1944-06-08

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, hon. members are aware that to-day, June 8, has been set apart for the celebration in Canada of His Majesty's birthday anniversary. The house no doubt would wish to extend to His Majesty greetings and good wishes on this occasion; and my hon. friend, the Leader of the Opposition, (Mr. Graydon) has kindly said that he would join with me in a motion which would

Wednesday Sittings
express the wishes of all parties in the house.
I	would therefore move, seconded by the Leader of His Majesty's Loyal Opposition;
That an^ humble address be sent to His Majesty, King George VI, in the following words:
To the King's Most Excellent Majesty:
Most Gracious Sovereign:
We, the members of the House of Commons of Canada in parliament assembled, desire to extend to Your Majesty, on this day set apart for the celebration in Canada of the King's Birthday, our loyal greetings and heartfelt good wishes.
Throughout these anxious days of the supreme effort of the united nations, it is our prayer that Providence may protect Your Majesty; that you may be spared to see an early triumph of the forces of freedom now launched upon tremendous battles on land, on the sea and in the air; and that the efforts of all who fight for freedom may be crowned with security and peace.


Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the most appropriate manner in which I may be allowed to second the motion of the Prime Minister is to ask the members of this house to rise and sing "God Save the King."
(The members rose and sang God Save the King.)


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: On Tuesday afternoon the leader of the opposition suggested that it might help to expedite the business of the house considerably were we to resume the sittings on Wednesdays. As hon. members are aware, the normal procedure has been to sit on Mondays and Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Fridays in the afternoon and evening, but on Wednesday for the half day only. I have been conferring with my colleagues as to the advisability of resuming the Wednesday afternoon sittings. If the house is prepared to accept the suggestion which was made constructively and helpfully by my hon. friend, that we might on Wednesday afternoons proceed immediately with government business, the business which was taken up on the previous night, or such orders as might be called, thereby avoiding delays on questions or motions preceding the taking up of business previously indicated, I would be prepared to move, with the consent of the house, that the house resume its sittings on Wednesday afternoons.
I have to make it clear that it will be necessary for the war committee of the cabinet to reserve Wednesdays, as we have up to the present this session, for the consideration of the very important matters which come before its members, and that the members of the government who are on the war committee will necessarily be obliged to absent themselves from the house that afternoon. I assume that hon. members will agree in the circumstances that there will be no divisions on Wednesday afternoons; that, as I have already said, ministers will not be expected to reply to questions, but that the procedure will be as it would normally be after the government has entered upon the orders of the day for the discussion of the different measures. If this is agreeable, and I gather from the response made to what I have already said that it is, I would move:
That on and after June 14, 1944, until the end of the session, the house shall meet at three o'clock in the afternoon on Wednesdays and that the order of business shall then :be the continuation of the business interrupted by the adjournment of the house on the preceding day, provided always that government business may be called on Wednesdays in such sequence as the government may think fit.
That last clause refers of course to government business. It means that the government would announce on Tuesday evening that on Wednesday we would take up such and such items on the order paper, but not necessarily continuance of the particular measure that was being discussed after time of adjournment on the Tuesday night. That might be a measure in which the Minister of Finance or some other member of the war committee would be interested. The house will observe that at present we shall continue to follow the custom of not sitting on Wednesday evening. Jf we make substantial progress under the proposed arrangement and we find that it is really likely to help in expediting the business of the house, we may a little later take Wednesday evenings and after that, I hope, before long begin morning sittings.


Gordon Graydon: There are just two things I wish to say with respect to this motion. I think it will expedite the business of the house considerably, and I wish to thank the Prime Minister for having acceded to what I felt would be a constructive request, because we are all very anxious, particularly in these times, to see the house conduct itself with as much celerity and dispatch as may be humanly possible in the circumstances, reserving of course the right to deal properly with legislation that comes before the house.
Wednesday Sittings

The second thing I wish to say is that, in connection with Wednesday evening sittings, I had made that a part of my proposal, and I was glad to hear the Prime Minister suggest that the door was being left open so that Wednesday evening might be taken advantage of a little later on.
The other matter mentioned, in connection with the question of divisions on Wednesdays, calls for a comment, and perhaps the opposition ought in its own interests to protect itself, as the government has done, and to make sure that no legislation will be brought in by the government which would, by reason of the acceptance of the Prime Minister's suggestion about no divisions, in any way embarrass the opposition in connection with details of that kind. Perhaps that is a matter upon which we can all cooperate so that the interests and the rights of all shall be protected as time goes on.


Mr. E. G. HANSELL (Macleod):: In rising to support the motion, may I make one or two suggestions to the Prime Minister. We usually find that civil estimates are rushed towards the end of the session. I think we could very largely comply with the suggestion made by the Leader of the Opposition and with the request of the Prime Minister and avoid divisions if it were possible to have civil estimates discussed on Wednesday afternoons. There is to my mind quite a difference in discussion as between civil estimates and legislation. When legislation is brought down it usually determines government policy. In order for us to familiarize ourselves with the various subjects involved in legislation a good deal of time is required, and an hour or two on Wednesday might facilitate the study of certain legislation. While civil estimates are being discussed there are not involved particularly questions of government policy. Civil estimates come down every year and usually about the same discussion takes place. I am going to suggest that if it is possible we reserve Wednesday afternoon for civil estimates and we may find as the session draws near its close that it is not necessary for us to hasten over these estimates as we usually do.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The government will be glad to consider the suggestion, but I do think that general legislation is more important than estimates, though estimates of course are one form of legislation. My hon. friend will realize that already this session a great deal of discussion of items that appear in the civil estimates has taken place on the war appropriation, also in addition there has been under discussion some of the civil estimates, so that there is not now the possibility that

the estimates will be left for consideration until the end of the session. On some Wednesdays we might take up civil government estimates; we might take them up on Monday or Tuesday, on Thursday or Friday. I would not wish to say that Wednesday would be reserved for that purpose. I think that precedence ought to be given to the bills we have, some of which are very important, and some of which will require a good deal of discussion.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I wish to announce to the house that a convention for the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion in the case of estate taxes and succession duties was signed this afternoon, June 8, at 2.45 p.m. Mr. Atherton, the United States Ambassador, signed on behalf of the United States of America; and Mr. Mackenzie King, the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and Mr. Gibson, the Minister of National Revenue, signed for Canada.
The text of the convention will be tabled in parliament, and an explanatory statement will be furnished as soon as arrangements have been completed in Washington for communicating the convention to the senate.



THE WAR


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Hon. members will have
observed that the Prime Minister of Great Britain has intimated to the British house that he does not think it will be possible for him to make statements from day to day in reference to the progress of the war, that he will have to choose occasions on which particular statements may be made. However, the Prime Minister in Britain is also Minister of Defence and may wish to speak in either or both capacities. I am sure hon. members will be interested in hearing this afternoon from the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) something about the events of the last few days, giving to the house as much in the way of information as it is possible for him to give, particularly in relation to the progress which has been made by our own forces. As there is no particular place indicated on the order paper for such a statement, if it suits the convenience of the

Invasion oj Western Europe
house I suggest that the Minister of National Defence might make a statement immediately.


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, I do not know that there is very much one can add to the press reports, but in view of the welter of official and unofficial news in the press and by radio, I do want to say a word about the various sources of information which we have and also a word as to the present situation.
Many of the reports that we get are from enemy sources and consequently they have to be taken with a good deal of reserve. Their object is not alwajs to inform but frequently with the hope that the allies will give them information by statements correcting these reports. In addition to the enemy sources of information we get official communiques from the supreme allied headquarters which all members see in the newspapers. These are necessarily general in character, and as they are issued only periodically some of the information they contain will already have been released. Then we have press dispatches through the news agencies, the Canadian Press, the Associated Press, the British United Press, and also stories by responsible war correspondents of various agencies and newspapers who are on the ground. While these reports are not official, it can be assumed that they have been passed by the security authorities.
I must say that we have been extremely well served by the dispatches which have appeared in the last few days from all the different sources. At national defence headquarters we get a series of situation reports which show the identity of the troops engaged and the progress made and the positions established. From these we are able to spot the general line which is being occupied. The press and radio provide such speedy facilities that very seldom do we at headquarters have news by way of situation reports or reports from commanders which are earlier in point of time than what is gained from the press or radio. On the other hand there are details which we get in situation reports and reports from commanders which cannot be given for security reasons and are not carried by the press, or radio.
The purpose of this explanation is to intimate that there would be very little point in my making announcements in the house unless there were some details affecting particularly Canadian interests which were not carried by the press or radio but which we felt might be announced without prejudice to security.
Since I am speaking I can say this that a careful putting together of the situation reports which have come in in the last twenty-four hours, enables me to tell the house that I am at least not making any over-statement
when I say that Canadians are as far forward as any other land troops. We have late news of heavy fighting in one sector in which it is stated that the casualties may be considerable. In two recent messages from the commanders, one pays the highest praise to the magnificence of our troops in the assault and indicates that good progress is being made and that the casualties are moderate. Another speaks particularly of the outstanding bravery and resourcefulness of our men. Speaking generally this news is good. What we here can do is to keep right on with training and dispatching men, shipping equipment and paying the shot. But we can also encourage and support our sailors, soldiers, and airmen by letters, messages and by unfailing interest in their loved ones in Canada, and by our fervent prayers.
We cannot help feeling, speaking of the operation generally, that the most precarious phase for troops in an amphibious operation is passed. The outstanding fact is that they have gained solid ground and are pushing forward. That fills us with a sense of humble thankfulness. I am sure, however, that we are not being lulled into any sense of false security or complacency because this first vital phase has succeeded more quickly and with less cost than we dared expect. These men are facing a strong and desperate enemy. We cannot expect that operations will keep steadily on with the good fortune which has so far attended this one. We must always be prepared for bad news, and perhaps shocking news. In the meantime, these men of ours have our grateful appreciation and our fullest confidence. May they have stout hearts and strong hands for all the perils and difficulties of the great undertaking in which they are engaged. On the other hand may we on our part try to match their heroism, their resolution, and their determination with our unbounded support and our unflagging help and interest.	*



AVAILABILITY TO MEMBERS OF MAP OF WESTERN INVASION FRONT-CASUALTY LISTS

Ernest George Hansell: Apropos of the statement of the minister may I rise to a question of privilege which I think affects every member of the house? It is not often that hon. members of the opposition hand bouquets to the government, but I wish to tell the Minister of National Defence how much I appreciate something that may not seem tremendously great, but which I think we all appreciate, namely, the announcement we received in the mail yesterday with respect to his decision to have maps placed in room 16 and an intelligence officer from his depart-
Questiont

ment in attendance to explain to us the progress that has been made in the invasion. I think these little acts of kindness all go to help make a member's work more pleasant.
While I am on my feet may I also express my appreciation of the decision made by the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power) some time ago to have his department send to members of parliament casualty lists with respect to the R.C.A.F. May I ask the Minister of National Defence if he would give consideration to sending to members of parliament casualty lists as they affect the army and the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services casualty lists as they affect the navy? They are of tremendous help to hon. members.


James Layton Ralston: I thank my hon. friend for his
reference to what is being done to inform hon. members; it is the least we can do. I only wish we could do more in that respect. With regard to the matter of casualty lists, that is now under discussion with the records officer and I hope to be able to advise very shortly whether it can be done or not. It is simply a matter of physical arrangement.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has the government made any proposals to the city of Toronto for the erection of small houses there on the new plan made in relation to housing in Montreal?
2.	If so, for how many houses, at what cost, and what is the plan proposed?
3.	What reply has been received by the government from the city authorities in relation thereto ?
4.	When will the houses be built?


Mr. ILSLEY:: Under the plan announced by the Minister of Finance on May 11, 1944, for the financing of low-rental housing projects sponsored by limited dividend housing corporations, the government does not make proposals to a municipality. On the other hand, as the announcement indicates, it is willing to assist by making a first mortgage loan at an interest rate of 3 per cent to finance an approved low-rental 'housing project *developed by a group of local public-spirited citizens organized as a limited dividend housing corporation. Such projects are planned by the local group and are taken up with the dominion authorities in order to secure approval of the project and to negotiate the loan.
City of Toronto officials requested information, and the general principles underlying the plan were explained to them. No reply has been received and no proposal for any specific housing project to be developed under this plan has been made to the dominion by the city of Toronto. .


R.C.A.F.-BOMBING AND GUNNERY PRACTICE- LAKE ERIE FISHING GROUNDS
Mr. CORMAN:: 1.	What arrangements regarding compensation were made -with the fishermen on Lake Erie who lost their grounds to the air force for bombing and gunnery practice?
2.	How much compensation are they paid per year?
3.	How much compensation have they received to date?
4.	What area of fishing grounds did each lose for the above purposes?


Mr. MACMILLAN:: 1.	Compensation is paid to lake Erie fishermen on the basis of the number of nets operated by each.
2.	Two hundred dollars per net per year plus one payment of $200 per net towards expenses of reestablishment. The latter payment will be made at the time the fishermen are able to renew their activities.
3.	For each of the years 1941, 1942 and 1943, $14,200 was paid to pound net fishermen. A further amount of $1,717.14 was paid in full and final settlement in respect of compensation to gill net fishermen.
4.	Information not available as compensation was based on sworn statements lodged by the fishermen with Ontario government showing the annual catch of each pound, variety of fish, selling price as well as the estimated value of equipment used.


BIRCH AND MAPLE VENEER LOGS
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	What was the total quantity of, (a) export quality and, (b) second quality of birch and maple veneer logs produced, purchased or acquired by the veneer Log Supply Ltd., of Montreal?
2.	What -were the quantities produced, purchased or acquired in the provinces of, (a) Ontario; (ib) New Brunswick, and (c) Quebec?
3.	What was the decimal of Scribner scale, if any, used in each province?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	Veneer Log Supply Limited purchased during its first fiscal year of operations ending August, 1943, (a) 14,810,570 feet of standard quality veneer logs; (b) 164,850 feet of second grade veneer logs.
2.	During the period stated in 1: (a) Ontario, 2,449,630 feet standard quality veneer
XMr. Hanscll.]

Questions
logs, 164,850 feet second grade veneer logs; (b) New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, 5.067,200 feet standard quality veneer logs; (c) Quebec, 7,293,740 feet standard quality veneer logs.
3.	Because each province used a different scale, Veneer Log Supply Limited decided to apply the Scribner decimal C log rule.


SOLDIERS' REESTABLISHMENT-SOFT DRINKS- SUGAR QUOTA
Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	How many returned soldiers have applied for a quota of sugar for use in the manufacture of sold drinks or fountain syrups?
2.	How many applications have been granted?
3.	How many applications have been refused?
4.	What quota of sugar has been granted to each applicant?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	One.
2.	One.
3.	None.
4.	A quota of 7,500 pounds of sugar quarterly has been granted to the above applicant.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS-CLAIMS AT VARIOUS DISTRICT OFFICES
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaCROIX (Quebec-Montmorency):
1.	How many claims officers, clerks and stenographers are working on claims for unemployment insurance benefits, (a) in the North Bay district office; (b) in the London district office; (c) in the Toronto district office; (d) in the Montreal district office?
2.	What was the number of claims dealt with in each of said offices between January 1, 1943, and January 1, 1944?
3.	What was the total amount of unemployment insurance benefits paid by each of said offices between the above dates?
Mr. MARTIN;
1.	North
Bay London Toronto Montreal Claims Officers	2	3	5	15Clerks	2	4	6	17Stenographers. 116	11Typists	..	7Total ....	5	8	17	50
2.
North Bay	 458
London	 806
Toronto	 4,759
Montreal	 13,995
3.
North Bay	$ 9,476 45
London	
17,457	93Toronto	
99,803	84Montreal	
401,731	52


Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	Has the government, on behalf of the Department of Pensions and National Health, purchased a property in Montreal known as "the Benny farm"? If so, when and at what price?
2.	Was the said property purchased from the
owner or through an agent; and if through an agent, what commission was paid on the transaction ?	'
3.	What is the area of the site and for what purpose was the property purchased?


Mr. MacKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: 1.	No. Subject to approval by the treasury board as to cost, the Department of Pensions and National Health has been authorized by order in council P.C. 3864 dated May 30, 1944 to acquire land west of Benny avenue between Sherbrooke and Monkland streets.
2	and 3. Answered by No. 1.



CANADIAN FORCES PERSONNEL-RAILWAY RATES

[Stage Direction]
Mr. CHURCH;
1.	Is the government giving consideration to continue negotiations announced to the house last session regarding the reduction of soldier fares by railways and a ceiling for the same for those on weekend leaves from camps while in training in Canada?
2.	What has been done in this matter since it was last before the house the past three sessions and what negotiations, if any, have been conducted between the government and the railways since then?
3.	Will time be set for the consideration of a bill, No. 6 on the order paper, regarding free soldier fares and railways?
Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax);
1.	No consideration is being given at present to negotiating with the railway companies for any further reduction to be met by them over what they are now providing as a concession, i.e.,
(a)	Provision of a return ticket for the cost of a single fare any time service personnel are travelling on ordinary leaves, including weekend leaves.
(b)	Provision of a return ticket for the cost of a two-thirds of a single fare to service personnel when travelling on annual or embarkation leave; one-third of a single fare is payable by the person travelling up to an amount of 815 and one-third of a single fare is paid by the government, plus the excess of any amount of one-third of a single fare over 815.
2.	Arrangements have been made to provide in the case of personnel proceeding on annual or embarkation leave under the arrangements of one-third of a single fare payable by the man, for a ceiling of $15 to be the maximum
Questions
[Stage Direction]
cost paid by such personnel; the government absorbing in addition to one-third of a single fare any amount in excess of $15 for the one-third of a single fare which was previously paid by the persons travelling on this concession.
The matter of free transportation at government expense for personnel to their homes and return to district depots when granted disembarkation leave on return lrom overseas is now receiving active consideration.
3.	See resolution passed by the house on February 11, 1944, providing for precedence to be given to government notices of motion and government orders until the end of the present session. (Votes and Proceedings No. 12).
The action taken by the house has precluded consideration up to the present of bill No. 6 on the order paper and the question as to when time will be set for its consideration depends on the further action taken by the house.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: What is the total amount of money received to date under item 36, general income tax T1 form for the year 1942?


Mr. GIBSON:: The total amount of deferred tax received as of May 31, 1944, under item 36, T.l general 1942 is $4,743,111.
[Mr. W. C. Macdonald.)


SELECTIVE SERVICE-TRANSFER OF FARM WORKERS TO INDUSTRY
Mr. MAYHEW:: W'hat steps were taken by the Department of Labour to facilitate the movement of farmers and farm workers into other industries during the winter months of 1943-44?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	An extensive educational and publicity campaign was undertaken early in the fall of 1943 to encourage farmers who could be spared from agriculture to accept work in other essential industries during the winter months. This campaign made clear to farm workers the procedure they were to follow in obtaining employment. In the case of those who were on postponement of military service assurance was given that their postponement would not be affected by accepting such employment provided that they had fulfilled the necessary national selective service mobilization requirements. This educational and publicity campaign included newspaper articles and advertisements, radio broadcasts, posters and a special letter from the director of national selective service to all farmers throughout Canada.
2.	In addition to the above publicity conducted by the Department of Labour, the cooperation of interested provincial departments and industries was secured in publicity specially adapted to meet the specialized needs for labour across Canada during the winter months.
3.	Under the dominion-provincial farm labour agreements all of the provinces made available members of their provincial' field staffs to assist in recruiting farm workers who could be spared from agriculture during the winter months. With the assistance of these officials and of members of local agricultural production committees, not only were the essential needs of agriculture protected, but those who could be spared during the winter months were recruited for other high priority employment.
4.	In some of the less commercialized districts where farm labour needs were less acute, certain high priority industries were permitted to employ canvassers under the direction of national selective service to recruit workers.
5.	Through an arrangement with the national film board representatives of national selective service attended showings of films on the rural circuits in several of the provinces. On these occasions the needs of other essential industries were made known and farm workers, who could be spared, were recruited to help meet them.

Questions as Orders for Returns


OFFICERS SURVEY AND CLASSIFICATION BOARDS
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	When was the overseas service control board formed?
2.	How many officers have been recommended for overseas service by that board?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: No such board exists. On the assumption that the officers survey and classification boards are meant the information is as follows:
1.	October 1, 1943.
2.	It is not the function of such boards to recommend officers for overseas service.
There are six such boards assigned to definite areas covering Canada and Newfoundland, and each board is responsible for the survey and classification of all officers within its respective area. Eventually every officer will appear before one of these boards in order that he may be appraised and that a recommendation may be submitted as to his suitability to retain present employment-for reallocation if his services can be utilized to better advantage elsewhere-or for his return to civilian status.
veteran's land act


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	Is the Veterans' Land Act in force?
2.	Are discharged veterans of the present war allowed to purchase land under this act?
3.	If not, why not?
4.	If the act is not in force at present, when will it become operative?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes. Discharged veterans certified as qualified under the act and regulations are assisted to purchase land. Farm machinery is in very short supply and a similar situation prevails with respect to building materials. Present administrative policy restricts establishments at this stage of the war to disabled veterans and to others in exceptional circumstances.
3	and 4. Answered by 1 and 2.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	Will the government construct a new hospital as a neurological centre in the city of Montreal? If so, what will be its capacity and estimated cost?
2.	Has the government retained the services of any firm of architects to prepare plans for a new neurological hospital in Montreal? If so, who has been so retained?
3.	Have any arrangements been made regarding the person who will be in charge of such neurological hospital?
4.	Has Dr. Wilder G. Penfield been appointed as head of this new neurological hospital?
5.	If so, will he ibe consulted so that plans in regard to the operating rooms and other facilities may be provided to meet his special requirements?
6.	If not, who will be responsible for this work?


Mr. McLARTY:: Return tabled.


