1944-03-30

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I table return to an order moved by the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) for a copy of all orders in council passed since July 15,1943, which amend, suspend or otherwise alter the operations of statutes, and so on. The hon. member will remember asking me last year if the government would not consider having these amendments presented in a form which would make them readily available to members of the house. I am glad to be able to inform him that this has been done. I would inform my hon. friend and other hon. members that a consolidated table of contents and reference index published quarterly by the privy council office as an appendix to the weekly publication "Canadian War Orders and Regulations" contains these various amendments to statutes. This is a quarterly consolidation including specific reference to statutes amended, suspended or referred to by order in council. The latest consolidation covers the last quarter of 1943. The consolidation for the first quarter of 1944, up to March 31, 1944, will be published shortly.

Questions



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 55, for the relief of Julia Menard Mills.-Mr. Hill.
Bill No. 56, for the relief of Vera Esteri Seppala Vuorimies.-Mr. Hill.
Bill No. 57, for the relief of Violet Magdalen Johnson Overall.-Mr. Hazen.
Bill No. 58, for the relief of Adelard Belanger.-Mr. Hill.
Bill No. 59, for the relief of Edna Lyall Burgess Lambert.-Mr. Boucher.
Bill No. 60, for the relief of Barbara Hellen Smith Dodds.-Mr. Mcllraith.
Bill No. 61, for the relief of Ellen Margaret Doris Sheehan Decary.-Mr. Mcllraith.
Bill No. 62, for the relief of Kathleen O'Raw Major.-Mr. Fulford.
Bill No. 63, for the relief of Vernon Oswald Marquez.-Mr. Fulford.

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

Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	Has a ceiling price been imposed upon farm implements and repair parts for same?
2.	If so, when was it imposed?
3.	Has it been enforced in regard to all farm implements and spare parts whether manufactured in Canada or imported?
4.	What relationship does the present price of farm implements and repair parts bear to prices for same on September 10, 1939?
5.	What relationship does the present prices
of staple farm products bear to, (a) the average price of same in 1926-29 inclusive; (b) to the price of same on September 10, 1939?	*
6.	What quantities of farm implements and repair parts will be released for sale in Canada during the year 1944?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Prices of farm implements and repair parts were frozen at the level of those prices in effect during the basic period-September 15 to October 11, 1941-with a few exceptions, covered by Order No. A8, issued to permit slight revisions in prices.
3.	Yes.
4.	The wartime prices and trade board has only controlled retail prices of farm machinery effective during or subsequent to the basic period-September 15 to October 11, 1941- and it has not made any investigation as to prices charged for farm implements and repair parts prior to that time. It is known that, apart from a few adjustments made under order A8, farm machinery prices have not risen since the basic period.
5.	(a) The Dominion Bureau of Statistics index of farm products' prices as of the week ending March 17, 1944, shows an increase of 3'9 per cent over the average for 1926 to 1929.
(b) The Dominion Bureau of Statistics index of farm products' prices as of the week ending March 17, 1944, shows an increase of 63-0 per cent over the average for September, 1939.
The farm products index covers milk, eggs, grains, livestock, etc., that is, the main staple farm products and it is based on returns received by farmers so that the present prices include subsidies and other government payments now being paid to farmers on milk, barley, oats and pork. No index was prepared for September 10, 1939. The average for the month of September is taken which would differ only slightly from the prices on September 10.
6.	Approximately 80 per cent of the average of the total tonnage of farm implements released in the years 1940 and 1941 will be available during the calendar year 1944 and 156 per cent of one-half the average of repair parts distributed in the years 1940 and 1941 will be available during the year 1944.



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY-EXPENDITURES IN SASKATCHEWAN

["1.\tYes, by P.C. 535, January 27, 1944. See\nminister's statement, page 6, Hansard, January 28, 1944.\n2.\tNo.\n3.\tAnswered by 2 and 4.\n\nInternational Labour\n4.\tNo commission was paid, but the Trusts and Guarantee Company Limited, the transfer agent, will be paid a small fee as a service charge for receiving share certificates and issuing cheques to the holders.\n5.\tYes, by P.C. 535, dated 27th January, 1944. All shares were automatically appropriated to the crown as of 3 o'clock eastern daylight saving time, January 28, 1944."]
Mr. BENCE:: What is the total amount of money spent by the Department of Munitions and Supply in the province of Saskatchewan since the commencement of the present war?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: Please refer to Report
on the government-financed expansion of industrial capacity in Canada, as at December 31, 1943, tabled by the minister. Reference page 1691, Hansard, March 21, 1944.
Note:	It is impossible to give a money
breakdown by provinces, that will properly reveal the extent to which each province is participating in war orders made possible by (a) government-financed expansion of industrial capacity, (b) the operations of crown companies, (c) by ordinary award of contracts.



Mr. HOBLITZELL:: 1.	What is the total of payments or remuneration paid to the chartered banks for services in connection with the handling of coupon rationing?
2.	What period does this cover?
3.	What is the basis of payment?
4.	Is any of this work being done by the small business man or firms?
5.	If not, what is the reason for their not being allowed to do it?
Questions


Mr. RALSTON:: 1.	The total paid to date to the chartered banks of Canada for services in connection with the handling of ration coupon banking is $575,046.84. In addition the Montreal City and District Savings bank and La Caisse d'Economie de Notre Dame de Quebec have been paid $2,729.55 and $1,389.32 respectively.
2.	This covers the period from March 1, 1943 to January 31, 1944.
3.	The wartime prices and trade board reimburses the chartered banks monthly on the basis of staff salary costs plus specific out-ofpocket expenses incurred as determined by time studies conducted by the banks in cooperation with the board.
4.	Every consumer, and every person engaged in the business of manufacturing, processing, or selling rationed foods handles coupons or some other form of ration document, but only the banks supply the service of coupon banking, which is a service provided by the government for the purpose of relieving traders from handling coupons in bulk.
5.	Coupon banking is a specialized banking service.


RATIONING
Mr. HOBLITZELL:: 1.	Has the government made any arrangement with the Canadian banks with reference to the gasoline coupon rationing?
2.	If so, what arrangements have been made?
3.	What is the particular function or the service they render in this regard?
4.	What remuneration will they receive?
5.	What is the basis of payment?
6.	Is any of this work being done by the small dealers distributing gasoline?
7.	If not, what is the reason for their not being allowed to do so?


Mr. CIIEVRIER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Arrangements have been made with the chartered banks to open gasoline rationing coupon bank accounts for all gasoline dealers selling 12,000 gallons or over per annum of graded gasoline and to all bulk stations.
3.	The banks, by intercepting gasoline rationing coupons from dealers and bulk stations, will take into custody and dispose of great numbers of coupons which, during the past year, have attracted the attention of racketeers and dealers in the black market.
4.	See answer to No. 5. No remuneration has been paid as yet.
5.	The basis of payment is as follows: 25 cents per account opened; 6 cents per debit or credit entry; 12 cents per 1,000 coupons

handled. The basis of these charges is subject to review following an analysis to be made within a few months after gasoline rationing coupon banking becomes effective.
6.	No.
7.	The object of gasoline rationing coupon banking is to take the coupons out of the hands of the dealers as soon as possible.


MOUNTED POLICE-PENSIONS, ETC.
Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	Respecting assistance to ex-members of the R.C.M.P., is there any fund, apart from pension or retirement, available for assistance to aged members of the force who are not on pension and have been rendered indigent?
2.	If so, what is this fund, and how is it administered?
3.	Is there any system of assistance in hospitalization for ex-members of the R.C.M.P.?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	No. None, except that established by section 21 of the R.C.M. Police Act, which is known as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police benefit trust fund, and which is composed of awards, portions of fines, seizures, etc., granted to serving members of the Force. From this fund, grants may be made, under the authority of the Minister of Justice, in accordance with regulations laid down by the governor in council in the following cases:
(a)	to any member of the force who, through disability, not due to his own fault, is discharged therefrom without being eligible for pension or gratuity, a sum not exceeding $200; or to any ex-member of the force who is in receipt of pension or compensation not exceeding $500 per annum and who, by reason of sickness or any cause not due to his own fault, is financially embarrassed, a sum not exceeding $200.
(b)	to any member of the force, who by reason of sickness or accident to a member of his family, or from any cause not due to his own fault, is financially embarrassed, a sum not exceeding $200, but any payment for this cause shall be made only when for the direct benefit of the family.
(c)	to any member of the force, in recognition of outstanding acumen, zeal or resourcefulness in bringing an important investigation to successful conclusion, a sum not exceeding $200.
(d)	to any member of the force, as recognition of any act of special endurance or bravery in the execution of duty, a sum not exceeding $200.
(e)	to any person designated by the minister, an amount not exceeding $75, to be applied on account of the burial expenses of any ex-member of the force who dies without leav-

Questions
ing sufficient means to provide for the cost of reasonable burial expenses, if no other source is available from which the necessary moneys may be obtained.
(f)	if a member of the force dies in the service and his widow and/or children may not be granted a pension or gratuity, if in need of financial assistance, there may be paid an amount not exceeding $300 in any one year to the widow, and to each child under fifteen years of age an amount not exceeding $60 in any one year.
(g)	for the purchase of recreation and mess equipment for the general benefit of any post or detachment, an amount not exceeding $3 per head in any year, the distribution to be based on the average strength of personnel for the post or detachment.
(h)	to members of the force generally, a lump sum annual payment, the amounts, basis of distribution and the date to be determined by the Minister in control of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
(i)	for the purpose of purchasing clothing, comforts, smoking material, or similar articles, for any members of the force on leave from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or who leave that force with the definite intention of proceeding on active service either in the naval, military or air forces of His Majesty, an amount not exceeding $3 per head, in any calendar year.
(j)	to any member of the force who sustains a loss or damage to personal effects or property in the performance of duty whilst attempting to make an arrest, or as the result of a motor-car accident, or any other cause or similar circumstance while on duty, and in which the Canadian government may either be unwilling or unable to reimburse him-an amount not exceeding $100.
(k)	to any member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who may be discharged from the force while still in hospital or who may be invalided from the force and who may still require medical and hospital treatment, if he is unmarried, a grant not exceeding $150 in any one year but if he is married, an amount not exceeding $500 in any one year and to each child under fifteen years of age an amount not exceeding $60 in any one year, irrespective of the fact that the member of the force concerned may be eligible for a pension.
Each case in which a grant is recommended is investigated by the force and is dealt with according to its merits and within the limits of the regulations set by order in council.
As the Royal Canadian Mounetd Police benefit trust fund only began in 1921, it is not yet twenty-three years old, and it is
obvious that any ex-member of the force who left it more than twenty-three years ago did not make any contribution, either directly or indirectly, to the fund.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	No, except as stated in Nos. 1 (a) and 1 (k).
M. & C. AVIATION COMPANY, PRINCE ALBERT


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	What is the amount of capital assistance
or other allowances granted to date to M. & C. Aviation Company	Limited,	Prince Albert,
Saskatchewan?
2.	How much has been paid to date to the said company for aircraft repair and overhaul by the Department of Munitions and Supply?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	The federal	government built	andequipped a plant for overhaul and repair at Prince Albert at a cost of $206,971.72. This plant and equipment is wholly owned by the Canadian government. M. & C. Aviation Company Limited were given a contract for the repair and overhaul of aircraft, and the facilities of the foregoing plant have been made available to	them to	carry	out	the
work.
2.	Payments for work on the overhaul and
repair of aircraft	are not	made	by	the
Department of Munitions and Supply. The Department of National Defence for Air have paid this company for such work $2,490,319.67.


SUBSIDIES TO WESTERN COAL OPERATORS
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: What reduction in the retail price of coal will result from the proposed payment of subsidies to western Canada shaft coal operators?


Lionel Chevrier: No reduction in price is expected to be made in the retail price of coal as the new subsidies to Western Canada coal operators only reimburse those who are in a loss position for limited out-of-pocket expenses incurred and which have not been taken care of by means of price increases for coal.


WHEAT PRICES
Mr. DONNELLY:: 1.	What price is paid to producers for their best grade of wheat, 1943 crop, by the grain regulating board of Argentina, basis Buenos Aires?
2.	What is the export price paid by the grain regulating board for the same wheat, basis Buenos Aires?
3.	What price is paid to producers for their best grade of wheat, 1943 crop, by the Australian wheat board, basis country sidings?
'Questions

4.	What is the price paid for the same grade of wheat for home consumption, basis f.o.b. Williamstown, Australia?
5.	What is the initial advance paid by the Canadian wheat board for the 1943-44 crop, basis Fort William?
6.	What is the commercial export price to countries not under Canadian mutual aid, basis No. 1 northern, Fort William?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1.	Price paid to producers by the grain regulating board for the 1943 crop, bulk, basis Buenos Aires: 8 pesos per quintal (64-8 United States cents per bushel).
2.	Export price quoted by grain regulating board on January 5, 1944. for 1942 crop wheat, bulk, basis Buenos Aires: 10 pesos per quintal (SI United States cents per bushel).
3.	Price paid to producers for first 3,000 bushels by the Australian wheat board, bulk, basis country sidings: 3 shillings and Hi pence per bushel (74-1 United States cents per bushel f.o.b. seaboard).
4.	Home consumption price, basis f.o.b. Williamstown: 5 shillings and 2 pence per bushel (83-4 United States cents per bushel). Australian wheat board export prices are not published.
5.	Canadian wheat board initial advance on 1943-44 crop deliveries, basis No. 1 Northern Fort William: $1.25 per bushel (113-6 United States cents per bushel).
Mutual Aid shipments, same basis as above.
6.	Commercial export prices to countries not under Canadian Mutual Aid, basis No. 1 Northern, Fort William, January 25, 1944: SI.46 per bushel (132-7 United States cents per bushel).


AIR TRAINING PLAN-CLOSING OF AIRPORTS
George Hugh Castleden: How many airports were closed under British empire joint air training plan in each province during 1942 and 1943?


Mr. MACMILLAN:: No main airports of the B.C.A.T.P. were closed during 1942 and 1943. However, the	following relief	fields
were closed:
(a)	In	April,	1942,	relief	field	No.	1	to
Boundary Bay, B.C., situated at Langley, B.C., was closed. '
(b)	In March, 1943, relief field No. 1 to No. 36 O.T.U., Greenwood, N.S., situated at Waterville, N.S., was closed.
(e)	In	April,	1943,	relief	field	No.	1	to
No. 9 E.F.T.S., St. Catharines, Ont., situated at Thorold was closed being replaced by R.l at Willoughby, Ont.
(d) In	April,	1943,	relief	field	No.	1	to
No. 19 E.F.T.S., Virden, Man., situated at Hargrave, Man., was closed being replaced by R.l at Lenore, Man.


WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-PRINCE RUPERT
Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: 1.	What is the total expenditure by Wartime Housing Limited at Prince Rupert, British Columbia, (a) cost of land; (b) cost of houses?
2.	How many residences have been built?
3.	What is the cost of each type of house?
4.	How many staff houses have been built?
5.	Have satisfactory arrangements been made with the city of Prince Rupert, (a) for taxes; (b) school accommodation; (c) sanitary purposes?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	(a) $14,450; (b) $1,512,304.
2.	501.
3.	2-bedroom house, small, $2,813; 2-bedroom house, large, $3,161; 4-bedroom house, $3,402. These costs are inclusive of all services.
4.	Nine staff houses and two bunk houses.
5.	(a) Wartime Housing Limited are carrying out the terms of the municipal agreement signed by the proper authorities, whereby payment in lieu of taxes is made at the rate of $24 yearly for the small house and $30 for the large house.
(b)	Wartime Housing Limited have built a 6-roomed school at an estimated cost of $50,000.
(c)	Houses built in Prince Rupert are standard in every way, with every sanitary convenience, and in addition Wartime Housing Ilimited have built a general sewage system at an estimated cost of $75,000.
The foregoing are in accordance with the terms of the agreement between Wartime Housing Limited and the city of Prince Rupert.


ELDORADO MINING AND REFINING LIMITED
Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	Has the government acquired the property of the Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited?
2.	If so, did the government acquire the property through an agent?
3.	What company or person acted as agent for the government?
4.	Was any commission paid to any person or company in the purchase of the property or the shares of the Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited; and, if so, what was the amount of the commission, and to whom was it paid?
5.	Has the government or its agent, or a crown company, acquired the shares of the Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited; and, if so, how many shares have been purchased, and how many shares remain unpurchased as at March 25, 1944?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	Yes, by P.C. 535, January 27, 1944. See
minister's statement, page 6, Hansard, January 28, 1944.
2.	No.
3.	Answered by 2 and 4.

International Labour
4.	No commission was paid, but the Trusts and Guarantee Company Limited, the transfer agent, will be paid a small fee as a service charge for receiving share certificates and issuing cheques to the holders.
5.	Yes, by P.C. 535, dated 27th January, 1944. All shares were automatically appropriated to the crown as of 3 o'clock eastern daylight saving time, January 28, 1944.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: 1.	What was the total amount spent by the government on the Marble island project, Queen Charlotte islands?
2.	Was this work done by tender? If not, why not?


SWITLIK CANADIAN PARACHUTES LIMITED
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	Has Switlik Canadian Parachutes Ltd., whose offices are located at No. 3575 St. Lawrence street, Montreal, obtained any contracts from the dominion government?
2.	If so, for what amount, in what year, and at what date?
3.	What kind of work has been done by this company for the government?
4. What is the name of the president of this company, and what is his profession or occupation?
5.	What are the names of the vice-president and each of the directors of the said company, and what are their respective professions or occupations?



USE OF FLAG AT MILITARY FUNERALS

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaCROIX (Quebec-Montmorency):
1.	At military funerals, are the coffins of members of the Canadian armed forces overseas covered with a flag?
2.	If so, what flag?
Mr. CHURCH:: Mr. Speaker, I would ask what was done with this question. I understand it was passed as an order for return. The question is an insult to our glorious dead, to our soldiers who will never return, and to their families. Army ritual is carried into effect in British countries, and the army rules comply with the regulations in force. I would like to have some reply from the government.


Mr. SPEAKER:: It was passed as an order for return.


Thomas Langton Church: These are soldiers who will never return, and it is an insult to them and their families.



CONTRACTS WITH J. FRANCOIS LEDUC

Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	Has J. Francois Leduc, consulting engineer and associates, whose offices are located at No. 354 Ste. Catherine street east, Montreal, obtained any contracts from the dominion government during the years 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943 and 1944?
2.	If so, for what total amount?
3.	What amount has been paid to them up to the present time by the government, and how much money was paid them during each of the above-mentioned years?



