which it was expunged.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I understood you agreed to have that done, and I agreed to it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Nevertheless it appeared in the press, and I thought it deserved an answer.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I did not put it in the press, and I am not responsible for what was there.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You are responsible for what you say in the house, I think.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is right, and I take full responsibility for it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: With regard to Defence Industries Limited, I think in fairness all the fees collected by the company should be placed upon Hansard. I have a statement here which, with the unanimous consent of the committee, I will ask to have printed in Hansard. It is as follows:
Defence Industries Limited Operating Fees
Chemicals and explosives
Plant	Paid to Dec. 31.	Value of	Per cent of fee to production1943	production	valueNobel	$ 796,000	$36,005,000	2-21de Salaberry	831.000	34.962,000	2-3Shawinigan .	42.000	3.268.000	1-28Winnipeg . .	585.000	25,006.000	2-34Beloeil	9.600	388,000	2-47Windsor ....	41,000	2,705,000	1-52$2,304,600	$102,343,000	2-2
War Appropriation-Supplies
	Ammunition filling	Percent of
	Paid to	fee to
Plant	Dec. 31, Value of	production
	1943 production	value
Bouchard ...	$ 180,000 $114,603,000	0-16Pickering ..	248,000 228,230,000	0-11Villeray ....	25,000 4.408,000	0-57$ 453,000 $347,241,000	0-13Small arms and sundry	Verdun	$ 922,000 $ 41,446,000	2-2Brownsburg. Montreal	348,000 12,160,000	1-35Works ....	147,000 10,375,000	1-42Westmount .	nil 3,785,000	nil$1,417,000 $ 67,766,000	2-09Total Operating ..	$4,174,600 $517,350,000	0-8Construction Fees	Chemicals and explosives	Paid to	Percent ofPlant	Dee. 31, Construction	fee to1943 cost	costNobel	$ 363,000 $ 11,278.000	3-2de Salaberry	137,000 14,323,000	0-96Sliawinigan..	15,000 585.000	2-6Winnipeg ...	91,000 10,276,000	0-9W'indsor ....	15,000 866,000	1-8Beloeil	8,700 310,000	2-8Stormont ...	nil 2,944,000	nil$ 629,700 $ 40,582,000	1-55Ammunition filling	Bouchard ...	$ 106,000 $ 13,277,000	0-8Pickering . .	86,000 11,489,000	0-75Villeray ....	25,000 2,244,000	M$ 217,000 $ 27,010,000	0-8Small arms and sundry	Verdun .... Montreal	$ 168,000 $ 15,593,000	1-1Works ...	101,000 9,529,000	1-1Westmount .	17,000 1,461,000	1-2$ 286,000 $ 26,583,000	1-08Total Construction.	$1,132,700 $ 94,175,000	1-2Summary	Operating ..	$4,174,600 $517,350,000	0-8Construction.	1,132,700 94.175,000	1-2$5,307,300 $611,525,000	0-86


Mr. COLDWELL:: Do those fees include the salaries of officers engaged in operating the plant?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It includes the services of the company and its head office expense. The men actually engaged in the plants, are paid as part of the plants' expense. In connection with construction fees, my hon. friend will recall that Defence Industries Limited were also designers of the plants, and experts in the process involved.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What
would be the average fee in commercial life as compared with the 1-2 per cent the minister has indicated?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I believe the standard fee is five per cent, but in a large work of this kind it would not be that much.


Major James William Coldwell: What I said may have been obscure. The figure the minister has given is the one I had in mind. I took it from a newspaper report that it was around the
8600,000,000 mark. That is where the figure crept in.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I see. While, as I pointed out, the average fee was -86, all this work was segregated in a corporation with a million dollar capitalization. This of course made its earnings subject to heavy taxation. That fee, after taxation, amounted not to -86 per cent but to -2 per cent, or one-fifth of one per cent.


Mr. GILLIS:: I understand it is the intention to go along with the estimates of the Minister of Munitions and Supply, as we did with those of the army, the navy and the air force. While the estimates set out specifically items covering almost everything one could discuss, there are some observations of a general nature I should like to make.
The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) stated in a general way the opinions held by this group respecting the minister's report to the committee. My own opinion is that under difficult conditions the minister has done an excellent job, from the inception of his department. When one stops to examine the record back to the outbreak of war, and realizes the position in which the minister was placed in a country totally unprepared for war, with the responsibility thrown into the minister's lap of putting Canada on a war-time basis, he can see that this was a big order to hand to any one man. The surprising feature is the success he has had, particularly in view of the lack of cooperation from the beginning on the part of those who were in a position to give him perhaps the only available assistance
180S
War Appropriation-Supplies

at that time. I refer to those organizations to which he handed so much power, a procedure for which I believe he has been justifiably criticized. When he first approached those organizations and asked for their cooperation in putting Canada on a war-time basis industrially, we remember that their only gesture of cooperation was that unless the clause providing for a limitation of profits to five per cent were removed, they would not be prepared to produce war materials.
The point I make is this: in examining the record of the Department of Munitions and Supply one must remember that the only machinery the department had to work with at that time was the then existing industrial establishment of the country. Any man who took that industrial machine and built from it the organization we now have must be handed a compliment, and it is one which I think he has justly earned. He had a terrific job, and received very little cooperation in the first instance from those who were in a position to give him real assistance.
The scene has changed, however, and a real organization has been built up. I agree with many hon. members who have said that to-day too much power rests in the hands of that group who are concerned about profits only. We do not quarrel with the controls, but rather with those who control, and what they control for. If the only desire in their minds is profits for themselves, that is a motive which the Canadian people, and particularly the members of this house, will have to watch very closely.
With respect to the industrial war machine that has been built up, the minister I think has proven that we have reached the peak of war production. The emphasis is changing; there is a slackening off, and a tendency on the part of those who are dominant in these controls, men from the larger industries, to create the opinion in the minds of the public generally that the war is near its end, and that the huge organization that has been built up for the purpose of prosecuting the war can now be unscrambled. I notice that many of the key people are resigning the positions which they have occupied for the past two years in the controls and are going back to their own private companies. When I say "going back", I should add that they are going back in name only, because they have never really left their own concerns. I think they reason this way: Controls have been developed, and certain legislation and orders in council have been passed, which make it unnecessary for us to remain in these controls any longer, because under the existing legislation and orders in council there is practically a guarantee to us that the emergency machine 
that was built up for war purposes will not be utilized in the aftermath of the war in competition with those of us who believe in private enterprise-whatever private enterprise may mean. I have lived under so-called private enterprise for forty-five years or so, and it has been so private, so mysterious, that most of the citizens of this country have not yet had an introduction to it. I could not give a definition of it; it is something really mysterious to me. But if by private enterprise they mean the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few men like Sir Herbert Holt and the Royal bank, I can understand that.


Mr. JACKMAN:: He is dead.	,


Clarence Gillis: But he left footprints on the sands of time. If that is to be the motive in the future with respect to the utilization of this industrial war machine that has been built up, the Canadian people are in for a very unhappy experience.
I said a few nights ago that I consider the war supplies allocation board and the War Assets Corporation which have been set up under the Department of Munitions and Supply perhaps the most important post-war organizations that have been, instituted by the government. I have served on the reconstruction committee for the past two and a half years. The committee has heard many briefs and recommendations with regard to planning for the post-war period and creating jobs for those in the armed services when they return. But the only jobs that you will have in the post-war period which did not exist in 1939, when there were one million and a half people on relief in this country- and to-day many of those boys are in Sicily or Italy-will be the jobs created by this industrial war machine that has been built up under the Department of Munitions and Supply. But if that organization is not used for that purpose; if these industries are not converted to peace-time needs, you are not going to have any jobs for our boys to come back to from overseas. We have placed in the hands of the war supplies allocation board and the War Assets Corporation the power of utilizing, in such a way as they see fit, the great industrial organization that has been built up by the taxpayers of this country and from the very slight experience we have had with it so far I am sceptical as to how that power is going to be used. For instance, here is a statement in Toronto Saturday Night of a few weeks ago, "Canada far ahead on disposal of surplus war supplies." The thing that gives me concern in this article is that the manufacturers' association emphatically state that

War Appropriation-Supplies
in their opinion industry which has been created for war purposes must under no circumstances when the war ends be given to newcomers in the industrial set-up, to be used on a competitive basis with industries now in existence. In effect that means to me that those who dominated the industrial set-up in the field of private enterprise in 1939 before the war are of the opinion that this whole war machine should be scrapped now, that under no circumstances should the industrial organisation that has been built up during the War be used for the purpose of creating peace-time necessities and come into competition with the existing industrial organizations. That is the opinion of your manufacturers' association and your chamber of commerce; there is no doubt about that. The chamber of commerce in making their presentation to the reconstruction committee not so long ago stated emphatically that one of the basic principles they were advocating was that immediately on the cessation of hostilities the whole industrial machine that had been built up during the war must be scrapped and the field left open to private enterprise. The point I wish to make there is this, and I have no ulterior motive at all; I do not care what kind of tag you hang on to your order of society, but unless that order of society takes care of the needs of the people it has no right to exist.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: We are all agreed on that.


Clarence Gillis: Then we must be in disagreement with the manufacturers' association and the chamber of commerce who advocate a return to 1939 conditions in the field of industry in Canada. That is their policy, and it is one with which I and those of us in this group disagree. I am glad to hear the hon. member for Rosedale say that we are all agreed on the principle of establishing an order of society that will take care of the needs of the people regardless of any particular group that may be injured in the process.
In the matter of utilizing the existing wartime industrial organization, I have had one or two little experiences which indicate to me that those who have the authority to dispose of surplus war materials and supplies have a certain definite policy that they are going to follow. Let me give the minister one example, a very small one perhaps.
An ex-service man who had been overseas for a couple of years came back and took work at a shipyard. He had previously been a miner. When the emergency fuel order came out he was directed by national selective service to go back to his old employment as a miner. He did so, going to the section to 100-114
which he was allocated by the selective service. His family was in another part of the country, and he desired to move them so that they could be together, but he could not find a place to live. There are barracks located in that town comprising some forty buildings. The barracks are new. They had been used for a short time, but were then unoccupied. He suggested to me that I get in touch with national defence with a view to his buying one of these buildings and convert it into a dwelling for himself and his family. I wrote several departments, not knowing exactly who or what this war allocations committee or corporation was. I was advised, after some considerable delay that, as far as selling any of these buildings was concerned, by virtue of the buildings having been put on land owned or leased by Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation Limited, that company had first option on them and it was believed that they would utilize them as homes for miners who might be directed from other industries into that section. Nothing has been done in that matter so far. The ex-service man who was directed to come back to that particular occupation still lives apart from his family.
I tried again. One of the larger credit unions in that area, desirous of obtaining more office space, wanted to purchase one of the. buildings. Upon writing about the matter I received exactly the same information.
These are small illustrations of a point which I wish to leave with the minister. My conception of the principle upon which this corporation and committee are going to work is this. Much of the money which through the minister's department has been put into industry for the purpose of expanding existing industry and developing new production has gone into plant and equipment on land held by private companies. Presumably the decision rendered by the board in the case I have mentioned is that upon which the whole industrial machine built by the minister's department will be disposed of.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I did not just follow the hon. member. May I ask, did he get his information from the disposal board in the case of the barracks at New Glasgow?


Clarence Gillis: The barracks were at Glace Bay, Nova Scotia.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Well, did he get his information from the army or the disposal board? Who told him?


Clarence Gillis: In the one case, national
defence secured it through the 'board; in the second case I myself secured it through the board.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Through the disposal board?

War Appropriation-Supplies


Clarence Gillis: Through the allocation committee.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Ordinarily land acquired by
the army for barracks purposes has been .purchased by the army. I am not familiar with the arrangements. But as to buildings paid for by the Department of Munitions and Supply, in practically all cases the land is owned in fee by the crown.


Clarence Gillis: I cited those two cases
merely to indicate the opinion I had formed because of this particular incident. Several orders in council I have seen appear to bear that out. For instance, you have investments in the plants of Canada Car and Foundry and Dominion Steel and Coal. Plants have been created, and when the war is over they will no longer be needed for war purposes and the committee 'has the right to tear the .plant down or move it somewhere else. But if it is not removed it reverts to the company on whose property it was built. I am. not blaming the minister for this. As I said at the opening of my remarks, he was faced with the responsibility of having to organize an industrial machine and had to use everybody and everything that he could use, and he did under those circumstances exactly as I would have done, or anyone else would have done; he built the machine without quibbling over details or technicalities. But that period is past. The time has now arrived when the minister, the members of this house, and everyone who is interested in ensuring the maintenance of full employment after the war, should see to it that legislation is enacted which will protect the investments the Canadian people have in our industrial set-up, so that they may be utilized when the war is over to do the job that everyone here agrees should be done, namely, provide employment for every last man and woman who is in the services and for those in war industries who have made it possible for the allied nations to put on an offensive to-day in Europe.
There is another matter I should like to bring to the minister's attention. I may have a little difficulty in proving to the chairman that it belongs exactly here; I think it does, but I am- giving him fair warning. First, however, I want to compliment the hon. member for Caribou (Mr. Turgeon). He pretty much agrees with what I have said, for according to a report in one of the Toronto newspapers he stated in a speech he made in that city that "free enterprise may not survive the end of the war." I am very glad to hear that statement from the chairman of the reconstruction committee. I have worked with him cm that committee, and I find him very broad* minded and farsighted.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Non-survival is what he was
afraid of.


Mr. ROWE:: Broader-minded than he is
farsighted.


Clarence Gillis: He sees the handwriting on
the wall.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Read the context.


Clarence Gillis: I have read it. It is a very good statement. He visualizes the utilization of the war machine in the aftermath of the war pretty much as I have tried to describe it this afternoon?


Mr. KNOWLES:: Does he ever talk that
way in the house?


Clarence Gillis: He has not much latitude on that committee. As the chairman he has to do all the listening.
The other matter I should like to bring to the minister's attention is one on which we may not see eye to eye. A few months ago the Prime Minister tabled in this chamber an order declaring a national emergency in fuel. After having that particular branch of our industry in many hands in the past several years, he centred the emergency organization of the fuel industry in the Department of Munitions and Supply. Of course Munitions and Supply was merely delegated authority under that order to get an increased production in fuel, necessary to the war effort. That organization has not worked out as well as I should have liked. Fortunately this winter has been very mild, and as a result we managed to get through without any great difficulty.
I notice according to the press and from consultations with union officials from Nova Scotia that in both the coal sections of Canada to-day there is considerable unrest in the mining industry. In the Alberta field, as pointed out by the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Johnston), there is actual unemployment, because of some faulty fuel policy in that particular area. In Nova Scotia there is a different situation. Their fears are for the future. But what I want to impress on the mind of the minister is that from both sections of Canada to-day come proposals, from operators and from miners' unions, to meet in Ottawa with government officials for the purpose of deciding on a national fuel policy. The operators in this country are not in a position to decide from day to day where they are going.
The markets are very uncertain, and as I see it in Nova Scotia, if the war were to terminate to-morrow, with the market arrangement that exists at the present time you would not have markets to guarantee a two days a week operation in the mining industry in that

War Appropriation-Supplies
province. I am not going to say what the situation is in Alberta, because I do not know, but our people in Nova Scotia are very much concerned about it. There are many angles to the problem, but I will not go into all of them.	,
One thing in the emergency arrangement that I think is unjust is that in Alberta, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, in the matter of domestic fuel, because of the increase in wages to the miners a substantial increase in the price of domestic fuel was permitted by the government. In other words, the consuming public of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Alberta and Saskatchewan have had to pay for the increases in wages given the miners in those provinces. On the other hand, the consuming public in central Canada, Quebec and Ontario, are in the reverse position. When you had to supply the domestic market in those two provinces, the small tariff that was against American coal was removed, something like 50 cents a ton-35 cents on some and 50 cents on others. In addition, importers of coal in central Canada were subsidized in order to hold the price ceiling. So that taxpayers generally across Canada are maintaining the price ceiling and absorbing the increased cost in domestic fuel in the two central provinces. While in the eastern and western provinces there has been some increase in the wages of those who dig the coal, the consuming public in those provinces have had to take on an additional burden in the way of an increased cost of domestic coal. Therefore, they are paying for the maintenance of the price ceiling in Ontario through taxation, and they are paying for the fact that there were increased wages in that industry, both east and west, when the government permitted a slight upward revision.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I should correct my hon. friend. There is no bonus on coal imported into the central provinces-that is, on steam coal. Thera may be a small bonus on anthracite, but there is no bonus on steam coal.


Clarence Gillis: I agree with the minister. I was speaking of domestic fuel. It is anthracite that is mostly used in the central provinces for domestic purposes, but my whole argument is based on domestic fuel.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You use anthracite in the maritime provinces, and it is bonused. You were talking of steam coal in the maritimes and domestic in the western provinces.


