1944-05-16

Mr. LIGUORI LACOMBE (Laval-Two Mountains):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question *of privilege. I quote from the House of Commons debates of May 15, 1944, at page 2915, the following statement made by the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent):
Under date of January 10 Mr. Houde wrote the deputy minister of justice that he did not want any further hearing, and a copy of that letter was tabled in this house. Subsequently an kon. member of this house came to see me and said that Mr. Houde, as was istated in this letter of -which a copy was tabled, had expressed the view that he had been interned by order in council and that he was going to *come out through the big door and there would have to be an order in council passed to let him out. I explained to the hon. member that he was quite mistaken; that Mr. Houde had been treated like any other Canadian or resident of Canada under the defence of Canada regulations; that an order had been made by the Minister of Justice, and if he wanted that order reconsidered-it had been reconsidered once- it could be reconsidered again.
The statement made by the Minister of Justice is right but incomplete. The minister will admit that when I discussed with him the detention of Mr. Houde I submitted to his consideration a document to the effect that Mr. Houde would sign an undertaking. Concluding this question of privilege, I would ask the Minister of Justice to treat Mr. Houde as Tim Buck and other internees have been treated-
Mr. SPEAKER; There is no question of ^privilege.



PUBLIC SERVICE


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a statement regarding the national joint council of the public service of Canada. The house will recall that on February 24 I announced that the treasury board had decided to establish such a council in order to provide machinery for regular and systematic consultation and discussion between the employer and employee sides of the public service in regard to grievances and conditions of employment, and thereby to promote increased efficiency and better morale in the public service.
It has been found that it takes longer to get such organizations established than originally contemplated. However, it is only natural that in an organization as large and complicated as the government service there should be many differences of opinion as to the composition of such a council and the representation to be given to various groups or organizations in the civil service.
We originally intended to provide for a council of twelve, equally representative of the official or employer side and the staff or employee side of the public service, and therefore announced that the Civil Service Federation, the Civil Service Association, the Amalgamated Civil Servants, the Professional Institute and the Dominion Customs and Excise Officers' Association would each be asked to name one representative, and that the three organizations amongst the postal employees would be asked to name one to represent all postal employees. Following my announcement of February 24, we received representations from the three organizations in the postal service protesting that no single person chosen from one of them could fairly represent the three organizations, and insisting on each organization being allowed to name its own representative. While this would mean a council somewhat unwieldy in size, nevertheless the treasury board decided that as the main purpose was to promote good will and better understanding, it should accede to the request. The board was immediately criticized for this decision, primarily on the general ground that it would give too much weight to what were strictly departmental organizations within the Post Office Department. At the same time we received requests for representation from several other civil service organizations, some recently

Public Service Council-Personnel
formed, which, if they were all accepted, would lead to the establishment of a council of no less than twenty-four members.
The board has therefore come to the conclusion that these differences and difficulties as to representation can only be adjusted amicably as a result of full and frank discussion of the whole matter between representatives of the various organizations and the official side of the civil service. In this connection I would emphasize that the first main task of the council will be to consider carefully the tentative or preliminary constitution which is being laid down by the order in council and to recommend a permanent constitution to govern the activities of the council.
It will also have to consider the advisability of setting up departmental joint councils and it is believed that when members of the council have had a chance of threshing out the part which departmental councils should play and what their relation should be to the national joint council, it will be far easier to reach agreement as to the organizations which should be represented on the national council and the weight of their representation.
The treasury board is hopeful that in this way a plan can be worked out which will assure a workable constitution with fair and appropriate representation to all existing organizations, and to all elements of the public service in the national council and the departmental councils that may be recommended.
At the conclusion of my remarks I shall table the order in council which has been passed. It will provide initially for a council of sixteen members. The eight members from the staff or employee side who have been nominated by their respective organizations or associations are the following:
Mr. V. C. Phelan, Civil Service Federation.
Mr. F. Knowles, Amalgamated Civil Servants of Canada.
Mr. N. T. Allan, The Professional Institute of the Civil Service of Canada.
Mr. T. R. Montgomery, Civil Service Association of Ottawa.
Mr. John J. Reaves, Federated Association of Letter Carriers.
Mr. Fred Whitehouse, Association of Canadian Postal Employees.
Mr. W. Dennehy, Railway Mail Clerks Federation.
Mr. J. H. Wood, Customs and Excise Officers' Association.
The representatives of the official side will be:
Dr. W. A. Mackintosh, Department of Finance, who will act as chairman, with the assistance of a vice-chairman elected by the representatives of the staff side.

Mr. W. C. Ronson, Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance.
Mr. C. H. Bland, Chairman of the Civil Service Commission.
Dr. C. A. Camsell, Deputy Minister of Mines and Resources.
Mr. Edmond Cloutier, King's Printer.
Mr. J. E. St. Laurent, National Harbours Board.
Mr. P. T. Coolican, Assistant Deputy Postmaster General.
Mr. A. H. Brown, Department of Labour.



PRIME MINISTERS' CONFERENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: The Prime Minister, prior to his departure for the meeting of the commonwealth prime ministers, intimated to the house that an invitation had been extended to Prime Minister John Curtin of Australia and Prime Minister Peter Fraser of New Zealand to visit Canada at the termination of the London meeting. It is apparent that our Prime Minister will be returning soon to Canada. I would appreciate it if the Acting Prime Minister will inform the house whether or not the Prime Ministers of Australia and New Zealand will be accompanying our Prime Minister on his return.


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Acting Prime Minister) :: The Prime Minister did extend an invitation to Prime Minister Curtin of Australia and Prime Minister Fraser of New Zealand, and I am very glad indeed to be able to tell the house that I understand the invitation has been accepted in both cases. At the moment I am unable to say whether the Prime Ministers of Australia and New Zealand will be accompanying the Prime Minister of this country on his return. I am also not in a position to say on what date they may be here.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I should like to ask the government if they will expedite as much as possible the bringing down of the remainder of the legislation which has been mentioned from time to time during the session and in the speech from the throne. I bring this to the attention of the government in order that we may be

Business oj the House-Legislation
able to make the best use of the time at our disposal in dealing with the activities of the session.
I find that apart altogether from the resolutions and second readings of certain bills that appear on the order paper, the following legislation is still to be brought down. When I read the list it will give hon. members some idea of what is ahead of us and how we must utilize our time if we are to make the most of it. The list is as follows: Civil service superannuation bill, amendment to Naval Services Act, Quebec Savings bank bill, export credit bill, national housing bill, the family allowances bill, floor prices for agriculture bill, war surplus assets bill, amendment to the Dominion Elections Act, Veterans' Gratuities bill, amendment to Veterans' Land Act, amendments to the criminal code, amendment to the Chinese Immigration Act, contributory old age pensions bill, health insurance bill; and in addition to these any legislation that may be based on reports of committees. Then there are the budget resolutions and whatever legislation may follow from them. In so far as the war appropriation bill is concerned the large departments of Agriculture, External Affairs, Finance, Pensions and National Health and Trade and Commerce have yet to be disposed of, plus thirteen separate items in other departments. If we continue to sit in future as we have done up to now, we have forty-three sitting days to August 1. We have had fifty-nine sitting days so far. I bring this to the attention of the house and of the government to request the government to expedite the bringing down of the legislation I have mentioned and thereby save time.
I should like to mention the cancellation of the Wednesday sittings. I do not want to bring up this matter ad nauseam, but I do feel keenly about it. I felt that the change should never have been made. But at this late date the government might give some consideration to the use of not only the Wednesday afternoons but Wednesday evenings, if they can possibly do it. This matter has been discussed and our party is substantially in agreement upon it. I may say to the government that as a party we are prepared to cooperate in these matters, and we hope that the government will do what it can-we shall do what we can-to bring the session into such order that the least possible time will be consumed in the transaction of the country's business. I realize it is not possible to cut off sessions at a certain time. This house owes a duty and an obligation to the country to see that legislation is dealt with properly. Subject to that reservation we as a party are anxious to see the session concluded as speedily as possible. I make this
suggestion in the hope that the tempo of the session may be increased and that the business of the country shall be carried on with perhaps even more dispatch than has been the case up to now.


James Layton Ralston: I am obliged to my hon. friend for having brought up this matter. I have been sitting here during the last two or three weeks as the discussions have proceeded on the war appropriation resolution. I have once or twice made suggestions to the effect that I thought we might get on faster with better organization of the house. I felt that the remarks which I had made had fallen on barren ground and I thought I was putting the government in the position of endeavouring to force people to go faster than they wanted to go. I feel, however, that perhaps the course the government has pursued in just allowing the discussions to take their course has had some results. I take my hon. friend's words at their face value, that he is desirous of expediting the business of the house, as I am sure all hon. members are; but I think the example we have seen, in the length of time that has been taken on the war appropriation measure, is perhaps the best way to bring us to a realization that this house is a long way from having completed its business, and that some measures must be taken which, to use my hon. friend's expression, will speed up the tempo of the house.
I am not criticizing anyone, but it seems to me that is exactly what is needed here. As a matter of fact to-morrow, which is Wednesday, the day to which my hon. friend referred, I was going to ask the leader of the opposition and the leaders of the other two groups to a conference to see if it would not be possible to organize the discussion of these war appropriation items so that we might give some definite time to them and then call it a day when that time has expired. I know how difficult it is to do this. Hon. members want to ask questions which may occur to them at the moment when they happen to be in the house, and if they are away they want to be able to ask those questions after they come back, but that is not the way to get on with our business. So that I am going to ask my hon. friends to consider between now and to-morrow, if they will, the possibility of deciding on a certain number of hours, or a day if necessary., to deal with a certain subject and let us get it over and done with. It seems to me that is the only way we can speed up the tempo of the house.
With regard to the matter of legislation, it has seemed hardly worth while to place on the order paper a great deal of legislation which
Halibut Fisheries

may not be reached for one, two or three months in view of the speed we are making at the present time. The government has that matter fully in mind and legislation will be brought down from time to time; but with the situation as we have it, that is to say with the war appropriation measure still to be passed, a measure which I hope and believe we all regard as the most important of the session; with the farm improvement measure, which my hon. friend said he would like very much to have go to the banking and commerce committee in order that it might be considered along with the Bank Act; with some other legislation that has to come in and with the budget, which will be taken up in the reasonably near future, it seemed to me we had a pretty full order paper before us as it is. However, that legislation is in course of preparation; as a matter of fact most of it is prepared and can be brought down very shortly.
With regard to the matter of Wednesday, that has been discussed and I am not going to add anything to what the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) said in regard to it. I wish to close, however, by expressing appreciation of my hon. friend's having brought up the matter in a very graphic way, perhaps better than I could have done myself, because it comes from those who really have it in their own hands to decide how much time shall be taken on these matters. I thank him for having put on record again the programme we have ahead of us before this session would conclude in the normal course.


Gordon Graydon: The minister said the
entire matter was in our hands, but that is not quite true. I made a check in that regard and found that to be not accurate; it is not entirely in our hands, in regard to the time that is consumed in this chamber.


James Layton Ralston: Shall I say it is not in
the hands of -the government?


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: If I may make one or two observations with respect to the minister's statement, I think we ought to get the war appropriation bill through. Then I believe the government ought to bring down its legislation, even though it may not be dealt with immediately, in order that we may be given an opportunity to study it. I find it very difficult to read these bills and discuss them on second reading without having adequate time for study.



CLAIRE WALLACE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day :
Mr. JEAN-FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): Mr. Speaker, the finest gentleman to have occupied the high oflice of leader of the opposition since I have been in politics-I refer to the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Gray-don)-paid very high tribute the other day to the member for Temiscouata when he said, at page 2854 of Hansard:
I very seldom find my lion, friend offering anything inaccurate. . . .
I thank him for that, and he went on to say that the salary of Claire Wallace had not been increased from $170 to $200 per week by Judge McTague. I agree with him; but on the other hand Judge McTague decided not to keep her salary at a lower figure than $200 per week.
Gordon Graydon: He did not touch it at all; that is the answer.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:	.
Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: In view of the still serious condition on the Pacific coast, resulting from the fact that the halibut fleet has been tied up for at least a month, and not because of any trouble on the Canadian side or with the Canadian authorities or canners, I should like to ask the Minister of Fisheries if he has anything to add to the answer given on Thursday last by the Acting Minister of Fisheries, the Minister of Transport (Mr. Michaud).


Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Minister of Fisheries):: The	halibut fishermen operate
under regulations established by international treaty. Our fishermen are not fishing, out of sympathy with the United States fishermen who are not satisfied with the prices established by the oflice of price administration. We are making recommendations to the Department of External Affairs, to be passed on to the United States authorities. We cannot divulge the nature of those recommendations before they are made known to the authorities of the United States, but in the meantime we hope that a settlement may be arrived at within a few days and that all fishermen will return to their trade.


Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Albemi):: Mr. Speaker, may I make a comment on the question asked by the hon. member for New

Air Force
Westminster (Mr. Reid), and the reply thereto, in connection with the halibut fleet. I hold in my hand the Vancouver Province of four days ago, which contains this headline, "Halibut Fleet Tie-up Ends", and says, in part:
A plan to end a six-weeks tie-up . . . has been agreed upon.
Is the minister not aware of that statement?


Ernest Bertrand: I did not catch the last sentence; what was it?


Alan Webster Neill: I hold in my hand the Vancouver Daily Province of May 12, which was four days ago, and which states:
Halibut fleet tie-up ends. A plan to end a six-weeks tie-up of 600 Pacific coast halibut fishing vessels has been agreed upon-
Then it goes on to say who are concerned in the agreement.


James Layton Ralston: What was the question?


Alan Webster Neill: It was settled four days ago.


Ernest Bertrand: I do not know if a plan has been arrived at. All I know is that we have not received any word about it. Our own fishermen were simply waiting for the United States fishermen to be satisfied to fish. If they are not fishing to-day I suppose they have not yet arrived at a plan. We have made recommendations to the United States authorities.



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Richard Burpee Hanson: I desire to direct a question to the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defence for Air. He will recall that some weeks ago, during a discussion on the labour estimates or the national selective service estimates, I referred to the question of the future of Pennfield airport. I have not verified it, but my recollection is that he undertook that an adequate statement would be made shortly. I do not recall that this statement has been made.


Hon. C. G. POWER (Minister of National Defence for Air):: I made a statement in the house.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That may have been when I was not present. Could the minister give me the date?


Charles Gavan Power: A full statement was made in the house in regard to Pennfield Ridge.



INQUIRY AS TO DISAPPEARANCE OF THREE TRAINING PLANES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. H. BENCE (Saskatoon City):: I understand that three R.C.A.F. planes have been missing since Sunday, when they took off on a flight from Charlottetown. Has the minister any information with respect to those planes, and what is being done in order to endeavour to locate them?


Charles Gavan Power: I have not very much information other than that which has appeared already in the press. It is true that three training planes out of twenty-four which were on a training flight have been missing since Sunday last. Intensive searches are being made all over the gulf of St. Lawrence and the neighbouring waters, so far without success. I am in constant touch with the situation, getting reports from eastern air command, which is in charge of the search. The inspector general of accidents, Group Captain Wilkins, is on the scene together with members of his staff, aiding in the search and making full inquiry into all the circumstances.



FRESH FRUIT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance. I sent a copy to the Minister of Agriculture thinking that it came under his branch. I consider this to be a matter of urgent importance to some 2,000 berry growers in the Fraser Valley and the lower mainland. On the 24th of this month we begin shipping strawberries, and it is of urgent importance that we know what the price is to be. I want to make it clear that we are not quarrelling with what the price may be at the moment, but we do want to know at what it will be set because, among other things, we have to hire pickers, and we must prepare ahead of time. Until such time as we know what the price will be we are in an impossible position. I took the matter up with the wartime prices and trade board, but could get nothing definite. Therefore I am asking the minister to say what the price will be on fresh strawberries, raspberries and other small fruits in British Columbia.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Is the hon. member referring to the ceiling price?


George Alexander Cruickshank: Yes.
Alaska Highway


James Lorimer Ilsley: I have not the information, but I will bring the matter to the attention of the board. I will also bring to their attention the hon. member's urgent representations.



ALASKA HIGHWAY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GEORGE BLACK (Yukon):: Mr. Speaker, I directed on Friday last three questions to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell). In his absence the Secretary of State (Mr. McLarty) was kind enough to say that if the questions were allowed to stand until Monday as a notice he would see that they were answered. Yesterday the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour gave what he said were answers to those questions.
It is usual when questions are answered to have a copy of the answers sent to the member who asked the questions. No copy was sent to me. I wrote a note to the parliamentary assistant asking for a copy, and he said he would send it, but none was forthcoming. So that until the answers appeared in Hansard I had no way of analysing them, as to whether they were answers to my questions. I find that the questions I asked were not answered, that the answers given were evasive, and in fact were not in reply to the three questions I asked. In order that my authority for asking those questions may not be in doubt may I say that I was quoting from a statement made by William McKin-stry, regional superintendent of national selective service at Vancouver, as reported in the Vancouver Sun of May 10, in which he said that American authorities were endeavouring to hire in Vancouver through selective service twelve hundred men for maintenance gangs on the Alaska highway; and that they had an order for labour from the northland on file at the national selective office in Vancouver for 300 men to work on the Canol pipeline. In reply to that the parliamentary assistant said, making no reference to the 300 men required for the pipeline:
The Standard Oil Company placed an order for 75 men for the Canol Oil Refinery Project, which was later reduced to eight men.
That is not an answer to the question at all, and I have to ask that the question be answered.


James Layton Ralston: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I have been sitting here, wondering whether or not a former Speaker of the house was entitled to less or to more
[Mr. Cruicksbank 1
latitude than ordinary members of the house. I have rather come to the conclusion that he is entitled, to less latitude than perhaps those of us who may not know the rules as well. I think my hon. friend knows he is quite out of order in rising as he does and making comment on an answer to questions he has asked.


Richard Burpee Hanson: He can rise to a question of privilege.


James Layton Ralston: This is not privilege. He is entitled to raise the question, and make any comment he may desire-but at the proper time, and not when the orders of the day are called.


Richard Burpee Hanson: But he can raise a question of privilege.


James Layton Ralston: It is not a question of privilege.


George Black: I do not appreciate being lectured by the leader of the house, but I must say the questions were not answered by the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour.


James Layton Ralston: I have taken a point of order.


George Black: Had I had a copy of the answers-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


George Black: I am speaking to the question of privilege.


James Layton Ralston: I believe I am responsible to some extent for observance of the rules of order, and I do submit that on a point of order my hon. friend is not entitled at this time to comment upon the insufficiency of answers that have been made. If they are insufficient he may say so at the proper time. The test as to whether they are sufficient or not is another matter. If my hon. friend wishes to ask other questions, he may ask them; but he is not entitled, wihen the orders of the day are called, to comment upon answers which have already been given.


Richard Burpee Hanson: He can do it on a question of privilege.


James Layton Ralston: But it is not a question of privilege.


Mr. PAUL MARTIN (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member asked me to send him a copy of the answers I sent one, and I cannot understand why he did not receive it. I wish to assure him that there

Vernon, B.C., Military Camp
was no attempt to be evasive, and I shall give it to the hon. member immediately. If the questions are not answered in the manner he would wish, every endeavour to satisfy the hon. member will be made.


George Black: The questions were not answered.


Mr. POULIOT:: Speaking to the point of order-


An hon. MEMBER:: There is no point of order.


Jean-François Pouliot: According to the standing order, when questions are called they shall not be commented upon by either party. They shall be answered, or allowed to stand. Then they remain on the order paper. This is a Tuesday, when questions are not called, and if there is a time when members may air their grievances about delay in answering questions, it is right now. I stand wholeheartedly with the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Black), who knows the rules better than any member-except you, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I do not think there is any necessity for my deciding in the matter. The hon. member has made his complaint with regard to the inadequacy of the reply he received. I understand the parliamentary assistant has taken that as a notice, and that he will reply.



WINNIPEG HYDRO-ELECTRIC QUESTION OF PERMIT FOR EXTENSION OF SLAVE FALLS PLANT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. S. H. KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct, a question to the Minister of Munitions and Supply, notice of which I sent him earlier to-day. In view of the information contained in sessional paper No. 302, tabled yesterday by the Minister of Munitions and Supply, to the effect that there is a certain amount of unemployment among carpenters and steel workers in Manitoba, and in view of the other information contained in the application of the Winnipeg hydro-electric system for a permit to commence preliminary work on the extension of its Slave Falls plant, will the minister make a statement as to the possibility of granting this permit?


