1944-03-20

[Stage Direction]
On the order of motions:
lion. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence): Mr. Speaker, I have an announcement with regard to the army which I consider sufficiently important to make at this time. I have to inform the house that Lieutenant-General H. D. G. Crerar, CD., D.S.O., has been appointed to command the First Canadian Army. General Crerar took over this morning from Lieutenant-General Kenneth Stuart, C.B., D.S.O., M.C. Lieutenant-General Stuart is chief of staff at Canadian military headquarters, and has also been holding temporarily the post, of army commander, in which he has given exceptionally fine service. General Stuart will continue in his substantive post as chief of staff at Canadian military headquarters. General Crerar, along with his own wide experience and his high qualities as a soldier, becomes heir to the results of the labours of General McNaughton and the tens of thousands of officers and men who, like him, have worked unselfishly to bring the army organization to effective battle worthiness.
I have already placed on record in Hansard the recognition and deep appreciation of the government and the people of Canada, as expressed by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) himself, of the outstanding service which General McNaughton has rendered to the army and to Canada as commander of the First Division, the Canadian Corps, and then the First Canadian Army.
I cabled General Crerar last night expressing every confidence in his leadership, and in the determination and fighting qualities of the army under his command. At the same time I sent to him and to them the heartfelt wishes of all Canadians for great success. I am sure that the house and the country will join very heartily in that expression of confidence and sincere good wishes.

Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: I desire to lay on the table the annual report of Trans-Canada Air Lines for the year ending December 31, 1943. I move:
That this report be referred to the standing committee on railways and shipping owned, operated and controlled by the government.
Copies of the report are being distributed to hon. members this afternoon.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the order for motions:
Mr. JEAN-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): Mr. Speaker, under the item for motions we find this paragraph:
Further consideration in committee of the whole of the report of the special committee on the revision of standing orders.
As this item constitutes an amendment to the statute of the House of Commons, will it be possible for the government to give sufficient notice to members to be present when this whole matter with regard to the rules of the house is discussed? At the last sitting the senior minister told us that the amendments to the rules may be taken up at any time. That does not seem reasonable, and I hope the Prime Minister will give ample opportunity to all members so that we may know when the matter will be referred again to committee of the whole.
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I am as anxious as can be to meet the wishes of hon. members. But it is obviously quite impossible to attempt to satisfy everyone in the matter of the time at which certain measures may be taken up. As my hon. friend knows, members are expected to be in the house at all times. The government must proceed on that basis. Notice is given in advance, where it is possible to do so, in order to further the convenience of hon. members. But that is wholly a matter of accommodation, so far as it can reasonably be carried out. There may be many occasions when this cannot be done. Beyond that I do not think the government should be expected to go in seeking to indicate the hour or day at which particular measures may be taken up.



EXCHEQUER COURT ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 35, to amend the Exchequer Court Act.
He said: This is a proposal that, if the business makes it necessary, the governor in council be authorized to appoint an additional judge of the exchequer court. For the last couple of years the work of the court has been unusually heavy, and it is contemplated that the problem of adjudicating upon relations between companies that have received capital assistance, and others engaged in war work, will be a heavy task. It was thought it would be wise to propose to parliament
[Stage Direction]
Questions
[Stage Direction]
that provision be made for the appointment of a third judge if the work of the court appears to make that necessary.
Mr. GRAYDON:: Is there any suggestion that the divorce jurisdiction now exercised by parliament is likely to be transferred to the exchequer court?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: No such suggestion s contained in this bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



WATER METERS INSPECTION


[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. W. G. GIBSON (Minister of National Revenue) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 36, to repeal the Water Meters Inspection Act.
Gordon Graydon: We had better have an explanation of this.


Mr. GIBSON:: The act to be repealed was assented to in 1905, but was not to be effective until proclaimed by the governor general. In 1927, when the committee was preparing the revision, of the statutes, it dropped the clause requiring proclamation, and so by error the act became law. It has remained on the statute book ever since, although it has never been actually administered.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CRIMINAL CODE


[Stage Direction]
Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 37, to amend the criminal code.
He said: This bill proposes an amendment to the criminal code by adding a new section, 318-A, to come after section 318, to prevent public utterances or the dissemination of material calculated or likely to cause discrimination or disharmony on account of race or religion. The utterance for publication of such statements tends to set race against race and religious groups against religious groups. The intention is to make such action illegal in the interest of unity and harmony among the people of Canada, irrespective of race or religion.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. QUESTIONS
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk)

Mr. MACKENZIE (Lambton-Kent):: 1.	Has J. L. Cohen, K.C.. of Toronto, been engaged in an official capacity by the government of Canada or any agency thereof since the beginning of the present war?

2.	If so, what were his duties?
3.	What did he receive from the public
treasury in, (a) salary and/or per diem allowances; (b) living expenses and/or travelling expenses?	.
4.	Were any accounts rendered by the said J. L. Cohen, K.C., considered excessive by the department of government concerned?
5.	If so, were the accounts reduced from the total amounts submitted, and by how much?
6.	If on salary for any particular government position, did the said J. L. Cohen, K.C., devote his full time to the position?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	(i) Mr. J. L. Cohen, K.C., served on various boards of conciliation and investigation under the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act during fiscal years 1940-41 and 1941-42.
(ii)	Mr. Cohen also was a member of the National War Labour Board from February 11, 1943, to September 9, 1943.
2.	(i) Mr. Cohen performed the normal functions of a member of boards of conciliation and investigation.
(ii) During the period Mr. Cohen served as a member, the National War Labour Board was charged with administration of the wartime wages control order, P.C. 5963 as amended by P.C.1141, of the order in council P.C. 7679 and of the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act, 1935, as well as the supervision of the regional war labour boards.
3.	(i) As member of various boards of conciliation and investigation under Industrial Disputes Investigation Act during fiscal years 1940-41 and 1941-42: (a) Per diem allowances, $6.920.00; (b) Living expenses and/or travelling expenses, $2,918.57; (20 different boards).
(ii) As a member of the National War Labour Board:	(a) Salary, $5,664.56;	(b)
Living expenses and/or travelling expenses, $3,176.09.
4.	Yes.
5.	Yes. Reduced as follows:
Date of	Submitted	Reduced	Paidaccount	at	by	atFeb. 28/43.	... $ 476 07	$ 1 40	$ 474 67Mar. 31/43.	... 766 07	* 137 06	629 01Apr. 30/43.	... 363 00	25	362 75May 31/43.	... 467 31	12 70	454 61June 30/43.	... 399 09	1 95	397 14Aug. 31/43.	... 444 86	54 51	390 35$2,916 40	$207 87	$2,708 536. While	serving as	a member	of the
National War Labour Board Mr. Cohen occupied a salaried position and devoted his full time thereto.
Excess due to an obvious error of which Mr. Cohen was unaware.

Questions



CANADIAN PACIFIC AIR LINES - LICENCES TO OPERATE AIR ROUTES

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	How many applications for licences to
operate air routes have been received from Canadian Pacific Air Lines since January 1, 1943?	.
2.	What routes are named in these applications?
3.	Have any of these applications been granted? If so, which ones?
4.	What is the status of any applications not yet granted?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	Twenty-eight.
2.	A. Old routes applied for:
(i)	Regina-North Battleford with points of call at Moose Jaw, Saskatoon and Prince Albert.
(ii)	Vancouver-Victoria.
(iii)	Senneterre-Waswanipi with points of call at Cameron Lake and Madeleine Lake.
(iv)	Roberval-Mistassini with points of call at Chamouchouane Lake, Chigobiche Lake, Dolbeau, Lac aux Dores, Lake Bourdeau, Lake Chibougamau, Nikabau Lake, Opemiska Lake, Rush Lake, St. Felicien, Wakonichi Lake, P.Q.
(v)	Prinoe Albert-Goldfields with points of call at Big River, Buffalo Narrows, Buffalo River, Clear Lake, Contact Lake, Cree Lake, Dore Lake, Fond du Lac, Foster Lakes, lie a la Crosse, Lac la Ronge, La Loche, La Plonge-Beauval, Montreal Lake, Pine River, Souris, Stanley Mission, Stony Rapids, Sulphide Lake, Saak.
(vi)	Vancouver-Zeballos with points of call at Ceepeecee, Chamiss Bay, Esparanza, McBride Bay (Port Tahsis), Nanaimo, Nootka, Port Alberni, Tofino, Ucluelet.
(vii)	Prince George-Watson Lake with points of call at Finlay Forks, Fort Graham, Fort Ware, Lower Post, McLeod Lake.
(viii)	Vancouver-Port Alice with points of call at Alert Bay, Campbell River, Coal Harbour, Englewood, Port Hardy, Port McNeill, Powell River, Quatsino, Rock Bay, Sayward.
(ix)	Vancouver-Whitehorse-Dawson with points of call at Carmacks, Fort Nelson, Fort St. John, Lower Post, B.C., Mayo, Y.T., Prince George, B.C., Selkirk, Teslin, Y.T., Watson Lake, Williams Lake, B.C.
(x)	Edmonton - Whitehorse - Dawson with points of call at Carmacks, Dawson Creek, B.C., Fort Nelson, Fort St. John, B.C., Grande Prairie, Alta., Lower Post, B.C., Mayo, Y.T., Peace River, Alta., Selkirk, Teslin, Watson Lake, Y.T.
(xi)	Prince George-Takla Landing with points of call at Aiken Lake, Bear Lake, Fort St. James, Germansen Lake, Germansen Land-
100-'03 J
ing, Manson Creek, McConnell Creek, Pinchi Lake, Thutade Lake, Two Brothers Lake, Uslika, B.C.
(xii)	Edmonton-Goldfields, Cameron Bay Aklavik with points of call at Arctic Red River, N.W.T., Bitumount, Alta., Blue Lake, B.C., (Port Radium) and/or Labine Point, N.W.T., Carcajou, Chipewyan, Alta., Coppermine, N.W.T., Embarrass, Fitzgerald, Alta., Fond du Lac. Sask., Fort Nelson, Fort St. John, B.C., Fort Smith, N.W.T., Fort Vermilion, Alta., Good Hope, Gordon Lake, Hay River, N.W.T., Keg River, Lac la Biche, Alta., Liard, N.W.T., McMurray, Alta., McPherson, N.W.T., Nelson Forks, B.C., Norman and/or Norman Wells, N.W.T., North Wabiskaw Lake. Alta., Outpost Island, N.W.T., Peace River, Alta., Providence, Rae, N.W.T., Red Fern Lake, B.C., Red River, Alta., Resolution, Rocher River, Simpson, South Nahanni, N.W.T., South Wabiskaw Lake, Alta., Stony Rapids, Sask., Taltson River, N.W.T., Tuchodi Lake, B.C., Waterways, Alta., Wrigley, Yellowknife, N.W.T.
(xiii)	The Pas-Flin Flon-Brochet with points of call at Cormorant Lake, Cranberry Portage, Man., Cumberland House, Sask., Elbow Lake, Gurney Gold (Brune Lake), Man., Halfway Island, Sask., Herb Lake, Man., Island Falls, Sask., North Star Lake, Man., Pelican Narrows, Sask., Pukatawagan, Reed Lake, Sherridon, Man., South End, Sturgeon Landing, Sask.
(xiv)	Winnipeg and/or Lac du Bonnet, Ken-ora-Pickle Lake, Norway House-Ilford with points of call at Berens River, Beresford Lake, Birk Lake, Blissett, Man., Casummit Lake, Cole, Ont., Cross Lake, Man., Deer Lake, Ont., Diana, Man., Doghole Bay, Favourable Lake, Ont., God's Lake, Man., Golden Arm, Gold Pines, Ont., Halfway Lake, Island Lake, Man., Jackson Manion, Ont., Knee Lake, Little Grand Rapids, Man., Madsen, Ont., Maskwa, Man., McKenzie Island, Minaki, Northwind Lake, Ont., Oxford House, Man., Red Lake, Sachigo, Sandy Lake, Sioux Lookout and/or Hudson, Swain Post, Uchi Lake and/or Lost Bay, Ont., Wadhope, Wallace Lake, Man.
(xv)	Kenora-Straw Lake with points of call at Flint Lake, Populous Lake, Rowan Lake, Whitefish Bay, Witch Bay, Ont.
(xvi)	Kenora

Red Lake with points of call at Minaki, Madson, McKenzie Island, Golden Arm, Cole.
(xvii)	Winnipeg or Lac du Bonnet-Hudson with points of call at Sioux Lookout, Uchi Lake, Jackson Manion, Swain Post, Casummit Lake, Golden Pine, Red Lake, McKenzie Island, Golden Arm, Madsen Cole.
(xviii)	Hudson-Pickle Lake with points of
call at Sioux Lookout, Doghole Bay, Uchi Lake, Lost Bay.	[DOT]	;
Questions

B. New routes applied for:
(xix)	Edmonton-North Battleford with point of call at Vermilion as an extension of the Regina-North Battleford route.
(xx)	Saint John-Halifax.
(xxi)	Toronto, Hamilton, St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, Fort Erie, Welland, St. Thomas, Chatham, Windsor, Sarnia, London, Woodstock, Galt, Brantford, Paris, Stratford, Waterloo, Kitchener, Guelph.
(xxii)	Port Alice and Prince Rupert.
(xxiii)	Toronto, Montreal, Cornwall, Brock-ville, Gananoque, Kingston, Belleville, Trenton, Peterborough, Lindsay and Oshawa.
(xxiv)	Montreal, Ottawa and Rouyn.
(xxv)	Toronto, Sudbury, North Bay, Hailey-bury, Kirkland Lake, Timmins, Porquis Junction and Rouyn/Noranda.
(xxvi)	Port Arthur, Sioux Lookout.
(xxvii)	The Pas and Winnipeg, Manitoba.
(xxviii)	Sydney, New Glasgow, Truro, Halifax, Kentville, Yarmouth, Saint John, Fredericton, Edmundston, Mont Joli and Rimouski.
3.	Yes. Licences have been issued for the
following routes by the Department of Transport and the Board of Transport Commissioners:	(1) Senneterre-Waswanipi; (2)
Roberval-Mistassini; (3) Vancouver-Victoria; (4) Regina-North Battleford.
Licences have been issued for the following by the Board of Transport Commissioners only: (1) Prince Albert-Goldfields; (2) Van-couver-Zeballos; (3) Prince George-Watson Lake; (4) Vancouver-Port Alice.
4.	AH outstanding applications to operate air routes are being held on file for future consideration.



FATS FROM BEEF CATTLE

Mr. SENN:: 1.	Is it compulsory for wholesale butchers when slaughtering beef cattle to deliver up all the fat produced?
2.	If so, to whom must such delivery be made, and at what price?
3.	What use is made of such fat when delivered?
4.	What is the price paid for fats resulting from the slaughter of beef cattle destined for use in the manufacture of explosives?-


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	By order No. 231 of the wartime prices
and trade board, slaughterers are required to remove certain fats from carcasses of beef at time of slaughter. Slaughterers have the option of selling such fats: (a) in the raw state at maximum prices fixed by administrator's order A-S49 of the wartime prices and trade board;
(b)	in the rendered state at maximum prices fixed by administrator's order A-426 of the wartime prices and trade board.
[Mr. Chevrier.J
2.	See answer to question No. 1. Prices of raw fats vary for the different kinds and for the different zones defined in administrator's order A-849; prices of rendered fats vary for the different kinds and grades and for the different zones defined in administrator's order A-426.
3.	Raw or rendered fats may be sold through retail channels for household culinary purposes. If fats are produced under government inspection they may also be sold to manufacturers of shortening. If they are not produced under government inspection they can be sold for any of the following uses:
(a)	soap; (b) lubrication; (c) tanning; (d) fatty acids; (e) chemical oils and fats.
4.	See answer to question No. 2.



BONUS ON WESTERN BEEF

Mr. SENN:: 1.	What is the amount per hundredweight paid by way of bonus on beef moving from Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta?
2.	Is there any bonus on movement of live cattle from western Canada?
3.	Has any bonus been allotted or paid to sastern farmers who purchase western cattle "or feeding in the east?
4.	If so, to whom is the bonus on western jeef paid?
5.	Is the bonus paid only on beef from cattle killed in the west?
6.	What is the total amount of bonus paid to date on western beef moving to the east?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	The subsidy on movements of dressed beef from certain areas of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta to eastern destinations (zones 10, 11 and 12 to zones 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 as defined in Order 194 of the wartime prices and trade board) has been suspended on all shipments on and after March 18, 1944. The subsidy was not payable on the basis of a fixed rate per hundredweight. The subsidy payable has been the amount by which initial icing or insulating charges (not exceeding S15 per carload), icing charges en route and rail freight charges at carload rates exceed the difference between the value of the dressed beef moved calculated at the maximum selling price in the zone of delivery, and the value calculated at the maximum price in the zone in which the shipment originated. Where such beef is shipped in a mixed car, initial icing or insulating charges and icing charges en route have been recognized to the extent of the ratio between the amount of dressed beef to the total amount of goods carried in that car.
2.	No.
3.	No.
4.	See answers to questions 1 and 3.

Questions
5.	The subsidy on dressed beef is paid to shippers, on shipments from the areas described in section 1 above only.
6.	The amount of subsidy paid on dressed beef to Feb. 29, 1944 was $293,506.20.



LABOUR CONDITIONS-RADIO COMMENTATORS

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	Under the ruling of the national war labour board respecting wage and salary increase, do all radio commentators come within the class of the "uncontrolled and legally uncontrollable section of the community"?
2.	If not, how many do?
3.	What is the "uncontrolled and legally uncontrollable section of the community"?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	Decisions of the national war labour board respecting wage increases are arrived at on the basis of specific applications made to the board covering the employees of a particular employer. As the wartime wages control order applies only to employees of or below the rank of foreman or comparable rank and does not apply to individuals who may be independent contractors rather than engaged in an employee relationship, whether or not a particular radio commentator was subject to the wartime wages control order would depend upon his or her comparable rank and upon the conditions of service.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	The expression mentioned has reference only to individuals such as doctors, lawyers and others who are neither "employees" nor "salaried officials" within the meaning of the wartime wages control order and the wartime salaries order respectively, and whose remuneration is not subject to the provisions of either the orders mentioned.



INDIAN AFFAIRS-DR. F. PORTH

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Is Dr. F. Porth in the employ of the Indian Affairs branch of the government?
2.	If so, (a) what was the date of his appointment; (b) what is his salary; (c) what are his duties?	,	,	, ,
3.	Has Mrs. F. Porth been employed by the
Indian Affairs branch at any time since January 1, 1940?	_	,	.	,
4.	If so, what remuneration has she received, and for what services?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	Yes.
2.	(a) Accounts paid since March, 1940;
(b)	Not oni salary; paid for services rendered up to $250 a month; (c) To supply medical attention to the Brokenhead reserve, Clande-boye Agency; in charge of medical work at Fort Alexander reserve and Fort Alexander Hospital at Pine Falls, Manitoba.
3.	No.
4.	Answered by No. 3.



ORDERS IN COUNCIL

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: How many orders in council have been passed,
(a)	since the beginning of the war; (b) since the present session of parliament has commenced?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: (a)	Since the beginning of the war (September 10, 1939 to March 15, 1944), 42,398 orders in council and 23,287 minutes of treasury board have been passed.
(b)	Since the present session of parliament has commenced (January 28, 1944 to March 15, 1944), 1,186 orders in council and 850 minutes of treasury board have been passed.



SOLDIER SETTLEMENT

Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	How many disabled veterans of the present ivar have applied for land under the Soldier Settlement Act?
2.	How many disabled veterans have been allocated to other districts than their own locality in order to receive the benefits of climate in alleviating the disability? -


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	Veterans of the present war are not eligible for assistance under the Soldier Settlement Act but may apply for establishment under the Veterans' Land Act, 1942. Up to January 31, 1944, six hundred and seventy-one applications for qualification had been received under the Veterans' Land Act. Applicants with pensionable disabilities are not segregated from non-pensioners for statistical purposes, but under present administrative policy of limited establishments made necessary by the shortage of new machinery and of seasoned lumber for building purposes, pensioners or veterans who are otherwise confronted with exceptional circumstances are being given prior consideration.
2.	Disabled veterans in common with other veterans who are qualified for establishment under the Veterans' Land Act are not allocated arbitrarily to properties or localities by the director of the act but have the right of choice subject to their being qualified for the enterprise in which they wish to engage and to the suitability of the land on which they wish to be settled.



KOOTENAY-FLORENCE MINE, B.C.

Mr. ESLING:: 1.	What price did the government pay for the Kootenay-Florence mine on Kootenay lake, B.C.?
2.	From whom was the mine purchased?
3.	What has been the expenditure for developing mine and mill to 31st December, 1943?
4.	What was the production of concentrates to 31st December, 1943, (a) to what point were
Questions

these concentrates shipped; (b) what price was received for the lead and zinc contents; (c) what price was received for the silver content, if any?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	The government did not purchase the mine but is paying a royalty to Florence Mining Company, Limited, for metals produced.
2.	Answered by one.
3.	By the government, $181,681.
4.	861-5 tons of zinc concentrate containing 863,569 pounds of zinc; 387-4 tons of lead concentrate containing 462,974 pounds of lead;
(a)	The concentrates were shipped to the order of the United States government through its agent the Metals Reserve Company;
(b)	Final settlement includes cost of production plus a royalty; (c) No payment was received on account of the silver content.



CANADIAN FORCES-SKILLED TRADESMEN

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	How many skilled tradesmen have been enlisted in each of the armed services?
2.	What is the percentage to the total enlistments in each service?


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: The information the hon. member desires is not available. Men are not enlisted as skilled tradesmen, they are enlisted as artillerymen or infantrymen, as the case may be. There is no record which enables us to give the hon. member the information that he has asked for so far as the army is concerned.



COAL PRODUCTION-NATIONAL EMERGENCY

Mr. HURTUBISE:: When did the government declare coal to be a national emergency?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: On November 23, 1942, P.C. 10674 was passed establishing an emergency coal production board on the advice of the coal administrator that a national -emergency in respect to the production of coal existed.
On May 17, 1943, P.C. 4091 was tabled authorizing the issue of a proclamation declaring that a state of national emergency in respect to the production of coal existed. (Page 2701, Hansard, 1943.)



COAL PRODUCTION-MAN-POWER

Joseph Raoul Hurtubise: What actions were taken by the government with a view to providing additional workers in the coal mines?


Mr. MARTIN:: (a)	Under arrangements between Department of National Defence and Department of Labour, coal miners receive special consideration for postponement of military service.
(b)	Personnel of armed services in Canada with coal mining expeiience are granted leave of absence (without pay and allowances) if willing to return to the coal mines; in certain instances they are granted discharge from the armed forces. (Such personnel are encouraged by both national defence and selective service officers to return to the coal mines).
(c)	Under instructions of national selective service, permits are not issued for coal miners to seek any other employment.
(d)	Order in council P.C. 4092 issued in May 1943 requires ex-coal mine workers to return to the mines regardless of present civilian occupations. They are guaranteed full employment.
(e)	Orders in council P.C. 4861, June 17, 1943 and P.C. 6077, July 29, 1943 give national selective service officers authority to direct any male person over 16 years and less than 65 years of age, to accept and enter specified employment in coal mining.
(f)	Order in council P.C. 121, January 1944, provides that no person engaged as a coal mine worker will be accepted prior to August 1, 1944 for enlistment in any branch of the armed services, except under permit issued by a national selective service officer.



COAL PRODUCTION-MAN-POWER.

Joseph Raoul Hurtubise: What have been the results of any actions taken by the government regarding increasing man-power in the mines?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The increases in the number of employees in the coal mines under the various government actions have been:
(a)	Ex-coal miners returned from armed services to coal mines to February 15, 1,955.
(b)	Ex-coal mine workers returned to mines under P.C. 4092 to January 15, 2,180.
(c)	Persons directed to mines under P.C. 4861 and P.C. 6077 to January 15, 480.
(d)	Others were employed by mine operators in the ordinary course, and certain employees were dropped from their payrolls for various reasons.
(e)	Net Result: Number of coal mine workers on payrolls June 1, 1943, was 24,864 and at January 15, 1944, was 28,526, an increase of 3,662 workers or 14-7 per cent.

Questions



INDIANS-SERVICE IN ARMED FORCES

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	What is the total number of Indians serving in the armed forces of Canada?
2.	What is the number according to province or military district?


Mr. CRERAR:: 1.	2,383 enlisted Indians (as at February 15, 1944).
2.	Enlisted Indians, by provinces (as at February 15, 1944): Prince Edward Island, 24; Nova Scotia, 92; New Brunswick, 166; Quebec, 164; Ontario, 1,062; Manitoba, 156; Saskatchewan, 382; Alberta, 87; British Columbia, 243; Northwest Territories, 0; Yukon Territory, 7.



WOOL PRICES SINCE 1930

Mr. FAIR:: What is the price for the best grade of wool in Canada each year since 1930?


Mr.   MacICINNON@Edmonton West: Annual prices of wool in Canada, 1930-February, 1944:
Raw Wool, per pound in quantities of 20,000 pounds or more, f.o.b. Ontario points
	Eastern	Western
	wool, bright	domestic
	low medium	semi-bright
	i blood	| blood
	Staple or 50's	Staple or 56's
1930 	
SO-179	SO-1631931 	
0-143	0-1261932 	
0-103	0-0901933 	
0-137	0-1451934 	
0-181	0-1901935 	
0-153	0-1511936 	
0-208	0-2041937 	
0-292	0-2581938 	
0-168	0-1611939 	
0-193	0-1911940 	
0-303	0-2731941 	
0-310	0-2801942 	
0-310	0-2801943 	
Q-310	0-2801944	January-February 0-310	0-280
Note.-These are the best grades of eastern and western wool for which prices are available since 1930. The price differential in favour of eastern quarter blood is related to its lower shrinkage. Under terms of order in council P.C. 1-2519 a bonus of 4 cents per pound was authorized on all standard grades of Canadian unwashed fleece wool from the 1943 clip. This amount is not included in the above prices.
An extension of the bonus arrangement to cover 1944 has been authorized by order in council P.C. 2-1000.
In 1943 highest maximum price authorized for established grades was 33 cents per pound for eastern and 29 cents per pound for western wool.



FARM LOAN BOARD-LOANS, OPERATING COSTS, ETC.

Mr. WOOD:: 1.	How much money has the Canadian farm loan board loaned by provinces from its inception of operations in 1929 to March 31, 1943?
2.	What is the source from which the Canadian farm loan board obtains such funds for loaning purposes?
3.	What is the total amount of money borrowed by the board to March 31, 1943?
4.	What rate of interest does the board pay on its borrowed moneys?
5. What is the present rate of interest charged by the Canadian farm loan board,
(a) on first mortgages;	(b) on second mortgages?
6.	Has the board repaid any of the borrowed moneys? If so, how much?
7.	(a) How many outstanding loans were on the books of the board in each province as of March 31 for each of the years 1939 to 1943;
(b)	what was the amount repaid on principal and interest by borrowers in each province in each of the fiscal years 1939 to 1943?
8.	Does the provincial government of the province of Quebec pay any portion of interest due by its farmer borrowers to the Canadian farm loan board? If so, at what rate?
9.	What were the total amounts of revenue producing assets under the board's administration for each of the last five fiscal years?
10.	What were the total operating costs of the board in each of the last five fiscal years?
11.	What were the board's reserves as of March 31, 1943?
12.	How does the board provide for reserves and operating costs?