MOBILIZATION ACT-RESERVE ARMY
Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	Do the call-up regulations of the N.R.M.A. apply to all personnel of the reserve army? If not, what ranks are exempt from said call-up?
2.	Of such ranks as may be exempt from said call-up, what is the total number now in the reserve army who are of military age?
3.	Of the number indicated in the answer to
question (2), how many joined the reserve army, (a) prior to September 1, 1939;	(b)
*between September 1, 1939, and September 1, 1940; (c) since September 1, 1940?


CONTINENTAL GLOVE COMPANY-AIRMEN'S GLOVES
Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	What was the amount of the original tender of the Continental Glove Company of Montreal for the lining of airmen's gloves with shorn lamb?
2.	Was the same amount paid to the Continental Glove Company for the lining of the gloves with a substitute?
3.	What were the names of the inspectors who made the first inspection of the linings?
4.	What were the names of the inspectors who made the final inspection and passed the gloves ?



PUBLIC RELATIONS, PRESS AND LIAISON OFFICERS

Mr. CHURCH:: What are the salaries, living allowances, travelling expenses and all other emoluments of the officials set out in sessional paper 320, tabled Tuesday, May 30, as follows: (a) public relation officers; (b) press agents; (c) liaison officers in civil and war work?



CIVIL DISTURBANCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I desire to ask a question of the Minister of Justice, and in doing so I intend no reflection against the provincial police of Quebec or the municipal police of Montreal. I should like to know whether the government has taken any steps through the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or any other agency, to
Civil Disturbances

ensure that there will be no recurrences of the fighting which has taken place in the Montreal area between gangs of so-called "zoot-suiters" and members of the armed forces. I ask this question because of what seems to be a quickening concern on the part of people generally as to what is going on in that district.
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice): I do not know that I can give a direct answer to the question as put by the leader of the opposition, because I would not want to suggest that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were concerning themselves with matters wdiich are primarily a provincial or municipal responsibility. But, noting the newspaper reports of what had been going on, the commissioner and I had the assistant commissioner proceed to Montreal, where he spent two days making a careful investigation into these instances that had been reported in the press. He returned last evening and I had a verbal report from him this morning. He is going to give me a more detailed written report, but in the meantime the provisional report with which I have been supplied states that there had been, over a period of several weeks, scattered and disconnected incidents in Westmount, Verdun, Longueuil and St. Lambert, and more recently there have been in the city of Montreal two or three street fights either between civilians or between civilians and members of the armed forces. The information obtained by Assistant Commissioner Mead was that these incidents were characterized in the newspaper reports as rather more serious than they were in fact, though it is regrettable that anything of the sort should occur.
In the provisional report it is stated that at present it is not considered that these fights are due to any racial animosities or that they have any political significance, and that view is shared by the director of the municipal police of Montreal. The situation, of course, is one that could be exploited by trouble-seeking persons, and if it were to continue it might become quite disturbing. It is suggested that one remedy which might be successful to a large extent would be in giving less exaggerated publicity to these isolated incidents, because it is noted now that people are commencing to congregate on St. Catherine street in the vicinity of St. Lawrence boulevard waiting to see if something is not going to occur, and the presence of crowds congregating there increases the occasion for unfortunate conflicts.
All I can add is that the provincial and municipal police, as well as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, are carefully inquiring into the possible origin of these quarrels and are also conferring with the provost corps, and 
that everyone is trying to avoid any occasion for incidents which up to the present time do not appear to have any other sinister' significance than simply spasmodic outbreaks between persons who are quick to take offence. The first clash between service personnel and civilians arose out of an incident when a sailor was perhaps successful in taking a young lady away from a civilian. That was resented and a fight ensued, which led to reprisals, and that appears to have been the start of clashes of this kind between civilians and uniformed personnel. I hope the efforts that are being made will be sufficiently effective to prevent any recurrence of these incidents.


Mr. POULIOT:: Would the leader of the opposition be kind enough to give a clear definition of a "zoot-suiter"?


Gordon Graydon: I am sure it is not necessary for me to assist the hon. member for Temiscouata, who on so many occasions has demonstrated in this house a very excellent understanding of the .English language.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I understand the Minister of
Labour has made plans to announce, some time during to-day or this evening, over a Canadian radio network, some important and far-reaching changes in government policy with respect to man-power. I would ask the minister if he would consider announcing these details as to any change in government policy where I suggest they should be made known first, that is, in the House of Commons; and, if he is not prepared to do that, I think he ought to give some reason why this extraordinary course is being taken.


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: I had intended to make a brief
statement, Mr. Speaker. It is quite true that I intend to make a short address over the radio this evening, as my hon. friend has done many times, but in the course of that address there will not be an announcement of any major departure in policy. Under existing orders we have all the powers necessary.
The plan is three-fold. First, some 500,000 men who have been rejected for service in the armed forces will be interviewed individually, with a view to moving them, where necessary, to more essential employment. I might add that in order to speed up this plan arrangements have been made for selective service and employment offices throughout

Labour Conditions
Canada to stay open when necessary during, the evenings. Second, the compulsory transfer regulations now in effect are to be extended to cover a greater number of occupations and will be applied more vigorously. Third, the industrial mobilization survey plan will be extended to cover all industries, regardless of priority. The employment of all men aged sixteen to forty inclusive, in all industrial and commercial establishments, will be subject to survey. These surveys will be made as rapidly as possible. Their primary purpose is: to determine cases where men on postponement can be called for military training without interference with essential production; to arrange transfer to more essential jobs of men who are medically unfit or not callable for military service for any reason; to discover cases where an employer, in any priority, has a temporary or permanent surplus ctf men in the age groups mentioned who may be moved to essential work. In view of its peculiar labour difficulties the agricultural industry will not be included in the survey. I might add that a survey of this nature is being applied to the civil service in Ottawa.
I would stress the point that in regard to men in the age groups mentioned, whether callable for military training or not, or whether married or single, all cases will be examined most carefully. Essential and non-essential industries all will be covered. Every effort will be made to treat fairly the employers and employees involved, but the paramount importance of war production will be the deciding factor.
To explain further: the officers of the industrial mobilization survey division of selective service will investigate plants, and will report to one of twelve industrial mobilization survey committees across Canada.
Workers transferred have the right to reinstatement in former jobs, after the emergency passes. Under certain conditions, special allowances will be paid to those moved to other jobs where hardship would be involved.
Employers and employees may appeal decisions of these committees to courts of referees, which are widely distributed throughout the country and which include representatives of labour and employers.
May I add this: as we did last year, we have reached that period when labour shortages are most marked, when we are moving from one season to a busier season, a condition which is traditional in Canada. I thought I would use this opportunity in an effort to speed up recruitment, particularly of women workers in Canada, to take the place of men in various industrial and commercial undertakings across the dominion.


Gordon Graydon: I take it that what the minister has given us to-day is substantially what he intends to give the nation on the broadcast?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes, absolutely.


Gordon Graydon: I heartily agree with him that in the original instance these arrangements involving substantial changes in regulations and setting out government policy should be made in the House of Commons. We are at one in that thought. Not long ago I heard one minister in the cabinet make a statement which I thought was quite in order, and that was that while he did not want the House of Commons to become simply a bulletin board, in respect of everything to be announced, at the same time there is a considerable distinction between major changes in regulations and major changes in government policy. I am glad the government is accepting the responsibility on this occasion.


Mr. GILLIS:: In making this survey will the different labour organizations across Canada be utilized?


Humphrey Mitchell: This policy was first decided upon after consultation with the national selective service advisory board, which is composed of labour organizations, farmer organizations, employer organizations, and ranking civil servants in the various departments of government most concerned. Then, as to appeal: of course the boards of referees are made up of representatives of employers and employees. I think I can assure the house that in particular industries there will be consultation with the labour organizations most directly affected. In the past they have proved very helpful.
LAY-OFF AT AIRCRAFT REPAIR LIMITED, EDMONTON [DOT]-QUESTION OF REEMPLOYMENT
On the orders of the day:


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Speaker, I should like to
answer a question asked on Monday last by the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair), concerning the placement of employees laid off from Aircraft Repair Limited, Edmonton. At that time I was not able to give full information concerning the disposition of these employees. I have now received a report from selective service officials in Edmonton, giving the information for which the hon. member asked.
Between January last and May 23, 1944, there was a series of lay-offs at Aircraft Repair Limited, Edmonton, affecting 624 male
War Appropriation Bill

employees and 523 females, making a total of 1,147. I find that 31 men and 42 women were placed with Canada Car and Foundry Limited at Fort William; 150 men and 330 women were placed in high priority industry in the Edmonton area, and 220 men joined the armed forces. Of those who were not immediately placed in employment the men were farmers who were returned to their farms, and the women returned to homes away from Edmonton and would be placed in employment through their local offices. Edmonton office reports a total of 3,785 unfilled jobs, so that it is evident that there is no shortage of work in that area.



OUTLET FOR PRODUCTION OF EASTERN CANNERS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON B. ISNOR (Halifax): Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Fisheries whether, in view of the need for food in Europe and elsewhere some assurance can be given to the canners of fish in eastern Canada that they will have a guaranted outlet for their production.
Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Minister of Fisheries):: Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt
in my mind that canned flaked fish, mackerel, herring and sardines will be needed in large amounts during the coming year. My department has been pressing for a conclusion of definite arrangements whereby all such canned fish as are able to pass inspection can be procured for this purpose, and I hope that these definite arrangements will be concluded within the next few days.



WAR APPROPRIATION BILL


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of bill No. 132, for granting to His Majesty aid for national defence and security.
Mr. STIRLING:: Mr. Speaker, may I draw the government's attention to the fact that this order was not forecast on Tuesday evening? Certain other business was forecast at that time, but we did not anticipate that it had been arranged to go on with this first.


Mr. CRERAR:: May I say that it should have been mentioned on Tuesday evening. However I understand that the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon) and the leader of

the C.C.F., at any rate, had expressed a willingness to proceed with this order this afternoon.


Grote Stirling: The leader of the opposition was not in the house.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That is true. The information was conveyed to me that the. leader of the opposition had expressed his agreement to proceeding with this order. Perhaps it was my oversight that it was not mentioned Tuesday evening. However the matter has been discussed at great length. I do not know whether hon. members wish to resume discussion.


Gordon Graydon: Since my name has been mentioned in connection with arranging the agenda, perhaps I should say that prior to my leaving the house early on Tuesday evening I spoke to the Minister of Finance and indicated my desire not to delay the second reading of the bill. The hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) and other hon. members, however, understood on Tuesday evening that the second reading would not be proceeded with, because it was not mentioned at that time. Our arrangements have been made without taking that into consideration, because I thought the government then had decided not to go on with second reading. We left it at that.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Is there any
objection to going on now, or does the hon. member wish to wait until eight o'clock?


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps in view of the misunderstanding, and the fact that the government did not mention this order of business on Tuesday evening, it should stand until to-morrow. I know some of the members were anxious to follow the government's proposal in this respect. I am sorry I happened to mention it to the Minister of Finance. It did not occur to me that what I had said would alter the situation.


Mr. KNOWLES:: May I offer a suggestion? While it is incorrect for the Minister of Mines and Resources to refer to me as leader of the C.C.F.-I am only the whip-it is true that I suggested to him after eleven o'clock the other night that I thought it proper to go on with the second reading to-day. I cannot of course speak for members of the official opposition. The suggestion I would make now, if they are not ready, is that this item be called at eight o'clock.


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is whatever the house wants to do, but I suggested the other night that we put it through then, and the hon. member for Yale said, "Oh, perhaps it had

War Appropriation-Mr. Knoiules
better go over." I thought there was a general agreement that it would be taken up at the earliest possible moment. If it was inadvertently left off the government list, it was because of the general understanding, and I am content to take it up under the present order.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, I have consulted with some of my colleagues and I think perhaps we have no special reason for delaying the bill. Perhaps we had better consent to the second reading. But I want to make just one observation before that is done.
Last session there was some criticism made of members of the house with respect to the debate on the second reading of a similar bill. This criticism by the press and the public largely centred around the fact that a huge sum of money had been passed by parliament on the second reading of a bill with little Or no debate. I want to indicate to-day the importance of the country understanding that we have already spent some forty-seven days or parts of days debating these war appropriations. I think it may properly be said that diligent care and attention has been paid by the members of the House of Commons to the various items.
I think the time consumed in this debate is exactly the same time as was consumed in a similar debate last year. That debate occurred at a different stage of the house sittings, because last year the budget preceded the war appropriation resolution. But suffice it to say that approximately the same length of time was consumed. I should like to point out also that when we speak of time being [DOT]consumed I think that only the minimum should be consumed in a war period. I remember well in the first session that I was in the house, in 1936, there was a substantially heavy agenda of legislation, but we dealt with only one-eleventh of the appropriation now being voted by this parliament. However, in doing that we took up almost six months of our legislative time. So that one can understand, I think, the delays which sometimes come with such heavy war expenditures, eleven times what they were in a preceding period.
I rose only for the purpose of establishing our position with respect to the question of the speedy passing of the bill. There was an arrangement in the house agreed to by all parties and groups, under which, instead of the discussion taking place on the second reading or in committee on the bill, it would take place at the resolution stage. Having said this, I have no objection to the motion.
I fancy the government is anxious to get the bill into shape so that it may go to another chamber as soon as possible.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, I should like to make the government's position clear along lines similar to those expressed by the leader of the opposition. It was definitely understood I think before we agreed to consider the resolution that the main debate would take place on the resolution and not on the bill. For that reason there has been wide latitude given to the discussion on the resolution which otherwise would not have been given.
I should like to take advantage of this occasion to say that I think the proper procedure in regard to all bills which are money bills should be to have a short discussion on the resolution with a full discussion on the bill. That is what was intended by the rules of the house, but this house has got into the habit recently, I think quite wrongly, of discussing resolutions at great length and then at times repeating the whole or much of the discussion on the bill itself. The resolution preceding a money bill is in the nature of a notice to the house that an important bill is coming down. It was never intended that a debate in any detail Should take place on the resolution. This particular bill has been discussed on the resolution perhaps even longer than it wouldl have been discussed on the second reading.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, before the second
reading is given to this bill, and apropos of the remarks of the Prime Minister just now, I should like to say a word about some of the items which I referred to the other night just before the chairman of the committee of the whole asked that the committee rise and report the resolution. I suggested that there were three or four items which had not been called and the chairman felt that I was mistaken. The items to which I referred appear on page 400 of Hansard and he stated that they were called when we were discussing items under the Department of Transport. Since then I have made a further search through Hansard and I feel sure that I was right when I pointed out that there were a number of items which were not called. These items are:
Government employees compensation act-[DOT] Administration, $79,500.
Provision for contingencies, $3,732,364.
Purchase of railway equipment, $24,726,460.
Canadian Wool Board Limited, $5,500,000.



War Appropriation-Mr. Knowles
Those items total S34.038.324. I understand quite well that when the committee reported the resolution we reported favourably on the total amount of money involved, namely, $3,650,000,000. Technically speaking, that means that the committee of the whole gave its concurrence to all that money and thereby to all the items involved. But as hon. members will recall, during the debate in the committee stage there were a number of occasions when hon. members wished to discuss matters not directly relevant to the item before the committee. A member would point out that we were really discussing the resolution which granted this total amount of money, but each time the reply was made that for the sake of convenience the total amount had been broken down into items and that it was more appropriate to stick to the various items. The house agreed to that procedure, but I think every hon. member will agree that involved in such a procedure was the responsibility to call every item.
I do not suggest that there was anything intentional about the failure to call these items. As a matter of fact I have no particular desire to discuss the items to which I have referred. But I think we should be very careful in following a procedure of this kind to see that every item is called. Despite the fact that we are accustomed to voting huge sums of money in this house I do not think we should treat lightly a sum of money which, if my observations are correct, totals more than $34,000,000.
Unless someone can show me in Hansard where these items have been discussed I should like to make two suggestions. The first is that when we are in committee on this bill hon. members should have the opportunity on an appropriate section to ask questions about any of the items that were not called and that the appropriate minister be prepared to answer. The other suggestion I would like to make is in keeping with what the Prime Minister said just now. I would hope that in another year, whatever government may be in power, the procedure for handling this bill will be studied before we come to it. I would hope that we might have a proper schedule, with the items properly numbered, so that what seems to have happened this time need not occur again.
This is no new suggestion; it has been made frequently during the course of this debate; but what has happened underlines, I suggest, the necessity of studying the whole question of procedure in a bill of this magnitude when we deal with it as we have, at the committee stage. This sum of money is very large. We realize that there are other
[Mr. Knowles.1
things at this time which are more important than matters of technical procedure, yet I think hon. members will agree with me that when we are voting sums of money we should do it correctly all the way through, and in accordance with parliamentary practice.
Someone may suggest, as I believe an hon. member to my right said a moment ago, that we had discussed the Canadian wool board. I would remind him that we discussed under the Department of Finance an item of $500,000 for the administration of the Canadian wool board; that item is to be found on page 305 of Hansard; but I am referring to an item of $5^ millions which is found on page 400.
Another reply which might be made is that these items may have been called but since there was no discussion they would not appear in Hansard. In reply to that I would point out that, at least on pages 3578 and 3579 of Hansard, items were called, there was no discussion, and the items were immediately agreed to, but that'agreement is recorded in Hansard. I suggest that if that is the case with some items, items which do not appear in Hansard at all were not called.
I make my two suggestions in this matter; first, that if any hon. members wish to ask questions about items which were not called, they be permitted to do so when the house is in committee on this bill; second, that close study be given to this whole procedure before another year rolls around. I offer in particular the suggestion that an attempt be made to draw up a proper schedule with the items properly numbered, as is done with respect to the civil estimates, so that we may know where we stand throughout the debate.
Before I take my seat I would like to take two or three minutes on another subject, although I shall not go into it at any length. Before this bill passes I appeal to the government in connection with a matter which comes under war appropriation and which was discussed at some length while we were in the committee stage. Perhaps the simplest thing for me to do is to ask the government, particularly the ministers concerned, to study an editorial found in the Winnipeg Free Press on Monday of this week, June 5, dealing with the whole question of the desirability of greater coordination of our medical services. The Free Press is perhaps the most pro-Liberal paper in the country, yet its criticism of the government on this score is so marked that if I attempted to read this editorial in the house I am sure I would be ruled out of order; therefore I shall not attempt it. But the point the Free Press makes, and has made, in fact, through the years, and the point which

War Appropriation-Mr. Michaud
some of us have tried to make in this house, is that what is important in the matter of providing the best possible medical service to our armed forces and to our civilians is not only the total number of beds, but the coordinating of the various medical services, with particular reference to specialist services. Not long ago the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) laid on the table an interesting and extensive report on this whole subject. The gist of it, as I gathered, was that an attempt should be made to arrive at a better coordination of our medical services;, and the Free Press-which I am not very often able to quote in support of a position I may take-suggests that in, view of what is now happening overseas, in view of the necessity of our being ready to provide, not just for a short term but perhaps through the years, the best medical and hospital treatment and care for the members of our armed services, now is the time to study again more seriously this whole question. I will not take longer on it, because it has been presented to the government before; it was presented a few days ago by the hon. member for Pardale (Mr. Bruce) when he asked certain questions as a result of statements made by the director of the Montreal Neurological Institute. I may say that I was not satisfied with the reply which the Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie) made on that occasion. I urge that one of the things we must do for the men now engaged in action is to make sure they have the best medical care and the best provision for hospitalization, and I hope that the government will give further consideration to this matter. We feel, notwithstanding arguments which have been put forth such as the upsetting of procedure which has been followed and the danger of establishing new precedents, that this thing has not been properly handled. I make this appeal at this stage of the war appropriation bill, raising only this point on second reading, that the government give further consideration to the recommendations in the report of the medical procurement and assignment board, and that it move in the direction of better coordination of our medical and hospital services.


Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (Minister of Transport) :: The hon. member is certainly labouring under a misapprehension if he thinks that some of the items to which he has referred were not called and approved in committee of the whole. On most of these items I happened to have been in charge, as they were expenditures under the Department of Transport; for example, on page 400 of Hansard, the item referring to Government Employees Compen-
100-228$
sation Act administration, $79,500; then the item relating to purchase of railway equipment, Canadian National Railways, $24,726,460; also, loan to the Canadian National Railways for the development of the Vermilion, Alberta, oil field.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am sorry to interrupt, but I did not include that last item.
Mr. MICHAUD; Well, the other two items were certainly called on May 16, and were not discussed, and possibly for that reason do not appear on Hansard, or perhaps they escaped the attention of the Hansard reporter. I may state that Hansard is not the official report of the proceedings of the house; it is the official report of the debates of the house; the journals of the house are the official report and record of what takes place in the house, as reference to rule 252 will show. If it happens that something escapes the attention or the hearing of the official reporter and does not for that reason appear on Hansard, that is not to say that an item which has been before the committee of the whole has not been approved or has not been passed. For that reason I state that all the items chargeable to the Department of Transport appear in the resolution and have been submitted to parliament, and the last of those items were submitted on the evening of May 16.
Mr. JEAN-FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): The other day some questions were asked about what had been said by Major-General Pearkes in Vernon camp. The Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) did not disagree with what was said then. To-day in the Montreal Gazette I read the report of a broadcast made by Brigadier Mess. I wonder if he is the man who was formerly appointed with Mr. Leon Trepanier of Montreal to look after the farmer's side? At any rate, he made a mess of his broadcast, and I will read it to you, sir, to show you the state of mind of that gentleman:
"Petticoat Slackers" from Army Scored in Plea for More Recruits
Ottawa, June 7. Speaking of the "vital and urgent need" for "more and more" fighting men to reinforce Canada's invasion army, Brigadier James Mess, deputy adjutant-general in charge of recruiting, to-night criticized several classes of young men who he said were waiting "God knows what for."
i In an address prepared for broadcast on the "headquarters report" programme over a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation national network, Brigadier Mess said:
"I want to appeal to several classes of young men in Canada who are still waiting-God knows what for. They are to be found in industry. They are pretending that their conscience is clear because they prefer to consider

War Appropriation-Mr. Pouliot
themselves as indispensable. They have been deferred for this or that reason, or are hiding away in the bush and making themselves scarce.
"I challenge each and every one of those men to stand betore a mirror, look at himself and put the questions 'Is my conscience clear?' 'Am I really indispensable?' 'Should I not take my proper place at the side of my brother Canadians and let some older man, some woman, do this job that may not, after all, be very intricate or very important?' 'What shall I answer when this war is over when I am asked where did I serve?' 'What shall I say-I didn't have to go, I wasn't needed, I was indispensable behind a plough or in a factory'."
And this is said ironically by that Brigadier.
Brigadier Mess, addressing his remarks to this class of men, asked them what their wives would think of them. "Now she may deter you in a weak sort of way from doing what she knows is your sacred duty, but in the final analysis it is your decision to make. You are the man. You cannot hide behind a petticoat, whether it be your wife's or your mother's."
He added: " . . . Your decision to get into the King's uniform for general service to become trained, skilled and tough is yours to make in this hour of dire emergency."
Sir, I am second to no one in the help I can bring to the armed forces in my humble capacity as a member of parliament.