CANADIAN FORCES-LOSSES BY FIRE IN CANADIAN CAMPS

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What has been the total loss from fire in the various camps in Canada since the war started, by years, and at what camps of the three military forces, by provinces?
2.	What insurance was carried on each camp loss by fire, and the net loss to the government?
3.	What has been done to increase fire precautions and increased fire protection at these camps?
4.	Were fire inquests held into the cause of each fire, and with what results?



LABOUR CONFERENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: I should like to ask a question of the Prime Minister. According to the con-sitution of the International Labour Organization, Canada's delegation to the session of the international labour conference to be held in Philadelphia on April 20 will be composed of four delegates-two government delegates, one delegate representing employers and one representing workers. Will the Prime Minister indicate to the house the names of the four delegates who have been so chosen to represent Canada at the conference?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The delegates representing the government will be Mr. Paul Martin, parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Labour, Mr. Brooke Claxton, parliamentary assistant to the President of the Privy Council. The Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) himself will be present at the conference, as Minister of Labour. The delegate representing employers will be Mr. W. C. Coulter, and the delegate representing workers will be Mr. Percy Bengough.
There are as well alternate delegates, a number of advisers, and also provincial representatives. However, I believe I have answered my hon. friend's question.
Wheat Accounting



ACTION TO SAFEGUARD FEEDERS AGAINST LOSS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: Mr. Speaker, before the orders of the day are called I should like to ask a question either of the Minister of Agriculture or, in his absence, the Acting Minister of Finance. In view of the precarious position in which beef feeders of southern Alberta and other parts of Canada find themselves, will the minister make a statement to the house to-morrow, Friday, setting forth the measures the government is taking to safeguard those feeders against serious loss in this year's operations?


Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Acting Minister of Finance) :: I have taken note of the question.


John Horne Blackmore: I asked that the answer be made to-morrow.


James Layton Ralston: I understand that.



PRICES AND TRADE BOARD


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. MAURICE LALONDE (Labelle):: Mr. Speaker, before the orders of the day are called would the Acting Minister of .Finance be good enough to. tell the house what steps have been taken by the wartime prices and trade board against J. Alphonse Forget, local representative of the board at Mont-Laurier, who has been found guilty of favouritism and complicity?


James Layton Ralston: I shall make a note of the question, and answer it to-morrow. Or, if my hon. friend wants it answered earlier, I shall write him.



WHEAT BOARD-ACTION IN COURTS FOR ACCOUNTING-PARTICIPATION CERTIFICATES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):: A day or two ago the Minister of Trade and Commerce stated he would answer a question I asked. I believe there were two questions. Will he be prepared to make a statement to-morrow?


Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I am not ready to
make a statement in connection with the question asked by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley). I was rising, however, to make a brief statement in connection
TMr. Mackenzie King.]
with participation certificates. Various members on both sides of the house have asked questions regarding the date of issuing and the amount of participation certificates in connection with the 1940, 1941 and 1942 wheat crops. I had hoped, and so stated, that I expected to be in a position to give the house this information before the end of the month. I am now informed, however, that it has been found a physical impossibility to arrive at the exact amount of this participation payment before the end of the month, to-morrow. I am advised that it will be about the middle of next week before this information is available. A recent decision that certain administrative expenses, that is, the cost of work on quotas, wheat acreage reduction and transportation, should not be charged against this grain upon which participation is about to be paid, has been partly responsible for this further delay. Although the house will not be in session, I have made arrangements to make public at the earliest possible moment the amount of the participation certificates. As soon as this figure is arrived at, payments in volume will immediately proceed.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. G. ROSS (St. Paul's):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Postmaster General. My reason for doing so is the approach of the Easter recess. I have had several letters and many complaints with respect to the question of mail for overseas. Many examples have come to my notice, one in particular respecting a mother who has two boys in Italy. One of those boys received the odd letter, but he has not received one parcel since last July. The other boy has received neither letter nor parcel for months, and she writes them once or twice a week, as well as sending them parcels. Another woman Whose husband is overseas writes him quite often, but he has had only four letters in the last four or five months from her. Another mother sent parcels overseas for Christmas. Those parcels were posted in October. She knows that fifteen of them were sent, but up to date the boy has received only two. Would the minister state what is being done about this condition?


Hon. W. P. MULOCK (Postmaster General):: If the hon. member will give me particulars of the cases he has mentioned, I shall have investigations made. He will

Supply-Agriculture
understand, however, that it is impossible to deal with an isolated case of the kind. I do not know the names, and I would have to have them before an investigation could be made. If he will let me have the necessary-information I shall be glad to have inquiries made at once.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: In answer to what the minister has said I would point out that this is only one of many complaints which have been made.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. McCann in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE Marketing service-
417. Marketing service administration-further amount required, $2,275.


Mr. SENN:: Is the Minister of Agriculture likely to be here to-day?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No.


Mark Cecil Senn: I should like to have some information about this item. When the minister spoke some time ago he referred to the floor prices on beef. I understand that the meat board has the power to set minimum prices for beef, but up to the present I have been unable to secure any information other than that contained in the minister's statement the other day. If the minister in charge cannot answer my question, I suppose it will have to be left until some other time, but I should like to know when these floor prices were set and what they are. Perhaps we could be given a general statement on the matter. The public is entitled to know what is being done. When the minister referred to floor prices on beef he stated that the meat board would be in position to buy cattle and freeze the beef and ship it to England. So far as I can find out, the public does not know what these floor prices are, or whether they vary from time to time or remain constant.


Hon. T. A. CRERAR (Acting Minister of Agriculture):: I am afraid I cannot give my hon. friend all the information he has asked for; I have not had an opportunity to go into the details. I believe there is a sort of scale of prices so far as beef is concerned, but I cannot be certain even about that. Am I right?


Mark Cecil Senn: I think you are.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I would suggest that perhaps a discussion on general marketing services might be left until the Minister of

Agriculture has before the committee that particular item, which has not yet been reached in the consideration of his 1944-45 estimates. I believe there is an arrangement by which some board under the Department of Agriculture can exercise an influence on prices if they become unduly low, but I regret I cannot give further details with any certainty.


Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):: If the
Minister of Agriculture is not here, and if the minister taking his place does not know anything about this item, it would not seem to be profitable to go on with it. Unless there is some insurmountable reason why these items have to pass before the end of the fiscal year, I suggest that they stand.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The supplementary estimates have to pass before March 31.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is rather late to bring them down.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: If my hon. friend wants to press the matter, I shall endeavour to get in touch with the deputy minister and see if I cannot furnish the information.


Mark Cecil Senn: I do not want to press the matter, but I had hoped to have this information. Will the minister be here to-morrow?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am afraid not. I forgot to mention that in .replying to the hon. member for York-Sunbury.


Gordon Graydon: In view of the fact that there is no minister in charge of these items and my hon. friend is not as familiar with this matter as he is with some of the others, perhaps an arrangement could be made to have the deputy minister of agriculture here as he is when the ordinary items are being discussed. Is it possible to arrange that?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Of course that is possible if my hon. friend) wishes further information. I notice that the estimate last year for marketing services was $101,314. When you get down to $314 in an item of that size it is some indication as to how closely the departmental officials estimated. However, it is found that a further amount of $2,275 is required.


Mark Cecil Senn: I think the minister is at fault in making that statement, because the money required for the establishment of floor prices would not be included in that item. However, I do not wish to press the matter, and perhaps we can get the information in some other way. This is important with the Easter recess coming along.. The public should know how these floor prices were
Supply-Agriculture

established. There are a number of other questions I could ask on this marketing item, but I do not want to hold it up.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The explanation of this item which appears on page 6 indicates that it is made up of cost of living bonus and other paylist items. I do not know just what would be included in paylist items, but probably it would cover additional staff. It is obvious that while an endeavour was made a year ago to estimate closely, the department underestimated this item to the extent of $2,275, and that part of it is made up of cost of living bonus.


Ernest Edward Perley: That would apply just to employees of the department?


Richard Burpee Hanson: That
explanation is quite simple mathematically.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: One at a time, please. I did not catch the question of the hon. member for Qu'Appelle.	*


Ernest Edward Perley: I said that that affected only the employees; it has nothing particularly to do with the marketing of products.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Evidently they did not estimate sufficient for cost of living bonus for the employees in this particular branch of the department.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That
explanation is accepted, but in the interim certain questions have arisen with regard to administration on which the hon. member for Haldimand wishes information. This is the only chance 'he has of getting it.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Hon.
members say "no", but that is the only way he can get it at this time.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: At this precise moment, yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I suggest that the item stand until the deputy minister is here.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I shall meet my hon. friend's wish if he presses it, but I submit that any discussion on the marketing service of the Department of Agriculture can take place when the items in the main estimates for the coming year are undler consideration.
I do not know why, if I may respectfully say so to my hon. friend, we should get into an involved discussion of marketing service when the item is simply to provide cost of living bonus for the employees of the branch, which apparently was underestimated when 'he estimates were prepared last year.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is a bad position for the minister to take. It is a simple thing to provide a little more money for cost of living bonus and the pay list of the department, but I submit that the hon. member for Haldimand is entitled to the information which he desires, arising out of a situation which has been created and now confronts the producers.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that the item stand.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I think it should.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Perhaps they had all better stand.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: Including item 415?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Item 415 was passed.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Then it was passed when hon. members in this part of the house could not hear what was going on.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That is a matter for the Chair to rule on.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. McCann):: Item 415 was carried.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Then it was passed when we could not hear what was going on at all.


Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):: While it is true, as the minister says, that item 416 is to provide for the cost of living bonus, the fact remains that these items present the only opportunity hon. members will have before we adjourn for the Easter recess of discussing government policy on marketing. It is the only opportunity we have had this session. For two weeks we have been in committee on the agricultural estimate. Last Monday night we tried to initiate a discussion on agricultural marketing with a view to getting a statement from the government, because very soon the farmers will be on the land and they want to know something of the government's marketing policy for the crop year 1944-45. We were prevented from having that discussion, and so far we have not had it. Judging by what the Minister of Justice announced last night as the business for to-day, we are not going to get that discussion on the government's marketing policy before we adjourn for Easter. We shall not come back here until the middle of April, so that if we do not have a discussion to-day it will mean that we shall not know at the earliest until the middle of April what the marketing policy of the government is to be. Here are the only estimates

Supply-Agriculture
which give us an opportunity of asking the government what its marketing policy is; the minister most concerned is not here, and the minister who is in charge of the estimates says he does not know much about them. Certainly that is not satisfactory.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: May I say just a word about these estimates. In the first place the committee understands that these estimates are for the present fiscal year which ends on March 31-that is to-morrow. They are in the nature of the additional amounts required to pay some of the expenditures of the present fiscal year. They do not touch matters relating to the next fiscal year. It is on matters that relate to the next fiscal year that the main estimates have been prepared, and it is on the main estimates that questions of government policy and the like are appropriately discussed. Hon. members know that in dealing with estimates the rule is that discussion must be confined to the item before the committee, but on the main estimates there is not infrequently an understanding that a general discussion shall be permitted on one of the items. That rule does not apply to individual items in supplementary estimates dealing with the present fiscal year.
I have no objections to hon. members, if they so desire, seeking to have it appear that ministers may not be wholly prepared to answer every question asked at this time. The ministers have taken into consideration the character of the estimates, namely that they are simply supplementary amounts required to make good small amounts needed to square accounts. The details given in the statement before us are in themselves pretty nearly enough to explain the items, which for the most part are for the payment of bonuses, for temporary assistance and things of the kind. Clearly it would be quite wrong to expect a discussion of general policy relating to agriculture or other subjects under items of this kind.
May I say to my hon. friend in regard to agriculture that there has been more time taken up in the house with the estimates of the Department of Agriculture for the coming year than with respect to any other department. The minister has devoted three, four . or five sittings to discussions of agricultural estimates. As I recall it, he had two sittings before he could get a single item through, and hon. gentlemen were at that time questioning him with regard to matters of general policy. I submit that the time of this house is precious at the moment and it is not in order to expect
the ministry to go beyond the items that appear on this particular paper in giving such explanations as can be given.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is the
Prime Minister asking that these items automatically pass? Is that his position?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend has sat on this side; he knows the responsibility of ministers, and knows that what I am saying is perfectly correct.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I notice that one item, 442, under public works for Ontario, is for a garage in Ottawa, $24,000. Is that not a new item? No further amount is being asked, simply the $24,000.


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: I am ready to explain that item.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I assume the minister will be. We shall expect an explanation. I am not complaining about the item.


Mark Cecil Senn: May I add just one word? I am sorry to have created this discussion. I had no intention of embarrassing the government. But item 416 is for marketing service administration, and we have had no chance yet to discuss the government's marketing policy- none whatever. This is the only chance we will have until we get back after the Easter holidays.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Let me ask my hon. friends what will be the effect of not passing these estimates? It will be that some civil servants will not get that part of their salaries for some time to come.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh!


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is exactly what it amounts to. My hon. friend knows that this is not the time to expect a general discussion of agricultural policy.


Mark Cecil Senn: Let me remind the Prime Minister that I was not asking for a general discussion, but only for some information in relation to a statement which the Minister of Agriculture made some little time ago, and which was not clear. I had no opportunity of questioning him at the time about his statement, for the simple reason that he made it on the orders of the day. All I was asking for was a simple statement to let the farmers and producers and others interested in marketing, the marketing of beef cattle particularly, know just what the position is. I am not going to carry the matter any further.
Supply-External Affairs


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have
suggested to the Prime Minister that these items stand and we can come back to them when the deputies are here.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: That is what the minister has already suggested.


Richard Burpee Hanson: All four
items.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The minister
has suggested that the agricultural items stand.
Item stands.
External Affairs Department-
WO. Portion of expenses of the intergovernmental committee on refugees, $5,789.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The mechanical majority had better keep quiet.


Mr. STIRLING:: Would the Prime Minister be good enough to bring public information up to date with regard to this matter? So far as I am aware we have the statement of the Prime Minister in July last, and the statement of the Minister of Mines and Resources in early November when he said that an official of the Department of Immigration would go to Lisbon and look into the question, and that the representatives of forty-four allied countries had been invited to join in a committee-perhaps this is the committee-to look into the various possibilities in regard to the movement of refugees. That statement of the Mines and Resources also included information with regard to separate activities of Canada in this regard outside of the operations which the committee was supposed to carry on.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: 
Grote Stirling: May I draw the Prime Minister's attention to the fact that in the February number of "Canada at War" it is stated that, I believe, twenty-five such families had left for Canada on January 25. When I made inquires of the immigration branch with regard to that I found that it was an inaccurate statement, and that none had yet left. I am speaking of two weeks or perhaps ten days ago. One of my reasons for asking the question I did was to endeavour to find out whether any actually have come or are in process of coming, because nothing seems to have developed from the visit of the immigration official to Lisbon.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Is my hon. friend speaking of movements from Portugal and Spain?


Grote Stirling: Yes.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I understand that within the last two or three weeks a substantial number-my recollection at the moment is three

Supply-External Affairs
hundred, including family members-have left, and I was under the impression that they are here now. I can ascertain whether that is so.


Grote Stirling: I wish the minister would clear it up, because, as I say, I was in touch with his department within the last two weeks, and the statement in "Canada at War" was definitely contradicted. The further statement was made that it was not improbable that a few family units would start to move from there during the month of March.


Mr. COLDWELL:: I do not wish to prolong the discussion on this item, but I suggest to the Prime Minister that as soon as we possibly can, after Easter, a day should be set aside for the discussion in this house of matters relating to the Department of External Affairs. An item in the estimates for the Department of External Affairs has already been called, so that the department is in; on that occasion, while some of us would have liked to ask questions regarding Canada's external relationships, we refrained from doing so because we realized that the government wanted to get that department into supply. But last year it was pretty well toward the end of the session before we were able to discuss the many matters in which hon. members ought to be interested, and in which many of them are interested, dealing with our external relationships.
This is only, of course, one phase. I think personally that we have done very badly by the refugee. I think that when the story of this part of our war assistance is written it will be a pretty sorry story so far as Canada is concerned. But at the moment I am speaking more particularly of the international situation, and the fact that Canada has played an important part in this war. I have followed with a good deal of misgiving the recent developments in the international field. International relationships, among the great powers particularly, have deteriorated in the past three or four months, and it is time that some of the smaller nations-if you will- gave much more attention- to external affairs than they have been giving to that subject. I notice that the Prime Minister of Great Britain said two weeks ago that the principal powers would have to do something. It is not good enough to leave these matters in the hands of the so-called principal powers. This house should seriously consider and discuss Canada's position in relation- to external affairs, giving full support to every measure and every necessary step for the winning of the war, yet considering also the problems which are arising and will arise. I ask the
Prime Minister that as early as possible after the recess we have a day to discuss external affairs, so that it may not be left until near the end of the session.


Richard Burpee Hanson: After that lecture to the government and to the principal powers, I desire to ask the Prime Minister a concrete question. What is the status of these refugees who are coming or have arrived, whichever it may be? Are they to be temporary guests of Canada, or are they to take up their domicile here permanently?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I might say in response to the previous question asked, that I telephoned the director of immigration and am informed that a party of refugees from Spain and Portugal, to the number of two hundred and fifty-six, is on its way and is expected in North America within a few days.
With regard to the question just asked by the hon. member for York-Sunbury, the situation is this. These refugees for the time being are being given an asylum in- Canada; that is, they can remain here until the war is over and later on their status if they then desire to remain here, can be considered and determined. For the moment they are coming in simply as refugees; that is they are getting asylum in Canada for the duration of the war.


Richard Burpee Hanson: They are temporary guests.


Gordon Graydon: Are any members of the party which the minister has mentioned going to the United States, or are they all coming to Canada?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am speaking only of those who are coming to Canada. What the United States may be doing in the matter I am not in a position at the moment to say.