Mr. ABBOTT:: The following reply is furnished by the Canadian Farm Loan Board:
1. British Columbia	 $ 2,618,144
Alberta	  9,019,771
Saskatchewan	 8,049,528
Manitoba	 5,822,469
Ontario	 6,025,110
Quebec	 13,631,762
New Brunswick	 1,188,769
Nova Scotia	 1,580,627
Prince Edward Island	 1,215,006
Total	 $49,151,186
2.	By proceeds of sale of Canadian Farm Loan Board bonds to the Dominion Government and from loan repayments.
3.	$35,250,000.
Questions

4.	3| per cent.
5.	(a) 5 per cent; (b) 6 per cent.
6.	Yes-$8,000,000.
Province	March 31/39	March 31/40British Columbia.	750	839Alberta	3,558	3,995Saskatchewan	2,998	3,358Manitoba 	2,009	2,204Ontario 	1,845	2,239Quebec 	4,771	5,036-N ew Brunswick..	626	664Nova Scotia	737	849P. E. I	453	563Totals 	17,747	19,7477.	(a) .Number of outstanding first mortgage loans by provinces for the fiscal years ending as follows:-March 31/41	March 31/42	March870	874	8464,128	4,128	3,9853.490	3,587	3.5912,314	2,337	2;2972,473	2,569	2,5305,306	5,579	5,527677	670	653884	896	874640	693	71720,782	21,333	21,020
(b) Repayment of principal and interest by
British Columbia
Year	Princ.	Int.March 31/39	82,940	71,436March 31/40	101,864	76,154March 31/41	125,223	82,287March 31/42	125,054	86,270March 31/43	Alberta	196,849	85,881March 31/39	306,926	294,464March 31/40	318,862	314,073March 31/41	364,179	350,139March 31/42	527,150	335,524March 31/43	
634,804 Saskatchewan	330,323Year	Princ.	Int.March 31/39	148,804	190,197March 31/40	358,371	405,742March 31/41 ,	322,975	335,924March 31/42 ,	447,659	361,740March 31/43	Manitoba	505,465	364,569March 31/39 .	211,609	178,522March 31/40 .	259,315	197,090March 31/41 .	243,359	207,781March 31/42 .	401,458	241,737March 31/43	Ontario	456,324	205,489Year	Princ.	Int.March 31/39 .	134,485	130,328March 31/40 .	179,284	172,157March 31/41 .	262.058	203,892March 31/42 .	336,895	234,960March 31/43 . 	474,706	239,733
fiscal years ending as follows:-
Quebec
March 31/39	
569,015	443,9S2March 31/40	
581,337	429,873March 31/41	
609,903	477,639March 31/42	
6S4,718	481,037March 31/43	482,206New Brunswick	March 31/39	39,879March 31/40	41,525March 31/41	37,167March 31/42	43,664March 31/43	37,037Nova Scotia	Year	Princ.	Int.March 31/39	44,466March 31/40	
45,788	44,795March 31/41	
51,310	53,167March 31/42	63,754March 31/43	
98,670	64,559Prince Edward Island	March 31/39	
20.776	22,768March 31/40	
20,820	30,291March 31/41	35,980March 31/42	49,440March 31/43	
64,604	58,7038.	Yes. The provincial government of the province of Quebec pays the difference not exceeding 3 per cent between the annual interest of 3 per cent and that charged by the Canadian Farm Loan Board to the farmers of the province of Quebec on the capital of loans granted.
provinces for the

Questions
Farm Mortgage
Loans
Year	$
March 31,	1939	
34,383,593March 31,	1940	
36,652,349March 31,	1941	
37,142,738March 31,	1942	
36,292,895March 31,	1943	
33,984,701Agreements for Real Estate	TotalSale	$	S	$394,496	264,027	35,042,116432,348	262,184	37.346,881455,363	. 326,568	37,924,669503,608	347,708	37,144,211554,829	339,582	34,879,112
10.
Fiscal Year	Amount
1938-	39	
$360,8601939-	40	
382,3101940-	41	
377,8291941-	42	
371,2991942-	43	
335,468
11.
Statutory Reserve	 $ 420,224.37
Unappropriated Surplus	 36,049.87
Reserves for Losses on Outstanding Loans:
First Mortgage .. $770,753.02
Second Mortgage. 107,551.23	878,304.25

Less Deficit from Operations under the Canadian Fisherman's Loan Act	 2,816.99

12. The spread between cost of moneys and revenue provides the margin for setting up reserves and paying cost of operations.



LIEUTENANT-GOVERNORS OF THE PROVINCES  EXPENSES ON ACCOUNT OF THE WAR

Mr. DORION:: 1.	Is any amount being paid to any lieutenant-governor other than the lieutenant-governor of the province of Quebec, to cover his additional expenses on account of the war?
2.	If so, (a) to whom; (b) in what amount;
(c)	since w-hen?


Mr. McLARTY:: 1.	Yes.
2.	(a) The Lieutenant-Governor of Nova Scotia; (b) At the rate of $4,000 a year; (c) April 1, 1941.



EXPORTS OF FRESH AND FROZEN HALIBUT

Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: 1.	How many pounds of Canadian halibut were frozen in 1943, and where, showing monthly amounts?
2.	How many pounds of fresh and frozen Canadian halibut w'ere exported per month in 1943, and to what countries?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	P.E.I.	NS.	N.B.	Que.	Ont.	Man.	Sask.	Alta.	B.C.	Canadalb.	lb.	lb.	lb.	lb.	lb.	lb.	lb.	lb.	lb.January	*	*	68,229February	*	....	*	*	282,093March	*	' Nc	....	*	*	296,651April	*	*	*	*	379,829May	5,516	*	*	*	563,176	573,065June	16,306	*	*	*	2,265,270	2,311,086July	45,656	*	*	*	2,551,706	2,630,088August	*	23,872*	*	561,964	654,403Sept.	5,544	*	*	*	669,851	683,421October	*	11,040	*	*	*	*	1,119,487	1,149,085
Nov.
*	....	*	106,876	175,542Dec.	*	....	....	*	88,815	100,641Total	2,359	114,710	360,876	29,248	19,202	18,254	28,543	8,730,941	9,304,133
* (In accordance with the usual statistical practice, where less than 3 reports received, details cannot be revealed.)
Questions as Orders for Returns

2.
January . February March ...
April ___
May	
June	
July ....
August ... September October .. November December Total
United
Kingdom
lb.
150,100
150,100
United
States
lb.
258,200
241.100
548.700 740,000
1,883,700
2,566,800
325.700 92,700
128.100
149.700 73,300 35,500
7,043,500
Total
lb
258,200
241.100
548.700 740,000
1,883.700
2,566,800
325.700 242,800
128.100
149.700 73,300 35,500
7,193,600
QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR [DOT] RETURNS



LEASE OF PROPERTY IN KINGSTON

Mr. CARDIFF:: 1.	Has the government leased the property known as St. Mary's of the Lake, 355 King St. West, Kingston, Ontario?
2.	If so, when was it leased?
3.	From whom is the property, leased?
4.	What rent is being paid for this property?
5.	What is the total of expenditure made by the government since it was leased?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.



MOBILIZATION REGULATIONS-PROSECUTIONS- CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What are the names, home addresses and
ages of all persons imprisoned to January 31, 1944, as a result of prosecutions arising from their failure to comply with mobilization regulations ?	,
2.	Which of these individuals claim to have conscientious objections to military service?
3.	Where are each of the individuals located at the present time, and what length of prison terms are they serving?



ALTERNATIVE SERVICE REGULATIONS-PROSECUTIONS

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	What are the names, home addresses and ages of all persons imprisoned or sent to alternative service work camps from the beginning of the present war to January 31, 1944, as a result of prosecutions arising from their failure to comply with alternative service regulations?
2.	Where are each of these individuals located at the present time, and what length of prison terms are they serving?



CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: 1.	How many individuals who made application to mobilization boards for postponement as conscientious objectors were granted this status by the boards up to January 31, 1944?

2.	How many of these individuals were sent to alternative service camps?
3.	How many individuals were refused status as conscientious objectors?



UNEMPLOYMENT, MONTREAL-NOBEL DEFENCE INDUSTRIES PLANT

Mr. FOURNIER (Maisonneuve-Rosemont):: 1.	According to the most recent official information, how many persons residing within the limits of the city of Montreal have been registered' as unemployed, (a) men; (b) women?
2.	Are there, within the limits of the city of Montreal, any industries which have hired persons previously employed at the Nobel plant in Ontario?
3.	If so, how many persons have been, so transferred?
4.	Have such transfers been made through the selective service? If not, how have they been made?
5.	Are the persons so transferred sure of finding living accommodation in Montreal?



DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR-MEMBERSHIP OF PERSONNEL IN TRADE UNIONS

Mr. CORMAN:: 1.	How many are employed by the Department of Labour who are or were members of a trade union?
2.	How many pefsons have been appointed to boards or committees, etc., after consultation with trade unions?
3.	What number allocated to each board, committee, etc., were recommended by trade unions ?
4.	What are the names of those holding official positions in the Department of Labour who are or were members of trade unions?



BOUCHARD, STE. THERESE, AND NOBEL DEFENCE INDUSTRIES PLANTS

Mr. BERTRAND (Terrebonne):: 1. Who ordered the transfer to the Defence Industries plant at Bouchard, Ste. TherJse, of some fifty employees from Defence Industries at Nobel ?	'

Motions for Papers
2.	Were such transfers approved by the selective service or made by the company itself?
3.	Has the selective service office at Ste. Therese been notified of such transfers?
4.	How long did each of such employees work for Defence Industries at Nobel?
5.	How many among them have previously worked for Canadian Industries Limited?
6.	Will the government take the necessary steps to reinstate in their former occupation some fifty persons laid off or placed with less pay in secondary positions?



PURCHASE OR RENTAL OF QUEBEC PROPERTIES

Mr. ROY:: 1.	Since 1939, has the dominion government bought or rented real estate or property, (a) in the county of Quebec West and South; (b) in the county of Quebec East; (c) in the county of Quebec South; (d) in the county of Quebec-Montmorency; (e) in the county of Levis; (f) in the county of Belleehasse; (g) in the county of Montmagny, in the province of Quebec?
2.	If so, (a) in what years, from whom, and at what price has such property or real estate been bought or rented; (b) where is it located, and what use is being made of it?
3.	Has the government cancelled the rental or resold any of such real estate or property?
4.	If so, at what price, and on what conditions?



JOHN GRIERSON

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: 1.	Having reference to sessional paper No. 175, is John Grierson still on loan from the national film board to the wartime information board?
2.	What salary is now being paid to John Grierson, on what authority, and for what service?
3.	Is John Grierson engaged in any employment or engagements other than the government service?
4. What amount has been paid to John Grierson in travelling or other expenses during the past twelve months?



ST. LAWRENCE NORTH SHORE MAIL SERVICE

Mr. DORION:: 1.	Is there a contract between the government and the Clarke Steamship Limited for carrying mail to the north shore of the St. Lawrence river ?
2.	If so, what are the terms of such contract?
Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West); Return tabled.



CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ARTICLES SENT TO OVERSEAS SERVICE PERSONNEL

[Stage Direction]
Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River);
1.	Is there a customs duty on cigarettes sent from Canada to the R.CA..F. stationed at Malta?
2.	If so, what is the duty on 309 Sweet Caporal cigarettes?
3.	Is there a duty on other articles sent to our fighting forces who are on active service and stationed in Europe?


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: For a copy of all correspondence since the entrance of Prince Edward Island into confederation exchanged between the government of Prince Edward Island and' the federal government, in connection with the proposed building of a tunnel or causeway from Cape Tormentime, New Brunswick to Prince Edward Island.
Also for a copy of all plans, surveys and estimates of cost with dates of each survey and estimate and by whom made.


Percy Chapman Black: Through the courtesy of the Minister of Transport I conferred with the officials of his department and we have agreed as to what information should be brought down.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Dropped.


Percy Chapman Black: I should like it to be passed. I am not asking for all the correspondence or all the plans; we have agreed upon what should be brought down and what can be brought down.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. ESLING:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, correspondence, reports and other documents in the possession of the Department of Transport, exchanged between the said department and the city of Nelson, British Columbia, or any official thereof, including any correspondence and reports of Mr. W. S. Lawson regarding an emergency airport on the waterfront of the city of Nelson.



SELECTIVE SERVICE-CONVICTIONS AT COCHRANE, ONT., FOR EVASION OF REGULATIONS

Mr. McGREGOR:: For a statement showing a list of the names of men convicted during the months of January and February, 1944, in the court of Magistrate Tucker at Cochrane, Ontario, for evasion of selective service regulations; also showing age of each one convicted, his home address, the selective service office from which these men were sent to northern Ontario, together with the name and position of the official signing the documents involved; also a record showing where these men were employed before going to northern Ontario; and also the reports of the R.C.M.P. on these cases.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I must object to the latter part of this motion, which asks for the production of reports of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. These are reports by officers of the R.C.M.P. to their superior officers and they are confidential in nature. I am informed in the department that the house has never ordered the production of any of this confidential information which is on the files of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
Motions for Papers



ACQUIREMENT BY CANADA OF UNITED KINGDOM CAPITAL INVESTMENTS

Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: For a copy of order in council P.C. 1/3233, April 19,	1943, together with a statement
describing the "capital investments" of the government of the United Kingdom acquired by the government of Canada and referred to in the above order; also for a statement giving amounts of refunds of duties and/or taxes granted to contractors in amounts not under $190, as referred to in paragraph (1) of the said order; and for a statement of what government-owned plants or incorporated crown companies received the benefit of remission of customs duties and/or taxes, referred to in paragraph (4) of said order; also amount of refunds or remission of duties and/or taxes paid to or granted to contractors, or increases in contract prices made under paragraph (7) of the said order.



MOBILIZATION ACT-DOUKHOBOBS

John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all orders in council respecting liability of Doukhobors for military service, and all rules and regulations and instructions issued by the Department of National Defence or the Department of National War Services in connection with the calling up of Doukhobors for service, or alternative work or service, under the National Resources Mobilization Act; and for a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents passing between the Doukhobors and any department of government from the outbreak of the war to date with regard thereto.



STATUTES AMENDED OR ALTERED BY ORDER IN COUNCIL

John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all orders in council passed since the loth of July, 1943, which amend, suspend or otherwise alter the operation of any statute or statutes passed by the parliament of Canada, and a list of all statutes so affected.



SYNTHETIC RUBBER-POLYMER CORPORATION

Mr. KNOWLES:: For a copy of all contracts and/or letters or other documents in lieu of contracts, written or entered into at any time since January 1, 1942, relating to the operation of the respective units of the Polymer plant at Sarnia, between Polymer Corporation Limited and Imperial Oil Limited, St. Clair Processing Corporation Limited, Dow Chemical Company of Canada Limited, and Canadian Synthetic Rubber Limited, as referred to in clause 3 (b) of order in council P.C. 2799, of April 8, 1943.
Also, for a copy of all orders in council relating to Polymer Corporation Limited, dated since April 8, 1943.



INTERNMENTS-ALOIS N. SCHNEIDER

Mrs. NIELSEN:: For a copy of all correspondence, reports, representations and other documents exchanged between any person, persons or organization and any department of government, including the R.C.M.P., with regard to the internment and release of Alois N. Schneider, of St. Walburg, Saskatchewan, from 1939 to date.

Mr. ST. LAURENT: I must object to this motion, which calls for the production of papers, including those of the R.C.M.P., with respect to the release of a person interned under the defence of Canada regulations. Up to the present time the house has never insisted upon the production of such documents, because it has been felt that their publication would be detrimental to the proper administration of the defence of Canada regulations. It has been explained to the house several times that much of the information respecting the internment of persons or the release of persons who have been interned is of a highly confidential nature, whether coming from persons within the country or from representatives of allied governments, and that it would be contrary to the proper administration of these regulations to have it made public.


Dorise Winifred Nielsen: My motion was seconded, not by the hon. member for Laval-Two Mountains (Mr. Lacombe) as Your Honour put the motion, but the hon. member for Cartier (Mr. Rose). May I be permitted to reply to the Minister of Justice? I was not able to hear everything he said, but I believe the minister said that reports from the R.C.M.P. could not be produced. I understand that the R.C.M.P. is a force for the protection of the Canadian people. Where a person has a record such as that of the man in question I think the people of this country should have information regarding his release, particularly when it so happens that for a number of years he was an organizer for the Liberal party and we are now expecting an election in the province of Saskatchewan.


Thomas Vien: Dropped.


Mr. COLD WELL:: Before the motion is dropped may I say my reading of it indicates that it does not call for a report from the mounted police. What it asks for is correspondence between persons and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, not confidential reports from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. It seems to me it is in a different position from the other motion to which the minister objected a few moments ago. Are we to take it that correspondence between persons and any department of government and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police should not be divulged in the house? This motion does not ask for a report.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Dropped.


Thomas Vien: Dropped. The minister has made his explanation, with his objections

Motions for Payers
to the fulfilment of this order, and I must take it; otherwise the question can. be put to a vote.



FARM LOAN BOARP-SASKATCHEWAN- J. L. DOUGANS

Mr. NICHOLSON:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams and other documents in possession of the government in connection with the resignation and reappointment of J. L. Dougans in 1940, employed by the Saskatchewan branch of the Canadian farm loan board.



ROYAL COMMISSION ON COMPLAINTS OF JAPANESE IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

Gordon Knapman Fraser: For a copy of the report of the royal commission on complaints of Japanese in British Columbia and which report vras made to the Honourable the Minister of Labour.


Mr. MITCHELL:: Copies of report in
French and English are now tabled.



DEPARTMENTAL ORGANIZATION


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE ICING (Prime Minister) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to establish a department of reconstruction with authority to formulate and coordinate reconstruction plans and carry out such plans during a certain number of years following the cessation of hostilities; to provide for the em-
Department oj Veterans' Affairs
[Stage Direction]
ployment of officers, clerks and servants necessary for the proper conduct of the department; and to provide for the proper and efficient administration of the act.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having 'been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon.. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to provide for a Department of Veterans' Affairs to replace in part the Department of Pensions and National Health and to assume the management and control of and to consolidate in such department all matters not by law assigned to any other department relating to the care, treatment, training or reestablishment of members and former members of the armed forces and other persons and all such other matters as may from time to time be assigned; and to provide further for the appointment of such officers, clerks and employees as are necessary for the proper and efficient administration of the act.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to provide for a Department of Social Welfare to include that part of the Department of Pensions and National Health not to be included in the Department of Veterans' Affairs and to assume the management and control of and to consolidate in such department matters relating to the social security and welfare of the people of Canada as may from time to time be assigned to it; and to provide further for the appointment of such officers, clerks and employees as are necessary for the proper and efficient administration of the act.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure for carrying into effect the agreement for the establishment of a united nations relief and rehabilitation administration, signed on the 9th day of November, 1943, and to provide that interim expenditures not exceeding $10,000,000 for carrying out the said agreement be defrayed out of moneys provided under the War Appropriation (United Nations Mutual Aid) Act, 1943, and that all other expenditures incurred in carrying out the said agreement be defrayed out of moneys to be voted by parliament.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Technical Education Act to make available, for the purposes of the act, any portion of the unexpended appropriation during the period of five years succeeding the fiscal year ending March 31, 1944.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Judges' Act to provide for the salary of an additional puisne judge of the Exchequer Court of Canada.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.﻿MARCH 20, 1944
Labour Conditions


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Acting Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to provide for the refunding of maturedi, maturing and callable financial obligations of the Canadian National Railways and for the issue of securities guaranteed by the Dominion of Canada in respect of such, refunding to an aggregate principal amount not exceeding $200,000,000.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
Resolved, that it is expedient to introduce a measure to authorize the Minister of Public Works on behalf of His Majesty to enter into an agreement to pay to the Corporation of the City of Ottawa the sum of $100,000 for the year ending July 1, 1944.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


Humphrey Mitchell: On Thursday last the Prime Minister informed the house that the Hon. Mr. Justice C. P. McTague, of the Supreme Court of Ontario, had felt it necessary, for personal reasons, to tender his resignation as chairman of the national war labour board. I now have pleasure in announcing the appointment of Mr. Justice Maynard B. Archibald, of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia, as the new chairman of the board. Mr. Justice Archibald has acted on a number of occasions on commissions and boards set up by the Department of Labour to deal with problems
of industrial relations. It is expected that he will arrive in Ottawa to take over his duties immediately after the Easter parliamentary recess; he finds it impossible to come any earlier. In the meantime, however, the house may rest assured that the board will continue to function, dealing with the cases before it.
I now table a copy of order in council
P.C. 1986, providing for the appointment of Mr. Justice Archibald.



WARTIME LABOUR RELATIONS REGULATIONS EFFECTIVE AS OF THIS DAY

Humphrey Mitchell: I wish to inform the house that order in council P.C. 1982 was approved today, bringing into force the wartime labour relations regulations covered by order in council P.C. 1003 of February 17 last. In announcing the new regulations I had stated that they would be put into force on a date to be fixed by the governor in council. They are in effect as from to-day. I now table copy of order in council P.C. 1982.



BOUCHARD DEFENCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED PLANT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. FRED ROSE (Cartier):: May I ask a question of the government. What are the real facts regarding a story widely circulated in the province of Quebec to the effect that French-Canadian workers have been laid off from the Bouchard plant and replaced by English-speaking workers. .


Thomas Vien: That is a question that must be placed on the order paper.



PROPOSED LAY-OFF OF AIRCRAFT WORKERS AT MACDONALD BROS., WINNIPEG, PLANT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Munitions and Supply. I shall respect Your Honour's view against the reading of telegrams, but may I say that I ask this question because I received, an hour or so ago, a telegram from the secretary of the Winnipeg and district trades and labour council. The question is this. Is the government aware of a proposed lay-off of 800 aircraft workers at the plant of Macdonald Brothers in Winnipeg? If so, will consideration be given to reducing the hours of labour if no other way can be found of avoiding such a lay-off?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I received notice of this ques-
Labour Conditions

tioa only a few moments ago. I know of no lay-off at the plant of Macdonald Brothers, but 1 shall be glad to look into the situation and answer the question later.



POSSIBLE CLOSING OF WESTERN COAL MINES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. E. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: The other day I asked the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance whether the subsidies would be continued to western coal mines in order that they might continue operating after the end of this month and the hon. gentleman said he would give an answer to-day.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I had hoped to have the information to-day, but I have not received it. I confidently anticipate that I shall have it to-morrow.



INCOME TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: Before the orders of the day are called, I wish to address a question to the Minister of National Revenue. Will the government give favourable consideration to allowing the final payment of the 1943 income tax to be spread over a period beyond April 30 next?


Colin William George Gibson: The hon. member was kind enough to send me a copy of the question. I answered substantially the same question on March 10, and he now asks whether there is likely to be any change in the policy of the government in connection with the final payment of income tax. All I can say is that should there be any changes in government policy, they will be announced in due course.



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: I have another question which I think should be directed to the Minister of Munitions and Supply. In any event, I have sent a copy of the question both to the Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power) and to the Minister of Munitions and Supply.
[Mr Howe.]
In cases where Royal Canadian Air Force pilot personnel have been released for active employment with Trans-Canada Air Lines, are these pilots allowed to become members of a trade union and enjoy the provisions of collective bargaining under the new labour code?


Clarence Decatur Howe: If the pilots in question have received their discharge from the Royal Canadian Air Force they are of course at liberty to join trade unions. If they are still members of the armed forces, the regulations of the forces do not permit their joining trade unions.


Gordon Graydon: In other words, it is a question of whether they are on leave of absence or have been discharged.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Quite.



FOREIGN EXCHANGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. VICTOR QUELCH (Acadia):: I should like to direct a question to the government. In the evening Citizen of March 15, there appeared a statement to the effect that early and complete agreement among British, American, Russian and Canadian treasury experts, on a multibillion dollar gold based fund to stabilize post-war foreign exchange "was believed imminent to-day". Will the Prime Minister assure the house that no such agreement will be entered into by Canada without first of all referring the matter to parliament?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Any assurance I have given the house will be implemented in so far as it is in my power to have this done.



CANADIAN ARMY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Chisholm Macdonald: Several members have made inquiries of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston) with regard to the terms upon which farm spring leave is to be granted by his department. I wish now to make a statement with reference to the matter.
When informing the house last year of the terms upon which leave for this work was

Canadian Army-Spring Leave
being granted to army personnel, the minister suggested that the hopes of members of the house and of those engaged in fanning should not be raised too high.


Mr. HOMUTH:: He was quite right about that.


William Chisholm Macdonald: In announcing the terms of farm leave for the present spring season, I repeat the minister's remarks, although, as I shall explain in a moment, leave this year is in some respects upon a more generous scale.
Following the conclusion of spring leave granted in 1943, an order (R.O. 3456) was issued providing for assistance to agriculture in two ways, (1) by granting compassionate farm leave to enable soldiers to return to their own or to the farm of their immediate family, where hardship would otherwise ensue, and (2) by detailing soldiers for farm duty in circumstances of emergency. It was decided to amend this order and to provide, in addition to the leave which may now be granted under it, for the granting of spring and harvest leave at appropriate seasons.
In the spring of 1943, seeding leave might be granted to, the following:
(a)	Personnel on strength of home war establishments of district depots, i.e., the members of the administrative and training staffs.
(b)	Other personnel on strength of district
depots, excluding those awaiting dispatch to basic training centres or awaiting allocation after completion of advanced or trades training.	.
(c)	Personnel of the Veterans Guard of Canada who had completed their training.
(d)	Personnel of operational units up to a limit of 5 per cent of the strength of such units and where the soldier applying had completed his individual training.
The order now provides that general service personnel who by age and pulhems profile are suitable for overseas service will not be eligible for spring leave.
Subject to this exception, spring leave may be granted not only to those on strength of the home war establishments of district depots, but also to those on the home war establishment of any unit. Other personnel on the strength of district depots, except those awaiting dispatch to training centres or schools, will be eligible, as well as will also personnel of the Veterans Guard of Canada
and personnel on strength of operational units, as was the case last year, but the restriction to five per cent of those on strength of operational units to whom leave may be granted has been removed.
The period for which leave may be granted has been increased from six weeks to two months.
As was the case in 1943, applications for spring leave will be submitted by the soldier to his commanding officer and by him, in turn, to the general or district officer commanding concerned, who has been authorized to grant the leave in appropriate cases. It should, however, be distinctly understood that the leave to be granted under this order, as in every other type of leave, is subject to the exigencies of the service and can be granted by general or district officers commanding only if, in their opinion, essential army activities will not be substantially interfered with.
I have indicated that routine order No. 3456 has been amended in order to set out the terms upon which farm spring leave for 1944 is to be granted. I have here an office consolidation of the order with all amendments to date and, in order that hon. members interested may have available in convenient form information with regard not only to the granting of spring leave, harvest leave, and compassionate farm leave but also information as to the circumstances in which soldiers may be required to perform farm duty, I would ask leave of the house to table order No. 3456 as amended and to have it printed in Votes and Proceedings.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weybum):: Will the
government pay all or any part of the transportation expenses of these men, to enable them to return home to do farm work? If a man has to go from one end of Canada to the other he cannot earn enough in two months to compensate him for the journey.
Mr. MACDONALD [DOT] (Halifax):	There is
provision in the order with respect to transportation. The soldier must pay his own transportation.


Gordon Graydon: The cost of transportation is to be borne by the soldier?


William Chisholm Macdonald: Yes.


Gordon Graydon: Will there be any provision for extension of the leave given under this new policy? I am not sure whether it was last year or the year before, but I remember that one year farm operations were retarded because of weather, and as a result a good deal of difficulty was experienced in
Canadian Army-Spring Leave

this connection. I was wondering if there was any provision with respect to the extension of the leave, or if this is a rigid regulation.


William Chisholm Macdonald: Although
there was no express provision in the order, last year extensions were granted in certain cases. In the present order there is no express provision dealing with that point; in that respect it is exactly the same as the order of a year ago. If in a special case a soldier applies for an extension of leave, and can show a good case, I presume his application would be granted; but the order authorizes only the specific leave of two months, which is considered ample in ordinary circumstances.


Gordon Graydon: But there is nothing to
prevent an application for extension?


William Chisholm Macdonald: No.


Mr. HATFIELD:: Is the soldier allowed to retain his uniform and other clothing?


Thomas Vien: The parliamentary assistant mentioned his desire to have the order appear in the Votes and Proceedings. If it would serve the purpose I think it would be better if it appeared in Hansard.


William Chisholm Macdonald: There is a provision in the order with respect to the matter mentioned by the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton (Mr. Hatfield). Perhaps it would save time if he read it himself.


Mr. W RIGHT:: When the soldier makes
application to his commanding officer, has that officer the authority to turn down the application without submitting it to the district officer commanding?