Clarence Gillis: We use very little anthracite in the maritime provinces, and American coal imported for metallurgical purposes is bonused 100-1141
to a certain extent. There is a drawback of 35 cents a ton. All coal used for metallurgical purposes is subject to that provision. It is a long story which I will not go into.' But both east and west the domestic consumer of fuel has a legitimate grievance in that he is contributing to the whole national set-up in the maintenance of the price ceiling as it exists in the two central provinces; and in addition he has a direct levy because of the increase given the miners in those provinces. It is something that should receive the consideration of those who are responsible for the fuel policy.
The other angle is this. In the house on several occasions I have suggested that in the field of fuel Canada definitely lacks a policy. There is no doubt about that, and for the past twenty years there has been enough money spent in delegations, in briefs, and in royal commissions to reorganize the whole industry. As I pointed out a moment ago, the fear in Nova Scotia is that we are facing a repetition of what happened in the last war. In the last war we lost the Quebec market completely, and that is the only economic market for Nova Scotia coal in Canada. United States coal to-day is going clear through to Riviere du Loup. That market has been completely handed over to the United States operators.
In the reconstruction committee when this subject was under consideration I specifically questioned those who represented both the companies and the fuel board. I asked if they were taking care this time, when handing over markets for emergency purposes, not to repeat the mistake of 1917 and 1918 and give away those markets without any understanding or agreement safeguarding the Canadian taxpayers against repurchase over a period of years at a cost of millions of dollars, as actually happened after the last war. I was informed then by the representatives of the fuel board that, as far as markets were concerned, there was no agreement or understanding and that it was a matter of getting that coal in during the emergency as quickly as possible without any regard to what was going to happen in the future.
In view of the fact that the miners themselves, their unions and the provincial governments are taking the initiative at this time in trying to head off something that may be very serious, should the war end within the next year or two, the minister should now inaugurate some kind of organization in Ottawa, or give instructions to those, under his charge, operating in that field, to see to it that this delegation is received and that a definite policy is mapped out for the Canadian industry in order to avoid what I can see
War Appropriation-Supplies

coming, in Nova Scotia at any rate, immediately on the cessation of hostilities if the situation remains as it is at the present time.
The industry in Nova Scotia requires a complete overhauling. Some people say, you cannot compete with American industries because they are mechanized and electrified. That is true. I can tell the minister that the industry in Nova Scotia is as fully mechanized as it can be. The mines there are old, and they cannot be further mechanized; and what is more, you cannot electrify them. You cannot put in . electric cutting and loading machines because the mines are submarine and very gaseous. Someone'said to me, "You fellows fought mechanization a few years ago", and I replied, "Yes, we did in one colliery, one of the most gaseous on the north American continent." It was new, with a very gaseous seam of coal, and if you installed an electric cutting ana loading machine, throwing sparks four hundred yards, you would blow the cover off the mine in a short time. We were right in fighting it. It cannot be done in those old mines, and that is something that must be considered.
The minister is an engineer, and I think he has a fair conception of the sort of problem with which we are faced. I should like to see that department, now that it is responsible in that field, institute an examination of that whole industry in Nova Scotia from the operating standpoint. I know there is one man in the fuel set-up, Mr. Frank Neate, secretary of the fuel control board, who has a thorough knowledge of the industry. I believe that if he were permitted to sit in with a miner's committee and the operators who are desirous of framing some kind of workable fuel policy for Canada, he has both the technical and the practical knowledge to do a really good job. I believe he could map out something that would be workable. It is a post-war problem which means a lot to Nova Scotia. The whole economy of that province is based on the coal industry, which at this time requires a thorough and solid examination.- Something has been done; I do not know whether it was through the minister's department or not. Substantial increases in wages were given the miners of that province, and for the first time in the history of that industry in Canada a week's vacation with pay was granted in the last agreement. That was something the miners used to dream about, but they never imagined it would happen.
Without going into all the ramifications and technicalities and the many things that one could talk about hour after hour I want to emphasize the necessity of examining that industry in Nova Scotia with the end in view

of reorganizing and stabilizing it. I could tell the minister a long story about the machinery he set up to go down there to get emergency production and all that kind of thing. You cannot get production in offices. You cannot sit in Moncton and imagine that the industry is going to be improved. It is a job that has to be done where the coal is produced. It was not done in that way. Divine Providence was kind to the minister this winter in helping him out in the coal situation; otherwise I think he would have have had more headaches. I should like seriously to advise him to do something about examining the whole set-up of that industry for the future.


Mr. RAYMOND (Translation):: Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) has given us quite a comprehensive picture of the tremendous production achieved by war plants during the last year and even since the beginning of the war. He has, moreover, outlined the programme he proposes to carry out during the current year , and he requests us to vote considerable amounts for those purposes. But if such a result has been achieved, it was through the cooperation of the worker who is an essential element of production, and it is imperative that he should be treated with fairness. Unfortunately, according to some statements I have received, in certain industries under government control, and especially at the nitro munition plant operated by the Defence Industries on Salaberry island, at Valleyfield, and at the Bouchard plant, near Saint Therese, the workers are victims of glaring injustice.
On March 9 last, I gave notice of a certain number of questions relating to the laying-off of some employees in those industries, that is to say, at the Bouchard plant or at the nitro plant on, Salaberry island, Valleyfield, and to the replacement of those workers by people from other provinces and particularly from Nobel, in the province of Ontario. I had hoped that I could obtain answers to those questions before making my present reWrks. Unfortunately I fear that the debate may come to an end before my questions are answered. Besides, the bon. member for Terrebonne (Mr. Bertrand) following some newspaper comments, has referred this -week to such cases of injustice which I mean to bring before the committee. As a matter of fact, employees with a long record of service, men who have worked in those plants for one, two and three years are laid off and replaced by men from other provinces and especially from the Nobel plant which- has been closed. Such is the glaring injustice done to those men. They have lived in the locality for many years as

War Appropriation-Supplies
permanent residents, they own their homes, and1 have families to support; they have worked almost since the beginning at the nitro plant in Valleyfield, and to-day they are laid off and replaced by people from other provinces. That is an intolerable injustice against which I must strongly protest. It cannot be claimed that those men are not competent because the fact that they were kept for two and even three years shows that they were considered as efficient, but to-day they are dismissed. Sometimes, another procedure is followed; the man is called and offered a lower position, with a greatly reduced salary, so that he is placed in the alternative of leaving or remaining at a lower salary with which, he cannot support his family. That is a devious means of dismissing him to make room for others. I admit that production has decreased, but if so, why does the management hire men from other provinces, such as those who have come from the Nobel plant? If there has been a reduction in the number of workers needed, why are outsiders hired? That is a lame excuse.
The government have some responsibility in that respect because those industries are under their control, inasmuch as the government have themselves established institutions such as the Allied1 War Supplies, which later on have entrusted to other companies the operation of some plants. But those institutions, organizations, or companies have been established with the taxpayer's money and this afternoon the Minister of Munitions and Supply has told us how much the government had to pay for the Nitro plant, on Salaberry island, at Valleyfield. Consequently, the taxpayers, the workers from whose weekly salary a deduction is made for war taxes, are entitled to some consideration and they have, in preference to others, a right to earn their living in the locality where they have always lived.
May I point out one case. The other day I received from a worker a letter in which he said: "I have two sons in the air force; one of them has recently been repatriated on account of illness; two other sons of mine have just been called for training in the army. 1 have a family to support and I have been laid off. How was it done? I have been offered a greatly reduced salary with which I could not support my family."
Those are facts which I wanted to bring to the attention of the committee, and particularly of the Minister of Munitions and Supply.
There is another fact which I also wish to emphasize. Ever since the plant on Salaberry island has begun its operations, local workers have been treated like neglected members of the family. All main positions have
been given to outsiders, and the positions left for local workers have always been minor ones. Let no one claim that competent men could not be found. I could mention particular cases, but I do not want to name any one, not because an injustice might be done but because the workers might thereby suffer unpleasant consequences. I know that, in some cases, a man in a minor position has had to teach a man of higher rank how the work was to be done, the salary of that lower man being much smaller and the man who outranked him having been brought from .outside to be placed above him.
I hope the Minister of Munitions and Supply will give careful consideration to the few remarks I made not only in the interest of the working class but also in the interest of peace in the post-war period. We hear a great deal about the post-war era, but if we really want to prepare it and avoid perhaps a number of calamities and a certain amount of ill feeling, we must give fair treatment to all citizens., and the working man should be- included among them.


Mr. CHEVRIER (Translation):: Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. member for Beauhar-nois-Laprairie (Mr. Raymond) expects me to reply to a number of questions which he has asked. I agree with a part of his remarks. I fully concur in his views when he speaks of the cooperation of the worker in war production. Indeed, the hon. Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) has on several occasions expressed his satisfaction with the magnificent war production to which all the workers of the country had contributed. However, I find that the facts that he mentioned a moment ago are not borne out by the documents which I have on hand at the moment. He referred to the alleged unfair treatment of a number of employees of a plant at Salaberry. I have before me a report which shows that 89 per cent of the employees of the Salaberry plant were of Trench Canadian origin; 11 per cent of British stock and 4 per cent of foreign extraction. 1 have been informed also from the same source that the lay-offs which he mentioned have been inevitable in some industries due to the curtailment of production. Then when it became necessary to dismiss some of the employees of the Nitro plant, they were laid off in the same proportions in which they had been hired. For instance, in September, the ratio of French Canadian employees showed an increase of 2 per cent in comparison with the other nationalities. The report I have before me, Mr. Chairman, shows that the discrimination, if there was any, was in favour of the French Canadians
War Appropriation-Supplies

The hon. member has spoken of the inferior jobs held there by our fellow citizens. I am not in a position to say what the jobs are, but I may state that the general manager of this industrial concern is a French Canadian by the name of Debarats.


Donat Raymond: Would the hon. member permit me. In the course of my speech, I did not refer to French Canadians, but to people of the Nobel plant who had come to take away the jobs of local people.


Lionel Chevrier: The hon. member has spoken of people from the province of Ontario who had been brought over to replace citizens of Quebec-


Donat Raymond: People from the Nobel plant.


Lionel Chevrier: -and I am convinced he was referring to statements made in the press-one paper in particular has put forth this claim, as I shall point out later-he has also spoken of the minister's responsibility concerning these plants. There is one thing which a lot of people do not seem to realize, and that is that Defence Industries Limited is not a crown company, as many seem to think. Defence Industries Limited1 is a private firm, a subsidiary of Canadian Industries Limited. It has not been set up by the Department of Munitions and Supply as has been alleged. Then, being a private enterprise, it is entitled to offer employment to anyone it deems fit.


Donat Raymond: Has this company no tie whatever with the government?


Lionel Chevrier: None whatever. And the operating company is the Allied War Supplies Limited, a firm with which the government has an agreement for the supervision of all these plants manufacturing explosives.


Donat Raymond: Is the Allied War Supplies firm not connected with the
government?


Lionel Chevrier: I have just stated that Allied War Supplies Limited is connected with the government. This firm controls the operation of explosives factories, and so forth. However, Defence Industries Limited and Canadian Industries Limited are private enterprises. It seems to me that these private firms are entitled to hire anyone they wish.
While on this subject, the hon. member will perhaps allow me to refer to a news sheet which he will recognize, no doubt. It is entitled Le Bloc. I believe it to be the organ of the party of which the hon. member is the leader. In its March 15 issue, this news sheet contains a number of inaccuracies, not to say
IMr. Chevrier.]
numerous falsehoods. I have just stated the first one. It starts by asserting that Defence Industries Limited is a crown company. It follows on with a claim that the workers of the Bouchard plant, at Ste. Therese, have often been discriminated against. I have here a report from the president of Allied War Supplies stating that no worker from the province of Ontario has been hired by or transferred to the Bouchard plant. The news sheet Le Bloc claims further that these persons have all had their expenses paid by the government. This report has it that in no case the expenses connected with transferring and hiring the men have been borne by Allied War Supplies Limited but that, on the contrary, the workers themselves have always paid their own expenses.
To conclude, I wish to point out to the hon. member that 1,665 citizens of Quebec have gone to work in war factories of the province of Ontario. Three or four hundred of them are located in Sarnia, a considerable number have secured jobs in Kingston, others in the Niagara peninsula, and others still in Kitchener. The hon. member may perhaps allow me to mention a report, just handed to me, published in a Kitchener newspaper of March 21, 1944. It is, therefore, of very recent date. The report points out that 300 Canadians from the province of Quebec have reached that town seeking employment in war factories, but could not secure living accommodation. Nevertheless, the mayor of the town issued a public statement requesting his fellow citizens to welcome them, to find accommodation, whether rooms or lodgings, for them and the local people have responded to his appeal. I fail to see why my hon. friend has brought this matter up, for it must not be forgotten that if, at times, our people seem to be discriminated against, there are, on the other hand, in the province of Ontario, a large number of them who secure employment in similar circumstances. From the newspaper report I was referring to a while ago, I shall now quote the words of Mayor Meinzinger of Kitchener:	'	.
Kitchener is fortunate in having to receive some 300 French Canadians which are come to this place to help relieve the labour shortage in local plants. We all appreciate the seriousness of the war, and therefore must feel that it is the duty of each and every one to assist in the problem. I appeal to every home-owner and property-owner in Kitchener, Waterloo, Centreville and Bridgeport, and other centres in which we have bus and street car facilities, to open their homes to these men.
In short, room was made to accommodate these workers. As I said before, a good number of them had come to Ontario and I cannot believe the hon. member for Beauharnois-

War Appropriation-Supplies
Laprairie would wish that any attitude different from that adopted by the mayor of this Ontario town would have been taken toward these people.


Donat Raymond: The reason may well be that they were not replacing their own people.


The CHAIRMAN (Text):: The committee will realize it is a problem to keep the debate in order. However, I saw the hon. member for Chambly-Rouville.


Mr DUPUIS:: I beg the indulgence of hon. members who have risen to speak. However, I hope they will permit me to proceed, because the debate is continuing in the other official language at the present time. This is a question of local interest. I think the hon. member for Yukon will not blame me.
(Translation): Mr. Chairman I intervene in the discussion, but this does not mean that I no longer have for my hon. successor in the county of Laprairie, the genial member for Beauhamois-Laprairie (Mr. Raymond) all the sympathy deserved by a member who rises above the petty jibes of politics to deal with a matter of public interest. The distinguished parliamentary assistant to the hon. the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe), the hon. member for Stormont (Mr. Chevrier), has replied to the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie and I might say that his replies have relieved my conscience to some extent. If it were true that, as stated by the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie, citizens of the constituency of Beauharnois-Laprairie and of the county of Terrebonne had been dismissed and replaced by outsiders, regardless of my political allegiance, I would join with the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie in protesting against such a discrimination. And I am sure that the hon. the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) and the hon. member for Stormont would support us, as no one wishes to commit an injustice. However the hon. member for Stormont declared, on the strength of written information in his possession, that no citizen of Ontario went to Beauharnois or to the Bouchard plant . . .


Lionel Chevrier: No worker.


Mr. DUPUIS (Translation):: ... to take the place of persons who had been dismissed. In my opinion, the matter is settled to the satisfaction of the committee. But while I was listening to my hon. friend from Beauharnois-Laprairie defending as always the rights of the working man, my thoughts dwelt upon the general policy of the party which he has deemed advisable to create. To give a rather
mild explanation of the policy of my hon. friend, I might say that if his party's policy is not one of non-participation it is at least one of limited nationalism-I would not call it extreme nationalism, as this would be too strong a term. On the basis of this policy, my hon. friend and all those who honour him with their confidence, find that we have no justification for taking part in the war; they claim that England has treated the French-Canadians unfairly and for this reason has forfeited any right to our sympathy ; they hold that all that we have accomplished since the outbreak of the war has involved useless expenditures of money and wholly unjustified sacrifices of human lives. Is this not, Mr. Chairman, the attitude of my hon. friend from Beauharnois-Laprairie?
In my student days, I had the opportunity of attending a meeting in Montreal where Sir Wilfrid Laurier was to speak in favour of voluntary enlistment. At this point, I shall indulge in a digression to tell my hon. friends of the Bloc Populaire they are mistaken when they claim that they have always been opposed to war. The hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie was himself a Liberal in those days and I, though quite young at the time, followed the example set by Sir Wilfrid Laurier and favoured participation in the war of 1918 though, like the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie, I objected to conscription.


Donat Raymond: I never favoured participation in the war, neither in 1914 nor at the present time.


Vincent Dupuis: If my hon. friend states he was then opposed to participation, it does not speak well for him since he was as mute as a fish.


Donat Raymond: That is of no consequence. You want to credit me with opinions I never held.


Vincent Dupuis: My hon. friend asserts he was not in favour of participation in war and he admits not having said a word about it at that time. Truth did not come to him in a flash or in some sort of vagary and he did not suddenly decide to declare himself opposed to participation in war.


Donat Raymond: I was not in politics.


Vincent Dupuis: The hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie only minimizes his own merit and intellect when he claims he was not interested in politics. No intelligent man ever takes that attitude.
Mr. Chairman, let us get back to our onions, -I beg your pardon, I mean the Bloc Populaire. This party, and I speak without a trace
War Appropriation-Supplies

of sarcasm, stands against all participation and, above all, against the billion dollar gift. What nightmares this has given them! They have lost sleep over it. Just think, to sacrifice our sons is a great deal, to take part in the war is far too much, but to raise one billion dollars a year from Canada's public funds and give it to England, a wealthier country, is truly scandalous!
When I hear my hon. friend complain that the workers of Beauharnois-Laprairie or some other district of the province of Quebec are not treated fairly, I can't help thinking: What a paradox! In fact, my hon. friend is opposed to participation in the war, he objects to any grant that might help those who held the fort in England. When France, our former beloved motherland lay crushed in June 1940, and one country alone could repulse the enemy, the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie and his followers deemed that nothing should be done. The house of our next-door neighbour but one is burning down and the wind blows towards the home of the hon. member for Beauharnois-Laprairie. He says to his children and his employees: "Never mind, I have a grudge against that fellow, let the fire destroy his property". But he is not far-sighted enough to think that before the house of his third neighbour has stopped burning, the flames will have reached the roof of his own house and it will then be too late to do anything. That thought has not occurred to him.
How inconsistent is the stand taken by my hon. friend! He claims that work should be given to those people, but how could they have had it had we not participated in this war, had we followed his advice and done nothing? Let my hon. friend rise in a few moments and tell us how many unemployed there would be in Valleyfield and everywhere in the country if we had done nothing.


Donat Raymond: Will the hon. member permit me to ask him a question?