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry I received no such notice-although I dare say it was sent' to my office. I have not been to
the office. I simply tabled the correspondence I received. There was no statement of mine to the effect that carpenters were idle in the Winnipeg area. I can assure my hon. friend my information is that the most acute labour situation in Canada-or at least one of the most acute-is in the Winnipeg area. We are very short of workers, especially in our very important war plants in that area. Whether the application he refers to can be granted or not is now being considered by construction control. I shall be glad to answer the question when a decision has been reached.



CANADIAN FORCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. JEAN-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): Mr. Speaker, before the order is called, I have an observation to make with reference to a resolution passed Friday night by the city council of Quebec about the way in which men have been dealt with at the military camp at Vernon, British Columbia. What I desire to speak about is a most important matter.
Thomas Vien: Is the hon. member rising to a question of privilege?


Jean-François Pouliot: No, Mr. Speaker, I am rising to speak before the motion is put. I am going to speak about a grievance that affects many people.


Thomas Vien: The orders of the day have not yet been called.


Jean-François Pouliot: The motion was just being called.


Thomas Vien: The orders of the day have not yet been called.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Monday, May 15, 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. Ilsley-Mr. Bradette in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Chief architect's branch-repairs, alterations, operation and maintenance of buildings occupied for war purposes, $2,300,000.
[Stage Direction]
War Appropriation-Public Works
Mr. COLD WELL:: Before the first item is put to the committee, I am going to exercise a right which I believe I have. I hesitated to bring the matter up on a question of privilege because it has to do with a matter referred to in this debate, although it does not come under the Department of Public Works. On Friday, May 12-page 2865 of Hansard-the hon. member for New Westminster made the following statement with reference to the C.C.F.:
They went to the newspapers in the Fraser Valley and told them that in their party they had so many subscribers to these different papers, and they said, "If you do not give us an extremely good break we will withdraw all these subscriptions of our adherents."
Mr. Graydon: That is pretty nearly blackmail.
Mr. Reid: It was serious enough. In Vancouver, the Sun, the Province and the Neics-Herald were informed that if they were not kindly-not kindly from my point of view but entirely from their point of view-these subscriptions -would ibe withdrawn from those papers.
To-day I received from Vancouver a copy of an article which appeared in the Province of May 13, which states:
In the House of Commons last night Tom Reid, member for New Westminster, named the Vancouver Daily Province as a newspaper that had been subject to intimidation by the C.C.F.
The experience of this newspaper provides no ground whatever for Mr. Reid's statements, reported in another column. It can Ibe said definitely and .positively that there is no ground whatever for his allegations. Neither directly nor indirectly has the C.C.F. approached the Vancouver Daily Province with threat or suggestion that it would be penalized if it failed to give "kindly-" treatment to C.C.F. party interests.
Mr. Reid says he knows of his own knowledge that the statements he made in the house are correct. In all fairness to the interests he has maligned, he should produce the proofs.
That is signed by the Vancouver Daily Province. I should like to say that the only suggestion that there should be any interference with the press was made by the hon. member's former leadeT, Mr. Pattullo. In reply to that suggestion, Mr. Winch, the leader of the opposition, said that he opposed such a bill, which was seconded by Mr. Uphill. He said:
I oppose licence, but I uphold the freedom of the press.
The C.C.F. whip in the legislature is reported to have said that he was prepared to "take it on the chin" as well as "dish it out." You find that even the most scurrilous editorials simply react to the interest of those who are maligned. I though that in view of what was said on Friday I should place this on the record.


Thomas Reid: Mr. Chairman, I must have a chance to reply, and I ask the indulgence of the committee. I am not going to let the leader of the C.C.F. or the leader of any other party make any comment about me without an opportunity of replying.


The CHAIRMAN:: I think under the circumstances the hon. member for New Westminster should be able to answer. Perhaps I was remiss in my duty in allowing the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar to make the statement he did, but I feel that the hon. member should be permitted to make an answer.


Thomas Reid: The article just read by the leader of the C.C.F. shows what is going on in this country with regard to the recording of the proceedings of this house. I remember distinctly what was said, and I think every hon. member who was present on that occasion will also remember. My memory is fairly accurate on the matter. I remember the interjection made by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar when I made the accusation against the C.C.F. in connection with newspapers of the Fraser valley. When I mentioned the Province, the Sun and the News-Herald, the hon. member interjected and asked me if I had any proof. I cannot turn up the record just at the moment. I said that I had no direct proof about those three papers, but that I did have some proof about the Fraser valley. That is the record and the hon. member knows it. He endeavoured by reading the record to leave the inference that I had deliberately lied in the House of Commons. He just cannot get away with that. He has got away with a lot, but he is not going to get away with anything of that kind as long as I have breath in my body. I will have more to say later about the tactics of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar.


An hon. MEMBER:: Oh, oh.


Thomas Reid: You just sit down; you will have a chance later. You are not speaking to a stranger now; you are speaking to someone who knows he has a right to speak. The record stands exactly as I stated it. I can well understand a large newspaper saying that no one had come to see them, but we know what took place in 1935 throughout the Fraser Valley. We had' it on fairly good authority that the three large newspapers in Vancouver were written to and told by the leaders of the provincial C.C.F. party that if they did not give them a good break, or were not kindly disposed to the C.C.F., the members belonging to

War Appropriation-Public Works
that party would withdraw their subscriptions. I have nothing to take back. I ask the hon. member to read the record as it stands.


Leslie Gordon Bell: Mr. Chairman-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Mr. COLDWELL:: May I just say this?


Thomas Reid: I do not care what you say.


Major James William Coldwell: May I just say this?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Major James William Coldwell: I quoted the record.


Thomas Reid: I demand that the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar read the record to the house right now. Read Hansard.


Major James William Coldwell: I will read it again.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I am going to give my ruling. The incident is closed. We are not here in committee to discuss matters of policy as between the different parties in the house. Both sides have had their say and the incident is closed.


Major James William Coldwell: We are discussing a
resolution, Mr. Chairman, and the statements to which I have referred were a part of the debate-
The CHAIRMAN. Order. I have given my ruling and the hon. member must abide by it unless he wishes to appeal from it.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not want to appeal from your ruling, Mr. Chairman, but I submit that your ruling is not in accordance with the rules of the house.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I will make another
appeal to the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar to abide by my ruling. He has always been very cooperative and has always abided by the decisions of the chair.


Thomas Reid: I am sorry that the rules of
the house do not permit us to discuss the matter further.


Major James William Coldwell: I want to abide by
your ruling, Mr. Chairman-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Major James William Coldwell: Hon. members cannot
shout me down. I was going to say on a point of order, Mr. Chairman, that we are not discussing a bill or schedule, but a resolution. The resolution involves all matters connected with the war appropriation and with peace, order and good government, and I submit that I am in order in discussing any
matter which comes under the war appropriation measure. But if you rule otherwise I shall abide by your ruling.


Gordon Graydon: I think we have had
enough of this anyway, Mr. Chairman.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I have already given
my ruling. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar used the word "technicality" yesterday. While technically we may have a right to discuss certain matters, there is an understanding that the members of the committee shall confine themselves to the item before the chair.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Rentals of premises occupied for war purposes, $1,900,000.
Mr. PERLEY:: A number of changes have taken place in the operation and rental of buildings in the west, particularly in Regina. Buildings are being taken over, buildings are being rented, remodelled and so on. How much was spent in Saskatchewan last year in rentals, repairs and alterations of buildings for war purposes?


Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: I presume that my hon.
friend is referring also to the first item?


Ernest Edward Perley: Yes.


Alphonse Fournier: With respect to
the first item the amount is to be expended as follows: Salaries and wages, $840,000; cost-of-living bonus, $145,000; alterations to buildings, $850,000. These are estimates for 1944-45, as we do not know at the present date just what repairs and alterations will be required. The other items are:	Light and power,
$175,000; water and water rates, $35,000; fuel, $200,000; supplies for char service, $45,000; sundries, $10,000. That makes up the total of $2,300,000.


Ernest Edward Perley: What portion of that will
be spent in Saskatchewan?


Alphonse Fournier: We are asking for a lump sum to make alterations to buildings as required. I cannot give a definite figure as to what will be required in Saskatchewan or any other province, but as recommendations come in from the district architects the expenditures are made.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: We should have a statement from the minister setting out by provinces the rentals to be paid during the current year, and also what is the policy of the government with respect to buying or renting premises.

War Appropriation-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: The buildings coming under this item are all for the use of war departments or for war uses. For the Department of National Defence, for the use of the army, we pay in rentals, at Ottawa, $65,906.90, and outside Ottawa, $141,365.28, a total of $207,272.18; for the navy, at Ottawa, $24,259.06, and outside Ottawa, $42,093.12, a total of $66,352.28; for the air force, at Ottawa, $8,424, and outside Ottawa, $98,342.50, a total nf $106,766.50; wartime prices and trade board, at Ottawa, $67,580.83, and outside Ottawa, $541,339.44, a total of $608,920.27; for the Department of Munitions and Supply, outside Ottawa, $150,339.78; for government departments, boards and commissions, at Ottawa, $155,855.43, and outside Ottawa, $459,918.49, or a total of $615,773.92; contingencies, at Ottawa, $17,973.78, and outside Ottawa, $126,601.29, a total of $144,575.07. That makes up a total of $1,900,000.


Ernest Edward Perley: What rentals were paid in Regina, to whom paid and for what buildings?


Alphonse Fournier: We have three different buildings for the army in Regina, at a total rental of $25,520.


Ernest Edward Perley: To whom is it paid?


Alphonse Fournier: I have not the names here but I could probably get them for my hon. friend some time to-day or to-morrow. The information before me shows the rentals for the army, the navy and air force and other departments. For the navy, at Halifax-


Ernest Edward Perley: What are the buildings rented at Regina?


Alphonse Fournier: In Regina we have no rented buildings for the navy or for the air force. For wartime prices and trade board we pay rentals amounting to $8,100; munitions and supply, $3,000; agriculture, $10,000; civil service commission, $480; labour, $7,630.08; pensions and national health, $480; soldier settlement board, $1,740; war labour board, $1,152. Those are the amounts paid in Regina in rentals.


Gordon Graydon: In the Department of Public Works, I am informed, there are about 110 seasonal firemen who are appointed through the minister's office from time to time. They were told by an official of the chief architect's branch that during the Christmas season they would get an addition by way of war supplement to the wages which they were then receiving. I understand that at that time these firemen were receiving $95 a month. After that season had passed and February 4
fMr. Diefenbaker.]
had arrived, an order in council or some regulation was passed which took care of some of the engineers, and some of the full-time firemen. I believe fifty engineers and sixteen full-time firemen were included and given war supplements. I wanted to bring this matter to the attention of the minister because there are some bitter complaints about it. There are, I believe, fifteen engineers who are not included in the order in council which was passed. These fifteen have a total of 250 years' service in the public works department, or at any rate in the civil service. I am told that these firemen and engineers work under a 26-shift month and their pay is $3.65 per shift. They have not received salary increases since 1921. I am not sure whether this applies to all of them, but it does to many of them. The question is this. Why was it that when the war supplements were paid all were not included? It is only fair that this question should be asked, and the minister should give us the reason for what seems to be an injustice to those firemen and engineers who were not included in the order in council , which granted the war supplement, after they had been told that they would be given what I believe was referred to as a Christmas gift in the form of an increase in their salary or wages.


Alphonse Fournier: I understand that in February there was a revision of salaries paid to seasonal firemen. If I remember rightly, before the question was settled they were receiving from $95 to $105 a month. After the first year they received $100 and after the second year $105. My understanding was that if anyone was left out of the supplement it would be the newcomers who had just entered the sendee. However, I will inquire into the matter and, if there is any injustice, see that it is remedied as soon as possible.


Gordon Graydon: I do not wish to do more than call the matter to the attention of the minister so that an investigation may be made. Will the minister indicate, as soon as he is able to answer the question, exactly what the position is?-because this is a matter that should be attended to. We cannot afford to have men engaged in such work unjustly treated.


Alphonse Fournier: I will have that done.


Major James William Coldwell: I thought we had pretty well completed the programme of erecting temporary buildings in this city or repairing and extending buildings, but I notice a very large extension of a temporary building is being made at the corner of Carling avenue-


Alphonse Fournier: That is item No. 4.

War Appropriation-Public Works


Major James William Coldwell: In that case I will raise the matter on the fourth item, or someone else will.


Gordon Graydon: I do not care whether the minister replies now to the remarks I am about to make, but I should like to have an answer from him at some time. I should like to know why the heating equipment in the east block was changed, the oil burners having been taken out and new stokers put in for the purpose of preventing the black smoke nuisance, when as a matter of fact, as I am informed, the nuisance is greater now than it ever was. When does the minister intend to go back to the original system of heating?
May I conclude all I have to say on public works by making this statement. I did not want to raise a complaint on the orders of the day because I thought that perhaps the matter was not important enough, but many members on this side of the house, and I have no doubt I speak for others as well, have found that their health is endangered by the draught in this chamber. I know that this remark is open to the facetious comment that it is hot air that is responsible. Coming from the other side such a comment might be so misunderstood. Seriously however, there is a great draught from the galleries or through the gallery doors. It flows down on some members and I have heard many complaints from various sections of the house. We cannot sit in this chamber day in and day out unless we are reasonably comfortable. Personally I do not suffer much from these draughts, but some members feel them keenly and have caught colds in consequence. Will the minister look into the matter?


Alphonse Fournier: Last year we did have the ventilation system examined and we thought we had brought about some amelioration. I shall ask the officials of the department to look into it. With regard to the east block, that was an order from the oil controller. We were asked to make a change over from oil because of the shortage of fuel oil.


Mr. PINARD:: Before this item is passed I wish to say a few words. My hon. friend the leader of the opposition acts as though he were the representative of the city of Ottawa. It is true the hon. member for Carle-ton (Mr. Boucher) is sitting next to him at the moment. He may act as though he were the representative of the city of Ottawa, but may I tell him that he will never occupy that position, nor will he have a representative from his party in that position.


Gordon Graydon: I do not think there is anything wrong in trying to do something for the city of Ottawa.


Mr. BOUCHER:: Does the hon. member object to his interest in the city of Ottawa?


Joseph Albert Pinard: No. My hon. friend speaks of an increase paid to seasonal firemen. That applies not only to the city of Ottawa; it applies to other places like Montreal and Toronto, but, of course, not to the village he represents. All those municipalities have firemen and they are all entitled to the same increase. May I say to my hon. friend that the Ottawa people and their representatives are as much awake as he is, but we do not want to disturb the peace of this committee.


Gordon Graydon: "Methinks the lady doth protest too much".


Joseph Albert Pinard: It all depends. The hon. member says "lady", I do not know whether that is so or not-[DOT]


George Russell Boucher: We will take your word for it.


Joseph Albert Pinard: This question has been up many times. The salaries paid to these men are not sufficient. This is not the only case. The government pays less for ordinary labour than does the city of Ottawa. I have not objected to all these questions because I did not want to take up too much of the time of the committee. I think the time of the committee is too precious to be used for this kind of thing-picayune politics; that is what it is. I am sorry that my hon. friend ever thought that he represented the city of Ottawa. We are capable of doing that.


Gordon Graydon: There is some doubt about that.


Joseph Albert Pinard: That is about all the hon. member can say. May I say further that the Department of Public Works has at all times done [DOT] the best it could for the general service rendered by these people. We have all classes of labourers working for the Department of Public Works-snow cleaners, window washers, and so on; and they are not being paid a sufficiently high wage. We have tried to do what we could for them, but we have not succeeded at all times. This question is raised to-day because an increase of $5 or $10 a month was granted a year ago to these men. I should like to know who are the men that were raised to $10 a month. I am sure the hon. member for Carleton knows all about it. I ask him to give the answer at once.


George Russell Boucher: Ask your minister.


Joseph Albert Pinard: The hon. member is making snowballs for his leader; he should throw them himself.

War Appropriation-Public Works


Mr. MARSHALL:: I should like to make a suggestion to the acting leader of the government. Would it be possible for the Minister of Public Works to sit in a more central part of the chamber? It is very difficult for many members who are interested in the estimates to hear what is going on.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: Has the wartime prices and trade board any offices in the Birks building in Ottawa?


Alphonse Fournier: They still have two floors in the Birks building.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Have any other departments offices there?


Alphonse Fournier: I do not believe there is any other department there.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Where did the wartime prices and trade board go when they were put out of that building?


Alphonse Fournier: We had just completed a building on Sussex street to which we transferred seven or eight hundred people.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That is where they went?


Alphonse Fournier: They went down on Sussex street.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I suggest to the minister that it does not look very well, when you go through the glass doors of the Birks building, to find on one panel the sign "Wartime Prices and Trade Board", and on the other panel "Liberal Association". It leaves a rather funny taste in your mouth when you go through those doors and see that.


Alphonse Fournier: I may tell the hon. member that I have not been down there. I do not know what is on the door.


Ernest Edward Perley: The minister in his breakdown gave some of the rents paid in the city of Regina, and they were as follows: Department of Agriculture, $10,000; Department of Labour, $7,000. Could he give us the names of the owners of the property concerned and where it is situated?


Alphonse Fournier: I undertake to give my hon. friend the names of the buildings and the lessors of those buildings leased to the government. I shall have a list made up of all the buildings in Regina and I shall give it to my hon. friend.


Ernest Edward Perley: When the estimates are carried?


Alphonse Fournier: I may get that to-morrow. I shall send it to my hon. friend.


Ernest Edward Perley: These estimates may be through in an hour and a half.


James Layton Ralston: Sooner than that.


Ernest Edward Perley: I hope so, if we can get that information. We are trying to get it, and if we do, it will facilitate the minister's estimates.


Alphonse Fournier: I will undertake to have a list prepared and shall send it as soon as possible, maybe to-night, to my hon. friend.


Mr. ADAMSON:: Does this item include the rental of the Toronto exhibition buildings for military purposes?


Alphonse Fournier: No. This item covers only office accommodation in Ottawa and outside of Ottawa. It does not comprise works.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Furniture, etc., for war employees, $500,000.
George Russell Boucher: Would the minister give us the details of this item?


Alphonse Fournier: Two years ago this item was $900,000. Requests come in from all parts of the country, from offices used for war purposes, for desks or filing cabinets or office equipment. Last year the item was $700,000 and almost the whole amount was expended. We believe that $500,000 will be sufficient this year. I cannot give the exact number of desks which will be needed by the departments. We are just the procurement agency for all these war departments.


George Russell Boucher: It seems to me that
$500,000 is a large amount at this late stage of the war when the expansion has been cut down very materially. Could the minister break it up into departments or into cities and give us some detail rather than have it put through as a bulk sum?


Alphonse Fournier: I am a little embarrassed because if we do not receive requisitions for this equipment from departments the amount will not be expended. It is voted as an estimate to meet future requirements. If no requisitions come in we will not spend the money. I do not know what the needs of the army, the navy, the air force, or the wartime prices and trade board or that of all the other departments for which we act, will be.


George Russell Boucher: If there were not a fair idea of the requisitions that would come, surely the sum of $500,000 would not have been provided. It occurred to me that the
MAY 16, 1944 [DOT]
War Appropriation-Public Works
appropriations of the various departments as submitted to the minister could be given to the committee now.


Alphonse Fournier: We base this estimate on requirements that have come into the department during the last month of the last fiscal year. Those requests multiplied by twelve amount to about $500,000. That may be a little over or a little under the amount actually required, but I would not like to get a smaller amount and then have to return to treasury board and ask for further money; I would rather have this amount approved.


George Russell Boucher: The minister has no
further break-down which he can give to the committee?


Alphonse Fournier: No, not on an
estimate of this kind.


James Alexander Marshall: I should think the minister could give us a break-down of the amount actually spent on furniture under the war appropriation measures since September, 1939. I should like the amount spent in offices outside Ottawa and the amount spent in offices in Ottawa. I should like also the amount the department pays in rentals for furniture and office equipment. I believe a considerable amount of money is spent from year to year by the government in rentals alone. I would ask the minister to give me those figures.


Alphonse Fournier: My officials
inform me that we do not rent furniture for government offices; we purchase it. I can give the hon. gentleman the amount spent on furniture since the beginning of the war.


James Alexander Marshall: Is this just in the city of Ottawa?


Alphonse Fournier: No, for the whole country, Ottawa and outside. The figures for the fiscal years are as follows:
1939-	40	
$253,3531940-	41	
598,9241941-	42	
784,2911942-	43	
850,734
I have not the exact figures for 1943-44, but to January 31 of this year the amount expended was $433,578. Probably that is the basis of this year's estimate of $500,000.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Would part of that $500,000 be used to furnish the new temporary buildings?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes; every temporary building put up for war purposes.