William Chisholm Macdonald: No; as I
understand it the application is submitted to the commanding officer, who forwards it to the district officer commanding or the general sfficer commanding, as the case may be.


James Lester Douglas: With his recommendation attached?


William Chisholm Macdonald: Yes. This is the provision:
Application for compassionate farm leave will be submitted in writing by the soldier to his commanding officer who will, after investigating, forward it, with his recommendation, to the
G.O.C. or D.O.C. concerned.


James Lester Douglas: I would ask
the parliamentary assistant if the department will give consideration to making some contribution toward the cost of transportation of men who are a long distance from home. Otherwise this may not be of much value in many cases.
Canadian Army Routine Orders No. 3456



APPLICABLE TO ACTIVE FORMATIONS, UNITS, AND PERSONNEL OF THE CANADIAN ARMY

[Stage Direction]
Headquarters, Ottawa,
27th July, 1943.
3456-Compassionate Farm Leave, Spring Leave, Harvest Leave and Ordering Soldiers to Perform Farm Duty.
1.	This Order supersedes all previous orders and instructions dealing with the subject of army assistance to agriculture. This Order is effective as from 31st July, 1943, and will remain in effect until further notice.
2.	Seasonal conditions have created unusual difficulties in connection with agriculture. It is desired in cases of genuine merit that the army give such assistance as is possible consistent with army responsibilties.
3.	Such help as can be given is made much more effective if given promptly and it is, therefore, desired to make the procedure as simple and direct as possible. Heretofore, frequent references have had to be made to N.D.H.Q. in order to ensure uniformity of treatment across the country. It is felt, however, that the G.O's. C.-in-C. and the D.O's.C., being on the ground and having qow had good experience in connection with requests for agricultural help are in a position to appraise the circumstances.
4.	It has, therefore, been decided to put the matter in the hands of the G.O's. C.-in-C. and the D.O's.C., subject to certain necessary general principles. They are relied on to exercise sound judgment so as to help meet the immediate situation created by abnormal seasonal conditions whenever and wherever that can be done without substantial interference with essential army activities.
5.	Types of aid:
Assistance to agriculture will be given in the following ways:-
(a)	By granting of leave (known as Compassionate Farm Leave) to certain personnel under administrative provisions as outlined in Appendix "A" to this Order;
(b)	By the detailing for duty on farms (to be known as Farm Duty) of certain designated personnel under the authority of P.C. 5931, and under administrative provisions as outlined in Appendix "B" to this Order.
(c)	By granting of leave (known as Spring Leave or Harvest Leave, whichever may be applicable) to certain personnel under the administrative provisions outlined in the Appendix to this Order.
6 Principles Governing Grant of Aid:
There are certain principles which obtain in both the aforementioned cases:-
(a)	It is not possible to allow personnel to help in farm work if such action would, in the opinion of the G.O.C. or D.O.C.,
[Stage Direction]
Canadian Army-Spring Leave
result in substantial intereference with essential army activities. The G.O's.C. and D.O's.C., should, however, endeavour to adjust and re-arrange personnel and duties so that such essential activities can be carried on for the period of the absence of personnel on farm work;
(b)	The farm must be a farm which contributes substantially to the national production over and above what is necessary for the occupants of the farm itself;
(c)	It is not possible at this time, which is1 the best training season of the year, to release men who are actually in training from Training Centres, except in special cases of compassionate grounds as mentioned in Appendix "A" hereto.
7.	Personnel Available:
Subject to the foregoing, the personnel from which assistance may be provided, are therefore:-
(a)	Personnel in disposal wings of Depots;
(b)	Personnel in home war establishments whom, by re-adjustment and re-arrangement, it may be possible to release for the time being. Regard shall be had to the continuing withdrawal of general service personnel for overseas duty;
(c)	Personnel in operational units also, having regard to the continuing withdrawal of general service personnel for overseas duty;
(d)	Personnel of the Veterans Guard of Canada.
8.	Personnel Not Available:
The following, although elegible for Compassionate Farm Leave, shall not be available for Spring Leave, Harvest Leave or Farm Duty:-
(a)	G.S. personnel who, by age and Pulhems Profile, are suitable for overseas service;
(b)	G.S. or N.R.M_A. personnel who are in training stream at Training Centres or Schools.
9.	Limitation as to number who may be granted Compassionate Farm Leave, Spring Leave, Harvest Leave and/or Detailed for Farm Duty.
Such numbers as G.O's.C. and D.O's.C. decide can be made available from any units in their command having regard to the exigencies of the service.
10.	G.O's.C.-in-C. and D.O's.C. will detail suitable members of their staffs to consult with the director, Dominion-provincial farm labour committee of the province concerned with a view of arranging to carry out the letter and spirit of this Order.
11.	The effective provisions of Order in Council, P.C. 5931 of 1943, are published for information as Appendix "D" to this Order.
(Effective 31st July, 1943.)
(H.Q. 54-27-55-4)
H.	F. G. LETSON,
Major-General.
Adjutant-General.
Appendix "A"

[Stage Direction]
1.	To Whom Granted:
This leave may be granted to men for the purpose of working on farms owned by members of their immediate family where there would be undue hardship if the leave were not granted. This leave is applicable where the relative working the farm is, because of old age or disability, incapable of continuing to do so and, by reason of their enlistment or enrolment, there is no other member of the family available to assist.
2.	Method of Application:
Application for Compassionate Farm Leave will be submitted in writing by the soldier to his Commanding Officer who will, after investigating, forward it, with his recommendation, to the G.O.C. or D.O.C. concerned. Such applications will not be referred to National Defence Headquarters. For the sake of uniformity, applications will be completed on M.F.M. 312 as amended to suit the circumstances.
3.	Duration and Renewal of Compassionate
Farm Leave:
The G.O.C. or D.O.C. may authorize leave for period applied for or such period as he deems advisable, but not to exceed six months. Subject to the exigencies of the Service, the same officers may grant extensions for such periods not exceeding six months as they may consider advisable.
4.	Investigation of Necessity for Leave:
The facilities of the N.S.S. Mob. Board, D.B.T., R.C.M.P., Auxiliary Services, or any Provincial, Municipal or Civic Organization may be used to investigate statements submitted on behalf of the applicant whenever the G.O.C. or D.O.C. considers it to be necessary or desirable.
5.	Transportation and Clothing:
The Department of National Defence will supply a suit of overalls and free transportation and meal tickets to all soldiers proceeding on Compassionate Farm Leave. Free return transportation shall be limited to destinations not more than 500 miles distant from the soldier's station and if the destination is more than 500 miles from the soldier's station, he shall furnish his own transportation jn excess of the 500 miles distance. The Department of Labour will pay the Department of National Defence the cost thereof on demand.
6.	Pay and Allowances:
Compassionate Farm Leave will be without pay of any kind or allowances of any kind, or subsistence, and soldiers will not be entitled to medical or dental attention, hospitalization, or compensation due to illness, injury or death while on Compassionate Farm Leave.
7.	Transfer to Depot in Certain Cases:
Personnel granted leave in excess of thirtyone days will be transferred to the District Depot of the Military District in which such leave is to be spent provided, however, that such transfer will be made effective the day following the commencement of leave. On such transfer the documents and other correspondence pertaining to the leave will be despatched
Canadian Army-Spring Leave
[Stage Direction]
immediately to the appropriate District Depot, to which Depot the soldier will report on the expiration of his leave when he will be medically examined and if found fit, will be completed with clothing and equipment and will be either despatched with his documents to his former unit or otherwise disposed of by the District Officer Commanding.
8.	Clothing, Equipment, etc., on Proceeding on
Compassionate Farm Leave:
Where a soldier is granted leave up to but not exceeding 60 days under the provisions of this Order, he will be permitted to take with him necessary clothing and uniform. Except when specially authorized otherwise by the G.O.C. or D.O.C. concerned, he will only be authorized to wear his uniform while travelling to the place where he will reside during leave, and while returning from such place on the expiration of his leave. The cost of making good any deficiency in clothing or equipment issued to the man as shown on his M.F.C. 800, before proceeding on leave, or found to be deficient on his return from leave, will be recovered in the usual manner. Where leave for any period exceeding 60 days is granted, uniform and clothing will be worn only when authorized by the G.O.C. or D.O.C. When not so authorized, the man's uniform and clothing, and in all cases his equipment, will be returned to stores before the man proceeds on leave. The man will be responsible for providing any civilian clothing he may require when proceeding on leave.
9.	Furlough Form to be Furnished Soldier
Proceeding on Compassionate Farm Leave:
Before proceeding on leave the soldier will be given Furlough Form M.F.B. 322, with those portions of instructions on reverse side thereof which deal with dress and medical attention while on leave, struck out and initialled by the officer authorized to issue same. The 6oldier will be given explicit instructions in writing from his Officer Commanding which will include:
(a)	Conditions governing wearing of uniform;
(b)	Cessation of pay and allowances;
(c)	His being subject to recall at any time on 48 hours' notice;
(d)	His non-entitlement to dental and medical care during leave;
(e)	When and to whom, and how to apply if extension of leave required;
(f)	When, where, and to whom to report on expiration of leave required;
(g)	The necessity of obtaining his Commanding Officer's permission (under Routine Order No. 2242) to marry to be eligible for Dependents' Allowance on return from leave.
10.	Medical Examination of Soldier Proceeding on Compassionate Farm Leave:
If the period of leave exceeds 60 days, the soldier must be medically examined before proceeding on, and again after return from such leave. Should a soldier die, or be killed while on leave, either during or as a direct result of his employment but not otherwise, he will be entitled to a military funeral as a soldier in accordance with Article 220 of F.R. & I. (Canada).
(Mr. Graydon.)
Appendix "B"
1.	Reason for Detailing:
In order to meet the present emergency and in addition to the granting of Compassionate Farm Leave, men may be directed to work on farms under arrangements to be made by G.O.'s.C. and D.O's.C. with Director, Dominion-Provincial Farm Labour Plan.
2.	Method of Requesting Soldier for Farm
Duty:
Requests for soldiers for Farm Duty will be made in writing by the Director, Dominion-Provincial Farm Labour Plan, to tbe G.O.C. or D.O.C. concerned. The requests will outline clearly the number of men required, the nature of the work and the rate of pay. They will also indicate clearly to what destination return transportation is required. Upon receipt of the aforesaid, the G.O.C. or D.O.C. may detail the soldier for the duty as requested in accordance with P.C. 5931 dated 24th July, 1943, and will supply the soldier with return transportation to the destination named and meal tickets while travelling, without charge to the soldier.
He will also supply the soldier with a suit of overalls without charge to the soldier. The G.O.C. or D.O.C. will supply the said Director with information from time to time as to the names, units, etc., of personnel detailed for Farm Duty. The said Director will keep the G.O.C. or D.O.C. informed at all times as to the address of the soldier and with the name of the farmer on whose farm the soldier is performing Farm Duty.
3.	Priority of Employment:
Questions on priority of employment as between individuals or groups of individuals seeking to obtain soldiers for Farm Duty, as aforesaid, shall be settled by the Director, Dominion-Provincial Farm Labour Plan.
4.	Who May be Detailed for Farm Duty:
The personnel from which assistance may be
provided are:-
(a)	Personnel in disposal wings of Depots;
(b)	Personnel in Home War Establishments whom by readjustment and rearrangements, it may be possible to release for the time being. Regard shall be had to the continuing withdrawal of General Service personnel for overseas duty;
(c)	Personnel in Operational Units, also having regard to the continuing withdrawal of General Service personnel for overseas duty;
(d)	Personnel of the Veterans Guard of Canada.
5.	Who May Not be Detailed for Farm Duty:
The following, although eligible for Compassionate Farm Leave, shall not be available for Farm Duty:
(a)	G.S. personnel who, by age and Pulhems Profile, are suitable for overseas service;
(b)	G.S. or N.E.MA. personnel who are in the training stream at Training Centres or Schools.
6.	Period of Duty and Renewals:
Normally the period of absence of such personnel from their Units will not exceed 30 days, but in exceptional cases, the G.O.C.-in-C. or D.O.C. may authoribe such reasonable extension as they may see fit.

Canadian Army-Spring Leave
7.	Provision of Transportation and Clothing:
As above stated, the Department of National
Defence will supply free return transportation, meal tickets and a suit of overalls to all soldiers proceeding on Farm Duty, but the farmer will supply his board and lodging for the period of employment. The Department of Labour will pay to the Department of National Defence the cost of transportation, meal tickets, and suit of overalls on demand.
8.	What the Farmer Will Pay:
The Department of Labour will pay to the Department of National Defence for each day a soldier is employed the minimum daily rate per soldier hereinafter set forth:-
(a)	Western Canada, to include Military Districts No.'s. 10, 12, 13, and Pacific Command-$4 per diem;
(b)	That portion of Ontario which is not included in Military District No. Id- $3.50 per diem;
(e)	Quebec, and the Maritime Provinces!

$3 per diem.
These rates are subject to any justifiable revision upwards depending on the local circumstances to be determined by an agreement between the Director, Dominion-Provincial Farm Labour Plan, and the G.O.C.-in-C. or D.O.C. concerned. Ordinarily soldiers will not work on Sunday. If, however, it is necessary to work on Sunday, soldiers so working shall receive the same remuneration as for any other day. The Department of Labour will arrange with the farmer to supply board and. lodging to the soldier without expense to the soldier.
9.	Pay and Allowances of the Soldier:
Personnel detailed for Farm Duty shall .continue to be credited with their normal pay and allowances including trades pay and Dependents' Allowance, if payable, but not including subsistence allowance. Upon the tertnination of such employment, if the amount payable by the fanner to the Department of Labour in respect of the services performed by the soldier exceeds the amount of the aforesaid pay and allowances, the amount of such excess shall be payable to such soldier. This excess will be credited through the Paymaster's accounts of the soldier concerned at the termination of the period of employment under arrangements to be made by the Paymaster-General.
10.	Method and Responsibility of Accounting:
It shall be the duty of the Director, Dominion-Provincial Farm Labour Plan, to keep regular time sheets on a pro-forma in quintup-licate to be supplied by the D.O.C. and at the expiration of the employment to obtain the signature of the farmer and the soldier certifying as to the accuracy of the time, rates, etc. These time sheets shall be certified as correct by the said Director and three copies shall be forwarded to the District Paymaster of the District to which the personnel belong, one copy being left with the farmer and the other copy being retained, by the Director. The District Paymaster shall make the following distribution of the three copies of the time sheets:-one copy to the Unit Paymaster, two copies to the District Treasury Officer for transmission to the Chief Treasury Officer at N.D.H.Q. The Paymaster-General will issue appropriate accounting instructions and will attach thereto the pro-forma and the time sheet to be taken into use as referred to above.
11.	Collection of Accounts from Farmers:
Collection of accounts from the farmers will
be made under arrangements to be formulated by the Department of Labour and are not to be collected by the soldier or by any other member of the Department of National Defence.
12.	Medical and Dental Treatment, etc.:
Personnel detailed for Farm Duty shall continue to be entitled to medical and dental treatment, hospitalization and all benefits on the same basis as though they were performing ordinary- military duty. In the event of illness or injury of the soldier the Director above referred to shall immediately get in touch with the G.O.C. or D.O.C. and arrange for medical attention or hospitalization. In emergency cases the nearest medical assistance will be called. It is of importance however that Medical Officers shall be called and that Military Hospitals shall be used where possible.
Appendix "C"

[Stage Direction]
1.	To Whom Granted:
This leave may be granted to such personnel of the army as can be spared for the purpose of sowing crops, harvesting and seeding in spring or harvest operations, provided, however, that only soldiers having actual experience in farm work will be eligible and such leave will be limited strictly for the purposes its name implies.
2.	Method of Application:
Application for spring or harvest leave will be submitted in writing by the soldier to his commanding officer, who will, after investigating, forward it with his recommendation to the G.O.C.-in-C. or D.O.C. concerned. Such applications will not be referred to N.D.H.Q. For the sake of uniformity, applications will be completed on M.F.M. 312, as amended to suit the circumstances.
3.	Duration of Spring or Harvest Leave:
The G.O.C.-in-C. or D.O.C. concerned may
authorize leave for a period not exceeding two months and may make such investigations as he may deem necessary before approving the same.
4.	Transportation:
The cost of transportation will be borne by the soldier.
5.	Pay and Allowances:
Spring or harvest leave will be without pay of any kind or allowances of any kind or subsistence and soldiers will not be. entitled to medical or dental attention, hospitalization or compensation due to illness, injury or death while on Spring or Harvest Leave.
6.	Transfer to District Depots in Certain
Cases:
Personnel granted leave in excess of thirty-one days will be transferred to the District Depot of the Military District in which such leave is to be spent provided, however, that such transfer will be made effective the day following the commencement of leave. On such transfer the documents and other correspondence pertaining to the leave will be despatched immediately to the appropriate District Depot, to which depot the soldier will report on the expiration of his leave when he will be medically examined and if found fit, will be
Canadian Army-Spring Leave
[Stage Direction]
completed with clothing and equipment and will be either despatched with his documents to his former unit or otherwise disposed of by the District Officer Commanding.
7.	Clothing, Equipment, etc., on Proceeding
on Spring or Harvest Leave:
Where a soldier is granted spring or harvest leave under the provisions of this Order, he will be permitted to take with him necessary clothing and uniform. Except when specially authorized otherwise by the G.O.C.-in-C. or D.O.C. concerned, he will only be authorized to wear his uniform while travelling to the place where he will reside during leave and while returning from such place on the expiration of his leave. The cost of making good any deficiency in clothing or equipment issued to the soldier, as shown on his M.F.C. 800, before proceeding on leave, or found to he deficient upon his return from leave, will be recovered in the usual manner.
8.	Furlough Form to be Furnished Soldier on
Proceeding on Spring or Harvest Leave:
Before proceeding on leave the soldier will be given Furlough Form M.F.B. 322, with those portions of instructions on reverse side thereof which deal with dress and medical attention while on leave, struck out and initialled by the officer authorized to issue same. The soldier will be given explicit instructions in writing from his officer commanding which will include:-
(a)	Conditions governing wearing of uniform;
(b)	Cessation of pay and allowances;
(c)	His being subject to recall at any time on 48 hours' notice;
(d)	His non-entitlement to dental and medical care during leave;
(e)	When and to whom, and how to apply if extension of leave required;
(f)	When, where, and to whom to report on expiration of leave required;
(g)	The necessity of obtaining his commanding officer's permission (under C.A.R.O. 2242) to marry to be eligible for dependents' allowance on return from leave.
9.	Medical Examination of Soldier Proceeding
on Spring or Harvest Leave:
As the period of spring or harvest leave authorized does not exceed sixty days, no medical examination will be necessary before proceeding on such leave. Should a soldier die or be killed while on leave, either during or as a direct result of his employment, but not otherwise, he will be entitled to a military funeral as a soldier, in accordance with Article 220, F.R. & I. (Canada).
Appendix "D"

[Stage Direction]
(Referred to in para. 5 (b) of R.O. 3456)
1.	All members of active units and formations of the military forces of Canada including persons who pursuant to the provisions of the National Resources Mobilization Act are attached thereto or are serving therewith may, on the order of the appropriate military authorities, be required to perform services and duties relating or in any way pertaining to the development, operation and maintentance of ranches, farms and gardens and the stock, buildings and equipment thereof.
2.	All orders given or issued by the appropriate military authorities pursuant to the pro-

visions of this Order shall be deemed to be lawful orders given by a superior officer, disobedience of which shall constitute an offence under Section 9 of the Army Act and said Section shall, as a part of the law of Canada, be construed accordingly.
3.	All members of the Military Forces of Canada performing services or duties relating or in any way pertaining to the development, operation or maintenance of ranches, farms or gardens and the stock and equipment thereof, pursuant to the provisions of this Order shall for the purposes of the Pension Act, The National Resources Mobilization Act, the Militia Act, the War Measures Act and all Regulations and Orders made thereunder, be deemed to be performing military training, service and duty as prescribed therein.
4.	The Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Labour are hereby authorized and directed to make all necessary financial arrangements relating to the employment of members of the Military Forces of Canada on ranches, farms or in gardens pursuant to the provisions of this Order including the charges to be made therefor and the disposal of the funds realized thereby. Each member of the Military Forces of Canada, while performing such services or duties as are mentioned in this Order shall continue to receive his military pay and allowances, including Dependents' Allowance. Upon the termination of such services or duties, if the amount of the charges so arranged by the Ministers of National Defence and Labour as being payable in respect of his performing such services or duties exceeds the amount of the aforesaid military pay and allowances, the amount of such excess shall be payable to such members.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, March 17, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money for the carrying out of measures consequent upon the existence of a state of war-Mr. Ilsley -Mr. Bradette in the chair.

Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Chairman, having given the committee a statement on civil aviation I now desire to place before it the war estimates of the air services branch of the Department of Transport, for which I am responsible. The estimates this year for this branch total $6,501,735 as against last year's estimates which totalled $6,885,0S5. These estimates are broken down into three items, one for radio services, the second for meteorological services, and the third for civil aviation. I will now table these and ask that they be printed in Hansard, with copies distributed to hon. members for the purposes of this discussion.


The CHAIRMAN:: By unanimous consent.
The items follow:

War Appropriation-Transport
Air Services Branch-Department of Transport War Expenditures and Estimates
1.	Radio services	
2.	Meteorological services	
3.	Civil aviation:
Extra airport traffic control systems....
Operation and maintenance of municipal
(terminal) airports	
Additional facilities-Moncton to Newfoundland airline	
Improvements to airports	
Canadian government transatlantic air service	
(1)	(2)	(3)Estimated	Estimated	Estimatedrequirements	expenditure	requirements1943-44	1943-44	1944-45$2,458,925	$2,086,000	$2,666,045 (Revote 97,000)1,432,860	1,432,860	1,670,480680,000	680,000	736,450336,600	336,600	398,260976,700	976,700	130,500 (Revote 78,500)800,000	800,000	500,000200,000	200,000	400,000$6,885,085	$6,512,160	$6,501,735


Mr. STIRLING:: Is this a portion of what appeared under Munitions and Supply in the statement of the Minister of Finance on February 11? Is this part of the $183,000,000 which is the share of the Minister of Munitions and Supply of the large total?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No; there is a separate item under the Department of Transport dealing with the war estimates of that department, and these are the items included in that estimate.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The subject with which
we are dealing at the present time is recognized by all hon. members as of great importance-


Gordon Graydon: On a point of order, Mr. Ohairman, I take it that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre is about to commence a discussion with respect to the air services branch of the Department of Transport. Before that is done I Should like to make clear the position of the opposition as to the matter of procedure, and the sequence in which the departments are taken up under the war appropriation bill. I want to raise objection to what is being done, having in mind the statement of the government on Friday in connection with this matter. It was my understanding that the Department of Munitions and Supply would go on to-day, and I took it for granted that the minister would make his ordinary statement in connection with his department. As a matter of fact I think I am supported in that by the exchange which took place between the hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) and the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King). At the conclusion of the statement of the Minister of Munitions and Supply I find this, as reported at page 1587 of Hansard:
Mr. Stirling: The understanding was that this matter would be set aside to a future date so that it could be digested before the discussion continued.
The Prime Minister then indicated that that was a correct interpretation of the situation. Then when the business of the house was under discussion the whole question with respect to the ministry of munitions and supply was indicated as the procedure for to-day. Upon that basis our arrangements were made. To say the least I think it is unfair to ask us to go on with the discussion with respect to civil aviation, and I say that for one or two reasons which I believe will at once be understood and appreciated. First of all, this is the next sitting day after the day on which one of the major statements of the whole session was made. That statement involves one of the most important pieces of government policy so far announced. In addition to that, the report of Trans-Canada Air Lines was tabled to-day and referred to one of the committees of the house, but we have not yet seen it. Besides, we have now before us, for the first time, placed upon H-amard by the minister himself, the estimates for the air services branch of the Department of Transport.
I believe the committee will see clearly that to ask us to go on without any notice having been given is not fair. I would ask the government to review the position in order that at least there might be an opportunity to give closer study to one of the major matters being brought forward by the government. The Prime Minister will perhaps be the first to recognize the justice and wisdom of my suggestion. We do not ask for any lengthy period of time, because I do not think that would be proper. The matter should be discussed as early as possible. On the other hand I ask the Prime Minister if he will not consent to have the matter laid over, so that we may have an opportunity to give it some study before we are asked to take part in the debate.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My recollection as to what was discussed with my colleagues
War Appropriation-Transport

in the matter of procedure was that it would be advisable to have the statement by the minister with respect to civil aviation made one week, and have the debate thereon the following week. In that way we would be sure to give the opposition over the week-end time to go carefully into the statement the minister might make. All hon. members will have assumed that at some time during the session there would be a debate on civil aviation. We had in mind that in addition to what they might have intended to say, hon members would wish to review carefully the minister's statement. For that reason it was decided not to go on with the debate in one week, but to leave it over until the following week.
I notice, in looking at Hansard for March 16, that I said as reported at page 1514:
If I may, I would change that order now,-
Referring to something that had been arranged.
.-and say that to-morrow the Minister of Munitions and Supply will make a statement with respect to civil aviation, and that he will not follow either this afternoon or this evening the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services.
At the conclusion of that discussion the minister said:
No. The intention was to give the statement on Friday, and the debate may go on on Monday, or later.
So that the minister had mentioned that the debate would go on on Monday.


Gordon Graydon: "Or later."


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes, or later. That is always a proviso. We were not committed to any particular order of procedure. Something might have prevented the debate from going on to-day-for example, moving into supply, if it had been decided to go into supply first of all.
On Friday, March 17, the hon. member for Yale is reported to have said:
The understanding was that this matter would he set aside to a future date so that it could be digested before the discussion continued.
Mr. Mackenzie King: That is correct.
That was on Friday. On Friday evening, the Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie) said:
On Monday we shall take up .first of all the
resolution on the war appropriation and the estimates of the Minister of Munitions and Supply, and we may call two items in order of supply during the day.
So that really there has been an effort to anticipate the point my hon. friend is now raising, namely that of not proceeding with the debate without giving ample opportunity

for careful consideration of the minister's statement. Earlier to-day, replying to the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot), I pointed out that it is very difficult so to plan as to suit the convenience of hon. members at all times. I have in mind, in connection with proceeding to-day, what I think hon. members will realize is an important aspect of the situation, namely that we have only two more weeks of sittings of the house before the adjournment for Easter recess. I am sure that if at all possible it would be advisable to have assent given to the war appropriation bill and one or two other measures before that adjournment. That is the reason the government is anxious to hold to the order of procedure as announced. Perhaps it would suit the convenience of my hon. friend and his friends if we allowed the debate to proceed for a time. It might be adjourned at six o'clock, and we could take up something else this evening, and later continue the discussion on civil aviation-say to-morrow.


Gordon Graydon: I would not have raised the matter at all had it not been for the fact that there was a good deal of confusion with respect to the business of the house, as indicated on Friday night. It was not clear to me, and I think perhaps it would not be clear to the Prime Minister, either, because it is not indicated that the Department of Transport, which covers the civil air services, would be before us to-day. The very fact that the Minister of Munitions and Supply said that it would be Monday, or later, indicated that the procedure would be through agreement with us. We assumed the minister would go on on Thursday with his statement. Then the Prime Minister changed the order of business, and we raised no objection at that time because we expected we would have a somewhat longer time to study the matter. However we are cramped in the attention we wish to give to this important matter of civil aviation. Were there any possibility of delaying the war appropriation measure, I would not have made the suggestion; but there is no possibility of such delay, because it only involves the minister's going on with another item.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I believe the minister intends making an important statement-I do not know whether it will be lengthy or not-with regard to munitions and supply generally. I understand he would prefer to make that statement to-morrow. We might make it the first order of business at that time. I have suggested that this debate be allowed to proceed, because there are some

War Appropriation-Transport
hon. members who are prepared to discuss the matter this afternoon. Discussion might be continued until six o'clock, and then this evening we could take up something else, thereby giving my hon. friend and his friends the opportunity they wish to have.