Vincent Dupuis: I would ask my .ion, friend to let, me proceed with my remarks. I have not interrupted him.
Mr. Chairman, as far as I am concerned, while respecting the opinions of those who do not support my views, I find it strange that we should be considered as blind followers of a party which has betrayed the country and the French Canadians. For months and months, Mr. Chairman, ever since the outbreak of war, we have been charged with having betrayed our race. However, we have said nothing because what was most urgent, what had to be done regardless of any revile-ment, was to help England. Even those who

had no love for that country before the war, because of the prejudice that had been spread by so-called historians, even those who had no love for that country realized the situation. Like our leader, the Prime Minister of this country, we had at first hoped that because of the Maginot line, which gave us such great hopes before 1939, Canada's participation would only be moderate. But when all countries of the European continent had, one after the other-France, our former motherland being the last one to succumb-been overwhelmed by the enemy, who would have been stupid enough, for the petty satisfaction of saying that he had not changed his mind, to refuse to give all he had, to devote all his energy, his work and his efforts to help England? And when the outstanding man who now leads the government of England said, at a time when the whole European continent was under Hitler's heel: "We shall fight on the beaches and the landing grounds, in the fields, in the streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender," could we have abandoned to their fate such men, whom some of us, without any reason, do not like? Could we have refrained from going to their help? Only a lack of knowledge of our own history could have prompted us to do that. Every school boy has a sufficient knowledge of history to recall especially the Treaty of Paris, signed in 1763, after our former motherland had been defeated on the Plains of Abraham, in 1759, and in Europe in 1763.
What was the first of the peace conditions laid down by the victor? It was the cession of Canada to England. Anyone with a knowledge of history knows that history repeats itself and he realizes that if, in 1940, following the collapse of France, England had been overwhelmed, the first peace term would have been the surrender to Germany of all the rights of the British crown over Canadian territory. Is this what my hon. friend wanted? I know that it is not so. For our part, we did not remain idle; we did not imitate the ancient Greeks, as reported by the glorious history of Greece. While Phillip, by resorting to the same method as is being used to-day by Hitler, was trying by every available means to seize neighbouring countries, the Greeks who should have heeded the advice of Demosthenes who was urging them to prepare to defend themselves against the common enemy, remained complacent and formed "blocs" such as we have to-day. My hon. friend from Beauharnois-Laprairie knows what happened to Greece. She %vas subjugated by Phillip and invaded by his son, Alexander the Great.
But, thanks to the foresight and vision of our leaders and particularly of the Prime

War Appropriation-Supplies
Minister of Canada, we decided not to wait until England, the next country on Hitler's time-table after France, was brought to her knees. All the colonies, all the Dominions, all freedom-loving and democratic countries rallied one after another to England's assistance, and the rest is history. Thanks to the unanimous contribution of all freedom-loving peoples, we may now hope that before long, Hitler the tyrant-I trust I do not displease the hon. member for Beauharnois-Lhprairie in calling him so-Hitler the tyrant of modern times will have reached the end of his rope.
Mr. Chairman, at an appropriate moment, and with all good faith and sincerity, with malice towards none but with an understanding of truth as I see it, I wished to state why we, the Liberal party, in spite of the insults that have been and still will be heaped upon us, will continue to fight for democracy and will keep up the struggle until we have triumphed. The history of a later age will record that we protected not only those who understood the situation as we do, but also those who refused to see daylight, like our friends of the Bloc Populaire.
(Text)


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: Last evening the minister said that there is no longer a shortage of material used in farm implements. This statement is at variance with the finding of the war expenditures committee which reported on January 26 of this year, after a thorough inquiry into the possibility of an immediate increase in the supply of farm implements. The committee stated that they had been assisted by farm implement companies; representatives of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture; Mr. Cruickshank, the metals coordinator; Mr. Bloom, administrator for agricultural implements; Mr. Hoey, associate steel controller of munitions and supply; Mr. Fowler, secretary to general counsel, wartime prices and trade board; Mr. Gavsie, assistant counsel, Department of Munitions and Supply.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I ask my hon. friend on what date the evidence was taken?


James Arthur Ross: I am not sure about that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It makes quite a difference, because the situation has eased greatly in the last few months. I was speaking of the position to-day.


Lionel Chevrier: It is over a year old, is it not?


Mr. REID:: No; some time in January.
100-U5


James Arthur Ross: I understand it is January of this year. The report is dated January 26, 1944. The finding is as follows:
Shortages which still exist and which will retard production of ample quantities of farm implements:
There is ample factory productive capacity in Canada to handle a much greater volume of implement production than we now have. The major problems now facing the industry are as follows:	(a) shortage of malleable
castings, due to volume of war production work;
(b)	shortage of ball and roller bearings;
(c)	shortage of seasoned fir and oak required for the production of certain types of farm machinery; (d) shortage of experienced manpower.
In 1939, at the time of the declaration of war, there were 53,000 tractors in Britain. In 1942 they had 150,000 tractors. The number of implements used in connection with these tractors has jumped from 200,000 in 1939 to well over a million in 1942.
In Canada, for 1944, production of essential farm machinery will be brought up to 80 per cent of the 1940-41 output, and spare parts to 150 per cent of that output. Under this control, only 10,000 of the 26,000 tractor orders can be filled during 1944. In Britain to-day, with less than one-third of the cultivated acreage of Canada, there are more tractors in use than we have available in Canada.
In more normal times, some years ago, farmers of western Canada spent approximately 850,000,000 annually upon farm implements. On account of depreciation and as a result of lessened purchasing power for a number of years prior to the outbreak of war in 1939, it was estimated at that time by implement manufacturers that it would require approximately 8200,000,000 to bring our farm implement equipment up to date.
Agriculture is an industry engaged in the production of foodstuffs, an industry with approximately 735,000 branch factories across Canada. Approximately 450,000 men and women have left the farms of Canada for service in the armed forces or in war industries.
The point I should like to make is that, with our farm labour shortages, tractors and especially combines along with other essential implements should be made available to as great an extent as is reasonably possible in order to assist in solving our labour problems.
The statement of the minister last evening, as I pointed out, is a contradiction of the report of the war expenditures committee in the past few weeks, and I trust that he will clarify this situation. I think he will realize that this is a very important matter and that our farmers need as soon as possible a much

War Appropriation-Supplies

greater output of farm implements, provided that it does not interfere with the production of essential equipment for the battlefield.
It was pointed out in a return brought down the other day that there have been issued from September 10, 1939, to March 15, 1944, 42,398 orders in council and 23,287 minutes of treasury board; that, since the present session of parliament commenced on January 28, 1944, to March 15, 1944, 1,186 orders in council and 850 minutes of treasury board have been passed. Therefore, I think, one may realize how difficult it is to follow all the various orders which are issued, not only orders in council but orders of these various controllers.
I should appreciate it if the minister could clarify this situation. The controllers in his department sat in with and gave evidence to the war expenditures committee. As a result we have their report, and for the sake of the producers from coast to coast the minister should make a statement to clear up this matter.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I should like to answer the hon. member immediately. I was reporting on the position in my own department as regards controls. In the years 1941, 1942 and the first eight or nine months of 1943 there was a very tight steel situation in this country; it was necessary to ration every use of steel outside of direct war use; but in that , period certain allocations of steel were made to the agricultural industry. The industry is administered by the wartime prices and trade board; nevertheless, since we control the use of war materials, the allocation in these years was made by agreement between the steel controller of my department and the agricultural implements administrator of the wartime prices and trade board.
During the last few months we have had sufficient steel for all reasonable purposes and the restrictions on use of steel in agricultural implements have been removed.
My hon. friend spoke of other situations. One was the supply of malleable castings. There is sufficient capacity, I think, for the manufacture of malleable castings in this country. The difficulty there is that malleable castings have in the past been largely imported into this country, owing to the fact that malleable castings made in large volume cost considerably less than the volume which was made in that time in Canada. The result is that the malleable castings business must be built up if it is immediately to take the whole load of the agricultural industry. However, we have that capacity in Canada, and the situation will be met as rapidly as the output can be built up.
[Mr. J. A. Ross.)
As regards ball bearings, of course we in Canada do not make ball bearings, and that is a situation which would not come within the jurisdiction of my department. That may be a bottle-neck, so far as I know; but there is no regulation of my department, at least-and when I speak of "my department", I refer to the administration of the controls of the raw material-which would interfere with the manufacture of implements.
Mr. FR'ASER (Peterborough West): What is the position with regard to metal roofing?


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is no immediate hope for the release of metal roofing. Productive capacity for the manufacture of thin sheet is very badly overloaded, and plants are working to capacity on uses of much higher priority than thin sheets for roofing, to which my hon. friend refers.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Metal roofing for barns.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is no possibility of obtaining this for a few months yet.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Even for patching?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, for patching there will be sufficient under certain conditions.


Mr. KINLEY:: Last evening the hon. member for York-Sunbury made what I thought was a rather provoking criticism of the Minister of Munitions and Supply, wherein he alleged that there was geographical discrimination in the distributing of war industries across Canada. In that he was referring to the report on the government's financial expansion of the industrial capacity of Canada. I think the criticism of the hon. member was unfair, distorted and incorrect, and I will deal with one or two items to show how misleading it was and how unfairly it would present the matter to the house.


Gordon Graydon: Does the hon. member think the maritimes are getting a square deal?


John James Kinley: I will come to that. On page 1790 of Hansard the hon. member for York-Sunbury is reported as follows:
Then there is a table 1A-11, general purchasing and miscellaneous, purchases of merchandise. Crown plants government operated, nil; crown companies government operated, nil; crown plants operated by private corporations, $5,000; privately owned and operated plants, general merchandising; Trenton Steel Works is the only one and it received $23,268 out of a total of $530,972,648.
The hon member had exhausted his time and he was stopped by the Chairman at a very opportune place, because he skipped over part of the report. He left out the last pages

War Appropriation-Supplies
altogether; perhaps the reason was that he was obliged to sit down. In the last part of the report the majority of the items were for the maritime provinces. Trenton Steel Works received $231571, which he accounts for as above. But on page 20 they are shown as having received $2,465,944, while on page 5 Trenton again received $636,685.
The hon. member led the committee to believe that this firm received the sum of $23,371, omitting the fact that they had received three amounts, totalling over $3,000,000. At page 1787 of Hansard the hon. member is reported as saying:
... it is the whole table I am talking about. For the whole table that I am referring to, which covers a net expenditure of $83,462,508, the actual total expenditure in the maritimes was $2,022,671. That is the only one in the whole page. Coming then to machine guns and small arms-
As a matter of fact, the item to which he refers was the Eastern Car Company Limited, the amount being $2,022,671. On the same page we find Trenton Steel Works with $636,685; the Canadian Car and Foundry with $351,294, and the Canadian Car and Foundry again with $57,988. So that he was grossly unfair in his presentation of the figures, leading us to believe that the amounts he mentioned as having been given to the maritime provinces, while we admit they were small for the purpose of assisting industry', represented the whole picture. They were not given correctly.


Mr. BROOKS:: You are too easily satisfied.
Mr. IvINLEY: I believe in the truth, and in keeping the record straight. He was presenting to the house a picture of war-time industry, conveying to the people what they were receiving in the war industrial endeavour of the nation. But this is only a very small part of the industrial endeavour of Canada. We have the estimates of the army, navy and the air force, and surely, in computing what goes to any section of the country in our war expenditures, we must include the whole picture; otherwise we get something which is dislocated and distorted.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The people of the maritimes know the picture.


John James Kinley: He might have mentioned the great development in Shelburne, the great naval base there. He said nothing about the great naval training depot at Deep Brook. He said nothing about the development at Sydney or the developments at Halifax.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Sydney; was that the place where another dock fell into the harbour?	,
100-115J


John James Kinley: He said nothing about the training camp at Debert. He said nothing about the marine railways on the coast of Nova Scotia at Shelburne, Lunenburg, Louis-burg and Liverpool.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: And all points east.


John James Kinley: There is a picture of wartime development that is in keeping with maritime industry and it is something we should naturally look forward to, part of our endeavour, part of the work we can do best in the interests of the war. Then there Was the rolling mill at Sydney for rolling steel plate. It is true it was not financed except by loan, but I am sure that one development alone at Sydney ran into millions.
The hon. member says that we are too easily satisfied. I want to tell him as a business man that there is nothing that concerns me more than the overdevelopment of uneconomic industry, and if we get ephemeral industry in any part of the country for the purpose solely of mushroom war-time development, it will create a condition, after the war, disturbing the economic situation in that section to such an extent that we shall be sorry it was ever started.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is the hon. member satisfied with the industrial development there has been in the maritime provinces and with the attention the government has given to the maritime provinces?


John James Kinley: No, I am not.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: No.


John James Kinley: And I have not been for many years. But it does not lie in the mouths of the Progressive Conservative party to talk about development in the maritime provinces. The hon. gentleman has asked a question and I will answer it. The Liberal government once was in power in Nova Scotia for forty years.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Too Jong.


Mr. BRUCE:: Forty years too long.


John James Kinley: I admit it was too long, longer than a government in any other part of the British empire. They were dying of old age, and a friend of mine, who was also a friend of these gentlemen, the late Hon. ' E. N. Rhodes, undertook to bring the boys back home. He said that Nova Scotia would prosper if the people elected him and put the Liberal government out of power there. He said that we would hhve our rights in the dominion. Well, they were in for two years, and when they had an election they came back with a majority of three and kept
1S20
War Appropriation-Supplies

on for another term when they were defeated, bringing back only a remnant of the men they elected when they went into power.
It is the industrial tariff and concentration of industry that has ruined Nova Scotia, the tariff that has built up big industries in central Canada. The idea of the men who created this situation in this country now coming to us in war time and saying, "You should have more in Nova Scotia because you have been neglected in years gone by," looks like a Daniel come to judgment. At the present time I believe that Nova Scotia has a degree of development which is better than we have had in many years. If we increase our development beyond the labour that we can supply to industry we should be creating a condition that is not good. At the present time labour is coming into Nova Scotia from other parts of Canada and I am greatly concerned about it because it is creating confusion. I wish to tell the Minister of Labour that we shall hold him to account if labour that has come in from other parts of the country continues to be employed and Nova Scotians are discharged.
Last night the Minister of Munitions and Supply told the hon. member for York South that when he took hold of that department it was his job to create an industrial machine to carry on the war, and in doing that he had to survey the situation and build where he could get the support naturally from those who could give it to him quickly. With the foundation of industrj' in Canada, as it was, centralized in the central provinces, they would get the major portion of the financial assistance to expand. We in the maritimes looked for that part of the development for which we were particularly suited and where we could do the job that was required at tidewater by men who serviced the sea activities.
There were plants in the smaller towns along the south coast of Nova Scotia which had survived since the last war. I know that during the last war one plant in Lunenburg had a trade all over this country and in foreign lands. They shipped equipment for ships to Greece, British Columbia, South America and the West Indies. When this war broke out, those plants were particularly suitable for marine work; and the minister, by providing new marine railway equipment, and by helping some of them that needed it to get the proper machinery, made a good move. This created a situation which has enabled Nova Scotia to make a contribution to the navy which has been so much praised in this

committee and which is a credit to the shipbuilders and the ship repair plants and personnel of Nova Scotia. .
My chief object for the future is to hold what we have in Nova Scotia. If we can hold what we have, and if we can keep employed the number of people that we have employed there, I shall be satisfied. That is much better than if we had, say a hundred thousand more men in Nova Scotia, because they of necessity must lose their jobs when the war is over.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That does not need to happen.


John James Kinley: I think there will be some disillusionment.


Richard Burpee Hanson: So do I.


John James Kinley: But I wish to tell my hon. friend that I do not think it will be as bad as it was in the last war because-


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is a matter of opinion.	.


John James Kinley: This time labour is earning more money. More money is being distributed among the people. There is a degree of saving, a degree of investment, which will make purchasing power for the people that they did not have in the last war. In the last war money was, concentrated in the hands of the few who made a deal of money out of the war. They had tax-free bonds that do not exist at this time. I think our economic position will be much better than it was at that time.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: You had better wait and see.


John James Kinley: I wish to touch on another subject. We are at war. Nova Scotia was very vulnerable at the start of the war. There were many people who thought Nova Scotia might be in an invasion district. Many people thought our shores might be visited by the fleets and armies of our enemies. I wish to tell the committee that within sight of the shore of Nova Scotia merchant ships were sunk by submarines and the crews brought into our ports. We had the enemy right at our door. What kind of minister would it be who had regard for the national safety of this country who would put key industries such as munition factories and that kind of thing on the coast unless it was necessary for him to do so? One of the things we are told about Canada is that you can do things in comparative safety. The air force is in Canada because of its comparative safety owing to vast distances. In so far as some of the industries are concerned I am sure that the safety feature and the element of hazard were some of the things that came into play and should have come into play

War Appropriation-Supplies
with regard to the placing of war-time industry where it could do the most good with the utmost safety.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That may apply to Nova Scotia; but what about New Brunswick, which got nothing?


John James Kinley: I am going to let my hon. friend speak for New Brunswick. I represent an intelligent community on the south shore of Nova Scotia. ,


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have often wondered why.


John James Kinley: I am satisfied to speak for them.
I should like to return for a moment to the report on the expansion of industrial capacity in Canada. When I turn to page 21 I see that in Nova Scotia the following firms were assisted in their finances, I suppose some in buildings and some in buying machinery: Thompson Bros., Machinery Company Limited, Liverpool. That is in my own riding. Starr Manufacturing Works Limited; St. John Machine Shop; St. John Iron Works Limited; St. John Drydock and Shipbuilding Company Limited.


Richard Burpee Hanson: All chicken feed.


John James Kinley: Pushle's Machine Shop; Purdy Bros., Limited; Pictou Foundry and Machine Works Limited; R. Musgrave and Sons Limited; Mersey Paper Company Limited; Margaree Steamship Company Limited; T. Hogan and Company Limited; Hillis and Sons Limited; Halifax Shipyards Limited; Atlantic Spring and Machine Company Limited; L. H. Cann, Limited. I shall not give amounts.


An hon. MEMBER:: I would not, if I were you.


John James Kinley: Rhodes Curry wharf; wharf extension (Acadia Sugar Refinery).


Richard Burpee Hanson: The Acadia Sugar Refinery is shut down.


John James Kinley: The hon. member talks about chicken feed. The Robb Engineering Works Limited received an expenditure of $59,543. The Trenton Steel Works received $2,465,944. The Canadian Car and Foundry Company received $179,729, and the Foundation Maritime Limited, $2,249,553. Is that chicken feed? Then we come to the Clare Shipbuilding Company Limited, the Eastern Woodworkers, Foundation Maritime Limited, Halifax Shipyards, $579,160; Industrial Shipping Company, and J. D. Irving Company Limited.


Richard Burpee Hanson: They die not take it.


John James Kinley: Irving had the commitment but did not use it. The hon. member was not in his place when I started, but I wish to say that he did not give a complete report in the pages he covered when he was speaking last night. He omitted to give the parts in which Nova Scotia was especially interested.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The Chairman stopped me. I would have been going yet, if I had a chance.


John James Kinley: The minister must feel gratified with the way in which he has been complimented by hon. members on all sides of this chamber. I think Canada was particularly fortunate in securing a man of his ability and attainments to head tips department at a critical time in our history.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Might I ask the hon. member a question?


John James Kinley: The minister has intimate knowledge of Nova Scotia; I believe he is a descendant of the great Joe Howe, still the greatest of all Nova Scotians. He bears an illustrious name, and I am sure he will look after the interests of Nova Scotia in connection with war-time industry in a way that will appeal to sensible men who have a knowledge of current affairs. When the minister was a young man he taught engineering at Dalhousie university, and I have no doubt that at that time he learned a great deal about the needs of that province. Since then his horizon has extended greatly; he has travelled and built all over the world; and it does seem to me that at this time, when any man has to carry such terrible burdens in connection with our war-time industry, we should at least be gracious enough to offer fair criticism, and not invoke the technique of legal confusion in order to present to the committee a picture that is not in keeping with the facts of the matter under discussion. Now, if my hon. friend would like to ask a question, I am prepared to answer it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I just wish to ask the hon. gentleman if he is quite satisfied with the allocation of war industries under this government, in respect of the maritime provinces; yes or no.