Mr. SINCLAIR:: Second to no one in wasting time.


Jean-François Pouliot: I will ask my hon. friend to keep quiet if he wants to be reelected the next time; otherwise he will be badly defeated.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: That is all you care about, being reelected. What do you care whether he is reelected or not?


Jean-François Pouliot: I shall reply to hon. members one at a time. I will deliver the goods to them one by one. My hon. friend knows that he is in very bad shape in his constituency.


James Sinclair: You are the biggest single waster of time in the House of Commons.


Jean-François Pouliot: The hon. gentleman's
laughter sounds false.


James Sinclair: As false as your tears.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: This is shameful. I have here another statement and I am sure hon. members will applaud this. These people are short-sighted-


George Alexander Cruickshank: They are not afraid to fight for their country, though.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am short-sighted, Mr. Speaker; I wear glasses but I am short-sighted only physically.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Mentally too.


Thomas Vien: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: The other day I put a gem on Hansard, at the last sitting-a gem. It was one sentence that was uttered by a man who occupies an official capacity as parliamentary assistant to the President of the Privy Council.


James Sinclair: 
Jean-François Pouliot: I have put it on the record.


James Sinclair: It is a reflection on you. not on him.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, I cannof understand the abnormal state of mind of the hon. member for Vancouver North. He has not done half as much as the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) and myself for the soldiers.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Nonsense.


James Sinclair: What do you think of your French Canadians?


Jean-François Pouliot: You cannot feed soldiers on raspberries.


James Sinclair: Will the hon. member permit me one question?


Jean-François Pouliot: No. Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious matter. I wish the constituents of hon. member's were in the gallery to see what is going on now and who are the members who are defending the people. This is not a time to make jokes. We are talking seriously about the policy of the government and of those who enunciate that policy. Let me read to you the statement that has been made by the hon. member who is the parliamentary assistant to the President of the Privy Council, otherwise known as Prime Minister. Here is what he said, at page 3592 of Hansard:
I deny that the job we are doing here in this parliament-[DOT]
In that regard I agree with one hon. member from British Columbia who will be reelected, the member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid). The other day he said something with which I agree. I continue the quotation:
I deny that the job we are doing here in this parliament or in our factories or on our farms is just as vital as the job being done by those men who are offering their lives in France for our freedom to-day.


James Sinclair: That hon. member has done both. What do you know about the other job?


Jean-François Pouliot: I will sign a petition and send someone-


Thomas Vien: Order.

War Appropriation-Mr. Pouliot


James Sinclair: You are still worrying about winning elections, not about winning the war.


Jean-François Pouliot: Sir, this is shameful.


George Alexander Cruickshank: It certainly is, to listen to you.


Thomas Vien: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: When we see some people who cannot listen-


James Sinclair: Nonsense.


Jean-François Pouliot: Now, sir, leaving aside all the frills, this is the statement made by one w'ho was speaking on behalf of the President of the Privy Council in answer to questions put to him. He was dealing with items in the war appropriation bill and speaking with authority. I want to know if it is the policy of the government. If it is the policy of the government it will be easy to understand that the farmers and those in industry cannot expect consideration from the government. In a case like this the statement should be put on the record. I am sorry the Prime Minister is not here, but I wrould ask whether he approves that statement or not. That is the question. I do not want any answer to that from the deputy prime minister; I want an answer from the Prime Minister himself. I deny the deputy prime minister the authority to give the answer, to decide the case of the parliamentary assistant to the President of the Privy Council; it is none of his business, and ministerial solidarity does not go as far as that.


Mr. GLADSTONE:: We will keep our
soldiers supported before all else.


George Alexander Cruickshank: You will not be
elected again.


Thomas Vien: Order. The hon. member has the floor. While he has the floor he is entitled to it without interruption, and I would ask hon. members not to interrupt.


Jean-François Pouliot: I hope that the Minister
of National Defence will tell us if he approves the statement of Brigadier Mess regarding those who are behind the plough or in the factories. I want to know if the Prime Minister approves the statement made by the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Claxton) in his official capacity as parliamentary assistant to himself as President of the Privy Council.
The premier of Quebec has said that the majority of the Conservative opposition is composed of gentlemen who are in favour of conscription, and that is so. As to the majority of the cabinet, I do not know, and I am not
going to start a Gallup poll to know the present views of each minister on the matter. But we have to know what is the policy of the government and if those who contribute to the war effort on the farm and in industry are considered as doing a useless job during this war.
I have several things to say, but I have here some cases of soldiers; I shall take them up one by one. To-day I heard the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) make a statement about man-power. He is going to speak over the radio to-night. I did not catch very well what he said from his seat this afternoon, but it is a matter of great concern. We do not know how long the war will last. Will it last one month or two? Will it last six months, a year or two years? No one knows. The head of the government, who is well informed, told us that we are facing a long war; therefore, sir, we must be prepared for it, and if everybody follows the unwise advice of Brigadier Mess there will be nobody left to look after the farm or industry.


James Sinclair: The hon. member for
Temiscouata will still be here talking. '


Jean-François Pouliot: Nobody to look after that. Brigadier Mess is totally ignorant of agricultural conditions and agricultural problems. He thinks that the work on the farms can be done by women and old men. A little part of the farmer's work can be done in that way. Men may milk cows, as the Minister of National Defence has done for three months, as he wrote on his registration form in 1940 that he had been milking cows. Women can do that; it is their job. But there is hard work on the farm that can only be done by ablebodied men. Everybody knows that; and everybody knows that a man who has reached fifty and who has been working continually on the farm often suffers from rheumatism and that he cannot make the same physical effort as he did before. One has only to live in the country to know that. I understand that the gentlemen who live in cities are ignorant of the problems. They think food grows on the shelves of the grocery store and that meat hangs itself on the hooks of the butcher stores. Of course, that is an unfortunate state of mind. They do not inquire about the causes of the growth of food. It is very hard work. Besides that, sir, you know that farmers go out in the woods cutting timber. I do not know how an old man or woman can do that.
I will tell you what it is: it is that in the province of Quebec-and I am not afraid to speak because my county has supplied the largest number of men to the army, the largest of any other rural county-

War Appropriation-Mr. Pouliot


James Sinclair: And the largest number of draft dodgers, undoubtedly.


Jean-François Pouliot: Well, sir, I resent that. I do not care what is said about me, but I resent profoundly what has just been said by the hon. gentleman who is not himself when he speaks that way, and I will not tolerate it. When I think of the boys of Temiscouata who have been at Dieppe, Hong 'Kong, in Italy and Sicily, especially Major Triquet, who was there-I am sure that both those noisy colleagues of mine from British Columbia were honoured to shake his hand-and others who have died, and others who may die to-day, and some who died yesterday perhaps; I will not tolerate anyone in this chamber casting aspersions on my electors. I will tell the hon. gentlemen- honourable in so far as they are members of parliament-that-


George Alexander Cruickshank: What about the last war?


Jean-François Pouliot: -the Minister of National Defence must have known from Major General Murchie that the eastern part of Quebec has done more than any other rural part of the country to supply men to the army. I can say that of all the other counties of eastern Quebec. But, sir, I will not be distracted from what I have to say; and if I speak for my people it is because I have no feeling of animosity toward anyone. I have not the time to waste on that. But I think of the future; I think of the Sunday before last when I went with my neighbour, who is a farmer, into the back country of my county. He is alone. He has a large farm, with cattle, horses and all that. He wanted to secure farm help. I went with him to many places, but we could not find a man to help him on his land; and when I was coming back from St. Eloi to Riviere du Loup in the private car of a railway official with Major Triquet, V.C., who had accompanied him, one of the colonels told me that my county had been denuded of men, that there was no one left, and besides that a large number of girls are in the forces; some of them are here in Ottawa and others have gone to larger cities to work in war industries. I cannot say anything too fine about my own people.	-


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Would the hon. member permit one question?


Jean-François Pouliot: Surely.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Would the hon. member concentrate and tell the house just what he is talking about?


Jean-François Pouliot: If the hon. gentleman will be kind enough to listen to me he will be satisfied.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I
have been listening now for twenty minutes.


Jean-François Pouliot: But I have been disturbed.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I
have not disturbed you.


Jean-François Pouliot: Not by the hon. member. I am satisfied now to have had this opportunity to tell the house what my people have done for the war effort in many ways.
In connection with the matter of man-power I have to complain very greatly about one thing; that is, the jingo and junker spirit which is shown by those [DOT] who preach that no man does his duty unless he is in the army, ignoring completely the hard work, the suffering and the trouble of those who work on the farms, on the railways and in industry. They are all slackers, according to Brigadier Mess, the parliamentary assistant to the President of the Privy Council, the Canadian legion, and some others. One must live in the country to realize what this means. Not so long ago the Minister of Labour informed the premier of Quebec that there was no conscription for farmers. That is untrue; conscription does exist for farmers. There are two classes of farmers, those who have had no training at all and those who have had some training. To-day those who have trained even for only a short time have no chance when they appear before the mobilization boards. I have asked several questions in this regard; I have tried to learn the number of applications for draftees submitted by the army, as far as farmers are concerned, in which cases as far as my knowledge goes applications for postponement were almost always turned down by the mobilization boards, but I could not get the information. I have before me the names of many men who formerly were engaged in agriculture, lumbering, or some similar industry. I shall mention only a few. The first is E-57830, Q-39-C-1884-F; E-622,202, who was a cheesemaker; E-620546, a farmer badly needed at home; E-629045, a farmer badly needed; E-630023, also a farmer; E-555036, a man who has a mill and a farm, and who is badly needed there. These men had no chance before the board, and there are many other cases. Here is another, E-615779, a flax grower who had a degree as an agronomist, and who is now in British Columbia; he did not have a chance. Then there is the case of I. Mignault, E-627375, who was told by his commanding officer that he would be given leave. The day his leave was

War Appropriation-Mr. Pouliot
to begin he was sent somewhere else; his application was never considered, though he was very badly needed at home. His father had only young children to help him, and he had to take them from school in spite of the compulsory education act and though they could not help him as much as this young man could have done. The father was ill in hospital, operated upon for a rupture. He is a good farmer, with good land and a good business, but it was not considered. He went to British Columbia; his requests were not considered. He was sent to defend that fine, beautiful province. When these men in Quebec ask for farm leave they are sent far away.
Here is the case of another man who had everything in order. He was a farmer's son who worked in the forest during the off season. He notified the unemployment insurance people and the selective service officer; he got his papers; he notified the postmaster, and then went to the forest to work. There he was arrested by the mounties, who put handcuffs on him and brought him to Sorel. That case was so bad that selective service intervened and the army released this man. This is not fair treatment for these fellows. They act according to the law; they are not conscientious objectors; they are told by selective service that wood is needed, and they go to work in the forests; then they are treated in this way.
I have another bad case, D-41583, who went to camp at Petawawa, where he was very badly treated. I tell the minister that the treatment of French-speaking soldiers in certain places, especially Barriefield. Petawawa, Camp Borden, and one or two others, is not worthy of the government. Because they do not speak English fluently, even men who have taken classical courses and have received a fine education are ordered to do fatigue work, to scrub floors, wash dishes and things like that. It is most discouraging. They can have no ambition; they are treated just as the negroes are treated in the southern states. There may be no orders from headquarters to this effect, but just the same these men are treated as though they had no right to be ambitious.
I hope the department will increase the allowances to the soldiers. They are not high enough. A room for an officer is $1.70 a day, and for a soldier it is $1.25. A room costs at least $6 for a week. Seven breakfasts at 20 cents amount to $1.40. Lunches and suppers at 40 cents amount to $5.60, making a total of S13. The allowance is $8.75, leaving a deficit of $4.25. When they try to manage with what is offered them by the Department
of National Defence they have to pay $6 for a room. In the mornings they have coffee and toast, costing $1.05. Then, seven hot-dog meals cost $1.40, and seven other meals at 40 cents cost $2.80, making a total of $11.25. The allowance is $8.75, leaving a deficit of $2.50. That is when they feed themselves with hot dogs and eat only toast in the morning. This is a problem for them. I submit it to the minister, and I hope he will see to it.
There are some painful cases. These are men who are ill and deserve to be well looked after. Very often men are not examined by the doctors as they should be at the reception centres. There are many unbelievable cases. The report of the examination made by a specialist is sometimes changed by the president of the board. This has happened in some classic cases. The sergeants and the corporals find what is wrong with the health conditions of the men as soon as they report to their unit. For instance, in Quebec city the doctor in charge of the specialists is a young man of about twenty-five years who was admitted to practice in June, 1943. He is a captain. I have before me the case of E-630952, with respect to private L. P. Beaulieu, deceased. This man died when he was in camp near Quebec. He was examined by the heart specialist, who mentioned that the soldier was suffering from his heart. This was struck out by the president of the board. It is the reason the sergeant told him he was a "faker," when he complained that he was sick. When he asked for a doctor the doctor was refused him. He asked for a priest, and was told there was no need for a priest, although a chaplain was in camp. He stayed two days in bed, during which time he could hardly speak, and was finally found dead in bed. This is a very bad case. There is surely something wrong. I know the parliamentary assistant to the minister is looking into the case now, andi I rely upon him to find out who is guilty, in order to protect other people. I am informed also that Doctor Trempe, of St. Sacrament hospital in Quebec city, has sent a report that the man was suffering from acute appendicitis, and was given a purge. He then died. An autopsy was performed, and they found the salt outside the bowels, in the abdomen. I have been told by some friends who are not in the army that the report' sent by Doctor Trempe to the Department of Pensions and National Health was very severe.
That is not the only thing. Sometimes hon. members seem surprised that I take an interest in people outside my constituency. I have been deeply touched by a letter written me by Mr. and Mrs. Horniblow, of Toronto. They

War Appropriation-Mr. Noseworthy
wrote me with respect to their son, regimental number B-621503. This was also a bad case
I have also been told that at a camp in Ontario there was the practising of jiu-jitsu, and that at that camp was a young man from the Matapedia valley. He did some wrestling with a professor of jiu-jitsu, and was strong enough to bring the professor to the floor. The professor was enraged, and said, "I will fix you up." Then they continued wrestling, and the professor turned the foot of the young man and broke it. He has been discharged from the army and will be an invalid for the rest of his life.
I have many cases, so that my hon. friends should not be surprised. I was a pioneer in defending the health of soldiers, to improve their lot. Life is much more pleasant for them, naturally, and parents have less to worry about.


James Sinclair: I wish to ask a question. Why does not the hon. member take these cases back to the minister, without wasting the time of parliament upon them?


Jean-François Pouliot: If I had done that at first I would have got nowhere. I wish to show to my hon. friends opposite, including the hon. member who has just spoken, what hag happened in the army, in some cases, so that there may be no repetition. If one case is settled, it is all right for that case; but what we need is a change in personnel in certain places, so that the bad condition may be improved in a general way.
Here is the case of E-621922. This young man was suffering from pleurisy in one lung, but was admitted to the army as fit. He was of weak constitution, and while in the army contracted pleurisy in the other lung. He is now sitting in a chair, unable to work. I wish to pay special tribute to the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defence, because he has done a lot to correct abuses and to improve conditions. I can remember one afternoon, however, that I mentioned similar grievances of the soldiers, when the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair) was not yet back from overseas-and in passing may I congratulate him upon his share in the war, and upon what he has done for us. He has done very well, and we are glad to see him among us, provided he is a little quieter.	.


James Sinclair: Provided I keep my mouth shut.


Jean-François Pouliot: No. I am always glad to applaud the hon. member when he has the floor. But I remember one afternoon last year when I brought up some cases like this to lay before the house a serious grievance

that had to be corrected, so as to improve the morale of the army, and keep it good. This is being said not to be unpleasant to anyone, but just to straighten everything out. You must have order in the army, you must have justice and fair play in the army in order to have things as pleasant as possible for the men. It is also important that the soldiers should be well cared for, and I would be remiss in my duty if I did other than I have done just now. It is important that these things be done in order to improve the morale of our people. For all these reasons I hope that such a condition in the army will not exist any longer and that what is wrong will be corrected in the immediate future.


James Sinclair: Mr. Speaker, I should like to apologize to you, and to any hon. members of this house who have listened to the hon. member for Temis-couata (Mr. Pouliot), for having interrupted. I did so perhaps out of unpardonable anger. Two or three days ago we heard the Prime Minister ask that in view of the seriousness of the situation the business of the house be expedited. I cannot help but think that the fighting men from Temiscouata, and I am quite sure there are many good men from there engaged in the invasion, and all the other fighting men, would not be very much pleased if they had listened to what has just been said by the hon. member for Temiscouata, who has redoubled his efforts to waste the time of parliament and obstruct legislation in this house.


Mr. J. W. NOSEWORTHY (York South):: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to delay the second reading of this bill, but I want to take advantage of this opportunity, since it will probably be the only one available, to call to the attention of the Minister of National Defence a question which I raised in committee on February 24 with regard to the amount of dependents' allowance paid to dependent mothers and the ceiling placed upon their earnings before a dependents' allowance is paid. I think the matter is important and I should like to quote what the Minister of National Defence said as reported on page 826 of Hansard.-.
My hon. friend asks me to reconsider this matter. He makes his request of one who is most sympathetic to the mothers, of these men.
It is because I believe sincerely every single word of that statement that I raise the question a second time and again make an appeal to the minister. He went on to say:
If there are eases or situations which really justify intervention, then we endeavour to intervene.

War Appropriation-Mr. Choquette
My point is that in so far as possible the regulations should be such that it will not be necessary for any mother to have to ask the minister or the department to intervene in her special case. The minister continued:
What we are endeavouring to do is to take the place of the sons with regard to mothers' earnings.
I merely want to point out to the minister that the government or his department are not doing that so long as they limit the payment of dependents' allowances to $25. I am confident that if the matter were brought to a vote in this house there are few if any members who would thus limit the allowance paid to mothers whose dependency upon sons in the armed forces has been established. I can see no reason why there should be any discrimination. why this allowance should not be $35 instead of $25.
In the second place, I can see no reason why the government should place a ceiling of $65 upon the earnings of a mother. If a mother earns more than $40 a month she cannot receive the full $25. It is argued that the assigned pay of the son is not counted in that $65, but many of the mothers with whom I am personally acquainted are anxious to set aside this assigned pay for the sons should they be fortunate enough to be spared to return. They do not want to have to depend upon that assigned pay if they can avoid doing so.
I feel that the government has no moral right to place a limit upon the earning capacity of these mothers. Nature itself and age have placed sufficient restrictions upon their earning capacity. The government should remove this restriction so that these mothers may earn more than $40 a month without having their dependents' allowances reduced. From the correspondence I have had with him and from the interest that his department has taken in cases I have referred to them, I am confident that there is no member in this house more anxious to see that these women should be treated fairly than the Minister of National Defence. I cannot understand why this situation is allowed to prevail, and I want to make this plea to the minister to see that it is remedied.