Gordon Graydon: Yes.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: I wonder if the leader of the opposition-


Stanley Howard Knowles: I would remind the committee that this is my speech.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Will the leader of the opposition inform the committee where he got his instructions as to the stand he is to take in this matter?


Gordon Graydon: I suggest that was somewhat uncalled for. My hon. friend is always fairly charitable toward me. I was called away on a rather sad mission on Friday, and it was not possible for me to be here. I am sorry he did not see fit to be a little more charitable in the observations he has just made.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: If I may be allowed to make a statement: We have before us a summary of the air services branch, in which there are three items. I would ask the minister if we are to have the general discussion on the first item, or would it be on item 3, which has special reference to civil aviation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think we could have a
general discussion on item No. 1.
1.	Radio services, 12,666,045.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I trust
j'ou will time me from this moment rather than from the moment I actually started, in view of the rather prolonged interruption. In this parliament we are dealing with a great many matters of extreme importance. Time will sort them out as to their relative significance. When that process has been completed I believe that the manner in which we deal with this question of air transport will loom large in the history of our time, it is only a few decades since the parliament of Canada was called upon to deal with matters pertaining to the rapid expansion of our railroad transportation facilities. I hope that we will avoid some of the mistakes that were made in those days and possess the imagination to sense what air transport will mean to civilization in Canada and throughout the world. I hope also that we will take the necessary steps to see to it that the full benefit of air transport is secured to the people of this country.
I should like to make a few remarks about the importance of air transport, dealing both 100-104
with the domestic and the international fields. Domestically it is obvious that travel by air is revolutionary, but there are some other things we should not lose sight of. Travel by air to the extent to which it is now possible will add tremendously to the sum total of the goods and services we shall be able to produce in this country. In a real sense air transport adds to the wealth of Canada. If we properly develop our facilities for air transport it should make possible greater travel on the part of our people between the various sections of our country, and should aid us in our desire to increase the knowledge of our people about Canada as a whole and develop our sense of nationhood and national unity.
Air transport properly developed should bring to remote areas in our country medical and hospital services and facilities of the kind which have been denied to the people in those areas. With a little imagination we should be able to realize that the full development of air transport may have an important bearing upon industry and upon the housing situation in this country. In due course air transport may make it possible to decentralize industry to an extent not hitherto possible. It introduces a new factor into the economic picture so far as industry is concerned. It is possible that a different civilization may grow up because of .this revolutionary development.
In this industrial age thus far it has been the practice to crowd people together in urban areas, with the resultant development of many bad features such as slum conditions and so on. We .recognize the desirability of people being able to spread out into rural areas and get more fresh air and sunshine, and I think we should let our imagination bring home to us the fact that the proper development of air transport may make possible better housing and living conditions for our people right across the country.
Another feature of our life which will be affected by the full development of air transport is life in the north country. Up to the present Canada has been thought of as strip of country running across the northern border of the country to the south. It is only in recent shears that we have begun to realize the potentialities of our north country, and I submit that the development of air travel will change those potentialities into realities.
On the international front it is recognized that this modern means of transport is of great importance. We can readily realize what air transport, if not properly controlled, may bring about in the way of unspeakable

War Appropriation-Transport

horrors in future wars. On the other hand, air transport, properly controlled, can aid in the establishment of permanent peace. On the one hand, it can do that by increasing the sum total of goods and services, increasing the wealth available in the world and in that positive way helping to bring about a better world in which war may not have to take place.
On the other hand, in attacking this problem of international air transport there is the possibility of developing cooperation among the nations. This cooperation can be built up in a functional way, as has already been referred to, as well as by the development of realistic organizations for the establishment and maintenance of world peace. I submit, therefore, that on every count this subject is one of great importance.
On behalf of the group with which I am associated I wish to say without hesitation that we welcome the statement made on Friday by the Minister of Munitions and Supply. I shall have some things to say about it in a few minutes which are critical, but in the main my criticism will be that it does not go far enough. Before making that criticism I want to say again that we welcome the statement and commend the government for 'having made known its position. I shall deal first with the international aspect of the statement.
May I first voice 1he hope that on this issue parliament will indicate that it stands behind the government as far as it has gone in preparing a draft international agreement. When the government sends its representatives to any international conference they should know that they can press for the implementation of everything in this proposed international convention. They should know that if everything therein is adopted it will be supported by any succeeding government. As I have already indicated, my point is that the draft convention should go further but to the extent it does go it should have the support of all groups in this house.
Having made the statement that in my view the proposed draft convention does not go far enough, it becomes my responsibility to indicate wherein I think it falls short. May I say first that when one approaches the whole problem of international control of air transport there are some basic matters that have to be agreed to. I feel that the minister stated those basic matters quite clearly, particularly when he referred to the necessity of agreeing to the right of innocent passage, and freedom of transit, and also his further statement with reference to freedom of com-
	!
mercial outlet within the limitations of certain regulations.
It might not be amiss to take a moment to look at the alternatives to international control of air transport. As I see it, there are two alternatives, and they are both extreme. On the one hand there is the possibility of what is miscalled the freedom of the air, the proposed right of companies anywhere and everywhere to fly anywhere and everywhere. I submit that if that were the case not only would we in Canada suffer materially but it would lead to all sorts of exploitation and rivalry and would be the basis for further disastrous wars. The other extreme from what I have said is miscalled the freedom of the air is the concept of narrow nationalism, the idea, for example, that each nation should set up boundaries around its own territory and refuse to allow planes in from other countries. One can see on that basis that we should soon be sidetracked in Canada. We should lose the advantage of our otherwise favourable position; and here too you will have not only the restricting of the people of the world with regard to the advantages of air transport but a development of ill-feeling and again a basis for international ill-will. Therefore I think we should recognize at the outset that either one of those extremes is out, and certainly should be out so far as Canada is concerned. Our representatives should go into any discussion on this question pledged to the idea of the international control of air transport.
As I see it, when one starts to discuss international control of air transport there are various matters that have to be considered. I see those matters falling on three different levels. On the first level there are such matters as safety regulations, rules of flying, standards of aircraft, standards of competency of the crews, ground equipment, meteorlogical services, navigational aids, and so on. On the second level are matters relating to the licensing of air routes, the arranging for quotas frequencies and rates, and also the whole concept of planning and fostering the development of various air routes in different parts ol the world. I pause for a moment to suggest that because one uses the word "licensing" in that connection it does not mean that the second level function is merely a restrictive function. I emphasize the fact that on this level initiative can be taken for the fostering and the developing of lines for the good of the whole world. But in addition to these two levels there is a third, namely, the level of operation of international air trunk routes, and seeing to it that the operation of such trunk routes will secure not to the owners of one

War Appropriation-Transport
company in one country but to the people of the world as a whole the full advantage of international air transport.
I think my criticism of the government's statement is obvious now that I have indicated these three levels. As I see the picture, the government has taken a fairly clear stand with respect to the matters which I say fall on the first and second levels. There are some details in the draft international air transport convention about which I shall make comments in a moment or two; but first of all I want to deal with the failure of the convention to refer to any of the matters which I have placed on the third level, namely, the level of international operation of international air transport. I should like to point out in that connection that my idea that this phase of the subject should be considered is not only ours but is contained in the statement which was issued by Australia and New Zealand on January 21, 1944. I should like to place on Hansard again one or two sections of the Australia-New Zealand agreement. Section 18 under civil aviation reads as follows:
18.	The two governments declare that the air services using the international air trunk routes should be operated by an international air transport authority.
19.	The two governments support the principles that
(a)	full control of the international air trunk routes and the ownership of all aircraft and ancillary equipment should be vested in the international air transport authority; and
(b)	the international air trunk routes should themselves be specified in the international agreement referred to in the next succeeding clause.
The point I wish to make in urging that this other phase of the subject should be considered is that I do not altogether agree with the statement of the minister, or with the parts that express the same thought in paragraph 3 of the summary or in article X, section 4 of the proposed convention, that it is of no concern to us who owns the lines from other countries which are participating in international air services. My contention is that if you have large private corporations from other countries participating in those international air services without an international air transport authority operating it, that authority merely licensing them, you have all the pressure of private ownership on rates to make all possible profit out of international air transport, and to that extent you have deprived the people of the world of some of the benefits of this modern means of travel which we feel should be secured to them.
100-1041	' [DOT] _	'
I would point out also that under the terms of the draft convention we in this country would be putting public money into the providing of air fields and ground services of one kind or another for those international lines. I think it is of concern to us whether that is to result in increased private profit to privately owned companies in other countries, operating into Canada, or whether it is to result in increased benefit to the people of other countries and to the whole world. In other words, I want to urge upon the government that it should consider going a step further than it has in the agreement that has been tabled.
There are one or two points of detail in the draft convention that I should like to comment on briefly. For example, I feel that we should be given more detail as to the basis for determining the relative importance to each state of international air services and of each state to international air services. This matter is referred to in paragraph 4 of the summary, and also in article IV, section 1, of the convention, and article V, section 1 of the convention. On the basis of this relative importance will be determined the membership in the proposed assembly, the-membership of the board, and the membership of the regional council. It should be readily seen that this is a matter of great importance, and I feel that more detail should have been given. Obviously the basis cannot be determined solely with respect to population, solely with respect to geographical size or geographical location. A great many factors-enter into the picture. I repeat that some detail should have been given; that we should know just what the view of the Canadian government is on this matter.
Then with respect to trans-frontier services, or services between two contiguous countries, I feel that the convention leaves the matter not as clear as it might be. In some sections it says that services between two contiguous countries will be excepted from the provisions of this convention; in others it says that services between any two countries may be worked out by themselves subject to the provisions of this convention, including specifically the provisions with respect to licences.. I am making two points in that connection: first, that the matter should be made clearer-than it is; second, that two contiguous countries such as the United States and Canada should have a certain amount of latitude in making agreements for what are called trans-frontier services; at the same time they should be subject to review by regional councils such as are provided for in the convention. While it may seem logical for two-

War Appropriation-Transport
countries such as the United States and Canada not to be subject to such a review, if you allow these bilateral agreements all over the world you can very soon weaken the position of the regional councils and of the whole attempt to establish uniformity of service and standards throughout the world. If private firms in some countries are stumbling blocks in this matter and represent the reason why the government is a bit timid, I would urge that into a gathering of this kind governmental representatives should go, not with the compromise that they hope to come out with, but with the most desirable position, and if they have to compromise at least they will not have had to give away too much as a result of that situation.
I would therefore urge these points on the government with respect to the international aspect of this whole situation. Nevertheless I repeat what I said earlier, that as far as the draft convention goes-and I have not only digested it over the weekend but have enjoyed studying it-it seems to me it should have the support of this parliament.
May I now turn to the domestic side of the picture. I should like first of all to say that the pride which the minister expressed the *other day in Trans-Canada Air Lines, especially his pride in its splendid record of safety, is one that is shared by the people of Canada from coast to coast. We are all very proud of our own Trans-Canada Air Lines.
With respect to the announcement that the minister made the other day to the effect that railway companies must within a year after the conclusion of the European war divest themselves of their air lines, I want to say that although I am no defender of the present government, the Minister of Munitions and Supply is to be congratulated on at last having lost patience with the Canadian Pacific in this matter. He put on Hansard facts which are the basis of his having lost his patience, if I may put it that way. First of all, the position which Canadian Pacific Air Lines now holds in this country has been made possible, not by the Canadian Pacific Air Lines, but in the first instance by the pioneering which was done by bush pilots down through the years. The minister pointed out that the Canadian Pacific was not in the picture for a great many years. It came along with its huge financial resources and was able to buy up all but one of the private companies in the field. As a matter of fact, I believe, the one which they did not buy up was not organized at the time Canadian Pacific Air Lines came into the field, less than three years ago.

The minister also pointed out the other day, although in this instance I do not know whether he was condemning Canadian Pacific Air Lines or condemning himself, that whereas Trans-Canada Air Lines has been unable to get additional transport planes during the course of the war, somehow or other it has been possible for the Canadian Pacific Air Lines to get additional planes because of the work that it was doing on the northwest staging route. I am still puzzled about that. I feel that the minister not only should condemn Canadian Pacific Air Lines for what they have done in this connection, but should answer the question why it was possible for them to get extra planes and at the same time not possible for Trans-Canada Air Lines to do so. I understand they now have more planes than Trans-Canada Air Lines has, and this at a time when the United States commercial air lines are operating their present services with little more than half the number of planes they had at the outbreak of the war. This is an example of the special privilege which this company has enjoyed, and it is on the basis of this special privilege that they have been able to build up the huge monopoly they have at the present time. Not only have they exploited the war situation in this way, but Canadian Pacific Air Lines is playing on sectional interests in various parts of the country, getting municipalities and councils to send in resolutions of one kind and another, and doing everything it can be threaten the position of our own publicly owned Trans-Canada Air Lines.
The Minister of Munitions and Supply has had long experience of this kind of thing. He did not lose his patience overnight. I was interested in reading the other day some of the debate in 1937, to find this from the minister, as reported in Hansard of that year, pages 2216 and 2217. The Minister of Munitions and Supply is speaking:
The question now arises: Have we invited the private interests to participate? That question was asked. May I say we did not need to invite them. They came from every part of Canada and the United States, and put on the most persistent lobby in Ottawa that I have ever seen. The only way we could make progress was to absolutely refuse to talk to them. We said, "Go back home...."
I am glad, in view of the intervening experiences which the minister has had with private enterprise endeavouring to build up, on the basis of the efforts of little people, a huge monopoly, that the minister has taken the strong stand he has in this matter. Not only has Canadian Pacific Air Lines built up its strong position at the present time on the basis of the factors which I have laid down,

War Appropriation-Transport
but it has done so with considerable government assistance. The minister mentioned the other day the part which air mail contracts have played in the development of air service down through the years, and not many days ago he gave figures as to the amount of government money which is going into the building of routes such as that from Edmonton to Whitehorse. He gave the figure at that time as about S46,000,000. In addition to that $46,000,000 of capital cost, I have here information which was given in sessional paper No. 213 of this year when I asked for the annual operating cost of the Edmonton to Whitehorse route and also the annual revenues from companies flying over that route. In 1943 it cost the government, to maintain that route, $337,835.63. The total amount of revenue which the government received from the only private company flying over that route, which was the Yukon Southern Air Transport Limited, fully owned by the Canadian Pacific, was only $30,276.05. In other words, there simply is no such thing as private enterprise in the field of air transport; what you have is the government providing the air fields, the air routes, the meteorological services and the other things which are necessary to make possible the flying of these planes, at almost no cost to the private company; you have the bush pilots of the early days developing these routes; and then you have private finance in the hands of the Canadian Pacific coming along at the last minute and cashing in on the whole works.
It is quite interesting to note, in a Gallup poll which was published just a day or two ago, some figures with respect to this whole question. I know that if the hon. member for Broadview hears me mention "Gallup poll" he will put in his crack about it. Nevertheless the figures are interesting. A vote was taken by these people as to what the Canadian public wants in regard to the ownership of airlines, and these were'the figures: Government ownership, forty-four per cent; private ownership, eighteen per cent; a combination of both, twenty-eight per cent; undecided, ten per cent. If you take these figures, eliminating the ten per cent who do not know what they want and consider the rest, you find that only twenty per cent want unadulterated private ownership while the other eighty per cent want either government ownership or a combination of the two.
I suggest, therefore, to the Minister of Munitions and Supply and the government that they are moving in the direction of the thought of the Canadian people when they look away from private monopoly in air transport and toward the strengthening of the people's position as expressed in government ownership. But now, in spite of the fact that the minister has taken the stand he has, namely, that the principle of non-profit and non-competitive operation should rule in air transport, I am afraid that the proposal he made the other day, although we welcome it, does not go far enough. I refer to his statement that within a year after the war the Canadian Pacific Railway, for example, must divest itself of its ownership of airlines, and also his statement that from now on no licences to operate new routes will be given to any railway operating airlines.
That is good, but I cannot help reminding the committee of the fact that once upon a time the Aluminum Company of America found it necessary to divest itself of ownership of the Aluminum Company of Canada, and what did that mean? Simply, that it was transferred to Aluminium Limited, so that we still have the same people in the background operating what has become a world cartel and drawing to themselves the profits from that operation.
I suggest that this is the question to be looked at here. It is not good enough merely to tell the Canadian Pacific Railway that they must divest themselves of ownership of Canadian Pacific Air Lines. It will *still be possible, under a separate name, for a private monopoly to be built up comprising the tremendous hold that Canadian Pacific Air Lines now have, which not only will challenge the position of Trans-Canada Air Lines but will interfere with the principle which I have said is important, namely, that we should secure for the people of Canada the full benefit of this modern development of air transport.
I say, therefore, that on this domestic front the government should go considerably further, and I would suggest at least two or three steps which in my opinion should be taken. I believe, for example, that the northwest staging route from Edmonton to White Horse and on into Alaska should be taken over and made part of Trans-Canada Air Lines because of the importance of that route in flying to Asia. Similarly, I feel that the route down the Mackenzie, because of its importance in the development of Canada's northland, where so much mineral wealth is located, which by the way is largely under the control of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, with its Canadian Pacific Railway connection, should be nationalized and made part of Trans-Canada Air Lines. I would say the same about the route being developed to Labrador, which may become very important in the services to Europe.
War Appropriation-Transport

If I had time I would make further suggestions along this line, but certainly I suggest that the government should take further steps toward nationalizing these sections of the present Canadian Pacific Air Lines.
There are other matters I should like to discuss but my time will not permit. However, I would express concurrence in the idea of setting up an air transport board, and I am particularly pleased at the fact that it is to be not just a judicial body, but one that is to act as an instrument of government policy, and that its purpose will be to develop and foster the extension of air services, air fields, air routes, research into new kinds of planes, construction and so on. That should be the function of such a body. It should not be just a judicial or restrictive organization but a body which in the name of the people of Canada takes the initiative to develop these modern means of transportation to see to it that its full and richest benefits shall come to and be secured to the people of Canada as a whole.
My time is just about up and I shall draw to a close, but before I do so I should like to quote from a gentleman who was a member of this house some years ago and who had some views on this subject. I refer to the then Right Hon. R. B. Bennett. Speaking in 1937 in the debate on the Trans-Canada Air Lines bill, as reported at pages 2210, 2211 and 2212, of Hansard of that year, these are some of the things that Mr. Bennett said:
I submit that in the light of the experience we have had in this country, if we are going into this air line business, we should own it from the start and not later.
Mr. Woodsworth: Hear, hear.
Later on, Mr. Bennett had this to say:
But I do now implore the minister not to part with this property. To-night the field is clear. To-night no franchise encumbers the .ground. To-night we stand in a position to create by act of this parliament an enterprise that will have complete control of aerial navigation between the Atlantic and the Pacific. We have that right to-night. If we pass this measure-
That is, the bill in the form in which it stood at that time.
-and hand this right over, not to the crown, but to a body of shareholders and provide that the crown may buy it back sometime in the future if it so desires, we shall be going in the wrong direction. I plead with the minister to reverse the process, to own the enterprise nowr, and sell it later, if he so desires. That is the difference between the minister's view and mine of the principles that underlie this measure. 1 make this suggestion to the minister not because I can be said to be one of those who believe in public ownership and control, for I have not that reputation, but because I have found by grim experience that the condition
(Mr. Knowles.]
that now exists in Canada with respect to railroads has arisen in consequence of the blunder we made.
That was Mr. Bennett speaking.
We cannot make a blunder if we keep what we have got, and what we have got to-night is control of the whole matter. It seems to me, therefore, wise to take initial steps to ensure that that control shall be retained by the action of this parliament and if we desire later to terminate it or to part with it, we may do so through an act of this house and as a result of the intelligent expression of opinion by members of parliament.
I have no desire to go into the matter at greater length, nor do I wish at this moment to go into details, because that will have to be done in committee. But I do hope that the minister will not part with control as this bill provides-control which in my judgment is so essential to our success in view of all the difficulties that will confront us-and we shall then be in a position to cope with the situation in a manner that will be denied us if we adopt the principle of this measure.
As I understand it, Mr. Bennett was stating an obvious fact, that it is a great deal easier to hold on to what you have than it is to try to get it back afterwards, and I suggest to the minister and to the government that they have learned this from bitter experience even in the last year. It is less than a year since the Prime Minister made his very important statement of the government's policy with respect to civil aviation, at which time he made it clear that Trans-Canada Air Lines was to have the exclusive operation of Canada's main line services and also our international connections, but also at which time he said to private enterprise, "The whole north country is yours". In less than a year this private company has taken advantage of that position to build up this huge monopoly which challenges the position of the government to the point where, even against his will, the Minister of Munitions-I am assuming that it is against his will, although I cannot presume to know what goes on in his mind-has had to take this somewhat drastic action. I suggest that this shows what can happen in a very short time with these powerful monopolies. At the present time we have not lost it all. We own the route from Edmonton to Alaska and in certain other sections. There are areas where final franchises have not been given, where the whole question of what lines are to fly these international routes has not been, finally settled. We have not lost this as yet; but if we carry on the policy of saying to private enterprise, whatever monopoly it may be, Canadian Pacific Air Lines or under some other name, "That field is yours," the day will come when we shall regret not having held on to what we have at this time. Therefore I plead with the government, in the domestic field as

War Appropriation-Transport
on the international front, to look again at this whole programme as laid down in the statement made on Friday. It is good as far as it goes, and I hope we shall not hear from any part of this house any suggestion that the government should take any less of a step than, it proposes. But I would urge that it consider going further, both internationally and domestically, along the lines I have suggested.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Shall the item carry?


Gordon Graydon: No, Mr. Chairman. The arrangement which came out of the exchange which took place a short time ago between the Prime Minister and myself was that this debate would be held over to give .us an opportunity of continuing at a later date the general discussion in regard to civil aviation. As far as we are concerned that arrangement still holds; perhaps the minister would- care to make some statement in that connection. That being so, I should like the opportunity of adjourning this debate, if that is the wish of the government at this time. I had rather thought some other hon. members would want to speak, but if not this would appear to be the only course open at the moment.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I should like to make as much progress as I can without closing the debate on this item. Would my hon. friend object to going on with the war estimates, with the understanding that the last item will not be passed until the discussion has been concluded?


Gordon Graydon: I would have no objection, provided that our rights were reserved as far as a general discussion is concerned Perhaps that would take care of the situation. All we are anxious for is an opportunity to give some study to the general situation, but the items may be discussed, I suppose, as far as we are concerned.


Thomas Miller Bell: I think it is regrettable that we cannot go on with this discussion today, in order that the matter may be thoroughly considered by the committee. This matter of civil aviation has been before the house since February 11, on which date the statement was placed on Hansard, at page 400, and it seems to us that hon. members who wished to speak for particular parties in the house at least should have given the matter a good deal of consideration prior to this. I know we did.


Gordon Graydon: Is this a lecture the hon gentleman is giving us?


Mr. COLDWELL:: No, I am not giving a lecture, but often I have to listen to lectures
from the leader of the opposition, and I see no reason why I, as a member of this house, should not express my regret that the official opposition apparently has been unable to arrive at a decision regarding this particular matter.


Gordon Graydon: On a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman, I have seen the leader of the C.C.F. party play this old game of politics quite often, but I have never seen him in quite as good form as he is in to-day. When he suggests that the leader of the opposition or this group has not come to a decision with respect to this matter, I want him to withdraw that remark. As far as we are concerned I thought we had placed our position before the committee so clearly that even the hon. member would not be able to play politics with it. I ask him to go through Hansard for last Friday and see if he or anyone else in this house can find the slightest hint or indication that this debate was to be proceeded with this afternoon. If he can do so I might be prepared to accept some of his other statements, but in all fairness I think he must admit that there was tremendous confusion and conflict with respect to the matter.


Major James William Coldwell: Like the leader of the opposition, I was not present when the statements were made on Friday evening. However, I do recall the statement on Thursday evening. As a result of that statement our party got together on Friday morning and discussed civil aviation, though we did not know what the minister was going to say that afternoon. The matter has been further discussed since that time, as should be quite evident from the comprehensive statement that has been made in behalf of this party, and before we came into the house this afternoon we discussed the matter further. I wish to say to the leader of the opposition that it seems to me unfortunate that we cannot proceed with this matter to-day as we had expected to be able to do. I must accept the word of the hon. gentleman that this is not because his party has been unable to arrive at a decision, but I think I have a right to draw my own conclusions as to what that reason may be, and I shall do so.
I just want to add that I think the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) has placed our position before the committee clearly and ably. We do welcome this step. For a long time we have felt that future generations might regret it if we allowed the present situation in this country with regard to aviation to continue. This is a
War Appropriation-Transport

new mode of transportation. Many of us in this house have done a good deal of flying at one time or another, and we realize perhaps more fully than a great many of the general public that to-day the safety, rapidity and comfort of air transport are bound to have a tremendous effect on the future development of transportation generally.
Another consideration I have in mind is that in this country we have a railway system owned by the people and another owned by a great corporation, the shareholders of which are very largely beyond our borders and the shares and securities of which may come into our hands at the conclusion of the war, thus giving us control of that other great transportation system. I have believed for a long time that while perhaps two well-established organizations within the same transportation field might engage, not in competition in the usual sense but in friendly rivalry, so that one form or one organization may become a yardstick for another form or another organization, yet in a country like this, with its great distances, with the necessity of transportation to join one part of the country to the other, it is essential that we should have a closely integrated and well-knit transportation system. I am pleased to see that the government intends to retain control of this great new facility. I was present the night the former leader of the opposition in this house, the Right Hon. R. B. Bennett, gave the warning which we can say to-day as we look back ought to have been heeded to a greater extent than has been the case. I am glad, therefore, to see that we have an opportunity now of controlling this great new form of transportation. Perchance, when the war is over, in the development of our country we shall have to consider ways and means of integrating all our transportation systems. I recall the years before the war when some hon. members talked about railway deficits, and when proposals were *made to tear up railway lines, mostly lines operating under the Canadian National Railways system. We were asked then to relieve ourselves of the financial burden those lines involved when, at the same time, we saw growing up in this country other and unregulated forms of public transportation.
These were, of course, the buses and trucks. We now have transportation by air. My view has always been that our transportation system, in a country like Canada, ought to be intelligently operated and intelligently integrated. For example, trucks and buses ought to be feeders to the railways upon which, to a great extent, because of the heavy freight we must carry long distances, the economic life

of this country must depend. That ought to be the situation, rather than have trucks and buses in disastrous competition with our railway systems. That means, of course, that if we are to have a desirable condition we must have the entire system under public rather than private control. The air arm, that great new field of transportation, most assuredly should be under national ownership and control now.
My colleague the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has spoken of the international importance of air transportation. I believe we have to consider it not only from the point of view of domestic convenience but also from that of national security and world peace. In the last generation we have had an opportunity to see how civil air transportation has assisted great nations to lay the foundations of military air power. Particularly was that developed in Germany. So that when the war came we found that through her civil air transportation system and the civil training of her young men in the operation of aeroplanes and gliders, she had a potential air force ready and willing to destroy the rest of the world.
Accordingly in the field of international air transportation it becomes apparent and, I think, important, that only public control should function. International cooperation does not mean, in reality, a diminution of national sovereignty. What it really means is, sometimes, the transfer-


Paul Joseph James Martin: The expansion of it.