John James Kinley: Some years ago a little book called "The Liberal Way" was published, which contained a statement something to this effect: that a Liberal was one who was never satisfied, who always advanced and never arrived. That is the way I feel. We want to go on from one thing to another. We think we are doing fairly well; we consider that this war is being
War Appropriation-Supplies

run in a way that will commend itself to the thinking people of Canada; and we believe that these criticisms which are intended to disturb public opinion for political purposes are not worthy of men who have served for a long time in this House of Commons. That is a compliment to the hon. member for York-Sunbury. He is an able member of this house, who I believe could be, if he so desired, of great help to the minister. If anything is really wrong, let us hear about it and let us deal with it; but please let us not see the spirit which is sometimes manifest during the confusion of an election, when Canada is facing such severe conditions and when men should be doing their best in order that our industrial effort may be the utmost of which this country is capable.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I should like to clear up one or two matters which were referred to yesterday. Before doing so, however, I wish to thank the hon. member for Queens-Limenburg for his eulogy. I am sorry to say that I am not a descendant of Joe Howe, but I am very proud of the fact that Joe Howe and I come from common ancestors. I think that is the most I can claim in that connection.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):: Joe Howe is silent on the question.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I did not hear that; I am sure I missed a choice remark.
Last evening the hon. member for Lake Centre offered some comments on the wood fuel situation in Manitoba. I think his statement is pretty well summed up on page 1777 of Hansard, where he is reported as follows:
After all, when the minister speaks I listen to him, and he can answer me afterwards, as I do him. Just because the minister realizes that $800,000 or thereabouts was thrown away, naturally he becomes annoyed. He was warned about this, and his controller was warned that the wood was not needed in Winnipeg, that wood could have been obtained in Manitoba at a freight rate of 4J to 7 cents.
As I stated yesterday, the fact of the matter is that the situation last autumn was considered so serious that leave was sought to move the adjournment of the house to call the attention of the government to an alarming situation. The hon. J. S. McDiarmid, Minister of Mines and Natural Resources of Manitoba, predicted a wood fuel shortage of from 100,000 to 125,000 cords in that province for the winter of 1943-44. My department was responsible for the fuel situation, and took steps to provide 500,000 cords of emergency fuel wood, cut in such locations as could be arranged, and available to move into distressed areas. Fortunately we have had a mild winter, but the fact that we have had these

reserve stock-piles has saved a good many situations during the winter. If the winter had been severe I feel certain that we still would have met the need, but owing to the mild winter we have a considerable quantity of emergency wood available. As regards the Winnipeg situation, naturally if there was to be a shortage it would be at the end of the winter. The movement of 500,000 cords of wood involves the movement of about 350 cars of wood every day of the season, and that is a fair job for the railways. Naturally the wood had to be moved into strategic positions gradually; we could not wait until the actual shortage developed and then hope to get cars overnight to carry out the movement. Therefore in the early part of the winter we were moving certain quantities of wood into centres where we believed it would be required. Actually we moved 8,733 cords of poplar from the head of the lakes to Winnipeg. This wood was purchased at a cost of $7.50 a cord f.o.b. freight cars. The freight charges have averaged $5.18 a cord, based on an average rate of thirteen cents per 100 pounds. Sales have been made to dealers at $5.15 a cord, which has resulted in a loss to the government on the sale of this wood of approximately $65,700. I compare that figure with the figure mentioned by the hon. member for Lake Centre, namely, $S00,000. I believe his earlier figure was from $600,000 to $900,000, but apparently in the latter part of his remarks he compromised on $800,000, which is an exaggeration by some twelve or fourteen times.
My hon. friend says that he has no objection to wood being moved. He thinks it is quite proper to arrange for these emergency supplies, and to move them. But he said we should have waited until the wood had dried out, because we could have moved it at a lower freight rate. I point out to him that this wood was cut in the autumn, and it does not dry very well when it is frozen. Therefore to have moved it at the cheaper freight rate would have meant waiting twelve months, and moving it for the next year. Had the winter been cold, that would not have helped the situation in the city of Winnipeg during the present winter.
I think that covers the corrections. The hon. member for Lake Centre is an industrious member of parliament. But it seems to me that he spends too much time in speaking in the house, and too little time in acquiring the facts. I would suggest for his future guidance that he do a little more research, so that-


Gordon Graydon: He does not need a lecture from the minister.

War Appropriation-Supplies


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am speaking now. I took a lecture from him last night, and now I will give him one, if he does not mind. Of course, if he minds I will stop.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: Now that we have had the statement from the minister the facts have been revealed. The minister has referred to the 8,733 cords of the 75,000 cords that were cut at the head of the lakes. If the same proportion on the 75,000 cords was loss, then the loss would actually be about $600,000. Would the minister now tell us as to the disposal of the remaining 67,000 cords; where they were sold; how much was the cost, and what the freight rate was? If the computation is made in connection with the 75,000 cords, it will be found to be very close to my estimate. The figure I gave in regard to cost was correct, and in regard to the sale price of the wood-I said 12,500 cords-I was correct.
Now I ask him to give us the figure with reference to the other 67,000 cords. I do not think the suggestion made by the minister will be borne out by the facts. When I make a statement, and take a stand such as I have done from such information as I am able to gather, it is correct. I have not in any way made statements which are incorrect. In that connection let me say this, that one of the great difficulties hon. members have is that they must go outside the house to get information that should be readily available in the house. This can be secured only by members who are industrious enough to spend their time in investigating these matters. If any question were asked regarding this matter the same answer might very well have been given, one which has been given too often in the past, that it is not in the public interest. The investigation I made disclosed, and it is borne out by the figures submitted, that on the basis of 8,733 cords, the loss suffered by the government would be over $600,000.
Let me add this now, that the government sold this wood at $5.15 a cord. My figure of 12,500 cords was wrong. The government sold this, and there is no denial of the fact that the controller, and the fuel controller in Winnipeg, were not discouraged in making the sale, but went ahead with it. The individuals who purchased it for $5.15 a cord immediately turned it over in the ordinary course of events to the city of Winnipeg at $6 a cord.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Nothing of the kind.


John George Diefenbaker: I beg your pardon?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Absolute denial.


John George Diefenbaker: All right.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend had better stop talking and let me tell him the facts.


John George Diefenbaker: Will the minister give us the facts as to what disposal was made of the 67,000 cords of wood, to account for the 75,000 cords?


Clarence Decatur Howe: A considerable part of the
75,000,	when it was found that the requirements for fuel would not be as large as had been expected, was sold for pulp, and sold at a profit.


John George Diefenbaker: I thought the
minister said last night that some part of it was shipped east.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Probably some of it was; I will get the exact figure. A very considerable part of it is there, and will be moved by barge into the Toronto area during the summer months when, as suggested by the hon. member, it will be dried out. But my hon. friend is trying to dodge, very artfully. Last night he confined his remarks entirely to the scandal of moving wood into Winnipeg. If it is not worth that amount to make the city of Winnipeg secure against any eventuality in the matter of fuel wood, then perhaps we acted extravagantly in that matter. But, knowing what we do know, and having the alarming statements not only in this house, but from the provincial authorities in Winnipeg, I think we were justified in doing what we did do.
Progress reported.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.



TECHNICAL EDUCATION ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Technical Education Act to make available, for the purposes of the act, any portion of the unexpended appropriation during the period of five years succeeding the fiscal year ending March 31, 1944.
Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, perhaps, before we go into committee, the minister might like to give some explanation to the house as to the reasons and necessity for the bill to be founded on this resolution. I would ask him if he is in a position to do so at this stage.


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, this resolution is precedent to the introduction of a bill to provide for the continuation of the provisions
Technical Education Act

of the Technical Education Act of 1919, as amended by the Technical Education Act of 1929 and again of 1934.
The scope of the proposed amendment is fully set out in the resolution. Similar resolutions were considered and similar bills passed by parliament in 1929, 1934 and 1939, in order to effect the continuance of the original act of 1919. Hon. members will remember that under the act the dominion government provided $10,000,000 for purposes of technical education throughout the dominion, $10,000 being provided yearly for each province and the remainder of the $10,000,000 being apportioned on the basis of population. Under the original act and subsequent amendments, twenty-five per cent of the money provided by the dominion and the provinces goes into building construction.


Gordon Graydon: Twenty-five per cent?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes, and seventy-five per cent to provide the necessary technical education. Every province with the exception of Manitoba has taken up its allotment of the $10,000,000, and at the moment there is $147,430.42 left in the allotment for Manitoba. All that this amendment does is to make possible the expenditure by the dominion of that amount in conjunction with the province of Manitoba.
I should like to point out to the house that the Department of Justice has indicated that the bill founded on this resolution must receive royal assent before the 31st of this month or else the original bill will lapse. That is the reason for the urgency of the passage of this amendment to the act of 1919 at this time.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, this resolution
affords an opportunity to the house to discuss one of the most important and, indeed, urgent questions facing the people of Canada at this time, a question which will become more important and more urgent perhaps as the days roll by. Apart altogether from the divisions into which the educational programmes of the provinces and the dominion fall, whether it be technical, vocational or some other branch of the educational field, this whole problem of education is one to which the house and the country should give urgent consideration.
One must, of course, approach the problem of education first of all from the point of view of the respective jurisdictions of the provinces and the dominion. Under the British North America Act, by section 93, education rests primarily with the provinces, and with that none of us will quarrel, because primarily it is a provincial matter and must remain with the provinces. But that does not presuppose that

there is not a responsibility for education resting also upon this dominion parliament within the jurisdiction in which it operates. Technical education particularly, and if one wishes to describe it, adult education and vocational training is not only of provincial but of federal concern, it being always borne in mind that the primary jurisdiction for education rests and must rest with the provinces.
The Technical Education Act passed, as the minister indicated, in 1919, was the beginning of that movement -which indicated the importance of technical education in a country like Canada, and more than that, it emphasized its importance from the dominion point of view. The importance of education and vocational training, if you like, is coming to be more and more clearly recognized as time goes on. We have made great strides in the educational field in the various provinces, but that does not mean that there is not still much to be done. The skills of the mind are important, but we must never lose sight of the importance of the training of the hand, and in this country in the days to come I hope that we shall always maintain a good balance as between the skills of the mind and the skills of the hand.
The problem of education has been tackled by the provinces, and by some of them very courageously. In Ontario from which I come there has been a recognition of the need for reforms in the educational system. The government of the Hon. George Drew has already during its short regime in this province recognized and will continue to recognize the importance of the educational system to the people of Ontario, and education is featured in the programme which that government is now attempting to carry out with great celerity and dispatch. Education is one of the planks on which that government was elected, clearly indicating the importance of the whole problem of education in the provincial sphere. Here is the programme of the province so far as education is concerned:
Our educational system will be completely revised so that every child in this province will have an opportunity to be educated to the full extent of their mental capacity, no matter where they live or what the financial circumstances of their parents may be. Vocational training will be made a much more important part of the school work, so that children may be prepared to earn a living by practical vocational instruction. The important place of our teachers in each community will be fully recognized.
I believe that to be a reflection of the general thought concerning educational affairs. Perhaps this is not the time or the place to discuss a subject which comes within the jurisdiction of the provinces; but we must recognize that it will be a responsibility within
\

Technical Education Act
the competence of the dominion to tackle, and fairly soon, those aspects of education which relate to matters of geography and ability to pay; to see to it that a student's location or his financial position shall not, as in the past, prejudice his right to a proper education. That is one of the ways in which the dominion and the dominion government can play an important part in the reform of our educational system. The question of ability to pay affects the whole problem of equal opportunity for our children. I am one who believes that the potential value to Canada of the boy or the girl in the far hinterlands is just as great as that of children who live in areas of greater opportunity, larger wealth, and more closely concentrated population. Having that definitely in mind, realizing the great differences of income which prevail in the different geographical locations and sections of Canada, I am frank to say that it does not seem right that because a child is born in one particular part of the country he should be denied full and equal opportunity so far as education goes. Attention must be given to the removal of the bars of geographical isolation and financial incapacity, so that the fullest measure of education shall be available to those who have the capacity and the desire to profit by it.
I hope that the government will also consider and review the whole matter of national scholarships. I realize that moves have been made in this respect. National scholarships would go far to meet a very real problem connected with education. I suppose there is cot one hon. member but can call to mind boys and girls who were brilliant and industrious and who desired to obtain an adequate education, but who, because of their parents' lack of means, or for other reasons beyond their control, were denied that opportunity. It seems to me that this nation cannot risk the loss of many bright minds merely because of such obstacles as I have mentioned, and which it is within the power of this parliament to remove.
Therefore, if the matter comes within the purview of the minister's department, I suggest to him that he enlarge the scheme and increase the amounts of national scholarships to enable students of this class to pursue their courses to the limits of their mental capacity rather than to the limits of their material resources.
The whole question of technical and vocational training assumes special importance because of the great job which will have to be done when our armed forces are demobilized'. Under particularly good leadership-I refer to the Canadian Legion-a great move
has heen made in the interests of the men of the armed forces while they are in the service. In addition, men benefit by the trades which they are enabled to learn while under enlistment. But I believe the government will have to consider enlarging the possibilities of giving young Canadians of both sexes, when they cease to wear the uniform, an education which will enable them not merely to become equal in earning capacity but to have even some preference over their civilian contemporaries and others who have not borne the brunt of battle through these years. In the matter of both technical and vocational education it is the dominion government which must give the lead and provide funds.
Adult education through the radio and the motion picture affords an important subject for consideration. In this field the federal government could properly take a heavy measure of responsibility. The air waves and the screen provide media particularly suited to this type of national education.
In passing, let me point out that in the rural communities there has not yet been developed, to the extent that we could wish, a proper system of education on agricultural lines, a system which through the primary and the secondary schools will train and equip our youth for agricultural activities. It is not impossible that many men in this chamber would now be engaged in agriculture instead of some other calling had it not been fashionable in the old days in the secondary schools for men-and women too-to drift into the professions. That trend, observable all over Canada, has not been a good thing for agriculture although it has enriched the larger centres. If agriculture is to continue to be a great industry and to develop as we hope, it is not too much to expect that our educational system shall direct and guide pupils from their early days into lines of agricultural activity and instil in them pride in the agricultural vocation. That is one of the things which must come in this land.
We have had debates in this house on the question of agricultural research, which, as most members who took part in those debates pointed out, is an important departure in that industry. In the competitive days to come no stone must be left unturned to ensure that farm life in Canada shall be raised to a position of importance so that it may take its place alongside other lines of endeavour and find its level of equality with other industries. The workers of Canada, too, are entitled to a broader and more abundant scheme which will be of benefit to their children, enabling them to obtain proper technical education and vocational training generally.
Technical Education Act

I merely wanted to point out on this occasion the importance of the whole problem of which this is but a very small part. Technical education, vocational training and education generally will, I hope, provide a means whereby this parliament, and the government, whatever government may succeed this one, shall make sure that the people are not neglected as in the past. We must see to that.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: We will.


Gordon Graydon: Of course, you are the only one who has ever suggested such a possibility. I am trying to be modest in the rather boastful air to the left of me. My hon. friend used to teach school, but after all he will not choose to regard me as a pupil at the moment. During the past in Canada education has been regarded by the dominion as an orphan. That must no longer be so. While we must respect and preserve and maintain at all times full provincial jurisdiction in this matter, still there are many fields in which we as a federal parliament can assist the various parts of the dominion financially as they need assistance. I am not one who believes that simply by giving grants to the provinces we as a dominion should hold a bludgeon over the provincial legislatures to make them do what we would like to have them do. That must never be the policy of the government. Rather, it must be the policy of this government and parliament to see that financial assistance is given to the provinces so as to provide a more uniform opportunity to pupils across Canada, regardless of the financial condition into which they were bom or in which perhaps their parents may find themselves.
I would urge the minister to regard this measure as simply one of those factors, small as it may be, in the general scheme which I hope the government is planning in the way of assistance to education throughout the dominion. The challenge to this parliament and to this government, the challenge to all the provinces, is imperative. The education of the new generation which is coming up is of such vast importance as almost to stagger one sometimes when one stops to contemplate the possibilities. In Europe and in other parts of the world education has been directed along certain lines which we think are undemocratic and which have led to bitter trouble throughout the world. The new generation now growing up are our citizens of to-morrow and are the most valuable asset that Canada possesses. There is no asset that can equal our pupils, and we must recognize this fact. Moreover, we must treat with equal consideration those charged1 with the responsibility of teach-

ing those pupils. They also are valuable national assets. The teaching profession, however, has not been paid as it should have been. We have money for other lines of endeavour but there has been too niggardly treatment of our teachers. I hope, therefore, that in the days which lie ahead there will be something better for those who teach and those who would learn, and that a giant structure, erected with a greater Canada in view, will make for that progress and development to which we all look forward.
I have pleasure, therefore, in supporting tonight the minister's resolution upon which a bill respecting technical education is to be founded. I regard it as a channel whereby we can bring to the government's attention the important problem of education, which must no longer be ignored or disregarded.


Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: I am not going to hold up the passage of this resolution or the bill that will be based upon it; nevertheless I do not believe that this is a step in our progress toward better education for everyone. Indeed, it is only a small part of a plan that was put into effect many years ago. One of the provinces has failed to take advantage of its share of the assistance granted, but I see no reason why the house should not pass the bill so as to give the province concerned an opportunity to take advantage of such assistance if it wishes to do so. I should like to impress upon the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) my belief that the time is opportune for the government, of which he is a member, to bring before the house a comprehensive scheme of federal assistance to education.
I am sure the minister and hon. members generally will agree with me that such assistance is badly needed in Canada. The mere fact that of the nine provinces that had the opportunity of benefiting under this legislation, which was passed in 1919, eight have long ago taken advantage of the assistance offered to further technical education in their respective areas, indicates to me that the provinces would welcome additional assistance. I agree with the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) that there is no reason why the dominion, in giving assistance, should seek more supervision than would be necessary to make sure that the grant was properly used. It was not found difficult to accept the grant and to satisfy both the provinces and the dominion under the old plan. I believe that many of the technical schools in the country are benefiting to-day from government assistance given for the purpose of training boys and girls in war work. I submit to you. Mr. MARCH 24, 1944
Technical Education Act
Speaker, that if it is important-and we agree it is important-to train boys and girls for war, it is equally important, nay, more important, to train boys and girls for peace as soon as the war is over. The problems of peace, as the years preceding the war brought home to us so definitely, are no less important than the problems of war.
There is another reason why the government should be ready with a comprehensive scheme of federal assistance for education once peace comes. But may I repeat, I see no reason why it should not be put into effect before peace comes. This war has taken an enormous toll of the better educated young men of this and of every other nation engaged in it. Possibly there has been no other war in history where the flower of the intelligence of our young people, if I am using the correct term, has been sacrificed to the same extent as in this war. Unfortunately in the past only a very small number of our people were able, to any extent, to take advantage of advanced educational training. I had the figures for British Columbia a few years ago. The figures that I shall give may not be absolutely accurate, but I think they will be found to be very close to the mark. It is doubtful if seventy-five per cent of the pupils who begin school at the age of five or six go through the elementary schools, and not more than thirty-five or forty per cent enter high school. Only a percentage of the number entering high school continue to matriculation. In British Columbia statistics show that only four per cent of the pupils who go to school reached university and a still smaller percentage than that passed through university. Surely we are not on that low intellectual level that only four per cent of our people can benefit by a university education?
There are various reasons why we have made such a poor showing in our schools. The reasons are largely economic. First of all, there is the poverty of some of the provinces. Then there is the poverty of certain districts within the province where, under our provincial educational system, the school districts pay for the elementary education with, of course, a certain amount of provincial assistance. Then there is the greatest drawback of all, the poverty in the home. Until we raise the economic level of our people by increasing wages, or in some other way, poverty will continue to be a bar to the education of the families of the poor. I do not think that difficulty can be met by scholarships. I believe that scholarships are of value; but the capacity of the pupil to benefit by advanced
education cannot be measured until that pupil has a least reached high school and has possibly had some years in high school. Therefore there must be something more than scholarships. Some means must be provided by which the children of the poor can be continued in school until it can be discerned whether or not they can benefit by further education.
As I said at the beginning, I see no reason why this measure should not be allowed to pass without any great amount of discussion, but I believe this house should impress upon the minister the urgent necessity of the government doing something to give assistance to the provinces to further technical and other advanced education. This would in turn take some of the load off the provinces and more could be spent on elementary education. But there is a whole field here that will have to be covered in some way if we are to do some of the things that the leader of the opposition said should be done, but which were never done, regardless of what party was in power in Canada.
Mr. JEAN-FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): I have listened with great pleasure to the speeches made by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Graydon) and the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis).
This resolution precedes a measure to amend the Technical Education Act. There is not an hon. member who will not agree that education, especially technical education, is an important thing for youth. But while I was listening to the speeches I was thinking of something, namely, that it is very good to boost education on paper and even in legislation, but on the other hand we must be more practical than that. We must not take it for granted that the men who will indulge in technical work shall be men who are physically unfit. At the present time those who work as technical tradesmen are considered as making an inferior contribution to the war effort. They are not put on the same footing as the men and women in the army. If all that has been said before is true, it must be acknowledged that those men who work in technical trades do something that is just as vital to the war effort as that done by those who are in the army.
That is my first contention. Now it is the fashion to give the cold shoulder to the man in overalls. Many people are under the impression that sick boys from sanatoria, boys who have been undernourished and who are weak physically, can do the work of ablebodied men. I do not agree; probably no one does in private, but when the time comes
Technical Education Act

to express an opinion everyone seems afraid to say so. There is no shame in wearing overalls; there is no shame in having spots of grease on overalls. The beautiful and expensive limousines in which landlords ride among the crowds of pedestrians are built by men who have greasy spots on their overalls; the landlords have none. The man who sweats tailoring fine uniforms for those who occupy high posts in the army is unknown. It reminds me of a reception; it is not the cook or chef who is complimented, it is the host. A caterer told me that every time he saw a fine cake he thought of the perspiration of the man who had looked after the baking of that cake.
It seems to me, sir, that in times like these people express views which are not exactly those they hold in the bottom of their hearts. Because I speak like this I may be told that I am opposed to the education of youth, that I am opposed to a federal grant to aid1 technical education. I want to respect the constitution and the law. In the Sirois report I saw a lengthy memorandum about federal gifts to the provinces in aid of education. According to the British North America Act, which is considered by some of my hon. friends of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation party to be an obstacle to progress, education is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces. Why? The reason is obvious; it is that education needs an immediate rather than a remote control. I give every credit to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell), but how can he possibly supervise the education of young Canadian boys and girls throughout this country? It is hard for a provincial minister of education to do that within his own province; so how would it be possible for the minister to do it for all of Canada?
That is my second point. My third point is that the best help the Minister of Labour can give to youth in technical trades is to keep in those trades the young men who are doing well at the present time, making armaments, making munitions, making clothes for the soldiers, working on the farms, on the railways and in the railway shops. Not long ago the railways decided to make an agreement with the Department of National Defence, in virtue of which young men with experience in technical trades, who have filled positions requiring experience both on the railways and in the shops, could not have any further postponement of military service. Though they had years of experience as tradesmen and only a few months of experience as soldiers, they were told, "You are soldiers first. We will not
[Mr. Pouliotd
ask you to continue at the trade in which you have acquired special skill. Go into the army." Well, sir, before voting money to encourage the training of young men in technical trades, I think first we should acknowledge the importance of those trades, and not give the cold shoulder to tradesmen and men in overalls. We should recognize officially that in war time these men do not help the country only by subscribing to war bonds; they help by their work, by their sweat, and by their activities in the various fields in which they are engaged. That is my point of view; and if this resolution is timely, there is no excuse whatever for not paying a special tribute of admiration to those men who work day and night in order to clothe the army, to arm those who are in it, to furnish them with munitions, food and transportation.
I remember very well that not long ago, following a suggestion by an old doctor friend of mine who is a member of- parliament in Canberra that each school boy should have a glass of milk in class at midday, I asked why there was no subsidy for the purpose of giving that glass of milk to each schoolboy and schoolgirl in this country. I was told by one of my esteemed colleagues that the suggestion was out of order because that matter came under the jurisdiction of the provinces. It is most timely that we should see about the health of the youth who are studying the technical trades, and especially the health of the young boys and girls who are going to school, who are undernourished and who cannot work so well because they are hungry.
And, sir, there is something else also. Why is it impossible-


Thomas Vien: Order; the debate has broadened far beyond what was ever anticipated, and I must call the attention of the house to the terms of the resolution. It
states:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Technical Education Act to make available, for the purposes of the act, any portion of the unexpended appropriation during the period of five years succeeding the fiscal year ending March 31, 1944.
The minister in his opening statement referred to the fact that there is an unexpended appropriation now in their hands, and that this measure will have to be passed in order that that amount may be given to Manitoba.
The present discussion is going into the broad field of education, entirely beyond the provisions of the resolution, and I must ask the hon. member to confine himself to the terms of the resolution.

Technical Education Act


Mr. POULIOT:: Yes, and what I said applies especially to the children of Manitoba.
Now, with all respect I was expressing my personal view about education. I shall act in accordance with the suggestion which has just come from the Chair. However, I hope Your Honour will have no objection to my making a few other remarks about technical education, although I am convinced that before considering this resolution we should consider other more pressing matters. I tell the house why I say that; I say it because at the present time there are many young boys in Manitoba, as well as in other provinces in Canada, who have had no technical training, or a technical training of only two or three months' duration. I have known many skilled tradesmen who can scarcely write their names; yet those men are experts at their own jobs. I am sure we could find many such men in the big industrial shops, not only in 'those where automobiles and trucks are made, but also in those shops from which guns, rifles and ammunition are being turned out. This is work calling for precision. Of course it is necessary for those who make calculation to have a degree of instruction sufficient to enable them to make their point.


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The hon. member comes from Quebec; this resolution deals with only one province. Every other province has taken up its allotment. This resolution only asks permission of the house to amend the present law so that it may be extended for another five years in order to enable Manitoba to take up its allotment. That is all that is before the house.
If we are to wander all over the lot and discuss the whole broad question of education, we could stay here for another year. I suggest that we stick to the terms of the resolution which asks the house to extend the act for another five years. All the other provinces have had their share of the $10,000,000, and we are merely asking that the provision be extended so that Manitoba may have its allotment.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, the point of order the minister has raised, if I understood him correctly, was this: He states that this affects Manitoba, and that no member outside that province can speak about it.


Humphrey Mitchell: Oh, no.


Jean-François Pouliot: What I have said applies as much to Manitoba as to any other province. I have been talking about the technical trades, and I do not see why the minister
would object to that. I have said that at times men without education are more skilled tradesmen than men with education-


An hon. MEMBER:: Oh, no.


Jean-François Pouliot: in certain cases. For instance, what success would the governor of the Bank of Canada have in making shells? He is a great banker, I am told. But what would be his success, if he were working alongside a man who had been making shells for years? I am not condemning education. But what I say-and I insist upon it, just as much for Manitoba as for the Yukon, the maritime provinces, Quebec or anywhere else- is that it is not only education that counts in the technical trades. It is skill; it is experience.
The Minister of Labour is himself a tradesman, and has acquired experience as such. He will admit, I am sure, that his experience as a tradesman counts more than education. The education received respecting technical trades from tradesmen themselves is of great importance. The education I have received in agriculture has been from farmers with whom I live-and I know of what I speak. I do not snub them. I do not think there is any fence between the provinces, nor do I believe that because I come from Quebec- or if I came from Cape Breton-I should be forbidden by the Minister of Labour to speak about technical education in Manitoba or in British Columbia or the Yukon.
Speaking broadly about education, I say there should be no snobbery about it. Every member of parliament shall be the friend of the working man, the friend of labour. And not only that, in Manitoba, as anywhere, the teaching of education shall be supervised by those it may concern. I insist upon that, so that every bit of money spent on education shall serve its purpose. Let us have men who will be worthy of those who have gone before.
In England I was struck by what tradesmen in some families have been doing generation after generation. The young man whose father is a railwayman succeeds his father because he has learned to love that trade. He has been told, within his family circle, about the general rules pertaining to it and the way things should be done. These things interest him, and he expects to be able to succeed his father and continue to find work in the same trade. I would hope that in Canada we would have the same condition where tradesmen would be trained by their fathers. Nothing could be finer than that. That would
Technical Education Act

be my wish. I often regret that young men, the sons of labourers, are ashamed to be labouring men and try to get into the so-called liberal professions. There is more future for the labouring man in his own field than there is for those who belong to the liberal professions in this country, except perhaps chemists and civil engineers. Therefore, when education is considered in this house, we should be extremely careful because it is not the business of this government to touch it, and we must see to it that we do not infringe at all upon provincial rights. We must be very careful to respect them.
My last word, sir, will be this. I hope that there will be no divisions between the citizens of any parts of this country over what is for the common welfare of all, and while distinctions were necessarily made by the British North America Act with regard to the power to legislate, that is an entirely different matter from the common effort of all citizens of good will working together for the welfare of the whole country.


George Hugh Castleden: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to hear any hon. member from the province of Quebec speak in favour of improved educational systems. I was pleased this evening also to hear the leader of the Progressive Conservative party express some fine ideals and aims and objectives of education. But the outside leader of the party who wanders about the country has not quite such a good record in the matter of technical education, because for twenty years he was premier of that province which failed to take up its share of this $10,000,000 grant for technical education.


Gordon Graydon: I rise to a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. If the hon. member for Yorkton would only acquaint himself with the facts he would find that the minister in charge of labour for the province of Manitoba for three years was a gentleman by the name of Farmer, a member of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation party.


George Hugh Castleden: Was not Mr. Bracken premier of that province for about twenty years? But perhaps we can excuse him because in those days he may have been a Liberal-Progressive or something else.
Canada has a long way to go in the field of education. It is too bad that higher education has to be considered in this country as a sort of monopoly of the rich. Another regrettable thing was our failure as a nation to provide those who had an education with an
fMr. Pouliot.]
opportunity to make a living in the years from 1930 to 1939. Only three per cent of our students graduate from universities. Many of these had to leave this country and go elsewhere to receive a reward for their labours.
Very rapid changes are taking place in other countries in the educational field. If one wished to place his finger on one of the basic reasons why our great ally Russia is making such a splendid contribution in the winning of this war and saving democracy for the world to-day, he could point to what Russia has done in the field of education for the rank and file of her people. And we in the so-called advanced nations, if we wish to hold our place anywhere near the top of the scale of peoples, must awake. We must demand as a nation a very high standard of educational opportunity for every Canadian.
I believe that some fundamental changes are required in our curricula. I agree with the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) that certain people with technical education can do better work than those who have had an academic education.
There must also be greater progress made in work of helping the students who enter our schools to find out what their latent and inherent talents, abilities and skills are. Then we must provide them with an opportunity to use those skills and talents to the best possible advantage. Every person differs, of course, and what is an education for one is not suitable as an education for another. But each has capacities which must be developed, and our educational system in this country has failed to find within our people their respective talents and capacities. There are people who can take tremendous advantage of a technical education, and there are others to whom it would be worthless. There must be an opportunity provided throughout all our nation for every person who has ability and talents to discover and use them.
The second point I wish to make is that there must exist in the minds of those who are getting an education the thought that when they have completed their education and training an opportunity will exist for them. They must have a feeling of security; there must be freedom from fear. We watched the youth of our nation graduate from our schools and colleges in 1930 to 1939 and go into the ranks of the unemployed, and then into the bread-line asking for relief. That must never happen again.
Canada can never fulfill her destiny until every child1 knows what his or her capacities and abilities are and has an opportunity to use them, not entirely for his or her own

Technical Education Act
particular gain or to make it possible for him or her to take advantage of his or her fellow-men to exploit them, but their capacities and ability and training must be used in the light of service which he and she can perform for their fellowmen. It is time that Canada realized that one of the greatest natural resources of this country or that any nation can have is the brains and ability of its youth.


Mr. CRERAR:: I rise to a point of order, Mr. Speaker. While the discussion of my hon. friend is very interesting I submit that it is not germane to the resolution which the house is considering. May I respectfully suggest that if such latitude is to be permitted, we may be here for days and days debating this simple resolution.


Thomas Vien: I have already called
attention to the terms of the resolution. I have been listening carefully to the hon. member, and while I do not think at the moment he is entirely irrelevant he is coming very close to it.


George Hugh Castleden: Then may I close, Mr. Speaker, with this one very relevant remark. I support this bill wholeheartedly, and my only regret is that it is not another bill being introduced to make available $100,000,000 for education in Canada.


Thomas Reid: Why not $200,000,000? Why limit it?


George Hugh Castleden: You are on the government side. You introduce it. I cannot introduce a money bill.


Thomas Reid: You are kind of cheap in
suggesting only $100,000,000. Don't be a piker. One hundred million dollars forsooth!


George Hugh Castleden: Make it $290,000,000, if you like. It is needed.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to raise the ante, as somebody says, on the $100,000,000. I merely wish to point out the great urgency that exists to-day for technical education, and so that I may be in order, Mr. Speaker, I say that the urgency exists probably to a greater extent in Manitoba than in any other province. We have this problem to face, and it is a very real one. We have the immediate problem of training the section leaders who will be doing the development work in the immediate post-war period. That is a very important matter. Unless we have the trained technical men, and unless we train them now, we shall find ourselves when the war is over with a problem on our hands and no skilled
workmen to cope with it. So far, some fifty or sixty thousand men have been discharged from our armed forces. When the war is over we shall be faced with the problem of employment for three-quarters of a million in the armed forces and, as the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) said, eight hundred thousand directly employed in war industry. And that will be an immediate problem; it will not be something that will wait; it is of urgent and vital importance.


Thomas Vien: I must call to the hon.
member's attention that he is not in order in dealing on this debate with the general question of education. This resolution deals only with the unexpended portion of an amount of money which the government wishes to handi over to the province of Manitoba, with regard: to technical education. The hon. member must confine himself to the terms of that resolution much more strictly than he has been doing.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Mr. Speaker, I naturally
bow to your ruling. But I wish to point out that practically nowhere are we going to be faced with this problem of technical education more than in the riding of the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Crerar). In that riding are some of the greatest mineral deposits known in this country, and they will not be developed unless we train and prepare technically equipped prospectors, and train them now. This resolution speaks of Manitoba. This is a question which should have been brought to the attention of this government long ago. We found ourselves in 1941 with 107,000 people in the mining industry supporting a population of approximately 1)200,000. Less than five per cent of our production is derived from properties which have been discovered since 1930. If that does not indicate that we need technical men trained to do prospecting in the mining business, I do not know what it does mean. The position is nowhere more serious than in the province of Manitoba and in the district represented by the minister himself. I will not transgress, Mr. Speaker, since I see you objecting. I see the minister waiting for the passage of this resolution, and I sympathize with him, but I wish to reiterate that unless steps are taken, and taken now, to train technically the troops in our district depots, so that, when general demobilization takes place, we shall have a skilled group of technicians who can do their part in bringing about the discovery and development of the natural resources of this country, the end will be chaos. Here is our
Technical Education Act

one hope of preventing a depression, and technical training is the most important element in preventive action.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Manitoba has been mentioned so often this evening in the course of this debate that perhaps someone from that province should rise and say a few words. Perhaps, coming as I do from that province, it may not be so difficult for me to stay in order.
As I understand it, the money which is to be made available for Manitoba if we pass this bill before the 31st of March-


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: It does not look like it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: -is for the purpose of enabling that province to carry on with the kind of technical education which was originally provided by the act many years ago. I express some shame that my province failed to make use of this money earlier, as it should have done. But I rose in my place principally to say that I happen to know that very good use is being made at the present time of money provided by this grant. Perhaps in passing I should say to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) that this matter did not come, at any time during the period that Mr. Farmer was minister of labour of Manitoba, under that department. As a matter of fact, it was shuttled between the department of education, headed by the Hon. Ivan Schultz, and the department of public works and labour, now under the leadership of the Hon. Errick F. Willis, who is the leader of the Progressive Conservative group in that province and was the leader of the Conservative party when Mr. Bracken was on the other side.


Gordon Graydon: Farmer cannot escape responsibility as easily as that.