Thomas Langton Church: This is the forty-first day of the session, and this item is the first regarding external affairs which has appeared. True, the particular item is a five or six thousand dollar vote for an intergovernmental committee regarding refugees; but one of the most important subjects we have to consider is the whole question of external affairs, our relation to foreign policy, to empire policy, to refugees and the other subjects with which the department deals. There was a good deal of immigration from Continental Europe before the war and people are asking questions that should be answered. I moved for a return this session and it was brought down, and I think that the minister should make a statement not only about refugees but on the broader question about what is going to be
Supply-External Affairs

done first regarding immigration from the British isles, where people have suffered from the war more than they have anywhere else, and regarding migration within the empire.
The same practice is being followed this session as was followed at the last session, . because then it was only on the 114th day of the session that external affairs were discussed. I have every respect for the Prime Minister and I know that he is carrying a heavy load, but I suggest that shortly after the Easter recess there should be a day or two devoted to this very important topic, which we have been ignoring right along. The question of refugees comes under the department.
The other day we had a statement before the Empire club by a Mr. Kirkconnell, who in 1942 was engaged by the Minister of National War Services to write a book on continental and other immigration. He told the Toronto Empire club last week that there was no room in Canada for these refugees, but I do not pay a great deal of attention to that because he said the same thing on January 14, 1942, in Convocation hall. He said there was no room for any more British born in this country-and I may say that his book was widely distributed in England after the battle of Dunkirk.
The people should know the facts; they should know what is going on in this important department of immigration. I do not object to this item; in fact, I would like to see all these supplementary items pass as quickly as possible. But with all due respect to the cabinet, and admitting the work they have to do, I suggest that they might have set aside one or two days for external affairs, which is one of the most important matters before us. All others are subsidiary to it, and the refugee question is coordinated with it. I hope that the government will see fit to 'set aside a specified time for the discussion of these external affairs matters.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: In reply to the leader of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation party (Mr. Coldwell) and to my hon. friend, who evidently did not hear his remarks, which were the same as his own-


Major James William Coldwell: Not quite the same.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: -may I say that I am as anxious as anyone to oblige hon. members, but I would point out that it is not possible to oblige everyone and at the same time have a programme which it would be possible to carry out.
With reference to external affairs, the main policy of the government is to win the war, and the first step in that direction is to have

supplies voted by this house for war needs. The war appropriation measure was among the first brought before the house this session and it has not yet been concluded. At the present time we are discussing the resolution which precedes the war appropriation bill, and until that bill is passed we should not, except for very special reasons, consider taking up the time of the house in the discussion of other matters which, though all important, are not as important as the necessity of giving an assurance to our armed forces everywhere that this House of Commons is giving its first attention to their needs. That is the line on which we have been proceeding. If we had begun by taking up external affairs and discussing policies with regard to Canada's relations with other countries, the first criticism would have come, and rightly so, from hon. gentlemen opposite, or if not from them, certainly from, those who are fighting the battles of the country. And that criticism would have been this, "Why can you not give your attention to the practical question of supplying the needs of those who are fighting the battle of freedom at the front?"


Major James William Coldwell: I suggested, as soon after the Easter recess as possible, after we had disposed of this measure.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The hon. gentleman did not say after the conclusion of the war appropriation measure.


Major James William Coldwell: That is what I had in mind.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: If that is what the hon. member has in mind, that is all right; but we must get on more rapidly with our programme if he expects it to be immediately after Easter, when we shall have concluded the war appropriation measure. I had hoped that we would have concluded that measure before Easter.
I should have welcomed a discussion on external affairs at a fairly early stage of the session

I would not say at the very outset- but hon. gentlemen are asking, for instance, when the budget will be brought down, that now seems to be the most urgent question at the moment. It must be an urgent question if the country wishes to have the budget brought down at an early date; but are we to delay the bringing down of the budget to discuss external affairs? These are questions which the government has to face in a practical way.
It is not correct to say that we have left until a late stage in the session the discussion of external affairs. But even if we had, as long as there was full opportunity given to discuss these matters during the session, the house could not say its members had been

Supply-External Affairs
denied that privilege. I am anxious to have a discussion) on external affairs at a fairly early stage of the session, but in respect of some things at the present time I cannot control my owm engagements.
As hon. gentlemen know, I expect to visit England very shortly. That may be immediately after the Easter recess, or it may be a month or two months hence, but if there is a chance I shall seek to bring on an early discussion.


Gordon Graydon: You had better not make it too definite.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It may be during the Easter recess; it may be a week or two after, or a month or two months after. I therefore cannot say at what time some of these matters may be taken up.


Mr. ROWE:: It is a forthright answer.


Mr. HANSELL:: We have listened to a beautiful speech by the Prime Minister. I say beautiful because it has portrayed the beauties of parliament, and so forth and so on, and the Prime Minister has attempted to show us the various criticisms that might come if we act now, and so forth and so on. But we all know that it is just so many words. He spoke as though we might lose the war if we did not have a certain item passed, or that somebody would go short of his salary if we did not move quickly to vote a certain sum of money, which we all know is just so many words. These things just do not happen. The war is going on whether we sit here or not; civil servants are going to be paid whether we sit here or not; and with all due respect to the Prime Minister I might even suggest that if there was a pretty good chance of the Liberal party winning an election he would not think twice about proroguing to-morrow. Now that would not mean that the war would be lost or that some civil servants would go without money.


Gordon Graydon: It would mean a change of government, though.


Ernest George Hansell: Let me remind the government that there is precedent for this; for if ever we wanted to get a move on in a hurry it was in 1940, just a few months after the war started. We all know what happened on January 26, 1940. Well, the war did not stop. Civil servants got their money and there was no money voted until we met late in the spring. However, we know what the Prime Minister means, and we can assure him that we want to facilitate the procedure in this house. We want to win the war, and nobody is going to act in any other manner.
So far as the principle of voting money is concerned, I think that is a thing we have to consider. My understanding is that when the government comes to parliament asking for money it is tantamount to His Majesty asking the people for money, and that at that time the representatives of the people have a right to lodge their complaints at the foot of the throne. That is my understanding of the principle involved. Therefore I say no item should be passed without members of parliament having ample opportunity to lodge complaints, though I have no objection to facilitating the work of the house by consenting to an item being passed if we are given the assurance that we may talk about it at some other time.
Dealing with this particular item I should like to ask one or two questions of the Prime Minister or the Minister of Mines and Resources; if they are not prepared to answer them at the moment I shall place them on the order paper. I understand that the large proportion of the refugees seeking asylum in Canada have come from the western part of the European battlefront, coming through Spain and Portugal to England and thence to North America. I understand, on the other hand, that quite a number of refugees from the eastern part of the European front have had to move over to certain sections of Asia, to Iran and India and perhaps to Turkey. I should like to know whether any of those refugees are finding asylum on this continent.
Having asked that question, would the minister mind telling the committee the procedure that should be followed when people in this country desire to have their relatives who are refugees in some other part of the world come to this country. I have a case in point which perhaps will serve as a more direct illustration. I have an inquirer who came originally from Poland. His relatives are understood to be somewhere in the east. They are destitute, and the inquirer in this country also is without money. There has been an exchange of correspondence, however, and the people here would like very much to have their relatives come to Canada. What is the procedure in a case of this kind?
It is the general impression in this country that those who have been able to gain asylum in Canada or in North America are people with some means. Of course I have no objection to any refugee coming here, but I do think something should be done to facilitate the movement of the more unfortunate, of whom there must be many, who have no money at all. If I were a refugee somewhere I should think I would feel much safer if I had my

Supply-External Affairs

pockets full of money, so it would seem only common sense to assume that the people who really need help are those with no money at all. I do wish something could be done for them.
Would the minister mind answering the question in regard to the procedure that should be followed? If he wishes me to place on the order paper a series of questions on these matters in order to give him time to look them up, I shall be pleased to do so.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend will recognize that the exigencies of war impose certain definite limitations upon what any government can do in seeking to meet the laudable wishes of many members of the community. For example, my hon. friend has referred to some persons who would like to leave India and come to Canada.


Ernest George Hansell: From anywhere.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Very well; make it from anywhere. The first problem that presents itself is how and where they are going to secure the necessary transportation to bring them to Canada, with the position as it is at present on all the oceans of the world and transportation for war purposes having the priority which necessarily it must have. Definite limitations arise from that fact; one of the greatest of the problems to-day is that of transport. A great many people in the British isles would like to come to Canada; a number of people in Canada are very anxious to get back to the British isles. Not a day passes when a request does not come to the Department of External Affairs asking if transportation cannot be arranged for someone; and in nearly every case the reply has had to be that at present it is impossible to arrange any transportation. That is the first limitation, and it is one that has operated in a definite way. There have been one or two cases where something has been arranged, as for example the exchange of nationals with Japan. It was possible to make special arrangements in those cases, but- they were limited and were made under great difficulty. As to the method of procedure, I would say that inquiries should be made of the Department of Immigration, and that department will give such information as can be given at the time. I do not think I can say more than that.


Major James William Coldwell: There have been times, though, when shipping could be arranged. If my recollection serves me aright, shipping was arranged at one time, and we had a shipload of refugees seeking asylum in many countries. At that time we did not offer any asylum to the refugees.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am giving
the reason that prevails at the moment.


Mr. WHITE:: I understand some arrangement has been made under which the Italian war prisoners who are now in Canada are to be given the opportunity to remain in this country after the war is over. If this is correct, will the Prime Minister give us some explanation in regard to it?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I have not
heard of an arrangement of that kind, and I should be surprised if any had been made.


Mr. KNOWLES:: There is another aspect of the refugee problem I should like to draw to the attention of the Prime Minister, on which he may care to make a statement. A number of times to-day, in another connection, it has been stated that to-morrow is the last day of March. That is the day when the full effect of the white paper of 1939 comes into operation with respect to Palestine. As the Prime Minister knows, that white paper has the effect of closing the doors of Palestine to any further Jewish immigration. I realize, as the Prime Minister does, that some permits which have been issued have not been acted upon as yet; in other words I believe it will still be posable for persons holding those permits to enter Palestine if they are able to get there. Apart from that, however, the door closes to-morrow. As the Prime Minister knows, there is a good deal of feeling among members of the Jewish community in regard to this white paper. The feeling is that it is in contradiction to the Balfour declaration, which was made not only to the Jewish people of the old country but to the Jewish people of a number of countries involved in the drafting of the original Balfour declaration. Perhaps I should) qualify that a bit and not say they were involved in the drafting of the declaration; the British government consulted the allied governments of that time before the declaration was announced, and it had their concurrence. After the declaration was made, other governments, notably the congress of the United States, issued a statement in full support of the principle of the Balfour declaration. I have digressed to this extent simply to point out that although it was a British government declaration, other countries, including Canada, are concerned. In a sense a commitment was made to the people of this country, as well as to those of Great Britain and other countries.
Has the Prime Minister any information he could give the house on this point? Can he tell us whether the government of Canada has made any representations to the BritiA

Supply-External Affairs
government in the matter? The question has been raised in the house before, both last year andi this year, as the Prime Minister will recall. In the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne the (bon. member for Trinity stated the case quite fully. Now that 'the urgency of the matter has come to our attention-because to-morrow the doors of Palestine close to any further Jewish immigration-I should appreciate it if the Prime Minister would make a statement.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As the hon. member has just said, the agreement was one which was made by the United Kingdom, and naturally it is of very special concern to the United Kingdom government. As my hon. friend knows, there is shortly to be a meeting in London of the prime ministers from different parts of the commonwealth. This is one of the questions which I expect will be considered there. I think until that conference takes place, and there is an opportunity to confer with those who may be present, it would be wiser for me not to make any statement.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the Prime Minister could say to-day that if the question is not on the agenda when he gets to London he will see to it that it is raised, I am sure it would mean a great deal to the Jewidh community of Canada.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Within the last day or two I have been waited upon by representatives of the Jewish community, and those who are interested in the question that has been raised, namely that of Palestine as a home for the Jew's. I believe that to-morrow again I am to meet another delegation. To those who have waited upon me I have said that it was a matter I intended to see would be considered at the meeting of prime ministers. I do not think I ought to go further than that at the present time.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have
looked through the supplementary estimates to see if there is anything in connection with immigration, and I find that there is not. Therefore I cannot pursue what I had in mind. However I would draw the attention of the appropriate minister to a leading article in this morning's Globe and Mail which calls for an explanation by the government with respect to the treatment of a Chinese lady by Canadian immigration authorities. As the newspaper puts it, the treatment accorded that young lady is quite different from the statement made by the Prime Minister on the occasion of the visit of Madame Chiang Kai-shek to this city. If it is true, it does not reflect any-
100-126}


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It is well that my hon. friend has seen fit to add that qualification.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not suggesting it is true; I hope it is not. But articles such as this, if untrue, do inestimable damage to our reputation as a free and a liberty-loving country. If the statement is not true, it should be refuted. I would ask the minister to give the facts as soon as possible.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I presume the case to
which my hon. friend has referred is one that was brought to my attention within the past week or ten days.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It has
reference to an American citizen of Chinese origin.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Precisely. The statement I received was based upon an article appearing in the New Republic, printed in New York.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Correct.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I presume it refers to the same action. The lady in question was of the Chinese race, and an American citizen. But while there may be certain disabilities in Canada against Chinese, in this particular instance she was not asked to leave the train by any Canadian immigration officer. According to the information and advice I have received, that step was taken by some railway officials who were in charge of the train upon which she travelled. I understand the lady was going from Buffalo to Detroit.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury). Ann Arbor.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not wish to say anything further about it, but my hon. friend knows that for many years we have had legislation in Canada affecting Chinese immigration to this country, and restricting movements very greatly. In this particular case the fault did not lie with any official of the Canadian government.


Major James William Coldwell: Will the railway officials take it upon themselves to do that?


Mr. POULIOT:: If my memory serves me correctly, this is the first time that refugees have been mentioned in the estimates. Therefore we have a new policy. Prior to this time refugees have been under the control of the Minister of Mines and Resources, and have been admitted under the regulations of the immigration branch. What is a refugee? What is the difference between a refugee and an ordinary immigrant? What is the difference between a refugee and an exile? That is the term used in some places. Outsiders whose transportation to Canada is facilitated or who
Supply-External Affairs

are helped to return to their country of origin are not refugees any more, nor are they exiles or immigrants or emigrants. According to the designation given by the League of Nations Society, they are evacuees.
Does the term "refugee" apply to only one race, or does it apply to all those who are coming to this country from occupied Europe? It would be well to lcnow the kind of people we are talking about, and what the money is voted for. Some people believe that those who are dealing with the problem of immigration in war time are anti-Semitic. That is not the question at all. The question is to know who is coming here and how they come here. I listened to the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell), who is one of the best debaters in the house, and I heard him mention refugees who have no money. If they have no money, how are they able to travel such a long distance to Canada? Some differentiation should be made between refugees, immigrants and exiles who are self-supporting and who are not self-supporting. As I say, I wonder how those who are not self-supporting can come so far to Canada and then become a charge on the country.
Canadian people are kind-hearted; they are generous; they are Christians, and they suffer because of the sufferings of others. Those of us who have read reports of the miseries of people in other parts of the world are ready to help them. But before this money is voted I think we should decide that the first immigrants to be cared for will be the Canadian boys who have fought overseas for this country and who cannot get satisfactory pensions when they come home. They should be the first immigrants to be looked after. There is no excuse for not giving priority to these boys or to these girls and women who have been in our armed forces. That is my first point.
It is pitiful to think of the men who have been in our armed forces and who cannot get pensions. How is it that we have to look after people who are not our own people? We should be ready to help to a certain extent, but I think we should look after our own people first. I shall have a lot to say when the' estimates of the Department of Pensions and National Health come up. We live in a strange world here in Canada, as I said when speaking on another matter not long ago. Apparently we think more of people outside our country than we do of the people within our borders. It seems to be considered bad manners to refer to the troubles of red-blooded Canadians. Apparently we are supposed to think only of the people outside our country. That is what 
is called external affairs. It is said that people who think like that are internationally minded. Let us get down to brass tacks. Let us remember that charity begins at home. Let us not be ashamed of looking after our own people who are in distress.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Let us go back to Riviere du Loup.


Jean-François Pouliot: It would be via Fredericton. Sometimes the hon. member for York-Sunbury speaks quite sensibly and it is unfortunate that he should spoil his reputation by making wise cracks which are rather hard to justify at times. I regret that a man of his age and ability has not given this problem the consideration it deserves. I would not want to joke about a matter like this; it is too serious, because it concerns the future of this country. There may be jibes from hon. gentlemen; others may laugh or cast aspersions-that is their right and I will not complain, speaking from my own point of view. But 1 do regret that the hon. gentleman does not give more serious attention to a problem of this scope.
We have an empire parliamentary association made up of people who hope to be the future rulers of the world. I see one hon. gentleman who probably expects to be the minister of external affairs when his leader comes to power. He is internationally minded. The leader of the C.C.F. is internationally minded. He thinks that Canada will play a great role among the nations of the world, and with that I agree, although I am not as internationally minded as he is. But Canada cannot play a great role among the nations of the world unless we have a definite Canadian policy. The principle of numerical strength seems to apply to any meetings attended by Canada, and the result is that the voice of Canada is not always heard. The Canadian policy should be drafted at home. When international meetings are held, representatives of Canada should be able to explain just what our policy is.
This item covers the portion of expenses of the intergovernmental committee on refugees. Who sits on that intergovernmental committee? Is it a Canadian committee made up of representatives of all the provinces, or is it a committee made up of representatives of the different governments in the world? When we know that, we shall be in position to ask what happened at the conference held last year in Bermuda at which Canada was not represented, and rightly so. No definite conclusions were reached at that meeting.
We do not want to see any trouble caused to Jews or to any other race, but we do not