Major James William Coldwell: -of national sovereignty between nations, and an expansion of it into a larger and wider field, so that a nation may have a voice in something greater and larger than its own narrow domestic affairs. I think in the field of civil aviation we must have international understanding, international operation and international control. I should like to see the world go beyond where I think it can go to-day. I should like to see an international system owned internationally; but I realize that under present world conditions not only is that improbable but it is quite out of the question. Hence I believe we must have an intergovernmental regulatory body, one which will license and regulate and enter into arrangements with the nations, so that we may achieve the results we desire, namely efficient transportation, rapid transportation, comfortable transportation, safe transportation-and peace at the end of it all.
I am glad, too. that the minister spoke as he did on Friday. I believe he made the position clear in that regards-because Canada is in a strategic position. The airways of the world cross our country-the airways to Europe,

War Appropriation-Transport
northeast and over the top of the world, or to the northwest, as we sometimes call it, again going near the cap of the world to Asia and into India. Those of us who have studied the new maps made in recent years showing the air routes of the world over the polar or arctic regions realize that instead of going in the direction in which we thought we should go, namely east or west, we went northwest, northeast, and sometimes even north to get to the places which seemed east or west of us.
As I say, Canada is in a strategic position. The airways to many parts of the world, from the great centres of population in North America to the continents of Europe and Asia, pass over this country. It is well, therefore, that an early start has been made by the government and by parliament in placing before other nations for their consideration the viewpoint-at least, I hope it is the viewpoint-of this entire country, regardless of our political affiliations. I should like to see our government extend air transportation as rapidly as possible into other parts of the world. As soon as we are able to do so, I should like to see Canada establish an air route to South America as well as to Europe and Asia. After all, we have much in common with the progressive peoples to be found in at least some of the South American countries, and there are advantageous trade relationships to be made between us. Therefore I welcome this step forward. I agree also with the criticisms which have already been made, but I think it is well that at this time we should face this great problem and let other nations of the world know where we stand.
In conclusion, may I say that Canada, as far as her population is concerned, is a small nation. But in the field of aviation she is a great nation-one of the three or four leading nations of the world. A great deal of pioneering has been done in Canada, and probably when the history of the war is written it will show that our greatest contribution will have been made in the air. Whether that be so or not, we have in Canada, I believe, a people who are air conscious to an extent greater than applies to people in most countries. We have tremendous opportunity in this field to wield an influence for good out of all proportion to our population or to our size. I hope we shall be able to make that position clear, and to maintain it when the time comes to negotiate agreements with other countries.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: I understood the leader of the opposition to say that no arrangement had been made to discuss these items to-day. I find this at page 1624 of Hansard for Friday:
On Monday we shall take up first of all the resolution on the war appropriation and the
estimates of the Minister of Munitions and Supply, and we may call two items in order of supply during the day. If we do call them, they are on the Department of the Secretary of the State and civil estimates of munitions and supply. Possibly we may have to discuss further the civil estimates of agriculture, and the house must be prepared to take into consideration at any time Mr. Speaker's report on standing orders.
Mr. Stirling: May I ask what the minister means by saying that we might have to discuss two further items of munitions and supply?
Mr. Mackenzie (Vancouver Centre): It is the intention to call two new items.
Mr. Stirling: Apart from that, we are going into committee on war appropriations and take up munitions and supply?
Mr. Mackenzie (Vancouver Centre): That is correct.


Gordon Graydon: That is what we thought.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps I can clarify this. I am rather surprised at the turn the debate has taken. I had regarded the hon. member for Lake Centre as the specialist on this particular subject. We have been corresponding since early- last week, the last correspondence having passed on Thursday. I wrote to him on Wednesday and Tuesday, stating that I hoped to go on on Thursday; I wrote him on Thursday saying that I intended to make my statement on Friday and that the debate would take place on Monday. I understood that that arrangement was satisfactory to him because I received no reply. There was no doubt in my mind that hon. members would be prepared to carry on this debate to-day. Since they are not, perhaps we had better straighten out the future programme. I am willing to meet almost any request that is made, but I think we shall arrange it in this way: to-morrow when the orders of the day are called I shall make my statement on the Department of Munitions and Supply having to do with war supplies. We shall then discuss the items under that heading and when those are finished we shall return to the unfinished items under the present heading. I cannot say when that will be, but I hope no oite asks me to change the programme again.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: May I finish the suggestion I was making? This is transport, but the whole business of transport has been placed under the care of the Minister of Munitions and Supply. It was generally understood that we could discuss civil aviation which comes under his care, and then discuss the general aspects of the Department of Munitions and Supply after this discussion had been completed.


Gordon Graydon: It is not munitions and supply.	.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Certainly it is.

War Appropriation-Transport


Gordon Graydon: It certainly is not. That is the problem; it should be transport.


James Lester Douglas: It is the part of transport that has been transferred to the Department of Munitions and Supply.


Gordon Graydon: You do not transfer departments like that.


James Lester Douglas: I do not think it would be wise to drop this discussion now and have the minister go into the general aspect of his department to-morrow after which we would have a general melee made up of both aspects of the programme. One hon. member will be discussing transport and another will be discussing munitions and supply. I suggest that we should let item No. 1, radio services, stand and then take up the other items. That would leave the leader of the opposition or whoever else is to speak for the official opposition an opportunity to come back to item No. 1. I think it would be better to discuss the other items and get them approved rather than to mix up civil aviation and munitions and supply.


Gordon Graydon: I think the minister and I are at one with respect to this. I agreed to go on with the items proposed, but the hon. member to my left says that that was not the arrangement. We are prepared to go on with the items as long as one is left so that there can be a general discussion later on. I do not think there is any disagreement on that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is no particular reason why any particular item should be left. We can go on and pass No. 1, pass No. 2 and then discuss No. 3. There is no reason why this discussion should come under item No. 1, which is radio services; it might just as well come under item No. 3, which is civil aviation.


Major James William Coldwell: It is understood then
that civil aviation will be discussed separately from the other items?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: If we are to discuss
other items and then come back to civil aviation and have them all mixed up, it will be most unsatisfactory.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is the place of the government to decide the order of business. At six o'clock we shall drop civil aviation and then go on with the discussion of munitions production. When we finish the munitions production discussion, we shall go back to civil aviation.


Grote Stirling: Now we are getting back to what was my understanding on Friday evening. Perhaps I may be allowed to run over 
the facts as I see them. Last fall the minister returned from the United Kingdom after holding important conferences there. I remember distinctly reading in the press that he had not brought back a draft agreement on this matter but that he would make a statement in the house, obviously after the house opened. Eight weeks have passed and at last we have had the minister's statement. When that statement was delivered we understood clearly that the debate would not then ensue. On Friday night the minister who was speaking for the government explained what the business to-day would be in such a way that I, who had taken it up with him, understood that we were going into other portions of the statement of the Minister of Munitions and Supply. It was not until just before I came into the house this afternoon that I heard that the government had changed its decision and wanted to proceed with civil aviation and permit a debate on the minister's important statement to take place. That change was not entirely convenient to members of the opposition. The arrangement to which the minister is now ready to agree is entirely in accordance with our understanding Friday night and I think it satisfactorily solves the whole matter.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the proposal made a moment ago by the minister is carried out, docs it mean that at eight o'clock he will make a statement on other aspects of munitions and supply?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, to-morrow at three o'clock.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What shall we do at eight o'clock tonight?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I cannot say just what the exact programme will be.


Mr. MICHAUD:: Possibly item No. 5 on the order paper, which is a resolution standing in the name of the Minister of Finance to raise money by way of loan. Then we shall possibly take up the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Civil supply.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: And then two items of supply, as announced on Friday night.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I agree with the statement made by the Minister of Munitions and Supply that we should discuss items No. 1 and 2 and then leave item No. 3, which is civil aviation. Shall I call item No. 1 for discussion?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Just before you do that, I think someone should make it more clear what we are to take up at eight o'clock. I still do not understand the situation.

War Appropriation-Transport


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I have stated that we shall take up item No. 5 on the order paper and then supply.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What supply?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Public works and then two items in departments not called yet, Secretary of State and Munitions and Supply civil estimates. That was announced Friday evening.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Item No. 1:
1.	Radio services, $2,666,045.


Gordon Graydon: Does this item cover services supplementary to the general radio services?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, these estimates arise wholly out of the war. Many radio beams have been installed between military airports and to provide defence services on the coasts. These are operated by the Department of Transport for the military services. All the items under this heading will disappear when the war is over; they are for purely war services.


Gordon Graydon: There would be nothing under this item which would have to do with the short-wave system that is proposed?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No; these are purely war estimates.


Mr. BENCE:: Under what item could I discuss the radio service between Winnipeg and Edmonton?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is a civil item which will be introduced later.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: The minister cannot say very much about these amounts, because they are secret?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes; they cannot be discussed in detail, I am afraid.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
2.	Meteorological services, $1,670,480.
Grote Stirling: Is there any relationship between this and the meteorological service already carried on throughout Canada for purposes other than war?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The situation is exactly the same. These are items that will disappear when the war ends. The services are installed wholly for war purposes.


Grote Stirling: They are not set up as separate stations from those in many instances already in existence and furnishing meteorological service, or are they entirely new stations set up for purposes of war?


Clarence Decatur Howe: They are really expansions of that service for war purposes. WThen I said 100-105J
that all meteorological stations installed for war purposes would disappear as peace-time services, I should qualify that, because we have extended the range of activities in that field and we might wish to retain the extended range. For instance, we have stations along the arctic.


Charles Edward Johnston: Would
some of those be taken over by the Trans-Canada service?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I might read what it covers: Meteorological services for (a) Trans-Atlantic ferry service with Dorval as the main centre. There is no civilian Trans-Atlantic line. The . item includes teletype installed from Dorval to Newfoundland; (b) Eastern and western air commands and the fleet; (c) Northwest staging route from Edmonton or Vancouver through White Horse to the Alaskan boundary; (d) R.C.A.F. and R.A.F. transport command; (e) R.C.A.F. aeroplane ferry from Kapuskasing. These are services which may be replaced with sendees for other purposes, but at the moment they are part of the war service. For instance, the ferry command to the United Kingdom is a war service, and the meteorological service that accompanies it is-also a war service.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: These stations are built so that they can be taken over later on?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. They are civilian stations,, operated by civilians. They are stations that would not be operated had the war not happened. As I say, we might operate them for another purpose after the war, such as the Atlantic ferry service. The only Atlantic ferry service Canada has to-day is a war service.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister mentioned the Edmonton-Alaska staging route. If that sendee is to be taken over by civil aviation you would need the stations, would you not?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. If there is a civilian plane service after the war, as I presume there will be, then this vote will be transferred to the civil vote and continued as civil aviation.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Would not a service like that help your navy and navigation generally after the war, especially if a new route is opened up and you have planes not only inside the coast but on the coast?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I presume there will be a civilian service after the war. The point I am making is that there are no civilian services there to-day and therefore this comes under the war vote and not a civil vote.
War Appropriation-Transport


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The thought I had in mind was this: Have you in mind all the time that some of these stations will be taken over on a permanent basis?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. We are working with a single purpose in mind at the moment; we are working for war.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I know that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We are mindful of the fact that facilities installed for war will undoubtedly be required for peace.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Has the minister a break-down showing the cost of the service in the northwest staging route, and how much the Canadian Pacific Air Lines pay for the meteorological services supplied by the Department of Transport?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The estimate for the meteorological work included in this item on the northwest staging route is $317,000. I may say that no one pays for weather service. Weather service is paid for by the government as a service to all aviation.


Mr. GILLIS:: With respect to the minister's statement that the meteorological services would disappear after the war, may I say that I cannot see it in that way. I am interested in the Trans-Canada Air Lines plane service made available to Sydney since the war. That service serves the whole area around that section of the country. They land on a R.C.A.F. field which is a large well-developed field for war purposes. In effect the minister's statement is. that that service would disappear when the war is over. That, would mean a discontinuation of the Trans-Canada Air Lines plane service now available in that area because of the war.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I clarify that? My hon. friend is speaking of a service that is not included in this vote. That is a civil aviation service and it is paid for out of the civil vote. This is a war vote.


Grote Stirling: Does the item of $1,670,480 cover the purchase of a considerable number of instruments for this purpose?


Clarence Decatur Howe: This is primarily the cost of operating.


Grote Stirling: Where would the instruments come in?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Material, supplies and equipment, $157,000, are included in this item.


Grote Stirling: Is there a vote elsewhere for more instruments than the minister has just mentioned?
(Mr. Howe.]


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is all. I can read the break-down of the item: salaries, $784,723; war duty supplements-I may say that applies to the war vote-$244;860; cost of living bonuses, $64,000; living allowances, $55,360; contributions to unemployment insurance fund, $5,000; weather observer contracts, $21,490; telephone and telegrams, $31,000; teletype, $110,000; travelling expenses, $32,000; printing and stationery, $28,000; materials, supplies and equipment, $157,000; construction, $59,000; freight, express and cartage, $62,000; sundries, $16,047. That makes a total of $1,670,480.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Mackenzie a little while ago the minister said that private air lines did not pay for meteorological services. May I ask on what basis payment is made to the government by private air lines over such a route as the northwest staging route? What services do they pay for in the figure that I gave earlier this afternoon? The figure I referred to for 1943 was roughly $30,000.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Payment is made on the basis of a fee for each landing. Each time a plane lands at an airport it pays a fee for doing so. It also pays for the communication sendees from the plane to the ground; that is the telephone and telegraph services from the plane to the ground. Where the government owns the ground station, each message which it receives from a plane carries with it a fee. These are a means of obtaining revenue from privately-owned planes or Trans-Canada planes. All planes flying pay the same scale of fees.


Grote Stirling: I suppose one can say that the whole of the meteorological services in connection with such fields as Gander and Goose come under this vote?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Grote Stirling: What about those which were carried on for Hudson bay and Hudson bay strait and localities up there? Are they still carried on, and come under this?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No; they come under a civil vote. If they were established before the early days of the war they come under a civil vote. It has been thought wise not to increase the civil vote by purely war expenditures. The purpose is, after the war is over, to consider what is then required as a permanent service and then to establish the civil vote. But the services which were in operation prior to the war are all charged to the civil vote.

War Appropriation-Transport


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Is all the information collected by the meteorological service- I mean from all over the place, civil facilities, the army, and the air force-gathered together and the results tabulated?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes; all the meteorological data is gathered and supplied to one source and distributed from the one source. There is no division of the meteorological service.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps under this item the question might be discussed as to the publication of weather forecasts across Canada. If my memory serves me correctly, at the beginning of the war weather forecasts were not made. Then some change was instituted which permitted certain localities to provide forecasts. I notice weather forecasts appear as a matter of course in practically every newspaper, at least newspapers which I happen to get in this district. Are weather forecasts made public generally throughout the country?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Whether the weather forecasts can be made public is a security matter which is determined by the chiefs of staff of the armed forces. Weather forecasts in certain areas, particularly in the Atlantic, are of importance to the enemy.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: I understand that some of the services included in this item are available to Trans-Canada Air Lines and to the Canadian Pacific as well as to the armed forces.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes; they are available to anyone. All the information collected on weather is available not only to Canadians but to everyone in the United States. Similarly all the weather information which is gathered in the United States is made available to Canada. There is a constant stream of weather information going out to every air field in the country.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This is treated exactly the same as in the case of water navigation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Clarence Gillis: What percentage of the
operating personnel included in this vote is civilian and what is in the services?


Clarence Decatur Howe: All those under this vote are civilians.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
S. Civil aviation:
Extra airport traffic control systems, $736,450; operation and maintenance of municipal (terminal) airports, $398,260; additional facilities, Moncton to Newfoundland airline, $130,500 (revote $78,500); improvements to airports,
$500,000; Canadian government transatlantic air service, $400,000; total, $2,243,710.
Grote Stirling: Docs the first of these items cover certain airports, traffic in certain airports, remembering always that it is the war expenditure portion of traffic control?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The following is the estimate of the funds required for the operation of three airway traffic control centres and fourteen airport control towers and an interphone and teletype service to control and direct the movement of aircraft on the airways and on approaches to landing of the various terminal airports in Canada.
This service was inaugurated in 1939 as a protective measure for airline and Royal Canadian Air Force aircraft, but during the past years has been greatly extended to meet the increased requirements made necessary by: the enlarged training programme of the R.C.A.F.; the expansion of the ferry command services of the Royal Air Force, the Royal Canadian Air Force, and the United States Army Air Force; the increased activity of the air transport command of the United States Army Air Force; the operation of traffic control centres and airport control towers on a twenty-four hour basis; the extension of interphone and teletype installations to provide a continuous service covering approximately 5,500 miles of airways from Vancouver, British Columbia to Torbay, Newfoundland; from Edmonton to Lethbridge, Alberta; from Montreal to Quebec; from North Bay, Ontario to Winnipeg, Manitoba; from Winnipeg, Manitoba, via Saskatoon to Edmonton; from Toronto via Sault Ste. Marie to Winnipeg; also to points in the United States, to connect with circuits provided by the civil aeronautics division of the United States. Such teletype facilities to include service between Winnipeg, Manitoba, and Pembina, Minnesota; Edmonton, Alberta, and Coutts, Alberta; Vancouver, B.C. and Blaine, Washington. Airway and airport traffic control stations are located as follows: airway traffic control centres, Winnipeg, Toronto and Montreal; air traffic control towers, Vancouver, Lethbridge, Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, Winnipeg, Windsor, North Bay, Toronto, London, Ottawa, Montreal and Moncton.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Are you dealing with
these subclause by subclause?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am waiting for No. 4.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I called the whole item, thinking the discussion would be general.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Subclause 1 is carried, Mr.. Chairman?

War Appropriation-Transport


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Subclause 1 is carried. We shall now deal with subclause 2, operation and maintenance of municipal airports, $398,260.


Grote Stirling: Would the minister explain this one?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. This item is for the operation and maintenance of fourteen municipal and other airports owned or leased by the Department of Transport for the duration of the w'ar, all of which are being utilized by the air forces of Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States for training operations, namely, Vancouver, Lethbridge, Winnipeg, London, Charlottetown, Edmonton, Medicine Hat, Fort William, Malton, Buchan, Calgary, Regina, Windsor, New Glasgow. This service was taken over by the Department of Transport from the Department of National Defence air services on April 1, 1912, and has since been maintained with funds provided by allotment from war appropriation.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: In view of the fact that
a great many districts are planning now for after the war business, in the way of developing district airports-I have in mind now the counties of Waterloo, Perth, Wellington and, I think, Huron, with some of the surrounding counties, the idea being to develop an airport which will take in the towns within a radius of thirty-five or forty miles, andi will prove important in the development of these districts- is the department now making any plans? I realize that some will come under reconstruction and* the repatriation of our men coming back, giving them work and so on; 'but is the department making plans whereby these developments, with government assistance, can be coordinated into the general scheme which undoubtedly we shall have when the war is over.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The government is not encouraging new development of airports at this time.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: I do not mean now.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We are willing, at the request of a municipality, to survey a site and report on it to the municipality, and then advise the municipality whether or not it is wise to purchase the land. But we are not prepared to make a commitment to any municipality about the nature of government assistance that will follow.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: The department has been of great assistance to us in our district. It has sent a man there who has made surveys and helped us in every possible way; he is a

very able fellow. We do think, however, that perhaps it is not too early to start on a plan for that work, because the big industrial centres such as we have in Waterloo, Perth, Welling' ton and that district dare not be off the air line. When the war is over we must be on the air line if we are to continue the development that has been built up over the last fifty or sixty years. Possibly it might be a good idea to have this whole picture coordinated with the efforts of the Department of Labour and other departments of government so that they may look after the post-war development of the country. I do not think it is too early to start and make some of these plans and have a general survey by the department.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The department is studying the situation, but municipal airports are usually started by the efforts of the municipality, and usually it is the municipality that puts the steam in the particular problems. The department either helps or vetoes as arrangements work into the general plan. I must say that until the war is further advanced we shall have to ask the municipality to do the pushing, requesting the government for such help as it requires from time to time which does not involve help in the actual construction of the airport.


Mr. PERLEY:: Can the minister interpret the term "municipal"? He mentioned Regina. Does the city of Regina own that airport?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Ernest Edward Perley: On what terms does the
government take over an airport and operate it?


Clarence Decatur Howe: At the beginning of the war we made an arrangement that all municipal airports required by the government for war purposes would be rented from the municipality at one dollar a year, the government undertaking to pay all operating expenses and make such improvements in the airports as might be required for war purposes. The municipalities that .entered into that arrangement have profited by it considerably, because all airports have been materially extended to meet the requirements of the air training plan.


Charles Edward Johnston: Will these improvements be turned back to the municipality?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The question is being considered. I may say that the land belongs to the municipality.


Charles Edward Johnston: But the improvements belong to the dominion government?

War Appropriation-Transport


Clarence Decatur Howe: The improvements usually go with the land.


Gordon Graydon: If I may say a word touching the point raised by the hon. member for Waterloo South (Mr. Homuth), I appreciate the minister's position with regard to the war coming first, and I think we all agree with that. But he also qualified that in one of his remarks, when he said that he is not unmindful of what comes afterwards. That is the proper attitude to take. The whole problem of transportation by air will be a very serious matter for many of the centres throughout Canada, because what happened when the railways went through the country may very well happen in connection with air lines. Those places which were on the railway lines were the ones that afterwards became great cities or impcrtant centres in Canada. The same situation m^y develop in connection with air lines; we may have a parallel here. In those days when the railways were pioneering their way through the dortlinion, the places which the roads did not go through gradually subsided in influence, in population and in business, and other centres which were on the main line of transportation took their place. Most of us envisage in the years that lie ahead the magnificent development that will take place in connection with air lines, and, I think the minister might give further consideration to the whole question of integrating, by way of survey and plan across Canada, the efforts of the government with respect to air lines in the days after the war.
I have been greatly impressed by the suggestion of the hon. member for Waterloo South in that particular respect. It is important that the minister give special consideration to it, because some of these towns and other places which to-day are thriving business sections may perhaps, if they are not properly integrated into an air line system, find that the present system of transportation may not meet the requirements of business which will come in another decade. They may find the whole situation changed. I add my word to what the hon. member has said.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I covered that phase of the matter fully in my statement on Friday. When my hon. friend recovers from his long weekend he will read the statement and find that the point is covered.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: A number of air force stations are being closed at the present time. This year, I believe, the plans are that some twenty-eight are to be closed. The people are concerned about the use that is to be made of these airports, the buildings and other facilities.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I wish to apologize to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon). I have some information and I realize that my remark was very much out of place and very rude. I apologize to him. I was trying to be amusing without any knowledge of the facts, and I hope he will forgive me.


Gordon Graydon: I did not think twice of that because I know my hon. friend would not have been rude intentionally.


George Hugh Castleden: There are about twenty-eight airports that are being closed out by the Royal Canadian Air Force this year across Canada. People are somewhat concerned as to the best use that can be made of equipment and so on and would like to see those places continued as airports in peace time if possible. They have not the full knowledge of the facts, and I would urge on the minister and the government the importance of letting them know at the earliest moment whether or not there is any possibility of the present facilities and equipment being put to civilian use in aviation. It would be a tragedy if they were informed that it was not likely that a port could be used and then later on found that it would have been very valuable. I should like to see the government come forward with a long range plan to help these communities in the great job of reconstruction.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I assure my hon. friend that airports that are being declared surplus to the air training plan will be maintained until the end of the war, and then as many of them as can be will be incorporated into the civil air services. As I stated on Friday, it is quite impossible to undertake new air services at this time. In the first place we have not the equipment, and in the second place we wish to wait and make the expansion of civil aviation part of the demobilization plans. I can assure my hon. friend, however, that the airports will not be allowed to deteriorate.
Progress reported.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.



LOAN OF SI ,000,000,000 TO MEET LOANS OR OBLIGATIONS, TO PURCHASE UN MATURED SECURITIES AND FOR PUBLIC WORKS AND GENERAL PURPOSES

[Stage Direction]
Mr. D. C. ABBOTT (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
Government Loan
[Stage Direction]
Resolved, tliat the governor in council be authorized to raise by way of loan under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931, an amount not to exceed in the whole the sum of one thousand million dollars for paying or redeeming the whole or any portion of loans or obligations of Canada and also for purchasing unmatured securities of Canada and- for public works and general purposes.
Gordon Graydon: Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether the parliamentary assistant desires to make a statement explaining this resolution now, or when we go into committee. I think, however, it might more properly be done now.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am prepared to do that. This resolution is to renew the general borrowing authority of the government. The last loan act was passed in the 1942 session of parliament, and of the amount so authorized there remains unborrowed and negotiable $92,413,058. To December 31, 1944, there matures or is callable a total of $1,032,240,470.85, which is exclusive of the deposit certificate and treasury bills. Therefore, as the house appreciates, the bill following this resolution is to authorize borrowing power to enable the government, if necessary, to renew the various loans to which I have referred, totalling something in excess of a billion dollars.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Bradette in the chair.


Grote Stirling: I did not catch any reference by the parliamentary assistant to the last words of the resolution, namely "for public works and general purposes". What does the government propose to do with regard to that?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, I did not refer to that. This resolution is in the same form as the resolution introducing a similiar bill in 1942. The money is borrowed under authority to be given under this measure, and can also be used for public works and general purposes of the government of Canada. It is to be noted, however, that the proceeds from sale of securities issued under this authority have to be paid into the consolidated revenue fund, and they can be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund only under some parliamentary authority. This means that the money borrowed under this measure can be used only for public works and general purposes if the moneys for those purposes have been voted or authorized by parliament. In previous loan acts, those of 1942, 1940, 1939, 1936, 1935, 1933 and 1931 there was provision that money borrowed could be used for public works and general purposes. There is no change in principle in this measure with regard to that matter.


Mr. POULIOT:: Would the hon. member for St Antoine-Westmount be kind enough to tell me if the Bank of Canada will have anything to do with it?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Well, the Bank of Canada acts as fiscal agent for the government. With that exception, however, I must say I do not quite understand what my hon. friend's question means. But except to the extent that the Bank of Canada acts as fiscal agent for the government in connection with the issue, registration and so on of government loans, I would say no.


Jean-François Pouliot: With regard to loans, no, when the loans are sold to the public. But here it is asked:-
That the governor in council be authorized to raise by way of loan under the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931. an amount not to exceed in the whole the sum of one thousand million dollars for paying or redeeming the whole or any portion of loans or obligations of Canada and also for purchasing unmatured securities of Canada and for public works and general purposes.
In the first place there is the paying of loans or obligations; second, the redeeming; third, the purchasing of unmatured securities of Canada, and then public works and general purposes. There are five different things, and "general purposes" may comprise a lot. Is the hon. member serious when he says that the Bank of Canada will have nothing at all to do with it, and that it will be done only through the Department of Finance?


Douglas Charles Abbott: As I said a moment ago, that is the language used in these acts. If the moneys are raised by way of loans under the authority of this measure, they must be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund, and they can be paid out of that fund only in virtue of parliamentary authority. So that I do not quite follow what my hon. friend has in mind when he asks whether the Bank of Canada will have some control over money which may be borrowed in virtue of the proposed resolution.


Jean-François Pouliot: It is not exactly a matter of control. I asked if the Bank of Canada would have anything to do with it?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can answer only in this
way, that the actual purpose of the bill to be founded upon the resolution is to provide for maturing obligations of the Dominion of Canada which will mature during this year- in other words, the refunding of loans. The ' language of the bill is, I am advised, identical in terms with the language of similar measures which have been passed by the house for

Government Loan
some ten or twelve years. I assume that the same procedure will be followed as has been followed in the past.


Jean-François Pouliot: My hon. friend is a
lawyer whom I would recommend to those who require a skilled jurist and a man who can make subtle distinctions. I wish to know if the Bank of Canada or the governor of the Bank of Canada will have anything to do with it. I should like to know if the Bank of Canada or the governor of the Bank of Canada advised such a step as this.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I find that question difficult to answer because I am afraid I do not clearly understand it. I said a moment ago that the Bank of Canada acts as fiscal agent for the government of Canada in connection with the registration and recording of government loans. Any proceeds of a loan made by virtue of the power conferred under this measure will be paid into the consolidated revenue fund and, as I said a moment ago, it can be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund only by virtue of the authority of this parliament. Therefore I would say in answer to my hon. friend's question that I do not see how the Bank of Canada would have anything to do with the paying out of the proceeds of that loan other than as agents for the government.	*


Jean-François Pouliot: I do not want to know if the money will be deposited in the Bank of Canada; I want to know if the transaction has been recommended by the Bank of Canada or by the governor of the Bank of Canada.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have no knowledge as to that. The government of Canada is -obliged to take care of its maturing obligations or securities. Whether the Minister of Finance has consulted the governor of the Bank of Canada as to this particular legislation-, I am not in a position to say. I think it is extremely doubt-foil that he has because this is the usual and ordinary loan bill which has been passed by this parliament for many years to make statutory provision for the refunding of maturing obligations of the dominion-. I am not in a position to answer my- hon. friend.