Thomas Vien: Order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As I was saying before the interruption, lately it has been discovered that this money is available, and I happen to know that good use is being made of it. I have had occasion to become acquainted with the work which in Manitoba comes under the direction of Mr. R. J. Johns. If my information is correct, his work comes under two or three different votes. Some of it is strictly technical education in the sense of training people to do war jobs, and some of it is education of the technical kind that is provided for students as part of their regular high school education. Last fall, during the course of a visit to the city of Brandon, I saw the work being done there under the direction of Mr. Johns, and more particularly

under the supervision of Mr. K. A. McKillop, who was in charge of this work at one of the high schools in Brandon. If it were not for the desire of the house to hasten the passage of this resolution, I am sure I could tell a story which would interest hon. members as to the kind of work being done there in an endeavour, as a part of the education of high school pupils, to make them acquainted with electrical work, sheet metal work, cooking, sewing, weaving, and a number of things of that kind. An interesting experiment has been developed there in terms of self-government and of cooperation which really did my heart good. I am only sorry that it has taken so long for the province of Manitoba to get started on this kind of thing. I wish at the same time to endorse the general remarks on education which have been made by my colleagues of this group. I am satisfied that this money, now that these progressive people whom I have named are on the job, will be put to good use in Manitoba, and I hope we shall forgive that province for having failed to take it up before this, and that we shall pass this legislation to-night.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I am not going to take very much time, but it seems to me that the question of education should not be hurried through this house. The debate to-night indicates the interest which hon. members are taking, and I am sure they reflect the interest of the people back in their constituencies. I do not think the discussion should be wholly confined to the matter in 'which the province of Manitoba is concerned. As I understand the resolution, it is to amend the Technical Education Act, an act passed in 1919 which affected every province, and I think every province is interested in this amendment. As a matter of fact, in my own province of New Brunswick after their portion of the $10,000,000 was expended they came to Ottawa time and time again, as did every other province, asking that provision might be made whereby they would receive more money to carry on technical education which had commenced under the act. Frankly, I think the dominion government should have assisted the provinces in furthering technical education.
It is not necessary for me to point out the needs of technical education. I have heard hon. members speak to-night, and there is not a member of this house, and there are very few public men or women in the dominion who do not realize that the system of education throughout the country needs a thorough overhauling. Associated with the military

Technical Education Act
forces as I am, 1 have had it forcibly brought to my attention. It would surprise hon. members if they knew of the thousands of young men across Canada who, on account of lack of education had to be turned down for military purposes.
These are things that make the people think, and it is one reason why the people to-day are not only looking to their provinces for better education acts, but hoping that the dominion will see that something is done to make sure that our young men are better educated. That, I believe, indicates the need and I hope that, while education is a matter for provincial jurisdiction, the dominion will realize the great asset which Canada is losing when it fails to see that our youth has suitable education.
I was surprised this afternoon to hear the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Kinley) say that he was quite satisfied with the industry we had received in the maritime provinces.


John James Kinley: I did not say any such
thing.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I am not going to transgress the rules, Mr. Speaker, but I would point out that industry, as far as our province or any other for that matter is concerned, requires men who are educated along technical lines. One reason why we have not had more men educated technically in New Brunswick is that we have not had the industries for which to train them. If we were training young men in Nova Scotia or New Brunswick to-day in our technical schools in any numbers, they would not be able to find' employment in those provinces but would have to go to other parts of Canada or to the United States. There is no question about that.
. Mr. SPEAKER: Order.


John James Kinley: May I point out, Mr. Speaker-


Thomas Vien: The hon. member for
Royal is out of order. He must confine himself to the terms of the resolution which does not deal with the question of unemployment in New Brunswick.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I bow to your ruling, Mr. Speaker. I was going to say that technical education and industry should go hand in hand, but I will not transgress your ruling. My point is, however, that if we are to have our young men educated as they should be, the poorer provinces, which in the past have been robbed because they have not had industry, will have to receive support from the
dominion government. Therefore I should like to see this act amended not merely: to assist Manitoba so that that province may spend its portion, but to enable every province to carry on education technically in connection with farming or any other industry that needs it.
* Mr. E. G. HANSELL (Macleod): We in this corner have not spoken to the resolution for the reason that we did not want to traverse the universe of education in talking to it. The . resolution is very simple. As I understand it, the purpose is to extend the privilege to Manitoba to accept funds which were available to that province within a certain specified time. Because they did not accept those funds within that time a resolution was introduced to extend the time. That is my understanding of the matter.
I recall not so long ago when the premier of Manitoba was the champion of what was known as the Sirois report which, if it had been adopted, would have given Manitoba some financial advantage. I mention that only because, since he championed that report in order to get that financial advantage, which of course was something that was within his power and his right, it should be observed that we have here a sum' of money which the province of Manitoba did not take advantage of. I do not speak in these terms to show any meanness or anything of that kind. I think the fund should be made available to them, but at the same time the minister must be prepared to answer questions in committee and to indicate why these funds were not used within that specified time.
I would make another observation because I believe that in this resolution there is involved a principle which may or may not be a good one. That principle is that when a province does not take advantage of that which is offered to it within a specified time, then the principle of the resolution makes the offer . still good. I wonder now if that principle would go for the provinces in any other line. Suppose it had been two or three other provinces and not Manitoba alone; would the same thing have happened? I fancy it would. We will give the minister and the government credit for being fair.


Humphrey Mitchell: One extension was made for the province from which my hon. friend comes.


Mr. HANSELL:: I am glad to hear that; nevertheless I am dealing with that one principle. If the principle is true in this case, in respect of technological education, it should be true in all cases, whether it be relief schemes or anything else.
Technical Education Act


An hon. MEMBER:: Or housing.


Ernest George Hansell: Yes, housing or anything else. I say that because we may have an opportunity at some time in the future of reminding the government that here they accepted a principle, whereas perhaps later on they will reject the same principle.
There is one other observation I would make and it is this. I appreciate what the hon. member who preceded me (Mr. Brooks) has said with regard to giving aid to the provinces for educational purposes. I am in favour of that, provided there are no strings whatsoever attached to the aid given. Education is a matter that comes within provincial autonomy and, while I am not voicing the view of my group, since I have not discussed the question with them, personally I am against any type of centralization of power or anything else, and centralization of education is just as dangerous as centralization of anything else. I am against any interference by the federal government with those things which are related to provincial autonomy, and education is one of them. With these observations, Mr. Speaker, I am willing to support the bill.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I do not wish to hold up this resolution. I know the minister wants to get it through. I have only one observation to make, namely, that while this resolution precedes the bill to allow the province of Manitoba to use up the remainder of its grant, nevertheless it does open up the whole question of technical education. While I do not wish to discuss the broad aspect of technical education I should like to say that instead of this measure I should like to have seen the government bring down a general technical education bill which would have provided Manitoba with the 3147,000, plus a grant for each of the provinces to begin the training of men who are already coming out of the services and to provide training for men and women who are being moved out of war industries as we* find that we have sufficient of certain War materials.
I am hoping that if the minister has nothing to say about this matter now he will have something to say about it before the session is very much older. A few weeks ago, when the estimates of the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power) were before the house, I made some proposals in which I asked that the government should consider doing two things which they should do on a large scale, namely, set up the necessary facilities for training large numbers of men, and then use those men in socially useful projects such as house building, rural
[Mr. Hansell.l
electrification, and the opening up of new industries such as synthetics and plastics. I am not going to discuss that-


Thomas Vien: I must again call the
attention of the house to the resolution. This resolution precedes a bill to make available, for the purposes of the act, any portion of the unexpended appropriation during the period of five years succeeding the fiscal year ending March 31, 1944. The hon. member is permitted, of course, to make any argument he wishes dealing with that particular subject; but he cannot deal with the whole question of technical education or any other issue in that connection. The resolution simply deals with the unexpended portion of money which is provided for in the bill that will be introduced. I have already given considerable -latitude. I must ask the hon. members to confine themselves solely to the terms of the resolution, and I ask the hon. member to do that.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I must point out-to Your Honour that this is a resolution preceding the bill to amend the Technical Education Act. Under the resolution I have the right to discuss the general principle underlying the act which we are to amend. As a matter of fact, the bill opens up the whole act and would allow me to discuss the act and how the act would be affected by this amendment. I do not wish to do that, Mr. Speaker. All I want to point out is that when I was talking about technical education the other day the Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie) interrupted me to say that the government was now doing that for thousands of men. I asked him if he would mind outlining to the committee just what plans the government had to train, let us say, half a million of three quarters of a million men who will be coming back from the war services and who will be coming out of war industry. The minister said, "I shall be glad to do that at the earliest opportunity."


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No. My hon. friend is misquoting me again. If you read Hansard you will find that I said, "At the proper time". My memory is better than his.


Thomas Vien: The hon. member is now discussing the policy of the government which has no relevancy to the resolution that is before the house.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I feel it has everything to do with it. I am suggesting-


Thomas Vien: Order.

Technical Education Act


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I	am suggesting, now that the government has brought down the resolution-


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Order.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I think the Speaker will be able to keep order without the Minister of Pensions and National Health making a lot of noises.'


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: My hon. friend is disobeying the Speaker's ruling.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: No. I am not. If I am, the Speaker will bring me to order. I do not require the Minister of Pensions and National Health to tell me what to do. I can take care of myself much better than the minister can take care of himself or me.


Thomas Vien: Order.


Gordon Graydon: It is like the blind leading the blind.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I could have said all I had to say in three minutes if I had been left alone. I rose for the purpose of saying that I hope some time during the present session, and very soon, that instead of a measure merely to pay out the remainder of the grant to Manitoba, the government will bring down a general measure of technical education for the post-war period. It is not enough merely to pay out the remainder of the grant which is now twenty-five years old; the government ought in the very near future to bring down legislation to Cover the whole field of technical education, because men are already coming back from overseas and men and women coming out of war factories, and the programme of technical education should be under way now to deal with the post-war period before it is too late.


Mr. F. D. SHAW (Red Deer):: While I agree wholeheartedly with the view of the previous speaker (Mr. Douglas, Weyburn) with respect to the effect which this resolution has upon the act itself, I shall not endeavour to go beyond the limitations which you, sir, have set.
We realize that this resolution has been brought forward with the express purpose of making available to Manitoba certain moneys which it has not used heretofore. I hope that Manitoba will recognize in the action which parliament is taking in this regard the fact that in that province, as a consequence of war, many establishments have been set up which, following their usefulness for war purposes, may well be utilized in connection with technical education. Moreover, I hope that Manitoba will recognize that as a result of the
specialized type of training which we are giving to-day to many of our service personnel, we shall before very long have an abundance of fully qualified instructors to carry on technical educational work in that province. What I say of Manitoba in that regard applies equally well to the other Canadian provinces.
I trust that Manitoba will recognize, together with all the other provinces, that in order to maintain fully qualified and competent technical instructors it must be prepared to recognize the importance of that type of work and to pay salaries which will induce these people to take a more intense interest in that type of instruction work and, therefore, add greatly to technical education in that province.
There is a good deal that I could say, but let me just add this:	Not only must we
concentrate upon providing technical education for the purpose of enabling young people to earn a living, but we must so educate them as to enable them to make profitable use of their spare time. I think we have almost entirely overlooked that in connection with our techincal education in the past. I agree with this resolution wholeheartedly, Mr. Speaker, as do the other members of this group.


Mr. J. S. ROY (Gaspe):: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this resolution is to make available to the province of Manitoba money provided by the federal government to encourage technical education, which offer Manitoba did not accept in years gone by. I shall certainly support the principle of this resolution, because I think it is a good thing to help technical education throughout Canada.
There is another reason why I am supporting this resolution. It is that it will create a precedent which may be very beneficial to my own province of Quebec, where the same situation exists in connection with old age pensions. For nearly ten years sums were provided by the federal government to help pay the cost of-old age pensions throughout Canada, but the province of Quebec did not take advantage of that offer. Perhaps, following this precedent, Quebec may be able to ask this government for the share of the money provided for all provinces for that purpose which it did not claim in previous years, and that, of course, would be of great benefit to the province of Quebec.


Humphrey Mitchell: After listening to many hon. members this evening, one would almost wonder whether we had any educational system at all in this country. Let me say
Technical Education Act

that I entirely agree with the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) and the other hon. members who spoke in regard to jurisdiction. I believe the strength of any nation the size of this dominion is predicated upon a federal constitution under which such things as education come within the jurisdiction of the provinces, and I do not believe any political party in this country has a first mortgage on the will to see to it that our boys and girls are properly educated.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is all right; I am going to get in my answer. My hon. friend the leader of the opposition made a fairly good propaganda speech earlier this evening. I wish to say very frankly that in my judgment those who framed the technical education legislation in this country planned better than they knew. Had it not been for the foundation laid by the government in 1919, following the action taken some years previously in setting up a royal commission to study the question, we would not have had an industrial structure that could have accomplished what has been done during the present war. I should like to pay tribute to the provinces. The dominion government has had complete cooperation from every province, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, in the war training programme undertaken since the beginning of the war. To listen to some hon. members, one would think almost no money had been spent on this sort of training in recent years. Let me tell hon. members that the federal government, in conjunction with the provinces, have spent over $18,000,000 since war broke out and have trained over 300,000 people in the technical and plant schools of this country.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I wanted to discuss technical education and the need for technical training both during and after the war. You, Mr. Speaker, decided that I should not do so under this resolution. Now the minister is proceeding to give the house a report on the training that has been undertaken by the government during the war and the preparation that is being made for the post-war period.


Humphrey Mitchell: There is a time and place for that, but I should like to say to some hon. members-


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I should like a ruling, Mr. Speaker, on the point of order I have raised. If the minister wishes to speak to the point of order, that is all right.


Thomas Vien: The point of order raised has been dealt with by the Chair several

times to-night. This resolution deals with the unexpended portion of an appropriation, and I would ask all hon. members to adhere to the terms of the resolution.


Humphrey Mitchell: It has been said that this government has no policy in regard to education, or something to that effect.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: That is not dealt with in this resolution.


Humphrey Mitchell: May I remind the hon. member for Weyburn (Mr. Douglas) that two sessions ago we passed a bill concerning vocational education which had a much wider coverage than the resolution we are discussing this evening. This question has been raised, and I think these things should be answered. It has been stated that in this country education is a monopoly of the rich. I disagree with that statement. That is the sort of thing that inflames public opinion from one end of this country to the other. I suggest to the hon. member for Yorkton that it would be just too bad for the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation party if education had been the monopoly of the rich, for I understand that the leader of his party is a university graduate, and a good scholar too. I do not think a statement like the one I have mentioned is warranted, particularly when one looks around the benches of this House of Commons.
I just wanted to answer those points while I was on my feet, Mr. Speaker; I am not going to detain the house longer. I should have been glad to give an historical review of technical education in this country, in which I have taken some interest and in the establishment of which I have played some small part. I hope this measure will pass quickly, for the province of Manitoba needs the money. I would say to the hon. member for Gaspe (Mr. Roy) that his province availed itself of its full quota under the legislation, and the only province that still has to make use of its allocation is Manitoba. I hope hon. members will grant the request of that province with due expedition this evening.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister answer the question as to why-


Thomas Vien: In committee.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Bradette in the chair.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister explain, if he can, why Manitoba did not use its portion of this money; and while he is answering that will he say whether he has any assurance that Manitoba will now take this money and make good use of it?

Technical Education Act


Humphrey Mitchell: I am sorry I cannot speak for the province. I think my hon. friend had better ask Manitoba that question.


Mr. STIRLING:: Can the minister place on record the division of the 810,000,000 as between the provinces, and can he give the committee an idea of the rapidity with which the provinces claimed their portion of it, so that we may have an idea as to how popular this training was province by province?


Humphrey Mitchell: I have it all before me; it covers a period of twenty-five years, and probably it would take ten minutes to read, but I think it would be all to the good to have it on record, and with the permission of the committee I should be glad to do so.


Grote Stirling: That would be satisfactory.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I think the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre asked the minister a perfectly civil question.


Humphrey Mitchell: I thought I gave a civil answer.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The answer was civil, but no one expected the minister to speak for the province of Manitoba. I think the committee has a perfect right to know that the province of Manitoba asked that this unexpended portion be revoted, and surely they must have given the minister some asssurance that they intend to make good and proper use of it.


Humphrey Mitchell: The only request we
received was that they anticipated they might spend it. That is the usual request one gets under such circumstances.


Charles Edward Johnston: Is there
not some way in which the federal government can check up on the provinces, to see whether this money is being properly spent? After all, when the federal government grants money it should have some means of checking up to see whether or not it is being properly spent. In respect of Manitoba, has any check been made to see whether they have made a proper expenditure?


Humphrey Mitchell: I can assure my hon.
friend that the federal government spends no money without a proper check. The legislation provides for the manner in which the money shall be spent, and I touched upon that point this evening. If my hon. friend would read the act I think he would find that every precaution is taken that the money shall be spent properly in the various provinces.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Mitchell thereupon moved for leave to introduce bill No. 41, to amend the Technical Education Act.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Bradette in the chair.
Section 1 agreed to.
On section 2-disposition of unexpended balances.
Gordon Graydon: I have not had an opportunity to check the phraseology of the bill with previous bills passed with respect to this subject. Can the minister assure the committee that this 'bill is in exactly the same form as previous bills, with the exception of the years involved?


Humphrey Mitchell: I cannot answer that: I askume it is the same. The same principle is involved.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: The explanatory note indicates that.


Humphrey Mitchell: There is no explanation on the other page.


Jean-François Pouliot: I wonder how this section could apply only to Manitoba, because Manitoba is not mentioned1 in the bill?


Humphrey Mitchell: I do not thick it need be mentioned. The only unexpended balance in the 810,000,000 affects Manitoba, and it does not affect any other province. The amendment stipulates that power shall be given to spend that money.


Charles Edward Johnston: I think
we should know how much of this 810,000,000 was spent, and how much we are still to appropriate.


Grote Stirling: The minister has told us.


Humphrey Mitchell: When we were in the
resolution stage the hon. member for Yale asked the same question.


Grote Stirling: No, not the same.


Humphrey Mitchell: He asked a somewhat
similar question, and at that time I volunteered to put the complete data on record. I could read it, but it would take fifteen minutes to do so. However, if the hon. member just wishes to know the unexpended balance for Manitoba, I can say to him that it is $147,430.42.