Mr. JOSEPH ARMAND CHOQUETTE (Stanstead) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, my purpose in taking the floor at this time is to remind the government that, in spite of the protests voiced by the hon. member for Port-neuf (Mr. Gauthier) against the rank discrimination of which the farmers of the province of Quebec have been the victims through rulings given by Mr. J. K. Smith, director of trucking in that province, the authorities have not taken
the energetic action we might have expected from them. Protests have been voiced in the Quebec legislative assembly last week and Prime Minister Godbout himself stated that Mr. Smith was incompetent. On May 22 last, in answer to a question placed on the order paper by the hon. member for Portneuf, the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) said:
Mr. Smith's services are quite satisfactory and he has several French-speaking assistants.
From what I shall have to say in a few moments, it can be judged whether Mr. Smith's services are as satisfactory as they are represented to us. On duty since May 1, 1942, Mr. Smith was loaned to the wartime prices and trade board by the Montreal board of trade. It is inconceivable that in a province where more than eighty per cent of the people are French Canadians the government should appoint an official who cannot and will not speak French. That man is incompetent and he cannot fulfil his duties to the satisfaction of a very large majority of the people.
As regards the organization of his office, the man in charge is a Mr. Desgroseiller, who was loaned to the board by a powerful company, the Smith Transport Co. The official in charge of the truck transportation of cream is Mr. Chevalier who, before joining the board's staff had been for seventeen years in the employ of a Montreal financial company headed by Mr. Stuart, a former director of the board, which fact shows that he has all the required qualifications for such a position. The staff supervisor, Miss Mary Chapman, has no knowledge of the French language; it is even said that she does not know shorthand or typewriting. However, she draws a monthly salary of $150.
I shall point to this house a few of the decisions taken, in order to show to what extent Mr. Smith's rulings are in opposition to the interests and the clearly expressed wishes of the farmers. In a Shefford county parish, a range has been split in two. The people who are on the right are compelled to deliver their cream to a butter maker who operates his own factory, while those who are on the left must go to the cooperative society's factory.
Some happenings may afford a farmer good reasons for dealing with a certain factory rather than with another, but this does not mean anything to Mr. Smith. He gives a ruling and the matter ends there. Another cooperative society is not allowed to collect its new members' cream on the same runs as last year. I even know that the members

War Appropriation-Mr. Gladstone
have decided, at a mass meeting, to ignore Mr. Smith's rulings, because they are so absurd. Another farmers' cooperative society is not allowed to collect the cream of its members, while the owner of a factory has four or five trucks which cover the whole county. On two occasions, another farmers' cooperative society has sent representatives to meet Mr. Smith in Montreal, but it could not obtain a permit for the purchase of a truck needed for the collection of its members' cream. Those facts clearly show what kind of sympathy Mr. Smith has for the farmers, and the development and progress of the cooperative movement in Quebec are thereby greatly hindered.
Mr. Speaker, the result of such a situation is that Mr. Smith's rulings are not always obeyed and that the price board has lost all control. No wonder that the Quebec government, which cooperated with Mr. Smith's office last year, has now withdrawn its support, because of the absurdity of Mr. Smith's rulings.
I may mention another case. Last fall, Mr. Smith spent a weekend in the Laurentians, as the guest of a butter factory owner and his truck driver. On his return to the office, on Monday morning, Mr. Smith cancelled the permit that had been issued to the cooperative society operating in competition with that buttermaker.
Mr. Speaker, it is said everywhere in the province that no one may obtain a permit for the purchase of a new truck without paying fifty dollars. I cannot vouch for the accuracy of that statement, but it is heard everywhere.
Following all those acts of discrimination, the union of eastern townships cooperative societies affiliated with the Cooperative federee de Quebec, which includes 17 cooperative societies, having been made aware of the difficulties that are now experienced in connection with trucking in rural areas, has decided, at a meeting held in Granby on May 10 last, to request the proper authorities to remedy the present situation, especially as regards the transportation of dairy products by truck.
The house can be sure that if I now protest on behalf of all farmers who have been the victims of such discrimination, it is not merely for the sake of indulging in criticism, but rather with a view to bringing the matter to the attention of responsible authorities and trying to obtain redress. Let those who are really in favour of Canadian unity first eliminate such causes of friction.
For all the reasons I have given, we demand a judicial inquiry on Mr. Smith's administration. The public is entitled to some protection.


Robert William Gladstone: I should like to support what was said a few moments ago by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) relative to the dependents' allowances for mothers. There are situations where a son of a widowed mother has enlisted, leaving a sister or brother to be supported in that home; likewise there are situations where the husband has enlisted, leaving the wife to care for a son or daughter. Surely these situations are identical; and while there may be variations, as a matter of general policy I cannot see that the treatment accorded by the government should be different. I would say also that the privileges relative to earning power of the mother should not in any case be different from those of the soldier's wife. It seems to me that the appropriate minister and his department could very well take up the suggestion which has been made for a more generous consideration, in some cases at least, of the dependent mother.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Bradette in the chair.
On section 2-Appropriation, $3,650,000,000, less $S50,000,000 voted under 1944, c. 6.
Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask the Minister of Finance whether it is his recollection that we have dealt with the items which I was speaking about earlier to-day? I ask him particularly with reference to the items that would come under his department.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I understood from what the Minister of Transport said that the item of $24,726,460 was called and passed. I made inquiries about that item myself, and was informed that this railway equipment item was agreed to without questions being raised, and is not referred to in Hansard but was passed. I am also informed that the same remarks would be applicable to the item of $79,500, Government Employees Compensation Act administration. With regard to the provision for contingencies I have not made inquiry, but I think that item was called and passed as well. There does not seem to be any procedure by which the Clerk can be interrogated directly in the house, but I might ask him about that.


The CHAIRMAN:: On that point, if I may be allowed: I have been very careful indeed in checking and rechecking all the items that were put under the war appropriation resolution before the committee of the whole; and I know the items which were mentioned and dealt with by the Minister of Transport were checked off. The same statement applies to the item respecting wool. I vividly remember

War Appropriation Bill
that I called the item and it passed without discussion. I might say that I was almost astonished at this; however, it was called and considered as passed. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has mentioned the fact that it is not recorded in Hansard. That point has been covered by the Minister of Transport; Hansard is not the real record of the work of the committee. As far as I am concerned I have been very careful in this matter; and I repeat, though I recognize it is not the intention of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre to throw any reflection on the Chair, that I have been very careful indeed to check and recheck all these items. Hon. members realize how difficult it is to deal with them all, because in some instances summaries were brought in to supply further information on items; in other cases they were dealt with in the form of the resolution as reported in Hansard in February last.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I explain, Mr. Chairman, following what you have said, that I made it very clear when I spoke before that I was casting no reflection on anyone. I believe the words I used were that I was satisfied that there was nothing intentional about this in any quarter whatever. But I think the comments which are being made indicate that there is no way of actually checking this; it is a matter of the memories of those concerned; there is no record of the calling of these items either in Hansard or in Votes and Proceedings; and that, it seems to me, underlines the desirability of a different and more proper procedure for this very matter another time.
While I am on feet I should say again, in reply to the Minister of Transport, when he makes the statement that Hansard is only a record of speeches made, that while that is correct, there are also, as I pointed out before, instances of items which were called and not discussed but which are mentioned in Hansard. I refer particularly to items on pages 3578 and 3579. It may be that earlier in the game that practice was not followed. There is, of course, no record of individual items in the Journals. In any case, I leave it as an example of the desirability of a different procedure the next time we come to this matter, and I take this opportunity again of urging that it be done by providing the house with a proper schedule.


Grote Stirling: I had reason to check with the hon. member occupying the Chair two or three days ago something with regard to one of the items and my attention was drawn to the fact that each item in front of the Chairman is initialled as it is passed.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
100-229i
On section 3-Government may act as agent.
Joseph William Noseworthy: Can the Minister of National Defence tell us whether any further consideration has been given, as he indicated would be given, to the question I raised a few moments ago?


James Layton Ralston: I can say that the matter is having study along with a number of other matters raised in connection with the work of the dependents board and the trustees dependents' allowance board. I cannot say anything further at the moment.


Mr. FAIR:: May I ask whether officers of equal rank in all forces are getting the same pay at the present time. I do not want to hold up this bill; but since the estimates were before the house on a previous occasion, I have been advised that officers in the army and air force at headquarters receive fifty cents a day which is not paid to officers of the navy.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Probably I am not the one who should answer the question; there are three defence ministers. I may say, however, that from the beginning of this war to the present time there has been application after application to equalize the position as among the three services. It is something that goes on endlessly. It is impossible to say when the rank is exactly the same as between persons in the army and in the navy and as between either and persons in the air force. The circumstances vary; all sorts of considerations vary. Claims are continually raised by one or other of the services that in some particular rank or position certain persons are getting a a little less than somebody who is of no higher rank and who happens to be in another of the services, and the treasury board is called upon time after time to try to equalize the position. I should be surprised if inequalities amounting to anything now prevailed.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: In answer to a question of mine in the course of the debate the Minister of National Defence said that some consideration was being given to the rehabilitation allowance and clothing allowance given to soldiers on discharge. Is that under review at the present time?


James Layton Ralston: Yes, it is.


Robert Fair: Perhaps the question to which I have just referred has been rectified since it was brought to my attention. If not, it would seem that the navy has a claim. If staff headquarters officers are receiving a certain rate per day. the men of the naval service are entitled to it as well.

Farm Credit


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 4 to 6 inclusive agreed to.
Section 1 agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, June 6, consideration in committee of the following resolution-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Bradette in the chair:
That it is expedient to introduce a bill to encourage the provision of intermediate term and short term credit to farmers for the improvement and development of farms through bank loans, guaranteed with limitations, by the crown; moneys payable under the act including expenses of administration to be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund.
Mr. ROSS (Souris):: While I think the principle of the proposed bill for guaranteeing individual farmers up to a maximum of $3,000 may be a step in the right direction, yet at this stage I have one or two observations to make and some questions on which I desire some enlightenment. When the parliamentary assistant was completing his argument on March 14 on the Industrial Development bank bill he said:
I find it a little difficult to see why the credit requirements of agriculture should be so different from those of industry that they should require a government central farm bank to operate in cooperation with private lending institutions.
The parliamentary assistant thought these two desires were very much in common at that time. In the first place, I believe that legislation with respect to floor prices for agricultural products have a great deal to do with the success or otherwise of this proposed bill, and I think it is unfortunate that the proposed legislation has not been before the house earlier than this. Had it been, it would have been very useful, when this proposed bill is being considered by the banking and commerce committee, which I believe is the intention. These two will be very closely associated if this proposed bill is to mean anything to agriculture.
If farm credit is to be on a sound basis the interest rate should be considerably less than five per cent. Many farmers are to-day receiving credit from the banks at five per cent. True enough, credit was not procurable at this rate of interest in many sections of the country some years ago, but many good farmers to-day are procuring such credit at five per cent. I have not been able to learn
[Mr. Fair.l
yet why it is necessary to have a separate industrial bank, supplementary to the activities of the existing lending agencies, while this proposed bill is for a limited guarantee of farm credit through the existing chartered banks, as I have pointed out; and the parliamentary assistant expressed himself similarly in winding up his argument on the industrial bank on March 14.
I am not able to recollect whether any suggestion as to interest rate in connection with the industrial bank has been mentioned. If the minister could enlighten us in that regard it would be appreciated. I should like him to tell us what the proposed rate of interest will be in that connection because it has a bearing on this bill. I have pointed out before that the Veterans' Land Act does provide an interest rate of 3i per cent in connection with land for these settlers.
This proposal to guarantee the banks is really just an extension of the provisions of section 88 of the Bank Act. In my opinion that is all it amounts to. I know personally a number of old people with substantial farm homes in areas where the Canadian farm loan board would not lend money a few years ago. These old people found it necessary to apply for old age pensions. These pensions are now a lien against these farm homes and in some cases the farm is now operated by the younger members of the family. I would ask the minister whether these people now operating these farms will be allowed the credit guaranteed under this proposal for home improvements while the lien applies against the farm home. I would also ask him whether this guarantee of ten per cent will cover the total loans of each chartered bank or each branch which carries individual loans or the individual loans themselves.
I have heard arguments about the interpretation of the wording. It is pointed out in the minister's statement that:
It is .proposed that the guarantee should foe effective in respect of a maximum of $250 million of loans made within a period of three years. Apart from this over-all limitation on the
Government's liability, there will foe provision or termination of the guarantee after due notice on loans in any particular category or made by any particular bank. This will ensure effective control over lending operations.
I am not very clear on that. For instance, there will be quite a number of loans taken out and loans may be repaid in a very short time. I wonder whether those loans will be included in the total, or whether it is the total over the given period, or whether it might be pro rated eighty-three and a third million dollars a year. On that point may I say to the minister that when we entered the war there

Farm Credit
was a backlog of requirements of farm implements alone of 8200,000,000. I am sure it will be all of $250,000,000 now. In fairness I do think many farmers will not have to take advantage of this guarantee in order to purchase implements, but we have been slipping away back in requirements of farm implements every year during this war and there will be a tremendous amount of money required for that alone, apart from the fact that there is a very great need for an improvement in live stock in this country.
With respect to live stock, I was surprised to note that in this great dairying province of Ontario butterfat production among Holstein cattle alone had declined on the average from I think 3-3 to 2-6 per cent over the past period of some years. I was amazed when I learned that. It certainly proves that we have to do something about the improvement of live stock. Many people in the west have never had an opportunity to procure better type sires to improve their stock, as they should have done.
A question was asked the other evening as to the interpretation of what was a farm. The minister said:
It is intended that .a farmer shall mean a person who is in possession of a farm, and whose principal occupation consists of farming such farm. Then "a farm" is defined to mean land used for the purpose of farming, which term includes live stock raising, dairying, fruit growing and all tillage of the soil.
This brings to mind the fact that in past years many difficulties were encountered in the administration of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act as to just what was considered a farmer by the treasury board. Many payments were held up at times because of the difficulties connected with a proper interpretation of what was forthcoming from the treasury board. I trust this matter will be very carefully taken care of in the drafting of the bill, because it is most important and many unnecessary inconveniences have been created.
As I said, I think this bill is a step in the right direction. I am sorry that we did not have the bill before us, but there was some little misunderstanding the other evening between the minister who was leading the government and others as to where we could properly ask questions. I did not want to lose the opportunity to raise the questions which I have asked of the minister. I hoped in the earlier discussions in the house when the proposed legislation with respect to agricultural credit was mentioned, that it might have been on a broader basis which would permit many agriculturists to rewrite their obligations at a lower rate of interest. I realize that
we have other measures such as the Canadian farm loan board. I think they make provisions for loans on lands and chattels. The minister has pointed to the success of the national housing plan. Might I remind him that in most sections of rural Canada, in the west at any rate, that plan never applied, and there is a great need of something of that kind in the rural sections. Therefore the success of this measure can hardly be based on the success or otherwise of the national housing plan.
I trust I may have an opportunity to ask further questions when the bill is before us, but I should like to have an answer to the questions I have already asked, if I may.


Mr. WEIR:: The resolution which is now
before the committee on which the bill is to be introduced later is a proposal for a measure that has for some time been looked for by Canadian farmers. If we understand the intention of the government with respect to this measure I think it is to fill a need in agriculture that has been looked forward to for a long time.
The principle of the bill, as I understand it, is that loans are to be made for improvements on farms, taking in practically all activities of the farm, but more particularly having in mind improvements with respect to buildings, machinery, fences, live stock, improved seed and even buildings such as homes and other permanent structures. I note that emphasis has been placed on electrical equipment. Electrical equipment is one thing farmers are looking forward to with particular interest at this time. If that is what is intended by this measure then it can be considered as filling a place that has been needed for some time. The rate of interest is five per qent. I understand that repayments are to be made on a basis that will be suitable to the particular type of agriculture for which the loan is being made. That is one of the important things that should be kept in mind-the obvious ways and means over a widespread type of agricultural activity either by regulations or otherwise that will permit the type of repayment suitable to the particular industry that is being undertaken.
I point out, however, in considering this measure which is to be administered through our regular chartered banks, that there is a little difficulty in this country in the service which this type of loan will give to certain communities. We have not been doing very much to increase the banking facilities, par-, ticularly in western Canada. In fact there has been a substantial reduction in the number of banks in the west. I find in the report of the reconstruction committee that this is substantially the case and that our banks have
Farm Credit

been reduced from 4,620 in 1920 to 3,300 in 1941. Our banking facilities are largely centred in the larger towns and cities. I wonder whether the minister has taken into consideration the outlying areas where banking facilities are nut provided by our chartered banks as they exist at the present time. That is one matter to which consideration should be given. The other point to which consideration must be given is with respect to the administration. I quite appreciate that ldans of this kind will depend a great deal upon the personal element, both from the point of view of the encouragement given by the bank manager to these loans and from the point of view of the individual who may borrow under this scheme. I do not know what the minister has in mind, but I hope he can draft some sort of regulation that will meet this problem, because it is going to be one of the most important that will have to be considered.
As the hon. member for Souris has already pointed out, the farmers are supplied with one type of credit through the Canadian farm loan board; that is long-term credit and, in some cases, short-term credit as well. I do not think we should get away from that system for the more substantial, permanent requirements of agriculture; that is, having longterm loans repayable on an amortization basis over a period of years at a rate of interest as favourable as that provided in this measure. The other type of credit that has been available in the past, of course, has been whatever loans farmers could make from their banks. I take it that the credit now proposed is to fill the gap between these two, and to take the place of the credit previously provided by merchants, lumber dealers, implement dealers and people of that kind. I point out that this is a new avenue of approach with respect to legislation of this type, and I believe it should commend itself favourably to agriculture.
Some people may ask whether this type of credit is needed at this time in the history of Canadian agriculture. In that connection I should like to make just two references. One was made by the minister in introducing this measure the other evening, namely, the report of the agriculture committee on reconstruction which, after making a general survey of the needs of agriculture, in the closing subparagraph recommended:
. That the dominion government make a careful survey of the schemes for providing short-term and intermediate credit now in force in other countries, with a view- to making provision for adequate credit at low rates of interest to deserving farmers, using as far as possible existing facilities, including the chartered banks of Canada.

I presume that recommendation was brought forward after very careful study, and after hearing representations made by a large number of people. If the policy can be made to operate successfully, using the banking institutions, as we hope it may, then we shall have the advantage of not being required to create any additional facilities for this purpose. I find also that in the spring of this year, in the representations made to the government, the Canadian federation of agriculture also referred to this matter, and I should like to read part of the introductory paragraph dealing with farm credit:
The first is the subject of farm credit. The international food conference at Hot Springs recognized the importance and necessity of adequate credit facilities in any soundly conceived programme of farm improvement. It recommended that every effort be made to ensure an adequate supply of credit for agriculture at low rates of interest.
I point out that the Canadian federation of agriculture, which takes in all the farm organizations of Canada, not only adopts this recommendation as its own but refers to the conference held at Hot Springs early this spring, which would indicate that the need for credit of this kind apparently is recognized even outside our own country. Then, after some reference to the work of the Canadian farm loan board, and the possibility of reconsidering the introduction of the central mortgage bank, the federation goes on to recommend:
That a plan be developed suited to the nature and requirements of agriculture in Canada for short-term and intermediate loans. In this connection it must be remembered that there 'has been a steady reduction in the number of branches of chartered banks in Canada. At present, for example, there are only 170 branches in the whole of the settled area of Alberta. After taking into consideration the numbers in the cities and larger towns, it is evident that such a number cannot adequately serve such a large area. The very nature of farm production in Canada makes short-term and intermediate credit a necessity in the post-v-ar years.
I merely mention this to indicate that the Canadian federation of agriculture have been urging the adoption of a policy which would provide a type of intermediate credit. In the pamphlet they have sent out, dealing with their activities as an organization, they make further reference to the need of some type of short-term or intermediate credit.
There is no doubt in my mind that during the period of transition from war to peace agriculture will afford a great deal of employment and a means of rehabilitation, so that anything we as a parliament can do to assist agriculture undoubtedly will help our rehabilitation programme. I doubt if

Farm Credit
there is a farmstead in Canada which does not need repairs of some kind. Buildings require paint; fences need repair; new buildings are necessary. Then when we look at the other side and see the encouragement that has been given to the use of electrical equipment on the farm, I think we begin to realize the importance of a measure of this kin,d. I would point out that in regard to the purchase of new equipment alone agriculture will be of great benefit as far as employment is concerned, which in turn will be of untold advantage in stabilizing agriculture itself.
A moment ago I mentioned that to a degree at least the credit facilities largely used in agriculture in western Canada have been provided by implement companies, lumber dealers and country merchants. The hon. member for Souris referred to the backlog of agricultural implement requirements in 1937, at which time it was estimated to amount to more than
8200,000,000, plus an annual requirement of about $50,000,000. That situation may have improved to some extent in the years following 1937, but I doubt if it can be very much better to-day because of the shortage of farm implements due to war conditions. Therefore I believe that we have at the present time in this country a very great need for new agricultural implements, which doubtless will be the reason for a great many loans of this kind.
Just here I should like to say one thing to the minister, to which I hope he will give particular attention. I go back to the inquiry in 1936 and 1937 into the cost of farm implements. One of the matters particularly looked into at that time was the cost of credit sales and collection costs by implement companies in connection with the sale of farm implements, and a great deal of criticism was expressed. I do not wish to repeat the figures which were quoted at that time; I do not think they would be applicable to-day, and for that reason might be misleading.
The committee ended its report by stating that the cost of credit to farmers purchasing farm implements on time is excessive, and that the companies-meaning the implement companies-should take immediate steps to reduce credit charges. My point is this, that if through this measure the government is to provide a type of intermediate credit, and assume a risk through a ten per cent guarantee to banks, then the implement and lumber companies, and those who have provided goods to farmers on credit and who now have the advantage of this type of credit, should be *called upon to reduce their distribution costs as far as possible. I say that because they will be able to do business on a cash basis without much risk.
So I say to the minister that in this regard I think he should go a long way, if there are no other means available, towards putting it up to implement and lumber companies, the two groups which will likely receive a very large share of the advantage from this type of credit, so to adjust their businesses that will reduce their cost to a lowest possible minimum for the advantage they will secure under this type of credit.
The same applies to suppliers of electrical equipment. In Manitoba at the present time we have under way a survey for the extension of the hydro electric system of that province to a greatly enlarged area. This measure should assist in the development; I hope it will. If it does, I believe a further step should be taken to see that the goods so provided will be provided on the basis of a cash sale, with the lowest possible cost to the farmers concerned.
I note with satisfaction, too, that this measure is to provide loans which will permit even the building of a house up to a value of $3,000. Here I believe is an opportunity to offer a suggestion which in my view would go a long way toward assisting in the stabilization of agriculture, particularly in western Canada. My suggestion is to encourage the building of a second home for hired help on many of our western farms. There is no doubt that hired men have been more or less transients in western Canada. They have summer employment, but they have never been given a permanency such as an industry like agriculture should provide for its workers. I believe that the hired man has not been treated as well as he should have been, and that as a result the industry has suffered because of its not being able to maintain in employment experienced labour. I therefore offer this suggestion in the belief that it would be a permanent development and should be given sympathetic consideration, so far as the regulations and other governing factors in connection with these loans are concerned.
The same should apply with respect to water development in farm homes. However, at the moment I shall not deal with that feature in detail.
Another point which I suggest should be kept in mind when dealing with this measure, and one which I believe would be of great assistance, is that connected with the cooperative movement. Cooperative movements in western Canada have been making sound and rapid progress. For the most part they have operated in a wholesale of bulk type of business, but they are rapidly entering the retail field. There is no doubt at all that these cooperative organizations have demonstrated that they have lowered many of the costs of
Farm Credit

distribution. Some of them are trying to get into the farm implement business, and I hope they succeed. In the type of business they have undertaken they have, in my judgment, reduced substantially the costs of distribution and, for that reason, should be encouraged. So that, in so far as this type of credit may be made available to people who are associated with cooperative organizations, I think it is commendable.
I am also wondering with respect to our credit union movement, which is also a wide and, I think, a sound development in many areas. It does not, of course, cover the western provinces to the extent of providing the general credit facilities that would be required. Nevertheless the credit unions have made fairly rapid progress. Their idea is partly one of thrift; but on the other hand they are also providing a type of community credit which is of particular advantage to the communities using it. I hope the type of credit indicated in this measure can be made to fit in with the type I have just mentioned, because I believe there is something in common between them, and something which should be encouraged.
I have no further suggestions to make to the minister at the moment, except to point out again that in my view this is a measure which will fit into a place for which there is a need. It will fit into a place between the long-term loan, such as is given on a farm mortgage, and the short-term seasonal borrowing. If we are to have this type of credit to meet the intermediate needs of agriculture, I think it is desirable. This is just another example of making national credit available to meet the needs of a certain branch of agriculture-national credit, in the first instance, through the Canadian farm loan board, and now national credit by way of a guarantee of this type of intermediate loan.
I think, when one considers what has been made available to agriculture, it will be realized that considerable progress has been made in meeting its credit requirements. When one reviews the situation, particularly as it obtains at this time, one cannot help realizing that the credit facilities now offered are much more readily available to meet the needs of the industry than they were heretofore. I point, for instance, to the Canadian farm loan board. I look, as w'ell, at the wide development of the credit union movement. I look at the wide distribution of victory bonds, a further evidence of the available credit and now this new type of intermediate credit. So that, if, along with these credit facilities we can develop added security, through the
IMr. Weir.]
establishment of floor prices, the credit needs of agriculture should be pretty well taken care of.
At the same time a word of caution might be voiced. I am not one who thinks we should take steps to give an endorsation or an invitation to go out on a borrowing expedition, merely for the sake of borrowing. To my mind debt is a serious thing, and so far as possible should be avoided. So that while this measure is desirable and needed, it should not be taken as an invitation for farmers to go into debt. That is not the intention of the measure. I desire to commend this legislation, because in my view it will fill a place of great importance in the post-wrar period in helping to establish agriculture on a sounder basis.