Jean-François Pouliot: I shall tell my hon. friend how it works. When an issue of victory bonds is sold to the Canadian people and any of those bonds are negotiated at a bank, they are sent to the Bank of Canada. The Bank of Canada pays cash f-or the bonds but they are not put iqto the market again. If the sale does not pass through the Bank of Canada in the first place, it does in the second place.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Not necessarily.


Jean-François Pouliot: It does when people exchange their bonds instead- of keeping them at ho-me. I am greatly concerned over this because of an answer that was given by the governor of the Bank of Canada to the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. McGeer) at a meeting of the banking and commerce committee on March 31, 1939, as reported at page 80 of the proceedings. This answer has been quoted already by the financial critic of the New Democracy group. The question and answer are as follows:
Mr. McGeer: Is it possible for you to imagine any way by which we are ever going to pay the debt we have got?
Mr. Towers: As the debts of the government are an asset of the Canadian people, I do not see much point in the thing.
The governor of the Bank of Canada did not see much point in paying the debt or in the redemption of the bonds. He then added:
Except in so far as there is maldistribution.
To quote his own words, the governor of the Bank of Canada said that he d-id not see much point in the payment of the debt.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Is that a fair inference to draw?


Jean-François Pouliot: I shall read it again:
Mr. McGeer: Is it possible for you to imagine any way by which we are ever going to pay the debt we have got?
Mr. Towers: As the debts of the government are an asset of the Canadian people, I do not see much point in the thing . . . except in so far as there is maldistribution.
That -is why I object formally to the governor of the Bank of Canada being in- charge of the victory loans.


Victor Quelch: I should like to put a question to the parliamentary assistant to the minister. Just exactly where is it proposed to obtain this money? Is it intended to obtain the money by floating bonds, or is it to be obtained from the chartered banks or from the Bank of Canada? I ask that question for this reason. We in this group have always advocated that to the extent that money obtained by taxation and by borrowing the legitimate savings of the people fails to meet government expenditures, the government should obtain funds from the Bank of Canada instead of borrowing from the chartered banks. Whether you obtain money from the Bank of Canada or from the chartered banks, in either ease it means expansion of money and to that extent it may be inflationary.
The argument of the Minister of Finance in the past has been that while you can
Government Loan

obtain money from the chartered banks without causing inflation, the obtaining of money from the Bank of Canada would be more inflationary. When money is borrowed from the Bank of Canada and paid out into circulation, eventually it finds its way to the chartered banks and thereby increases the cash reserves of the banks, making it possible for them to expand their loans by ten times the amount. When the parliamentary assistant spoke on the Industrial Development bank bill the other day he contradicted that statement. He said that there was no danger of inflation because the Bank of Canada would be able to control that situation. He referred to the statement made by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard who had referred to the fact that if a certain amount of money was obtained from the Bank of Canada and paid out in circulation, apparently that would be increasing the cash reserves of the banks and thereby make it possible for them to expand their loans; The parliamentary assistant took the stand that that was not necessarily so because the Bank of Canada could take the necessaiy action to control the chartered banks in expanding their loans.
Mr. ABBOTT; I said that the amount of loanable funds involved in the proposed Industrial Development bank was not of such a magnitude that the central bank could not control the reserves of the chartered banks, even if the full amount went out into the commercial banking system. It is all a question of degree.


Victor Quelch: You are dealing with the amount rather than the question of whether or not the Bank of Canada could control the situation?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Right.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: The principle.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The principle.


Victor Quelch: 
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: A lot of eye-wash.


Victor Quelch: In order to have a balanced budget and a surplus in the post-war years there must be very heavy taxation. The purpose of taxation in the war years has been to reduce spending. We have been told that time and time again. For exactly the same reason taxation will have to be reduced after the war, in order that spending may be increased. That statement was made recently in a speech by the deputy minister of finance. If taxation is to be reduced after the war in order to increase the spending of the people I should like to know how we are to have a balanced budget.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It all depends on the size of the national income.


Victor Quelch: I think the statement made by the former chairman of the advisory committee on post-war reconstruction was far more practical in this regard. I should like to quote from the report of the special committee of the Senate in the session of 1943. The quotation will be found at page 29 of proceedings of the special committee, No. 1. This is what Doctor James had to say:
I wanted to add one further point there, namely, that the recognition of that policy of public investment as a marginal factor to take up the slack of private investment at any period implies the necessity of a complete change in our budget philosophy. We should still have an annual budget for probable revenues and expenditures; but so far as public investment expenditures are concerned for the construction Of all kinds of projects, it would obviously be necessary to have a budget which extends over a period of years. Mr. Churchill two Sundays ago suggested four years as a period for a plan. That may be perfectly right, politically thinking, but economically 1 prefer a period of seven or ten years. It may also be true-I mention this because somebody may think of it-that the adoption of that policy will mean a slight but continuous increase in the total public debt of Canada over the next hundred years.
The only exception I take to that statement is this: Why say one hundred years? Why not say "forever as long as we continue on the present system"? If under a policy of that kind whereby you can maintain the full development of the resources of the nation you will have a continued debt for the next one hundred years, I should like to know how you are going to pay off the national debt in the manner suggested in the quotation from the predecessor of the present Minister of Finance? I think we should adopt a practical attitude toward this whole thing. Come out frankly and say that we are going to continue under the present system, which means a continuous increase in debt forever and when the debt gets so large we can no longer service it we will borrow money and pay interest on it. Let us be frank about it. If we are to carry on under such a system it will mean a continued increase in the borrowing until the system will become so absurd that the people will realize there must be a change. On the other hand, if we are really sincere in wanting to bring about a reduction in the national debt, let us recognize that the only possible way by which we can ever bring it about is by the issue of debt-free money, because you cannot pay debt with debt.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: In the resolution which precedes the bill to give the government power to borrow SI ,000,000,000 I would have thought the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance would probably have taken the opportunity to give the committee some information with regard to the fiscal picture as it affects the Dominion of Canada. I would ask that at some time in the course of this debate some information be given to us, so that when the bill comes down we can discuss it more intelligently. I remember in the first year of the war the then Minister of Fin-
Government Loan

ance said that the government was pledging itself to the policy of a pay-as-you-go war. I think we should know something about the extent to which the government has been able to maintain that principle. Would the parliamentary assistant to the minister tell us what is the national debt to-day as compared with September 1, 1939 and 1919, which was the dose of the first great war? Would the hon. gentleman tell us how much money has been borrowed by the federal government in each year during the present war? How much of that borrowing was from the chartered banks; how much was from the general public by the sale of victory bonds, and how much by the sale of government bonds on the investment market? Would he tell us to what extent, if it all, we have used our own Bank of Canada in financing operations and to what extent? Would he tell us what the annual interest bill of the government is now as compared with the beginning of the war and as compared with 1919? I think he should give us a general picture of those bonds which will be maturing during the present year. What amount of bonds will mature? Would he tell us if at any time in the last twenty-five years the federal government has ever paid off a maturing bond obligation, or whether it has merely refunded those bonds as they matured? If the parliamentary assistant could give us some of that information I think we should be in a better position to discuss this resolution. Certainly we shall have to have it before we can discuss the bill.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Under the Conservative
regime we paid off some debts.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can give my hon. friend some of the information he asked for.
First, as to the national debt to-day as compared with 1939 and 1919, the total unnurtured funded debt as at January 31, 1944, amounted to $10,561,454,023.79, and the annual interest charges on that amounted to $268,312,935.81. I have not at my hand the comparable figures for 1939 and 1919, but I can get that information and perhaps give it on the second reading of the bill.
My hon. friend asked for the borrowing each year during the present war. The first war loan was for an amount of $250,000,000, $200,000,000 of which was issued for cash and $50,000,000 was issued in conversion, of three per cent bonds which matured. March 1, 1940 by the Bank of Canada through banks, brokers and investment dealers. The second war loan was issued in the amount of $324,945,700, $300,000,000 for cash, and $24,945,700 in conversion of 4i per cent bonds due September 1, 1940. The 1941 victory loan was $836,820,250,

$579,286,250 for cash and $64,248,000 in conversion. The second victory loan was $997,503,300, $845,360,300 for cash and $152,143,000 in conversion of maturing loans. The third victory loan was $991,389,050, all issued for cash. The fourth victory loan, $1,308,716,650 was all sold for cash. The fifth victory loan was $1,571,311,550, of which $1,383,275,250 was sold for cash; $188,036,300, conversion. The sixth victory loan is coming on at the end of April.
Those loans represented loans issued to the public. My hon. friend asked the amount sold to the chartered banks and to the Bank of Canada. I assume he would be satisfied with the totals.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Yes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The total amount sold to the chartered banks since the beginning of the war including deposit certificates and shortterm loans, $1,697,660,000, and to the Bank of Canada, $1,415,171,000. These figures are all as of January 31, 1944, and the total is $3,112,-
831,000.


Victor Quelch: What was the main purpose of the borrowings from the Bank of Canada? It was, I assume, chiefly for the purpose of buying gold and refunding.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I believe that is correct; and in connection with the taking over by the foreign exchange control board of the gold holdings of the Bank of Canada.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Were there any borrowings outside Canada, on the New York market?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No bonds for new money have been issued on the New York market, as far as I recall. All these are domestic issues.
My hon. friend asked as to the interest. I am afraid I have not in dollars the interest paid on government securities. I have the average rates of interest paid on the funded debt of Canada, including treasury bills and deposit certificates, from 1913 to 1944. Perhaps I might give the rates as of 1913, 1919, 1939 and 1944.
On March 31, 1913, the average interest rate paid on Dominion of Canada borrowings was 3-44 per cent; March 31, 1919, 5-02 per cent; March 31, 1939, 3-52 per cent; January 31, 1944, 2-54 per cent-the lowest, as my hon. friend will see, at any time during the period of 1913 to 1944.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: The picture might be much better if you read off every year instead of taking certain years.

Government Loan


James Lester Douglas: Has the hon.
gentleman the total amount paid in interest?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would be glad to give the hon. member the figures for each year. I did not want to take up the time. As of March 31 the interest rates are as follows:-
Year	Per cent
1913		 3-44
1914		 3-58
1915		 3-65
1916		 4-04
1917		 4-38
1918		 4-83
1919		 5-02
1920		 5-18
1921		 5-17
1922		 5-20
That is where it reached the peak; that was the maximum.
I have not the figures for the period 1923 to 1929.
1930	 5-02
[DOT] 1934	 4-63
1935		 4-15
1936		 3-94
1937		 3-75
1938		 3-53
1939		 3-52
1940		 3-40
1941		 3-06
1942		 2-90
1943		 2-60
January 31, 1944	 2-54


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Has the hon. member the amounts of interest in addition to the rates for those years?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I have not those figures before me.


James Lester Douglas: The hon. gentleman can get them?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can get them.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: But those figures would not be comparable, because of the changing interest rates.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I gave my hon. friend the gross figure of interest paid. The annual interest charge to-day on our total funded debt, including treasury bills and certificates, at January 31, is $268,312,935.81.


James Lester Douglas: The hon.
gentleman has given the victory loans and the money borrowed from the chartered banks. Would there not be bonds sold on the investment market either for refunding purposes or for state borrowing? Has he any estimate of these?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps I would need to check this, but I have given, I think, all the issues of government securities which have been made since the beginning of the war.


Major James William Coldwell: If the figure the parliamentary assistant has given is correct, showing that the gross amount of interest is
5268,000,000-


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is $268,000,000 a year, roughly.


Major James William Coldwell: Is that not double what it was in 1939?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot give that from memory but I can get that information.


Major James William Coldwell: I thought it was about $130,000,000.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is nothing like double. I am sorry I did not understand the question. I would not want to give the figure from memory, but I would say that it is not more than $100,000,000 at the outside. I do not think it is that high.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: 


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: On February 17 the minister answered a question I had asked. For the fiscal year ended March 31, 1939, the interest on the public debt was $127,995,616.75. I notice a discrepancy between the amount which the parliamentary assistant has just given, $268,000,000, for the end of the calendar year, and the figure given in the answer that was tabled on February 17. The figure then given was $188,556,249.39. Do I understand that to indicate the rate at which the snowball is accumulating in size?


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend will realize that the $188,000,000 represents interest actually paid up in a certain period. Is that not correct?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: For the previous year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Of course there have been two victory loans since the dale of those figures and the figure which I have given of $268,000,000 odd represents the annual interest charges on unmatured funded debts, including treasury bills, as at January 31, 1944.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: It is much more than double.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am not prepared to answer that question.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Since this
money is for the purpose of refunding debt, how many of these maturing obligations have been met outright, or have we always refunded during the last twenty or twenty-five years?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would hesitate to answer that offhand. I am almost certain we have met some maturities out of existing funds. I shall have to take note of the question and answer it later.
Government Loan


Major James William Coldwell: Is this the gross debt including the railway debt, or is it the debt excluding the debt, of the Canadian National Railways?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That, I think, includes only the government debt, excluding the Canadian National Railways.


Mr. MacNICOL:: 
Douglas Charles Abbott: Certainly the purchase of 12,000 is a purchase for cash. The purchaser obtained that cash by selling other bonds, I gather from what my hon. friend has said, and someone else has bought those bonds. But on balance, as I say, someone has provided the cash to the purchasers or the purchasers have obtained cash, whether by borrowing or otherwise, to purchase the amounts mentioned.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Has the parliamentary assistant any record of the number of bonds returned in such circumstances during the last victory loan?


Douglas Charles Abbott: We would not have those figures. I certainly do not have them here.


John Ritchie MacNicol: What would the bank do with the bonds they had just purchased from the customer?
Date
April 15, 1944	
April 15, 1944	
June 1, 1944	
July 1, 1944	
September 1, 1944	
October 15, 1944	
Callable October 15, 1944 (due October 15, 1949)
October 1G, 1944	
November 15, 1944


Douglas Charles Abbott: I suppose they would either keep them in their own investment portfolio, if they were anxious to invest in that particular maturity, or they would sell to another customer who wished to buy that particular maturity of bonds. As my hon. friend knows, the banks are continually buying and selling government bonds.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I was under the impression that the Bank of Canada would have to buy them.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Not necessarily.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Will the parliamentary assistant tell us how much of this one thousand million he estimates will be used for redeeming matured loans, how much for the purchase of those loans that are not matured and how much for public works? In the second place, will he tell us just what is the nature of these unmatured loans? Will any of this money be available for the purl-chase of victory bonds that have not yet matured? I am thinking of the debate we had in the house some days ago and of those who will be required undoubtedly to sell victory bonds at less than par. Will any of this money be available for the purchase of these unmatured victory bonds, or just what is the nature of the unmatured securities the hon. gentleman has in mind? There was a question asked that has not yet been answered: How much of this one thousand million will be borrowed from the Bank of Canada?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That last question I am not in a position to answer. That is a matter that will be determined in due course, but I assume that these refunding issues, as was the case in the past, will be issued to the public. As to the maturities to December 31, 1944, which include callable issues, the figures are these:
Interest rate	Where payable	AmountPercent 1	Canada	$250,000,000 00li	Canada	100,000,000 002	Canada	90,625,000 004	Canada	33,293.470 85li	Canada	150,000,000 004i	Canada	50.000,000 003i	Canada	138,322,000 00li	Canada	200.000,000 002i	Canada	20,000,000 00

If we break that down, the maturities in 1944 amount to $893,918,470.85, and the one issue to which I referred as being callable, which is due in 1949, amounts to $138,322,000.

In addition there are treasury bills and deposit certificates outstanding which, I take it, do not interest the hon. gentleman at the moment.

Government Loan


Victor Quelch: Is it not quite true to say that in the past the policy of the government has been to borrow money from the Bank of Canada, to buy gold which it turns over to the foreign exchange authorities, to refund a debt owed to the Bank of Canada; it has not been the practice of the government to borrow money from the Bank of Canada for the purpose of putting that money into circulation?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is true, generally
speaking; but the hon. gentleman will recall that in the early stages of the war, I think either in the fall of 1939 or early in 1940, the government borrowed about 3200,000,000-I am speaking from memory-from the Bank of Canada.


Victor Quelch: That was from the chartered banks.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Oh, I see.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The parliamentary
assistant was asked to give the total debt as of the end of December, and he gave a figure of something over $10,000,000,000. In a return he brought down recently he gave the debt as at the end of March, 1943, as $6,182,000,000. I wonder if he could account for the difference between those figures, which seems a very large increase to take place in the course of a few months.


Douglas Charles Abbott: As my hon. friend will recall, since March 31, 1943, there have been two victory loans totalling some $2,600,000,000.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: But the difference is $4,000,000,000.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not before me the return to which my hon. friend is referring, and offhand I cannot reconcile these figures, but I am informed that what I have before me represents the net unmatured funded debt as at the date given. The figure given by my hon. friend may not include treasury bills or deposit certificates. I am inclined to think that may be the explanation.


Mr. JACKMAN:: In view of the fact that the forthcoming victory loan is to be for $1,200,000,000, I am a little curious to know why the resolution here calls for only $1,000,000,000 in connection with the raising of new money or for refunding. Where is the authority to raise the other $200,000,000?


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend has probably overlooked the fact that the authority to borrow in connection with the victory loans is contained in the war appropriation bills. The hon. gentleman will remember that
each war appropriation bill, whatever amount it is for, includes the necessary statutory authority to borrow; and the borrowing authority asked for here has no relation to the borrowings we make in connection with our victory loans. That borrowing authority is contained in the war appropriation bill.


Mr. KUHL:: Has the parliamentary assistant any figures to indicate the amount of money the people of Canada borrowed from the chartered banks with which to purchase victory bonds?
Mr. ABBOTT, No, I have not.


Mr.   IIANSELL@: We have been talking a good deal about the details of facts and figures, but one big question remains when this is all boiled down. How much are the people of Canada in debt? After all, that is the great question that has to be answered. What is the per capita debt of the people of Canada, and how is that debt to be retired? It seems to me that sums up the whole thing. I am not so much concerned about where the Canadian National Railways debt is placed, or how many bond issues there have been in past years. As the representatives of the people we want to know how far our people are in debt; we want to know when the debt is to be paid off, and how. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance is standing up to it well to-night; perhaps he will be Minister of Finance one of these days if he keeps going, and I hope this question does not embarrass him; but we should like to know how the government, if it remains in power, is to retire the debt. If the government cannot answer that question, let them tell the country so; let them get out of the saddle, and let somebody get in who knows how. That is the position. Perhaps we shall have an opportunity to challenge the Progressive Conservative party with the same question. If the parliamentary assistant, will answer that he is going to settle everything.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is a tall order. This matter has been discussed previously. The method which I know my hon. friends in the far corner would suggest does not commend itself to me. My hon. friend asked if the question was embarrassing. No, it is not particularly embarrassing, but he and I both know that this debt will not be paid off this year, next year or the year after. However, if he will tell me how soon the war will be over, or how long we shall be obliged to continue to make these large war expenditures, I may be able to give him some idea as to when I think we may start reducing this debt.
Government Loan


Mr. HANSELL:: I should like the committee to get that answer, for that is the very best the government can give us as to how this debt is to be retired. If I shall tell the hon. gentleman when the war will end he will tell us something else. That is a great answer, is it not? We are asking that question of the men who are in the saddle, the authority in Canada; they should know.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: There are so many figures being mentioned, and some of them do not gibe with some others. In connection wth paying off or redeeming the whole or any portion of a loan or obligation, or purchasing unmatured securities, the government does not require any further authority, as I understand it; but before the money can be used for public works or other purposes, authority has to be obtained from parliament?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is correct.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Then the parliamentary assistant mentioned that the amount paid in interest was $268,000,000.


Douglas Charles Abbott: If my hon. friend will allow me, that is not the interest paid; that is the annual interest charge on the debt as it stands at January 31, 1944.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: In the estimates for this year the amount is given as $273,000,000. It was $200,000,000 last year, so that there has been an increase of something over $72,000,000. I do not understand where the hon. gentleman gets this figure of $268,000,000.


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend will recall that we have two months to go to the end of the current fiscal year, as of the date I mentioned in connection with that figure. I was giving the annual interest charges on the total national debt as it stood on January 31 of this year. I take it we must assume that the debt will increase in the two months subsequent to January 31, before the end of the fiscal year.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: But the parliamentary assistant said that the interest charge is $268,000,000. Yet, the estimated interest charge for the next year is only $273,000,000. We have two victory loans we shall have to go through.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, that is a difference of some $3,000,000. I suggest to my hon. friend- and I am making this answer offhand-that that $3,000,000, or $5,000,000, whatever the figure is, will represent the interest on money which will be borrowed between January 31, and March 31, the end of the current fiscal year. I refer to the fiscal year which will close at the end of this month.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Yes, all right. What I am getting at is this: Your estimate for next year is only $273,000,000, and the amount increased by $73,000,000 over the year before. I cannot see how you get that charge at all. Then there is one other question I would ask in connection with these interest rates. We have noticed that the rates have come down from 5-20 per cent to 2-50 per cent, I believe it is.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, 2-50 per cent.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Yes. Could the government borrow that money at two per cent? Could the victory loan be put over at two per cent, under the mechanism we have at the present time?


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend's opinion on that is probably more valuable than mine. Previous victory loans have sold on a basis of approximately three per cent and, as my hon. friend knows, that is the basis for the forthcoming sixth victory loan.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Is it not so that there are two reasons for the rate we have today? One is that w'e have a mechanism which we did not have in the last war, and the other is that the public are asked to buy it, and the Bank of Canada pretty well controls what rate we shall give. Is that not so?


Victor Quelch: The assistant to the minister apparently feels that when the war is over the government will be in a better position to answer the question as to when the national debt can be paid. I draw his attention to a question asked of the governor of the Bank of Canada in 1939, before this war started.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That matter was raised a little earlier, if I remember correctly.


Victor Quelch: This is found at page 80 of report No. 1 of the banking and commerce committee. The question was asked:
Is it possible for you to imagine any way by which we are ever going to pay the debt we have got?
The debt at that time was only about three and a half billion dollars. This is what I find in the report:
Mr. Towers: As the debts of the government are an asset of the Canadian people, I do not see much point in, the thing; except that, to the extent that the government thinks that the distribution of those assets of the Canadian people-which are its debt-is unsatisfactory, it may take steps to remedy that distribution in any way that lies within the legislative power; in fact, in any way, I suppose-by income tax or succession duties or any other action it cares to take.
Then, further on in the report he said that the national debt, to a large extent, is a sign of a nation's prosperity. Take central Africa,

Government Loan
with no debt, and no prosperity. We should, therefore, be getting very prosperous in the future, because now our national debt has gone up to around eleven billions. It is increasing by about two and a half billions this year. If the war goes on for another two years our national debt will be around fourteen or sixteen billions.
The governor of the Bank of Canada could not tell us how we were to pay off the national debt of three and a half billions of dollars, so that I do not think he will know how we shall pay off a national debt of fourteen or sixteen billions. Yet, according to the sessional paper tabled in the house and referred to by me a few minutes ago, a scientific scheme is to be brought down by which this debt can be paid.
The .point I wish to raise is this:	I notice
that the national resources planning board of the United States, quoted by Stuart Chase in his book "Where Will the Money Come From," stresses the fact that there is no immediate danger until the national debt is equal to double the national income. Well, we shall be pretty near that in another two years, if our national debt gets up around fourteen or fifteen billions of dollars, and the national income falls to about seven billions.
Then they go on to say, and this is an. interesting point, that when the national debt rises to double the national income we shall probably have to use interest-free money in the future. Why wait until we reach, a crisis to use interest-free money? Why not use it before that? If it is possible to use interest-free money when we reach a crisis, in which the national debt is double the national income, then surely we can start to do so now and avoid this great interest-bearing debt.
Mr. Towers poinst out that the dangerous feature is not so much the size of the debt as the distribution of it. Are we bringing about a better distribution? The parliamentary assistant will probably say that to-day we are having a very wide distribution of bonds. But are we bringing about an equitable distribution of bonds? In respect of the third, fourth and fifth victory loans one-third of one per cent of the subscribers purchased sixty per cent of the total loan. This shows what a very inequitable distribution of debt we have to-day. So that in the future you will have to tax the whole population in order to pay tribute to a comparatively small number of people. Since the war we have greatly aggravated the problem to which the governor of the Bank of Canada referred. I am not referring to the size of the debt, but to the distribution of it, in which there is a more inequitable distribution of debt from day to day, as the war goes on. It is high time some action was taken.


Mr. HLYNKA:: The parliamentary assistant blames the war for the rise in. debt. May I point o.ut .that in 1934, for instance, the national debt of Canada was $3,141,042,097. At that time 44-11 per cent of our total revenue was used to pay interest on our national debt. That was in 1934. There was no war at that time, and I say that the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance is on the spot when he is asked to tell us how this debt is to be paid off.
If governments in the past were unable to meet their debt obligations, except by piling up more debt, then we doubt that this government, following the policy it has followed, will be able to pay off the debt, when it has already reached over ten billions of dollars. The people of Canada, and hon. members are entitled to a definite answer. The people want to know how the government is to retire this debt, because our children will have to bear the burden. If after the war the people have to spend seventy-five cents out of every dollar collected in taxes to pay the interest on our national debt, how in the world is the government to pay for all the social services, and all the promises which are being made during this session? Although it may be quite a job for the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance to answer this question he should, however, tell this committee and the people how the government intends to pay off the debt which the people will have to meet.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: They will not be here to do it anyway.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: On February 17 the parliamentary assistant to the minister gave some information in connection with the public debt. His answer at that time showed that every baby born in Canada in 1914 started out with a debt of $42.64. By 1919 this had increased t.o S1S9.45; in 1939, to $278.62 and by March 31, 1943, to $523.44. The question may be asked if this has anything to do with family allowance. Something will have to be done about the interest charges. In 1914 the per capita expenditure on interest on public debt was $1.64; in 1919 it had increased to $9.32; in 1939 to $11.31 and in 1943 to $15.96. Every man, woman and child has an interest bill of $15.96 to pay each year. Could the parliamentary assistant give us some statement to indicate the percentage of the debt owing to ourselves, the percentage owing in the United States and the percentage owing in Great Britain and in other countries.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The great portion, of
course, is owing to ourselves. Of the total funded debt of $10,561,454,023, $10,216,028,133 is
Government Loan

payable in Canada; 8333,000,000 is payable in New York and $12,425,890 is payable in London.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Could the minister tell us to what percentage of the Canadian people that $10 billion is owing? Is it fifteen per cent or ten per cent or what?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I cannot answer that question.


John Horne Blackmore: That is an allimportant question. If the money is owing to ten per cent of the population then it would seem that ninety per cent of the population are going to be hewers of wood and drawers of water for the other ten per cent.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: In Waterloo county everybody took his share.


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend will recall that in the fifth victory loan there were over
3,000,000 individual subscriptions, which would indicate that one in three and a half or four Canadians was a purchaser of government securities. Other than that I am not in position to give my hon. friend any figures as to what percentage is held by how many people.


John Horne Blackmore: It would be interesting to know what percentage of those people still hold their bonds and what percentage will still be holding their bonds in another five years. I think we shall find that the same thing will happen as happened in the past, the bonds will all gravitate into the hands of a few people.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is my hon. friend's opinion, but I hold a different opinion.


John Horne Blackmore: History supports my view.


Mr. McNEVIN:: 1 should like to direct the attention of the committee to the statement made by the hon. member for Acadia with regard to the number of people who have invested in victory loans. He was referring to the fact that a few people held a large portion of the investment in these government securities, people such as trust companies and life and fire insurance companies. They are very heavy investors, but after all they are investing trust funds for the people and therefore I do not think the hon. member's statement gives a true picture of the situation.


Victor Quelch: On the other hand there are great masses of the Canadian people who have no interest in trust or insurance companies.