Clarence Gillis: I think even if it takes ten minutes for the minister to read it, it should be read,


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.
Technical Education Act


Clarence Gillis: Some of those smart fellows who know all about it-and who perhaps do not actually know any more about it than we do-laugh at that suggestion. Personally, I should like to know if my figuring of the problem is correct. Twenty-five years ago the federal government passed an act in which it made $10,000,000 available. That was for the development of technical education in this country. Most of my hon. friends must accept their share of responsibility for the administration of that act. Well, there is no wonder technical education has been neglected, because we find that Manitoba did not use
even the small portion made available to her. I say that before this amendment is accepted, and we give effect to the same old act-one which certainly did not serve a very useful purpose in the past-the committee should take at least ten minutes, and listen to the Minister of Labour tell most members something they know very little about-although they are not big enough to admit it. I should like to hear the minister put the whole thing on record.


Humphrey Mitchell: If the house wishes, I am prepared to put it on the record. It is as follows:



[Stage Direction]
Statement showing disposition of funds under the Technical Education Act as at the end of November, 1943
Prince Edward Island
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia____
Amount available during period of act
$	198,187 86
662,113 94 512,461 28 2,569,655 53 3,178,608 97 719,746 56 847,620 91 678,524 40 633,080 55
[Stage Direction]
Amounts paid by federal government as at Nov.
30,1943
[Stage Direction]
Balance
147,430 42
[Stage Direction]
The following table indicates the amount of money paid to the various provinces during the ten-year period of the Act:
Summary of Amounts Available and Amounts Paid to Provinces, 1919 to 1929,
Under Technical Education Act, 1919
Amounts available to prov- Grants paid
Province inces during to provinces, 1919-20	1920-21	1921-22	1922-23	1923-24
period of act ten years
P.E.I. ..	.$ 198,187	86 $ 71,665	79	$ ...	$ 2,700	65	$ 7,241	73	$ 5,858	46	$ 6,550	56N.S	. 662,113	94	299,046	05	24,193	32	32,758	01	33,166	00	35,501	95N.B. ...	. 512,461	28	405,692	68	3,396	66	10,408	73	22,160	70	17,476	06	20,382	00Que	. 2,569,655	53	2,444,353	18	36,500	00	167,886	85	114,651	04	128,182	27	328,682	25Ont	. 3,178,608	97	3,178,608	97	106,297	63	294,111	73	378,174	84	314,206	97	347,636	30Man. ...	. 719,746	56	191,406	49	2,648	49	7,268	00	21,173	94	25,121	14	20,092	49Sask. ...	. 847,620	91	152,565	92	1,142	00	3,534	28	13,665	50	18,263	84	18,397	18Alta. ...	. 678,524	40	656,744	58	17,107	90	41,438	01	82,606	18	71,019	91	57,613	63B.C	. 633,080	55	564,516	82	19,407	81	29,133	86	47,904	04	34,932	38	53,535	26Totals.	.$10,000,000	00 $7,964,600	48	$186,500	49	$580,675	43	$720,336	07	$648,227	03	$888,391	62Province	1924-25	1925-26	1926-27	1927-28	1928-29	P. E. Island 	... $	1,950	76	$	7,254	66	$ 7,757	33	$	11,981	85	$ 20,369	79Nova Scotia 	34,623	67	30,999	96	31.494	87	29,224	77	47,083	50New Brunswick ....	43,040	51	93,874	50	76,208	59	70,107	03	48,637	81Quebec 	263.399	70	299,143	78	403,944	35	329,072	14	372,890	80Ontario 	347,636	30	347,636	30	347,636	30	347,636	30	347,636	30Manitoba 	19,500	37	19,488	77	20.056	34	27,529	51	28,527	44Saskatchewan 	17,249	37	20,083	89	18,021	83	17,048	13	25,159	90Alberta 	62,215	61	72,731	78	85.789	16	74,000	10	92,222	30British Columbia ...	40,860	48	53,123	05	56,627	03	59,355	49	169,637	42Totals 	... $	830,476	77	$	944,336	69	$1,047,535	80	$	965,955	32	$1,152,165	26
[Mr. GiUis.1﻿MARCH 24, 1944
Technical Education Act
As will be noted from the foregoing table, the total payments from the Technical Education fund to the provinces during the ten-year period amounted to $7,964,600.48, leaving a balance of $2,035,399.00 remaining unexpended, which amount was carried forward by the extension act of 1929 and made available for a period of five years among the provinces which had not received their entire allotment.
During this five-year extension period the following provinces exhausted their respective allotments: Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia, leaving still three provinces with balances to their credit, namely, Nova Scotia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. The following statement sets out a summary of the amounts available at the 1st April, 1929, by provinces, and the grants to the eight provinces during the five-year period by fiscal years.
Summary of Amounts Available and Amounts Paid to Provinces under 1929 Extension to Technical Education Act of 1919 (to March 31, 1934)
	Amounts	Grants paid						
available	to provinces to	Paid in	Paid in	Paid in	Paid in	Paid inProvince	to provinces Mar. 31, 1934, 1929-34 under extension	1929-30	1930-31	1931-32	1932-33	1933-34P.E.I. ..	.$ 126,522 07 $ 126,522 07 $ 22,117 30	$ 30,790	34	$ 31,898 89	$ 29,370 71	$ 12,344 83N.S	. 363,067 89	242,214 89	21,525 08	73,669	61	48,699 87	50,628 81	47,691 52N.B. ...	. 106,768 60 125,302 35	106,768 60 125,302 35 176,884 81	51,951 21 125,302 35 41,541 51	50,025	71	4,791 68	Man. ...	. 528,340 07	38,621	44	27,488 24	46,169 12	23,064 50Sask. . . .	. 695,054 99	550,428 89	60,505 89	198,289	95	170,094 89	75,567 61	45,970 55Alta. ...	. 21,779 82	21,779 82	21,779 82	B.C	. 68,563 73	68,563 73	68,563 73	Totals.	.$ 2,035,399 52	$1,418,465 16 $413,286 89	$391,397	05	$282,973 57	$201,736 25	$129,071 40
The following recapitulation shows the disposition of funds during the fifteen-year period, ending March 31, 1934.
It will be noted from this statement that the total payments to the provinces during the fifteen-year period amounted to $9,383,065.64, leaving a balance of $616,934.36. As there still remained available to the provinces of Nova Scotia, Manitoba and Saskatchewan $616,934.36 and as these provinces were anxious to avail themselves of these benefits a bill to extend the life of the act for a further five years from April 1, 1934, was introduced and passed by parliament. (Chap. 9,
24-25 Geo. V).	Amounts	Amounts	available during 15-year period ending March 31,1934	paid during 15-year period to March 31,1934	Balance
$ 198.187 86	$ 198,187 86 541,260 94	Nova Scotia	$120,853 00
512.461 28	512,461 28 2,569,655 53 3,178.608 97 368,291 30	
2.569.655 53	
3,178,608 97	Manitoba 	351,455 26Saskatchewan 	
847,620 91	702.994 81	144,626 10
678.524 40	678,524 40	
633,080 55	633,080 55	' $10,000,000 00	$9,383,065 64	$616,934 36
The next statement shows by provinces the amounts available on the 1st April, 1934, and the amounts paid up to March 31, 1939.
Summary of Amounts Available and Amounts Paid to Provinces Under 1934 Extension to
Technical Education Act of 1919
Province
Nova Scotia Manitoba .. Saskatchewan
Amounts available to provinces 1934-39
[Stage Direction]
Grants paid to provinces to March 31, 1939, under extension $120,853 00 76,232 13 144,626 10 $341,711 23
Paid in 1934-35
[Stage Direction]
Paid in 1935-36
[Stage Direction]
Paid in 1936-37
[Stage Direction]
Paid in	Paid in
1937-38	1938-39
[Stage Direction]
Technical Education Act
[Stage Direction]
The followng statement shows amount available to Province of Manitoba on 1st April, 1939, and the amounts paid up to November 30, 1943.
Summary of Amounts Available and Amounts Paid to Provinces Under 1939 Extension to Technical Education Act of 1919. (To Nov. 30, 1943)
Province Manitoba .
Amounts available to provinces
[Stage Direction]
Grants paid to provinces to Nov. 30, 1943, under extension
[Stage Direction]
Paid in 1939-40
[Stage Direction]
Paid in
[Stage Direction]
Paid in
[Stage Direction]
Paid in
[Stage Direction]
Paid in
1943-44 to Nov. 30, 1943
George Hugh Castleden: In what year did
Saskatchewan receive its 8800,000?


Humphrey Mitchell: In 1934 Saskatchewan
had a balance of S134.000. That has been used up since then.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Chairman, I bring to the attention of the committee the fact that there is something wrong with the printing of the bill. When a section is substituted for another section, and only a few words are changed, those words should be in italics in the bill, so that the members may see the change made. Section 8 of the act states:
Any portion of the ten million dollars appropriated under the act which may remain unexpended at the expiration of the fiscal year one thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine, whether previously carried forward or not, shall be carried forward and remain available according to its apportionments for the purposes of this act during any one or more of the five succeeding fiscal years, and no portion of the said ten million dollars shall be paid to any province after the thirty-fist day of March, one thousand nine hundred and forty-four.
As I say, section S of the act at present reads:
Any portion of the ten million dollars appropriated under the act which may remain unexpended at the expiration of the fiscal year one thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine. . . .
That is five years ago. We are to revive an amount that was spent five years ago. Why not make a grant in the usual fashion or have a new bill? The present act has almost expired1, and now on the 24th of March, just one week before the expiration of the last one of the five years after 1939, the minister brings in this legislation. The minister understands the situation very well, and he should give instructions to the legal officers of his department that labour legislation be drafted otherwise; it must be clear. In order to perpetuate the grant to one particular province, the minister tries to clean up the rusty wheels of past legislation to make it work in a fashion that is quite obsolete. I am not objecting because I complain of the principle of the legislation; what I complain about is bad legislation. It is enough to have

rottenly drafted orders passed by dollar a year men. Let us not follow their example. The only thing I ask is that we shall have clear legislation, legislation that reaches its objective, legislation that can be understood by a man who is not a lawyer but who will have to deal with it.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice) moved the second reading of bill No. 35, to amend the Exchequer Court Act.
Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, before this bill is read a second time I have one or two observations to make.
First of all, I should like to bring to the minister's attention the situation in connection with the Exchequer Court of Canada. At the present time I think there will be few who will disagree with the proposal in this bill to increase the membership of the court. I am hopeful that the minister, when he closes the debate on the second reading or during the committee stage, will indicate to the house whether there is not more behind the passing of this legislation perhaps than appears on the surface. I wish to raise my voice to-night in protest against what I think is fairly close to what the public believe is almost a national disgrace. I refer to a certain type of legislation that sometimes finds its way into the Senate and House of Commons. I refer to the time-honoured subject of divorce. I am not going to deal with it in any detail to-night. Suggestions have been made from time to time seeking to rid the two chambers of parliament of the scourge of having to deal with this type of legislation from year to year. I think most hon. members are agreed that if there is some sensible, sane way of having divorce dealt

Exchequer Court Act
with other than by a private bill in parliament, it is our duty and bounden obligation to find that better means and method.
It seems to me that the best method would be to refer the question of divorce to the Exchequer Court of Canada. That has been suggested already by my colleague, the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson), at a previous stage of this session. I repeat, with all the emphasis at my command, that I am hopeful that the government will delay no longer with respect to this matter, because not only is this house but, I suggest, the other place, too, sick and tired, if I may use an expression of the street, of dealing with divorce legislation in parliament. There is no justification, to my way of thinking, for continuing the present situation any longer. Perhaps this increase in the membership of the exchequer court is proposed for the reason that the court may deal with this very subject. I hope that the minister will give due consideration to that suggestion and that an end will speedily be put to parliament having to deal with this type of legislation. I think most decent people who are sent here by their constituents rebel against the hearing of evidence and all that is involved in this type of legislation. That is all I shall say at the moment, but there is so much to be said that perhaps on some other occasion, when the government sees fit, the matter may be further discussed.
There is a second point I wish to raise in the brief observations I have to make, namely, with reference to the way in which the exchequer court works. I can quite see that the minister may have been forced into the position of proposing an increase in the membership of the court largely because of the situation which has grown up in the court wherein there are delays with respect to legislation and the delivery of judgment. I do not want to make any criticism of those who are operating under the present system. I think that would be grossly unfair. I should not like any member of the house or any member of the public to think I was reflecting in any way upon any member of the exchequer court. What I have to say is with respect to the system, for which the government must, I think, take a heavy responsibility. I am told that there are many cases which have been argued and in which judgment has been outstanding for over a year. I do not know how many, but I am informed that they run into much larger numbers than is good for the general benefit and welfare' of litigants before the court.
Further, for some reason which does not seem to me a very good one, the president of the exchequer court has been required to sit as an ad hoc judge in the supreme court, leaving only a puisne judge to do the work of the exchequer court. The whole matter is in a position which has become a sort of bedlam as far as litigants and the general set-up are concerned. It is so serious that I deem it my duty in the interests of justice to bring it before parliament. Responsibility does not rest upon the judiciary but upon the government which permitted this situation to arise and to continue.
I also draw to the minister's attention that, because of accidents in which are involved members of the armed forces and certain jurisdictional questions, the exchequer court not infrequently has to deal with automobile damage cases, and that in some actions witnesses are brought from the far ends of the country at heavy expense to the parties. In addition to these matters, the congestion of business has put the court in an obviously unsatisfactory position. I should like to know why it is necessary to attach the president of the exchequer court to the supreme court as an ad hoc judge.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I think it has happened
once.


Gordon Graydon: The minister says he thinks it has happened once. The information I have is that it has happened more than once, but if the minister is definite upon the point I should not like to challenge his statement.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I do not think it has happened more than once in the last couple of years. I was informed by the president of the exchequer court that he had sat recently as ad hoc judge in the supreme court, but he mentioned it as being the first occasion on which it had happened since he became president of the exchequer court.


Gordon Graydon: I am glad that the minister has given that explanation, but may I point out that, in the face of so many undelivered judgments, this movement occurred at a time of exceptional congestion in the exchequer court, and I hope that it will not be repeated. The fact that the judge was called in on only one occasion does not dispose of the question of how long the particular sittings occupied in which he was concerned.
I do not wish to take up any more time on this matter, but I would stress the point of expense and inconvenience imposed on litigants who have to come from all parts of

Exchequer Court Act

Canada on eases connected with automobile damages. It has been drawn to my attention from time to time that the expenses involved in such proceedings may amount to more than the whole damage claim.


Mr. McILRAITH:: Would the leader of the opposition permit a question?


Gordon Graydon: Yes.


George James McIlraith: Do I understand him to say that the litigants have to come to Ottawa to these trials in the exchequer court?


Gordon Graydon: I am told that in some cases they have had to come long distances to the exchequer court. For that reason I made the statement I did and I stand by the statement I made. May I add that if the facts are as stated, the situation amounts to a denial of justice to litigants.
In conclusion, I hope that the appointment of the puisne judge envisaged by this legislation will not be used as a reward to someone who has been active in the political field. I believe that we in this country have been fairly fortunate in this regard. I am not going to raise the question at this moment, but I warn the minister that if there ever was a time when it was important to maintain and preserve the high prestige of the judiciary, and, indeed, to enhance it, it is in the perilous times through which we are passing. I plead with the minister to keep this high judicial appointment above any influences which might reflect upon the importance of the position. I like to see the Canadian judiciary preserved upon a plane in keeping with the kind of democracy for which so many of our men and women to-day are fighting.


Mr. FREDERIC DORION (Charlevoix-Saguenay):: I should like to make a few remarks on this bill, not to oppose it, because I believe it is an opportune measure, and I cannot refrain from congratulating the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) upon having presented it, because it will help the administration of justice.
The other day, when this bill was read for the first time, a suggestion was made by the hon. member for York-Sunbury (Mr. Hanson), which, I think, deserves special attention, and this suggestion has been repeated to-night by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon).
Since 1930, divorce cases in all provinces except Quebec and Prince Edward Island have been decided by the local courts. I must state right away that, whatever one might think or say about the province of Quebec, we will never consent to have divorce cases decided by our provincial courts. But, instead of having cases come before parliament, I wonder

whether, with the nomination of one more judge to the exchequer court, this is not the proper time to study the question of extending the jurisdiction of this court to divorce cases.
It would be necessary to make special provisions regarding this kind of cases, and I think we Catholics would be ready to accept such a suggestion, provided-and I must insist on this point-a case could not be heard when the petitioner is a Catholic unless he can produce leave to proceed which has been granted him by the bishop of the diocese in which he has his domicile.
This suggestion would not interfere in any way with the rights of those who are not of the Catholic faith, and it could not then be opposed by anyone, because the only effect would be to restrain divorces of Catholics and help them to respect their faith, their religion.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that if the Minister of Justice, who is a fervent Catholic, would discuss this matter with the religious and civil authorities of our province, something along that line might be done to enable the House of Commons to get rid of these bills which constitute a shameful burden in our statutes.
(Translation): Mr. Speaker, I wish to add a few words on this bill, and the appointment of an additional judge of the exchequer court. My remarks will, in a certain measure, support those made by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon). As this hon. gentleman has stated a few moments ago, we have been fortunate so far in avoiding most of the dangers with which our method of appointing judges is fraught. The few mistakes we have made, in spite of all the precautions inherent with these nominations, are working to the prejudice of those who avail themselves of our courts of justice. Consequently, I believe we should attempt to prevent the appointment of judges who would not prove equal to the task. In my opinion we can never be too careful in this connection. One method would offer some guarantee in this matter. The government could ask the bar associations of the various provinces to supply, at the beginning of each judicial year, a list of lawyers whom they consider as competent to sit on the bench of the superior court or any other provincial or federal courts including the exchequer court. I feel this is about the only way to prevent unqualified persons from being appointed and I claim that this would help, as nothing else could, to restore the coat of arms of our courts of justice to its former lustre and give our citizens the guarantee to which they are entitled in connection with the dispensation of justice.