Mr. DORION:: Mr. Chairman, the first observation I should like to make is closely connected with one of the questions raised by the hon. member who has just taken his seat. I should like to know what will happen in the case of farmers in remote areas, such as I have in my constituency. In many of these places there are no bank branches, and I contend that these farmers should be helped just the same as those living in other places. This bill should provide relief for these farmers.
There is another matter I should like to take up. The minister told us the other day the purpose of this bill, and I quote from page 3608 of Hansard as follows:
With this in view, it is proposed that the guarantee should apply to loans made for the purchase of farm implements and farm equipment. for rural electrification, for the purchase of live stock, for fencing and drainage, for the repair, alteration and construction of farm buildings and for other farm improvement purposes that may later be specified in the regulations. The categories are very broad and include nearly every kind of permanent improvement to a farm or farm home.
Will loans be made to farmers for purposes other than those mentioned by the minister? For instance, when spring comes around, many farmers need money with which to buy seed and fertilizer in order to carry on until the fall. I know many of them borrow a few hundred dollars which they pay back in the fall, and I should like to know if this scheme will provide for small loans like that.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Chairman, I will deal with the questions that have been asked in so far as I can remember them. The hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) asked if I could give the rate that would be charged on money borrowed from the Industrial Development bank. No rate is specified in the act and the rate will vary with the risk and type of loan. The hon. member asked whether the

Farm Credit
advantages of this legislation will be available to those occupying farms on which there are liens with respect to old age pensions. The answer is yes; the advantages of this legislation will be available to the occupants of those farms. This does not mean that everybody who comes to the bank for a loan will automatically get it. That will be a matter for the judgment of the bank. It is hoped that the fact that the government is assuming part of the risk will make for freer and wider lending for these particular purposes than the banks have been prepared to enter upon up to the moment.-
The hon. member for Souris also asked whether 8250.000,000 is all that may be lent, subject to the guarantee provisions of this measure. The answer is in the affirmative. The banks may not expand that to the extent of the repaid loans. That is, if they lend $250,000,000 and $100,000,000 is paid back within three years, it would not be considered that they had lent only $150,000,000; it would be considered that they had lent $250,000,000. That is a lot of money, but if the plan was working well and the money ran out I assume that future parliaments would take such steps as they thought were in the public interest to increase the amount available.


James Arthur Ross: There was the question of whether the guarantee applied to a bank, like the Royal Bank of Canada, or just to a
particular branch or to an individual.


James Lorimer Ilsley: It applies to the bank, not to the branch.


James Arthur Ross: Ten per cent of their total loans?


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is right; ten per cent of the total loans.
The hon. member for Macdonald (Mr. Weir) expressed the hope that in districts where branches have been closed down or where there are inadequate facilities, necessary facilities will be supplied. I cannot give any undertaking on behalf of the banks. I dealt with this matter in the speech I made on the Bank Act, and 1 quote from page 2556 of Hansard as follows:
It also seems to me the reasonable expectation that the banks will only ;be too ready to reopen branches in any community where there is any prospect of the branches being self-sustaining.
If as a result of this legislation the banks are able to increase their business and have a prospect of doing a reasonably profitable business, I am quite sure that there would be every reasonable expectation that they would establish branches in those communities where they have been closed or where branches are not now established.
The hon. member for Macdonald expressed the hope that one result of this legislation would be a reduction in the cost of agricultural implements. That is our hope and expectation. The cost of credit for the purchase of agricultural implements from the implement companies is higher than the cost of credit to be extended under this measure. It is expected and believed that one of the most beneficial features of this measure will be the reduction in the cost of credit for the purchase of agricultural implements.
The hon. member for Macdonald also expressed the hope that credit would be made available for the building of homes for hired help. That is an objective we had in mind, an objective which I think will be attained.
The hon. member for Charlevoix-Saguenay (Mr. Dorion) suggested that something should be done to bring the advantages of this legislation to farmers who live in districts far distant from bank branches. I do not know what can be done and the hon. member has made no suggestion. He will have to deal with the bank in that connection. As I say, he has made no suggestions.


Frédéric Dorion: We will make some when the bill is before us.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I shall be glad to receive them. Money for seed is normally obtained on a short-term loan and no further facilities are required. For the most part the type of loan contemplated under this legislation is the intermediate loan, the loan which, as the hon. member for Macdonald said, comes between the short-term and the long-term loan which is secured on real estate, the ordinary mortgage loan.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. BRYCE:: The two hon. members from Manitoba who preceded me have asked some questions I had intended to ask, and the minister has already answered them. I should, however, like to know whether the minister intends to include a crop failure clause in the bill which will shortly be introduced. Such a clause is absolutely essential. Because of the troubles which the western farmer has experienced, not only in the distant past but right up to the present time, he has had to pay some small loans three and four times over. The situation which the minister mentioned with reference to cream separators is pretty well taken care of to-day by the
Farm Credit

farmer himself, by the establishment of credit unions; but so far as other loans are concerned, which are perhaps a little larger and extend over some time, I am sure the minister understands the difficulty a farmer finds himself in when, having agreed to pay for something in three years, he gets two bad crops in succession, and has nothing with which to pay, no matter how anxious he is to meet his debts. There should be added to the proposed bill or incorporated in it a crop failure clause whereby things would stand until a crop comes along.
Regarding interest rates, I am disappointed that the figure of five per cent has been mentioned. Mr. Donald G. McKenzie, of Winnipeg, speaking before the reconstruction committee, asked for adequate credit at low rates of interest to deserving farmers. To-day I or any other farmer in Manitoba can go to a bank and get credit at five or six per cent.


James Arthur Ross: Five per cent.


William Scottie Bryce: This part of the measure will be of no advantage unless the interest rate is lowered. I do not know what amount of research the minister has done into conditions in other countries which have established cheap agricultural credits; but, as Mr. McKenzie pointed out, it is essential that we have cheaper credits, or service at cost, the government providing for what profit is necessary. The minister said that "earnings must be sufficient to cover the bank's costs of operation and to give them an incentive to go out after business." The banks are to have their profit first.
The minister also said that this is a thorny problem and that the government intends to initiate discussions with the leading companies at once so that suitable agreements can be worked out in advance of the coming into force of the act. The minister there refers to the agricultural implement companies and the banks. I am sure that these organizations not only see the writing on the wall, but see it in neon lights-that the farmer, by organizing and building up more and more strongly his credit unions, is going to be a menace to the banking system in the operation of short-term credits. The implement companies at the same time see the threat of Cooperative Implements Limited coming along after the war. No doubt the banks and the implement companies are anxious that legislation of this kind shall go through.
I ask the minister, where do tenant farmers come in on this list? Most of them are men who lost their farms in the thirties and are anxious to be reestablished in the various provinces. I understood the minister to say

some time ago that a measure would be introduced to cover the case of farmers and fishermen. Will the farmer who fishes in the winter come under this measure, or will he have to wait until the legislation with respect to fishermen becomes law?
Regarding live stock, I hope that when the arrangements are put into motion they will apply not only to pure bred live stock but also to grade animals; because it would be all right for sires to be pure bred, but so far as dairy cows are concerned it would halve to apply to grade animals.
Those are all the questions I have at this time, although I may speak on this subject at a later date.


James Lorimer Ilsley: There is no crop failure provision in the bill as drafted. That matter can be considered by the banking and commerce committee. I do not know whether such a provision would be practicable or not. I think it is a matter which would have to be provided for by regulation under the powers to be conferred by the bill rather than by a provision of the bill itself.
Another question was, does a farmer come under this legislation if he fishes in the winter? I think the definition of "farmer" would be wide enough to cover that case. The bill will be before the house, of course, after this resolution goes through.
The hon. gentleman also asked whether the tenant farmer would be eligible for the loans ts be made under this measure. The answer is that if he is a dirt farmer he will; and that raises a very important question of principle, because we have gone that wa.y rather than the other way in the bill; we have provided that the occupier rather than the owner of the farm will be entitled to the provisions of the bill. That shuts out the landlord and lets in the tenant.
The hon. gentleman made some other observations, but so far as T know those are all his questions.


Thomas Langton Church: While I support the principle of this measure for the provision of intermediate term and short-term credit to the farmers of this country, I believe it would have been better if the minister had not written it into the Bank Act. In my opinion the proposed bill will be serviceable in a great many cases, but it looks to me as though the guarantee principle of ten per cent will make the chartered banks of this country a farm development finance corporation. Every good citizen has always supported very liberal terms for the farming community, protection all along the line; measures such as the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, and

Farm Credit
many other forms of assistance, through bonuses, subventions and subsidies, have commended themselves to the country. The provisions of the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act were afterwards applied to fishermen. I [DOT]contend that the measure now before us should also have included provisions for industrial *workers. The experience of the minister has borne out what I felt from the start would be true as regards the home improvement loans, of which the banks advanced 855,000,000 from November, 1936 to October, 1940. The government guaranteed up to fifteen per cent, but in fact every dollar was paid. It was a very wise proviso, and I hope it will now be extended because it is of particular value in urban and suburban areas, whereby also financial aid by the banks was promised for the stocking of fuel by consumers, the consumers placing orders with the coal dealers and the bankers advancing the money repayable each month. That has been a magnificent success; there has been only one bad debt. The minister gave a very fine statement on Tuesday night as regards these new forms of loans.
As hon. members know, I_have contended for many years that there has not been very liberal treatment to the man who has a small retail store which is subject to war-time controls, or to the small manufacturer or small wholesaler. I have very little hope after the discussion in this chamber that the proposed industrial bank will ever meet the situation so far as the retailer, the manufacturer and the wholesaler who are in a small way of business are concerned.
I am sorry that the minister has not seen fit to announce a liberal extension of the Home Improvement Act. Thousands of houses are needed not only in the urban and suburban areas but in the country as well, and we are not going to catch up with the shortage unless we do something definite about it. When this measure goes to the banking and commerce committee I should like to see this matter considered so that arrangements can be made for small house building on a long term policy for advancing money through the banks or by means of some amendments to the Home Improvement Act, whereby an equivalent amount of $250,000,000 could be provided for a period of from three to five years, for the purpose I have indicated, as the government is providing under the amendments to the legislation before us.
At page 3608 the minister said:
For these reasons it is proposed that the guarantee should be effective in respect of a maximum of $250,000,000 of loans made within a period of three years.
I should like to see that extended to take in small houses for soldiers, and white-collar
workers and industrial workers, a large number of whom are soldiers, so that they might be enabled to acquire small houses under the Home Improvement Act, at a reasonable rate of interest of 5 per cent. The minister said further at page 3609:
It is interesting to observe that the subcommittee on agricultural policy of the advisory committee on reconstruction, headed by Donald G. McKenzie of Winnipeg, in its final report recommended:
"That the dominion government make a careful survey of the schemes for .providing short-term and intermediate credit now in force in other countries, with a view to making provision for adequate credit at low rates of interest to deserving farmers, using as far as possible existing facilities, including the chartered banks of Canada."
I quote again from the minister's remarks, at page 3608:
First, as to purpose: the object of the scheme is to provide the credit needed by farmers to increase the efficiency of their farming operations and to enable them to make their farm homes more comfortable and attractive. With this in view, it is proposed that the guarantee should apply to loans made for the purchase of farm implements and farm equipment, for rural electrification, for the purchase of live stock, for fencing and drainage, for the repair, alteration and construction of farm buildings and for other farm improvement purposes that may later be specified in the regulations. The categories are very broad and include nearly every kind of permanent improvement to a farm or farm home.
Then he goes on to speak of eligibility for loans. I submit that instead of writing paragraphs f, g, h and i, of subsection 1, into the new Bank act, the same arrangement could have been made, as in the case of the home improvement act, and the same purpose achieved by making an agreement accordingly with the chartered banks, which are now before parliament seeking a ten-year renewal of their charters.	[DOT]
I am glad to see that something is being done with regard to the electrification, of the farms. One of the greatest achievements of the Ontario hydro electric scheme, under Sir James Whitney and1 Sir Adam Beck, was that it brought the joy of living to the farmers of that province through the electrification of the rural areas. In Sir Adam Beck's own bams, on almost the first power secured, I saw the use of electricity fully illustrated. As I say, the electrification of the farms in Ontario brought to the farmers the full joy of living that electricity gave to the people in the cities. Now that that has been accomplished on a large scale in Ontario with rural lines by direct subsidy, the rural sections of the province have been given at very low cost electrical service for all the requirements of the farm.
I am sorry to see the proposals with regard to the Bank Act so far as real estate is con-
Farm Credit

cerned. I refer particularly to sections 82 and 88, the latter being amended by this particular resolution. By section 82 it is provided that no bank shall hold real estate or movable property except such as is required for its own use. The building must be commensurate with the size of the business, and no bank is allowed to erect a building of thirty or forty stories. This provision, however, is circumvented by having some lawyer draft an agreement for some kind of holding company, indirectly and, as I said, illegally. In that way the section is got around. By section 82, with regard to real estate, any bank property such as I have described is held for seven years and after that it reverts to the crown and anyone can bring action to have that section enforced. But there are large buildings and skyscrapers all over Canada.
As regards section" 88, I think it is very dangerous to open up the Bank Act to the extent proposed. We have the Macmillan report for guidance, and I can find in that report nothing that would justify the very wide open door we have here. Many of the provisions of the proposed legislation will alter the whole basis on which these loans are made. In Toronto there are seventeen trust companies, many loan companies and corporations, insurance companies, the chartered banks and the shark loan companies. Under this legislation I should like to see every industrial worker, small retailer, small wholesaler and small manufacturer given some relief from the system of shark loans. I should like to see the shark loan companies wound up and liquidated and the work they are carrying on transferred to the chartered banks or the industrial bank or come under a new measure like this one, or under the Home Improvement Act, so that there might be equality of treatment as between farmers and urban and suburban workers and the small manufacturer and retailer, in regard to credit. If that were done there would be no more two per cent per month, or twenty-four per cent per annum, for all these small people to pay. The shark loan companies are exploiting the small man, and I submit that we should also do everything in our power to protect from these agencies the soldiers who are coming back. I suggest that an agreement could have been made with the banks.
I hope the banking committee will consider what I have said here and elsewhere many times and put the people to whom I have referred on a basis of equality with other classes in the community, who are now preferred. There is one thing about the present Minister of Finance, and I will say this in his favour. I am glad to see that he has not

overlooked committees of the house, as the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) does. That minister seems to be a law unto himself when it comes to some of the bills in which he is interested. The Minister of Finance, on the other hand, is quite willing to meet a committee of the house and he does not mind having the proposals of his technical officers examined by any committee. Not so the other department to which I have referred. The rules of the house should be amended accordingly to apply to all such large proposals.
I will say this in conclusion, that there is great demand that something be done by the banks and by the government in connection with housing, including the farms. Under the definition of land everything is included up to the skj'-buildings, farms, everything else. No doubt the same definition will be given under the amendments to the act. I venture to say that when some of those loans are applied for, (he chartered banks will insist, under section 88 and others, on collateral security. They will insist that agreements for sale, mortgages and othci forms of collateral, such as deeds [DOT] and insurance policies, be deposited with them, so that in the event of the loan not being paid those deposits can be liquidated. I believe that will prove to be so, and it will be so in so far as the Industrial Development bank is concerned.
When the committee considers this measure I hope that it will consider whether we should open this door wide open for real estate investments by banks and make what should have been arranged by agreement, part of the Bank Act. Once this gets into the Bank Act you will never get it out; it is there to stay. In any revision ten years hence paragraphs (f), (g), (h) and subsection 1 and so on included in this measure will remain.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: I am in general agreement with the purposes of this legislation and I wish to commend the minister for introducing it. I think all parties are in agreement with the purpose. Most agriculturalists from my part of Canada have not so much difficulty in getting credit, although in many instances it is needed. What they require more than credit is a satisfactory market for their production. Our farmers should" have earnings at least fifty per cent greater than they have been able to obtain over a period of years in order that they might be prosperous enough to avail themselves of the new credit facilities that will be provided by this measure.
I notice that it provides for the financing of agricultural implements. Costs of agricultural implements in Nova Scotia are too high.

Farm Credit
I believe they are greater than in other parts of Canada. I know they are greater than in central Canada. Central Canada gets the benefit of producing those agricultural implements, the benefits of wages, material, and all the incidental business that goes with them, while we pay the higher cost. On Monday a return was brought down at my request with respect to the higher cost of bicycles in the maritime provinces. What applies to bicycles applies to agricultural implements as well. I would say that, in fairness to the maritime provinces, prices of bicycles and prices of farm machinery should be uniform. The people of Nova Scotia should not have to pay a higher price than the people of central Canada.
The return to which I referred shows that a man's bicycle costs in all parts of Ontario and Quebec 842.50. Some parts of those provinces have just as expensive a freight rate as the maritime provinces. A lady's bicycle costs $43.50. What do we find in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island? A man's bicycle costs $45, and a lady's $46, or $2.50 per bicycle additional, about five and a half per cent more.
It is my view that farmers and others in the outlying parts of Canada who do not have the benefit of the labour, material and business that go with the production of farm implements, bicycles and articles of that kind they require, should at least be accorded the same price when they have to buy them and they should not have to pay higher prices.


George Alexander Cruickshank: You will never get that from Ontario.


Percy Chapman Black: This measure will also provide for additional financial facilities for the improvement and construction of new buildings. That is fine. We are all in favour of that; but I would suggest to the Minister of Finance that he should at the same time take the sales tax off the cost of lumber, paint and other supplies that go into the cost of these farm buildings. Interest on the loans will amount to five per cent; the sales tax is eight per cent. That means a cost of thirteen per cent added on to the materials that go into these farm buildings; therefore the farmer is not able economically to borrow the money and make such investments, because the cost is too great, unless the sales tax can be removed. If the farmer wishes to build a henhouse or an addition to his barn or his house or to supply storm windows the cost is eight per cent for sales tax, and if he has to borrow the money he must pay five per cent, which makes a charge the first year of thirteen per cent. I would say, Mr. Chairman, that an undertaking on
the part of the minister that the sales tax will be removed on farm improvements should go hand in hand with this measure. If that cannot be done during war time an assurance should be given that the sales tax will be removed immediately on the termination of the war when we expect these new financing provisions will be made use of to assist the farmer and give employment to help reestablish many returned men after the war. This legislation will be a benefit not only to farmers all over Canada but to workingmen and merchants in the towns and cities and to manufacturers generally. I make that suggestion to the minister. I am in favour of this legislation. And I think it will be appreciated by the agriculturists, but I think it should go farther than the terms of the proposed bill.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: I think all hon. members of the committee will support the general principle of this legislation. It is advisable to provide for allowing farmers easier credit conditions for medium and short-term loans, but I think we must not overlook this important fact, that the fundamental difficulty we are going to face in the years during the war and in the post-war period is that of purchasing power in the hands of the people to enable them to buy the goods which the farmers are able to produce. Thus far the minister has not brought in any measure designed to provide such purchasing power. That is an exceedingly important matter. If there is not sufficient purchasing power in the hands of the people of Canada to enable them to buy the goods which the farmer produces, then there will be the grievous danger of a fall in prices; and if the prices of the product that the farmer produces, and the markets fall low enough, then these loans will be unrepayable. All that they will do is constitute a millstone round the necks of the farmers. All through the western Canadian provinces we are suffering grievously because the farmers obtained credit when there were reasonable prices for products and then were required to repay the loans when the bottom had fallen out of the market. Thus far there is simply no provision before parliament to prevent the bottom from falling out of the market. Of course it is suggested that the government propose floor prices. We have no idea how high those floor prices are to be. What precaution is to bq taken against the floor prices being so low that the farmers, after they have paid the cost of production, will be unable to make a living on the farm?
My general criticism of all the minister's measures thus far is along the line I have indicated; there is not sufficient provision for internal purchasing power to enable the people
Dominion Elections

to buy the goods which the producers of Canada will be able to produce in abundance, and there is no adequate provision for fixing prices which will be remunerative to the producers.
May I now turn to a matter which came up just before the dinner recess The minister asked what could be done to make sure that the farmers in any given area would be able to obtain loans, following the remarks of the hon. member for Charlevoix-Saguenay who asked how the government were going to provide that farmers in every area would be able to obtain loans. I should like to offer this suggestion, that one good way to help attain that objective will be to permit the creation of provincial banks. No governing body in the Dominion of Canada is more concerned about seeing that the farmers in Nova Scotia obtain loans than is the government of Nova Scotia, and the same is true with respect to every province in this dominion. If you want to be sure that the farmers in any particular area are going to have the opportunity to get the credit they need, one way to bring about that result will be to allow the provinces to have provincial banks. Let the minister bear that in mind when he comes to consider the petition of Alberta for a provincial bank. I believe one great difficulty that has been developing during the last three or four generations in Canada is the centralization of the control of credit. That control must be decentralized. The credit union has done a good bit toward helping farmers in local areas to get credit, but the credit union is too small to accomplish the total objective, and its development is rather too slow. I have all respect for those who advocate credit unions; I know something about them and appreciate their value, but this whole matter of the control of credit must be put into the hands of the people whose interests are directly concerned. I submit that to have the control of the credit of Saskatchewan placed in the hands of a group of men living in Ontario and Quebec is not likely to provide the credit needed in Saskatchewan.
Perhaps anything else I have to say can be said at a later stage of the bill.