Gordon Graydon: I rise to my feet at this time largely because of a remark made by the hon. member for York South who referred to 
the possibility of victory bonds being worth less than par at some time in the future. This matter was discussed during a previous debate, and I thought it was made fairly clear that the only real danger so far as these bonds were concerned was the possibility, remote though it may be, that the party of which the hon. member was a member would at some time get into power. I should like to give what I think is perhaps the most recent evidence on this point so that the committee may be fortified in its desire to see that our bonds remain where they are. I think the best evidence we can offer at the moment that the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation is not likely to come into power is the results just handed to me of the Ontario by-election in Haldimand-Norfolk. The Progressive Conservative candidate has been conceded election by a clear majority over all, and then a good deal, with the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation candidate running a very bad second. I think we can be charitable and say that the Liberal candidate was also in the field.


David McKenzie Wright: The leader of the opposition has introduced another note into this matter.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: It is the same old note but with a clearer tone.


David McKenzie Wright: In connection with the guarantee of government bonds I should like to refer to the statement of the governor of the Bank of Canada who said that the amount of debt did not matter as much as the distribution. I wish to ask the parliamentary assistant some questions in connection with that. I do not suppose the figures are available for the last victory loan, but I should like to know how many bonds sold on time in the second to the last victory loan were paid for before the next loan was floated. How many of those bonds were disposed of within a year from the time the final payment was completed? I have been given to understand that large numbers of the smaller bonds are being turned in each year, and in order to have some idea of the distribution we should have these figures.
In connection with the guaranteeing of bonds I should like to ask another question. When men return from overseas and take up land under the Veterans' Land Act or buy homes under a housing scheme and have to pay ten per cent down, will the government accept at par the bonds which those boys are buying to-day out of their meagre earnings?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think my hon. friend has
asked me three questions. First of all, how many bonds which were purchased on the

Govemvient Loan
instalment plan in the fourth victory loan were paid for before the next loan came along; is that correct?


David McKenzie Wright: Yes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That information may be available. I did not anticipate that it would be asked for to-night and I am afraid I have not it here. As to the second question, how many were sold, the government would not have that information. It is perfectly open to the holder of a bond who has received delivery of it to sell it through a bank, an investment banker, or any of the security dealers, and the government would have no record of those successive transactions. Therefore any information which the government might have on that could only be an estimate.


David McKenzie Wright: Does the parliamentary assistant not think it is a very important thing to know?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It may be important.


David McKenzie Wright: How many of the small holders are retaining them?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It may be an important thing to know, I agree. The government would be very much interested and I would be very much interested to know, but I do not know how we are to get the information as long as there is a free market for the sale of bonds. Those securities are bearer securities. They may be transferred from hand to hand. They are being bought and sold every day and the government has no record of those transactions and could not possibly have any record of them. Therefore any information the government may have on it would be a pure estimate, a pure guess.


David McKenzie Wright: Would the government not have any idea of the numbers that are sold to the banks?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have no information here, and I do not know that the government has any definite information as to just how many bonds are handled by the banks. I should think they would not have.


David McKenzie Wright: With respect to the government accepting those bonds-


Douglas Charles Abbott: Mr. Chairman, I dealt with that the other day when my hon. friend raised it on the motion to go into supply. My hon. friend has cited the case of a returned man who wants to make a payment on a house or a farm and he has government securities which he wishes to use in order to make the payment. If he wished to do that he could dispose of his securities and use the money
for the purpose of making his payment. I answered my hon. friend the other day and now he is trying to get me to give a different answer from the back-door.


David McKenzie Wright: No; I beg your pardon. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance cannot put words into my mouth. I did not try to get an answer from the back-door. I am trying to get some statement from the government that they would accept the bonds at par.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I did not mean to offend my hon. friend when I said that. I shall answer the last part of it. It is a matter of government policy which will be announced in due course if any such decision is made; but I answered my hon. friend the other day as to whether the government was prepared to guarantee a market for bonds of any and all maturities at par. I pointed out to him that this would mean in effect that all government borrowings would be demand loans, and I gave that as one reason why the government was not prepared to give any such guarantee.


David McKenzie Wright: My suggestion was that a floor be placed under them.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Abbott thereupon moved for leave to introduce bill No. 38, to authorize the raising, by way of loan, of certain sums of money for the public service.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



DEET SUGAR INDUSTRY IN CANADA- STATEMENT OF MR. BLACKMORE

[Stage Direction]
Mr. D. C. ABBOTT (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
John Horne Blackmore: On Friday, March 18, I promised that at the earliest opportunity I would reply to the Prime Minister's attack of March 10 upon certain remarks of mine of March 7, in which I said I believed that the quality and price of sugar in Canada had been manipulated by a trust or combine. I have no doubt the vested interests of Canada are highly gratified with the Prime Minister's vigorous defence of their prerogatives, and the reputedly richest man in Canada, J. W. McConnell, of Montreal, must be indebted to the Prime Minister for his eloquent testimonial of that gentleman's patriotism. I raised no question as to Mr. McConnell's patriotism. I raised, a question
Beet Sugar Industry

which the Prime Minister could have answered "yes" or "no"; but he did not answer that question. I did ask several other questions. The question which the people of Canada have a right to have answered is the one which I did submit to the Prime Minister. May I repeat the questions which I asked? I turn to page 1278 of Hansard and I find this is the question I asked:
What is the relationship existing between the government and this great sugar combine, and between the government and the head of this corporation, one John W. McConnell?
That is the first question. The second question is:
Why has the government condoned this manipulation in the sugar industry? It would allay considerable suspicion in this house and throughout the country if the Prime Minister would rise and categorically state that the Liberal party has never received, directly or indirectly, from the St. Lawrence Sugar Refining Company, from J. W. McConnell, or from anyone representing either or both of these, or any other Canadian sugar interest any contribution of money for the campaign funds of the Liberal party.
The answer to that question could have been given as either "yes" or "no". The Prime Minister must have known the answer. He did not choose to give the answer. I am sorry he is not in his seat at the present time.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, I can assure my hon. friend that the Prime Minister did not know and I do not know. The members of the government do not handle campaign funds.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: They know where they come from.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Who does?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: They ought to know.


John Horne Blackmore: We have that much at least, whatever it means. The question arose out of my expression of belief that efforts were successfully -made before and during the present war to restrict artificially the production of beet sugar in Canada so that the cane sugar interests might prosper at the expense of the people, prosper not only through prices but through having the Canadian market reserved for their cane sugar. It is a fact which is perhaps not as well known throughout Canada as it might be that the cane sugar interests are desperately anxious to reserve the Canadian market for their own product; and consequently they will go to almost any limit in order to avoid having beet sugar production increased in the Dominion of Canada, and from that very fact we are suffering to-day.

May I give some evidence upon which I base my suspicion that the production of beet sugar in Canada has been deliberately restricted by the Liberal government ever since that government came into power. First of all I wish to read into the record a statement which perhaps is almost forgotten by a good many, showing that the Liberals had no excuse for neglecting the beet sugar industry in Canada. In 1932, in this house, under the administration of the Right Plon. R. B. Bennett, there was appointed a select standing committee on agriculture to conduct an investigation into the beet sugar industry. These men, among whom were a good many Liberals, did a thorough job. They called many reputable witnesses. After having conducted what they considered to be a thorough probe, they submitted a report in which the following words appear: I quote from Hansard, 1932, pages 1606 and 1607:
Your committee therefore recommend that in view of the existing tariff on sugar and in consideration of the substantial payments being made to agriculture and labour by the beet sugar factories at present in operation, 111'-cane sugar refineries should undertake to provide for a gradual increase in factory facilities for the refining of beet sugar in Canada, ami that, with the additional advantages in freight rates to points in the middle west, heretofore described, factory facilities should now be steadily increased in western areas where beets are grown, and thereby make it possible to produce from beets a more substantial percentage of the sugar consumption of Canada.
Your committee further recommends that if no successful attempt be made in the immediate future by the refineries to increase the facilities for the manufacture of beet sugar, the government should take into consideration steps to accomplish that end.
I had thought that it should be worth while to bring in the names of the Liberals who were on that committee. However, I will omit to mention them to-night. But there were a number of hon. members in this house in 1932. before the many labour-saving devices which have been brought into the beet sugar industry had been introduced, and therefore before beet sugar could be manufactured nearly as cheaply as can be done nowadays, who were advocating an increase in the production of beet sugar.
I have in my hand a brief which was prepared by the present parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Martin). That parliamentary assistant prepared a very fine brief; it did him credit. He was in favour of increasing the beet sugar production in Canada. ' Unfortunately his labours, since I have been here, have been so arduous that they have prevented him from getting round to the point of making a speech in support of beet sugar, although several times, while I have been speaking, he has kindly interjected remarks

Beet Sugar Industry
which indicated that he was sympathetic with my point of view, and I am sure he continues to be sympathetic.


Mr. MARTIX:: Undoubtedly most of the information in the hon. gentleman's speech comes from my brief.


John Horne Blackmore: Undoubtedly; I seek knowledge wherever I can find it. I wish the Liberals would do the same. The trouble with the Liberals is tiiat they think that anything which does not come from Liberals is not , worth listening to.
I find on page 41 of that brief the following words:
It is not too much to ask of the federal government a definite consideration of the problem that will bring about a heavier consumption of beet sugar in Canada, thereby providing Canadian farmers with a greater income resulting from readier cash crops...
Furthermore, the government might well consider an advertising campaign to stimulate the use of ibeet sugar. In this way the unfair prejudice against beet sugar would gradually, but effectively, be eliminated.
These words do the hon. member great honour. This brief was submitted to the Hon. C. A. Dunning, then Minister of Finance, and to the present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), at a conference held in the office of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) on Thursday, March 5, 1936, at eleven o'clock. I was present at that time. I think the Liberals cannot beg that they just did not know how important the beet sugar industry was in Canada: they cannot offer that plea in excuse. The Minister of Agriculture in the spring of 1937 sent Doctor E. S. Archibald out west to examine the beet sugar industry in Alberta. Whether the minister did that merely in order to make a fine gesture or whether he really wanted to find out what were the conditions in the industry, no one is able to say. But . Doctor Archibald went out, conducted an examination and came back and submitted, on October 28, 1937, a thorough and comprehensive report, in which he showed the great value of the beet sugar industry to Canada. He did not make any definite recommendation.
I have often wondered why. I have often wondered whether the reason he made no recommendation was that a certain thing had occurred in the spring of 1937, to which I shall refer by and by.
The Alberta Cooperative Sugar Beet Growers' Association made a submission to the Row^ell-Sirois commission, exhaustive and unanswerable in its arguments. Anyone who read that brief would realize that the beet sugar industry, at least in the west, was one which could not possibly be with impunity disregarded. It proves that the industry is economic and a success in every way. From page two of the report I read the following quotation:
To indicate the value of this industry to the agriculture of our district, the community in general and the Dominion of Canada, we submit the*following figures relating to the 1937 beet crop:
235,481 tons of .beets were produced from 19,829 acres of irrigated land-dn average of 11-88 tons per acre.
75,603,700 pounds of sugar were manufactured.
3,813 pounds was the per acre yield of refined sugar.
$3,040,000 worth of sugar was manufactured.
$155 was the total gross return per acre.
$77.50 was the gross return to the manufacturer.
$77.50 was the gross return per acre to the farmer.
The farmers' costs approximated $60 per acre which includes $25 per acre for hand labour 'by the farmer. These figures were given in a speech made by T. George Wood, Manager, Canadian Sugar Factories Limited, at Lethbridge, Wednesday, March 23,	1938. We
believe that this land is producing more food value per acre than any other land in the dominion.
Sugar beets of the highest quality can be grown, harvested and manufactured into refined sugar on all of our irrigated lands in Alberta. This industry has, in the districts where it is established, made a tremendous contribution toward the prosperity of both the urban and rural sections and to our national economy.
The annual returns .from the Lethbridge northern irrigation district rose from $761,000 m 1935 to $1,057,000 in 1936, the first year the new sugar factory operated in that territory.
If that year is in any way an indication of the ordinary performance of the beet sugar industry in Alberta, it is to be seen that the statement that the beet sugar industry is an economic success cannot possibly be refuted.
Something comes into the picture which is astonishing and which, I think, reflects great discredit upon the Liberal government and opens the way for the suggestion which I made the other day. In London, between April 5 and May 6, 1937, was held an international sugar conference. In that conference someone-and I have never been able to find out -who it was-is quoted as having said the following:
At the same time the government of Canada reiterates the assurance already given, that they do not propose to stimulate the production of sugar in Canada during the term of this agreement-
I interpolate here the remark that five years was the length of the agreement.
-by subsidy, increased protection, special remission of taxes, or by any other similar measure.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Whom is the agreement between?
Beet Sugar Industry


John Horne Blackmore: Apparently it was a world agreement for the restriction of the production of sugar.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Who was the author of that statement?


John Horne Blackmore: That is what we all w'ant to know. We have been trying to find that out since the statement was made and we cannot find out. Canada, astonishing as it may seem, the government of Canada, has held itself bound by that statement, as though the statement w'ere its bond. Who made that statement for Canada? That is an important question.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Who represented Canada at the meeting?


John Horne Blackmore: We cannot find that out. I have tried to find out and I have put a question on the order paper. Who gave him the authority? We want to know that. Was the consent of the cabinet given in any resolution? Was any province consulted? Was this statement submitted to the cabinet after it was made? Was it passed? Was it submitted to any province? Was it submitted to parliament? As far as I can judge, the answer to every one of these questions would be no. Now, who is this individual, who sent him there, and under whose influence did he agree to that convention? That is the question that has to be answered.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: He is the little man who wasn't there.


John Horne Blackmore: Well, his works remain; his tracks are there. If the answers to each of those questions must be no, then what? I think when the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) and the hon. member for St. Antoine-Westmount (Mr. Abbott) finish explaining that matter they will remove a lot of suspicion in this country, and I think the Prime Minister will not be so eager to rush into parliament and accuse me of irresponsible utterances.
What did the United States do with respect to that agreement? The representative of the United States signed the agreement, and then the house of representatives and the senate of the United States repudiated it, refused to ratify it. Can anyone give me any reason why the United States, after signing the agreement, should refuse to ratify it, while Canada, without having signed it, would hold herself bound by the thing? If there was not some secret influence at work it is going to be pretty hard to make any hard-headed man believe it. It is astonishing.
Let it be borne in mind that in that year the war clouds were already threatening. Any
fMr. MacNicol.]
man of vision could see that war was coming; any man with judgment could see it. Furthermore, any man of vision, with any kind of information, would know that the war which was coming would be a war of bombs, of surface raiders, a war of submarines, and that consequently the sugar supply of Canada would be seriously threatened and that the sugar supply of the world would be destroyed. And anyone who reflected on Canada's happy position would realize that this country was in an admirable position to become the sugar-bowl for the needy world. Yet what was done?
The question springs into my mind:	Was
the government in its sugar policy, with respect to beet sugar, accommodating friends, or was it placating potential enemies? When I asked whether or not the Liberal party had received campaign funds from these gentlemen I was not insinuating that the Liberal party would necessarily be doing a reprehensible thing if it had received campaign funds.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Oh, they would never do that.


John Horne Blackmore: I was not implying
that. What I was indicating was simply this- what the Prime Minister apparently failed to get. I wondered whether he was doing what he did with respect to beet sugar in this country because he wanted to help his friends or because these interests were so powerful that he did not dare do otherwise.


Clarence Decatur Howe: On a point of order, my hon. friend is suggesting that the Liberal party has entered into an agreement with persons unknown not to extend the sugar industry. I would point out to him that there 'has been more expansion of the sugar industry in the last five years than in any other five years.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: On a point of order, I also wish to point out to the hon. member that under section 158 of the criminal code, if he is making allegations of this kind he should proceed in the customary fashion, according to that section of the code; otherwise he has said too much or too little.


John Horne Blackmore: Yes; I know the Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie) is a champion bluffer, but he does not bluff me, and I am perfectly aware of the protection I have in this house. I would point out to the hon. member that a man, in order to attack interests so powerful as the ones I am trying to move, needs all the protection he can get because they, the interests, have plenty of it.


Thomas Vien: I am not so much concerned with the remarks the hon. member

Beet Sugar Industry
made against the government, but I did think he stated that the Prime Minister was responsible for this reprehensible practice.


John Horne Blackmore: I think you will find, Mr. Speaker, that the record will show that
is not the case.


Thomas Vien: If the hon. member tells me that I am wrong in my impression I will take his word, but that was what I understood him to say.


John Horne Blackmore: I am endeavouring to speak loudly enough so that Your Honour will hear, but perhaps it is difficult at that. I did not say anything to reflect on the Prime Minister's honour.
Now I will deal shortly with the remarks of the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe). Suppose the industry has expanded; it has not expanded in my area to any great extent. I have some other things which it would do the Liberals good to contemplate.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: They will have a lot of time to do it after the next election.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I suggest that it has expanded in the hon. gentleman's area in the last few years.


John Horne Blackmore: We shall leave the records to show it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: One of the last jobs I did was to design the extension of that plant.


John Horne Blackmore: 
John Horne Blackmore: It would be nearly impossible to sell her much shorter than the Liberals have done already; she is short of nearly everything. What happened in Canada? I have in my hand a statement issued by the wartime prices and trade board on May 2, 1940, in reply to a statement given to the press on May 1, 1940, by the chairman of a committee representing the Southern Alberta Beet Growers association; this will be found in the Ottawa Citizen of May 2, 1940:
At the conclusion of the interview the chairman1-
That is the chairman of the wartime prices and trade board.
-stated explicitly to the delegation that the '[DOT]wartime prices and trade board, as a federal authority, was not in a position to do anything whatsoever to assist the expansion of the sugar beet industry in Canada."
And further on:
"At no time was any suggestion made," said the chairman, "that the wartime prices and trade board would proceed either directly or indirectly to encourage the expansion of the beet sugar industry."
Oh, what immaculate honour! At that time was not Hitler's power apparent? Had not most of the nations of western Europe fallen? Had not people everywhere awakened from their idiotic dream that Hitler would not last? Then why could nothing be done to assist in preparing this country against the dangers that yet lay ahead?
But we have not yet reached the climax. In the spring of 1941 word came out from Canadian Sugar Factories Limited-page the Minister of Munitions and Supply!-at Raymond that 1,300 acres of beets must be taken out of cultivation that year. In that area 1,300 acres of beets under normal conditions would produce 5,569,200 pounds of sugar. The reason given by the factories was that they had 200,000 hundredweight of sugar in their warehouses which they could not sell. Who was at fault because they were unable to sell? Let me read a statement from order in council P.C. 1983 dated May 15, 1940, setting forth the powers of the sugar controller. Hon. members will notice that he started his work in May of 1940, while the incident to which I have been referring took place in 1941, so that he had had time to find his way around. These are the words:
All sugar refiners in Canada shall sell to the sugar administrator as and when required by him, all raw sugar, and all refined sugar, syrups, liquid sugar and molasses manufactured from beets or cane now or hereafter in their possession at such prices as the sugar administrator, under the direction of the wartime
Beet Sugar Industry

prices and trade board, from time to time may prescribe and, to effectuate suoh power, the sugar administrator, under the direction of the board, shall have power to take possession of all or any such sugars accordingly.
Who appointed the sugar administrator? The Liberal party. At whose instigation? Well, you tell me. Whose business was he doing when he would have allowed these 1,300 acres to be taken out of cultivation? Let someone supply the answer; I have been trying to find out. Certainly he was not looking after the welfare of the people of Canada. Undoubtedly it was that man's fault that 200,000 hundredweight of sugar remained unsold in the storehouses of these factories. Whose fault was it that 1,300 acres were to be taken out of cultivation? It was the fault of no one but the sugar controller. Whoever appointed him, whoever instigated his appointment, was responsible for the decision to take that land out of cultivation. Fortunately, because of the pressure of public opinion, the unwise decision was rescinded and the 1,300 acres were put back into cultivation. Let us remember that this was in 1941. In those days there was no doubt about the terrific power of the enemy we were fighting; yet there were men in this country who could toy with an industry upon which the very lives of the people depended. For whose benefit? Well, we are all trying to find out. I suggested an answer.
Then we had rationing, and now we have scarcity. I am going to call upon the Toronto Globe and Mail to consider the array of evidence which I have submitted, and I wish to ask them to take a little time off to explain, in the light of that evidence, how they justify themselves in characterizing my remarks as irresponsible utterances. Someone in this parliament, Mr. Chairman, must rise and defend the cause of the common man; but he who stands in this House of Commons and undertakes to battle for the truth finds all the terrible powers of this country dead against him, and that he must labour under every handicap. Then, if he endeavours to use the rules as a means of strengthening himself, he must be abused by what should be a responsible newspaper and by those who should be responsible men. It does not hurt me; I came here to defend the cause of the common man and I am going to defend it. Now I invite the Prime Minister and the Toronto Globe and Mail to spend any necessary amount of time to prepare a satisfying explanation.


Paul Joseph James Martin: You would not have them together?


John Horne Blackmore: No; they had better work separately, though apparently they did not do so in the last instance; the one copied from the other. Let them prepare an explanation that will satisfy any hard-headed, common-sense man, an explanation that will justify the government in following the questionable policy with respect to sugar which has prevailed in this country. I shall be told, as one of the stock reasons why it is necessary to avoid any expansion of the beet sugar industry during wartime, that we must not have too much beet sugar producing capacity at the end of the war because we have to sell abroad and therefore we must buy abroad. That is the stock argument, May I ask those who would bring forward such a foolish argument if we ought to stop manufacturing agricultural machinery in Canada in order that we might buy from Britain or Germany. Should we stop manufacturing shoes and clothing in Canada in order that we might buy from the United States, in order that we might sell our wheat? Should we stop manufacturing lumber in order that we might trade with Russia, or stop manufacturing cheese and butter in order that we might trade with our sister dominion, New Zealand? Those sound like intelligent proposals, do they not? Or should we stop producing oil in order that we might trade with Roumania?


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is one thing of which we are producing very little in Canada,


John Horne Blackmore: But should we stop even that little production? Well, if we would not stop producing these commodities we have mentioned, why stop producing sugar from beets?


Clarence Decatur Howe: WThen did we stop?


John Horne Blackmore: When limiting production.


Clarence Decatur Howe: When did we do that?


John Horne Blackmore: In 1941, and ever since the signing of or the acquiescence in the international trade agreement, as I have abundantly proved. I think the minister will find, when he reads my remarks in Hansard, that it will be hard to find an answer to them.
Some will say: "Is the sugar from the beets as good?" Yes, it is exactly the same kind of sugar. It is the same, chemically, as sugar wherever you find it, or whatever it is made from.
Then they will say: "Is it cheap enough?" I point out only this fact, that according to the report which I have here from Canadian Sugar Factories Limited, for 1938-and I am speaking

Beet Sugar Industry
from memory, although I am sure I have it right-they sold their sugar for a net price of $3.94 a hundredweight in. 1937.


John Ritchie MacNicol: F.O.B. mill?


John Horne Blackmore: That is the year they made $155, to which I refer. I say that $3.94 a hundredweight is pretty cheap sugar.


John Ritchie MacNicol: At what point?


John Horne Blackmore: At the refinery. All this manoeuvring of the Liberal party in connection with the restriction of the production of beet sugar I think we must characterize as the most effective government cooperation with somebody-and if not the sugar interests, then with whom?


Douglas Charles Abbott: There has never been any restriction of the production of beet sugar.


Clarence Decatur Howe: There has been an expansion
in every year of the war.


John Horne Blackmore: Some men looking at sunlight in broad day would declare it was dark. This is cooperation with these interests in what appears to be an international conspiracy to impose either scarcity or high prices or both upon the people of Canada, through an agreement on Canada's part to refuse to assist in any way the expansion of the beet sugar industry in Canada-the beet sugar industry, for which Canada is extraordinarily well adapted. I see no way in which one can explain that in any other way.
Now, another serious thing: This participation, in the international sugar agreement appears to be not only a conspiracy to foist high prices upon the Canadian people but, perhaps worse still, and yet more sinister, it appears also to be an agreement, or complacency, or conscious if not wilful acquiescence on the part of the King government, in an international plan to rob Canada of her economic independence.
Sugar is one of the most vital needs of the Canadian people. In fact it is practically indispensable to them. Imagine how helpless might be the condition of the Canadian people if an international organization, desiring to brow-beat Canada into some policy repugnant to Canadians were to threaten to withhold from Canada the sugar her people needs! In such a condition the threat of withholding sugar would be a fearful weapon, through the use of which an international organization could destroy Canada's independence. It would be a weapon even more potent than an international police force. I repeat: it looks as though the King government had been at least cooperating with interests definitely aiming at the destruction of Canada's sovereignty.
There are some who smile. I will tell you that if some of the schemes which these supranational government artists are trying to have fixed on this country succeed, the smile will be on the other side of the face. This method of food control is exactly the strategy and technique by which they seem to intend to work.
Let the people of Canada know, and I hereby declare to them that, except for the opposition of the sugar interests and the government's acquiescence in that opposition, the domestic production of sugar in Canada could now be meeting the domestic non-rationed requirements not only of Canada but of a very considerable portion of the English-speaking world. Let me give the house just a few figures to indicate the truth of what I say. The hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) in his brief points out that the county of Lambton alone could produce twenty five per cent of all Canada's sugar needs in peacetime. They could support four factories of 1,200-ton slicing capacity. And he points out that Kent, Essex, Middlesex and Huron are all counties admirably adapted to the production of sugar beets, and that they could produce the sugar which Canada requires. Why is that not being done?
Now, in Doctor Archibald's report, to which I referred earlier, with respect to the Alberta sugar beet situation, published on October 2S, 1937, he points out that only 20,000 acres were being used in Alberta for the production of sugar beets, and that 200,000 acres of irrigated land of just as fine quality were available for sugar beet production in that province. May I point out that in my constituency by the expenditure of $15,000,000 in the construction of the Lethbridge south-east water conservation project 350,000 more acres of as fine quality as are now producing sugar beets could be brought into cultivation. There is no doubt in the world that Canada can produce all the sugar she needs.
I turn now to the hon. member for St. Antoine-Westmount. I wish I had time to deal with his speech categorically, but I shall be able to make only a few comments with respect to it. As for his contribution to the debate I would say that as one who comes from the citadel of high finance the faults in his argument can be explained. Any man who undertakes to talk about matters concerning which he has little information and less understanding will naturally blunder at every turn, as did the hon. member for St. Antoine-Westmount.


Douglas Charles Abbott: What is the hon. member reading from?


John Horne Blackmore: Does the hon. member wish me to read the article?



Beet Sugar Industry


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am glad to see he has committed it to writing.


John Horne Blackmore: I am referring to the speech which he delivered, with respect to my speech. Of course he thought my remarks were full of inconsistencies. It requires a well-informed man to follow the reasoning of another well-informed man. The hon. member for St. Antoine-Westmount appears to argue that even if Canada had been committed to beet sugar industry of no matter how great an extent, her domestic sugar production could have made no difference to the quantity of supplies available for wartime consumption in Canada.
Suppose, Mr. Speaker, that Canada had thirty sugar factories of 1,200-ton slicing capacity, which she could easily have in Alberta and Ontario alone, and producing one and a half times the amount of sugar she needs, are we to be told in all seriousness that that production would make no difference to the sugar which the Canadian people would have? If that is the case, then I ask what foolhardy policy it was that dictated the signing of an agreement which rendered such a thing as that possible?


John Ritchie MacNicol: The hon. member left out Manitoba in his list of provinces which could produce beet sugar. They are growing sugar beets out there, and also have a sugar beet factory.


John Horne Blackmore: I knew that the Manitoba people would not mind. The point I wished to make was that two provinces alone in Canada could produce one and a half times the sugar we need. And if you bring in the other provinces there is no reason in the world why this country should be without sugar. This thing of trying to argue the Canadian people into the idea that it is the war which brought on the shortage of sugar is simply deluding the people. There must be a complete change in the whole outlook in respect of many commodities produced in this country. We must stop the restricted, short-sighted, narrow-minded point of view, or using the point of view we have had up to the present time. We must reach out in a generous way, we must use the resources of our country and distribute them so that the Canadian people may have abundance.
In closing, I again make an offer to anyone in the Liberal party who thinks he can explain away the arguments I have advanced, and upon which I base my suspicion that secret influence has been brought to bear upon the government to bring about a policy of restriction with respect to the production of beet sugar in Canada since the beginning of the

war; to attempt to do so. I have not said anything about prices, although I mentioned prices in my speech. I have an array of figures which would be quite as impressive, and perhaps if the opportunity offers at some time I shall give particulars of the prices to indicate that there has been manipulation resulting in the Canadian people having to pay more for their sugar than they should have had to pay.