George Russell Boucher: I do not quite understand the minister saying he arrived at the amount of $500,000 with no data at all, unless it was
done by virtue of past experience. It does seem to me that each department would submit an estimate which the minister could give us.


Alphonse Fournier: I am told that the estimate is based upon monthly expenditures for furniture during the previous year. That is about the best directive we can follow. We are not buying this furniture for public works; we receive requisitions from various departments. We try to keep down expenses as much as we can, but we have to fill the requisitions when they are approved by treasury board, and this $500,000 seems to be the amount that will be required this year.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: Shortly after the minister came into the department he achieved a good deal of notoriety in connection with rugs and chairs that were purchased. Could he bring the committee up to date on the situation in regard to rugs?


Alphonse Fournier: There has been a lull in questions asked in the house in regard to rugs. During the first six months I was in the department, when questions were asked in the house, I think we had purchased six rugs for the whole country. Since then I believe we have purchased a few more, but I have not the exact number. I recall signing two or three requisitions, and I am informed that two were for the senate.


John George Diefenbaker: Does the minister purchase all the rugs and supplies of that kind for the various war departments?


Alphonse Fournier: Oh, no. This item goes to provide for furniture purchased by the Department of Public Works for offices only, at Ottawa and outside Ottawa, for all war departments, boards and commissions, but does not cover requirements of active field units such as air stations, ordnance depots, naval stations and military hospitals, which are purchased through the Department of Munitions and Supply and charged to each separate war department.


George Russell Boucher: Is it not a fact that many departments purchase their own rugs, chairs and furniture without asking the Department of Public Works to procure them, for war purposes only


Alphonse Fournier: I would not know. If they do, it is not to my knowledge and I would not discuss it, because I do not know the facts.


John George Diefenbaker: Why is it that purchases of rugs and that sort of thing are made by the Department of Munitions and Supply instead of through the Department of Public Works?

War Appropriation-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: I do not even know if they do purchase them.


John George Diefenbaker: A return brought down last year showed the purchases of rugs for the navy, army, and air force. It would not be necessary to refer to this but for the fact that the minister said with considerable pride that since he had been minister only a few rugs had been purchased.	*


Alphonse Fournier: You do not doubt that statement, I hope?


John George Diefenbaker: Oh ,no; but the departments that purchase the rugs for the use of the navy, army, and air force are entirely apart from the Department of Public Works. As a matter of fact purchases made for the year ending March 31, 1943, the latest figures available, were as follows: For the air force, 811,300; for the navy, $14,800, and for the army, $19,500. These are in addition to any purchases that may come through the Department of Public Works. Has the minister any figures before him to show the expenditures on furniture for war departments in Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba during the past year?


Alphonse Fournier: I have not a break-down of those figures. To deal with the first point mentioned by my hon. friend, that rugs are purchased by departments other than the Department of Public Works, I am quite willing to accept statements made in the return, but personally, as minister of the department, I do not know. All I can say is that they may purchase rugs in their units, air stations, ordnance depots, naval stations and military hospitals, which do not come under public works in connection with these purchases. As to the break-down by provinces, I am afraid I do not have it.


John George Diefenbaker: A short time ago the hon. member for Qu'Appelle asked a question, and the answer was, "Well, we have not the records available." We are asked to pass very large sums of money, and surely we are entitled to these break-downs when we ask for them.


Alphonse Fournier: I believe the hon. gentleman is right in asking the question, and probably I should have the break-down. I will instruct my officials to prepare it, but I cannot give it at the moment. Some time later I can place on record a break-down of this item by provinces.


Ernest Edward Perley: I see at page U-16 of the auditor general's report an item of $400,000 for rugs and desks. The minister said a few moments ago that he had not purchased

any since he took office. This item in last year's accounts shows that a considerable quantity was purchased.


Alphonse Fournier: What financial
year is that?


Ernest Edward Perley: Last year.


Alphonse Fournier: That is 1942-43.
I was sworn in on October 7, 1942, and served for only a few months of that fiscal year. The hon. member may be sure that what I had said about rugs is true. I am not trying to hide any purchases of rugs we have made.


Ernest Edward Perley: I was just taking what
appears in the auditor general's report, where I find an amount of $399,000.


George Russell Boucher: Would the minister give us further details as to the policy of purchasing? I see that some departments do purchase rugs without going through the Department of Public Works. What is the line of demarcation as between his department and other departments for the purchase of supplies and furniture? How is it decided which department should do the purchasing?


Alphonse Fournier: The Department of Public Works purchases furniture for office accommodation throughout the country. But what I have said about the army, the air force and the Department of Pensions and National Health is true. We receive no requisition, and have no authority. Then, as to our method of purchasing, we proceed by calling for tenders for every bit of furniture we buy.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Ottawa, addition to temporary building No. 8, Carling avenue, $300,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: At this point will the
minister answer the question asked a few moments ago by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar ?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. Under this item we are asking for $300,000 for the extension to No. 8 building on Carling avenue. That building has 200,000 square feet, and we have been requested by different departments for an additional 80,000 square feet. This space is for national registration under the Department of Labour, and for the censorship division of the Department of National War Services. In the last year those two departments have expanded to the extent that they need nearly all this new space. After tender the contract was awarded to H. A. Wickett & Company for $332,557. In the last fiscal year $50,000 was spent; this year we are asking for the balance of $300,000.

War Appropriation-Public Works
This is one of the largest temporary buildings in Ottawa. The location seemed suitable for these two departments, because they have other branches located there. I believe, too, that the records division of the Department of National Defence is in the same building. I think this is the last temporary building we have undertaken, because we have tried to limit their number. I am receiving requests nearly every month from different departments for more space, but I have tried to keep down the number of temporary buildings and the amount of rented space. This is the last one, and the contract was given on September 23, 1943.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When will this building
be completed?


Alphonse Fournier: The work was
delayed because of the difficulty of obtaining lumber. It is expected however that the building will be occupied in the fall.


Mr. EDWARDS:: It is my understanding that the Department of Public Works, in awarding contracts for temporary or other buildings to a general contractor, imposes no condition that the contractor shall name the subcontractors to be used or employed by him. On the other hand I understand that in respect of contracts let by the Department of Munitions and Supply that department requires the general contractor, if he is to' use subcontractors, to name them. I understand that there are complaints by subcontractors in various parts of the country who in good faith have tendered to general contractors for work involved in connection with certain undertakings-be they plumbing, heating, painting, stone work or the like. It appears that it is the practice of some general contractors-I do not believe it is general-to go round and try to get better prices-or, to use the common expression, to chisel on the subcontractors. I should like to ascertain from the minister-and I am not suggesting that this practice has developed recently-how long it has prevailed in the Department of Public Works, and whether or not any consideration has been given to adopting what to my mind is a fairer practice-that of requiring the general contractor to name his subcontractors, and following through and seeing that the general contractor does in fact award his subcontracts to the persons named in his tender.


Alphonse Fournier: The policy in the Department of Public Works is to ask for tenders after having the plans and specifications prepared. General contractors make their bids, and the lowest bid is accepted. We do not inquire into subcontracts, or those from whom the general contractor has asked 100-186
tenders with respect to subcontracts. There may be something in my hon. friend's suggestion to the effect that, after being awarded a contract, a general contractor may go round and peddle subcontracts. As I am not an expert in the matter I have no personal knowledge. However I shall ask the officials of the department to study the system outlined by the hon. member, and followed as he says by the Department of Munitions and Supply.


Manley Justin Edwards: I believe what I have said is accurate.


Alphonse Fournier: Perhaps we will change our policy, if the suggested one is found to be better.


Mr. GILLIS:: May I support the hon. member for Calgary West, and perhaps go somewhat further. He is completely justified in what he has said-so far as he has gone. In my view the procedure of letting subcontracts should be completely eliminated. I think it is the government's responsibility to know that a contractor bidding for a contract has machinery adequate to carry out such contract. The contractor makes a bid at a certain price, and gets the contract on that basis, in many instances because he is the lowest tenderer. Immediately he gets the contract he starts to subcontract, and then the subcontractor has to chisel on his employees. The employees are the ones who suffer at the hands of the subcontractor. The subcontractor must try to make some money out of his subcontract, and the only way he can do that in many cases is to chisel on the men who actually do the work. If you examine into the construction of your airports and other national defence projects since the outbreak of the war you will find that -many labour disputes occurred because subcontractors endeavoured to make some money by chiselling on their employees.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member is referring to Munitions and Supply now.


Clarence Gillis: The principle is the same in any department.


Alphonse Fournier: Not according to what the hon. member said a moment ago.


Clarence Gillis: If a company undertakes a contract for the Department of Public Works to construct a building they figure their labour and material costs. They should then be obliged to go ahead with the work. But after getting a contract on that basis they farm it out to others who did not figure in the main contract. The result is that they have to squeeze somebody, and the only ones they can squeeze are the men who actually work on the job.



War Appropriation-Public Works


Manley Justin Edwards: I am sure my hon. friend is misinterpreting what I said, or is not familiar with the practice followed by general contractors.


Clarence Gillis: I am familiar with it. I have had many headaches during the last four years because of that very point.


Manley Justin Edwards: If, as my hon. friend has suggested, a general contractor had to do all the work in connection with the construction of a building it would mean the elimination of seventy-five per cent of the general contractors in this country. Very few of them have the facilities, for example, to do heating and plumbing work, tinsmithing, roofing, electrical wiring, and so on. I know of only one general contractor who has representatives of all the building trades in his employ. When a general contractor is bidding on a contract he goes to the metal worker to get a price on the metal work; he goes to the hardware man for a price on the hardware; he goes to the painter for a price on the painting, and so on down the line. He takes those prices and makes his bid on that basis. But the difficulty arises from the fact that when a general contractor is awarded a contract he is under no obligation to give subcontracts to any of the men who in good faith have submitted bids. After the contract is let he knows what his price is, and some of these men are likely to go, for example, to the electrical man and say, "We have your price of $10,000 for the electrical work; if you can cut that by $1,500 we will give you the contract; failing that we will probably give it to somebody else." The result is that subcontractors are bidding against each other.
I can quite understand a subcontractor being tempted, in an effort to keep his men employed, to do what my hon. friend suggests is done. He might go to his workmen and say, " Here is a six months' job that will provide work for everybody; if you are willing to cut your wage rates for steady employment, I will take you on." I can see quite well that that nefarious practice might be adopted by a subcontractor. The practice, as I appreciate it, now followed by the Department of Munitions and Supply, is to require the general contractor to name the subcontractor. Then perforce the general contractor would have to use those subcontractors and you would avoid the possibility of the general contractor chiselling on his subcontractors. It may be necessary and desirable that some protection be provided. I understand that according to the regulations the subcontractor must comply with the fair wage provisions which are embodied in every federal government contract.
'Mr. Gillis.]


Mr. ISNOR:: The point raised by the hon. member for Calgary West is well taken. It is just a matter of procedure. I differ with him to this extent: if his suggestion were followed it would make it almost impossible for the small local contractor to get any of this work. I do not wish to go over the procedure, but the fact is that when a large contract is to be let, the bidding is done by contractors in the larger centres. In the east we have to contend with contractors from Montreal and Toronto who bid on every large project. I do not think the solution to this problem will be found by naming the subcontractor. I should like to offer a suggestion which I admit may not be feasible. I suggest that the amount of the subcontracts be indicated. It would then be possible for the main contractor to go to the local subcontractors and say: Work is being done in this section of the country and we have put in a tender of $15,000 for plumbing, $7,000 for electrical work and so on; those figures are included in our main tender; we know you can do this work satisfactorily, because you are a reliable firm, so that if you are prepared to do it we are prepared to enter into a subcontract with you.
I know the minister and his officials are very efficient, and I make that suggestion to them. I support the principle of fair wage provisions. In every contract I have seen, and I have read over a number in the last fifteen or twenty years, there have been fair wage clauses. The main contractor is responsible for the maintaining of the fair wage schedule, in connection not only with the main contract but with all subcontracts. I think serious consideration should be given to adopting a procedure under which protection would be given to the small contractor so that there would not be-I am not going to use the word "chiselling"-any of the shopping around that is so prevalent when the larger contractors are bidding on projects.


Clarence Gillis: In my opinion the procedure described by the hon. member for Calgary West is not subcontracting; it is simply a main contractor getting a contract under false pretences. Let us assume that Public Works is undertaking the construction of a building in Ottawa and a construction company puts in a bid. The bidding is on the total construction of that building, on every phase of it. When a company puts in a tender and receives a contract it is assumed that it has figured on every item of cost, and it is the main contractor who has the obligation of seeing to it that the work is carried out according to specifications. It is not his job, after he receives a contract to go shopping around,

War Appropriation-Public Works
trying to get someone to do it for nothing. But that is the case under present conditions. I do not believe that the main contractor should name any subcontractors or firms who are to assist him in completing the contract, because the whole obligation rests upon the main contractor himself, and the government is responsible for seeing to it that he lives up to his contract. But here is what sometimes happens, and I know this particular case. The main contractor got a contract for erecting a barracks in a certain section in my part of the country. Then he goes to an undertaking firm and gives the undertaker a subcontract for the construction of those buildings. That is neither efficient nor in the best interests of the country. When a contractor accepts a contract with the federal government for any project it is up to him to see that it is done, and he must figure on every item of cost.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: The main contractor is still responsible even if he has a subcontractor.


Clarence Gillis: There have been some pretty miserable jobs done, and I would not want to start mentioning them here at this stage, but when the war situation is not so tense and we get some of our problems off our hands, we shall be able to tell the Canadian people about some jobs which have been done on that basis since the outbreak of the war.


An hon. MEMBER:: What about the
undertaker?


Clarence Gillis: I could name the firm and go into details of the transaction, but I do not want to do so now. I cannot agree with the hon. member for Calgary West that the main contractor should be permitted to farm out his contract to get the work done as cheaply as possible. That should not be permitted.


Alphonse Fournier: The procedure followed in the department is not exactly as it has been described. The lowest tenderer gets the contract. He is a general contractor, we will say. The next step is that he brings into the department a list of his subcontractors and the amounts they are charging for every part of the work they are doing. We approve or disapprove the subcontractors. The work proceeds and we see to it that the contract is executed according to the terms of the contract. We know who are the subcontractors. We have a fair wage clause in the contract and that is followed throughout the contract. We require a security deposit which we hold until the building has been finally accepted.
I do not see how they can start playing with wages, because we haye our inspectors going around and the labour department also has a 100-186J
fair wage officer whose duty it is to see that the fair wage clause is observed. I should like to enlighten myself, but I have not seen the light yet after the two speeches to which I have just listened.


George Russell Boucher: Does the minister say that the department goes into the various costs submitted by the subcontractors and checks them up?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.


George Russell Boucher: I can see that difficulty might be avoided by that policy. I suppose the only difficulty, when there are two or three subcontractors, would be with their getting the necessary materials and labour.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Post-war construction programme-preparation of plans, specifications, et cetera, $95,000.
Liguori Lacombe: Mr. Chairman, I have just one word to say in this connection. Before contemplating any building programme for the post-war period, the government would do well to pay their old debts, especially those incurred in the fall of 1939. I have already pointed out to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) that his predecessor, the hon. member for Richelieu-Ver-cheres (Mr. Cardin), promised to compensate the reverend trappist monks of Oka, for advances made by them and in connection with work done on a public stream.. I am again making representations to the Minister of Public Works with a view to obtaining for the reverend trappist monks a refund of the expenditures they have made for work done on this stream during the fall of 1939. I had quite a correspondence with the hon. member about that matter. Agriculture is essential to our armed forces and our civilian population; I have already said and I repeat now that it is our first defence line. The minister claimed in his correspondence that such work now comes under the jurisdiction of provincial governments, but the pledge given to the reverend trappist monks goes back to the fall of 1939 and it should be fulfilled. It is just a matter of refunding S184, which is a paltry sum for the government but a most important item for the reverend trappist monks.


Alphonse Fournier: As far as I can recollect, that protection, work was carried out under an appropriation for the fiscal year-


Liguori Lacombe: May I
remind the minister that it was not protection but drainage work carried out on the Rousse stream.

War Appropriation-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: Such work would have been carried out under an appropriation voted for the year 1939-40, to the best of my memory. As the work was not completed during the fiscal year the appropriation lapsed and the nest year the house did not vote any further amount for work of that kind. That work was begun during the fiscal year 1939-10-I do not recollect all the details on file-and in 1944 I answered that the house had not put any funds at my disposal for that kind of work. In spite of my goodwill, I was not in a position to make that payment, as I had no authority to do so and the required funds were unavailable.
As regards that part of my hon. friend's remarks where he mentioned the development of agriculture, he knows quite well that we are all in favour of that, but I do not think that such an argument could solve the problem and induce parliament to vote in time of war money for work of a civilian character. Since 1939, the government's policy has been directed towards avoiding all such expenditures and attempting to direct; all our efforts to the winning of the war. Such was the policy of the former minister and such it still is to-day. I am sorry, but my estimates do not provide any funds for expenditures of this kind.


Liguori Lacombe: The minister will allow me to point out that this expenditure was incurred following a direct promise of reimbursement made to the reverend Trappist Fathers. I fail to see why the minister has not included in his estimates this small amount of $184 which is justly claimed by this religious order.


Alphonse Fournier: This claim is not the only one of its kind by any means. During the war, I cannot undertake to reimburse expenditures on works carried on in the course of a fiscal year for which no estimates have been provided to that end. I do not know whether the hon. member has followed me. The amount had been voted for, say, the fiscal year 1939-40. If my memory serves me right, the work had not been completed by the end of the year, indeed there are several similar cases. This work was continued during the next fiscal year. The hon. member says that a formal promise was made. There can be a formal promise only when work is carried out during the fiscal year for which estimates were voted; you may then receive payment. But if the work is carried out the following year when no appropriations
have been submitted to the house in connection with such work, I cannot see how you may be reimbursed.


Liguori Lacombe: As we are now discussing a postwar programme, would the minister tell me whether the reverend Trappist fathers may be paid after the war?


Alphonse Fournier: I may say that I shall submit the case to the government for further consideration, but I cannot commit myself to a formal promise.
(Text)


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: Will the minister
explain what is meant by this programme in connection with the preparation of plans and specifications? Does it relate to any of the plans that may have been before the reconstruction committee? Will he be good enough to tell us exactly what plans and specifications are covered?


Alphonse Fournier: The amount
required in this estimate would be for the cost of additional temporary architectural and clerical assistants necessary to carry out the preparation of plans and specifications for departmental projects for the post-war period. I understand that our architects are making a survey of public buildings in every district and are reporting to us on future works that may be carried out in all these places.


James Arthur Ross: Right across Canada?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. We find that we shall need more architects and we are even looking for architects. They are very difficult to find nowadays because they are all employed in war construction and other undertakings, but we intend to employ more architects and acquire more clerical help to look into the condition of buildings, the necessity for new buildings, and so on, throughout the country. We are preparing standard plans for certain post offices, according to the size of the town or city, so that we may be ready, if it is the wish of parliament, to undertake work in this connection when the war is over.


James Arthur Ross: This covers ordinary public buildings such as post offices and the other buildings that are used now?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.


James Arthur Ross: It does not cover any specific programme?


Alphonse Fournier: No.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I had thought this amount would be very much larger. It takes in a big

War Appropriation-Public Works

programme of post-war construction, expenses in connection with the preparation of plans and specifications, et cetera, $95,000.


Alphonse Fournier: May I interrupt to say that the amount is $250,000 for what they have in mind, though for this fiscal year they are asking for $95,000.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I am pleased to know that the amount is nearer a quarter of a million. Will this cover assistance to projects that will be undertaken in connection with a post-war planning scheme by the municipalities?


Alphonse Fournier: No.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I have in mind particularly a request I received from the town of Dartmouth on the eastern side of Halifax harbour. No doubt the minister is familiar with the situation there. We were promised years ago. by former prime ministers, that there would be a Halifax-Dartmouth bridge and we are still waiting for it. Perhaps the minister will take note of that and include it in his post-war programme for construction at the proper time.
That, however, is not what I have in mind.
I am thinking of ferry facilities. There is a ferry which is operated by the municipality of Dartmouth. It carries on a twenty-four-hour service between Halifax and the town of Dartmouth. As the minister no doubt knows, the eastern air command have a very fine airport and base on the eastern side, and this ferry is the only means of communication. The traffic has increased some 300 per cent, with the result that they have not been able to look after their docking facilities in the same way as they have done in ordinary peace times. Quite recently, with the idea of postwar planning, they placed before the Department of Public Works a request that they be assisted in making plans to take care of a larger and more up-to-date system of dock facilities. My question is this: Does this item cover such post-war plans as I have mentioned, and, if so, will the minister be good enough to indicate whether the department is willing to assist the town of Dartmouth, in connection with the Dartmouth ferry, in procuring the necessary advice and plans to bring into effect their proposed development?