Clarence Gillis: I want to ask the minister
one question in order to determine what will be my attitude in this debate. As I understand it, all that the minister is asking now is the right to introduce a bill.


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is correct.


Clarence Gillis: In my opinion to attempt to discuss a bill before you see it or know anything about it is a wrong procedure.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Hear, hear.
	*


Clarence Gillis: The memory of some hon.
members is very short. Every afternoon at three o'clock the leader of the opposition rises in his place and pleads with us to expedite the business of the house, because the war is so serious; and that is right. This afternoon the Prime Minister pointed out specifically, I thought, the bad habit that has grown .up of doing exactly what we have been doing all day and so far this evening. Therefore I should like to know if it is the intention of the minister to put this resolution through and give the bill second reading to-night, if that should be possible.


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is my intention to introduce the bill and move first reading, and then move second reading after hon. members have had a chance to read it.


Clarence Gillis: Then I shall defer my discussion until such time as I know something about what I am discussing.
Resolution reported, read the second time
and concurred in, Mr. Usley thereupon moved for leave to introduce bill No. 134, to encourage the provision of intermediate term and short-term credit to farmers for the improvement and development of farms, and for the improvement of living conditions thereon.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



DOMINION ELECTIONS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Secretary of State) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide regulations enabling persons (to be described as Canadian wrar service electors) to exercise their franchise and the Canadian prisoners of war to vote by proxy at any general election held during the present war; and also to provide amendments to the Dominion Elections Act, 1938, consequential to such regulations; and to provide further that any expenses incurred in the carrying out of the said measure shall be paid out of unappropriated moneys in the consolidated revenue fund of Canada.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Bradette in the chair.
Mr. GREEN:: As hon. members know, a special committee was appointed to consider the whole question of the best method to provide votes for the men and women in the forces. That committee brought in a report which will be found in Votes and Proceedings

C.N.R.-Guarantee of Securities
of April 28, and which contains various recommendations. Will the minister tell us whether or not the recommendations have been accepted in full and, if not in full, in what way they have been varied?
Mr. MeLARTY: I wonder if the hon. member is referring to the specific regulations adopted by the special committee dealing with war service electors. If he is, they have been adopted in full, as have the provisions which were recommended by the special committee in connection with granting votes by proxy to prisoners of war and those interned in neutral countries. I wonder if that answers the hon. gentleman.


Howard Charles Green: Apparently the regulations have been adopted in full?
Mr. MeLARTY: That is correct.


Howard Charles Green: Without any variation?
Mr. MeLARTY:	There might be the
change of a word, but nothing material.


Howard Charles Green: What about the other recommendations? One was that the regulations should apply to any election held during the war or within six months thereafter.
Mr. MeLARTY: That has been adopted.


Howard Charles Green: I notice that in the resolution as it appears on the order paper there is no reference to the period of six months after the war.
Mr. MeLARTY': Perhaps the reason is that the bill itself contains certain provisions. Schedule A to the bill will be found to contain the regulations as passed by the special committee. Schedule B is also attached. That deals with the resolutions which, in effect, were dealt with by the special committee, but were not considered verbatim by that committee. The regulations of themselves provide that they will be operative only during the period of the present war, and within six months of its termination.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. McLarty thereupon moved for leave to introduce bill No. 135, to provide regulations enabling Canadian war service electors to exercise their franchise, and Canadian prisoners of war to vote by proxy, at an}' general election held during the present war, also to provide amendments to the Dominion Elections Act, 1938, which are consequential to such regulations, or have become necessary by the advent of the said war.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Gordon Graydon: Is this bill printed?
Mr. MeLARTY: Yes, it is.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to authorize the Canadian National Railway Company to issue securities not exceeding $10,549,500 in principal amount to provide the moneys necessary to meet capital expenditures made or capital indebtedness incurred during the calendar year 1944; to make provision for the purchase or refunding of capital obligations of the company, or of any company comprised of the Canadian National Railway system, during the said calendar year and for the issue of substituted securities for such purpose; to authorize the governor in council to guarantee the principal, interest and sinking funds of securities issued by the company for the purpose aforesaid; to authorize the making of temporary loans to the said company secured by such securities and not exceeding $10,549,500 in principal amount to enable the said company to meet such expenditures and indebtedness; with authority to give financial aid and assistance to other companies of the said national system.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Bradette in the chair.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Ilsley thereupon moved for leave to introduce bill No. 136, to authorize the provision of moneys to meet certain capital expenditures made and capital'indebtedness incurred by the Canadian National Railways system during the calendar year 1944, and to authorize the guarantee by His Majesty of certain securities to be issued by the Canadian National Railway Company.
Motion agreed to.
Mr. ILSLEY moved the first reading of the bill.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Would the minister make an explanatory statement?


Thomas Vien: The first reading is not debatable.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I merely asked for an explanation of the bill.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, I would have been in order, on motion for leave to introduce. However, if I am in order now I would say that this is just the annual bill which provides the Canadian National Railway Company with capital requirements for the year.


Percy Chapman Black: Has the minister details of those capital requirements?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I am not in order if I give that now. I can do that in committee on the bill.
C.N.R.-Guarantee of Securities


Thomas Vien: The motion is on the first reading.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first and second times.
Mr. ILSLEY moved that the house go into committee on the bill.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the chair, may I say that the minister has suggested that we should have second reading of the bill. I have no objection to that, but I should like to have the bill in the hands of every member before we go into committee. The principle involved is one which requires little or no discussion in the house, but perhaps the details will require discussion in committee of the whole. For that purpose it would be necessary to have a bill before us. I have grave doubts as to whether or not it has been printed.	,


An hon. MEMBER:: It is on the desk.


Gordon Graydon: I do not know how that can be, because it was introduced only a few minutes ago. I am sure it could not be on our desks.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not see how it could be, either.


Thomas Vien: Then the house will go into committee at the next meeting.


Gordon Graydon: I think that would be sufficient, if we have the bill by then.


Thomas Vien: It is the pleasure of the house, then, that the house will go into committee at the next sitting?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.


Gordon Graydon: Could the minister not make his statement now? It is important that that should go on the record.


James Lorimer Ilsley: We can do this: We can go into committee on the bill; I can make the statement and then move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again. Is that satisfactory?


Gordon Graydon: Yes.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Bradette in the chair.
Section 1 agreed to.
On section 2-Power to issue securities for capital expenditures.


James Lorimer Ilsley: This bill is for the purpose of providing authority for the capital expenditures of the railway system and the retirement of miscellaneous maturing obligations, either by way of loan from the dominion or by the
[Mr. Ilsley.)
issue of securities of the company to the public and guaranteed by the dominion. The total amount to be provided for this purpose is limited to $10,549,500, divided as follows: Additions and betterments (less
retirements)	 $18,611,500
Additions of securities	 1,921,000
Retirement of maturing capital obligations, including sinking fund and equipment principal payments 9,117,000

Less: Available from reserves for depreciation and debt discount amortization	 19,100,000


Gordon Knapman Fraser: You might put the list of the loans on Hansard without reading it.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I will put them on Hansard
at this stage.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: By unanimous consent.


James Lorimer Ilsley: The following are the loans outstanding from the government to the railway company at April 15, 1944, under various authorities:
Canadian National Railways Refunding Act, 1938	 $ 94,841,705 71
Financing and Guarantee Act,
1940, purchase of G.T.R. 4 per cent perp. con. deb. stock.... 107,596,832 25 Financing and Guarantee Act,
1940-	purchase of securities
from Canadian	holders		8,643,331	44
Financing and Guarantee Act,
1942-purchase of securities
from Canadian	holders		18,262,597	75
The War Appropriation (United Kingdom financing) Act, 1942 *-repatriation of securities.. 255,035,927	81
The War Appropriation Act,
1941-	working capital advances	 13,906,927	81


Mr. ADAMSON:: This does not include any equipment trust funds?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I had better leave the answer to that question until the next day in order
to make sure.
Progress reported.



SURPLUS CROWN ASSETS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce legislation:
To confer authority upon a corporation to be established thereunder, to sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of, hold, manage, recondition, or otherwise deal with surplus' crown assets,
and to confer certain powers upon the Minister of Munitions and Supply and the governor in council in relation thereto including the power to establish an advisory committee;
To provide also that authority be given the governor in council to authorize the Minister of Finance to pay or advance to the corporation, from time to time, working capital from unappropriated moneys in the consolidated revenue fund; with provision for the deposit by the corporation to the credit of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada of all moneys received by it, except moneys paid or advanced to it on account of working capital and such percentage of all other moneys received by it as the governor in council may from time to time determine as being necessary to defray the administrative costs or other expenses of the corporation;
And to provide further for the payment of the salary of the president of the corporation and the chairman of the committee, and fees and salaries of persons in the employ or service of the minister, the committee or corporation.
Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, before you leave the chair I should like to say a few words. This resolution presages a piece of legislation as important as almost any piece of legislation we shall have passed this session, outside the war appropriation bill itself. If the minister is in position to give some statement while the legislation is in the resolution stage, the house would appreciate it as well as the country. We should have a statement with respect to the government's policy and what the bill proposes to do. The question of the distribution and sale of surplus crown assets is one which is engaging the attention of the whole nation at the moment because of the present situation. Could the minister oblige the house by giving a full statement at this stage?


Mr. HOWE:: Mr. Speaker, the procedure for the disposal of surplus crown assets has been worked out over a short period. It was set up by order in council and we have had some three months in which to assay the efficiency of the programme. First, there is the determination of surplus property. This determination is made by a surplus crown assets committee which is made up of representatives of each of the departments of government which is concerned with the disposal. The membership of the committee consists of representatives of the three armed services, of the Department of Public Works, of the Department of Pensions and National Health, of the Department of Munitions and Supply, of the Department of Trade and Commerce, of the Department of Finance and of one or two others. In addition there are representatives of the farmers, of labour and of the consumer. The committee is a policy committee.
Surplus Crown Assets

Anything that any department may declare to be surplus is reported to the committee. The representatives of the government on the committee are senior civil servants of the rank of deputy minister or assistant deputy minister. The material is reported as surplus to the committee and the committee decides, first, whether the material should be disposed of and whether it is really surplus to government requirements. The various departments of government are represented and if a department can show that it can usefully use the material, this is noted by the committee.
The committee represents various walks of life and various departments of government and it recommends the policy that shall be followed in the disposal of the article. The matter is then referred by the committee to the Minister of Munitions and Supply with the recommendation, first, that the property should be disposed of and, second, as to what priorities should be given. These may include the provinces, the municipalities, and the various public agencies or otherwise as a means of disposal to the public. The recommendations of the committee are noted and an order in council is prepared.
The recommendation is made by the Minister of Munitions and Supply to council that the property should be disposed of, and as to the various priorities that should be recognized in the disposal of the property. If council approves the disposal of the particular property the title passes to a corporation known as War Assets Corporation. This is a corporation in the ordinary form. Its directorate includes business men of varied experience and a representative of labour, whose composite judgment cover the field of disposal in many avenues. The president is a man who has been with the Department of Munitions and Supply' as director general of its Washington office since the commencement of the war; before that he was an experienced contractor and president of a steel company, a man with wide experience in purchasing various materials and one who has a good knowledge of the avenues of disposal.
The material or equipment passes to this corporation. The corporation is bound by the recommendation which goes forward to it from the committee at Ottawa, as to priorities. It may be material or equipment which should be rendered into scrap; if so, it is rendered into scrap through the agency of the corporation and sold as scrap. If it is possible to recondition the material or equipment and sell it in its original state, that is carried out.
The corporation will have a number of advisory committees. These will be formed as required, and the advice of the industry' within
' 
which the material falls is asked. It may not alway's be followed, but at least it is at hand as a guide. If the material can be used in its original form, the purpose of the corporation is to make that material available as widely across Canada as possible. Motor cars, for instance, are not offered for auction in one city; a price is placed upon them and they are shipped to various centres in Canada and sold, so that each section of the country may have the same opportunity as any other to buy. If it is scrap it is sold on the scrap market at a ceiling price imposed by the wartime prices and trade board. That board, by the way, is represented on the disposal committee, and its advice is sent forward together with the advice of representatives of the department and representatives of the public that I have named.
The experience to date is on a limited scale. Hon. members will realize that, while disposal in future will be a job of the greatest magnitude, at the present time it is fairly limited, but experience is being built up through such use as is being made of the machinery at the present time. When the bill is before the house for second reading I will table a report of the disposal on machinery up to the end of May which will give hon. members a fair idea of the methods used to date and the results obtained. Our experience so far is such that I believe that the machinery provided by the bill which is now being brought before the house will be the best that can be devised for the huge job of disposal which will follow the end of hostilities. When the bill is before the house we shall be able to discuss the machinery in detail. I may say that the study of disposal in this country runs parallel with the studies being conducted in the United States. Our machinery was set up some months before the machinery was established in the United States, but it is a matter of interest to me that the disposal in that country operates almost exactly in the manner which had previously been established for Canada. Those responsible for the disposal in Canada work closely with those similarly responsible in the United States. The methods are compared, and if it is a matter of export the opinion of the United States is obtained, just as the United States obtain the opinion of Canada if they have material to export.
We have exported a considerable amount of surplus material under very satisfactory arrangements. Later on, the scope of the' disposal must be extended to the United Kingdom. Obviously a great deal of Canadian material will have to be disposed of in that country, and we are conducting studies with the United Kingdom government

Surplus Crown Assets
to make sure that the methods for disposal of Canadian materials shall parallel the methods which will be established in Great Britain.
I do not know that I can usefully say anything further. I shall be glad to answer any questions, but I suggest to hon. members that we can most profitably discuss this subject when the bill is before the house.


Mr. J. R. MacNICOL:: According to a dispatch in one of the evening papers, a debate took place in the old country parliament to-day, when an hon. member called the attention of the Prime Minister to what happened after the last war in the matter of purchase of German ships, an operation which, according to the hon. member, resulted in great disasters to employment in the British shipbuilding industry. The hon. member asked the Prime Minister if such a condition would prevail after the present war. The Prime Minister intimated that many mistakes were made after the last war, but this was one which would not be repeated.
In looking over the resolution, I notice that the corporation which is to be set up is to be authorized to "sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of, hold, manage, re-condition, or otherwise deal with surplus crown assets." I have been wondering whether such a committee should not have some authority over the buying of scrap material or other material from other countries, because we shall have a large amount of material to be sold in this country, and we have plants here with a capacity far beyond our peace-time requirements, plants which will have to be demobilized in an orderly way. This I know from what I personally have seen in the plants I visited, and it seems to me that the proposed bill should call for some control over buying, too, whereby dealers in Canada would not be permitted to purchase huge stocks of cheap material, whether in Great Britain, the United States or elsewhere, and throw them on our home market. After the war, our own plants will return to their normal peace-time production; their own workmen will have to be protected, and I cannot see any other way to do so than by some control over buying. The minister said nothing about that, or I would not have risen. But I remember clearly what happened after the last war, when the business with which I was associated bought many steel boilers which were used in this and that plant, and then-


An hon. MEMBER:: You had better be careful.	,


John Ritchie MacNicol: I am always careful. I do not say anything I do not know. The
firm bought many steel boilers and afterwards sold them at prices below those for which boilers of a similar capacity could be purchased from the home manufacturers. That must have had an effect on boiler production and naturally on the employment in our boiler plants. So that as far as I can see, unless there is some control over buying as well as over selling munition materials, the situation as a whole will not be taken, care of. As the minister has said, in. the United States they are planning and setting up a body which will to the best of their judgment carefully watch that the market is not glutted in any way and that employment is not retarded through the placing on the market of equipment which will have such effect.
The minister said something about cars. It would be an exaggeration to say that there are hundreds of thousands of motor cars stacked up across the country, but undoubtedly there is a large number. The minister did mention motor cars distributed across Canada, and we shall all be anxious to get the motor car companies engaging in that line of manufacture and everything associated with it, and the thousand and one concerns making equipment for motor cars must be got back into peace-time production as quickly as possible. If the market throughout Canada is to be glutted with thousands of war motor cars, which naturally would be sold cheaper than would cars made in the regular plants, that, too, will affect employment, will it not?
I for one will support the proposal. I have heard the names of the men who will head the company. I am not at all in favour of government companies, but I believe that this is one that possibly could manage to do a good job. In any event it will be expensive, and it will call for control to see that the market is not glutted with war material. Having heard the names of the men who are to look after the affairs of the company, I have confidence in them. They are men of great experience. The chairman, whom the minister mentioned, has had vast experience. I doubt if you could select a more capable man in the country. The others also are good men, and I have no doubt they will do the best job they can.
I do not remember clearly what programme operated after the last war. I do not think it was very good, but perhaps it was not very bad. I will not say anything against it apart from what I have said about buying used equipment for resale. But may I ask the minister this question: Has he in mind any control over the buying of material from the United States or Great Britain or from any other producing country, Australia or elsewhere, so that our market shall not be flooded
Surplus Crown Assets

with competition of surplus war goods? The minister spoke of sending our surplus goods to Great Britain. According to a debate in the British House of Commons to-day, they will take care that their market shall not be glutted with goods from other countries, and I presume that our cousins to the south of us will do the same. I am anxious that Canadian plants will not have their production retarded through competition with huge used stocks from other countries, because I want the Canadian workmen to be given the best possible opportunity to produce when the war is over. I ask this question: Has the minister in his mind some control over buying outside war surpluses?


Clarence Decatur Howe: In answer to the hon. member, I may say that a gentleman's agreement has been arrived at with the United States, who have also set up machinery, that they will not dump their surplus goods in Canada and we shall not dump our surplus goods in that country. It is a matter of agreement between the disposal agencies in both countries. I fully anticipate that similar arrangements will be made with other countries which will be having the same problem. It is a reasonable arrangement as between countries with a common problem and I am sure it can be worked out. In the matter of disposal, there are many interests to be considered. We cannot concentrate on protecting-


Thomas Vien: May I interrupt the minister. The house is considering the resolution and these questions can be answered better in committee.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I see that. I am sorry.


James Arthur Ross: With regard to the statement of the minister on the war assets disposal board, I want to make one observation.	[DOT]


An hon. MEMBER:: Why not wait until we get into committee.


James Arthur Ross: This is rather important and I wish to make this statement before we get the bill.


An hon. MEMBER:: Not on the resolution.


Gordon Graydon: He can make the statement now.


James Arthur Ross: I was pleased to hear the minister state that in the matter of priorities the provincial governments and the municipalities would be represented on the committee to which he referred and, I believe, he said the farmers as well. As a humble representative, I have had many inquiries from rural and urban municipalities as to the dis-

posal of equipment. They would like to have road equipment and machinery at airports and other places connected with the war effort, and such things as fire-fighting apparatus. The rural municipalities would like to have the first opportunity to procure this road equipment and other machinery. Various urban centres would like to have the first opportunity to procure fire-fighting apparatus and other equipment that is of vital importance to them, and rightly our provincial governments and municipal units should have the first consideration ahead of speculators.
If these articles which this committee may decide should be disposed of could be listed with the municipal department of each provincial government, and they in turn could notify the municipal units under their jurisdiction, it would be all to the good and would be greatly appreciated by the taxpayers of the country. I wish to make that proposal at this stage of the proceedings.


Thomas Langton Church: The experience the government will have in connection with these crown plants will follow the experience we had after the great war and other wars the world over in connection with a venture like this. I do not hesitate to say, Mr. Speaker, that the country will never get any reasonable return on the investment involved and some crown plants should have been left to private enterprise. The minister hopes to make a deal with regard to the surplus assets and he confers on the corporation power to spend more capital and to dispose of, hold, manage and re-condition these plants. Again I say they will never have any reasonable return on investments in the past or from the proposed policy of the government in the future in regard to captial advanced. Many of these undertakings have been constructed in an uneconomic way and they have dragged in some municipalities in the building of certain roads, sewers, pavements, water supply and all that sort of thing. I have seen some of the crown plants and I do not believe that business of this kind can be run on an economic basis. When the war is over, a great many of them will be obsolete and not worth much from a commercial point of view. They will be uneconomic, and it will not be possible to operate some of them commercially. Many of them will be worthless. We had an experience of that in the last war with the merchant marine. We constructed many plants throughout Canada and some ships cost SI,750,000. They ran all the way from SI ,000,000 to S2,000.000 What was the result? About a year before Munich the present minister of the department sold without tenders some of them for $50,000, although

Surplus Crown Assets
they cost $1,750,000. There was a return with a list of them made to an order of the house along that line. I doubt very much whether we shall ever get any reasonable return on some of these investments. If more capital is put into it after the war I venture to say that less will be got out of the total investment in the future than in the past.