Ernest Edward Perley: Mr. Speaker, I am not very anxious to get into this debate, but several references have been made to the party, of which I happen to be a member. There are at present in the house four members who were members of the agriculture committee which sat in 1932. The hon. member for Haldimand (Mr. Senn) was the chairman; the hon. member for Wood Mountain (Mr. Donnelly) was a member, as well as the hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling) and myself. The question of encouraging the production of sugar from beets in Canada was referred to that committee. I have before me the report of the committee which was presented to the house on April 1, 1932, and I should like to read one or two paragraphs from the report, as follows:
The evidence submitted established the following facts regarding the industry:
1.	That the production of sugar beets has been carried on very profitably in certain districts of Ontario and Alberta; that the area under cultivation has increased from 25,000 acres in 1921 with a yield of 200,000 tons to 42,000 acres in 1931, with a yield of approximately 435,000 tons, and that the production of refined beet sugar has increased from 53,000.000 pounds in 1921 to approximately 100,000,000 pounds in 1931.
That is in ten years. The report goes on:
2.	That large additional areas, suitable for the growth of sugar beets, are available in Canada.
And again:
5. That the sugar beet factories at Chatham, Wallaceburg and Raymond are now operating at full capacity, and that no further development of the beet sugar industry in Canada is possible until manufacturing capacity is increased.
The final paragraphs of the report read:
Your committee therefore recommends that in view of the existing tariff on sugar and in consideration of the substantial payments being made to agriculture and labour by the beet sugar factories at present in operation, the cane sugar refineries should undertake to provide for a gradual increase in factory facilities for the refining of beet sugar in Canada, and that, with the additional advantages in freight rates to points in the middle west, heretofore described, factory facilities should now be steadily increased in western areas where beets are grown, and thereby make it possible to produce from beets a more substantial percentage of the sugar consumption of Canada.

War Expenditures Committee
Your committee further recommends, that if no successful attempt ibe made in the immediate future by the refineries to increase the facilities for the manufacture of beet sugar, the government should take into consideration steps to accomplish that end.
I read from that report to show that the government of that day and the agriculture committee of that day were ready to encourage the production of beet sugar in Canada. Since that time there has been a considerable increase in the production of beet sugar in Manitoba. There is a splendid refinery located there and I suggest to all hon. members that they visit it. It is one of the best in Canada and it has great possibilities. I say these few words to show that the party of that day was interested in increasing the beet sugar industry of Canada.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Mr. Speaker, the sugar agreement of 1938 was wholly to increase the supplies of sugar and to divide them equally among the people who were preparing for war. During every one. of the last five or six years there has. been an expansion in the sugar beet industry. The sugar beet refinery in Winnipeg which was referred to was,completed'within the last three or four years, and recently a new industry has been started in Quebec. I can assure my hon. friend that if any other interest wishes to increase the production of beet sugar in any area of this country they will have the support of the government, as has every -other beet sugar project that has come along.
In connection with the project in Quebec there was an acute shortage of building materials, and it was difficult to justify the use of the materials for that purpose when -they were needed for direct war projects. Nevertheless the government decided that the project was of such importance that an exception must be made and the beet sugar plant in Quebec was classed as a war project.
I can say categorically that this government has taken no action that would in any way limit the production of sugar in Canada. I can give evidence of the fact that we have given every assistance to those interests that wished to expand the production of beet sugar in this country.


John Horne Blackmore: How about the 1,300 acres in 1941?	-


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is absolute nonsense.


John Horne Blackmore: It is not nonsense. My hon. friend has just forgotten, that'is all; he does not know.


Percy Chapman Black: What about the old and well established, sugar refinery in Halifax which was closed down recently because of war conditions. The conditions that forced the closing of that refinery have pretty well rectified themselves. Cane sugar is now coming into Halifax harbour and going to other parts of Canada. Can the minister give the house any information as to when the Acadia sugar refinery will reopen and again be producing sugar?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The house is not in committee. My hon. friend is standing up for the sugar barons who use cane sugar. I may say that no action of the government closed the refinery in Halifax. It is my understanding that it was bought by private interests who decided that it was better closed than open.


Percy Chapman Black: The government had no authority to keep it open?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The government has plenty of
authority.



WAR EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE-IN CAMERA SITTINGS-MR. HOMUTH

[Stage Direction]
Mr. KARL K. HOMUTH (Waterloo South): Mr. Speaker, now that we have finished a sweet subject, perhaps I may be pardoned for interjecting something sour into the debate. I do this because I feel the matter I have in mind is of considerable public importance and is directly associated with the activities of the Department of Munitions and Supply. I know of no other time to take up this matter than on the motion to go into supply. I refer to the matter of whether the war expenditures committee should sit in camera or in public and to the question which I had with Mr. Speaker with regard to it.
Thomas Vien: I think the hon. member has given me sufficient indication of what he intends to speak on. He is proposing to deal with an opinion which I gave to him personally regarding the secrecy of the meetings of the war expenditures committee and I must rule that on the motion to go into supply the hon. member cannot discuss that matter. The rule is perfectly clear according to citation 568 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, third edition, which reads as follows:
Until the report' and evidence have been laid upon the table, it is irregular to refer to them in debate, or to put questions in reference to the proceedings of the committee.
The reference is to select committees. That rule is also borne out by Bourinot's Parliamentary Procedure, at page 474, wherein it is stated:	.
Until a committee report, it is irregular to refer to its proceedings in debate in the house.
Deserter at Longueuil

For instance, in. the session of 1873, Mr. Huntington was proceeding to refer to certain papers and letters relative to an important matter under the consideration of a select committee; but the speaker decided in accordance with English precedents that they could not be read in the house (a). Neither can a committee report the evidence taken before a similar committee in a previous session. . . .
The matter that the hon. member has referred to is a matter under discussion in the committee. It is not before the house. It is not a grievance in the sense that the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) spoke of this evening. It is a matter purely of proceeding, which is within the hands of the committee. It is not before the house and therefore I must rule that the hon. member cannot bring it up.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: But is a grievance. It is one of those grievances that we cannot bring before the house and the hon. members are stymied.
Mr. SPEAKER; The hon. member will have opportunities in the proceedings of the house but I cannot now indicate them. At the moment we are on. the motion to go into supply. It is not a grievance in the sense that is intended when the committee of supply is being set up. As I have already said, it is a matter that is before the committee. It is a proceeding which they are dealing with. It is a matt ;r which cannot be brought before the house in the manner in which the hon. member is now trying.


Gordon Graydon: May I crave Your Honour's indulgence for a word in this matter?


Thomas Vien: I am always ready to listen to the leader of the opposition, but in this instance my position is perfectly clear. I have no doubt'in my mind as to the soundness of the rule I am now propounding and it r-ust be taken without argument.
Mr. GRAYDON; I am sorry Your Honour made that ruling because this is the situation in which we find ourselves. The committee has ruled in a certain direction.. We have an appeal to. Your Honour but we are not allowed to exercise that appeal. In a few words, that is what it means.


Thomas Vien: There will be opportunities in this house when the matter can be brought to the attention of the Chair.


Gordon Graydon: What are they?


Thomas Vien: At the moment there is, in my judgment, nothing before the Chair which would justify the hon. member in bringing up this question when going into supply.
TMr. Speaker.]


Gordon Graydon: He can never bring it up
then.


Thomas Vien: I have ruled.



CASE OF DESERTER AT LONGUEUIL-MR. POULIOT

[Stage Direction]
Mr. JEAN-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): Mr. Speaker, in accordance with your ruling I shall not speak about that matter. I wonder if the leader of the opposition has something more to say. I have another case that I shall bring to the attention of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Ralston). I shall summarize in a few words what it is. There was a fellow who. deserted for about a month or two. He was sentenced to the clink in Longueuil, and I am informed that he suffers from sinus trouble. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Macdonald) told me that I could have a copy of his examination with a letter from the man authorizing the department to give it to me. I sent a draft letter of two or three lines to his brother and asked him to go to Longueuil and have it signed by the man. The brother could not see him that day, and then I wrote a letter to the man with that draft letter of two or three lines. The letter was along these lines:
I hereby authorize the department to give a copy of my medical examination to J. F. Pouliot.
That letter was registered. The command1-ing officer said to that man:
If you sign that letter you will be punished for that or if you send that letter.
I am informed that the letter has been signed, has been sent to me and has been held by the officer because I have not received it. Since that time the man has been condemned to bread and water and the restrictions upon him have been more severe. Naturally I do not blame headquarters for that treatment, but there is something wrong there. That man had a most unsatisfactory medical examination. In Longueuil a young man who had heart trouble was ordered* to shovel sand in a cart for a whole day. There is something wrong there. I shall ask the minister kindly to send someone from Ottawa, someone who has nothing to do with the garrison at Longueuil and have a report made on that case. It seems to be a reasonable request to make. If the situation is as I am informed it is, it reminds me of* the dark ages of long ago. That man cannot be treated like that. I have a right to his examination, upon the conditions set by the parliamentary assistant to the minister. He said to me:
Let us have a letter from that man.; let us be authorized by that man and I shall give you a copy of the examination.

German Prisoners in Canada
That man cannot write me. The medical doctors of the army at Longueuil have already, to my knowledge, freed some men. When I complain of this case I know whereof I speak. I know also that these men have been freed after I directed the attention of headquarters to the case. It is time it should finish; whoever is in charge in Longueoiil should be severely punished if the facts that I have given are true, and I presume they are because up until how they have been.
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Minister of National Defence):: I want to say to my hon. friend
that I have the greatest confidence in the officer who is in charge at Longueuil. I shall be very glad to look into the matter to which he has referred. As he has said himself, it is not a matter for headquarters, but a matter of administration in the district. I shall have an examination made. If he had referred the matter to me I can assure him I would have been very glad to have had it looked into without taking up the time of the house.


Jean-François Pouliot: Thank you. I will notify the minister.



TREATMENT OF GERMAN PRISONERS OF WAR IN CANADA-MR. ROSS (SOURIS)

Mr. J. A. ROSS (Souris):: On this occasion I should like to raise a question in regard to enemy prisoners in this country. It is not only to-day that the press has carried stories across the country with regard to German prisoners, but on other occasions in my province that has happened for some months past now. To-day the press has carried a report concerning hun prisoners being given free rein at Buckingham. The press states that they drink in taverns and go out with local girls. The ire of townspeople is aroused. This is a quotation from a local paper:
The prisoners allegedly getting this favoured treatment are engaged in. work for the Singer Company in timber limits near Thurso.
The article points out that these prisoners had been taken into Buckingham for dental treatment, I think, by a guard. Following that, the guard took them to the tavern where they drank beer freely. Then he took them in an automobile, and they went to some other place and picked up the other guard along with four girls or young ladies and went carousing around the country that evening. It is quite a lengthy article and it points out ihe disgust of those people, the relatives of young people serving in the armed services. Certainly it is not a very nice situation. There is a lengthy article which may be found in various papers to-day. The minister will find it there. As I say, had this been the only
case I would not have raised the issue right now, but in the Dauphin Herald, of Manitoba of February 24 there was a very strong protest, as follows:
For the second time within two months a German officer from the prison camp on the Riding Mountain has been seen on the streets of Dauphin under very loose courtesy custody.
Doctor and professional man though he may be, he is still a captive German and must be regarded as an enemy of the country.
Shortly before Christmas this same officer was taken in broad daylight and with a full view of everything right into No. 10 service flying training school, R.C.A.F., at Dauphin. The excuse then was that he had to accompany another German prisoner to the air school to have his teeth fixed.
_ On the same occasion the enemy officer asked if he might visit the medical clinic at Dauphin and permission was readily accorded by the pliant guard.
In the name of the parents of this country whose boys at this very moment are fighting for their lives in Italy we protest against this preferred treatment and we warn the Department of National Defence, that the next time we see this German prisoner on the streets of Dauphin we shall proclaim the fact in three-inch head-fines and send a copy to every newspaper in Canada.
This is a war to the death we are now engaged in as many of us already know to our sorrow.
That will indicate that this practice has been prevalent, apparently, in these camps. We have a report to-day from this town in Quebec and these other reports from the area in my native province to the west.	*
The minister during his own war appropriation bill rather took me to task when I asked a question about recruiting at this time. He said he thought he was getting splendid results following these recruiting parties and dances being held throughout the country. Well, that is going on, on the one hand, and this laxity on the other, and it does not create a very good feeling among the parents and relatives of the boys who are serving overseas to-day. It is a very bad situation.
I maintain that we have not to this day national selective service in operation as we should have for the armed services, for agriculture and for industry. Anybody knows that the system of recruiting to-day is far from satisfactory.


James Layton Ralston: Mr. Speaker, is this a grievance or is this anything which can be discussed on this motion? 1 am rising to a point of order. My hon. friend may have been within his rights in discussing German prisoners of war, but I submit he is not within his rights in discussing what has already been discussed on the war appropriation resolution, which was before the committee for three weeks: I myself was here at that time for a
German Prisoners in Canada

week. I made my answer to my hon. friend. He could answer or not just as he liked. But I say that he cannot take the opportunity now, on a motion to go into supply, to raise >
matter which has already been discussed on what in effect were estimates under the war appropriation resolution.


James Arthur Ross: I shall not deal any further with that phase of the matter. Had I been able to raise the question on the orders of the day I would have preferred to have done it at that time, but I realize how far I could have gone on the orders of the day in this matter.
To many thousands of relatives of our men throughout the country this will appear a very serious situation. To permit such unreasonable conduct by enemy prisoners in our midst is an insult to the relatives of those who are serving overseas to-day on our behalf. The present camp in Riding Mountain was built last fall under a wartime housing scheme. I personally visited it upon its completion, and I say that it is the most up-to-date camp I have ever been in. There are conveniences and comforts there which very few of the pioneers of this country are able to afford to-day. I think our prisoners should have proper treatment, but they should be properly guarded, and insults such as have been allowed in the last few days and few months should not be tolerated in this country. I cannot think of anything more insulting to the relatives of the boys in the armed services. A statement from the responsible minister with regard to this very serious and nasty occurrence is due to this house and to the citizens of Canada.


Mr. G. S. WHITE (Hastings-Peterborough):: Before the minister replies I should like to odd a word to what has been said by the hon. member for Souris (Mr. Ross) regarding the treatment of German prisoners in Canada. Hon. members will recall that last session the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) ^ead a statement in the house regarding the treatment accorded to British and Canadian prisoners held by the Japanese. It was a copy of the statement given in the British House of Commons by Mr. Anthony Eden. Hon. members will recall that almost unheard-of savage and barbarian treatment inflicted by the Japanese on British and Canadian soldiers. I am vitally interested in Ihese Canadian boys because fifty-two of the soldiers from the district in which I reside were at Hong Kong and are now prisoners of the Japanese. I wonder what the parents and the families of the boys who are now in Japanese hands must think when they hear over the radio and read in the press to-day of
[Mr. Ralston.!
the de luxe treatment accorded to German prisoners in this country. If any hon. members took the trouble to read the article which appeared in the February 7 issue of the United States magazine Lije, they will recall the very full statements by American officers and men who escaped from the Japanese in which they give firsthand, accurate information as to the manner in which their prisoners are treated.
I protest strongly against the fashion in which these German prisoners are treated in Canada. The hon. member for Souris says it is an insult. To me "insult" is not an adequate description of the feelings of the parents and beloved ones of Canadian boys who languish in Japanese prison camps when they read of the way we are treating German prisoners in this country. I concur in everything the hon. member for Souris has said, and I think it is the minister's duty to make a very full statement on this matter.


James Layton Ralston: I do not know how many times I am allowed to take part in this debate. I have already spoken once. But I am not going to let the remarks which have been made by hon. members to pass unless you, Mr. Speaker, consider that I am not in order in discussing them.
In regard to the Thurso incident, I, like my hon. friends, first saw it in this evening's papers. My hon. friend does not suppose that I have a personal check on these matters or know all that is going on. But I immediately called up the adjutant general to find out what he knew about it, and I was informed that he was getting a report on the matter and that, as a matter of fact, the director of prisoners of war had already sent someone to Thurso to ascertain what the situation was.
Let me say first of all that, with regard to this matter of prisoners of war in working camps, I warned this house last session that we were having great pressure to allow prisoners of war to work, and I told the house that so far as the Department of National Defence was concerned, we must point out that there were some risks involved, because we could not exercise strict supervision when they were outside the internment camps. We felt, however, in view of the strong pressure which was being brought to bear, that we should do the very best we could to make prisoners of war available for work.
We have not a veteran's guard sufficiently numerous to guard all these prisoners; that is to say, to accompany the individuals. They have to have some leeway. But they are working in camps at the insistence of the public of this country, and I warned them that a certain number of these prisoners would pro-

German Prisoners in Canada
bably escape. The house seemed to take it as quite all right so long as that labour was provided.
At Thurso, as I understand from the very little I have .learned, these men came down to have some dentistry done. There was a corporal with them. I do not want to misjudge his case. I may say that as a result of the incident he is under close arrest. Apparently there were some irregularities, and the irregularities will be looked into. While it is not something which occurs every day, these things do happen from time to time. However, the matter will be gone into thoroughly.
I wish to point out to my hon. friends that when prisoners of war are sent outside the internment camps to do work it is not possible to have a guard for each one of them. When they are brought to a centre they are brought in as small numbers as possible, and it is thought that the guard provided is sufficient under the circumstances. We cannot possibly send guards to the lumber woods to guard these prisoners of war to the extent of having a guard for each prisoner, and the result, therefore, sometimes is that these irregularities take place. But the matter will be investigated and whatever disciplinary action is necessary will be taken.
WTth regard to the Dauphin case, I never heard of it before. That was the case of a prisoner of wTar working in one of the labour camps, not in one of the internment camps.
As regards prisoners in internment camps my hon. friend will not have much to complain about. They are dealt with under close guard, and I think the public have reason to be pretty well satsified with the way in which the internment camps have been conducted in this country, considering the number of men we have and the fact that these men from day to day have nothing to do but to sit and plan how to escape. I pay tribute to the veterans' guard of Canada for the splendid way in which they have carried on in seeing that these >
prisoners are properly guarded.


James Arthur Ross: So do I.


James Layton Ralston: The record cannot be excelled anywhere of the way in which they have been handled.
Coming back to prisoners like the one in the Dauphin case -who are working, there is a different situation existing there and there cannot be the same strict and complete supervision. There are not the same number of guards provided. I have an arrangement with the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) whereby we are responsible for guards up to a certain point, and after that my hon. friend takes
over. We supply a nucleus to help with the discipline in the labour camp, but as regards security generally the responsibility is that of the Department of Labour. Having regard to all they have to do in that respect, they have done an excellent job and have provided a great many prisoners of war to do work. They have done a great deal of work with little trouble to the citizens.
With regard to the treatment of prisoners of war, I do not know what either of my hon. friends is talking about when he speaks of de luxe treatment. They are treated in accordance with the Geneva convention, and regardless of what some barbarous nation does as regards prisoners of war, so far as I am concerned, prisoners of war will be treated according to the terms of that convention, and we will live up to it. From, the point of view of the citizens of Canada, their boys are either in Hong Kong or in German prison camps and if we treated prisoners of war here contrary to the terms of that convention, their mothers and fathers here would be the first to say, and say rightly, that the Dominion of Canada, through the Department of National Defence, had brought on their boys in the prison camps of Germany and Japan persecution and hardship by reason of the fact that we treated German or Japanese prisoners of war improperly here. I have seen the representative of the protecting power and have had him go over all the camps and report to me personally to see that they were living up to the terms of the Geneva convention, and I assure this house that nothing more than that is done, I propose to follow that policy straight through so long as the Department of National Defence has the responsibility.
The house can see that we are in a difficult situation. We do not want to treat them better than we are required to do according to the letter of the law. At the same time, however, reports do get back, and if anything goes wrong reports will immediately reach the powers detaining our boys, with the result that hardships are imposed on them and then the families in this country feel that the action we have taken against German prisoners has been visited upon their boys overseas. We have to hew to the line and that is what we are endeavouring to do.
I assure hon. members that if there is any case in which the line is overstepped I do not know of it. I shall look into the case of Thurso. That is a case where apparently some men got liquor and perhaps those in charge engaged in irregularities. Disciplinary action will be taken. The Dauphin case I will look into. I understand from my hon. friend that somebody wanted the attention of
German Prisoners in Canada

a dental officer and went to an air force camp in order to get it. I do not see anything wrong about that at first blush, though there may be. I will say that they were not in the custody of the Department of National Defence at the time but in a labour camp, which is authorized by the government and the house, and which has been urged by the people of the country in order that they may get the advantage of the prisoner of wa-labour available for that purpose.
I have nothing more to say except that I shall look into both cases, and if there is any cause for complaint I assure the house it will be rectified.


James Arthur Ross: After the investigation, will the minister tell the house what the regulations are with respect to taking these prisoners into centres of population?


James Layton Ralston: I do not know that there are any regulations particularly. Both these cases, I believe, as a matter of fact were men from labour camps and not from internment camps. The Minister of Labour will tell the hon. gentleman if there are special regulations about them. I have no doubt they are taken to centres of population when it is necessary to take them for treatment. The only question is as to the adequacy of the guard provided for that purpose.


Humphrey Mitchell: In view of the fact that my department is probably involved, I should like to say a few words. I had not known anything about the matter. The first I knew about it was what I found in the newspapers this evening; in fact I had not read it until my hon. friend mentioned it.
There is nothing novel about the employment of prisoners of war outside internment camps.


James Arthur Ross: I am not objecting to that.


Humphrey Mitchell: Many members have
approached me in an effort to get prisoners of war to work on farms and in other industries in the country in view of the severe manpower situation. In South Africa there are 60,000 prisoners of war working outside internment camps. They have them in Great Britain and in the United States and it is a question of man-power. As the Minister of National Defence has said, if you have to have as many guards as you have prisoners, you might as well use the guards and not bother about the prisoners. May I say to the hon. member for Hastings-Peterborough (Mr. White) that I do not think the Anglo-Saxons have reached the level where we should endeavour to match brutality with brutality.


George Stanley White: I never suggested that we should match the Japanese at all, but I do not think we should adopt a continual appeasement policy.


Humphrey Mitchell: There is no appeasement about it, but I say this to my hon. friend. As long as I am in charge of prisoners of war I am going to maintain that same dignity of treatment afforded human beings which has made the British people what they are. I know it is the easiest thing in the world, to raise this kind of question, to set passions aflame, and no one regrets more than I do the treatment of prisoners of war in Japan. But I think this will readily be understood, that after all, in that part of the world, they have just a veneer of civilization and that is all. It would not, however, redound to our credit if we varied in any detail from the international law laid down in the Geneva convention for the treatment of prisoners of war in this country.
I join with the Minister of National Defence in the assurance that we will look into the matter. I am frank to admit that in the employment of prisoners of war some risk is run. We often read in the newspapers that our young fellows manage to escape from Germany and other parts of the continent, and that is one of the inevitable risks which those people who desire such assistance at this time, in the way of man-power, have to take. It has to be taken in every country where prisoners of war are employed outside the regular internment camps. I would go so far as to say that there have been actually more escapes from internment camps in this country than there have been from what we might call the work camps under the jurisdiction of my department.
I shall be glad to look into the matter as far as it affects my department and give my hon. friend the information he desires.



INCOME TAX-POSSIBILITY OF EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FINAL PAYMENT-MR. KNOWLES

Stanley Howard Knowles: There is another matter I should like to bring to the attention of the government before Your Honour leaves the Chair. It is a matter about which questions have been asked, but as yet hon. members have had no opportunity to discuss it or to express the views of their constituents. I refer to the problem created for a great many people by the necessity of paying the entire balance due on their 1943 income tax by April 30. As I say, questions have been asked in the house about this matter, and the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Gibson) in reply has simply stated the terms of the statute as it stands.

Income Tax
As hon. members are aware, it is a matter of considerable urgency for a great many people. We hope the government may give some consideration to this matter, and that such consideration might be given soon, so that if any change in policy is to be made an announcement to that effect might be given at an early date. Following many letters which I have received on this matter, I wrote the Minister of Finance (Mr. Usley) -


Clarence Decatur Howe: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, surely this does not come within the rules on going into supply. The hon. member is talking about a matter which will not eventuate until April 30 of this year, and this is now only the middle of March.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If I may speak to the point of order, in my reading of the rule with respect to the right of private members to raise grievances on going into supply I do not see anything about urgency. The rule refers to grievances: I submit that this is a grievance of my constitutents, and also that there is in it an element of urgency. The Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) suggests that April 30 is a long way off. It really is not very far off when one considers the plans that people must make to take care, in many cases, of quite large sums that must be paid by way of balances of their income tax. I submit that it is in order, that it is a matter which should be brought to the attention of the government and a matter on which hon. members should have an opportunity to express their views at this time.


Thomas Vien: I would refer hon. members to citation 345 of Beauchesne's Rules and Forms:
The ancient doctrine that the redress of grievances should ibe considered before the grant of supplies is maintained in the House of Commons of Canada by the provision of standing order 49 that the motion for the Speaker to leave the chair can be amended; and the amendments need not be relevant but may relate to every question connected with public administration.
And further:
Matters of detail which should be discussed in committee cannot be debated on these occasions, nor can debate be permitted relating to grants already agreed to, or to resolutions which will be proposed in the committee, or to items in the estimates.
The other day I ruled that a matter which was being discussed could be taken up when the estimates were before the committee, but I know of no item, though I may be informed to the contrary, on which the matter to which the hon. member is now referring could be discussed. .


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Item 189, covering the general administration of the income tax division.


Stanley Howard Knowles: This is in reference to a statute passed last year, and no item covering it appears anywhere in this year's estimates.


Douglas Charles Abbott: If I may interject a word, this collection of income tax comes about by virtue of a statute which has been on, the statute books for some twenty years, during which time income tax has been payable on April 30 of each year. One-third of the total had to be paid by April 30 and the remaining two-thirds, bearing an interest rate of five per cent, I think, must be paid by September 1. That has been the law. Last year an exception was made because of the change-over to the pay-as-you-go policy, but with that exception that date of April 30 has been fixed for some twenty years.


Thomas Vien: I am rather inclined to think the hon. member is in order. Item 189 reads:
Income tax division: general administration, including authority to create positions and make appointments-*
The matter being discussed by the hon. member has to do with the date of payment of the income tax, and I am rather inclined to believe that the hon. member is in order in discussing it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If I may continue, I believe I had referred to the fact that I wrote the Minister of Finance about this matter under date of March 9. He replied under date of March 11, and I should like to quote part of that letter:
As you know, the Minister of National Revenue stated in the house on Friday-
That would be on March 10, and that statement appears at page 1347 of Hansard.-.
-that no extension is at present contemplated. Your suggestion will, however, be kept in mind.
On the basis of that last short sentence, I felt there was some point in raising the matter in this way and pressing the government to give consideration to it, I was further encouraged by the reply given on the orders of the day to-day when the question was asked of the Minister of National Revenue; I felt that his answer at that time was not quite so final and categorical as the one he made on March 10. The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance has just made reference to the situation that has prevailed in years gone by, and has indicated that there has been no basic change. I should like to point out to him that there is considerable confusion

Labour Conditions

over this matter, and I should like also to call his attention to information that can be found by looking at the income tax form for various years. I have a number of them here in my hand. First I have the forms on which taxpayers are now working, the T-l special, 1943, $3,000 or under; and also T-l general, 1943. On each of these forms it is indicated that payment is to be made in full on April 30, and there is nothing anywhere in the form to indicate that any postponement or deferment is possible. If the house will permit me to move the adjournment of the debate, when I come back to the matter I shall refer, by way of contrast, to the information contained on the forms for 1942 and 1941.


Thomas Vien: Is the hon. gentleman moving the adjournment of the debate?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Yes; I move the adjournment of the debate.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Tuesday, March 21, 1944