Supply-External Affairs
want to see Canada run by foreigners and outsiders, by men from Geneva or other places who occupy key positions in Canada and who boss Canadian affairs. This should be of great concern to us all. How is it possible to have a Canadian policy when the Department of External Affairs is composed of men from all parts of the world who act as advisers to the government on international issues? I admit that a man may come from outside Canada and still be a good Canadian. On many occasions I have said that some of the people born in the British isles or other places outside of Canada were better Canadians than those born in the country. But those people have the happiness of this country at heart. What they had in view was to serve this country before all others. The people who are afraid of the propaganda of these international organizations for refugees, those who bend before those who take the lead in this movement, now say that the situation in the province of Quebec is unfortunate, that the French-Canadians are against the Jews, that the French-Canadians are against one class of the population, that they do not want refugees who want to take control of the whole country. That is not true at all. But how is it possible for men who have no experience of Canada to come here and take control of all the important positions there are, not only in the civil service, but in the government?
So long as a man comes here from outside, he is apparently all right. I remember the case of Alexander Gunn, that great expert who was called from London, not as a refugee, not as an immigrant, not as an exile, but as a kind of missionary from the British government, to tell us, to tell all Canadians what were essential positions and what were nonessential positions from which men should be transferred to the essential positions. That man was called here for the very reason that more importance is attached in this country to anything said by an outsider than to what is said by a good Canadian.
Not only that, but you know what happened with respect to the anti-nazi camp at Sherbrooke. I spoke about that last year. After Dunkirk there was a panic in England and there was a round-up of all men of central European origin who were in London. They were sent here and the government put them in a concentration camp. Think of that- anti-nazis being put in a concentration camp in Canada. I asked the Minister of National Defence last year if he knew anything about it, and he said no. But afterwards what did I see? I saw that an order in council had been
passed precisely to give a chance to these then who had entered Canada contrary to the provisions of the Immigration Act. They should have been returned to their country of origin. As I said to the Minister of Mines and Resources two or three years ago, where shall we send refugees from occupied Europe who have entered Canada illegally? There was an uproar of laughter at my question and it was not answered. I should like it answered.
I have no racial animosity in speaking as I do. I have a profound love of my country and of my fellow-citizens, and I am ready to accept the rule of any Canadian in any high post in this country, but I deny any outsider the right to boss us in this country. I think the man who has lived his whole life in this country has the right to attain to the highest positions of responsibility in this country, but I deny to the newcomer and a migratory bird the same right.
Moreover, I learned some time ago that a person who sits in the other house used to have fits when she spoke of refugees, and it was said to me by someone in authority that she cried, that she thought only of the refugees. Well, if one is to be in the other house to represent only those who do not belong to this country, there should be some means of stopping that. I know whereof I speak.
I hope, sir, that in the future those who speak of international affairs and the like will have a programme ready to submit to the house, and be ready to explain what is their stand on any item for the purpose which appears in the estimates. If some of those refugees were not so rugged when they come to this country, if they were not taking possession of Canada when they come here, they would be tolerated, but the man with the worst possible manners that I have ever seen was a millionaire refugee from France. He was eating in the dining room of the Ritz-Carlton in Montreal, and everyone was shocked by his bad manners. He was powerfully rich; he belonged to one of the richest families in the world, but I have never seen before a man who looked like him. Which means that it is not only wealth that we should bring here. It is all right to help other peoples. We have been giving billions of dollars to help other countries, and we have no objection to helping other peoples. We will do our best for them, as much as we can. But we must look after our own people in the first place, and then we must be very careful that we are not ruled by the bold refugees who come here from outside to take hold of this country, or then we shall be slaves in our own country. We cannot have that.
Supply-External Affairs

What is the policy of other peoples? What do they do for Canada, these refugees? When I asked for help here for poor settlers who need help for themselves and their children, I could not get it. The Indians get help, but I could not get it for my own people, and I do not see how the refugees can get it. I hope that the government will take that into consideration and will not press further for the passing of this item.
The United States is a large country, and it puts quotas on immigration. But so-called anti-nazis are sent here and we accept them. They jump the fence and get in. They were accepted here in spite of the laws of the land. There will be no end to it if we do not put a stop to it.
One other thing I will mention in passing. Why is it that those young men who were not originally residents of this country, young men who have come here from all over as guests in this country, are not subjected to the mobilization act? Why is that? If I am told that they are, I say that a number of those boys who have come here since the passing of the mobilization act have no trouble at all in continuing at their civilian work and are not called up by the registrars of the various military districts. That also is stupid. How is it that a man who comes here for shelter is not bound by the ordinary obligations of a Canadian citizen? I know that by speaking like this I shall scandalize some virgin souls who do not like plain talk about these matters. In external affairs we have gone far backwards. I regret it, and I hope that the policy of the government will be so changed as to be along the same lines as-


Mr. McIVOR:: I wonder whether the hon. member would allow me to ask a question?


Jean-François Pouliot: Surely.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: If he were a member of the British house, what would his attitude be to Viscount Bennett, who was bom in New Brunswick and schooled in this country?


Gordon Graydon: That question is too easy!


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: There is a certain attitude of reciprocity as between England, Scotland, Ireland and Canada, and I am curious to know what the hon. member's position would be under these circumstances toward Viscount Bennett.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Chairman, I cannot reply to the hon. member for Fort William, because this item refers to refugees and he is speaking of an evacuee.
I hope that the matter to which I have been referring will be considered on its merits. I appreciate the kindness of the committee in

listening to my views, which I express in all earnestness. I trust that the government will not be too quick in pressing the adoption of this item, for the reasons I have mentioned, and many others which I will give in due course.


Gordon Graydon: I should like to suggest to the Prime Minister that, since there is a question which I desire to ask the Minister of Mines and Resources, who at the moment is not in his place, and which-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: He is trying to get a little lunch. He has not had any yet. The cabinet meeting lasted until three o'clock.


Gordon Graydon: I hope that the Prime Minister is not taking umbrage at what I am saying.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Oh, no, but my hon. friend was drawing attention to the absence of the minister, and I was saying that the minister had been to my knowledge in the cabinet until nearly three o'clock this afternoon and has had no lunch. He slipped off for a minute to get a bite to eat.


Gordon Graydon: I am not raising any question about the minister going out to his lunch.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend drew attention to his absence from the chamber, and I am giving him the reason.


Gordon Graydon: My right hon. friend need not be so touchy.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not touchy, but part of my duty is to defend my colleagues during their absence, and when my hon. friend puts on Hansard the statement that a particular minister is not here, and my hon. friend knows the significance of that, I am giving him the explanation.


Gordon Graydon: I merely innocently rose to ask the Minister of Mines and Resources a question. I cannot ask the question if he is not here, but if the Prime Minister wants to answer it I will tell him- what it is. He may clear it up and the matter will then be concluded.
When the hon. member for York-Sunbury rose in his place to bring to the attention of the Minister of Mines and Resources the incident of an American girl travelling from New York to Ann Arbour, Michigan, I thought the minister did not make a clear explanation of the situation, because there is a serious aspect of this particular complaint. I wish to put on the record one sentence in connection with the report which was published in the New Republic, and which was

Supply-External Affairs
mentioned by the hon. member for York-Sunbury during the debate. That publication refers to-
. . . this piece of startling governmental stupidity and brutality (which) occurs over and over; No American citizen who looks like a Chinese, we are told, is allowed to pass through Canadian territory on an American train even though the points of departure and arrival are in the United States. Canada has a good record in this war; and it is a little startling to find her deliberately going out of the way to insult and humiliate citizens of an allied country, the United States.
The reason why I rose at this time was to give the Minister of Mines and Resources, or the Prime Minister if he chooses-perhaps the Prime Minister is the one to do it-an opportunity of making a categorical denial of the entire statement and a proper explanation of what happened, because I do not think what has been said goes far enough, in view of the serious charge which is made in a United States magazine with a wide circulation. I believe the Prime Minister and every member of the house wants to repudiate any suggestion that this country would treat nationals of another country in the manner alleged, and in my opinion the Minister of Mines and Resources should have gone farther than simply to say that no Canadian immigration official was involved; he should have told the whole story. What I intended to suggest at the beginning of my remarks was that the item might be allowed to stand until the Minister of Mines and Resources returned to the chamber. If the Prime Minister desires to make an explanation, that is satisfactory to me; but the article should not go unchallenged, because it contains a reflection on our relationship to other countries, and I should like to see the matter satisfactorily cleared up.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: The minister, I thought, made it quite clear that such action as was taken was not by any Canadian government official, and that any such action on the part of any of its officials would not be countenanced for one moment by our government. Possibly the minister, for reasons which he had better explain himself, deemed it inadvisable to place the responsibility where, perhaps, it exclusively belongs. I will allow him to answer that part himself. So far as the government is concerned I can assure my hon. friend that every member of the government would take the strongest exception to any action of the kind on the part of an official, and in this particular instance the government officials were wholly innocent of any such act.


Gordon Graydon: Our position is one of friendship toward nations which are friendly with us.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Certainly. The incident was most regrettable.


Mr. LECLERC (Translation):: Mr. Chairman, I have just a few words'to say on the question of refugees. That matter is closely connected with the immigration question. During the war we have had to admit into Canada a large nmber of so-called refugees, who have been expelled from their own country by the invader but who may wish to become permanent residents of Canada. Despite the kindheartedness of the Canadian citizens, that question is, in mj- opinion, one of very great importance and we. should not. exclude reason from our feelings. We must not forget that the post-war period will probably be marked by widespread unemployment and that we shall then have to take care of hundreds of thousands of demobilized soldiers and laid off workmen apart from those refugees and of the immigrants whom some may wish to send here.
I ask the government to take my remarks into serious consideration. I agree with what the hon. member for Temiseouata (Mr. Pouliot) has said a few moments ago, and I must say that the government has received numerous petitions and that I have also received some which indicate the general feeling in Shefford county. I ask the government, once again, to consider the question of postwar immigration and to make sure that the number of immigrants admitted is commensurate with the employment available at that time. Without any doubt, we shall then have very serious problems to solve in connection with the Canadians who will have to be provided for. I ask the government that before they take care of European refugees, they provide for Canadian-born citizens.


Mr. ROEBUCK:: In view of some of the remarks that have been made with regard to this small item, I should like to be heard. The hon. member for Temiseouata (Mr. Pouliot) commented that the matter should be considered on its merits, and of course with that statement I entirely agree.
Let us see what the problem is that we are considering on its merits. I understand that an intergovernmental committee has been set up to consider at some length continuously a problem which is on the hands of all the nations of the world, those of good will at all events, those on the united nations side, with respect to people fleeing the wrath of the nazi murderers in Germany and other occupied territories in Europe.
Supply-External Affairs

My good friend t(he hon. member for Temisoouata says that charity should begin at home. Of course that is right, but unfortunately he has not finished the quotation: It should not stay at home. The remarks madie by that hon. member reminded me of the little couplet:
Me and my wife, John and his wife.
Us four and no more.
It is a matter of judgment. It is true that, as he says, our first concern in this country is the returned men from the front, that they have priority on all occasions, and that of course they be given reasonable treatment in the matter of pensions. But it can hardly be contended that the question of giving a sufficiency in pensions to our returned men in any way depends upon or is influenced or affected by the S5,000 appropriation in order that Canada may take her place and her proper place among other nations in doing the right thing by poor people.
It does seem to me, however, looking at the matter entirely from the point of view of -the boys who are returning, that were we in this chamber to take a miserable, mean attitude, that charity stays at home, exclusively in Canada, and that we cannot afford $5,000 in order that Canada should take her place on an intergovernmental committee, these boys returning here would blush with shame that they come from Canada rather than from some of the other nations -that are playing a proper part.
The hon. member for Temiscouata said that Canadians are a kind-hearted people, and that is true. We are a self-respecting nation, and it. would not, it seems to me, be in keeping with our self-respect if we even questioned this amount, much less if we rejected it.
I compliment the government upon taking its proper place on this international committee for the handling of this modt important world problem. If the item is to be criticized at all, it is only because it is so small.


Mr. MacNICOL:: I just wish to add a word along the line taken by the hon. member who has just sat down (Mr. Roebuck). In bis part of Toronto and in my part as well there are people of all races, and I have found sons and daughters of all races, no matter what their language was, no matter where they came from, rendering good service to the country. I, too, congratulate the government upon carrying out its agreement, in fact on entering into an agreement even in a small way, and it is only in a small way, to relieve the unparalleled and almost unmentionable distress that refugees
TMr. Roebuck.]
of all races in Europe -have gone through. It is a small item which does not mean very much in money, but I am happy to support it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: The next item is one which relates to the Department of Finance, the estimates of which have not thus far been called. If hon. gentlemen wish to obstruct or to delay the proceedings of the house-


Richard Burpee Hanson: Do not
use that word "obstruct."


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am not saying that they will, -but if anyone wishes to delay the proceedings of the house, the business of the country, he may take exception at this moment to our discussing on a Thursday, when Mr. Speaker leaves the chair without question put an item in a department that has not already been called. I am obliged to leave the chamber shortly and I wish to make a statement on this before withdrawing. Hon. members * will have noticed that since the beginning of the session the government has sought on a Monday, or Tuesday or Wednesday to have the different departments called in as expeditious an order as possible, but we have been prevented time and again, particularly in the last two weeks, from getting any additional departments into supply. It has not been the fault of the government that all departments have not been called up to this moment. It has been owing to the fact I have mentioned, that motions have been put which have made that impossible. I do not take exception to that; that is the right of the opposition.


Gordon Graydon: I hope you are not referring to the opposition, because we did not raise any questions.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I regard everyone who is not for the government as being opposed to it.


Gordon Graydon: If that is the situation
the Prime Minister had better withdraw his remarks about the opposition having brought in amendments to the motion for supply, because we have not.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I regard those who are not for the government as opposed to it, and when I speak of the opposition I do not mean my hon. friend only. I mean particularly some of those hon. gentlemen who belong to other groups and who have been-


Richard Burpee Hanson: Do not
class us with them, please.

Supply-External Affairs


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My own belief is that there should be simply one government and one opposition. I think it is a mistake having the house divided into the government and its supporters and three or four oppositions, so that each time one of that number speaks the other three feel that they must also put in their oars or say something.
In the years I have been in parliament there have always been, just before the beginning of the new fiscal year, some estimates brought down in the nature of further supplementary estimates to cover small amounts that may be outstanding to meet accounts for the current year. I have never once seen the house refuse to give unanimous consent to the consideration of these estimates on the score of any rule that may appear in the rules of procedure of the house, and I hope that we may take it as assumed that hon. members opposite of all parties are prepared to allow the government to proceed with a discussion of any items that may appear on this supplementary list.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Speaking
on behalf of the official opposition, I wish to assure the Prime Minister at once that no objection will be taken to any item of any department which has not yet been called, but I would point out to him that he has a good many departments in already. As far as my recollection goes, he has more departments in than is the case in the ordinary session of parliament. It is the right and the duty of the opposition to see that too many departments are not brought in too soon. My hon. friend knows that, and nobody was more dexterous in preventing that sort of thing than the right hon. gentleman when he sat on this side, and especially some of his henchmen who sit around him, in days gone by. I have reason to remember that.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Speaking of the rights of the opposition and of the government, I would say to my hon. friend that the government has a perfect right, once in supply, to call an item in every department if it so desires. There is no rule of the house which says the opposition has the right to prevent the government from obtaining supply in any way it can, consistent with the rules. It has been to help meet the wishes of hon. gentlemen opposite that the government has not called every department once it has been in supply. I should like to have that clearly understood. Once the house is in supply the government has a perfect right to call any item in any department it pleases; and if we had wished to stand strictly on our rights, the first day the house met we could have called an 100-127
item in each department and been free to go into supply any Thursday or Friday on the estimates of any department. But that is not the way in which business can be carried on as between a government and an opposition.
May I take advantage of this opportunity to point out what I think is in the interests of all hon. members, namely, that we cannot make progress unless each member assumes a real responsibility and restricts on his own part the amount of time to be taken in discussion. If this afternoon the Chairman had ruled strictly, as I think he should have done-if he will not mind my saying so -this discussion might have been held down to the simple question of whether a small amount still owing by Canada to an international organization should be paid. The broad discussion in regard to immigration, refugees and the like, has not been strictly relevant to the item before us. The time to take up those matters would have been when the main estimates are being discussed.


Grote Stirling: But the Prime Minister will agree that this is a new item; it is not a further item.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It is an item which has arisen during the year, which there has not been a chance to meet before this; it belongs to the current year. In a word what I want to say is this. Hon. members are asking, and rightly, that we should shortly begin a discussion on external affairs, that we should bring down the budget, and that other measures should be brought down; yet discussions such as that which has taken place this afternoon make it wholly impossible to do any of these things. We have been sitting for two hours, but up to the present we have passed only one item. I think, without injury to any living soul, the whole lot of them might have been passed in ten minutes. I am perfectly certain that is what, in similar circumstances, they would have done in the British parliament. There is a vast amount of legislation still to be brought before the house, and before we get much further with the session hon. members are going to be asking the government, " Cannot this be expedited; cannot that be expedited?" This is the time for expedition, if it is to amount to anything in the long run.


Mr. MacINNIS:: If the Prime Minister does not mind, may I suggest that the estimates are not going through faster largely because of his own attitude in the matter.


James Joseph McCann: Order. There is absolutely nothing before the committee; no item has been called. The dis-

Supply-Finance

cussion that has been going on has taken place between the calling of items. I should like to know what item to call.


James Layton Ralston: Item 421.


James Joseph McCann: Very well; 421.



DEPARTMENT OP FINANCE

[Stage Direction]
421. Departmental administration - further amount required, $76,200.
Angus MacInnis: I understood that we were talking on item 421.


James Joseph McCann: That has just been called.


Major James William Coldwell: There was a discussion as to the propriety of taking up this item at all. We are not objecting to it, but my hon. friend would like to speak to that point. As the Prime Minister has pointed out, this house might stand on its rights and refuse to recognize this item at all, because as yet the Department of Finance has not been put into supply. We are not going to do that, of course, but at the same time I think my hon. friend has a right to discuss the point, which he was rising to do.


Angus MacInnis: As a member of this
house, Mr. Chairman, I object to being lectured by the Prime Minister or anyone else. The right hon. gentleman rose and very properly drew to the attention of the opposition the fact that they could have refused to allow this item to come in, because the Department of Finance has not as yet been brought into supply. But he did not simply make the statement and leave it to the opposition to agree or not to agree. I am satisfied that the opposition would have agreed, but he went on and on and on, lecturing hon. members about their duties in the house; he went on to tell us that the government had the right to bring in all the departments on the first day of the session, after the estimates were introduced. Of course that is so, but it would be so only if the opposition allowed that to be done. The opposition could carry on a discussion for weeks, and under those conditions the government would not be able to bring in anything at all. I have said time and again, as the Prime Minister has said, that if we are to make progress here we must discipline ourselves and agree, as among the various groups, how much discussion shall take place on various subjects. I am absolutely in accord with that idea. The attitude of the Prime Minister reminds me of a statement which the late Henry Labouchere is said to have made in regard to the late Mr. Gladstone,
(The Chairman.]
who used to lecture the British House of Commons in somewhat the same way. He said he did not mind the old man, as he called him, having the ace of trumps up his sleeve every time, but he did object to the old man saying that God Almighty had put it there. That is the way I feel in regard to these matters. Let the Prime Minister put the point to hon. members, and if it is put fairly nicely, as the right hon. gentleman can put it.if he wishes, I am quite satisfied that we shall agree and let the item go through.