Alphonse Fournier: This item would not apply to any municipal project or to any ferry projects. It concerns public buildings, such as post offices, customs buildings, and other public buildings in cities and towns throughout the country. As to the request for assistance to the people of Dartmouth, the department is always ready to help communities, but to what extent I cannot say. I shall have to look into this project and see whether the federal authority has jurisdiction or could employ its people, or spend any money, on the undertaking. However, I will bring the matter to the attention of the officials of the department to see what they can do.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I thank the minister. I may say that the people of Dartmouth are not asking the department to undertake the expense of building these facilities. They are simply asking for assistance, to provide them with the architects, because architects are not available at the present time in that section of the country. The people are hoping that the minister will see his way clear to place at their disposal one or two of the men in the district of Halifax to assist them in making plans.


Alphonse Fournier: I should not like to commit the department during war when we ourselves lack architects and engineers. I could not undertake to do what the hon. member requests. His" request can be gone into after the war. At the present time we are looking for architects and engineers for the work we have to do.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: The minister will give the
matter consideration?


Alphonse Fournier: Certainly.


John George Diefenbaker: There are two
items in connection with post-war construction that I presume could be dealt with at the same time. There is the item of $95,000 under the chief architect's branch, which has to do with expenditures in connection with preparation of plans, specifications, et cetera, and there is an item of $146,000 in connection with surveys, preparation of plans and specifications, et cetera, under the chief engineer's branch. This is the first concrete example of the government's plans to take up the slack of unemployment after the war. That will be done, apparently, by a public works construction programme. We have heard a great deal of plans for the post-war period. One hon. member of this committee has given much consideration to the necessity of public works being used in that connection. I refer to the hon. member for Davenport. This item indicates that the government now has a definite plan or blue-print that is to be followed, I should like the minister to explain fully the nature of that plan. I realize that there cannot be complete unanimity in the cabinet in that regard; for last fall I remember reading that one minister, the Minister of Pensions and National Health, in making a

War Appropriation-Public Works
speech to a service club referred to the necessity of public works and a programme being made available now for post-war. On the same day the Minister of Munitions and Supply said that public works was not a solution of post-war unemployment.
This is a considerable expenditure, particularly when one remembers that it is concerned only with the matter of plans. I should like the minister to tell us to what extent he is following out the policy of the government in this item and to what extent it is anticipated that during the first or second year after the war the development of a public works project will ensure employment. In Canada to-day, as in the United States and elsewhere, groups of business and professional men and service clubs are endeavouring to visualize the conditions that will exist when the war ends. They are endeavouring to arrive at plans for postwar employment. For the first time to my knowledge parliament is now asked, and properly so, to pass a vote in order to enable the Department of Public Works to prepare plans for the post-war period. As I see the picture, it is to survey the need for public buildings in all parts of the country. That survey has now been proceeded with. If my information is correct, the minister has in his possession a general indication of the possible expenditure that the government, if it is in power at that time, intends to make after the war, and also the number of people, men discharged from the armed forces, and those who will be out of work as a result of the discontinuance of war industry, who will be assured of employment. No one expects that public works of itself will ensure employment. But it is one method whereby during the interim period in the passage from a wartime to a peace-time economy the slack of unemployment may be taken up temporarily.
I believe that a survey has been made by the Ottawa branch of the unemployment commission to indicate the degree and percentage of unemployment there will be when the various war industries are closed down. I referred to it the other day. For instance, if a class A industry is closed down within thirty days, thirty-five or forty per cent of the employees will require work elsewhere. I presume that this vote is to cover a situation such as that, in order that in that great changing period those who otherwise would be out of work, or would find themselves in receipt of payment under the Unemployment Insurance Act, instead of following that course and that delay, will be assured of employment through the medium of public works.

I commend the minister for taking the first step; but in asking us to vote this amount I think we ought to be assured that the government has a definite plan in mind; that it has a survey reasonably completed to-day, and that the members of this committee and the country will be made cognizant of what is being done.


Alfred Henry Bence: This is one of the very important items of the minister's department. Like the hon. member for Lake Centre I should like to obtain some information on what plans the government has in mind with respect to the allocation of this work across Canada. I believe that the minister's department should be concentrating as much as possible on matters such as these in an endeavour to obtain some cohesion across the country so that we shall know what we are stepping into when the war is over and what type of public buildings will be erected and where.
I was considerably surprised by the minister's statement that he had difficulty in finding architects, because information that I received as late as last fall indicated1 that architects were available. It may be that engineers are not available, but I believe that if the minister would canvass the situation carefully and advertise extensively he would find that architects are available, provided that they are paid adequately and reasonably for the services which they render.
May I suggest to the minister that when he considers this problem across the country he should remember that many municipalities, towns and cities have plans either ready or in mind, and that he should in some way or another endeavour to work out some kind of proposition so that all these plans and suggestions will be gathered together and correlated. In that connection may I say it has been brought to my attention that some of the smaller municipalities and towns find themselves in a position where they are unable to give complete details to the minister's department or to the administration with respect to proposed public works because they have not the necessary money with which to prepare the blueprints. I have in mind a communication which I received from the town of Sutherland, in my own constituency. They say that although they have certain plans which they should like to pass on to the administration, they cannot afford to spend several thousand dollars in the preparation of blueprints, not knowing whether or not in the final analysis the plans will be accepted.
I suggest to the minister and to the ad' ministration that some kind of plan should be

War Appropriation-Public Works
worked out whereby those municipalities, particularly in what are called the unorganized areas, may be in a position to present complete and adequate plans to the administration. The same difficulty does not arise in the larger cities, because they have the necessary staff and finances to carry out this work, but the smaller places find themselves in a position where they cannot do this 'Work.
May I suggest to the administration that when it comes to the erection of these public works consideration be given to an endeavour to solve the problem which has arisen as a result of the war, namely, the congestion in certain parts of the country. The minister and his advisers should consider the commencement of these works, particularly in areas such as in Saskatchewan, which, because of the necessities of war, have been denuded of their population, which has been brought down to this part of the country and other congested areas. It seems to me that the administration would be very well advised to keep this in mind, so that these works will be among the first to be undertaken in order that we may complete the decentralization which will have to be brought about if we are to have a proper and adequate economy in this dominion.


Alphonse Fournier: This item was studied by the department with one object. In the last year before the war the department spent something like $27,000,000 on public works. This year the ordinary estimates are down to something like $13,600,000. This means that we have not maintained our public buildings, wharves, breakwaters and so on, in the state of repair in which they would have been maintained had more money been placed at our disposal. We shall have our architects and engineers go over these works that belong to the federal government and make a report on their condition, in order to see what expenditures will be necessary to put them in a good state of repair. In addition, every day we receive requests for public buildings throughout the country, and we are convinced that many of them are needed. I would not want the committee to think that this item was brought in here by the department as the reconstruction programme of the government. This provides for the reconstruction of our own works immediately after the war; it will form a part, but not a very large part, of that post-war programme. Supposing we should fall back into a period of depression and unemployment; we have tried public works in the past, and they are not a cure or even a palliative for unemployment. They can help, as
they have helped in the past, but I believe- and I am speaking personally-that a reconstruction programme should include much more than just public works, because public works coming under federal jurisdiction are limited to certain kinds of buildings and other projects, which we are quite ready to undertake.
I make this statement so that hon. members will not think it has been decided by the government that this amount represents the reconstruction programme envisaged by the setting up of a reconstruction department to coordinate the efforts of all departments of government. This money will be expended on our own works, in an attempt to put them in a good state of repair and develop them where necessary for the good of the public service.


John George Diefenbaker: Is this not part of the government's post-war scheme to take up the slack in employment?


Alphonse Fournier: Not in the sense my hon. friend has in mind. This is a departmental post-war plan to take care of property coming under our control.


John George Diefenbaker: That being the case, is there any government plan under which the Department of Public Works will consider some segment of the greater problem of postwar employment?


Alphonse Fournier: I believe that is a matter of policy which will be dealt with in due course. I do not think under this item I have authority to deal with the policy of the government as a whole in connection with reconstruction projects.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I believe it is the thought of the Prime Minister that one memorial to those who give their lives in this conflict might be the general reconstruction of the city of Ottawa, and I am wondering whether such plans are included in this item.
There is another matter I should like to suggest to the minister along the line of memorials which might be constructed in local communities when the war is over. The suggestion I am going to offer appeals to me very much. It was made to me in a letter I received not long ago from a member of the armed forces serving overseas. His thought was that when the war is over and local communities are thinking in terms of the most suitable kind of memorial to erect to the memory of those who gave their lives in service, it might be desirable to construct something really useful in the community. Several times this afternoon the minister has referred to public buildings and has made it clear that

War Appropriation-Public Works
in using those words he is thinking primarily of buildings for government departments, for office purposes and so on. There are other kinds of public buildings that we might take into consideration, such as adequate community halls, particularly in rural communities, which would be useful not only for office purposes but for a large number of Canadian citizens. That, indeed, is the suggestion which my correspondent has made to me, and because it appeals to me I offer it to the minister now. As he may know, the community halls we have in some parts of the country to-day do not fill the bill. In many cases they are fire-traps and lack such things as accommodation for a district nurse, committee room space for men's and women's organizations, agricultural societies, boys' and girls' clubs and organizations of that kind. There is also the matter of toilet accommodation and washroom facilities necessary in local communities, particularly when one thinks of days when the whole countryside visits the town for some particular occasion. One thinks also of attractive dance halls, and facilities for drama and other seasonal activities which might be provided in such community halls, together with basement facilities for games and other activities.
This is the sort of thing that might well be realized if some lead were given in the matter. The suggestion in the letter to which I have referred is that the federal government thinking in terms of post-war construction, might offer to put up dollar for dollar with local communities to enable them to erect adequate fireproof community halls containing the facilities I have already suggested. No doubt in some communities an idea of this kind will take root and be acted upon. There can be no doubt of the need for it, particularly in rural communities. Although I do not represent a rural constituency I know something about life in the country, particularly in western Canada. Bearing in mind the need for this kind of thing, I believe it would be a worth-while gesture if the government were to give consideration to the idea.
As I said a moment ago, when the minister speaks about public buildings he appears to think only of buildings which provide office space for government departments. We recognize the need for those buildings, not only in Ottawa but throughout the country. I suggest, however, that there is also this other kind of public building which could be of real service to a community.


Mr. STIRLING:: And use the taxpayers' money for it?
fMr. Knowles.]


Stanley Howard Knowles: I suggest, too, that the money the people of this country will want to spend on some kind of suitable memorials for those who are serving and giving their lives in this conflict would perhaps be spent more wisely and more usefully if a lead of this kind were given. I am wondering whether anything of this nature is included in the item for postwar construction. If not, would the minister take it into consideration?


Alphonse Fournier: No; under the item for post-war reconstruction we do not contemplate erecting any buildings or works which are not for the use of government services. War memorials are not comprised in this item.


Clarence Gillis: I should like to ask a question connected with this matter of post-war reconstruction.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I believe the minister has stated that he can answer no question of policy with respect to the post-war programme. We are dealing with public works actually in existence.


Clarence Gillis: I am going to ask about public works. The minister will remember that in December and January I had some correspondence with him, and interviewed an officer in the Department of Public Works in respect of the breakwater at Port Morien, Nova Scotia. In the minister's last letter dated January 13 he mentioned that an item in connection with the post-war reconstruction programme would be placed in the main estimates to take care of that situation. I have gone through those estimates, and I find no such item.


Alphonse Fournier: That would not be a war appropriation.


Clarence Gillis: It is not in the main estimates, either.


Alphonse Fournier: But there will be supplementary estimates.


Clarence Gillis: I merely wanted to know if the minister still had the matter in mind, because it is closely connected with the livelihood of the entire village.


Alphonse Fournier: I wrote a letter stating that we would have an estimate, and there will be an estimate.


Clarence Gillis: I hope there will be.


Mr. TUSTIN:: In connection with the item of S95,000 for the preparation of plans and specifications has the minister any definite proposals in mind, or is he talking only in generalities?

War Appropriation-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: Mostly generalities because, as I said, these men are going to look over the buildings, see what has to be done to them, report to the department, and then prepare plans in the department either for repair and maintenance, for the putting up of new buildings, or for the extension of those in existence. The same applies to the item under the chief engineer's branch, and having to do with wharves, breakwaters and the like. I cannot give a specific instance. We are putting these people to work to make the necessary reports. Then we will prepare the plans according to the reports.


James Alexander Marshall: Are these new departments to be set up, separate and entirely different from the other departments?


Alphonse Fournier: No. They come under the chief architect's branch and the chief engineer's branch. There is no change in the set-up.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Post-war construction programme,_ surveys, preparation of plans and specifications, etc., $146,000.
Mr. MacNICOL:: Why are any of these
items in the war appropriation measure? So far as I can see, they all pertain to the postwar period.
Mr. FOURNIER (Hull)1: We have thought in the department that during the war we should have an item in which we would prepare for the post-war period. This amount of $146,000 in the chief engineer's branch is for surveys of which I have spoken. They are to be made all through the country, and on both coasts, to see in what state our works are, and what will have to be done after the war to make repairs and extensions, and to provide new works.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I Would understand that to be ordinary, routine, departmental business. I should think the engineers and architects, in the ordinary course of their activities, would consider what repairs or additions should be made to buildings, either now or after the war. I cannot understand why we are discussing this programme under a war appropriation measure. I can understand that the minister's department has little or nothing to do with post-war reconstruction because, according to the announcement by the Prime Minister, a new department to be known as the reconstruction department is to be set up. It will be the business of that new department to provide employment in a large reconstruction scheme. I should think the activities of the minister's department would be confined to 100-187
regular public buildings, and his department would do as it has been doing for years. Why are these two items in the war estimates?


Alphonse Fournier: Perhaps I did
not make myself clear. Every year since the beginning of the war the budget of this department has been decreasing. We have not done the work on our own buildings and works that we do in ordinary, normal times. The cut has been made because of the war. The reason given me as to why the amount appears here, instead of in the civil estimates, is that we say the work is brought about by war conditions, and because we have not had the amount required to do the necessary work during the war. Year in and year out, since the war began, we have cut our civil estimates, and they have now reached a point where they are about half of what they were before the war.


John Ritchie MacNicol: In reality these two postwar items have nothing to do with the war appropriation measure, or the conduct of the war.


Alphonse Fournier: They may be
applied to works which will be useful to the war.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Would this item take care
of projects such as the strait of Canso causeway, and the tunnel between the mainland of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island?


Alphonse Fournier: I understand
that those matters would come under the Department of Transport, rather than the Department of Public Works.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: That is what I wanted to know. The transport items have not been dealt with.


Gordon Graydon: I fancy that there are a number of hon. members who would like to know about that. They are waiting for transport.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: It has been suggested by an hon. member that I should appeal to the Minister of Public Works to make representations on behalf of the people in the eastern section of our country to the Minister of Transport to have this done at as early a date as possible.


Gordon Graydon: Is he so hard to approach as all that?


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: He is fairly reasonable and willing to undertake anything that is presented to him, but sometimes he cannot see things just the way we would like him to. We will continue to make the representations we have made in the past.



War Appropriation-Public Works


Gordon Graydon: You might call in the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services as well.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: He is always willing to help that section of Canada.


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: "Ready, aye ready," is my motto.


John George Diefenbaker: I think this item requires further explanation by the minister. Possibly the best way to get this explanation is to ask him if during peace time it was customary to retain the services of architects and engineers apart from those employed by the Department of Public Works.


Alphonse Fournier: I understand that temporary employees were engaged to meet the requirements of the department. Because of war conditions and lack of funds a number of buildings have deteriorated, and it was thought that we should survey every property and prepare plans so that we would be ready after the war as soon as parliament voted the necessary amounts, to do these repairs or extensions.


John George Diefenbaker: Then I understand that the architects and engineers employed by the Department of Public Works do not have the work to do now that they had before the war?


Alphonse Fournier: Do not change what I have said. There are three different types of work carried on by my department. First, there are the ordinary works. We did not get the vote we were accustomed to getting for this work. Then we have war work, and then we do work for other departments, such as pensions and national health and munitions and supply. Those three types of work come under the chief architect's branch and the chief engineer's branch.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: Does the department employ outside engineers as well? Some time ago the minister was in Toronto and he tried to give us some idea of what was to take place after the war. I do not think he told us very much about what the post-war planning was. As I understand it, this item is to take the place of estimates which were not granted during the war. It is simply a civil estimate and it should not be here at all.


Alphonse Fournier: When I was in Toronto I did not speak so much of post-war planning; I was asking the people of Toronto to tell me about their post-war plans so that the department would know what was planned for Toronto, or for any other section of the country.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: As a result of the trip the minister made to Toronto, perhaps he
[Mr. Isnor.l
can tell us something about the suggestions which were made by various members from that city and by people of Toronto. Is it intended to do anything constructive as far as our city is concerned?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I do not think a report by the minister about Toronto has anything to do with the item.


Major James William Coldwell: Does this item include repairs that- have been deferred as well as plans for post-war projects other than repairs or extensions of existing buildings, as has been suggested by the senior member for Halifax?


Alphonse Fournier: Not under this item.


Major James William Coldwell: Is that being done under any other item?


Alphonse Fournier: There are people working in the department all the year round on plans and specifications for different works. We do not have a special item for that, but we are receiving reports from our district engineers all over the countiy and the work on those reports is carried on at the head office in Ottawa. This item is to cover the preparation of plans for repairs or extensions or the construction of new buildings which are needed and which were not carried on because of the war. We have not received from parliament the money necessary to keep these buildings in the state of repair in which we thought they should be kept, and we thought that now was the time to make a general survey and prepare plans so that we could go ahead as soon after the war as parliament might grant us the money.


Major James William Coldwell: Should this item not be in the civil estimates? It has to do with ordinary repairs and extensions of buildings, work which has been normally deferred. It seems to me it is entirely misleading to the committee to have this item in these estimates. When I saw it I was pleased because I thought the government was prepared to do something concrete, even though it was in a small way. I have been looking for something of this sort for a long time and I thought this was at least something that was being done to prepare a programme of work for the post-war period.


Gordon Graydon: You are too innocent.
Mr. COLDW'ELL: I usually am quite innocent. We now find that this is an ordinary civil estimate and it does not give the right impression to the committee. The minister cannot be particularly busy with his ordinary civil public works just now and I had hoped that he would be devoting some

War Appropriation-Public Works
time to preparing a real programme for postwar development. The Canso causeway was mentioned.


Alphonse Fournier: That would not come under public works.


Major James William Coldwell: There is to be a provincial election in Saskatchewan and a bridge has been promised across the Saskatchewan river in my constituency. I used to raise the question of this bridge with the former government member, Mr. Bothwell, prior to the war, and the predecessors of the minister always promised that it would be considered.


Alphonse Fournier: It could be considered under this item.


Major James William Coldwell: It is being considered under this item?


Alphonse Fournier: It could be.


Major James William Coldwell: My hope was that projects of that description would be considered under this item.


Alphonse Fournier: Every hon.
member wants some project considered under this vote.


Major James William Coldwell: I am not asking for any special consideration; I am simply saying that projects of this description ought to be considered now. Projects that are deserving, not just because a particular member sits for a particular constituency, should be considered in time of war for completion in the post-war period in order to give employment, assist industry and all the rest of it. I am disappointed that the minister is not doing what I thought he was doing. I wish to express my regret. I think we should see to it that this item is transferred from where it is now to the civil estimates.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member was absent from the committee when I tried to explain to the best of my ability why this item had been put in the war estimates.


Major James William Coldwell: No one understood it; that is why I ask the question.


Alphonse Fournier: The other hon. members stopped talking after I explained and my hon. friend is the only one who has raised it again.


Gordon Graydon: For a different reason.


Major James William Coldwell: I came in with reinforcements.


Alphonse Fournier: The work we shall be doing under this item has not been done hitherto because of the war. Any project that is under federal jurisdiction could be studied, 100-187J
of course, but I would not want to promise that we will study projects for dance halls and things of that kind all over the country.