Exchequer Court Act


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: present library. That library is not fireproof. I fought to have a fireproof library. It exists in the sumptuous new building. The old one is just a place where rats eat books. They are not bookworms; they are book rats. There are judges who have died on account of the unhealthy and unsanitary conditions of that building. They complained to me. I fought their case with success and the new building was built. It was so much my case that I was given a copy of the inspection report which was made by an official from the Department of Pensions and National Health. I fought their case under the old regime and under this government.
There is no other country in the world where a beautiful and sumptuous building built for the Supreme and Exchequer Courts of Canada is serving as offices for recuperation and salvage bodies, while the old building that would be fit for the recuperation and salvage body is serving as the location of the highest court in this country and the exchequer count. It is only in Canada that things like that happen. It is only in Canada that things like that are looked upon as a natural matter of course. Nobody will complain about it. It is supposed to be the right thing. Judge, you go to the kitchen. Well, sir, it does not make sense. Everybody laughs. It is ridiculous. I again bring it to the attention of my good friend, the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier), who is in charge of all the buildings of this country. I ask him if he will not give the order to tell recuperation and salvage bodies to go from there and to tell the judges that they should go to the quarters that are fit for them, that are worthy of their dignity and where they will have room enough to breathe. Apart from that, there are treasures there in the form of books that cannot be replaced with any amount of money. They are most valuable; yet they are exposed to fire, rats and vermin. They will be protected against loss if they are moved to the already fireproof library of the new supreme court building. I do not want the justices to die. I do not want the gentlemen who will be appointed by the Minister of Justice to these high functions in virtue of this bill to be exposed to the contracting of deadly illnesses in the present premises where the court sits. They should move somewhere else. Give the order which should be given, and which I hope will be given.


John George Diefenbaker: I listened to what my leader said with regard to the delays in the handing down of judgments by the exchequer court, as it is now constituted. I had not heard that feature raised before. I think it is a matter upon which the

minister should give information to the house and to the country. I think he should tell us whether or not judgments are outstanding and whether or not that is one of the reasons why this court is to be increased in number. I can very well understand that by reason of the exigencies of war there is a necessity to-day to increase the number of judges of the exchequer court. I favour an increase in that court, for the reason that if there is delay in the handing down of judgments it is a matter which more than anything else has been responsible for the very great increase in recent years in the trend to the establishment of administrative bodies which not only create the law, interpret the law, but enforce the law as well.
I believe that is one of the matters which should receive the attention of the minister, a most distinguished member of the bar, a man whose services to the legal profession of Canada may be measured by the fact that he has been president of the Canadian Bar Association. I look to him to make certain changes in the general set-up of the judiciary in Canada to ensure that not only will justice be assured by the quality of men appointed to the bench, but the independence of the judiciary shall be maintained.
If there is one thing that is necessary it is the maintenance of the public esteem of the judiciary. That esteem is not as high to-day as it was some years ago. I think the reason for that can be found in the fact that too often the members of the judiciary have been utilized and their services secured in connection with royal commissions set up for the investigation of various matters. If there is one matter more than any other that would improve the judiciary of this country it would be a declaration by the Minister of Justice that from now on no judge in this country [DOT] would be appointed as a member of a royal commission investigating any matter that savours in any way of a political nature.
I have every regard for the judiciary of this country and for the high standards that they have maintained, but all too frequently the idea is held throughout the country that a predominant prerequisite to an appointment i3 not always eminence at the bar or judicial merit but political considerations. I am not arguing that political considerations do not enter into the matter, but I suggest that in appointing judges the minister should first and foremost take into consideration the leadership at the bar of the. gentlemen who are candidates for the position. Good men can be found in his own party, and I do not believe in placing specious arguments before the house and say that he must necessarily go outside of it. The

Exchequer Court Act
aim should be to place in positions of judicial responsibility the best men that can be secured. I heard the minister enunciate that principle more than once while he occupied the highest position in the bar association of this dominion.
In making that statement I am not suggesting that any appointments have been made recently or since he occupied his present position that savour of political considerations having been paramount. But I do think, at this time when democracy is being challenged, that above all we must maintain the independence, integrity and security of the bench.
Most of the legislation affecting the people of this country at this time has never seen parliament. Most of it is a product of administrative boards, controllers and other persons holding similar positions. I realize that in time of war there must be a tendency in that direction to a certain extent. I consider that it is unfair to the individual that in almost all, if not all, of the legislation passed by administrative bodies to-day there is a denial of the right of the individual to seek recourse to the courts. Equality before the law and equal access to the courts are denied individuals to-day under some of the legislation that has been passed by administrative bodies, and I suggest to the minister that the exchequer court, which is national in character, might be one court to which powers should be given to enable individuals affected by orders in council or administrative orders, not as members of a class but as individuals, to have the right of appeal to that court. As far as orders in council and administrative orders are concerned which affect all the individuals within a class, I do not ask for the right of appeal; but when boards or administrators single out one individual and direct him to do that which other individuals within his own class are not required to do, then I submit that in the interests of justice and fairness, there should be a right of appeal, to the end that the private rights of the individual should not be made subject to the dictation or the caprice of an administrative body.
Therefore I ask the minister to take into consideration at a later date extending the powers of the exchequer court in order to protect the rights of individuals subject to individual orders made by administrative bodies, to the end that the first right of a British seaman, equality of access to the courts and the right of appeal, shall be assured to all who are so affected. Personally I can understand why there has been delay in the handing down of judgments on the part of the exchequer court during the last two years.
I might say that hon. members were pleased with the appointment of a former member of this house, a distinguished member of the bar, as a judge of this court two years ago. It is impossible for two judges, however eminent and diligent they may be, to hand down judgments in the order in which they should be handed down, having regard to the increasing numbers of cases that have been heard since the beginning of the war. I support the principle of the bill, increasing the number of judges of the exchequer court, and I submit for the consideration of the minister the suggestions I have made.
Mr. A. H. BENCE (Saskatoon City); Mr. Speaker, I should like to take this opportunity of suggesting to the minister and to the administration the advisability of revising the Judges' Act in at least one particular, namely, in connection with a matter which has been a subject of discussion in this country lately, particularly in the press. I refer to the anomalous situation that exists as far as the compulsory retirement of members of the judiciary is concerned. In 1913 a provision was placed in the Judges' Act under which county and district court judges were retired compulsorily upon attaining the age of seventy-five. Then in 1935 the Judges' Act was amended to provide that judges of the supreme court-
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Mr. Speaker, I regret to have to raise a point of order, because this is a very interesting subject and one which I think will require at the proper time to be considered and discussed in the house, but it does not seem to me that it arises under this bill. This is merely a bill to amend the Exchequer Court Act to provide for an additional puisne judge. The Judges' Act does contain a section with respect to the retirement of judges of the Supreme Court of Canada and of the exchequer court, so that the matter is not germane to this subject at all.


Mr. BENCE:: If I may speak to the point of order, it is true that this bill has to do with the amendment of the Exchequer Court Act, but it also contains this provision:
Whenever in any act of the parliament of Canada reference is made to the judge or a judge of the Exchequer Court of Canada for the purpose of conferring any power, authority or jurisdiction upon such judge, the same shall be taken to confer the said power, authority or jurisdiction severally and respectively upon the president and the puisne judges of the court.
That directly refers to the Judges' Act, and I would point out also that the minister is providing for the appointment of another
Exchequer Court Act

puisne judge to the exchequer court, but as far as I can see he does not provide for the payment of that judge. The only authority for the payment of the puisne judge is under the Judges' Act, and certainly if a discussion of the Judges' Act with respect to the payment of that salary and with respect to retirement is not germane, then I do not know what is.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: There is on the order paper a resolution providing for the introduction of a bill to amend the Judges' Act precisely for the purpose of providing a salary for this additional puisne judge; but the bill now before the house merely amends the Exchequer Court Act to provide that there shall be two puisne judges instead of one. It is not that I do not find the subject interesting, or that I shall not be glad to have the views of hon. members upon it to assist me in the administration of my office, but I suggest that this is not the time when such a discussion is in order.


Thomas Vien: The hon. member refers to section 1 of the bill, which contains these words:
. . . the same shall be taken to confer the said power, authority, or jurisdiction severally and respectively upon the president and the puisne judges of the court.
On the strength of that he suggests that he is entitled to discuss the Judges' Act. While on second reading a good deal of latitude is allowed as to the subjects that may be introduced, I must say I hardly think it would be relevant to discuss the Judges' Act under a bill such as this, which simply provides for the appointment of another puisne judge of the exchequer court. I do not think the hon. gentleman would be entitled to proceed. It has been pointed out that a discussion of the Judges' Act might be more relevant on the resolution on the order paper standing in the name of the Minister of Justice, to amend the Judges' Act.


Alfred Henry Bence: I must bow to your ruling, of course, Mr. Speaker. If I may, I would point out that the puisne judge appointed under this legislation will be subject to the Judges' Act, but if as a result I may not discuss the Judges' Act I shall not do so. The minister suggests that I shall have an opportunity to discuss the matter when the amendment to the Judges' Act is under consideration, so that I shall wait until that occasion.
The other point I wished to raise was the point so ably dealt with by the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker), namely, the policy of this administration, and of some prior administrations, of using the judiciary
[Mr. Bence. 3
for purposes other than those for which they were appointed. At the present time we know of at least three cases where judges of superior courts have been appointed to boards in this country. We also know that one hon. justice from the province from which I come is, and for some years has been, high commissioner to Australia. It does seem to me that when it comes to a question of appointing judges, if the act provides for the setting up of a court, and for the appointing to that court of a certain number of judges, they must be appointed for the purpose of considering judicial matters, and that the administration should avoid the appointment of them for any other purpose. If they are to be judges, then let them be judges. If they are to be chairmen of boards or high commissioners to other countries, then let them be chairmen of boards and high commissioners to other countries. But so far as their position in the judiciary is concerned, I suggest that as long as they are judges they should confine themselves to their judicial duties.
I think it is extremely unfair that the administration has seen fit to appoint a number of these judges-and I do not for one moment criticize the judges; I am criticizing the administration for appointing them-to posts where they remain for months or years, and at the same time hold their appointments in what I would call cold storage.
I should like to make a suggestion to the. administration in connection with the matter of vacancies. It seems to me that vacancies in judicial bodies in Canada should not be allowed to remain for any length of time. I suggest that in proper time an amendment should be brought in to the Exchequer Court Act, and the other acts which would be applicable, providing that no vacancy in connection with the Exchequer Court Act or the Judges' Act shall remain for longer than three months.
At present in Saskatchewan we have a situation where there is a vacancy on the court of king's bench. That vacancy has existed for some months, and I suggest that to meet the ends of justice it should be filled as quickly as possible. I am sure that many eminent men are available for the position and would be quite willing to accept it. The feeling is that too much point is made of the holding up of these vacancies for political considerations. The feeling in the part of the country from which I come is that the vacancies are allowed to continue, and that the judgeships are dangled in front of the noses of prospective appointees until the eve of an election, on the basis or presumption that possibly they will be able to render a

Exchequer Court Act
1S47
greater and more effective service to their particular political party, and their adherents in the interim. It seems to me that this is a very bad practice, and that when these vacancies occur, in the interests of justice, in the interest of the bar and particularly in the interests of prospective litigants, such vacancies should not be allowed to continue in that fashion.
So far as the addition of a puisne judge in this instance is concerned, I presume, from the information which has been given rather briefly by the minister, that undoubtedly one is required. I believe it would be interesting if the house were given more information on the matter. It may have been asked for earlier, because I was not in the house during the whole of the discussion. Perhaps the minister might advise us as to the increase in litigation, and the number of judgments which have not yet been handed down. He might tell us how the situation compares with that of two or three, or perhaps five years ago. So far as I am concerned, as a lawyer I welcome the opening up of any additional positions like this. But as a representative of the people I wish to make certain that such additional judgeship is absolutely required in the interests of the people, and that it is the economically sound thing to do in the long run.
The minister mentioned that the salary of the judge would be discussed under the amendment to the Judges' Act. I have some observations to make in that connection, but I shall defer them until that time.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Bradette in the chair.
On section 1-Constitution of court.
Gordon Graydon: I believe the minister is going to make a statement, x
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Mr. Chairman, I just wish to state most emphatically, in answer to the remarks of the leader of the opposition, that there is nothing behind this bill which would be in line with his suggestion that the government might be contemplating the creation of a court to administer the law of divorce for those provinces which at the present time do not have such a court.
I do not wish to discuss the matter of divorce. The only two provinces which have no divorce courts at the present time are those of Quebec and Prince Edward Island. In Prince Edward Island I do not know whether divorce jurisdiction is exercised by the governor in council. But I see from a very interesting
book on parliamentary divorce by Gemmill that there was jurisdiction in the governor in council to deal with divorce cases.
In Quebec not only is there no jurisdiction to deal with divorce, but there is a preconfederation law, which was continued in force by the British North America Act, and which will remain in force until this parliament chooses to deal with it, as it has jurisdiction to do under section 91 of the British North America Act. This pre-confederation law declares that marriage is dissolved only by the natural death of one of the spouses. No matter what jurisdiction you set up, so long as that is the law of the province, no divorce could be granted by any court.
There are applications for legislation which come before this parliament, and where divorces are enacted. This is not as a matter of right; no one has any right to a parliamentary divorce. That is a special legislative grant that is made under special circumstances revealed by the investigation carried on before a committee. I do not wish to enter into any controversial discussion of the matter, but for [DOT] those who admit the supreme authority of the Scriptures, the natural inquiry is, as stated in Gemmill: what law has the Saviour propounded on the subject?
Many Christian people believe that the law He has propounded on the subject was that divorce could be granted for adultery. Many other Christians believe that that exception in the Scriptures about adultery does not authorize the granting of a divorce, even for that cause. The latter view is that held by the Roman Catholics; the former is the view held by the other Christians who also take their law from the Scriptures, because of their reading of the Scriptures.
But for a great many years there has been the tendency in many countries to disregard that as the fundamental law, and to provide for divorces for causes other than adultery. I do not wish to discuss the merits or demerits of the case; but there is one province in which there is no right to a divorce under any condition-because of a positive statutory enactment existing prior to confederation, and confirmed by the British North America Act, which constitutes the law of that province until it is otherwise dealt with by the proper authority, which, in this instance, would be this parliament, and which denies absolutely that there can be any divorce or any dissolution of marriage otherwise than by the natural death of one of the parties. This bill has nothing to do with what some might consider advisable and others consider inadvisable, namely, to establish divorce as an institution where under certain conditions parties in the
1S48
Exchequer Court Act

province of Quebec would be entitled as of right to obtain a judgment of divorce. That matter is not intended to be dealt with at all by this bill.
The only other point with which I wish to deal is the suggestion that there have been serious delays in the handing down of judgments in the exchequer court. Only one case has been brought to my attention. That was some time in January. I inquired about it and found that the hon. justice required, for the purpose of his judgment, a transcription of the evidence which had been taken; the stenographer had been prevented from transcribing his notes, and the judge was waiting for them. This information was transmitted to the litigant who had complained of the delay. He wrote again about a fortnight ago, and I made a further inquiry and found that just a week before I made the further inquiry the transcription of the evidence had been filed and that the judge hoped to be able to dispose of the case within a very short time afterwards. I have no doubt that there are cases in that court, as there are cases in all courts, where judgments are reserved for a period which seems unduly long not only to the litigants but to the lawyers who represent the litigants. I practised at the bar too long not to have found that to arise all too frequently, I thought, but I have not heard any serious complaint of undue delay in the exchequer court.


Gordon Graydon: Have there been any complaints of delays by any representative of the Ontario bar to the minister?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: No, the only complaint I got was from a litigant who complained that his judgment had not been handed down. I have no recollection of receiving, over the last several months, any other complaint with respect to delay in any case in the exchequer court. The president of the exchequer court informed me when I inquired about the matter generally some weeks ago, that very satisfactory progress is being made in getting rid of the reserved cases both by himself and by his colleagues. But the number of cases has increased, and increased quite substantially. For instance, informations filed by the crown in 1935 amounted to twenty-five in number; in 1939 to sixteen; in 1943 to seventy-two. Petitions of right in 1935 were fifteen in number; in 1940, eleven; in 1943, fifty-three. Patent cases are not as numerous as they were before the war, because of the special situation arising out of the war, but it is anticipated that as soon as that special situation ceases to exist, the number of patent cases will very probably increase. There has been a substantial

increase in the amount of work to be done, and I am glad to know that all those who have taken part in the debate consider that it will be proper to have another judge there to carry on the work of the court expeditiously, because I admit that good justice must be expeditious justice. Otherwise, it is not really sound justice.


Gordon Graydon: There is too much work for the court to do at the present moment.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I think there is. I see my colleague the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) is not here at the moment. He was listening attentively to what one hon. member had to say about the place where that court and the supreme court are housed. I am afraid the hon. member exaggerated a bit, because I have visited from time to time the premises in Downing street where the judicial committee of the privy council sat, and though I am not as a lawyer satisfied with the premises now occupied by our supreme court or by our exchequer court, they do have something of an age-old respectability that also pervades the premises where the judicial committee of the privy council used to sit.


Gordon Graydon: They certainly have an age-old atmosphere.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: With respect to the appointment of judges I have tried to make satisfactory appointments, and quite frankly I have been rather proud of the comments I have received about most of the appointments to the high courts in the several provinces that it has been my privilege to recommend. I may say to the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) that a large number of the recommendations it has been my privilege to sign were in respect of gentlemen-but this did not have any effect upon it-who, I am told, were at one time or another connected with another party than that of the present administration.


Gordon Graydon: There are an awful lot of people who are not connected with that party any longer.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: A number of excellent judges have been appointed who, I am told, were not at any time members of the party of this administration.


Alfred Henry Bence: Was the minister referring to the elevation of judges already appointed or to brand-new members of the judiciary?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: To both, but I must say that there were more of the former category, the elevation to chief justiceships, or to another court of gentlemen already on the bench. I am sorry that any member of the

Coal
1S49
bar would suggest in this house that I would be dangling judgeships before anybody's eyes. I do not feel that that is quite fair.


Alfred Henry Bence: Will the minister expedite the appointment in the province of Saskatchewan?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Does the hon. member suggest that there has been any undue delay in the administration of justice in Saskatchewan?


Alfred Henry Bence: If five judges are required on the bench as provided by the act, then five ought to be appointed.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I have very much sympathy with the hon. member who, I understand, is a member of the bar of that province, but the information that I have is that the amount of litigation prosecuted in that province is not such that there has been any undue delay resulting from the fact that one of the judges of the court of appeal has been serving his country in another capacity since the beginning of the war, or because since December another vacancy has occurred in the high court of that province.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I would point out, Mr. Chairman, that it is eleven o'clock, if the minister wants to discuss the bill further. Is my voice getting so weak that I cannot be heard? I am suggesting that it is eleven o'clock, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I have no other observations to offer on this point, unless there are other questions it is felt I should answer.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2-Power to appoint a deputy judge.
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: There are a number of questions we have to ask and it is now past eleven o'clock, Mr. Chairman.
Section stands.
Progress reported.
On motion of Mr. Mackenzie (Vancouver Centre) the house adjourned at 11:10 pun.
Monday, March 27, 1944