Mr. C. E. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: I am pleased that the minister is forming this Crown Assets Corporation to take charge of this material after the war, because I can see where a company of this kind can be of good service to the country. I do not agree with some of the suggestions that have been made here to-night to the effect that this material should be turned over to private concerns to sell at prices which they may set. It is government property and the government should take the proper steps, as the minister has indicated, to dispose of it.
I want to join in what the hon. member for Souris said a few moments ago about the disposal of some of this machinery. I received a resolution passed by the board of trade of the city of Drumheller with regard to this very thing. I am sorry I have not the resolution here to put on Hansard or read to the minister; but its contents are to the effect that these municipalities are desirous of obtaining some of this machinery, especially road machinery, from the assets corporation. They figure, and I think rightly so, that they will be able to get this machinery at very reasonable prices. They are of the opinion that some of this machinery will be of use to them in the construction of roads and for other purposes, and they are quite concerned about it. It may well be that some of this machinery will be practically new, or it may be, as the minister has indicated, that some of it can be repaired with very little trouble and be made very useful to the municipalities and other organizations of that kind.
I think it is proper that arrangements should be made with other countries, as the minister has indicated, so that there will be no dumping of great quantities of machinery into Canada from the United States or from Canada into other places. Let each county dispose of its own surplus material in its own way. I just wanted to mention this and to give what support I could to it along with what other hon. members have said, because municipalities are very much concerned about getting possession of some of this machinery which will be useful to them. I think the minister should indicate in a circular letter, or something like that, to the municipalities or cities that such action is being taken and, if they wish to get in touch with him, he will acquaint them with the
methods of obtaining the desired material. I think that would be of great assistance to them and would give relief to what means a great deal to them.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I am very glad to see that the minister is setting up this corporation. If we did not have some corporation of this kind we would have chaos in this country. It depends to a great extent on how it is managed. The minister has said that up to the present time the machinery has been successful. I think it has been only moderately successful. There is a great deal of improvement necessary. I have great faith and confidence in the manager who, I understand, is Mr. J. B. Carswell. I have known him for many years. He is a man of great patriotic spirit, a man who could have looked after himself much better in this war if he had not been patriotic. He is a man of great ability. He is a Scotsman, by the way.
I want to see this government corporation get back to private enterprise as quickly as possible. There is only one way to judge efficiency and that is by competition. At the present time we know that some of our government plants have done splendid jobs, but we do not know at what expense. We are bound to have extravagance in war time; there is no question about that. But in peace time you cannot have efficiency and extravagance; it just does not work out. The only way you can gauge the efficiency of a firm is by the competition it meets. There are so many controls of one thing and another to-day that private enterprise no longer obtains. There is only one thing that is worth while in the production of ordinary goods and that is private enterprise. That is the way to do it. I do not say that everything should be private enterprise. We must have a combination of private and public enterprise. After all, the government is here to help private enterprise, not to run private enterprise. The sooner we get these industries back into the hands of private enterprise after the war, and not run them as government concerns, the better it will be.


Mr. M. J. EDWARDS (Calgary West):: I am pleased with the acclaim with which this legislation has been received on all sides of the house, but I think lurking in the back of everybody's mind is the desirability of this, and primarily that is because of the hon. gentleman whom we all know or hope and believe will be the responsible minister of the crown administering this measure, and the company which is being set up. I refer to none other than the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe). It is the fact that he has
Surplus Crown Assets

done such a remarkable job in his present capacity and is likely to have charge and supervision of this measure which gives us so much confidence in what this company will be able to do in the disposal of our surplus assets. In my own home city we have already had concrete proof of what a government department can do in converting a war-time asset into civilian use and employment. Nothing could give us more confidence in Calgary as to the future success of this corporation than the demonstrated ability of the present minister who is responsible for this legislation.
But there is the thought to which the hon. member for Davenport gave expression, which was uppermost in my mind, namely, the possibility of the disposal in this country of surplus assets of other countries to the detriment, if you like, of our own corporations or to private industry in Canada. We are all well aware of it. I personally have had brought to my attention already the difficulties which may be encountered in that respect in Alberta, I believe that certain surplus assets of a friendly neighbouring country are being offered for sale. I have already had it brought to my attention that certain associations in the United States are encouraging or bringing pressure to bear to have surplus assets of that country disposed of as secondhand material in Canada, to use Canada as a dumping ground to get rid of those assets so as to clear the field for their activities in their own country. I am very much concerned as to what effect that is to have, and while I well understand the anxiety of municipalities, provincial governments and local authorities to get equipment and machinery especially, after all, private enterprise, the people who have been handling and dealing in machinery and equipment and who will be expected to maintain it and to provide repairs for it in the years that are to come, would like to know what position they are to be left in.
We in this county are now educated to look to the manufacturer of any implement or machine to guarantee performance. The trade mark, trade name or manufacturer's name, when impressed upon a machine, does mean something; and the person who buys that machine looks to the manufacturer to maintain it in good working order. Take a piece of road building machinery, for example, that has been used on the Alaska highway under most trying conditions, operated by inexperienced or perhaps incompetent workmen, without proper maintenance, because speed was the prime consideration. That piece of equipment may look all right, but it may be full of defects not apparent to the ordinary

purchaser. Is that to be put on the market as a bargain and sold to the highest bidder for whatever it will bring in its present condition, under the principle of caveat emptor, or let the buyer beware? That piece of equipment may look to be worth $5,000, while in reality it may need repairs or replacements costing $2,000. Who is to service it; who is to be responsible for it?	I can see the
possibility of great harm and damage to Canadian industry unless this matter is very closely supervised. The minister said that at the present time there is a gentleman's agreement with other countries. I hope there will be something a little more definite than that; otherwise I fear we may have this country flooded with the surplus used material of a friendly neighbour, who will be glad to get rid of it at prices which we in this country cannot afford to meet.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mrs. Casselman in the chair.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like the minister to make it clear whether crown assets include buildings and crown companies as well as such movable things as automobiles, jeeps and so on, which have been mentioned already. Perhaps I could come straight to one point that I have in mind. Is there any likelihood of a company such as the Polymer corporation being turned over to this board for disposal?


Clarence Decatur Howe: What is to be disposed of is a matter of government policy. As I explained, if any department of government decides that it has anything surplus to its requirements, that fact is reported to the committee I have described to the house and that committee recommends what shall be done. One recommendation is as to whether or not it shall be disposed of, and further recommendations deal with how that disposal is to take place. Then that recommendation comes back to the government, and nothing can be disposed of except by the decision of the cabinet. Therefore, whether the Polymer corporation or any other corporation will be disposed of depends entirely upon the government of the day, and as long as we maintain good government in Canada I hardly think the Polymer corporation will be disposed of.


John Ritchie MacNicol: There will be a good government after the next election.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I said as long as we maintain it. Referring to the discussion that took place before the house went into committee, I should not like hon. members to believe that the sole duty of this disposal corporation will be to prevent surplus material from interfering with the manufacturers of this country. That

Surplus Crown Assets
will be one duty; but it must be remembered that the surplus material from this war is the property of the people of Canada, and must be disposed of in the interests of the people of Canada, having due regard to the situation of the manufacturer and the effect on employment. The practice is to price the material reasonably, having in mind the value of similar material newly manufactured. None of this will be sold as a pig in a poke; it will be sold either as scrap or as usable material. It will be properly priced and distributed as well as possible, so that if it is useful to the people of Canada it will be obtainable in all sections of the country at a price representing fair value in comparison with the article when new.
I may say that an effort is being made to give priority to various users. For material such as road-building equipment, which has been mentioned, and which I may add has not come on the market as yet for the reason that the limited quantities in Canada are still needed for war production work, the first option would go to the provinces, then to the municipalities and then to any other public use for which there might be a requirement. However, the price is the same for all. That has been determined as a policy, and I think it is the only sound policy. We have resolutions coming in suggesting that certain users should obtain property as a gift, or at a lower price. All we can give any user is a first claim on the material; but once the price is fixed that will be the price to all. I am glad to have this opportunity of making that fact known to all those who have written me, and others .who say we should offer one price to one and another price to another.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Would that price be the same all over Canada irrespective of freight?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The matter of freight differentials will be considered in the light of the situation affecting the commodity in question. For instance, motor cars have one ceiling price in one area and a different ceiling price in another area. Disposal will take into account the question of freight, though that will not necessarily be the governing factor in all parts of the country. It will follow the practice of the trade.


Percy Chapman Black: I think the least we in the outlying parts of Canada should expect is that the price will be uniform. In the earlier discussion this evening I mentioned bicycles and farm implements and said that we in Nova Scotia certainly are discriminated against in the prices fixed by the wartime prices and trade board, since we have to pay
five and a half per cent more than is paid in central Canada, though we do not get the benefit of the employment which is incidental to the manufacture of these articles. I would protest if we are not to get the advantage of at least a uniform price on these surplus war articles that are being sold.
I should also like to ask the minister if any agreement or understanding has been entered into with manufacturers of motor vehicles, tractors or jeeps that such articles would be made into scrap and not placed upon the Canadian market, in order that they would not interfere with the post-war manufacturing output of these industries. There have been reports current to that effect. I appreciate that there will be a clash of interest between manufacturers and those who can make use of these articles. I would say that farmers should be entitled to a chance to secure motorized machines suitable for their requirements when they are placed on the market at a reasonable price. I feel strongly that the outlying parts of Canada, such as Nova Scotia from which I come, which do not benefit from the manufacture of these articles, certainly should have an opportunity to purchase them at the lowest possible prices. If these articles have value they should be able to get the articles they require at the lowest possible prices, instead of their being scrapped.
I ask the minister, has there been any understanding, or agreement, with manufacturers, in any instance, that their production would be scrapped rather than utilized in the postwar period.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Madam Chairman, I am glad to have an opportunity of saying that no such agreement has been arrived at. A story wholly without foundation was published in Vancouver papers to the effect that by agreement with automobile dealers the government had decided that certain vehicles, such as jeeps, would not be sold in Canada. I may say that the government never heard of any such arrangement, and upon inquiry from the automobile association, whose convention was being held at the time, I was assured no such proposal had come from them.
I repeat that the government intends to dispose of government property in the widest and best interests of all the people of Canada, and that no association of dealers, no association of manufacturers or no other association will have any deciding voice in what is done with the surplus war materials of this country.
As for the differential in the price of bicycles as between central Canada, where they are made, and Nova Scotia, may I say that that principle works both ways. I lived in Halifax for several years, and while there I found that
Surplus Crown Assets

the lobster served at the elub cost twenty cents a helping. When I came to Ottawa I was astonished to find that lobster at the club in Ottawa cost ninety cents a portion. Then, when I went to Winnipeg I was more than astonished to find that it cost $1.50 a portion.


Howard Charles Green: The minister should have
had Winnipeg gold-eye.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We cannot get away from
the principle that the source of production usually has the lowest price.


Percy Chapman Black: Then the minister is opposed to giving the outlying portions of Canada, the maritime provinces, equal opportunities to secure these surplus materials at uniform prices? Do I understand the minister is making such a declaration of policy? If he is, then I am certainly protesting against it.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I call the minister's attention to an order in council dated May 29, 1944, directing the transfer to War Assets Corporation Limited of any material or article having value not in excess of $15,000, and reported as surplus by any government department or agency. What happens to surplus over $15,000?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Surplus over $15,000 is reported to council, with the recommendation of the disposal committee. The action taken is the action of council. Under $15,000 the material is reported by the committee to the minister, and over his own signature the minister can carry out the recommendations of the committee.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Then the committee would look after ships, and other articles valued at more than $15,000.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is correct.


Mr. HAZEN:: The minister has just made
.a comparison between prices paid for raw materials or primary products, and prices paid for manufactured goods. He referred to the cost of bicycles, and also of lobsters in different parts of Canada. I doubt very much if that is a fair comparison. In a case of that kind I think one has to compare a manufactured product with a manufactured product.
I do not wish to go into this matter fully, but I would point out to the minister that some goods manufactured in the maritime provinces are sent throughout Canada. I have in mind particularly Ganong's chocolates, sardines put up by Connors Brothers, and shaving brushes put up by Simms. I understand that these articles are sold throughout Canada at the same prices. It seems to me

some consideration might be given to manufacturers of other goods in other parts of Canada being obliged to sell their products throughout Canada at the same price, particularly when they receive the benefit of the tariff.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My statement was that the practice of the trade is followed. For instance, if we are selling surplus shaving brushes they may very well be sold at the same price throughout Canada. We are bound to follow out the ceiling price set by the wartime prices and trade board. Or, if there is a differential, we follow the differential in ceiling price. Obviously we cannot sell above the ceiling price in any community, and there is a ceiling price for used goods in all parts of Canada. As I say, the ceiling price of to-day follows the practice of yesterday. And if the practice of yesterday was to sell at a uniform price across Canada, then the ceiling price of to-day follows that practice. We are more or less bound to follow the practices which have grown up in Canada through the years.


Howard Charles Green: What is done with regard to automobiles which are being sold now?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Automobiles being sold now are being sold at ceiling prices of automobiles for the year in which those were produced.


Howard Charles Green: I mean by way of comparison between Ontario and British Columbia, for example.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If they are sold in British Columbia, they are sold at the ceiling price in British Columbia; if they are sold in Ontario, they are sold at the ceiling price in Ontario.


An hon. MEMBER:: Plus certain charges.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, not "plus" anything.


Howard Charles Green: Would it be fair, in the case of army equipment on the Pacific coast, that it be sold for more there than would similar equipment in Ontario?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I suggest that army equipment on the west coast stands the government more than army equipment at Oshawa. They have already paid freight on it, and it seems fair to sell it at the ceiling price in that area.


Howard Charles Green: I suggest that that should be given further consideration.


Clarence Decatur Howe: All right.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I was interested in the personnel of the war allocations committee, as mentioned by the minister. There are two classes of purchasers which I think should receive representation on that committee, and

Surplus Crown Assets
which I find have no representation. The first is the educational interests of the country. It is true the minister said there would be municipal representation.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, I did not say that. I said that there would be the department of government, the farmer, labour and the consumer.


Joseph William Noseworthy: But the minister did mention that the municipality would receive priority?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Just what the committee gave them in respect of a particular article.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I would call the minister's attention to the fact that there will be enormous quantities of this material which would be invaluable to the technical schools and vocational schools of Canada. I am satisfied that they should have high priority in the disposal of these materials. I feel that there should be some one representing the educational interests of the country on this war allocation board, so that the school boards across Canada may have an opportunity of securing some of this material. The federal government has undertaken to bear a proportion of the cost of vocational training across Canada and some means should be provided to make this material available to schools, at least in the outlying and smaller areas, without undue regard to price even if the difference must be charged to the federal government's share of the cost of technical education.
I have had a number of representations from men overseas in regard to this matter. Only last week I received a letter from a boy in Italy. Before he went overseas this boy had been in the garage business, which he gave up in order to enlist. He realized that there would be considerable material salvaged after the war, particularly from some of our factories, and he felt that this should be made available to men such as himself. My first question is: will this material be disposed of before the men overseas have had an opportunity of securing what they want? My second question is: will the government make provision for the disposal of this material to men who are now overseas at prices and terms with which they will be able to comply? I ask the minister to give consideration to the two classes of potential purchasers of this material I have mentioned.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I may say that due regard is being given to the educational institutions. They have a very high priority on any material that they require. As for the soldiers overseas I may say that we have hardly touched the fringe of this disposal problem.
I suppose that the whole programme will run into at least three or four billion dollars, whereas the materials offered to date amount to hardly three or four hundred thousand dollars. The main disposal problem will come after the end of hostilities when the soldiers overseas will have ample opportunity to obtain anything they require.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am asking that consideration be given to this class of purchaser in disposing of this material and that they be granted terms and prices so that they may be able to avail themselves of the opportunity of securing it.


John Ritchie MacNicol: When I spoke a few
moments ago I said I was in favour of the resolution, and I am yet, but I am a little alarmed at what the minister has said about the disposal of this equipment. Both in England and the United States the cardinal principle has been to ensure the orderly marketing of the material. If that is the minister's idea, then I am for it. But I am not in favour of marketing along the lines of what has been suggested by two or three hon. members.
I can see what will happen to young men coming back who have worked in the roadmaking plant at Plessisville, Quebec, or in the Sawyer Massey company at Hamilton or in the John T. Hepburn company at Toronto. The markets of these great road-making machinery plants *will be obliterated if the market is flooded with the road machinery being used in the war. Our primary purpose after the war will be to provide jobs, but if the markets of these companies are destroyed by disorderly marketing, then we shall have nothing but chaos, just as we had after the last war.
I had hoped that this committee or company or whatever it is to be called1-I have heard great things about the personnel and I have great confidence in them-would take over some of the strategic war plants across Canada and store this war material and equipment therein for orderly marketing so that it would not interfere with the reemployment of the boys coining back from overseas in the plants in which they formerly worked. I realize that if this equipment is used to make roads, men will also be given work. I have confidence in the men whose names I have heard and I feel sure they will bring about orderly marketing without dislocating industry.
A large number of the young men overseas went from the five thousand and one plants across Canada and they will be looking for their former jobs when they come back. I understand that after the last war vast quanti-

Surplus Crown Assets

ties of shell-making machinery were just smashed up and made into scrapiron. They were single purpose machines and they could not be used for anything else. I imagine that after this war a great deal of the heavy iron equipment which was made to produce some special war equipment would be better scrapped than an attempt made to alter it and use it in some other way. I would rather see the plants whose business it has been to make machinery for civilian use permitted to do that instead of attempting to alter war machinery. It is always a costly procedure when it is not done by private interests.
The minister has mentioned equipment of an amount of three or four billion dollars, but I suppose it may be twice that before this war is over. Prior to the outbreak of war the total production of Canada in a year was not much more than that. If this material and equipment is flooded on the market it will shut up every plant in Canada. I am sure the hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) does not want to see the fine plants in his riding closed up. There are too many of his supporters working in those plants, and there are many others overseas who will be coming back and wanting their former jobs. I think the same applies to every representative of an industrial area. I want to be sure that the marketing of this vast quantity of material will be done in an orderly manner and that no effort -null be made to glut the market simply to provide cheap material.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to explain the interjection I made a moment ago. The minister was speaking of the price at which the government sells cars to-day. He said they were sold at the ceiling price at the time of the manufacture of the car.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No; the ceiling price at the moment.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I interjected the remark, " plus certain charges." It may be only a matter of a difference of definition, but I had in mind the charges allowed, such as carrying and storage charges, from the time of manufacture to the time of sale.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No; I meant ceiling prices for used cars. There are ceiling prices for new cars and ceiling prices for used cars. There is a differential allowed which represents the cost of laying down the car in the area. I am very sorry to say I must take the train in twelve minutes from now. Would hon. members object if my able parliamentary assistant carries on? I may advise hon. members that he tells me the answers anyway, and he may as well give them to the committee direct.


Gordon Graydon: Open confession is good for the soul.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I believe that on a former
occasion-


Gordon Graydon: Do not let the minister miss the train.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He can go or not, as he wishes. On a former occasion the question was asked whether priority would be given farmers' organizations such as cooperatives in the matter of distributing among the farmers of Canada war material which will be useful to them. Earlier this evening the minister indicated that priorities may be given to provincial and municipal governments on materials useful to them. I wonder whether the consideration which the minister said would be given has been given, and with what results.


Mr. CHEVRIER:: I do not think there will be any difficulty as far as priorities are concerned. I know that one of the members of the board-I think it is Mr. Purdy-is well conversant with the pool interests of western Canada, and the representations which those organizations may make will receive consideration when the question of purchase comes about. There is too, of course, the question of government policy; the cabinet will make recommendation to the committee, who will also pass them on to the corporation. I believe that in that way the interests which my hon. friend has in mind will be protected.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The hon. member for Souris mentioned fire-fighting equipment. The A.R.P. at the present time have closed down a number of their units across Canada. In these units they have what they call trailer pumps. The small villages are anxious to get those small pumps; in fact I wrote in to the director of War Assets Corporation asking about trailer pumps; and I wonder if these are going to be disposed of. Are they being packed up now and being disposed of, or are they being held in those cities which have them?


Lionel Chevrier: That is an individual case with which I am not familiar. I shall be glad to ask the chairman of the allocation committee and tell my hon. friend; but I may say that, following the general principle of the legislation, the practice would be, after the recommendation has gone to the committee, to give a preference or a priority, as the minister has pointed out, first to the municipality, then to other' organizations in the community -farm organizations, I would take it-and lastly, I suppose, to the general public. But the particular case which my hon. friend has

Naval Service Act
mentioned and other like cases have been brought to the attention of the department. If my hon. friend wishes, I can obtain information on that particular case for him and pass it on to him.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I wish the parliamentary assistant would do so. These small villages are handicapped at the present time owing to the fact that they cannot get proper equipment, and they have had a number of fires. If the parliamentary assistant could find out what is being done, and whether these municipalities which have written have priority over the others, I should like to know that aisu.


Lionel Chevrier: I do not think that
because a municipality has written in, it should have any priority over another, but I believe it is the intention of the corporation, after it has been set up under the powers contained in the measure, to see to it that a priority be given to a municipality in a case such as my hon. friend has mentioned.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Where they need it.