Major James William Coldwell: Nobody suggested dance halls, surely?


Alphonse Fournier: That was suggested while the hon. member was out of the house.


Major James William Coldwell: Community halls.


George James Tustin: This item reads "post-war construction programme". I listened attentively to the minister's explanation, and I gathered that what is to be done under this item is to make a survey of present buildings that may need to be renovated after the war. The minister has explained to us several times that his estimates have been cut almost in half within the last three or four years and that he has not been able to keep up the public buildings. To be quite clear about the matter I would ask the minister to state whether this is a post-war construction programme or just a survey of the buildings that may need to be renovated after the war. If I understood the minister aright, the details given on this page are entirely wrong. If the details are correct. I cannot understand the minister's explanation.


Alphonse Fournier: If the hon. member would read the item as post-war construction programme with respect to our own property or public works, that is all that it means. The hon. member for Lake Centre asked if this was part of a large reconstruction programme after the war and I said, no; that it was a programme applying only to our own public buildings.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Does it include harbours and things like that?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.


James Alexander Marshall: I find that the civil estimates of the chief engineer's branch have been steadily increasing since the beginning of the war. For instance, in 1942-43 they were $659,000, and in 1943-44^-


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Order. We are dealing with the war appropriation, not with civil estimates. There will be an opportunity to discuss them when civil estimates are before the committee.


James Alexander Marshall: I am quite aware of that, Mr. Chairman. But the impression was being left with the committee that the majority of this-vote has nothing to do with the chief engineer's branch.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Jl'fir Appropriation-Transport
[Stage Direction]
Sundry services, $2,000.
Mr. MaoNICOL: Following the item just passed, the next item reads, "Seymour Narrows, B.C.-removal Ripple Rocks".
Joseph-Arthur Bradette: There is a summary of the items before the committee.


Alphonse Fournier: Last year we had a vote of $200,000 for the removal of Ripple Rocks. This year we have no item for that purpose but are considering the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Telegraph branch-*
Ottawa-telephone service, $390,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: What does this cover?


Alphonse Fournier: It covers service to 6,221 telephones which have been installed for the war departments since the war.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And long distance charges?


Alphonse Fournier: No. It covers a charge of $1.33 a month for each telephone, plus a mileage rate for telephone lines, and certain fixed charges which have been approved by the board of transport commissioners, all new equipment required to operate government phones, as well as the salaries of the additional operators required.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
Departmental administration, $26,960.
Gordon Graydon: I take this opportunity, at the opening of the minister's estimates under the war appropriation resolution, to enlarge upon a matter I brought up at a similar stage of the session last year. I rise to say a word about the employees of our railway transportation systems, and I do so because, during this war time, the strain, the stress and the pressure which have been placed upon the two major railway systems have been most extraordinary. I think the committee ought to take these facts into consideration. Take the question of ^passenger traffic alone. If the minister will recall, last year I put on the record the figures of passenger traffic, showing that in 1939, the year the war broke out, the railways of Canada carried 17,000,000 passengers, which figure had risen in 1942, the year prior to my speaking on the matter in this house, to 42,000,000. In 1943 that figure had risen still farther to 52,000,000 persons carried

on the railways in Canada. I' am not sure, but I believe there was at the same time a substantial decrease in the number of employees of both systems. Previously they had carried 17,000,000 persons and that number had been trebled in the last year. That alone would indicate how the railways, and particularly their employees, have measured up to the challenge which the war has presented to the transportation industry of Canada.
Added to the passenger position, I had the figures checked with regard to freight, and while figures are not always interesting, these particular figures should be borne in mind by the committee. In the year the war broke out the railways carried 69,000,000 tons of freight. By 1942 the freight haulage had risen to 107,000,000 tons and last year it had increased still farther to 133,000,000. In other words, the quantity had doubled from 1939.
Those of us who have had the privilege of travelling to any great extent on the passenger trains of Canada will realize how little, if at all-and I emphasize that qualification-the convenience of travellers, and their comfort, have been interfered with during this strenuous war-time period. That is due largely if not entirely to the type of employees, who, as I have said, have measured up so well to the challenge thrown out to them by the war.
May I say a word also with regard to the enlistments from among the employees of the railways. I also put certain figures on the record last year in this connection. There have been substantial increases since. The latest figures show an enlistment percentage which is extremely high. They show that from eighteen to twenty per cent of the employees of both roads have enlisted for active service in Canada's armed forces. The enlistments to date from the Canadian National Railways total 18,434, and from the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, 18,726, so that well over 37,000 of our railway employees are in the services.


Mr. SLAGHT:: And the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario will compare favourably as well.


Gordon Graydon: I am not quite as well versed with respect to the T. and N.O., but my information would bear out what the hon. gentleman has said in that regard. That road will compare favourably indeed with any others in Canada. I say, therefore, that these matters, in the general discussion which will take place on these estimates, must not be lost sight of because they show that the railway employees of Canada have played a magnificent part in this war and have made a splendid contribution. It is a contribution

War Appropriation-Transport
which Canadians would expect from the men and women engaged in our transportation service.
In concluding my remarks, I take a little pride in the fact that the first job I ever had was with one of our railway systems in western Canada, and I think I can say something about railway employees with perhaps a little more emphasis and somewhat more from the heart than others may be able to do. They have played a part in the welfare of the country which perhaps Canadians do not generally recognize. We do not always express our appreciation of and gratitude for the splendid service which these employees have rendered, and therefore I take this opportunity, at this stage of the debate, to make this reference to a section of the community who, in my opinion, are entitled to the thanks of this committee, of the House of Commons and of the country.


Major James William Coldwell: I, too, would say something about the contribution! which the railways have made during this time of war. I suppose we from western Canada use these lines more than most other people in, the country, and I may say that I have relied on railways all my life for very much that I have had1 to do. For some years, when I was a boy, I took the train early in the morning to go to school forty miles away and I came back the same way at night. The attitude of some people and. of this house toward the railway systems of Canada is altogether different from what it was a few years ago. We used to hear a great deal of criticism of the Canadian National Railways. We were told that we had too many lines of railways, that the National railway was running the eountrj-, that they were too extensive, and so on. To-day, we can ask ourselves the question, where would we have been during this war had we not had these transcontinental systems? I am sure the Canadian Pacific Railway company would have given a great deal in 1941 and 1942 to have the rails which were pulled up in northern Ontario during the depression years, because they would have assisted in the carriage of the very heavy traffic across the country.
We should not lose sight of the fact that, after all, Canada as a nation could not exist without those bands of steel which unite the country from one end to the other. Before the war the railways were in danger of losing a great deal of profitable revenue by the competition of trucks and other forms of transportation. I have always believed that our transportation system ought to be considered as one public service and integrated as an entity. Instead of trucks competing with
the railways for the profitable freight and express, the better traffic, they ought to be complementary or supplementary to the railway systems. There is plenty of room for trucks and buses to serve areas in this country where there is no railway transportation or where the transportation on the railways is inadequate.
I think the committee will do well at this time to express the gratitude we all feel to the railway systems, and particularly to the men who have done this remarkable job. I have met railway men during this war who have travelled thousands of miles every month and who from time to time thought they were going to get a good night's rest but who have been called to take out another train of supplies that were needed for the war effort. Those of us who have been in other countries since the war broke out and have seen the manner in which the people of those countries have to travel in war time realize that we in this dominion do indeed travel in luxury on our main lines of railway. Even in the great country to the south of us, the United States, I have found that the dining-car service there does not compare with ours. The service in our country far excels any dining-car service that I have seen even on the very best lines in the United States, lines such as the one running between New York and Washington. I think the tribute which was paid by the leader of the opposition a few moments ago to the manner in which the railways have been operated and the manner in which the men have given service to the communities at this time should be endorsed by everyone. We have men of all types, races and colours on our railways, and from the porters on the sleeping-cars to the men on the front of the train operating the engine I think we can say that they have done a truly remarkable job, a most wonderful contribution to the effort of this country during this period of war.


James Arthur Ross: I should like to endorse the remarks made by the two previous speakers as to the splendid job that has been done by our railway systems during the past four years.
I wish to ask the minister a question concerning the purchase of certain property by his department. I refer to property bought in 1942 for the Gimli airport, approximately sixty miles north of Winnipeg. The original purchase price paid by the settlers for that entire block of land was $11,515. The total 1942 municipal assessment value of land was $3,815, and the assessment of buildings, $3,420, making a total assessment of $7,235. In 1942, the government, through the transport department, paid $52,150 for the 724 acres, or an average
War Appropriation-Transport

of $72 an acre for the land and whatever buildings were thereon. This airport land cost the vendors originally an average of $15.99 an acre. One vendor bought his property in 1905, 120 acres, for $2,800, or $23 and some cents an acre. The year next furthest back was 1909 when 160 acres were purchased for $1,300, or $8.50 an acre. The next is 1910 when some 160 acres were bought for $1,000, or $625 an acre. I think, all told, there were some thirteen parcels in this. purchase. The first one was purchased from one Frazier, fifteen acres, the land being assessed for $80 and buildings for $70; the value at that time was $700. The government paid $1,500. Number 3 was the Schnerch property, forty-seven acres *of land assessed at $250. There were no buildings on the land. The land was purchased on November 18, 1921, for $850, and the government paid $2,450. Number 2 was purchased from Julius and Mary Solomon, eighteen acres of land assessed at $100 and buildings assessed at $90. They purchased it on December 1, 1921, for $700, and the government paid $2,000.
Number 4 was purchased from Marks Steblinski, eighty acres of land assessed for $400 and buildings for $160. The registered deed was issued on February 3, 1937. He paid $2,000 for this parcel, and the government paid $6,000 for it. The cottage which was on the land was moved off the property into the village of Gimli and is now occupied by the original owners. Parcels Nos. 5 and 6 were purchased from Michael and William Hykanay, eighty acres of land assessed for $400 and the buildings assessed for $800. This land was purchased on July 26, 1926, for $1,400. The government paid $7,500. Parcels Nos. 7 and 8 were bought from Michael and George Wawrykow, 160 acres of land assessed for $800 and the buildings assessed for $800. This land was purchased in 1918 for $1,800 in United States funds, and the government paid $11,200 for this parcel.
Parcel No. 9 was bought from Mike Yurek-chuck, 159 acres assessed for $800 and the buildings assessed for $800. This was acquired by deed on March 31, 1910, for SI ,000. The government paid $10,800. Parcels Nos. 10 and 11 consisted of a community hall and li acres of land. They do not appear in this statement.
Parcel No. 12 was bought from Wasyl Ewanchuk, 80 acres and 160 acres assessed for $830 and the buildings for $600. One hundred and sixty acres were purchased by the vendor in 1909 for $1,200. The government paid $7,100 for eighty acres of this land. Parcel No. 13 was bought from Gudjou

Narfason, 120 acres of land assessed for $650 -there were no buildings on it. This land was purchased for $1,865, and the government bought eighty acres of it and paid $3,900.
During the same year there was much better agricultural land witih considerably better types of buildings on it purchased in southwestern Manitoba at a much lower price. This land was much closer to the main line of railway and assessed several times higher in value. This land was taken over by the government for an airport at much less than one-half of the price per acre of the Gimli airport, and the owners of the property did not wish to part with it at that time.
Then we have the case of the Netley airport, twenty miles from Gimli. That land was acquired, including buildings and compensation, for an average of $30.75 an acre, land which, to say the least, was comparable with the Gimli land.
There was some controversy during the fall of 1942 over this Gimli property when a lengthy statement was made by the then representative of the riding, an hon. member who was in the cabinet, the Hon. Mr. Thor-son. He hinted that this deal must have been all right because it had been valued by one J. J. Swanson, who had been a candidate of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation for a seat in parliament at one time; also that one of the properties purchased was owned by the family of an individual who is now a C.C.F. member of the legislative assembly of Manitoba. I do not know why the then minister should have made that statement; I do not see that it had any bearing at all. I think it is distinctly the responsibility of the government. About this time or during the controversy the present Minister of Transport was reported in the press to have stated that everything was perfectly in order in this deal because the original owners had paid $40 an acre for the land. I have already cited to you, Mr. Chairman, and it can be borne out by the land titles office in Manitoba, the cost of this land. The original cost to the vendors was, on the average, $15.99 an acre. Surely the government have some system of checking on these property deals. This one happens to be in my province. I remember an hon. member raising a question in the house some time ago as to the purchase of property in the province of Quebec, at, I think, Granby. He pointed out that a property there had been offered to the government gratis for the establishment of an industry; that a man had purchased the land for $100 an acre and later had sold part of the poorer land for $400 an acre to the Department of Munitions and Supply. I am just

War Appropriation-Transport
giving this as another example, for I am rather concerned, as are many people in my part of the country, over the wide variations in the amounts that have been paid by the government for land of the same type during these war years. I trust the minister can tell us what system they follow in making these purchases or in agreeing upon values which will be at least in the interests of the taxpayers.


Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (Minister of Transport) :: I do not know why the hon. member
should bring up the question of the Gimli airport now-


James Arthur Ross: I can tell the minister.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: -because it was gone into quite fully about two years ago. Possibly the hon. member is under the impression that the work was done by employees of the Department of Transport, and that this item for administration includes part of the salaries of these people, as a result of which he feels at liberty to discuss this matter now. For his information I may state that I have nothing before me in regard to the purchase of that land, because nothing in the item under consideration has any connection with the payment of any of the employees who did that work. That land was purchased for the Department of Munitions and Supply, which had to do the work and whose responsibility it was to buy land and equip airports for the Department of National Defence for Air. The services of the land valuators of the Canadian National Railways were employed in connection with the purchase of all property required for w7ar purposes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: For war
purposes?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes, and in peace time
as well, but we are now speaking of war expenditures.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Was that true of the Winter club in Montreal? Did they value that property?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No; that was the air
force. The question of the Gimli airport was aired at that time. My only connection with it arose from the fact that for the time being I happened to be acting for my colleague, who was out of the country for a few weeks. That was the only connection the Department of Transport had, as such, with the purchase or valuation of land in connection with the Gimli airport. If I remember correctly, the services of two land valuators, located in Winnipeg, of the western division of the Canadian National Railways were employed; and because there was some little criticism of the work done by these people some so-called independent valuators-I think the name of the company was Swanson-were asked to revise and check up on the work of the valuators of the railway company. There is nothing in this item that has any connection with the salaries of the officers of the department who had any connection with the purchase of that land.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Since I am the minister who
was responsible for the purchase of the land for the Gimli airport I should like to make a few comments. It is strange, I think, that my hon. friend should have waited until this occasion to bring up an item which has been before the house several times. I have been prepared to discuss the Gimli airport on a number of occasions; it has been threatened as a subject of discussion here for years. The purchase was discussed in a Winnipeg newspaper, I think at least two years ago; the curbstone opinions of a number of Winnipeg people were published in the newspaper at that time, though I do not believe any of them had ever examined the property. Tonight we are told what the purchase price of the property was in 1910. May I ask my hon. friend if the purchase price in 1910 would be any guide as to the selling price in 1942?


Richard Burpee Hanson: No; but
in law it is one criterion.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is, raw land at that
time is the same as cultivated land thirty years later?


James Arthur Ross: Mr. Chairman-


Clarence Decatur Howe: Oh, sit down.


James Arthur Ross: You asked me a question, and I am going to answer it.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: The minister has the floor. The hon. gentleman will have a chanct to answer the question later, if he wishes to do so.


James Arthur Ross: Both ministers have belittled me for bringing up this matter at this stage of the proceedings. I wish to make it quite clear that one of the last items discussed in this house last session was in connection with the war expenditures committee. At that time I attempted to discuss this matter and was ruled out of order by Mr. Speaker, who did not quote any particular rule or reason for doing so. I had no other opportunity to discuss the situation. This is not such an ancient matter as the minister would have the people believe. This airport was opened only last year, and I have had no other opportunity to discuss the matter without being ruled out
War Appropriation-Transport

of order again. The property was purchased by the Department of Transport, and I am sure I am perfectly in order in discussing it under this item. If I had not done so it would have been buried again.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We discussed the airport estimates of the Department of Munitions and Supply some three weeks ago, and we also discussed similar estimates a year ago.


James Arthur Ross: When was this property purchased?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It was purchased in 1941, I think.


James Arthur Ross: By the transport
department?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It was purchased by the
Department of Munitions and Supply.


James Arthur Ross: It was purchased in 1942; the order was issued on June 10 of that year, and it was purchased by the Department of Transport.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The position in regard to the Gimli airport is simply this. The Department of Munitions and Supply received a requisition from the Royal Canadian Air Force for a bombing and gunnery school, which included an airport and a bombing and gunnery range. The dimensions of the bombing and gunnery range, as I remember them, were fifteen miles by eight miles. In order to acquire a range of that kind reasonably, it is necessary to use a body of water. There are two other bombing and gunnery schools in that area, which had used the two available lakes of the size required for a bombing and gunnery range. The only lake with an area large enough and suitable for the purpose was lake Gimli. Therefore it was necessary to establish the airport near lake Gimli. A thorough survey of the area was made, and it was decided that the cultivated land, adjacent to the village of Gimli, which was ultimately purchased, was by far the most suitable land for the purpose. It was estimated that the cost of clearing raw land for this purpose would be 8100 an acre more than the cost of using cultivated land. Options were taken in the area, and the department was astonished at the price. Our surveyors were asked to go back and try again. Once more they returned and said that this area was infinitely more suitable for the purpose than any other in the vicinity of lake Gimli.
I may add that the purchase was in charge of the lands division of the Canadian National Railways, which has handled all land transactions for the Department of Munitions and

Supply since the department was formed. Colonel Clarke, head of that division, was in general charge, while the western representatives of the railway in the land department were in immediate charge. Colonel Clarke was asked to get an independent valuation, and he chose the Swanson firm. Colonel Swanson was at that time, or had been very shortly before, president of the Winnipeg real estate board, and, in the opinion of Colonel Clarke, who made the choice, it was a thoroughly reputable firm. It was solely his choice. Colonel Swanson made a detailed valuation. He and his staff spent some time at the site, and submitted a report on values which was considerably in excess of the options that had been taken by Colonel Clarke. A thorough discussion was had. Officers of my department were consulted, and it has been explained to me that the site chosen is made up of highly productive land. It is in a dairying section, and it was pointed out that there was not a mortgage on any piece of land; that all lands were owned debt-free. The farmers were prosperous and doing well, and some of them were extremely reluctant to sell at any price. The owners took the view they were getting on very well, and they wished the Department of Munitions and Supply would go elsewhere for their airport.
Having all these reports before me, and all the information I could obtain, I decided it was better business for the government to pay the price asked than it would be to expropriate, and to leave the fixing of values to the exchequer court. These were small farmers, small holders, men who were being deprived of their source of livelihood and who had to settle elsewhere. It was thought it would be unfair to these 'small holders to put them to the expense of exchequer court proceedings, and cause delay in payment for the land, payment upon which they must depend to reestablish themselves in other locations.
On the other side it was felt by my officers- an opinion in which I concurred-that after ten per cent was added for forcible taking the chances were that the government would pay more for the land, as a result of an exchequer court finding, than it would pay by accepting the options which had been obtained by Colonel Clark. I may say that it has been our experience that wherever we have submitted the purchase of land to the exchequer court we have paid more for it than the price for which we could have purchased it through direct negotiation. I can give chapter and verse for that, in respect of a considerable number of airport sites which have been acquired by expropriation.

War Appropriation-Transport
The airport was built. I may say that it was the cheapest airport among the bombing and gunnery schools. Results amply bore out the information given to me that this was very suitable land for an airport. As I have said, I have been prepared on other-and appropriate-occasions, to supply all the information bearing on this airport. I could have given my hon. friend chapter and verse for every parcel of land included in the area.
I do say this: I take full responsibility for the purchase of the Gimli airport. I am willing to appear before any tribunal and justify the purchase. I believe I can bring evidence of responsible people who have had years of training in the purchase of real estate, and who actually went on the site and explored the situation upon which their report was made, sufficient to justify the transaction.