Gordon Graydon: Let me point out to the Prime Minister what the hon. member for Vancouver East omitted to say. I think if Hansard were to be checked it would be found that the Liberals, including the Prime Minister, have had more to say than perhaps all the rest of us combined.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Speaking to the point of order which the Prime Minister suggested could be raised-


James Joseph McCann: Order. There is no point of order before the committee.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Taking part in the discussion-


James Joseph McCann: Will the hon. gentleman please sit down. There is no point of order before the committee. The-item under discussion deals with the departmental administration of the Department of Finance, and I shall have to insist that the discussion be relevant to that item.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I just wish to say to the Prime Minister that I think we should have an understanding-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We in the opposition
have been asked to agree to a matter of pro-ceduie, and we have stated our willingness to do so.


Gordon Graydon: We object to your being called the opposition, for one thing.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: What do you
call them?


Gordon Graydon: Give them any name you like, but you cannot call them the official opposition. They are with the government more than they are with the opposition.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am sure the Prime Minister is prepared to give an undertaking that the calling of this item does not constitute the opening of the Department of Finance in all its estimates.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Certainly not.

Supply-Legislation-House of Commons


Stanley Howard Knowles: As long as we understand that it will still be necessary to call, on a Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday, the estimates of any department not yet in supply, even though we pass these supplementary items to-day-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Certainly.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
422. Royal Canadian Mint, including the Dominion of Canada assay office-further amount required, $54,241.
Mr. ADAMSON:: Do I understand that
the mint makes a charge for refining gold bullion, at the rate of one per cent of the value of the bullion so refined? Is that so?


James Layton Ralston: I cannot tell my hon. friend the
rate; but I shall get that information for him.


Ernest George Hansell: I should like to ask a question about the Royal Mint. Does any government department or organization print paper currency? It is my understanding that the government lets out contracts to private companies for the printing of bank notes.


James Layton Ralston: There are contracts with the bank-note companies for the printing of bank notes.


Ernest George Hansell: It is not done by any department of government?


James Layton Ralston: No.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Are all the coins, including the nickel coins, made at the mint?


James Layton Ralston: I think so, but I cannot tell my hon. friend for certain.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Has there been a shortage of coinage recently?


James Layton Ralston: Not that I know of.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
432. To provide for the expenses incurred under the agreement between the dominion, Ontario and Manitoba confirmed by the Lac Seul Conservation Act, 1928, moneys expended to be largely reimbursed-further amount required, $2,270.43.
An hon. MEMBER:: Explain.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: As hon. members are aware, the Lac Seul Conservation Act was passed in 1928. Under that act certain works of a conservation character were erected at the outlet of Lac Seul. This involved an arrangement between Ontario, Manitoba, and the dominion government. This government pays over to 100-127J
Ontario certain sums which it collects from Manitoba. Apparently last year, for some reason or another, an insufficient amount was voted, and this is to make up the deficiency. The disbursements we make to Ontario are all collected from Manitoba.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Is it for power purposes?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes, for power purposes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
429. To provide an additional amount, and under the same terms and conditions, to that *provided under vote 475 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1943, for transportation and living expenses of members of the House of Commons during the Easter recess, 1943-further amount required, $250.
Ernest George Hansell: Although this is a vote for merely $250, I believe it is the only place at which I could make the observations I wish to make-and perhaps what I am about to say will not be any too popular. However, the present high taxation imposed upon incomes is affecting members of the House of Commons to the point where, unless they have certain expenses paid, this parliament will result in a rich man's parliament. I say that because, while some members have other interests, such as professions or businesses, quite a number make the business of being members of parliament a full-time job. In so doing they have no other income.
I am suggesting that if only a slight investigation were made it would be discovered that some members of parliament who attend parliament, with all the expenses involved- and they amount to a considerable sum, because a member has a certain kind of life he must lead-have to get along on a very small amount of money. I know, in fact, that some members have to draw on their indemnities long before they are due.
I understand I have some small support, because I have read, in some, of Canada's leading daily papers, several editorials in which the same view has been expressed. I believe the country is gradually realizing the truth of what I have said. Especially is this true in war time, when taxation is high, and when the work of the member of parliament, somehow or another, is doubled. In war time he must attend to many things which in peace time he need not attend to. For instance, I have in mind particularly members who represent large constituencies, some of which are two or three hundred miles in diameter. A member in such a constituency may be requested to address a Red Cross or

Supply-Legislation-House oj Commons
salvage meeting, or to appear before a board of trade or a council, and! to do so 'he must travel the width of 'his constituency. Nevertheless he receives no out-of-pocket expenses. He has to do this on the indemnity he receives, one which, in reality, is supposed to indemnify him against loss of time during a parliamentary session.
I believe it would be only fair if the government were to give some consideration to this matter. We want to bear our fair share of the burden of taxation, but the situation is such that I think we are bearing more than our share, because no consideration is given to our expenses outside the session. I believe it would be only fair if the government were to. allow members of parliament a certain, amouat to cover expenses involved in carrying on their work. I am not alone when I make these observations, because I think almost every member of parliament agrees with what I have said, and I would urge that the government do something about the matter.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: What dioes the horn, member think would be a fair amount for expenses?


Ernest George Hansell: I do not know; I am afraid I cannot answer that. I do not think any member of parliament wants to make money out of it; but I am of opinion that some regulation could be arrived at which would be fair to all members. On the one hand we may find' a city member, the length and breadth of whose constituency would not cover more than a mile or so. On the other hand we find another member who must travel a couple of hundred miles to cover his constituency. From one end of my constituency to the other is a distance of 200 miles. The people at one end of my constituency have just as much right to my services as any organization in the constituency of a city member, but I may have to travel a couple of hundred miles while the other fellow needs only to hop on a street car.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: What would the expenses here in Ottawa be worth?


Ernest George Hansell: I do not know about that. If a member of parliament cannot bring his family to Ottawa he must keep two homes going. No member can live in Ottawa and keep up the position he should at less than what it costs him to live at home, even though he has his family here with him. I am sure if the people were aware of these expenses they would not object to the government allowing hon. members out-of-pocket expenses.
TMr. Hansell.]
Mr. O'BRIEN: I should like to approach this problem from another point of view. Two or three sessions ago I referred to the matter of taxation, and I was criticized severely by the press, it being intimated I was trying to avoid the payment of the tax. This time I should like to approach the matter from the constitutional point of view. Up to a certain time members of parliament received indemnities, but now they receive salaries. I submit it is entirely unconstitutional for a member to be sitting here representing the people and receiving a salary. Apart altogether from the matters referred to by the hon. member who has just taken his seat, I submit that a most serious situation exists in this parliament at the present time. It should be cleared up. If the tax is to be taken off the indemnity, it should be done by an amendment to the House of Commons Act, which originally gave hon. members their indemnities.


Mr. JAQUES:: I should like to associate myself briefly with the remarks of the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell) and with those of the hon. member who has just taken his seat (Mr. O'Brien). If a member of the House of Commons is paid an indemnity for his services, either the indemnity was too large before the war or, if it was not, it is too small to-day. Because of added taxation, the increase in the cost of living and the extra work that must be performed as a consequence of the war, it would seem to me that the indemnity received by hon. members to-day is much too small.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
iSO. To provide an additional amount required for expenses of the special committee on war expenditures under the same terms and conditions as provided under vote 476 of the Appropriation Act No. 5, 1943-further amount required, $1,600.
Gordon Graydon: My remarks will be brief, but they would be much longer if it were not for the circumstances. In my opinion this is a good example of wasted money. It is not very often that I make a charge as bluntly as that, but that is what this actually means. Apart altogether from the uselessness of certain parts of the work of this committee, which I am not going to deal with because I have referred to it before, the main reason for this expenditure is the fact that this committee was set up in the dying days of the last session. Therefore it had to sit between sessions and incurred expenses which had to be paid by the taxpayers of Canada.
I doubt if there is anything we can do at this stage except to protest, as I have protested before, against this situation. When this committee was set up so late in the last session

Supply-Legislation-House of Commons
every hon. member must have realized that it would mean money out of the taxpayers' pockets. Had the war expenditures committee been able to sit while the house was in session there would have been no need for these extra expenses. The Prime Minister is not at the moment in the house, so that I shall not press for further details. The most charitable view that can be taken of this expenditure is that it is attributable directly to the situation I have described. I simply wish to make this vigorous and vehement protest against what I think is a waste of public funds.


Mr. GOLDING:: That is your opinion.


Gordon Graydon: I think my opinion ought to be heard in the House of Commons and I do not want the hon. member to challenge it.


Thomas Langton Church: This committee was
appointed some three years ago to carry on a definite task in the darkest hours of the war, but it has outlived its public usefulness. The committee and the system have been weighed in the balance and found wanting. In saying that, I do not wish to reflect upon the hon. gentlemen who compose the committee. It was a very good body of men. However, I protest against the useless system. In the olden days we used to have an auditor general, a Mr. McDougall, who made a great name for himself because of the way in which he checked expenditures. He had the power to veto expenditures which he considered were not within the four corners of the law as it then was. But then the great war came along and that practice was discontinued. Last session I read a letter from the auditor general in which he stated that he had no power to investigate any account incurred under the war appropriation bill which called for four billion dollars. Last year the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) referred to this, as did the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) and myself. A comptroller of the treasury was appointed. This officer is a civil servant appointed by the Minister of Finance and under his control. He passes upon all accounts which come within the four corners of the resolution upon the order paper, which is divided into paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and (d). Would any business firm conduct a four billion dollar business like that, without any checks and balances? I do not object to the trips that the committee take, although they are not authorized to take Cook's tours all 'over Canada. I do not object to that. I have not been able to take any myself. But I am glad that the members see Canada and learn something about the country. It may in the end save some money. But there is a war on and
the public think we should have a system of checks and balances over our expenditures. I have had many business men write me on this
subject.
The public usefulness of the committee has gone. As I suggested the. year before last, we should change our system. At the other end of this building we have what is technically called another place, a very good body of men; sometimes they call it a house. It is not a house at all; it is only half of parliament; you would not call it a house. But it is there, without war work to do, although willing to do it. Why could they not be given the opportunity of doing some more useful work? I read a report of its meeting the other day. They said prayers, took in four new members from Quebec, and then adjourned-and they call that a day's work. The whole business of parliament should be reconstructed and divided in war time. In England, three years before the war, they had long debates on this subject of parliamentary reform, and they reformed the upper chamber and gave it more legislative work to do, looking into accounts and all that kind of thing. They have a real system of checks and balances.
When the Tupper government left office in 1896 our expenditures were S36,000,000 a year, and under Laurier they were 837,000,000. We are now spending that much in three or four days, and when the taxpayer gets his bills he is beginning to wonder about all this expenditure in the fifth year of the war. I do not object to members of the committee taking Cook's tours to the sun or the moon if we are getting value for it, but it was not the intention that the committee should travel around the way it does. They should sit down like the British committee and go over the expenditures. The British committee gets results and changes; it has a big staff of accountants and outside auditors checking the expenditures, and it meets the whole year round and gets some place. But the committee here sits one day and then departs to Montreal or for parts unknown, and then some of them go by aeroplane to Halifax. Let them take all the trips they like. I am not objecting to that. What I am objecting to is the system under which we spend over four billion dollars a year, without any check on it. Any large departmental store that had such a system would go bankrupt; with everybody spending money just as he likes. A letter was read in the house by me not long ago in which the auditor general said he had not control over some expenditures.
The time has come to take action. I move,. Mr. Chairman, that this item be reduced to'
2014	COMMONS
Supply-Legislation-House oj Commons
one dollar. That will give this committee an opportunity to express its dissatisfaction with the conduct of the war expenditures committee. It holds its meetings behind closed doors, like the Star Chamber. I asked in the house the other day if a private member could go into the committee and the answer was: no; you cannot go into the committee. The doors are closed and locked and no private member can get in. But in 1923 when the Canadian National railway estimates were under consideration I asked the late respected Bight Hon. George Graham if a private member could go into the select committee on railways and shipping and ask questions, and he announced that any private member could go into the committee and ask questions on any railway matter in which he was interested.
Certainly a change is needed in the system. We should get some public-spirited business men in Canada to act as a committee or royal commission and go over the accounts, and make recommendations for retrenchment looking toward a better business system. That would strengthen the hands of the Minister of Finance. I advocated in 1924 and 1925 that we should adopt the municipal system, and the hon. member for Wellington South has been taking that up in the last three or four years. That would enable us to reduce and strike out various items of the estimates. But that policy has not been adopted. We follow the old practice of two hundred years ago under which a minister resigns if his estimates are reduced. To show disapproval I move that this item be reduced to one dollar.


Mr. CLEAVER:: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the members of the committee I think a word should be said. Members of the committee and I are getting fairly well fed up with the constant charges of Cook's tours, giving the impression that the different inspection trips made by members of the committee are not made at their own expense. I want to say positively that every trip made at any time by the war expenditures committee has been made at the personal expense of the members of the committee. The committee members reecive a per diem allowance of $12 for every day they are away from home at Ottawa or otherwise on committee business, when the house is not sitting. When the house is sitting and trips are made the members make them in their own time and at their own expense, and no expense account of any kind is payable to any member of the committee when he goes to Vancouver or Halifax or any other place in Canada.

The hon. member for Broadview says that the Canadian committee is not functioning as the British committee is functioning. In his very next breath he complains of in camera meetings. The British committee has held all its meetings ever since the outbreak of war in camera. He cannot have it both ways. My hon. friend knows better than to make a statement of that kind. Time and again in debates on the subject this house has been told that the Canadian committee is functioning as nearly as can be after the manner in which the British committee is functioning. One feature of the Britsih committee is the fact that all its meetings are held in camera. Our meetings are held in camera, not that we have anything to conceal, but simply that we can better do our job in in camera meetings.
The hon. member for Broadview also stated that the British committee employed accountants, auditors and the like. I took the trouble to have an interview with the chairman of the British committee when he visited this country a year ago, and I was told by him that the committee does not make a practice of hiring accountants and auditors, but is doing exactly as we are doing here. When they need professional assistance or the help of accountants they call them in just as we call in men who are already in the employ of the government in the various departments to assist us in our work. The members of the war expenditures committee were asked to take this work on as a war task and we have approached it entirely from that viewpoint. It is not an easy thing for a member of that committee to spend weeks and months of his time in between long sessions doing this work, which is quite often tedious and tiresome, but I wish to assure the committee that we are approaching it from the point of view of a war duty. We are trying to do our best, and while I do not mind fair criticism I do not like this constant unfair criticism as though the committee simply were going on joy rides and the like.


Alphonse Fournier: I was sorry that the leader of the opposition spoke in the way he did about the war expenditures committee. In 1941 this committee was set up, I would say at the request of the leader of the opposition of the day. I recall speeches he made at that time telling us about the war 'expenditure committee in Great Britain, and that during war time members of parliament should devote some of their time toward assisting the war effort, and that to set up a war expenditures committee here would be one fine way to help the country

Supply-Legislation-Home of Commons
in this respect. That year the committee was set up at an early date. They sat until the close of the session, by which time they found that the field they had to cover was so large that it would be well to do what was done in Britain, namely, to sit the year around. The government at the end of the session brought in a supplementary estimate of 825,000 to pay a living allowance to members who during the recess would sit on the committee. That committee sat from July 7, 1941, to some time in September; that is, although it had sat during the session it continued its sittings afterwards. The following year it was again set up at any early date and functioned during the session, and a supplementary estimate of $30,000 was passed at the end of the session to permit sittings during the recess. That fall the committee sat for two and one-half months or thereabouts. The members were not paid any expenses other than an allowance of $15 per diem.


Angus MacInnis: Less taxes.


Alphonse Fournier: The $30,000 was expended and no further vote was asked for. At that time members of the opposition did not criticize these two estimates. They eon-ceded that it was a good committee, and that it was useful to the government to have a committee of that kind, because the reports it produced served as advice and as a check to the defence departments and the Department of Munitions and Supply, helping them to find ways and means of curbing expenses.
Last year the committee was set up at a late date, but that was not the reason why it sat during the recess. It sat the two previous years during the recess. Another supplementary estimate for $30,000 was voted.
As the hon. member who spoke before me has pointed out, travelling expenses are not paid to the members. Last year, I believe, they received $12 a day when they were on committee work in Ottawa.
I disagree completely with the leader of the opposition when he says that this committee has no useful purpose. If he had experience in that committee; if he knew the work which is done there and followed the procedure, he would find that it is a useful organism of government. Members of the opposition say that it has lost its use because it sits in camera. My goodness, we went over that objection in 1941, 1942, 1943, and it has come back this year. We are convinced and the government is convinced that the committee could not do its work properly if it sat in public. Much of the information given is of a secret nature. We can advise the govern-

ment as to what should be done to try to economize on some of the expenditures. I have sat on that committee for over two years, and I am still convinced that it is useful and that we should continue to follow the same procedure as we have followed hitherto. Furthermore, I believe the committee should sit during the recess, although it has been appointed early in the session. If one glances over the formidable list of expenditures made by the government in the prosecution of the war effort, it seems evident that this committee should be continuously looking into these expenses and advising the government thereon.


Mr. HANSON (Skeena):: This committee, I believe, is one of the best committees which has ever been set up in this house. One reason is that each year since the committee has been set up, all hom. members are advised that if any irregularities have come to their notice in their constituencies it is hoped that [DOT]they will take the matter up with the committee. Every year I 'have had a letter from the chairman to that effect, and any time in my territory, which is a big one, irregularities are reported to me, I forward particulars of the complaint to the committee for investigation. I am wholly in favour of the committee being maintained. It is a great help to the individual member, and) a great advantage to the general public who are thus enabled to put grievances before a, committee of parliament.