Lionel Chevrier: In any event I will look into the matter and get the details.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Ralston (for the Minister of Munitions and Supply) thereupon moved for leave to introduce bill No. 137, respecting surplus crown assets.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



NAVAL SERVICE ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. ANGUS L. MACDONALD (Minister of National Defence for Naval Services) moved the second reading of bill No. 112, respecting the naval service of Canada.
Grote Stirling: Does the minister propose to make a statement at this stage?


Mr. MACDONALD (Kingston City):: I
should be glad to make a short statement on the principle of the bill. This is a measure to amend and consolidate the Naval Service Act, which was first passed in 1910 and which now appears as chapter 139 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927. In all the years since the first Canadian naval legislation was passed there have been but three very minor amendments of the act; and that, I think, is a'tribute to the vision of those who laid the foundation for the service we know to-day. However, needs and conditions have changed, and under
the acceleration provided by war conditions some changes are necessary and some of those changes ought to be made, I think, immediately.
The existing act was passed before Canadians had any extensive knowledge of naval warfare and before Canada had any fleet of her own. We can now lay claim to some considerable practical knowledge of naval affairs and naval administration. We find that some procedures required by the present act are rather clumsy; certain other procedures are inconvenient; still others are obsolete entirely.
The passage of the amendments which are proposed to the house will enable the naval authorities to reduce the great mass of legislation in one form or another which is now applicable to the naval service of Canada. At the present time the service is governed by a complex body of Canadian and British acts, regulations and orders which can be integrated only with the utmost difficulty even by legal specialists. I may say that there is no comparable complexity in the Royal Navy or in the United States navy, the two services with which we are best acquainted, and that is so mainly because the legislation applicable to these two great services is designed to fit their own requirements. With these amendments we hope to accomplish a similar result for the Canadian naval service.
The house probably will be surprised to know that the provisions applicable to the Canadian service are to be found in no fewer than eleven different sources. Eight of these are Canadian and three from the United Kingdom. Thus to understand properly the conditions governing the naval service one would have to know first of all the Naval Service Act. In the second place, one would have to be familiar with the Canadian naval regulations, then with Canadian naval orders, three volumes, then with the Canadian confidential naval orders, then with the regulations affecting the fleet reserve, then with the regulations affecting the Royal Canadian Naval Reserve, the regulations affecting the Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve, and1 finally the regulations affecting the W.R.C.N.S., or the Wrens as the organization is usually called.
There is a total of eight different sources to which one would have to look for the Canadian authority governing the naval service. But that is not all. Through the operation of section 45 of the present Naval Service Act, the following laws and regulations of the United Kingdom are in operation in so far as they are applicable to the Canadian service, and these United Kingdom regulations and laws are superimposed on all the
Naval Service Act

Canadian laws and regulations which I have mentioned. These United Kingdom laws and regulations are: The Naval Discipline Act of Great Britain passed in the year 1866, a fairly extensive act in itself; then there are King's Regulations and Admiralty Instructions, which are to be found in three volumes, and which contain something like 2,000 odd sections; and finally there are the Admiralty Fleet Orders, which up to the present are comprised in eight volumes.
That is a tremendous bulk of material for the personnel of the Canadian naval service to become familiar with, and in addition to that there is always the problem of deciding the application of this British legislation to situations that arise in the Canadian navy. There exists, as a further and very practical and pressing problem, the question of the constitutional right of Canada to adopt any part of the laws and regulations of the United Kingdom merely by future reference, as section 45 of the Naval Service Act of Canada proposes to do. Section 45 of the Naval Service Act states that the Naval Discipline Act of 1866, and the acts and amendments thereof passed by the parliament of the United Kingdom "for the time being in force," and so on, shall apply to the naval service. Now that phrase "for the time being in force" has given rise to considerable constitutional discussion in this country, and opinions have been given that no amendments or regulations passed since our statutes were revised in 1927 can be applicable at this time.
That is a brief outline of some of the difficulties. How do we propose to cure them? It is hoped that once the Naval Service Act of Canada is amended we shall be able to embody the Canadian law and the Canadian regulations in two volumes. First of all there will be the King's Regulations and Instructions for the government of the Canadian naval service, and that will be known by the short title of K.R. Can. (Navy). Then there will be, secondly, the Naval General Orders.
The amendments I am proposing by this bill will accomplish two general purposes. First, the amendments will affect some of the sections of the present Naval Service Act. These amendments will leave as much as possible of the present act untouched, and the changes suggested will merely be to simplify the administration of the act in the light of practical experience.
The second purpose that we have in mind is to provide Canadian legislation comparable with the British Naval Discipline Act of 1866. That purpose is carried out in part if of the bill, and the sections in this regard are to be found beginning on page 11 and

going on to the end of the bill. They are largely, almost entirely, simply an adaptation of the provisions of the British Naval Discipline Act, with a few minor changes to make the British provisions conform to Canadian terminology and Canadian legal practice.
I am of course in the hands of the house with regard to this bill, and I shall be glad to have any suggestions that may come from any quarter as to the proposals advanced.


Grote Stirling: I have read the bill and have listened to the minister's brief remarks. It is hardly to be wondered at that after thirty-four years the Naval Service Act of Canada requires revision. The purpose of the first part of this amending bill is thus to revise that act. The Royal Canadian Navy has passed through so many exigencies in that time, it has grown so magifi-cently, particularly in these latter years, that I can well understand the difficulties which have been entailed in endeavouring to administer the navy under the succession of pieces of legislation such as the minister has announced.
The introduction of the second part, in which the Naval Discipline Act of 1866 is replaced by part II of this bill, appears to me to be an admirable way of dealing with the situation. There is no reason at all, since the passing of the Act of Westminster, why we should turn any longer to the legislation of the United Kingdom, useful and helpful though that has been to us in the past. It is the minister's proposal that we shall dispense with all of that and incorporate in one bill, the Naval Service Act, all the necessary legislation. Any further remarks, notes of which I have made in many places in this bill, I shall reserve to the committee stage.


Douglas King Hazen: I understood the minister to
*say that when this bill passes, the law regarding the naval services of Canada would be embodied in two volumes: King's Regulations, which he described as K.R. Canada (Navy), and the Naval General Orders.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes.


Douglas King Hazen: Are those two volumes in existence now, or do they become effective after the act is passed?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister cannot answer that now.


Thomas Vien: We are on second reading now. That question may be asked when we get into committee.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mrs. Casselman in the chair.

Naval Service Act
Douglas King Hazen: May I now repeat the questions I addressed to the minister? I do not know whether I made them clear or not.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes; I think I understand. Perhaps if my hon. friend will look at the last clause of the bill, 124, he will find that:
This act shall come into force on a date to be fixed by proclamation of the governor in council published in the Canada Gazette.
That has been inserted for the very reason my hon. friend has in mind, namely, that after the bill is passed the regulations must still be drafted, and until the regulations are drafted we cannot do other than proceed in the old way. Once the regulations are finally drafted and approved by the governor in council it will then be time, and properly time, to bring this bill and regulations into effect at one and the same time.


Douglas King Hazen: In addition to the two volumes already mentioned, a considerable part of all of them regarding naval services will be contained in this bill we propose to pass. I see that there are two kinds of offences provided for and penalties imposed.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes; that is quite true. But I might say to my hon. friend that now the Canadian regulations are contained in a book of some 493 sections and there have been quite a few amendments to it; therefore there is a great deal of work to be done on the regulations when this bill becomes a statute.


Grote Stirling: That does not cover
K.R. Navy?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That does not cover a great man}' other things that we now get by reference to the British Naval Discipline Act and the King's Regulations and Instructions.


Douglas King Hazen: After these regulations are finally completed, hon. members will have no opportunity to pass upon them at all, as I understand it. It hardly seems to me that that is quite right.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The regulations, of course, under this bill will be made and agreed to either by the governor in council in the main matters or by the minister in certain other matters. They will not be formally passed by the house, no.


Grote Stirling: They will be published in
the Canada Gazette?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes.


Douglas King Hazen: I am more or less at sea in these matters. I do not know what these regulations will contain, but, of course, under our democratic form of government the members of this house are supposed to make the laws. These regulations are going to provide for offences and impose penalties. I think the members of the house should really have some say about it.
While I am on my feet I should like to refer to another matter. I am glancing hastily through this bill this evening. I see that it provides for courts-martial and for naval discipline or some other form of court, courts-martial and disciplinary courts. In addition to the courts-martial and the disciplinary courts, has any ranking naval officer authority to deal with any offences set out in this bill?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes.


Douglas King Hazen: Where do we find that?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: There is a provision that the captain of a ship can impose punishments.


Douglas King Hazen: I might call the minister's attention to section 88. I do not know if that has anything to do with it or not. I do not quite understand it.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No; section 88 is a general section, simply stating that unless there is some other express penalty provided the man shall be punished in accordance with the customs of the sea. If my hon. friend turns on he will find that the clauses dealing with courts-martial and disciplinary courts are sections 103 and 104. Section 103 deals with disciplinary courts and section 104 with courts-martial. If he follows down he will find that there is authority in one clause giving the master of a ship the right to deal with offenders and to impose imprisonment up to, I think, a term of three months; therefore, there is provision outside the courts-martial and the disciplinary courts.


Douglas King Hazen: Would the minister give us the number of that section?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Section 101, subsection 2, reads as follows:
Any offence not capital which is triable under this part, and (except in the cases by this
art expressly provided for) is not committed
y an officer, may, under such regulations as the minister from time to time issues, be summarily tried and punished by the officer in command of the ship to which the offender belongs. . . .
And so on. My hon. friend also asked about the regulations. Of course the regulations are laid before parliament within ten days after
Naval Service Act

being enacted, if parliament is sitting or, if parliament is not sitting, within ten days after the opening of parliament.


Douglas King Hazen: That does not give members of parliament any control over them.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: That is correct, but I do not think it would be possible to do so. If my hon. friend would look at the present Canadian naval regulations he would find that they deal with matters such as these, taking a few items at random: allowance for uniforms; transfer of personnel; arrangements for transportation; sick leave; stewards' fees; stoker ratings; specialists' allowances; shipwrights' pay; schoolmasters; repairs; retirement of officers; retirement of ratings, and so on. Those matters, while important in their own way, are hardly of sufficient importance to be in the statute. They belong properly in the regulations.


Douglas King Hazen: I appreciate that there would be no point in laying regulations of that kind before members of the house; but if any of these regulations provide for penalties and impose punishment, I think they should be laid before members of the house.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The scale of punishments is set forth under the Naval Discipline Act, where the offences are described and the punishments set out, and that will become part of the law of this country if this bill is passed. At present, however, we are invoking the traditions of laws made outside this country, with the passing of which laws we have had nothing whatever to do. As I say, the regulations will deal with minor matters such as pay, clothing, leave, retirement, promotion and so on, but the great, vital matters will be dealt with in this bill.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I wonder if when this bill was drafted any consideration was given to lessening the severity of the penalties set out. From what the minister has said I take it that this legislation is pretty well copying the British practice, but it does seem to me that the death penalty occurs a great many times in the pages of this bill. I recognize instantly the necessity of discipline in a service such as the navy, but at the same time it seems to me we should realize that with the march of history our armed services have become much more democratic. These armed services are now people's services, to which citizens go perhaps more than was the case years ago, and I suggest that some consideration might be given that point. As the minister has just said, these penalties are included in this bill and will become part of the lavy of this land
fMr. A. L. Macdonald.]
if parliament passes this measure. I am asking if any consideration was given to lessening the severity of the penalties, at least in certain cases.	'


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Certain penalties found in the British act have not been included here. For instance, there is penal servitude; that is a form of punishment unknown in this country. The punishment of flogging is not provided in this bill; but the other offences to which my hon. friend refers, those punishable by death, I think are treated in most services as very serious offences which may render the offender liable to the death penalty. Treason, for instance, is a capital crime under the laws of this country. So is murder; so is rape; so are certain other offences, such as desertion in the face of the enemy and perhaps one or two others. Generally speaking, I think this bill is in no respect more severe' and in some instances is less severe than the British act.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: When we were on the war appropriation resolution in 1942 I asked the minister if he had considered the possibility of this country having a seaman's manual of its own, instead of the out-dated manuals the boys have to use at the present time. At page 2295 of Hansard for that year I went on to say:
They are now using volume 1, 1937, and volume 2, 1938, and these volumes are unrevised.
Those are the British volumes, and I went on to s^y:
In the United States the navy department is issuing "Knight's Modern Seamanship", which is revised right up to March, 1942. That manual is right up to date; it covers everything, oil burners, depth charges, torpedoes, bombs, up-to-date anti-aircraft guns, and everything else.
The minister replied:
It is true that the seamanship manual used is the manual of 1937, as prepared by the British admiralty. It is not up to date, but after all is said and done we have turned out some pretty good seamen with this manual.
I acknowledged that fact, and later on the minister thanked me for my suggestion. I bring this matter up now because I want to ask the minister if he will not bring in a seamanship manual absolutely Canadian, to correspond with the regulations he is bringing in under this measure.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
shall be very glad to take that matter into consideration.


Howard Charles Green: In various sections of the
bill additional powers would appear to be given to the minister to make regulations.

Naval Service Act
whereas under the old act that power could be exercised only by the governor in council. Will the minister explain just what is the trend in that regard? Is it a fact that additional powers have been given to the minister?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: In
certain respects the minister is given more power than under the old Naval Service Act, but they are in what I would call very minor particulars. For example, in connection with regulations governing target practice, formerly the power was given to the governor in council. I think that matter is too trifling for the governor in council to bother with, and now it has been transferred to the minister. In a few other cases that will appear as we go along with the bill, power has been transferred; but I think in all major cases where power formerly rested with the governor in council, that power is retained.


Howard Charles Green: Section 9 deals wTith the terms and conditions of engagement of officers and seamen, and that is now left to the minister himself rather than to the governor in council. In section 38, which is a general section providing for regulations for carrying out the measure, and for the organization, training, discipline, efficiency, administration, and good government generally of the naval service, power to make those regulations has been taken away from the governor in council and given to the minister. Those sections go much farther than just passing regulations for target practice. It would seem there is a definite change by way of giving the minister much wider powers. I have nothing against the present minister, and I do not wish him to take my remarks that way. But we are finding this trend quite often nowadays. For example, in connection with the aeronautics bill we find the same position. There the Minister of Munitions and Supply is becoming a dictator. This practice goes one step farther even than running the country by order in council. This bill has the same trend, the running of things by the minister, himself, without having even the steadying influence of the whole cabinet. Why are these changes made in the case of the navy?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: First of all, in connection with section 9 of the bill, the old section read that the governor in council might authorize the engagement of officers and seamen in the naval service upon such terms and conditions as may be prescribed, without stating definitely who was to do the prescribing. The rvords "by the minister" have been inserted to clarify that situation. It does not mean that a power which formerly resided in the governor in
council is taken away from them. It means that a power which was more or less implied has now been placed in the minister.
Then, with regard to section 38, the hon. member says that there, again, the minister is given additional power. I do not think a careful reading of the section will bear out that contention. The section states:
Except where by this act the governor in council is empowered to make regulations, the minister may make, regulations . . .
And so on. Any place where the governor in council has power or authority under the act on major matters, he still retains it. But there may be some cases where authority is expressly vested in nobody, and in such cases it is felt that the minister should have power to deal with such matters.


Howard Charles Green: Is not the effect of the section that, of cutting down the number of instances in which the governor in council will make regulations? As the section read formerly, all the power was given to the governor in council. But now the governor in council has only certain specified powers. Whatever powers are not specified as being exercised by them are now exercisable by the minister. In other words, he exercises all the residual powers. Surely it is true that that means that the minister will have a great deal more power than he had before.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: It depends upon how closely the powers have been divided. I think they have been divided very carefully. This bill has been drawn up by expert draftsmen, and the powers have been specifically apportioned, some to the governor in council and some to the minister. Then, to make abundantly sure, it was felt that there should be a general section in case some power had to be exercised without any particular authority being named to exercise it. That power was given to the minister.
I can say to the hon. member, however, that I think governors in council and ministers are bothered too much with detail. If we expect the governor in council, particularly in this time of war, to deal with petty matters such as it has to deal with, involving $2 here or So there, it seems to me totally ridiculous.


Howard Charles Green: Of course this bill will carry over into peace-time.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes, but at no time should the governor in council or the cabinet have to sit down and trouble themselves with trifles. They have to deal with great and important matters. Minor regulations should be dealt with by the departmental head, deputy ministers, or even
Naval Service Act

officials lower than that. I am afraid the tendency to-day is to throw too much on cabinets, instead of placing responsibility where a lot of it ought to be, namely, on the ministers and departments.


Howard Charles Green: What power has the minister now to make regulations-before the passing of this measure?
Mr.	MACDONALD	(Kingston	City):
Under the present act certain powers are not specified to anyone. Under section 5 the minister is given control and administration of all naval affairs. Under section 6 he is given control and management of all naval establishments and ships. Then he is given further powers under section 34.


Howard Charles Green: That is the old section. What does it enable him to do?
Mr.	MACDONALD	(Kingston	City):Sections	5 and 6 give	the minister	general
control and management of naval affairs, naval establishments and naval ships. Then section 34 is the one which deals with target practice.
Mr.	GREEN: None	of them gives him
power to make regulations.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: This book of Canadian naval regulations contains many regulations now made by the minister. Some are made by the governor in council, and others are merely copies of sections of the statute which are considered applicable. But there are a great many regulations here which the minister has made by himself.


Howard Charles Green: Perhaps he has been making them without authority.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I hope not.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2-Definitions.
Grote Stirling: I notice that paragraph (f) changes "seaman" to "man", for reasons explained on the opposite page. I am wondering if there is any reference to the Women's Royal Canadian Naval Service, or whether they come under the composite title "man".


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
am glad the hon. member has raised that question. If he will look at section 22 of the bill he will find under the heading "naval volunteer reserve" these words:
22. The naval volunteer reserve shall consist of officers and men raised by voluntary engagement from among seafaring persons-
The word "persons" is used there deliberately to permit the inclusion of the WRCNS.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Paragraph (a) states:
(a) "active service" as applied to a person in the naval forces means service or duty during an emergency.
Then, further down:
(d) "emergency" means war . . .
And so on. Does this apply to boys in training in the different camps or training centres in Canada, or does it apply to those who are on ships?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: What section is my hon. friend reading from?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Section 2, paragraph (a).	'


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Every one in the navy is now on active service.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Whether they are in a training camp or on a ship?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Yes; that is right.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Why is paragraph (g) not in the same position as paragraph (c)? Paragraph (c) refers to deputy minister, whereas paragraph (g) refers to minister, and it strikes me that the minister ought to come first.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: They are arranged alphabetically.


Grote Stirling: Does the minister consider that the women in the Women's Royal Canadian Naval Service are taken care of by the explanation he has given? Over and over again the word "man" appears in the bill; does he suggest that the use of the word "persons" in section 22 gives the necessary authority to deal with these women where a man, a petty officer or officer is referred to throughout the bill?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The draftsmen advise me that under the Interpretation Act, which applies to this bill and to all the regulations under it, the word "man" would be taken to include women, apart altogether from the use of the word "persons" which, of course, includes both men and women.


Gordon Graydon: If that interpretation is to be carried out then the provision for equal pay for women would automatically come in. If the minister is going to give us that definition now, perhaps we may expect that from now on the Wrens will get equal pay. with the men.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
expected that my hon. friend would take that

Naval Service Act
ground, since he has taken it consistently throughout the session. The matter is one I must discuss with my senior colleagues, the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of National Defence for Air.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps this will be an easy way for both the ministry and the opposition to let the women in the forces in on an equal basis?


Howard Charles Green: Paragraph (e) in section 2 reads:
"general orders" means orders and instructions issued to the naval forces by the minister or under his authority.
Who would be able to issue orders under the authority of the minister? Why should that not be done by the minister himself or someone acting as the minister?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: There are many cases where the minister must delegate to someone, perhaps on the coast or in Newfoundland or in Londonderry, the power to do something. He, of course, would have to confine himself to those things which he had the right to delegate. There might be cases where it would be very convenient to the minister to delegate powers to make certain orders.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 3, 4 and 5 agreed to.
On section 6-Rates of pay.
Grote Stirling: The explanation reads:
There is no corresponding section in the present act, but rates of pay and allowances have always been and should, it is considered, continue to be fixed by order in council.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: Rates of pay of ratings and officers have been the subject of order in council. I think that is one responsibility that should rest there. When you begin to regulate the pay of thousands of men-it is now about 90,000 men and officers- it is perhaps well that the governor in council should be the one to fix the rates. That has always been the case and it is being continued.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is subject to treasury board now.


Gordon Graydon: That is the shadow that falls over everything.


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The treasury board considers the matter and passes its minute which is approved by the council as a whole. The treasury board has not the final word in these matters.
On section 7-Chief of the Naval Staff.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Is the chief officer in the British service and in the United States service a rear admiral?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: No; they are of higher rank. It says, "not lower in rank, than rear admiral." His title is now changed to "chief of the naval staff" instead of "director of naval services." That has been the title ever since I came here and I think it is a much better one.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
On section 8-Permanent naval force.
Howard Charles Green: Is the minister in a position to give us any more details than he did during the discussion of his war appropriations, with regard to plans for a permanent navy after the war?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
think I intimated at that time that there was authority from the cabinet to have a navy of some eight or nine thousand men after the war. That is the only authority we have, and I cannot add anything to what I said when the war appropriation bill was under discussion.


Gordon Graydon: I suppose it will depend upon how far Canada commits herself in connection with the world organization with respect to an international police force?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: I
fancy that would have some bearing.


Grote Stirling: That was the understanding arrived at some years ago, was it not?


Angus Lewis Macdonald: The complement was arrived at in 1941.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Progress reported.
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Friday, June 9, 1944