Mr. DORION (Translation):: Mr. Chairman, before we start on the detailed examination of the estimates submitted to us by the Minister of Transport (Mr. Michaud), I wish to make a very special appeal to him on behalf of a class of citizens about whom we seldom hear in this house, namely, our college students. I wish to call the minister's attention to them, following some steps that were taken in December last so that they might continue to enjoy the privilege of reduced fares which the railways used to grant them when they went home for the Christmas or summer holidays. Having been advised by many of them at the beginning of December last that such a privilege would no longer be granted, I communicated, in the first place, with Mr. G. A. Brass, chairman of the Canadian Pas-.senger Association, from whom I received the following letter:
December 8, 1943
Dear Sir:
Referring to your telegram of date regarding students' Christmas vacation fares.
As you know, it has heretofore been the practice of the railways to authorize reduced fares during public holiday periods, such as Christmas, New Year, Easter, et cetera, and, as a part of the general public holiday arrangement, to also accord to students and teachers a longer period of sale and return limit to coincide with the period of school closing.
However, under the provisions of orders in council P.C. 2557 and P.C. 6372, the railways are prohibited from authorizing any reduced faxes for public holidays. . . . Consequently, the customary holiday fares for the general public, including students, during the Christmas and New Year holidays will not be authorized this year.
I regret that, under these circumstances, we shall be unable to make any exception in the case of the students referred to.
Yours truly,
J. A. Brass, Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the Minister of Transport should, before the end of the present school term, see to it that these orders in . council are amended to enable these college students to benefit from the reductions which they enjoyed in the past. And in support of this appeal, I feel that I cannot do better than to read excerpts from three letters which I received last December and which give a true picture of the plight of our college students. I quote the following from one dated December 4, 1943, which I received from Mr. Paul Emile Tremblay, of the Seminary of Chicoutimi:
We, of Charlevoix-Saguenay, have learned with considerable dismay of this extraordinary announcement. Indeed most of us belong to large families who are forced to make sacrifices in order to enable one of their members to complete his education.
We cannot afford to pay twenty-five, thirty-five or even fifty dollars (in the case of those who live on the north shore) for two weeks' holidays. If we were earning money, the situation might be different, but we must face facts. This is why, to-day, more than seventy-five young men from Charlevoix-Saguenay request your help.
I have received another, bearing the date of December 4, 1943, and signed by Mr. Saul Otis, of the Seminary of Chicoutimi. It says in part:
Consider my case. I live at Baie-Saint-Paul, [DOT]which is quite a distance. This trip would call for an expenditure of about $20 for fare alone, and as I have a brother with me, a total of $40 would be required. Do you think it is fair to have us spend $40 just for a very short stay in our family?
And, finally, I shall read the following excerpt from a letter of December 5, 1943, signed by Mr. Alphee Lessard:
However, unless I can get a reduction, I shall be compelled to spend the holiday season within the four walls of my seminary.
I believe, Mr. Chairman, that the Minister of Transport should listen to the appeals of these young people and take the measures necessary to have them enjoy, as I said before, the rate reductions to which they have been accustomed. When all is told, we should not forget that most of these students are members of large and poor families and I feel that the Minister of Transport would deserve commendation if he had this order in council amended.
War Appropriation-Transport

(Text)


Mr. GOLDING:: The last time this question of the Gimli airport was raised by the bon. member for Souris, namely the occasion when the war expenditures committee was under discussion, he promised he would prove to the house that this land cost the department $72 an acre. At that time I said that that was not true.


James Arthur Ross: Land and buildings.


William Henry Golding: The hon. member did not say land and buildings.


James Arthur Ross: Read the record tomorrow and see.


William Henry Golding: If that is true, I have no more to say.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That may be a good idea.


William Henry Golding: The hon. member for York-Sunbury knows something about taking land, and I am sure he will appreciate that the report of the department states that the value of the land was $45.00 an acre; the buildings were valued at an average of $20 an acre, and forced vacating was valued at ten per cent, or $6.40, which made a total of $72. The Winnipeg Tribune compared the purchase of this land at Gimli with the purchase of land at Carberry, but the fact is that at Carberry no buildings were involved and the average price paid per acre was $43. I refer the hon. member to the independent valuator's report on the land at Gimli. There was an alfalfa crop valued at $15 an acre, and other grain crops which were valued at so much an acre, the total valuation, all included, being an average of $72 an acre. But it certainly did not cost S72 an acre for the land alone.
If my hon. friend says that he did not say that, I am not going to raise any further point with him. But it has been said repeatedly that the land at Gimli cost $72, while the land at Carberry cost $43, but there is no comparison between the two. There were thirteen properties and nine homesteads involved at Gimli, but in the other case it was all clear field. I think everybody in the house will appreciate the difference.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I believe hon. members will agree that this discussion should be terminated now, since it has nothing to do with the item before the committee.


Mr. SENN:: It should have been terminated long ago.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: It should have been ruled out of order when the hon. member for Souris first made his statement.


Richard Burpee Hanson: On the point of order, if we cannot discuss anything relating to this department under the item dealing with administration, we might as well fold up.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is not in this department.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: It comes under the Department of Munitions and Supply and we are now discussing the Department of Transport.


James Layton Ralston: I think the hon. member completely misunderstands the purpose of this item. It has nothing to do with the Gimli airport. As the minister has explained already, the officials concerned with this item of administration had no part in the purchase of the Gimli airport. That was purchased by the Department of Munitions and Supply.
May I just say this to the committee. I have sat here for half an hour and have listened to a discussion about the Gimli airport. I did not say anything because I did not want to appear to be stopping debate all the time. This afternoon the leader of the opposition hoped that we could increase the tempo of the business of the house. I submit to hon. members, and 1o the hon. member for Souris particularly who seems anxious to rise in his place again, that there is a time and place to discuss this item and he will have full opportunity to do so when that time arrives. But this is not the time to discuss it, and I submit that it is not fair for him to press this discussion further in view of the many items that we have to take up under this war appropriation bill. I am taking the point of order that this discussion is entirely out of order and I submit that it should cease.


James Arthur Ross: On the point of order, with all due deference to the minister who is leading the government may I say that this' property was not purchased, as he says, by the Department of Munitions and Supply. I have all the detailed documents in the return and they show that the papers were signed by officials of the Department of Transport. If the minister can show me where I would be more in order to discuss this matter than under this present item, I should like to know.


James Layton Ralston: I would suggest to my hon. friend the public accounts committee which is sitting. He has full opportunity to go before that committee any time he likes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What department purchased the land?


James Layton Ralston: The minister has said already that the officials of the Department

War Appropriation-Transport
of Transport had nothing to do with that matter. That was done by the Department of Munitions and Supply.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The return shows otherwise.


James Arthur Ross: Still on the point of order, I have followed this matter for some time and the Minister of Transport and Minister of Munitions and Supply took me to task for waiting until this late date. I pointed out last year that this airport had only been opened during the past year. The purchase was made in 1942, and I waited purposely for the setting up of the war expenditures committee in order to discuss this matter. That was one of the last items of business in the dying days of 1943 and everybody was-


James Layton Ralston: "Fed up" is the word.


James Arthur Ross: I was ruled out of order and I had no opportunity of rising at that time. I have been careful to wait until I would be in order, until I would not be ruled out of order. I certainly think I am in order now. I have the documents that were brought down by the Department of Transport and I do not think the minister can deny that this property was purchased through his department. I maintain that I am strictly in order. In answer to the hon. member for Huron-Perth (Mr. Golding), I would say that I have an article signed by an official of the department, Mr. J. H. Murphy, wherein he points out that prices obtaining here were somewhat higher than those paid for other sites in Manitoba. I did not refer to Carberry; I referred to a field in my own constituency which was purchased.
This was some of the best agricultural land in Manitoba. The owner did not want to sell at any price, but pressure was put on by the government and they took over the land at less than half the figure which was paid at Gimli. This was much better agricultural land than could be found in the interlake district of Manitoba. I want to find out from the minister if they do not have some system of fixing values in connection with these purchases. I am willing to take any agricultural expert in Canada and show him the land they purchased in my constituency, and I know he will say it is more valuable than the land at Gimli.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Just to clear up the point that has been raised about responsibility, it is the responsibility of the Department of Munitions and Supply to carry out all defence construction as well as to do the purchasing for the
armed forces. When I left the Department of Transport to take over the Department of Munitions and Supply in April, 1940, I arranged with the then minister and with the Prime Minister that I would have the use of the experts on airport construction of the Department of Transport in carrying out my new responsibilities. As a practical way of making the arrangement, I took over under my responsibility the air service branch of the Department of Transport, together with a small part of the time of the deputy minister of transport, who had formerly had jurisdiction over that branch. I am the minister responsible in this case, and this expenditure was an expenditure of the Department of Munitions and Supply. I should like to make it clear that I take full responsibility for the transaction.


Mr. ROY (Translation):: Mr. Chairman,
I wish to join the hon. member for Charlevoix-Saguenay (Mr. Dorion) to support the request he directed a few moments ago to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Michaud) on behalf of our students who have been deprived of the reduced fare privilege -which they used to enjoy as regards railway travel. I shall not repeat the arguments advanced by the hon. member for Charlevoix-Saguenay. Like him, I had, at the request of a number of people from my district, taken the matter up with Mr. Brass, and I received from him a letter quite similar to the one the hon. member for Charlevoix-Saguenay has read a few moments ago.
However, I should like to point out another feature of that matter. If the government has taken that step it is certainly not for the mere satisfaction of depriving the people of a privilege they had long enjoyed, and whose purpose was to help our young people to obtain some education. I think the motive behind the order in council which cancelled the reduced fares granted to students in the past was to relieve traffic congestion on the railways, especially during the Christmas, New Year and Easter holidays.
However, last winter, at least in regard to the Gaspe Seminary where I made enquiries, this measure proved itself unavailing. Indeed, * every pupil who had planned, as in the past, to spend the holiday season with his family, went home as usual. Therefore, the object of the order, which was to relieve traffic at that particular season of the year, by curtailing travelling on the part of students of seminaries, colleges or universities, seems to have failed utterly.
This is the point to which I desire to call the attention of the Minister of Transport. If
War Appropriation-Transport

the minister will take the trouble of making enquiries from various educational institutions, and especially from those which are patronized by pupils who come from distant points and who must, of necessity, travel by train, he will find, as I have said a moment ago, that students travel as usual and that this order has failed to attain its purpose. If he finds that such is the case, he will undoubtedly agree to have, as in the past, a reduced rate granted students.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No one was more aggrieved than I at the treatment meted out to university and college students during the last holiday season. The hon. members who have just made requests on behalf of students,.seem to believe that the minister enjoys the privilege of granting fare reductions on the railways. If they entertain such a delusion, let me tell them that the minister does not enjoy among his prerogatives that of granting reduced fares or any transportation privileges on the railways, whether the Canadian National or any other. The conditions under which railway transportation in Canada is regulated are determined by the Canadian Railway Act. Ever since 1918, pupils, students, teachers, have never enjoyed reduced fares as such on the railways.	These special
privileges have been abolished since the winter of 1918, when the Railway Act was amended. Since 1931, the railway association had granted them the privilege of reduced fares enjoyed by other travellers in connection with excursions or on week-ends. In other words, students, professors and teachers were assimilated to other citizens of the country who could avail themselves of reduced transportation fares on week-ends and on certain holidays: Christmas, Easter and All Saints' Day.
Last winter, the transport controller, pursuant to the powers vested in him, decided to abolish all reduced railway fares and, by the same fact, the students, pupils and teachers were deprived of the rights they had been enjoying as citizens of Canada. Under the Railway Act as it now stands, it is impossible to grant special fares to students and teachers as such. Therefore, we have not been able to acquiesce to the urgent requests of parents, college presidents, university rectors, religious * institution superiors of the province of Quebec and other parts of the country, who asked that reduced fares be granted them this year for the Christmas, New Year's and Easter holidays.
You may be convinced that we have endeavoured, by every possible means, to discover some loop hole in the act which would allow

us to take appropriate steps short of amending the Railway Act. The legal advisers of both the Department of Transport and the Canadian railways have clearly indicated that it was impossible to make an exception in favour of students. As long as the Railway Act remains unamended for the purpose of granting special privileges to students and as long as the order cancelling all permits or reduced transportation fares for week-ends applies to the general public, we shall have to deplore the impossibility of granting the numerous requests received from students, teachers, both male and female, as well as parents.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Was the lake Utopia training field purchased by the minister's department or by which department?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I do not know.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I understand that it is not settled for yet. Did the minister's department or did the Minister of Munitions and Supply, acting in his dual capacity as he often does, purchase the Penn-field airport, or how was that purchased?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: By Munitions and Supply.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Through the hon. member for Port Arthur as minister?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Then
Tracadie. Who purchased the artillery field? I should like to say this. The minister said that in every case the private treaties arranged by the department-


Clarence Decatur Howe: Tracadie was bought by the Department of National Defence.


James Layton Ralston: So was Utopia.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is quite all right with me. The prices paid at Tracadie were exceedingly low, but the prices paid at Tracadie were ratified by the exchequer court. Certain persons whose land was taken away from them refused to accept the government's offer, and my understanding is that in every case the exchequer court based its decision on the offer made by the crown. The offers were exceedingly low, and I think I know the reason; the land was inferior. But it is not quite fair for the minister to say that the government in all cases made purchases at prices lower than the exchequer court award. Perhaps that is not just what the minister said. He may have said that he or his officials made purchases in all cases lower than the exchequer court award. The

War Appropriation

Transport
exchequer court awards in the Tracadie artillery cases were exactly on the basis of the government's offers.
While I am speaking, may I say that so far as lands purchased in New Brunswick by officials of the Canadian National Railways are concerned, I think they did a good job and saved the country a lot of money. For the benefit of the Minister of National Defence I suggest that when they come to settle for the blueberry lands in the lake Utopia training area he let the matter go to the exchequer court and allow them to fight it out there, because the differences between the department's ideas on the one hand and the ideas of the proprietor of the blueberry plains, on the other, are so far apart that I do not think a compromise would be possible. But perhaps the minister has nothing to do with lake Utopia.	[DOT]


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Director of merchant seamen, $1,308,240.
Richard Burpee Hanson: What is this item?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: This is to cover cost of equipping, maintaining, and operating manning pools, merchant seamen's training centres, welfare institutions, facilities for merchant seamen and the extension of existing nautical schools in our principal seaports.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Where are those schools?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: There are two training schools, one at Prescott, Ontario, and one at St. Margaret Bay, Nova Scotia. Then there are manning pools at Halifax, Montreal, Vancouver and Saint John.


Stanley Howard Knowles: There is one matter about which I should like to ask the minister a question, and I trust it will not be out of order if I indicate how it has come to my attention. As hon. members may know, I raised in the house some time ago the case of a man discharged from one of the services at his own request and being left without any means of getting home to his place of residence when that is far removed from the point of discharge. The Minister of National Defence was the first to announce that a change had been made with regard to men discharged from the army at their own request, and as I pressed the matter further, an announcement was eventually made by the
Minister of National Defence for Naval Services to the effect that men discharged from the navy at their own request would have their travelling expenses paid either to the place of enlistment or to their home. As I indicated at the time, I raised the matter because it was drawn to my attention by a prominent gentleman who is working with the Navy League of Canada at Victoria, British Columbia. He and others have been most appreciative of the new provisions laid down by the government with respect to men in the services, and he has drawn to my attention the fact that there are men in the merchant navy who find themselves in the same situation.
Coming as I do from Winnipeg, which is far from either coast, I have not a great deal of contact with this kind of thing, but knowing the gentleman who has written to me about the matter, I feel that it should be looked into. He has suggested that there are men of the merchant navy who find themselves in the same position as men in the Royal Canadian Navy. For reasons back home it becomes necessary for them to leave the merchant service. The withdrawal is at their own request; but it is owing to conditions beyond their control, and when it comes to finding their way home, it may be a good many thousand miles, they are stranded. May I ask the minister whether something can be done for these men, comparable with what has been done for men in the navy.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: My hon. friend will
understand that merchant seamen, unlike the men in the other services, are not employees of the crown. They are employed by private companies that operate ships and hire them for pay. When, for some reason or another, they abandon their occupation and desire to go home, since they are not the employees of the government, they must pay their fare. All we have to do with merchant seamen is to recruit them. It is a service we have organized during the war to ensure that there are complements of the crews that are needed for the ships that take cargoes overseas from Canada and the moment the seaman signs articles of agreement with an operator of a ship, he ceases to be under our care and he returns home or voluntarily reenters a manning pool.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I understood that this would be the situation; but, as the minister points out, the government does spend money
War Appropriation-Transport

recruiting men in order to make them available. Some of these items relate to manning pools and other services so as to make sure that these men are available, and it seems unfair to the men to absolve the government of all responsibility when the men find themselves in a situation similar to that of men in the armed services.
Every time the question of merchant seamen has come up I have listened with interest to the discussion, and it has seemed to me that these men deserve every, possible consideration that can be given them in view of the hazardous as well as the valuable nature of their service. They deserve a consideration comparable in all points with that given men in the other services.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I fully subscribe to that. We recognize the valuable services these men are rendering, but our duty is to recruit men to ensure a properly trained crew for any ship that wishes to leave any of our ports. We give them as many benefits as possible while they are in the manning pools waiting for their ships or waiting to be assigned or to be engaged for some voyage overseas on the high seas. But once they sign on a ship they are no longer members of the pool, and until they are through with their contract and come back voluntarily into the pool in order to hire again they are not at all under our control.


Clarence Gillis: I have spoken several times on the merchant marine. I think they are more or less forgotten, although they are serving in just as important a capacity as the army, the navy or the air force. I believe the minister recognizes that. I hold in my hand a press clipping dated April 3, 1943, which contains a statement of the minister. In that statement he recognizes the importance of the merchant marine, because he said that without the service performed by the me'chant marine the rest of our war effort w" lid be totally unavailing. It is a realistic sta iement, but when it comes to doing something for these people the shoe is on the other foot.
While I was listening to the minster a few moments ago, answering the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, I could not help thinking the war effort of the army, navy and air force is a protected one. The only section of the war effort that has received practically none of the benefits that the government are making available to the sections of the service over which they have control is that which is still prosecuted under the system of private enterprise. I refer to the merchant marine. That applies to wages,
rMr. Knowles.]
allowances, rehabilitation benefits and everything that goes to compensate them in a monetary way. But the situation is different with those who are fighting the war in the recognized military services.
One point brought out by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre is worthy of consideration. Many of those boys from the prairies and some from Vancouver, after serving on the water for a considerable length of time, are landed in Halifax, or persons from Halifax are landed in Vancouver, and they have to make their way across the country without any assistance in the way of transportation.


Richard Burpee Hanson: To get to their homes?


Clarence Gillis: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is there
not a distressed seamens' fund to take care of that? There has always been provision for that.


Clarence Gillis: That is charity.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No; I
would not say that.


Clarence Gillis: Absolutely.


Richard Burpee Hanson: There is
a distinction between charity and that. I do not think it is quit^ charity.


Clarence Gillis: In my opinion it is. Those men suffer from many disabilities. The dependents of those men who serve in the merchant marine are in an awkward position. If a young man goes into the merchant service and is lost at sea, or if he is on a ship of foreign registry, it takes months for his parents to unravel exactly what happened. You have to check with the Norwegian consul, or the Greek consul, or someone else. If the boy is a Canadian citizen and he volunteers in one of the most essential branches of the service and goes on board a ship of foreign registry, he loses his Canadian citizenship; and the responsibility for checking or compensating the parents for the loss of the son is passed along to another government. That is something which should be corrected.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I think my hon. friend
has been misinformed if he labours under the impression that because a seaman takes articles on a foreign ship he loses his citizenship. He does not. A seaman who is sick abroad gets twelve weeks' pay, and if he is injured on a boat of Canadian registry he gets compensation.


Clarence Gillis: In theory.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No; in practice.

War Appropriation-Transport


Clarence Gillis: Perhaps I have had as much experience in this as any other hon. member of the committee, and I am still tracking down cases that I have had on my hands since 1941. While the minister has a paper organization that sets up the mechanics which he describes, unfortunately when you try to put them into practice and administer the regulations you are up against a different proposition. If you can prove that the boy was lost at sea by enemy action, you are referred by a department of government to the government that has the ship under its registry. You deal for a short time with the British board of trade, and after months and months of correspondence perhaps you get somewhere. While the minister is quite right in theory in saying that the boy does not lose his Canadian citizenship, yet in fact he does. He certainly has not the benefits that the Canadian service personnel receive through the medium of their own government and through the Department of Transport and the Department of National Defence for Naval Services. None of these departments of government in Canada is able to do anything for him until you finally check and prove your case through other governments. What I am arguing about at the present time is the delay and all the unnecessary machinery that applies to Canada nationals serving on ships of foreign registry. I want the minister to answer these questions because I have another question to ask.	*
There is the matter of insurance. The service personnel in the merchant marine have very little protection. When a Canadian national goes aboard a ship of foreign registry in Canada, or on one of our own Canadian steamship lines, is he protected by insurance of any kind by the company which owns the ship on which he is serving? That is a question which comes up from time to time.