James Layton Ralston: I wish to say one word before the item passes, and that is with reference to what was said by the hon. member for Broadview. I got the impression that in his view this committee was the only agency which stood between the taxpayer and1 anyone who was spending money, and that it was the only check which was made on the public accounts in so far as war expenditures were concerned. If that is the effect of what the hon. member said, I believe he is entirely in error. I have before ,me the combined public accounts in their new form for 1943. My hon. friend suggested, I believe, that war expenditures were not under the auditor general, and that this committee was the only checking agency in regard to war expenditures which was available for the benefit of the taxpayer. I would refer my hon. friend to pages 8 and 9 of part II of the public accounts for 1943. There he will find not simply the ordinary expenses but the special expenditures and the war appropriations, all set out on those two
2016	COMMONS
Supply-Legislation-House oj Commons
pages, and at the bottom appears the certificate of the official who, the hon. member says, has nothing to do with these war expenditures. That certificate reads:
The accounts of expenditure, which are associated with the foregoing statement, have been examined under my direction, and subject to the relative observations in my report to the House of Commons made in accordance with the provisions of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, 1931, I certify as the result of my audit that the statement is correct.
That is signed "Watson Sellar, Auditor General".
I hope my hon. friend will be relieved by *that of 'his misapprehension that the committee is the only' form of check which the public have.
I do not think I need add anything at the moment to -what- has been said about the committee and its work. For some reason or another the work of the committee is minimized by some hon. members, particularly by the leader of the opposition and the opposition generally. I do not understand [DOT]why they reiterate that it is not doing effective work because it is sitting in camera. That is just an instance of how .the repetition of a fallacy develops in the minds of some people the idea that it is the truth. As a matter of fact, this committee has done exceedingly valuable work. It has been stated time and time again that it is set up and functions exactly as the committee at Westminster does, and that statement has been verified in interviews with those who have had to do with the committee's work at Westminster and know the procedure which is adopted there. The question being raised on this particular item with regard to expenses is a reflection on the committee, because, as has been pointed out, travelling expenses are paid by the committee members themselves. I do not think the committee needs any defence at my hands; its members, and in particular the chairman, are quite capable of taking care of themselves; but I simply wish to assure them that the opinion expressed in some quarters with regard to their work is not held by the people of Canada generally or by the great majority of the members of this house. They work diligently, and while they cannot go over all accounts, at the same time they provide a means of checking on certain accounts and no one knows where they will strike next. All of that helps toward the proper keeping of public accounts and the maintenance of regularity in public expenditures.

I rose particularly to put on record the real situation with regard to the check provided by the auditor general not only in connection with ordinary expenditures, but in connection with war expenditures as well.


Angus MacInnis: I do not rise to discuss the work of the war expenditures committee particularly. I do not think it would be wise for us to turn down the appropriation since it is for work that has already been accomplished, for expenditures that have already been incurred. For that reason I think this committee should pass this item.
As regards the work of the war expenditures committee itself, having been a member of that committee the first year it sat, 1942, I am quite convinced that it can render an important 'service. I am also of opinion that much of the reason for holding the committee meetings in camera has disappeared, and now that the war work has been got well under way there is every reason why these hearings should be held in public. There are certain matters that should not be divulged in public and they could be discussed in camera. It has been said that possibly one reason why the meetings were held as they were was that we could get more information from subordinates in departments. There is a way in which that can be remedied. A man coming before the committee can be sworn- I do not know whether that is done-and when he gives evidence he will give evidence of that which he knows, and does not hold anything back. I pass that on to the members of the committee as my own opinion. I do not think we should hold up the item.
Amendment negatived: Yeas 12; nays 73.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
far. Printing of parliament, including salaries of staff of the joint distribution office-further amount required, $15,000.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: There is a standing committee on printing which sits for about fifteen minutes each session. It never discusses any printing of the house except sessional papers, to ascertain whether they shall be printed or not. In my opinion the committee should have some say as to what is printed. Members always see copies of divorce bills, but I do not think there are more than five or ten members who read them at all. It is an absolute waste. It should be done away with, or members should be asked whether they want them or not.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-War Services
DEPARTMENT OP NATIONAL REVENUE Income tax divisiontiSS. District offices-further amount required, $138,500.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Will the Minister of National Revenue consider putting in a branch office in Peterborough, and perhaps in other places as well? Other members may want offices in their ridings, but we have a large industrial city, and with income tax papers as they are at present, though the forms are supposed to be very simple, I believe that even some of the income tax officers would find it difficult to make up some of them.


Hon. C. W. G. GIBSON (Minister of National Revenue):: The matter will, of
course, receive consideration, but at the present time the difficulty of securing qualified accountants militates against opening up new offices. It would be difficult to get sufficient qualified staffs to man any more offices than we have at present. It is quite difficult to keep up the staffs in the offices we already have.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I made a suggestion to the Minister of Munitions and Supply with regard to muntions plants in places where that department has offices of its own. I suggested that those offices have men there to look after the income tax forms of workers in the plants. The workers in the plant at Peterborough have to make out their forms and then buy money orders and send them to Belleville along with their income tax forms. That puts a double tax on the wage-earner.


Mr. BURTON:: The sum of $138,500 seems a rather large amount for a supplementary vote. Would the minister be good enough to explain how it comes about that he was not able to make a closer estimate?


Colin William George Gibson: The increase has occurred
chiefly through the greatly increased number of taxpayers and the new method of collecting the tax. Postage alone amounts to $100,000 to take care of a very large number of additional returns that are being filed, which are collected by the district offices and sent to the head office. That is the largest item of the total amount. Travelling expenses amount to $22,000, and that again is occasioned by the increased number of taxpayers, which has caused higher travelling expenses.


Ernest George Hansell: This is a tremendous
amount, which appears to be an expansion of the income tax division. I would suggest that one thing that would be acceptable to perhaps 100 per cent of the people of Canada would be that the income tax division be done away with altogether.


Mr. TUSTIN:: The minister said that there was a great shortage of chartered accountants. What would be the percentage of accountants in each district office?


Colin William George Gibson: It varies with the size of the office. Some offices have a larger number of accountants, while in smaller offices we probably have only one or two.


George James Tustin: How often are the district
income tax inspectors called to Ottawa to be given instructions or to get an interpretation of the income tax law? Are they all called at certain times? I ask this question because it seems to me that in some of these offices there are no two employees who can figure an account exactly the same. I suggest, therefore, that the income tax inspectors should be brought in to what one might call a school, at least once a year, and given instructions which they could impart to the employees.


Colin William George Gibson: That has been done. They were all in during the past year. In addition, we have three regional inspectors for central, western and eastern Canada who visit the local offices.


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

[Stage Direction]
4S4. National film board, including the motion picture bureau-further	amount required,
Agar Rodney Adamson: For some time there has been a growing feeling that the work of the national film board has been devoted to a type of propaganda far beyond and in. excess of the reasons which brought about the creation of that board in the first instance. There has been a growing suspicion that the film board has become a propagandist for a type of socialist and foreign philosophy; heretofore it was merely an instrument of propaganda for the government. It is still an instrument of propaganda for the government, but it has become an instrument for the spreading of propaganda which is foreign to our Canadian way of life, and in a moment I shall show the minister what I mean.
I should like to point out why I regard this matter so seriously. The film has come to be the supreme vehicle of propaganda to-day. It takes precedence over the written word in the newspaper and the spoken word
Supply-War Services

on the radio. Not only does it combine the written word with visual action; it takes in also the spoken word, and it does all this in surroundings which lull the subject into a sense of confident security, and put him into a receptive frame of mind. The Wallman theory shows a direct ratio between the efficiency of the newspaper, the radio and the film; and I feel safe in predicting that, as time goes on, the newspapers of the country will have reason to appreciate fully the seriousness of what is happening. This is a most sinister situation, because they get the adolescent mind in a receptive mood, in comfortable surroundings, and spray it with an anaesthesia of propaganda which in most cases it is not capable of resisting. The function of the film board in England has been merely to assist the government and to explain various government policies. It has done excellent instructional work concerning rationing, health measures, security regulations and other matters. No doubt our film board has done similar work, but the Canadian board has stepped out of character and undertaken to promote a philosophy foreign to the Canadian philosophy.
Before continuing with this discussion, I should like to quote from an article written by one who is considered perhaps the best moving picture critic in the city of New York, appearing in this week's issue of the New Yorker and dealing with documentary films. The first part of the article deals with "Desert Victory," and the new picture, "Tunisian Victory," and then goes on with this interesting paragraph, which I shall read to the committee because I think hon. members will be interested:
Speaking of documentaries, the latest "World in Action" short is Russia's foreign policy, the strongest statement of the Russian point of view that has come from any place but the U.S.S.R. It maintains-and it will take no back-chat- that the Comintern was a protective measure, as was the German-Soviet pact, and that Russia is a youthful, zestful, oppression-hating state with a spirit that should be shared by the rest of the world. The film is typical of the "World in Action" series in its smoothness and economy 3f expression. Every foot of the film makes a point, and the editing of dozens of library shots 

news reels and Russian movies of all ages- has been canny. Russia's foreign policy toward the national film board of Canada, which makes this series, should be fairly amiable.
This publication certainly has no political animus; this is merely a factual criticism of this series, which is put out by the national film board. Perhaps the more that is known about Russia, the better; and from time to time I have advocated that a chair of Russian studies might be inaugurated at one of our universities, because this is an interesting and

veiy important social experiment. My objection is that we have a national instrument of government that is obviously putting out soviet propaganda. I feel strongly that it is not the duty of any vehicle of government to put out propaganda concerning any foreign country. The film board should be a Canadian film board and it should put out Canadian propaganda. If we have anything to sell, it is ourselves. The whole trend of this propaganda is dangerous because it is not delivered solely to adult minds. I would suggest to the minister that very careful investigation be made into the operation of this board. This is not the first time that this question has been brought up. There was another film put out called "Our Native Land". It was released by a French motion picture company in New York and released in Canada by the film! society. Paul Robeson took a prominent and leading part in that film. There is nothing wrong with the showing of a film on Soviet Russia or even showing films on anybody else's philosophy; in fact the more accurate information we can get, the better; but my objection is that it is not the function of a government-controlled operation to undertake this work, which is being done, according to the information I have.
Hon. L. R. LaFLECHE (Minister of National War Services): Would the hon. member for York West be kind enough to give me the name of the picture which has offended him? If he does so, I assure him that I shall see the film and, if necessary, will have other gentlemen see it, so that I also may have an appreciation of its value or otherwise.
I think it must be granted by all concerned that one cannot go to a radio producer and say, "I want the equivalent of a tailored suit of clothes." Necessarily a great deal must be left to the man who writes the script. The same thing applies to the production of the film. I agree that one philosophy should be followed by the national film board, namely, Canadian. May I say that if we are strong Canadians we, at least the adults, shall be strong enough to see some of the things that are going on in other parts of the world. I am sure my hon. friend agrees with me there. I come back to my original question. I ask him to be good enough to give me the names of the films and I shall have a look at them.


Agar Rodney Adamson: "Our Native Land" is one of them and "World in Action" is the other. I agree with the minister that we should have information concerning other lands, but I disagree with him that it is the function of a department of this government to do that.

Supply-War Services
work. That is my objection. I have no objection to communist propaganda. It is an interesting subject and we should know more about it. No matter what the foreign philosophy is, we should study it; but my objection is that it is not the function of this government or any other Canadian government to undertake that task.
Mr. LaFLECHE: I shall look into the matter and give it very careful consideration.


Mr. GILLIS:: I did not intend to say anything on this matter, but the remarks of the hon. member for York West have placed most of us in the position where we should say something.
Since the present session of parliament opened, the national film board has made it possible for hon. members to assemble every Tuesday in a room in this building to get some knowledge of the work they are doing. Personally I am very well pleased with the contribution that the national film board is making toward clarifying the minds of the Canadian people with respect to what is going on in the Soviet Union. I do not agree with the statement that was made by the hon. member for York West. He said it was not the duty of a department of government to take the responsibility of clarifying the minds of the Canadian people, poisoned over a number of years, with respect to what was going on in Russia. It definitely is the government's responsibility. If it is not, whose responsibility is it? Does the hon. member for York West want to place the education of the Canadian people with regard to the affairs of one of our most important allies at this time back in the hands of those who carried on that education for the past twenty-five years? If he does, I think he is going too far. I believe that the Canadian government should have interested itself in this question many years ago. Members of this House of Commons are under a debt of gratitude to those who are conducting the operations of the national film board. They are making one of the most important educational contributions to the Canadian people (hat could be made at this time. It is definitely the responsibility of the Canadian government to place every facility necessary and available at their disposal in order that they may do that job fairly and impartially.
If the economy of our country and the philosophy behind it is correct; if there is nothing wrong with it; if we have nothing to fear in comparison with any other country, the national film board are telling the truth in their films. They are showing the situation
as it actually exists. I have sufficient confidence in the judgment and the intelligence of the Canadian people to believe that, regardless of anything they may see or hear with respect to the organization of this country in the future, they will do their job in their own way. I definitely deprecate the remarks made by the hon. member for York West. I consider it is an insult to the intelligence of the Canadian people.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: I suggested last year and the year before and I would suggest again that the film board should take pictures of perhaps the most beautiful scenery in Canada, Kakabeka falls with a 90-foot head, lough Lomond, Mirady park and mount McKay, which would show well all over Canada. It would not only advertise the head of the lakes but all of Canada.


Gordon Graydon: Would you have the hon. member's picture with it?


Mr. ROSE:: I have thought it my business to go down on Tuesday and Thursday nights to see some of the pictures. They were fine pictures. I have read reviews in the United States papers about different pictures and they offer high praise for the films put out by the national film board. However, I am surprised when I find people attacking a picture about the Soviet Union, an ally that is doing so much fighting, an ally for whom we have a lot of admiration, but an ally for whom some people have nothing but a good word now and then, and no more. They will not let the people find out anything about that country. A continuation of this policy will lead to catastrophe. We should fight it every time we see any signs of it coming back to life.
I visited the Soviet Union in 1930 and I was in Stalingrad when the great tractor plant there first started producing. Lately I saw a film which showed that there was nothing left of the Stalingrad plant. The people of Russia have paid with their plant and with their blood. When I came back to this country in December, 1930, and told people what I had seen they said, "You have been looking through rose-coloured glasses; you saw what you wanted to see." A few weeks after that the Bennett government put on an embargo against products from the Soviet Union. This was sheer stupidity because we were importing very few commodities from the Soviet Union. Canada produces about ninety per cent of the world's asbestos, and shortly after that time I visited the asbestos producing area and was told by the people there that this action had been taken because
Supply-War Services

Russia was dumping asbestos in Canada. This was because of the lies spread about that country. To-day some people still try to slander the soviet people. This sort of action comes from the hon. members to my right. It appears that the spirit of Bennett is prevalent in their ranks.


Ernest George Hansell: I was not in the house when the hon. member for York West (Mr. Adamson) was speaking, but apparently he referred to certain films which have been shown lately and which depict life in the Soviet Union during these war days. I have no objection to seeing a good show or a good war picture, whether it shows activities in Russia, Italy, North Africa or any other country. In motion pictures we have a most powerful medium of propaganda and I think we should try to arrive at a proper balance in the pictures shown. Recently I saw a picture; I believe its title was "Russia at War", and I must confess that I was tremendously impressed with the fortitude of the Russian people. It was a most powerful picture, and it was powerful propaganda. All pictures of that type are propaganda, whether they are meant to be or not.
As I saw that picture I asked myself, how many pictures showing Canada's war effort or pictures showing the war efforts of Great Britain and the United States are being shown in the theatres of the Soviet Union? We have produced some good pictures of our own war effort. Not many months ago a picture was shown entitled "London Can Take It", showing London after the terrible bombardment of the blitz. Pictures of that kind should be shown in other countries, including the Soviet Union.
I ask the minister, how many pictures produced in Canada-I do not confine my question to the "Canada Carries On" series, although that should be included-have been exported to be shown in other countries, and in what countries have they been shown? If the minister cannot give the information tonight, perhaps he will furnish it at some other time.
Mr. LaFLECHE: I am sorry I cannot tell the hon. member for Macleod the number of Canadian pictures that have been exported. Many have been exported, especially to the United States. Canadian pictures go to the British isles and to the British dominions. Our trade commissioners and diplomatic corps see to the distribution of Canadian pictures. There have been some inquiries about, if not orders for, Canadian pictures for Russia. I regret I have not the figures this evening, but if they are required I shall be glad to make them known later on.
[Mr Hose.]


Ernest George Hansell: A moment ago I said that motion pictures constituted a most powerful medium of propaganda. What I am going to say now is not said in any sense of harsh criticism of the government. At the present time the government is in a rather preferred position with respect to propaganda. Any picture that portrays Canadian war industry has a psychological effect upon the people. They are inclined to think what a good government they have.


Gordon Graydon: They would not take on a big task like that, would they?


Ernest George Hansell: I do not mean this as harsh criticism because I suppose it is quite natural. I imagine any government in power would make use of such a department to propagandize its own work.


An hon. MEMBER:: They would not do that.


Ernest George Hansell: I would not say that. For instance, we see a picture of a factory going at full blast; perhaps the factory is just being officially opened, and on the screen we see the smiling countenance of the Minister of Munitions and Supply (Mr. Howe) who makes a speech into the microphone. Whether we like it or not, there is a psychological reaction in favour of the present government. Of course, it would depend upon whose face is shown on the screen, because it could work the other way. I would suggest that in any pictures which the national film board may take in future of the various political groups in Canada, it be fair to all groups. I could illustrate what I mean, but I shall not take the time to do so now.
I think we are all interested in our Canadian institutions, and one of our Canadian institutions is the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. I visited Toronto a few weeks ago and met some of the officials, the men who are in harness operating the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's programmes. I must confess that the C.B.C. was sold to me, and I determined that I was going out to try to sell the C.B.C. to the country, provided that it does not make any mistakes to cause me to do the very opposite. I suggest that the national film board could do something to put over the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in Canada. A film showing some of the equipment used, for instance, or the way in which electrical equipment is worked would be interesting. That is one way in which they could be of service to the Canadian people.


Gordon Graydon: If they could get a picture of the general manager, that would help, too.

Supply-War Services


Ernest George Hansell: We might have that picture one of these days. I understand that the national film board or some department of government assigns somebody to travel and show these motion pictures. I do not know what pictures they show, but I would make this observation and give this warning that if we are not very careful, the circuits can become propaganda media for the government that is in office. With that observation I would ask the minister how many of these circuits there are in Canada and what type of film is shown by the men who are employed going around the circuits.
Mr. LaELECHE: I presume it is rural circuits the hon. member has in mind. There are over sixty of them. My hon. friend need not fear that these circuits will be used for government propaganda. The pictures are chosen to meet the wishes of the local audience, scenes that will interest them. If there were anything of that nature to fear, I think the national film board had better be afraid of the possibility of using the circuits for propaganda purposes. But I do not like to have the feeling that it is necessary always to be fearing this or that. We are dealing with Canadians who are capable of thinking and dealing with matters for themselves, and they certainly warrant our having confidence in them just as we hope they will have confidence in us in this House of Commons.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Did the
minister never hear of the power of suggestion and of psychology?
Mr. LaFLECHE: Yes, I have.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is a
very important factor.