An hon. MEMBER:: Yes.


Clarence Gillis: I have never been able to prove that. I have a dozen cases.


An hon. MEMBER:: He is protected on lake steamers.


Clarence Gillis: That may be so on lake steamers, but I am talking about ocean-going ships.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Under the provincial laws of all the provinces there is compensation on inland waters and on coastal waters.


Richard Burpee Hanson: But not
on the high seas.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Not on the high seas. There is no compensation under any law as yet; but for the benefit of my hon. friend I
may say that at the present time some officials of several departments of government are working together preparing a plan of compensation for Canadian seamen who meet with accidents on the high seas.


Clarence Gillis: I am very glad to hear that, but there is discrimination again. There is a private enterprise set-up to employ - merchant seamen and there is the government setup which is responsible for the other service personnel. The man who is in the sendees is protected; his dependents are protected if anything happens to him, but not so with the merchant marine. In my opinion it is rank discrimination to enlist the services of a man or a boy in that particular occupation, because I think it is the most hazardous of all, sailing on those old boats with very little protection and under war conditions at all times. There is no way of fighting back. If the seaman is lost at sea I think the least that the companies which employ him can do is to insure him for a certain amount in order to protect his dependents. I realize that such seamen are included in the Canadian pension regulations now, but if they are killed by enemy action you have to prove the claim, and it is a rather difficult thing to do. It takes a long roundabout course, as the Minister of Pensions and National Health will admit, because he is tracing a lot of them now.
Another point I should like the minister to comment on is medical facilities. What are the medical facilities at Canadian ports for Canadian merchant seamen who happen to land at Halifax, Montreal or Vancouver, or any of our Canadian ports? What are the facilities to take care of them if they are sick and require medical attention or hospitalization? Have they the right to enter a military or naval establishment in those ports? I have received letters stating that men have left their ships in Halifax, for example, requiring hospitalization, and met with a great deal of difficulty in securing it. Finally they got into hospitals, but during the period of their stay they receive none of the benefits that are given the service personnel in the way of pay, allowances, a little something for comforts and so forth. It seems to me that they have a great deal of difficulty in getting any kind of medical attention if they leave their ships under the circumstances I have just mentioned. These are sore points with the men serving in the merchant navy, and I think they require some attention.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: By arrangement with the Department of Pensions and National Health the services of that department in all Canadian ports are available to merchant seamen who
War Appropriation-Transport

are in need of medical attention. In addition, we have just drawn up a new regulation under which sick seamen are entitled to an amount not to exceed twelve weeks' wages, excluding war risk bonus and war service bonus, in addition to the medical care and attention they receive through the Department of Pensions and National Health.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is this the distinction, that men in the merchant marine are not enlisted men of the crown, while those in the armed services are, and therefore the men in the merchant marine have never been given the same benefits? I think that is the principle upon which the department has been acting. Some time ago men of the merchant navy who suffered by reason of enemy action on the high seas-Canadian nationals, we will say, serving in ships of Canadian registry- were brought within the provisions of the Pension Act, were they not?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Now they are entitled to pensions, provided they prove their case, to the same extent as men in the armed services. I point out to the minister, then, that we have admitted the principle; and if these men to whom the hon. member for Cape Breton South is referring are doing war service comparable with that of the men in the armed services who are not actually fighting abroad, then why should we not, at all events during the period of the war, go a greater distance than we have gone? I think the hon. member for Cape Breton South has made out a case for further assistance to the men of the merchant marine.
Take the case of the damage to the Lady Nelson, about which I happen to know quite a lot because the captain was a great personal friend of mine. She was torpedoed in St. Lucia harbour; her whole stern was blown off, and I suppose there was some loss of life, though I do not recall that. She was repaired on the spot at least to the extent that she could be towed to Mobile, Alabama, where she was, in fact, rebuilt and converted into a hospital ship. The season of the year was such that getting her there was a terrific task. She was a tow at four miles an hour over thousands of miles of water, down through the Florida ship canal and up through the gulf of Mexico to Mobile, Alabama, and then the superintendence of the conversion had to take place. As a result, more than one person, including the master, lost his health. After some trouble-[DOT] I do not say there was a battle or anything of the sort-upon the submission of evidence as to his health before this voyage, the pension

commission agreed that his condition, which they had previously held was pre-enlistment- I believe it was a heart condition-had been aggravated by the services he had performed.
I mention this case to show that by virtue of the amendment to the pension legislation we have recognized the very principle for which the hon. member for Cape Breton South is contending. As 1 understand it, he is saying that while in theory and in certain directions we have perhaps admitted the principle, in other directions it does not function without a great deal of trouble. If that be so, it is a pity. The minister and the officials of his department ought to make it easier for a man in the merchant navy to show that he is suffering as a result of his service at sea, because that man is really not in a position to fight for himself. The minister should give the committee some assurance that the extension of the principle of liability for injury or suffering or incapacitation will be sympathetically considered, because undoubtedly these men are doing a great national service. I offer this to the minister as a constructive suggestion.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: These are very good suggestions. The committee will realize that when war broke out we had to build up a body of merchant seamen as quickly as possible, but practically every week we are able to grant further benefits to these men or do something that will improve the conditions under which they work or the conditions under which they wait between voyages, and also improve their remuneration. We now pay them up to twelve weeks while they are sick. We expect to have full compensation even for both sickness and accident on the high seas. We give them an additional war service bonus after they have served in the merchant navy for a year. At the end of one year's service we give them twenty-four days' leave with pay, and a one-third of single first-class or coach fare, with the remainder of the fare paid by the Department of Transport, round trip. These are benefits we have been able to work out gradually for the merchant seamen. In addition, we make an allowance to the dependents in case of death, and we are working out rules which will make it as easy and simple as possible for the sick or disabled man or his dependents (to establish a claim to benefits from the Department of Transport, which in turn we transfer to the Department of Pensions and National Health, who administer these matters.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I should like a little more information as to just what is done for dependents of merchant seamen who lose their lives as a result of ships being torpedoed. I

War Appropriation-Transport
was following the last war, and still am, now an honorary officer of the Navy League of Canada. The Navy League of Canada was appointed one of the agencies following the last war to dispense reparations. I have forgotten all the particulars, but I know they applied to merchant seamen, or rather to the families of merchant seamen who had lost their lives through ships having been torpedoed.
I have long believed-I could not believe' anything else-that the family of a merchant seaman who loses his life while engaged in war work, possibly that of convoying the goods of war, or goods required to maintain the people of the old country, are just as much entitled to full compensation as the man who does the fighting-perhaps I should not say just as much as the man who does the fighting, because perhaps he is entitled to more than anybody else-but at all events are entitled to full compensation.
I am not sure just what the position is to-day, but if the wives and families of men who have been lost in convoy work are not receiving the same benefits, then certainly they should be. If that is not the case, then I hope the minister will see that it is.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: To-day the dependents of merchant seamen get exactly the same benefits as those of the navy.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And just as quickly, and without trouble?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes, it is administered by the same department, namely the Department of Pensions and National Health.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Joint U.S.A. and Canada defence-purchase, leasing or otherwise acquiring .properties, $110,000.
Leslie Gordon Bell: Will the minister give us an idea of the properties involved?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes. This is just a tentative estimate of what we will need to purchase or to take over property acquired or leased by United States representatives in Canada. The title has to be vested in the crown, or in His Majesty the King in right of Canada. Some real estate is required. There are many leases, both large and small, especially in the west, standing in the name of officials, but held for the United States government, and the title to which is to be transferred to His Majesty the King. This is done partly through the Department of Transport and partly through the Department of Mines and Resources.


Major James William Coldwell: I notice the amount is considerably less than last year.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: And is it "acquired" or "required"?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: "Acquired"-and it may be "required", I do not know.


Major James William Coldwell: Either by lease or purchase. The property required by the United States government is mainly leased.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Mainly leased.


Major James William Coldwell: And I suppose chiefly around Edmonton?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes, around Edmonton.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: There are two or three matters connected with manning pools to which I would direct the minister's attention. I am not sure whether they should have come under the last item or this one. I have before me a copy of an agreement which the men entering these manning pools are required to sign. I was pleased to hear the minister report on the degree of responsibility his department was accepting for the men employed in the merchant marine. I think it is not only the nature and importance of that work in our war effort that makes the department responsible. The department takes men into the manning pools, invites them to enter into a contract, and once they have entered these manning pools they are to all intents and purposes under government direction, almost as if they had gone into the armed forces. They sign a contract by which they undertake to go to sea in whatever capacity they can go, and on any ship which may be assigned to them by the regional director of the pool. I believe the very nature of that contract involves the government in a good deal of responsibility regarding those men.
I was sorry to hear the minister disclaim any responsibility for their transportation from the point of disembarkation to their homes. In my opinion the government should assume the responsibility for transportation of not only those released from the service on compassionate grounds, but also those discharged from the service, and those who return to their homes between voyages for periodic holidays. It seems to me that these men are entitled to a reduced fare for their return from the point of disembarkation, just as is the man in the armed forces. They have no choice as to the port from which they shall sail, nor have they any choice as to the port at which they shall land when they return. They are completely at the disposition of the director of the regional pool, so far as being sent aboard any ship is concerned.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: May I point out that we are dealing with item 4. Item 3 is passed.
War Appropriation-Transport


Joseph William Noseworthy: Item 4 deals with manning pools, does it not?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: No; it deals with joint
United States and Canada defence.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am sorry if I
missed the item. However, I was on my feet two or three times before it was declared passed.
In these agreements one of the qualifications is that a man shall be hired at the rating last held. My information is that this procedure is not followed at all the manning pools. Reports from officers say they have been stepped down from senior to junior officers upon entering the pool.
Paragraph 4-C of the contract states that these men are to receive wages, board and lodging while in the pool. The practice is that when a man comes to the pool, and it is found that his services are not likely to be required for some time, he is advised to go home. While he does receive his pay, he receives no maintenance allowance, although he must remain on call at all hours of the day and at all times, until the pool calls him. I am informed that when men go from the pool to a Park ship they receive regular annual increases, whereas men going from the pool to other ships, even though they are operated by the same companies that operate pool ships, receive no increases. If they go from one of those ships to a Park ship they get no credit for the time they have served on the other ship. I am informed also that in 1943 all the officers on Park ships received annual increments except one class, the wireless operators. That seems to be a case of discrimination.
I received another complaint about the manning pool in Toronto.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: There is no merchant seamen manning pool at Toronto.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am informed that there is no one to whom the -men can refer grievances, that they are advised to communicate with the director at Ottawa. It has been suggested that the director or some of his assistants should visit these pools on occasion and receive such complaints as the men- have to register. It is hard for them to obtain any degree of satisfaction by means of correspondence.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: This item has been carried. I am in the hands of the committee if hon. members want to revert to it.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I have just one word to say about correspondence with Mr. Randles, director of merchant sea-
[The Chairman.1
men. I understand that any one who has ever written to -him has always received a most courteous reply.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I should like to give a word of explanation about transportation costs. If a man leaves home to enlist at a pool located some distance away, he is not entitled to any transportation costs because he is not under agreement. If he leaves his work voluntarily he does not receive transportation home, but if for some reason or another he is sent home, he receives two-thirds of the cost of his transportation. This is a recent regulation and possibly the informant of the hon. member was not aware of the change in the regulations.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Under what conditions would he receive two-thirds of the cost of transportation from the port of disembarkation?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: On annual leave. These men take employment for two years. I am told that merchant seamen receive pay and lodging as long as they remain in the pool, but if they prefer to live outside the pool they receive pay only.


Joseph William Noseworthy: If they live at home they get nothing?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: They get no living allowance, but they are free to remain at the pool if they want to. There is no manning pool at Toronto, but I shall look into the complaint about the men in Toronto.


Leslie Gordon Bell: In connection with
properties acquired or leased on behalf of the United States, do I understand that we are reimbursed for these, or is that part of our contribution under the joint defence scheme? Do we assume the obligation, or are we reimbursed in any way?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: We simply take title, and the United States services continue to occupy the property as long as they have need for it.


Major James William Coldwell: But we get no revenue in the meantime?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No.


Major James William Coldwell: It is a contribution on our part?	.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Railway and steamship service, $3,030,000.
Grote Stirling: What ships are degaussed?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Merchant ships that are built in Canadian yards and all others assigned to ocean travel.

War Appropriation-Transport


Grote Stirling: I can understand where it woidd be done in the case of new ships, but I am surprised to hear that there are still ocean-going ships that have not been degaussed.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: This item applies only to the new ships, repairs and renewals.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Mr. Chairman, are you calling the details of the item or simply the item as a whole? I had a question I wanted to ask about one of the details of item 6.


Major James William Coldwell: We did not hear item 6 called.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. McCann):: We are now dealing with item 7.


John Ritchie MacNicol: What about item 6?


Major James William Coldwell: I did not hear it carried.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I wanted to ask a question on item 6.


James Joseph McCann: Item 6 has been called and passed. Does the hon. member wish to revert to it?


John Ritchie MacNicol: I wanted to ask a question about aids to navigation. During 1943 a great amount of traffic went down the Mackenzie river and also on the Athabaska.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: That would come under the main estimates.


John Ritchie MacNicol: This item covers aids to navigation for war purposes. I wanted to know if any aids to navigation had been provided on the Athabaska river, lake Athabaska, the Rocher river, the Slave river, Great Slave lake and the Mackenzie river. I was informed a short time ago by a member of one of the transportation companies that a large amount of traffic had passed over these waters and that there had been some damage. If the minister is not familiar with navigation matters in that part of the country, there is no use in my continuing.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Since 1933 the department has maintained some aids to navigation in the waters mentioned.


John Ritchie MacNicol: They are insignificant. So far as I can see they amount to little. Barges are constantly running on to the butts of trees which are piled into the river every spring by the thousands. I speak of what I know. Pilots going down those rivers-I have been down them-frequently have very great difficulty. Our United States friends had much difficulty last year in taking their supplies down to their works at Fort Norman. It was for that reason they began to build the roadway from Peace
River to Fort Providence. But if the'department does not bother about providing better aids to navigation on the Mackenzie river route, I have nothing more to say.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I understand that in those waters we have over thirty aids to navigation -flash lights, gas lights, buoys and so on.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I had reference to keeping the channel open and removing sand bars and stumps of trees.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I will call the matter to the attention of the Department of Public W orks.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The Saskatchewan department of public works would not have a solitary thing to do with the Mackenzie river, which is outside Saskatchewan. Nor has it anything to do with the Athabaska river.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I mean the federal department of public works.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Since the traffic is for war purposes, I would think the Department of Transport would have something to do with it.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: There are thirty-eight aids to navigation in the Northwest Territories.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I shall not proceed further. I can see plainly that not very much is known about the navigation end of the river.


Major James William Coldwell: On what basis is compensation paid to masters and crews of Canadian vessels for loss of personal effects? Is it on a pro rata basis, and, if so, what is the limit? How is the valuation made.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The authorized rates of compensation range from $70 to $350 for men and officers and $600 for masters.


Major James William Coldwell: How do they apply for compensation? Do they give a list of the clothing and valuables they have lost? Do they get compensation for a watch, instruments and so on?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes; instruments, clothing, and so forth.


Major James William Coldwell: And $70 is the minimum compensation?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: For men and officers $70 is the minimum, and it ranges up to $300; $300 for certificated officers and) $250 for uncertificated officers-that is the maximum. Ratings and waiters, $150; bedroom steward and others, $70.


Major James William Coldwell: Is $70 the maximum
compensation that can be paid to a bedroom steward and others?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.
War Appropriation-Transport


Leslie Gordon Bell: If a man loses all his clothing in a shipwreck, surely he cannot replace the kind of clothing he would need on the Atlantic for $70. That sum seems to me very little.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I have had no complaint.


Major James William Coldwell: How does it compare with rates paid on ships of United States registry?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I do not know; I have not those figures.


Major James William Coldwell: Whether the minister has had any complaints or not, $70 seems to me very little with which to replace the clothing that is required on the north Atlantic.


Mr. NOSE  WORTHY@: Is there included under these items for marine service the upkeep of government steamers which take care of lighthouses and buoys?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Joseph William Noseworthy: What improvements have been made in recent months in, the working conditions, the hours, wages and living conditions, of the men who live on board such boats as C.G.S. DollarcTt I visited that boat at Saint John last fall, and I found the men complaining of working as much as twenty hours a day, as much as nine hours at a stretch between meals, and some deck-hands figure that they received on some days about eleven cents an hour, considering the number of hours they worked. I want to say this. I have in my lifetime lived aboard fishing vessels that go from Newfoundland to Labrador, and I have lived in mining, railway and lumber camps, but I have never at any time in my life seen human beings required to live under conditions such as I found existing aboard the Dollard at the time I visited her last fall. The boat was simply crawling with vermin and the officers and men told me that it had not been fumigated for years.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes; but the men have to feather their own beds. They are responsible for the quarters in which they live practically all the year round. When the conditions were brought to the attention of the department we pointed out to the men who were responsible for and submitted to those conditions that they should change the bedding and clean and fumigate the boat, and I understand that they did.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Is it not the policy of the government to have these boats fumigated annually?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes, indeed, and we give instructions to the men who live on the boats to clean up their own quarters. That is their

responsibility. We do not send in outside help to clean the boats, only to make repairs which the crew cannot make themselves. The crew look after their own quarters and take care of themselves. If they want to have ideal living quarters it is up to themselves to make them so. I know the conditions of which the hon. member speaks. In some instances we have compelled I lie men to clean the quarters so as to improve conditions.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Who is responsible for the conditions? When the minister says that instructions are given to fumigate the boat, who receives the instructions?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: We send the instructions to the captain, but a dozen or twenty men cannot live on a boat and allow vermin to accumulate. If they do, it is their own fault.


Major James William Coldwell: Does the captain of the ship hire the crew? Is he responsible for the personnel or for any changes made?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The crews are hired
through the local marine agent at the port.


Major James William Coldwell: Is there a large turnover on the boats?


John Ritchie MacNicol: Of vermin?


Major James William Coldwell: I do not mean turnover in the sense that some hon. members have in mind. I mean the labour turnover. Are the sanitary conditions good on these ships and can the men bath and wash? What kind of boats are they?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Some are quite modern and clean and others are not, until we compel the men to clean them.


Joseph William Noseworthy: The only way in which the men could wash on that boat was by taking a pail of water to where they slept or in a small cubby-hole between the place where they slept and where they ate. There was no convenience. In fact, the conveniences on the boat, I would say, were out of date when Noah built the ark.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Additional harbour facilities at Halifax, N.S., $275,000.
Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: Will the minister explain the harbour facilities at Halifax?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: On April 30, 1941, an order in council was passed appropriating $4,000,000 for lighterage facilities at Halifax. Since then, every year the work has been done. This year the requirements amount to $275,000. We have expended $3,238,769.40.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

War Appropriation-Transport
Assistance to Canadian National Railway Company for development of Steep Rock mines (revote $260,000), $2,360,000.
Grote Stirling: Will the minister describe this large item.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: In September, 1942, the Canadian National Railways made an agreement with Steep Rock Mines Limited whereby they undertook to guarantee the movement of ore from a point near Atikokan, Ontario, 150 miles west of Port Arthur, to the docks at the latter place. The government agreed to advance to the Canadian National Railways the capital required for building the spur line from the mine to the line to Port Arthur and also for building a loading dock there.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does the minister not mean, for building the spur line from the mine to Atikokan?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes; to the main line of railway.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And building the shipping facilities at Port Arthur for loading iron into the ships?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I did not mean to say that the Canadian National was to build 150 miles of railway to accommodate the mine. It is a spur of three miles to join the mine with the main line of railway, and then there are the dock facilities at Port Arthur.


Grote Stirling: Under what terms would repayment be made?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The railway gets a subsidy of twenty cents a ton for the first five million tons of ore to enable it to give a reduced freight rate, and there is six cents a ton set aside, on every ton handled over the dock, to cover the cost of construction of the spur and the ore dock.


Mr. NOSE  WORTHY@: My information is that the company was guaranteed that the dock would be ready by August 1 and that in the event of its not being ready the government would undertake to pay the difference in freight charges for shipment by rail instead of by water. Is that information correct?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I have no knowledge of that.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Is there in the
original contract any date by which the dock was to be ready for use?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No. That is probably the agreement between the railway and the company, but it is not in the agreement between the railway and the dominion. All we have guaranteed is to advance the money to the railway.


Joseph William Noseworthy: My information is that that was the contract between the railway and the company. I am informed that the first contract for piling was let by the railway to be completed by June 1. I understand that has not yet been completed and is not likely to be completed by that date. Another contract for the superstructure on the piling was advertised in some newspapers some time ago, and I am told that the contract for the superstructure calls for completion on October 1, months after the dock is supposed to be completed. My information is that the superstructure cannot possibly be completed by October 1, and if there is a delay of many months and the ore is to be shipped for many months by rail, the difference between rail shipment and water shipment may very well run into the total cost of building that dock. What firm has the first contract for the building of that dock?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: These contracts were let
by the railway.


Joseph William Noseworthy: And are sent to
the minister's department?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No; except that they
report to the department once a year.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does the hon. member
know whether the Steep Rock company has commenced to ship iron from Atikokan to Port Arthur?


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am told they will be ready to ship by August 1, but the dock cannot possibly be ready until October or N o vember.


Agar Rodney Adamson: They have an agreement to ship five million tons the first of the year. I think they are bound by that agreement.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I cannot say; I have not the contract. But according to the agreement between the railway and the department they are to get twenty cents a ton on the first five million tons.


Agar Rodney Adamson: It will be paid for then
in the first two years?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I think I have the information here. I see by a letter that is attached to the deputy minister's book that J. W. Pitts of Winnipeg has the contract for the spur line to the iron mine. The date of completion of this contract is June 30, 1944; that is for the spur line.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Has the minister
the name of the company that is driving the piles for the dock?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No; there is nothing in
this letter to indicate that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
29SS
War Appropriation-Transport
[Stage Direction]
Loan to the Canadian National Railways for the development of the Vermilion, Alberta oil field, $313,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: May I ask the minister
whether the Vermilion oil field supplies oil to the operations of the Canadian National locomotives in that part of -the -country? Is that what the field is operated for?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: That was the reason why this venture was gone into, but I am told that they have not been producing enough for the requirements of the locomotives of the Canadian National Railways in that -territory.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Are any of the locomotives in that section of the country oilburning?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes; my information is
that in the mountain section -the Canadian National Railways have oil-burning locomotives.


Mr. FAIR:: Is it -the intention of the government to continue the operation -of the wells at Vermilion?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: This is no-t a government operation; it is a Canadian National operation. They have agreed to test or prove fifty wells, and when they have completed their contract I am under the impression that they are to abandon the work, although I am not certain of that.


Agar Rodney Adamson: How many wells are
producing?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I have the list here.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What do- they call the
wells?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The last report made by the Canadian National Railways to the department was dated April 21 within the last three weeks. The report is to the effect that -the chairman of the company, -the Canadian National Railways, felt the result was very disappointing and the vice-president in charge of research and development has been asked to review the whole position to determine whether formal steps sho-uld not be taken to discontinue drilling under the terms of the agreement with the Western Drilling Company Limited. Since then we have had no report. It was agreed that if -ten of the wells should produce an average of less than twenty-five -barrels a day for the first thirty producing days, the leased area could be returned to the Western Drilling company. So far, twenty-nine wells have been drilled. Seventeen are in production, but -the production is very low, an average of eighteen barrels 
per pumping day per well. In the month of January 8,654 barrels were produced, and in February, 6,836 barrels.


Agar Rodney Adamson: How far does that go to meet the requirements of the railway?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I do not know about that. I am told that the Canadian National Railways need about eight hundred thousand barrels a year-this is about ten per cent.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Joseph Enoil Michaud: There is an item on page 397 of Hansard of February 11, which has to be passed. It appears under the heading "National Harbours Board."
National harbours board-
Halifax harbour-operation and maintenance of fire boats -and other fire -protection, $178,800.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Why the increase?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: We had -to have another boat. We were operating only one fire tug last year and this year we have to operate two.


George Hugh Castleden: But the item is about three times as large.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No. In that amount is included the cost of building the fire tug as well as the operation of it. We had to remodel an old tug and turn it into a fire tug. The cost of remodelling the old -tug is included.


George Hugh Castleden: Did they put new pumps into the old tug?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No; this is another tug. We are operating two tugs.


George Hugh Castleden: Did they put new pumping equipment in the one that is being added this year?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes; new pumping equipment, and a lot more, I understand.


George Hugh Castleden: What is the cost of fixing up the new boat?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The operation of the old fire boat, called the Rouille, is estimated at $66,600 a year. We have other special fire protection, the cost of operating the James Battle. That is the new fire tug. We have charter hire, $17,520, and the gross operation will cost $71,370 this year. Equipment and maintenance amount to $7,430, and, in addition, we have a special fire patrol which cost $32,200.


James Alexander Marshall: What do you expect to do with the $700?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: That is the balance of the cost of altering and assembling a heavy lifting

War Appropria tion-Fisheries
crane in the harbour of Saint John. The whole cost was $151,000, which was paid out of last year's appropriation-, and outstanding accounts remain, totalling $700. This appropriation is to clean up all those accounts.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Assistance in the construction of vessels of the packer-seiner type, $250,000.
Grote Stirling: Why should this be a war appropriation expenditure?


Ernest Bertrand: The construction of these vessels resulted from the fact that about seventy vessels were requisitioned by the army and navy, especially after Japan came into the war. This only affects the packer-seiners of the west coast. We had to replace some of those, because we did not know how long they would be in the service. Eleven have been built and ten are partly completed. We have subsidized them to the extent of $165 per gross ton, .but more recently abolished this subsidy, because we believe that some of the boats requisitioned have been replaced by the army and we do not think we need the subsidy any more. Altogether we have paid $121,500.


Grote Stirling: If I understand the situation aright, these boats were taken over by the government for army purposes?


Ernest Bertrand: Not those
on which we are paying subsidies; these boats were built by different corporations to replace boats that were requisitioned by the army early in the war. We had to do that in order to have the production necessary to carry on the fisheries. This applies only to packer-seiners seventy-two feet or more in length and of from ninety to one hundred and ten gross tons.


Alfred Henry Bence: How much was spent during the fiscal year 1943-44, and how much is it anticipated will be spent in the current fiscal year?


Ernest Bertrand: In 1942-43 we spent $61,511.55; in 1943-44, for seven vessels, we spent $118,225.80. We have abolished the subsidy, so that we are not going to pay any more money except in connection with those now under construction, for which permits had been granted at the time we passed the last order in council.


Alfred Henry Bence: I thought the minister said that the total amount expended was $121,000. Now he tells us that $61,000 in round figures
was spent in 1942-43 and $118,000 in 1943-44. What is the reason for the disparity in the figures?


Ernest Bertrand: The amount of $121,536 is the expenditure up to date. The amount of $118,000 was the expenditure up to a month ago, but since that time another subsidy of something over $3,000 has been paid. These subsidies are paid during the course of construction, and we have paid another $3,000 since this figure of $118,000 was given.


Alfred Henry Bence: Then the total amount that has been spent is $179,000 in round figures?


Ernest Bertrand: About $179,000, plus $3,000 which will appear in the estimates for the present fiscal year.


Alfred Henry Bence: Then how much will be spent during the current year?


Ernest Bertrand: We do not know exactly, because we do not know the tonnage of all the boats that are under construction. These boats are measured after they are completed, and we pay $165 per gross ton, but we think the expenditure will run to about $250,000. We are asking for that appropriation; it may not be all spent.


Alfred Henry Bence: I am not at all clear on this matter yet. If during the first two years this scheme was in operation $179,000 was spent and now the whole scheme is being ended, I should like some indication as to how much money is still to be spent.


Ernest Bertrand: The amount already expended was paid on the boats that were finished. I stated that eleven boats were completed and ten more were in course of construction. Of course, until they are completed we cannot tell exactly what it is going to cost, because we cannot measure the tonnage of the boats. We are asking for an appropriation of $250,000 for the fiscal year 1944-45.


Alfred Henry Bence: It seems to me that this is a good deal more money than you need.


Ernest Bertrand: It depends upon the size of the boats. This represents the best judgment of the experienced officials of the department.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Do we understand that these boats are being built to replace boats which were requisitioned for war purposes?


Ernest Bertrand: Over seventy boats were requisitioned by the army and navy on the west coast; and when the army and navy requisition boats, they take the best.
War Appropriation-Fisheries

They took most of the best boats, and we did not know how long they would remain in the possession of the army and navy, so that an order in council was passed granting a subsidy of $165 per gross ton, which would amount to approximately 33J per cent of the cost of construction of new boats. More recently this order in council has been withdrawn, because boats are now coming back from the army and navy. The navy particularly has been building its own boats, which are better fitted for naval service than the fishing boats that were requisitioned at the time, so that we do not think we should grant the subsidy any longer.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Is part of this a revote from last year?


Ernest Bertrand: It has that character, in the sense that we did not spend all that was asked for last year.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: You are asking for $250,000, plus a revote of $71,000.


Ernest Bertrand: No; the
$71,000 is included in the $250,000, which we expect to reach this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Assistance in the construction of vessels of the dragger type and the conversion of fishing schooners to draggers, $250,000.
Alfred Henry Bence: What is the explanation?


Ernest Bertrand: The wooden dragger is a boat used on the east coast. It is something like the otter trawler, but much smaller, running from seventy-two feet, up, and it drags the bottom of the ocean. We felt that the fisheries on the Atlantic coast needed to be subsidized and that some of the boats were antiquated. We felt we should have the fishermen build another kind of boat that has been very successful in other waters, especially in the United States. The boat has been subsidized at $165 per gross ton, with a depreciation of twenty per cent a year for five years, to be taken in one year if the proprietor wishes. That order in council has not been utilized by the fishermen to the extent we thought it would be.
There was one boat completed, and there are two applications which have been approved, but the boats are not yet built. In the same order in council we also subsidized ;he conversion of schooners into draggers. Only one has been converted. The order in council is about the same as the one for packer-seiners, except that it is for the east coast, where the packer-seiner type would not be the proper boat on account of the different kind of fisheries we have on the Atlantic coast.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Does the $250,000 cover the boats to which the minister referred?


Ernest Bertrand: No; this is in anticipation of this year's programme. Only one boat has been built, and two applications have been made. One schooner has been converted. We have paid only $22,088.


Grote Stirling: Is this subsidy to be cancelled?


Ernest Bertrand: No, we have not cancelled it, because we think there is a great need for this kind of boat on the east coast. We are short of vessels and short of men.


Clarence Gillis: Possibly the reason why the order in council was not taken advantage of to a great extent is that it is not generally known. It was not advertised. It is safe to say that a large percentage of fishermen on the east coast would tell you, if this were brought to their attention, that they had not heard of it before. Then there is the other angle that a large percentage of fishermen on the east coast are not financially able to take advantage of it. A certain portion of the necessary capital has to be put up by themselves.
I hope the minister will not withdraw the order in council, because it is an important step in the rehabilitation of the industry. We should see to it that it is fully utilized, and in my opinion it should be more widely advertised.


Joseph William Noseworthy: What is the minimum cost of a boat to which this order in council is applicable?


Ernest Bertrand: A dragger may cost between $75,000 and $100,000.
To answer the hon. member for Cape Breton South, I believe the order in council is known in the maritime provinces. Perhaps it is not known as well as it should be, but there has been considerable discussion about it. We do not intend to withdraw it-quite to the contrary. The hon. member was right when he said that it is not applicable to lone fishermen, because it costs too much. It is our intention to do something, either by reducing the tonnage or the length of the boat, or by doing something for the fishermen so that two or three may get together and be in a position to have one of these boats.


Joseph William Noseworthy: How many firms on the east coast operate boats of this type?


Ernest Bertrand: Only one has been completed. It is being operated by Sea Nymph Fisheries Limited. Two applications have been made by Lunenburg Sea Products

War Appropriation-Fisheries
Company, Limited. The converted schooner is the property of the Norway Dragging Company of New Brunswick.


Joseph William Noseworthy: In other words, this concession made by order in council can be made available to only a comparatively few firms operating on the coast.


Ernest Bertrand: It could be available to any firm, or individuals, or cooperatives that wish to put the amount of money into it. We feel it has not been taken * advantage of to the extent it should have been. A study has been made of the matter, and we are preparing an order in council which will be more appropriate for the use of individual fishermen.


Clarence Gillis: What is the number of that order in council?


Ernest Bertrand: Which one? [DOT]


Clarence Gillis: The one in force to-day, to which we have been referring.


Ernest Bertrand: It is P.C. 7580, of August 26, 1942, amended by P.C. 2397 of April 22, 1943.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Sundry services, $190,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: What are the sundry
services?


Ernest Bertrand: They include S3.000 for the wartime fisheries advisory committee. It is only to pay the travelling expenses of that body which sat only once in 1943. and spent $37.80. This year, on account of the increased difficulty of distributing fish, they might have to sit more than once. There are seven members on the committee. Nothing is paid to them with the exception of their travelling expenses, when they are called to sit and advise the government in respect of wartime fisheries. Then, some of the sundry services could be listed as follows:
To provide for payment of compensation for diminution of value caused by war damage to fishing boats and fishing gear, $50,000.
Construction of experimental long line fishing vessel on Atlantic coast and operating expenses. $60,000.
Expenses in connection with the supply of frozen fish to the British ministry of food, $30,000.
Payment of war bonus to crews of fisheries protection vessels and fisheries patrol vessels operating in war zones within dangerous waters, $15,000.
Salt fish export regulations-administration, $32,000.
In connection with the construction of an experimental fishing vessel, I may say that on the Pacific coast they have a boat which is
called a long liner and used to fish for halibut. This boat carries a line with hooks of a length of 300 fathoms, or 1,800 feet, which is used in the fishing operations. It was thought that this method of fishing would be appropriate for the eastern coast and we had a boat built as an experiment. This boat is now on the ocean fishing and1 it carries a crew of six. It has been successful for the three trips it has made up to this time, and it has been out fishing for four or five days now, but we have not received the results of the last trip. In a nutshell I might say that the amount of fish caught per man per day has been about 5,000 pounds, which is considered to be quite good.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister made reference to the vote to provide for the repair of fishing vessels. I suppose that would be to take care of vessels that were injured.


Ernest Bertrand: That was to provide for the payment of compensation for diminution of values caused by war damage to fishing boats and fishing gear.


John Ritchie MacNicol: It is quite right that they should be compensated if they are injured as a result of the war, but would the minister elaborate a little on that? I suppose these ships are operating in the gulf of St. Lawrence or on the grand banks. Have any of these ships been torpedoed or damaged by gunfire?


Ernest Bertrand: " Canadian
salt water fisherman" means persons of Canadian nationality employed upon a fishing vessel or boat engaged in the fishing industry of Canada in tidal waters. "War damage" means loss, including destruction, and damage caused by, or in repelling, enemy action, or by measures taken to avoid the consequences of damage caused by or in repelling enemy action. There is a schedule of compensation for war damage to personal effects through war perils at sea. In the case of a master of a fishing vessel of sixty registered tons and over, this amounts to $200 for personal effects. For a mate or engineer it is $100, and for all other members of the crew, $70. In the case of other vessels, it is $125 for the master and $70 for other members of the crew. If a boat or gear is damaged, the damage is valued and the amount is paid. "Diminution of value" means the amount by which the value of any fishing boat or fishing gear in the state in which it was immediately after the occurrence of the war damage is less than its value in the state in which it was immediately before the occurrence of the war damage.
The minister may pay compensation to any person in an amount not exceeding $2,000 for each diminution of value caused by war damage

War Appropriation-State

in any fishing boat of which that person is the owner. It is provided that if any person is a joint owner his compensation shall be limited to his proportionate share of the said $2,000. There are also benefits for sickness or injury, and pensions are paid. In the case of a master of a fishing boat of sixty registered tons or over, this would be equal to that paid to a lieutenant. In the case of a master of other fishing boats, it would be equal to that paid to a sub-lieutenant. In the case of other members of the crew, it would be equal to that paid to a naval seaman. The scale of pensions paid to widows or dependent parents amounts to $800 for a lieutenant and $720: for sub-lieutenant and all other ranks and ratings. Additional pensions for children or dependent brothers or sisters are $180 for one child, $324 for two children, and $120 for each subsequent child.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister referred to ships being damaged in avoiding enemy action. What would that cover?


Ernest Bertrand: In repelling enemy action or because of measures taken to avoid the consequences of damages caused by or in repelling enemy action.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Running into another ship or something like that?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: How much of this vote was used last year?


Ernest Bertrand: There are two or three applications under consideration but the damage has not yet been arrived at, so that nothing has been paid.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: That is of the total of $15,000?


Ernest Bertrand: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Department generally, $8,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: What is involved by way of war expenditures under this item?


Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Secretary of State):: This is made up of two items. As the committee is aware, in 1941 a special appropriation was made for the lieutenant governor of Nova Scotia in the sum of $4,000 to cover additional expenses to which he was put by reason of entertainment and other duties he had to perform in war time, supplementary to those performed in peace time. As the committee is also aware, this year a vote of $4,000 was made to the lieutenant governor of Quebec. Before his appointment the lieutenant governor was entitled to a pension of 
$6,300, and some doubt arose as to whether he was still entitled to that pension. He has not been drawing it, and if the decision is that that pension is recoverable, then the $4,000 will be returned.


Alfred Henry Bence: Under what section of the estimates of the Secretary of State would questions relating to the custodian of enemy property come?


Norman Alexander McLarty: That would be the civil estimates, departmental administration.


Gordon Graydon: It should not be.


Norman Alexander McLarty: It is.


Alfred Henry Bence: There is the question of the return of properties which were taken over as a result of the ban placed on certain groups in this country. Does the investigation of , this matter come under another item?


Norman Alexander McLarty: I do not wish to be technical, but it could not come under this item, and it does not come under any item in the war appropriation. It would come under the general estimates of the Secretary of State.


Alfred Henry Bence: If it does not come under "department generally", will the minister explain just how the McPhee commission was paid, under what appropriation?


Norman Alexander McLarty: The McPhee commission was paid out of the custodian's administration fund. Judge McPhee would receive no remuneration, only expenses, and the other members of the commission would be paid out of the custodian's fund.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Commission re revocation of naturalization certificates, $3,000.
Grote Stirling: The other evening the question of the possibility of revoking the naturalization of persons who were interned came up, and I should like to ask the Secretary of State whether there is not power now to revoke the naturalization of interned persons?


Norman Alexander McLarty: I shall have to give a careful answer to that question, because I have never had occasion to go into the question of the inherent right to revoke the naturalization of an interned person. The procedure that is followed in the event of a person interned expressing a desire to lose his Canadian citizenship is that notice is sent to him in the regular way advising him that unless he wishes to appeal against the decision his naturalization will be revoked. But the practice has not been to revoke his naturalization because of the mere fact of his internment.

Newfoundland, Fisheries


Grote Stirling: In the case of a convicted person, at least consideration is given to the revocation of naturalization and the deportation of the individual, is it not?


Norman Alexander McLarty: It is only to the matter of deportation, not to the revocation of naturalization, although the revocation would presumably follow.


Gordon Graydon: Does the custodian of enemy property come under the jurisdiction of the minister?


Norman Alexander McLarty: Yes.


Gordon Graydon: I have been checking over the estimates, and it looks to me as though the minister will have to get along without a vote for the custodian of enemy property because there is not an item for him in the *war appropriation estimates or in the civil estimates.


Norman Alexander McLarty: The reason is that the custodian requires no vote. The custodian is self-supporting.


Gordon Graydon: Does that mean that we shall have no oportunity to discuss the position? It is important that an opportunity be afforded. If there is no vote for the custodian of enemy property, then I think the departmental estimates generally, as the hon. member for Saskatoon city suggested, would be the proper item for the discussion. I think the minister was wrong in suggesting that it would not be proper to discuss it on his estimates.


Norman Alexander McLarty: There would certainly be no objection to giving to the committee all the information required in connection with the custodian of enemy property, but I suggest that rather than delay the committee now we should take it up under the civil estimates of the department's general vote. The items now before us are two particular items which have nothing whatever to do with the custodian. I do not wish my hon. friend to get the impression that there is any holding back of information, because there is no information that the custodian wishes to be held back.


Gordon Graydon: If I may say so, I think the minister's suggestion is a good one, that the discussion take place on the civil estimates. In the meantime there will be no delay in passing his war appropriation estimates. But I hope the minister will make sure to remind us that the discussion comes under the first item of his civil estimates.
100-188i


Norman Alexander McLarty: I am afraid that my hon. friend will have to charge his own memory with that responsibility.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned until Thursday at 3 o'clock p.m., pursuant to special order made Monday, February 21, 1944.
Thursday, May 18, 1944