George Hugh Castleden: As an influence in
education in Canada the national film board stands very high, and its vast possibilities are just beginning to be realized. I [DOT] think Canada has been fortunate in having Mr. Grierson to lead in the growth of that organization. He appears to have imagination, ability and a knowledge of his work. It is most important, it seems to me, since these films are such an influence in our Canadian life, that they should at all times portray the truth. The trouble in the past with so much of our education in Canada by way of the press, particularly with regard to such things as the story of what was happening in Russia, is that it has not, I am afraid, been based on the truth, and we have later found out to our sorrow that the Canadian people were being fooled. I had hoped that the minister, when he replied this afternoon to
the hon. member for York West, would have given the assurance to the committee that the films used in this country by the national film board have been based on the very latest facts that it is possible to obtain. If that is the case, we need have no fear of the consequences. Canada is fortunate if she can present the truth in this fashion at a time when the world is influenced so much by propaganda.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The hon. member for
Cape Breton South and the hon. member for Cartier have misinterpreted my remarks as being a criticism of the Soviet Union. They certainly were not so intended. I was the first member of this house to advocate the official recognition of the Soviet Union by the Dominion of Canada. My reason for bringing the matter to the attention of the minister was this. I still do not think it is the duty of a government body to put out films concerning the foreign policy of any country. We have seen magnificent Russian films, the story of Stalingrad, the story of the Red Army, the navy film-"The Red Poppy" I think it is called-excellent documentary Russian films, but still I do not think it is our business to portray the way of life of the Russians or the French or the Americans or any other	nation. It	is	up	tothem to tell their own	story, and	it	is	up
to us to tell ours. That is the reason why I brought the matter to the attention of the minister.
Mr. LaFLECHE: May I assure my hon. friend that that is what I am going	to	study.I will see the picture	and look	into	the
matter. May I remind hon. gentlemen that twice a week the national film board comes * to this house and shows pictures, so that members of parliament, of both houses, may learn what is being done by the board. May I say, in addition, that if any hon. member desires to see a particular picture which is in the library of the national film board, it will be shown here with great pleasure.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
436. Post offices, including salaries and other expenses of headquarters and staff post offices and supplies and equipment for revenue post offices-further amount required, $676,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Sometimes we criticize
the ministers, but occasionally we have an opportunity to say something in their favour. A few days ago on the train to Toronto I sat behind two gentlemen who were praising the Postmaster General very highly. I asked one
Supply-Post Office

of them if he knew the Postmaster General. He said: "Yes; I am a postmaster myself"; and the gentleman sitting beside him said the same thing. I said, "How do. you find the Postmaster General?" "Well," he said, "he has been a great help to us." I made up my mind that on the first occasion I would bring that tribute publicly to the Postmaster General. In doing so, I hope he will not compare me with a Greek bearing gifts if I ask a favour for the Toronto "posties." The minister knows well the situation in Toronto, and he will agree that there is no part of the public service which does a better and more onerous job, and whose members are more faithful, than the postmen not only of Toronto, but of all the great cities. The burdens they carry are terrific, particularly around Christmas time. I have attended a number of their meetings and heard them tell of their remuneration, which is so small that I could hardly believe it. All I have to ask the minister, and that as a favour not to myself but to a large body of faithful government employees who richly deserve much more than they get, is that between now and the bringing down of the main estimates he carefully look into and review the remuneration paid to the " posties," and if he concurs in what I have said, that he bring in supplementary estimates, if sufficient is not provided in the main estimates, to give fitting and fair remuneration to the postal service of Canada.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I brought this matter to the attention of the house on February 3. The wages paid to postmen are out of line with those received by all other public servants in our city, particularly firemen and policemen. This question has been brought to the attention of the minister for several years, but nothing has been done about it. The whole range of salaries of the postal service in Toronto is long overdue for overhaul and a change. These fellows are doing a wonderful job, especially in war time. I agree with the hon. member for Davenport that something should be done; I know he has brought this subject to the attention of the minister before now. It has always been a surprise to me that we have not been able to get some action in this matter. -


Joseph William Burton: I find myself somewhat at a loss to understand why, in an old-established department, a supplementary vote should be as large as $676,000. Would the minister care to explain it? When I turn to page 7 of the further supplementary estimates for an explanation, I find, "cost of living bonus and other pay-list items, $211,000," which is a brief
rMr. MacNirol 1
explanation; then there is, "temporary assistance" amounting to nearly half a million dollars. Is it not possible for the minister and his department to estimate their requirements a little closer, or why is so large a supplementary vote found necessary now?


William Pate Mulock: May I deal first with the question of the hon. member who last spoke? That $676,000 is divided into three items. The first one, $115,000, is for salary expenditure exclusive of increases granted under the provisions of order in council dated November 17, 1943. It is expected to be in the neighbourhood of $15,640,000, whereas the vote is only $15,524,995, leaving a shortage of $115,000. The reasons are these: first, the increase in temporary staff over and above the provision made in the main estimates, which were prepared in the fall of 1942; second, assistance required to handle the Christmas rush of work cost $470,000, whereas only $350,000 was included in the salaries in the main estimates for that purpose. The shortage cannot be adjusted by transfers from a vote on the estimates of one branch to that of another. The second item is $350,000. This is required to pay increases granted to permanent and temporary employees under the provisions of order in council P.C. 194-8855, dated November 17, 1943. This takes care of 2,089 employees, of whom 630 are permanent and 1,459 are temporary. The third item is $211,000. This is for the cost of living bonus. The The shortage in the ordinary expenditure is estimated at $188,000, owing to the fact that treasury board directed that provision in the 1943-44 main estimates be restricted to the amount payable on September 30, 1942; therefore no provision could be made for the larger staff which we thought would be needed. The additional bonus payments resulting from increases granted under order in council P.C. 194-8855 are expected to reach $23,000, making the total expected shortage of $211,000. That makes up the $676,000.


George James Tustin: When I look at this amount of $676,000, and then at the detail on page 7, I am somewhat surprised that the minister did not see to it that greater detail was given on this page. The item states, "including salaries and other expenses of headquarters and staff post offices and supplies and equipment for revenue post offices," but in the detail nothing is stated about supplies to these revenue post offices, and the item of $465,000 is stated to be for "temporary assistance". Surely a department such as the minister presides over should not have to carry

Supply-Post Office
an item of that size for temporary assistance. If it is necessary to have that amount of assistance, I suggest to the minister that they should be permanent employees.
In the next item in "details" it says, "cost of living bonus and other pay-list items". One question I wish to direct to the minister is, are the rural mail carriers included in the cost of living bonus; if not, has any increase or bonus been paid to them since the war began? Then I should like to direct to the minister a question which I believe was put to him and to this parliament by the leader of the opposition at the last session. The suggestion of my leader was that a parliamentary committee be set up to study the problems of rural mail carriers. If I remember aright, the minister at that time said that he would give consideration to the matter. Has that consideration been given; has the minister decided to set up that committee, and if not-


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why not?


George James Tustin: -what conclusion has the minister arrived at; and, as my hon. friend says, why not?


William Pate Mulock: In these further supplementary estimates there is no item for rural mail carriers, but I shall be glad to consider the question on the main estimates.


Richard Burpee Hanson: This is a post office estimate.


George James Tustin: I am asking whether a cost of living bonus is paid to rural mail carriers and, if not, why not, when other employees are paid such a bonus.


William Pate Mulock: I have certain items to deal with and I have the information regarding them, but I did not expect the hon. member would be asking questions about matters that are not included in these estimates.


George James Tustin: I am not asking about any items not included in this estimate. This speaks of a cost of living bonus, and the question is whether rural mail carriers are included in that bonus. If not, why not?


William Pate Mulock: No.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The minister complains that he should not be asked about increased compensation to rural mail carriers because it is not in this item. It is the privilege of the opposition, to inquire why not, why provision is not made for some increases for rural mail carriers. There is not a class of people in the public service of this country who are more poorly paid than the rural mail carriers. Our page boys get more money than the rural mail carriers and it is
an everlasting disgrace to the country and to the department. I know at once what the answer is, that they are not employees but contractors. That may be good enough in normal times, but with the cost of operation going as high as it is in this war, some consideration must be given to the plight of some of these people who are being held strictly to a contract. I believe that in some cases that has happened, and I suggest to the minister that the whole policy should be reviewed for the period of the war.
I am sure there is not, within the sound of my voice, a member representing a rural constituency who does not agree with the principle for which I am pleading to-night, that these people who took their contracts pre-war at low prices, in competition if you will, and who are now bound by the terms of a legal contract, should have the right to a reinvestigation and renegotiation of their contracts in the light of what they are asked to do.
I do not believe there is an employee in this house who receives a lower rate of compensation than the rural mail carriers, and it does not reflect very much credit on us, and certainly not on the department.
While I am on my feet there is another matter to which I would refer. A few weeks ago I made an inquiry of the Postmaster General with reference to the plight of certain railway mail clerks in my own province who, on what they considered the best of advice, did not elect to take advantage of the offer held out by the government twenty years ago to come in under the new scheme of the Superannuation Act, and who to-day find themselves in a precarious position with respect to their retiring allowances or whatever comes to them when they go out of office, because of reduction in the rate of interest allowed.
I am not going to go into into any further details. The minister is quite familiar with the matter, and the assistant deputy minister was good enough to explain to me the legal aspects and the effect on the men, At that time the Postmaster General indicated that it was a matter of policy for the Department of Finance. I suggest to him that he has some responsibility in trying to convince his colleague of the justice of the claim' of these men. I could put the whole matter on Hansard in detail, but I am not going to do so. The minister knows the problem to which I refer and I bespeak from him, not generosity but justice for these men, who after all are really only a small group and whose request would not represent a great charge on the public revenue. I ask for justice for them and I ask for justice for the rural mail carriers of Canada.
Supply-Post Office


William Pate Mulock: The hon. member for
York-Sunbury will be glad to know that a substantial number of contracts with rural mail carriers have been reviewed where men have written in and stated that under present conditions they were unable to carry on because of increased cost. They have been given increases. I think it is probably well known to a large number of members of the house that where a man has claimed that he is not fairly treated his contract is reviewed and in many cases an increase has been given.


George James Tustin: He was not asked to resign from his position or to give up his contract before the increase was made?


William Pate Mulock: It is given as a war bonus. It is not a permanent thing and does not affect his ordinary contract. He gets the bonus on account of war conditions.


George James Tustin: That is the question I was trying to ask the minister, if any of these men were given cost of living bonus-


William Pate Mulock: It is not a cost of living bonus.


George James Tustin: -and if not, why not? When every other employee in the government receives a cost of living bonus, why should not such a bonus be given to the rural mail carriers?


William Pate Mulock: As a matter of fact, many of these men are a great deal better off under this arrangement than they would be under the one suggested by the hon. member. The cost of living bonus would be of very little help in many of these contracts. It might be in some, but in some of the more difficult contracts it would not, where men with competitive tenders went very low in certain cases. The hon. member for York-Sunbury knows they had the same problem when he was a minister. Unfortunately, a man thinks he can make money but does not realize the expenses of carrying on, so that he undercuts somebody else, gets the contract and then finds that he is losing money. It is a very difficult matter. The government has studied it and tried to bring about an improvement, and we think the fairest way is what is being done now. We are giving what one might call a war bonus. These cases are investigated by the department and, where the claim is borne out, consideration is given. We do not want persons to be slaving and losing money on a contract. If we are to give the people of Canada good service we have to have contented employees, and as far as I am concerned I will do what I can to see that they are fairly treated and are contented.


Gordon Graydon: May I ask the minister what has happened to the suggestion I advanced last year, referred to by the hon. member for Prince Edward-Lennox, with respect to a special committee of the house in regard to the rural mail carrier problem. I make the suggestion because, whatever the palliative may be, it is a war time palliative at best, and the whole problem will be on the doorstep of the administration. It may not be on the doorstep of the administration now in office, because we have to look a little farther than that. I would like the minister to reconsider the problem in the light of present circumstances. Perhaps he would consider setting up a special committee of the house to deal with it. Surely there cannot be anything wrong with that suggestion, because after all I do not see why the minister should refuse to allow a committee of members who know a good deal about this matter to review and study the whole problem in the hope of proposing a solution satisfactory both to the treasury and to the contractors themselves.


Mr. HATFIELD:: Have any increases been given contractors unless the contracts have been renewed? The increases I have heard of have been given only where contracts have run out and have had to be renewed at higher prices. Hundreds of men took these contracts in 1941 at low rates, and they have received no increases at all.


Richard Burpee Hanson: How many rural mail contractors are there, and how many have received increases under the circumstances to which the minister has referred? The number is relatively small, I think.


William Pate Mulock: I shall be glad to get that information and give it to the committee.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What about the other request I made of the minister in regard to the railway mail clerks, who consider that they have a substantial grievance. Is the minister promoting their claim with the government, and will he continue to do so until success crowns his efforts?


Mr. McILRAITH:: Since the question of the retirement fund and the Superannuation Act has been opened up under this item, I presume we are at liberty to discuss those matters fully. I take it that the hon. member for York-Sunbury has in mind the right of the railway mail clerks, who are contributing under the old retirement fund, to re-elect for the right to come under the Superannuation Act of 1924.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is it exactly.


George James McIlraith: If that is the question it is most interesting. I had hardly expected that a discussion of it would have been permitted under this item.


James Joseph McCann: The hon. gentleman is out of order in discussing superannuation under this item. I might have called the attention of previous speakers to the fact that they were also out of order in discussing rural mail contracts, but having failed to do so is no reason for letting this go further. A discussion of superannuation does not come within this item.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am
obliged to the Chairman for his forbearance.


George James McIlraith: I merely wanted to discuss the exact point raised by the hon. member for York-Sunbury, Mr. Chairman. Do I interpret your ruling to mean that I am not entitled to pursue that subject farther?


James Joseph McCann: It is out of order.


Mr. NEILL:: May we proceed with the debate in connection with the rural mail carriers?


James Joseph McCann: No; it is out of order.


Alan Webster Neill: I put it to the committee if I am not as much entitled to speak on this matter as were hon. gentlemen who preceded me. I think some hon. gentlemen to my left do not thoroughly grasp the situation, nor do I think the minister was quite as frank as he might have been in describing it. Most of us will remember that last session the minister announced, much to our gratification, that certain orders in council had been passed dealing with this situation. He took credit to himself and to the government, quite naturally, for his generosity in dealing with the matter, as a result of which the lot of these men would be improved. But he was not quite so altruistic in his actions as it might appear. The real reason why increases were given-and they were given, or at least arrangements were made for some increases- was that the government found they would save money by doing so. The.cost of living, and expenses in connection with running a car, have increased so enormously that men were throwing up their contracts. Perhaps they would come to the government and say, "We cannot carry on like this", but the government would reply, "Well, we have two sureties." Often, one of them might be a parson, who would not know anything about running a rural route; but the government would add, "We will hold you to it". A great many of the rural carriers quit, and then
Supply-Post Office
the government had to put up the routes at public auction. As a result they had to pay much larger sums than they had been paying previously. Therefore they said, "We do not want to do this. If a route is put up at auction we will have to let it for four years at a high rate, so that perhaps we had better compromise". Accordingly they made inquiries and found that many of the rural carriers, who always take their contracts at less than they should, were willing to compromise. They said, "If you will give us a little extra money while the war is on, to meet the extra cost, we will not mind going back to the original lower rate at the end of the war". That seemed reasonable, and orders in council were passed providing that some official of the Post Office Department should consider the situation and, where it was found that the rural carrier was doing the work for a price at which he could not really work, with the increased cost of living, then he would be given more money for the duration of the war, with the understanding that after the war was over he would have to go back to the lower rate.
This satisfied the government, because as a result they had to pay the extra money only during the war and were not saddled with a four-year contract. It satisfied the rural carrier, because he had been willing to carry on the work at a low rate previously, and when costs went down he would be willing to continue at that low rate again. That would have been satisfactory if the arrangement had been carried out in the right spirit, but that was not done. The hon. member for York-Sunbury wanted to know how many rural mail carriers there are. I think the number is around thirteen thousand. We know that the price of a rural route is decided by public competition; the public decides what it is worth. It may be a little higher in this part of the country and a little lower in another part, but it is worth whatever the public says it is worth, at a very low estimate. It is always taken at below a reasonable price. I said to one man, "Instead of being helped, you should be ashamed for taking the contract at such a low rate". He replied, "Well, I had a Ford car and a bit of a pension, and I thought it would work out all right". He is not paid a pension in order to permit him to operate a rural mail route at less than its value.
To my mind it would have been a reasonable thing-and I spent most of last fall arguing this matter-for the government to take the prices which the public had made these routes worth. Then they would have had a guarantee that the price in future would be in proportion to what the public had said
Supply-Post Office

it should be originally, whether that price was fifteen, cents a mile in one place or twenty cents in another. Then I suggest the fair way would have been to say, "Well, we will raise all of you five or ten or whatever percentage is thought reasonable." That was not done. The matter was put into the hands of one official, probably a very fine official. I know him personally, and I am glad to say that I think he is my friend, but he had not been over all these routes. As far as my district is concerned, I have been over every rural mail route in it. This official went to work and said to one man, "You are getting fourteen cents a mile now and you want eighteen cents. Well, you will not get it; I think fourteen cents is enough." Then he would buttress his case by saying, "The man next to you is getting fourteen cents, and so is a man somewhere else," but as far as I could ascertain it was not worked out by any definite process of arithmetic. I know of one case where two rural routes ran out of one small village. One man was given an increase of seventy-two or seventy-four per cent, while the man operating the route which ran in the other direction was refused any increase at all, though his rate was lower than that of the first man. That was the sort of thing that caused all the trouble; instead of giving satisfaction it created a great deal of dissatisfaction. Most of the carriers put in for increases; those who did not get them, but saw others getting them, of course became dissatisfied. I think it would have worked all right if the government had said, "The public have beaten down the prices; this is what the public think these routes are worth, and we will give you an increase of ten per cent," or whatever increase was thought sufficient.
An hon. member to my left asked how many rural routes there were and how many carriers had been given increases. If you went into that aspect of the question you would get into a lot of trouble, because it would require an enormous amount of labour and then you would reveal percentages, which would not be very satisfactory.
If the order in council is to be believed, it was the intention of the government to relieve these men. The men would have been relieved. They would have got something to keep them going through these expensive times. The government would have been better off because, when the men threw it up, the contract had to be let at public tender; the government paid a great deal- more, and then it was let for four years, whereas now it runs for only a year and a half or until the end of the war. That is the situation as I know it.


Mr. NOSEWORTHY:: Since this debate has gone into the question of rural mail carriers perhaps I-


James Joseph McCann: The debate will not go farther along the line of rural routes. I would ask the cooperation of the committee in obeying the rule with reference to debate, that the discussion must be relevant to the item under review. I think the committee will agree that quite enough latitude has been allowed and that if we propose to pass these estimates, the discussion will have to be confined to the matter under review.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I agree with the fairness of the ruling at the beginning of the debate, but Mr. Chairman, I should like permission to ask the minister a couple of questions. Has any consideration been given to representations made by the rural mail carriers' association?
The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. McCann); I have already declared that that discussion is out of order.


Clarence Gillis: An hon. member has just spoken for twenty minutes on that subject.


Mr. BREITHAUPT:: I should like to ask a question which I think is in order. I believe it has some urgency. I understand that the mails have been used for chain letters to further the sale of war savings stamps and certificates. I believe the people sending those letters are acting in what they think is the best of faith, but I would ask the Postmaster General-by the way, it has been outlined in the Kitchener Daily Record-if this procedure has the approval of the Post Office Department.


William Pate Mulock: It has not.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why not?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
HI. Printing and binding official publications for sale and distribution to departments and public-further amount required, $18,000.
George James Tustin: What is meant by "printing and binding official publications"? Why is another $18,000 required?


Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Secretary of State):: This is a matter where it is most difficult, if not impossible, to estimate at the time the general estimates are passed the demand which there will be for the official documents printed; consequently, this being pretty well a selfsustaining item, it is thought better to make

Supply-Public Works
the closest possible estimate and to include in the supplementary estimates any deficit which may have to be made up.


George James Tustin: Then there is some return from this item?
Mr. "McLARTY: Undoubtedly. I cannot give the exact figure, but it is not a matter where the documents are printed and distributed without some remuneration to the printing bureau.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Chief architect's branch-
442.	Ottawa-Garage, carpenter's shop, etc., for the printing bureau, $24,000.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Is this the new garage?


Alphonse Fournier: It is for replacing the old shop which was demolished on Sussex street to make room for the women's hostel. We have built the new shop behind the printing bureau.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Chief engineer's branch-
443.	Esquimalt graving dock-further amount required, $19,200.
Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: Would the minister tell us where the department draws the line in these appropriations? Would he tell us where the payments are made out of ordinary account and where they are paid out of war expenditure appropriation?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. When we made out the estimates last year we asked for $84,280. During the year more warships and vessels were brought into the dock to be repaired, and we had a further expenditure of $12,500 for electric power and $6,700 for materials and repairs. The money was allotted from the war appropriation, on condition that we come back to the house for this further supplementary estimate.


Percy Chapman Black: I do not understand why this comes out of the ordinary expenditures for which the Department of Public Works is responsible, while like expenditures are made out of the war expenditures appropriation. I know there are expenditures made under the war expenditures appropriation which have less to do with the prosecution of the war than this estimate has, according to the explanation given to us by the minister.


Alphonse Fournier: This dry dock is of a permanent nature. Before the war we
had this dock which came under the public works department. We had our estimate every year. The dock is now used for war purposes and ordinary purposes. That is the explanation I give for having it in the civil estimates. However, when we needed the money it was allotted to us from the war appropriation. During the year this dock brings in revenue. Speaking from memory, during peace years I think it had a revenue of from $30,000 to $39,000. In 1942-43 I believe the revenue was $96,225 and in the preceding year, around $100,279. All our expenditures for maintenance are covered by the revenue that we receive.


Percy Chapman Black: This is the regular standard that designates under which expenditure the money is voted. That applies not only to this case but to all like cases in the department and under the defence minister and the war expenditures appropriation?


Alphonse Fournier: No. The public works department has its ordinary estimates amounting to some $13,000,000. Then it has estimates under the war appropriation. The department acts as a service department for the other departments on construction and so forth. The work is divided into three phases: ordinary work, war work and work for other departments.


Percy Chapman Black: As I understand the minister, every expenditure made for improvement or repairs to a public work that has a peace-time value or service to perform is paid directly by his department.


Alphonse Fournier: Expenditures not made exclusively for war services or war work come under the ordinary estimates.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Is this work done by contract?


Alphonse Fournier: For the dry dock?


Richard Burpee Hanson: Excuse
me, I thought we were on another item.


Alphonse Fournier: All the work was done by contract.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
444.	Commercial intelligence service-further amount required, $50,000.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Is
this item to take care of the new places that have been opened up in South America and Central America?
Supply-Trade and Commerce


James Angus MacKinnon: There is an amount of $19,000 for temporary assistance. That is to cover officers who have been on active service but who have returned to the department; trade commissioners and assistant trade commissioners who have been sent to offices already opened, and personnel of new offices.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: How does the $8,000 for cost-of-living bonus come in?


James Angus MacKinnon: That is to cover the amounts paid to trade commissioners and assistant trade commissioners who are located in countries where the cost of living has risen.


Charles Edward Johnston: On what is the increased cost based?


James Angus MacKinnon: We receive representations from the particular office in connection with wages paid by offices maintained by other countries, and we also receive particulars of the cost of living.


Charles Edward Johnston: They make their own representations about the increased cost of living and you accept it?


James Angus MacKinnon: We would take that into account when considering wages paid to other representatives working along the same lines in the same country.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What is
the total under the five headings?


James Angus MacKinnon: 


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is the further amount required. There is an amount of $10,000 for travel and removal. What was the vote in the main estimates, and what is the total amount of this item? What travel and removal has there been to occasion an expenditure of $10,000? I thought most of these men were back home.


James Angus MacKinnon: I
have not the figures for the total departmental estimates for travel and removal, but they are quite large. This particular item is caused largely by increased travelling by trade commissioners in making preparations for the post-war period.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Missionary work for the post-war period?


James Angus MacKinnon: That is the item of $10,000.


Richard Burpee Hanson: In the
main estimates this year you are asking for $8,120,786 for the department, but I wish to know how much is proposed to be voted for this particular item and how much was voted

last year. What I am trying to get at is how much money was spent on travel. Unless the minister watches this item it may increase considerably. Instead of these men taking a hotel suite, perhaps they should take an ordinary room like other travellers. I am not finding fault with the men because as a rule they are good men, but travel runs into a great deal of money and I think the minister should give us a little more detail in connection with this service.


James Angus MacKinnon: I agree with the remarks of the hon. member for York-Sunbury. This is one of the items that impressed itself on my mind when I was dealing with the ordinary running expenses of the Department of Trade and Commerce. It seems that there has to be a certain amount of going about a country or from one country to another, and these expenses, particularly at this time, have been quite heavy. However, they have been carefully scrutinized, and the remarks just made are quite proper. I have not the total travelling cost for the year, but when the main estimates are before the committee that information can be given.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mail subsidies and steamships subventions.
Eastern local services-
*445. Murray Bay and north shore, winter service between-further amount required, $10,000.
Heber Harold Hatfield: What is this Murray Bay service?


James Angus MacKinnon: It is the Murray Bay-north shore winter service.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Mail subvention?


James Angus MacKinnon: Mail subvention.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Is that by plane?


James Angus MacKinnon: No; by ship. This service has been operated by the Bras d'Or Bay Navigation Company Limited of Quebec, each winter since the winter of 1930-31, at a subsidy of $40,000 for the winter period of four months. This service is essential to the welfare of the inhabitants of the coast, extending a distance of over 400 miles east of Murray Bay. Calls are made at nearly twenty ports under severe winter ice conditions, which frequently result in damage to the vessel.
The service has been operated at a loss since the beginning of the war, operating

Supply-Canada Grain Act
costs having increased, while the regulations of the wartime prices and trade board prevent the contractors from making any increase in their passenger and freight rates.


Richard Burpee Hanson: This is a war casualty and you are helping him out?


James Angus MacKinnon: Exactly.
Canada Grain Act-
446. Operation and maintenance, including inspection, weighing, registration, et cetera- further amount required, $90,585.


Mr. PEREEY:: The details of this item appear on page 8 of the further supplementary estimates, and one item covers the cost of living bonus. We have an item of $118,000 in the main estimates for the cost of living bonus, and here we have another 89,000. There is also 819,000 for temporary assistance, and there is 85,000 for travelling expenses. I should like to have some explanation of these four items. Why should the amount for the cost of living bonus be so great when
8118,000	is provided in the main estimates for the same purpose?


James Angus MacKinnon: I was not quite able to follow the questions asked by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle, but he did refer to the extra amount for cost of living bonus. That is in connection with additional temporary employees, whose services were necessitated by the exceptionally heavy movement of grain from the head of the lakes by rail and lake. As a matter of fact, practically all these increased expenditures are necessitated by the heavy movement of grain to Fort William and Port Arthur during the 1943 season of navigation, the second largest movement on record. This exceptionally heavy movement was not anticipated when the estimates for the current fiscal year were submitted. The total lake shipments for the season were 344 million bushels as compared with 211 million bushels in the previous season. Increased shipments to eastern Canada were also made by rail. This increased activity is reflected in the revenue of the board, the total of which for the first nine months of the current fiscal year is 81,304,977.43, or an increase of $418,983.06 over the same period in the previous fiscal year. All this increased work has necessitated increased expenditures.
As to the item of 85,000 for travelling expenses, war conditions have necessitated the temporary transfer of employees for longer periods on account of changes in the routing of the grain. Congestion in storage
necessitates more supervision, and audits of stocks in eastern elevators have necessitated increased travelling expenses for this year.


Ernest Edward Perley: The minister emphasizes the increase for temporary assistance. I cannot see the force of his argument, because there have been many years in which the movement of grain has been practically as heavy as this last year. It is based on the amount of the crop harvested, and large stocks of coarse grains were marketed this year. I would not think there would be very much more work involved than usual. The work is principally issuing licences and regulating the marketing of the grain, and that has not much to do with travelling expenses. A considerable amount, over 875,000 of this 890,000, is for temporary assistance.
Since there will not be another opportunity until after the Easter recess, I would ask the minister to make a statement now with respect to the auditing of accounts. Is the auditing done by an official duly appointed by his department? Is it the same auditor who audits the books of the wheat board? The minister has promised a statement with respect to that, and this might be a good time to give it.
I also asked one or two other questions which I was not allowed to put on the orders of the day because they were declared out of order, and they were not allowed to go on the order paper. Perhaps the minister would make a statement now.


James Angus MacKinnon: I did not anticipate being asked about the auditors on this item and have not that information before me, but I will get it and give it to my hon. friend later.


Ernest Edward Perley: That is an interesting statement from the minister who is carrying on a department, that he does not know who the auditors are.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am a little surprised at the hon. member. I do not consider it necessary for him to take that attitude at all.


Ernest Edward Perley: I was a little surprised at the minister's answer, that he did not know who the auditors were.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury:) Is there a firm of chartered accountants making the audit? I presume there is an audit made?


James Angus MacKinnon: Most certainly.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is a long time since I was in charge of the department and I do not expect to be back there again,
Supply-Canada Grain Act

so that I may be pardoned if the matter has slipped my memory. I do not know whether a firm of chartered accountants makes the audit or whether it is done by the auditor general's department.


James Angus MacKinnon: A firm of chartered accountants, I believe.


Richard Burpee Hanson: A reputable firm I presume?


James Angus MacKinnon: Certainly.	*


Ernest Edward Perley: The minister must have accepted a recommendation for their appointment.


James Angus MacKinnon: It is the same firm of auditors who have been actively engaged at that work since I came into the department.


Joseph William Burton: Thousands and thousands of farmers in the west and ini other parts of Canada are producing grain, and I suggest that the information given here is meagre when we take into consideration that the returns from our labours are practically decided by men in the employ of this department. Under the item for the Canada Grain Act, there is an amount of $90,000 for operation and maintenance, including inspection, weighing, registration, et cetera. That covers a very large field, and the details on page 8 after further supplementary estimates are meagre. Then there is an item of over $75,000 for .emporary assistance, and $8,000 for cost of iving bonus, and other items such as office [DOT]ents, travel and removal. Does the inspection )f quota books come under this item?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.


Joseph William Burton: Then we can let that go for the time being. The item of $75,000 for temporary assistance seems large. Is no provision made for employing seasonal help, so that the department has all at once to go out and get help where it can be found? There is a considerable amount of grain to handle at all seasons of the year. Do those who are giving temporary assistance receive the cost of living bonus?


James Angus MacKinnon: The hon. member will have an opportunity to get information on a number of points he has raised, some of which have to do with the operations of the Canadian wheat board and some with the board of grain commissioners, when the main estimates of the department are up for consideration. This is a relatively small extra amount that is required at this time which was not provided for when the

estimates for this year were being prepared. As the hon. member knows, there were some difficult problems to deal with in handling the western grain crop this year, and the expenses were considerably higher than it was anticipated. This item is to take care of unforeseen expenses.


Joseph William Burton: Are the temporary employees given the cost of living bonus?


James Angus MacKinnon: The
new employees.


Charles Edward Johnston: There is an item for $5,000 for travelling expenses. How is that amount made up? What is the scale of travelling expenses?


James Angus MacKinnon: These people are required to submit details of their travelling expenses.


Charles Edward Johnston: How much do you allow them, for instance, for car expenses per mile?


James Angus MacKinnon: I do not think it is that kind of travelling, but it may be in this particular case, if this has to do with the board of grain commissioners.


Charles Edward Johnston: This in-eludes, I think, inspectors carrying on registrations and so on. I imagine it has to do with inspectors travelling from one place to the other, and they would be allowed so much per mile if they owned their own ears, or be subject to some other arrangement if they did not.


James Angus MacKinnon: I have not that information before me, but there will be an opportunity for me to give the hon. member the facts on the main estimates.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Does the department provide government cars for these inspectors? I know that was a vexed question ten years ago. Every man wanted to have his own car and be paid for it. I came to the conclusion that sooner or later the inspector would own the car and the government would pay for it. I did not think that was very good policy, but I know the problem is a difficult one. What is the policy at the present time? Does the department encourage employees to use their own cars; does the government provide cars; does it hire cars, or what does it do?


James Angus MacKinnon: Speaking from memory, I think cars are handled in different ways, but the policy of the department has been to encourage a man to own his own car, the department to pay

Supply-Transport
him a per mile rate. I shall, however, be glad to take note of the hon. member's question and give him full information later.


Richard Burpee Hanson: The
minister is not able to state to-day the rate per mile?


James Angus MacKinnon: Not at the moment.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If the
minister has not the information here I am not going to press the question.


Mr. DONNELLY:: There is a board of grain commissioners, with an assistant board of grain commissioners in each of the western provinces. I imagine these travelling expenses are the expenses of these grain commissioners and assistant grain commissioners in the course of their duty in the different parts of the country. A lot of it would be railway fares. I am inclined to think a larger proportion is represented by railway fares than by the cost of driving cars.


Mr. ROSS (Moose Jaw):: And hiring
vehicles to carry weights for the weights and measures branch.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT Marine service-
US. Marine service steamers, including icebreakers-maintenance, operation and repair- further amount required, $24,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: Will the minister state how many icebreakers the government owns, operates and maintains and where they are operated?


Hon. J. E. MICHAUD (Minister of Transport) :: There are five icebreakers. All operate in the gulf of St. Lawrence, and the Atlantic [DOT]-Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and some other points in the Atlantic, during the war.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What icebreaker is operating on the New Brunswick coast this year?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Of course, there was the car ferry from the mainland. Then for a while, early in the winter, there was the old Lady Grey and the Saurel between New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Cape Breton.


Richard Burpee Hanson: During a recent period there has been a great deal of interruption of the car ferry service between the mainland and the island, but no icebreaker was available. Yet I am told that we have five in operation, and certainly those
out of Sorel could not have beeen operating very much. Why was there a lack of foresight in not having an icebreaker available to keep the Northumberland strait clear, having regard to the-shall I say-ineffectiveness of the old car ferry to maintain the service? The state of communications between the mainland and Prince Edward Island is little better than a scandal, having regard to the obligation of Canada to the island. I know the difficulties very well, and I am going to refer to them a little later, when another item is up, but at the moment I want to confine my questioning of the minister to the failure of his department to provide an icebreaker as an all-time supplement to the Prince Edward Island car ferry. During the months of January, February and March not a single icebreaker has been available for that service; yet there was an icebreaker at Quebec, where she must have been doing nothing or next to nothing. The only sendee I have heard of that is being performed is the rescue of the lives of the three Quebec Airways men, which of course was most commendable, and from that point of view it was very fortunate that she was available. But we have at least two big icebreakers with headquarters in the lower St. Lawrence or in the vicinity of Quebec, and after navigation closes they cannot have anything to do for months. My complaint against the minister's department is that one of these icebreakers should have been kept available in the Northumberland strait to take care of the greatly increased heavy traffic or to keep open the channels for the greatly increased heavy traffic which has developed. Unless relief comes very soon there will be an enormous loss to the shippers of Prince Edward Island, and there will be great difficulty in obtaining transit of the large numbers of cars of fertilizer which have arrived at Tormentine for transmission across the strait. I think the service has not been good enough, and I suggest that it could have been greatly improved if the minister had had foresight enough to have had in Northumberland strait during this season one of those big icebreakers which have probably been tied up at the wharf at Quebec or Sorel for the last several weeks.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Evidently the hon. member is misinformed, because there is no icebreaker at Sorel.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well,where are they?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: There is an icebreaker called the Saurel which was and is almost always in the winter time in the gulf of St Lawrence.
Supply-Transport


Richard Burpee Hanson: I misunderstood the minister. Where was she.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: She was working between Halifax, Sydney and Newfoundland, and she left Newfoundland to come to the rescue of the three men who were saved last week in the gulf of St. Lawrence. There are no icebreakers tied up at any wharf, whether at Quebec or at any other place, during the winter.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Was she breaking ice in Halifax harbour, or outside
Halifax, or between Halifax and Sydney?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Between Halifax, Canso, Sydney and Newfoundland, and late in the fall, between Prince Edward Island, Pictou and the Magdalen islands. But during the months of January and February that icebreaker was detailed to do some special work in the gulf of St. Lawrence towards Newfoundland.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is
one out of five. Where are the rest of them?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Two were employed as
usual, breaking a channel from Quebec to Montreal.


Richard Burpee Hanson: In the
winter time?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: In the winter time. That has been done for years, and it is a necessity.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I have no doubt it has been done for years, but why the necessity? There is no winter shipping into Montreal.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Oh, no, but there would be floods in the spring all along the banks of the St. Lawrence, and especially around the island of Montreal, if that work were not done in the winter time.
The other icebreaker was recalled from Cape Breton to help in certain war work in the gulf of St. Lawrence. My hon. friend says that there was negligence or lack of foresight on the part of the department in not bringing a powerful icebreaker to the rescue of the Prince Edward Island. I must inform him that early in the winter, when the Prince Edward Island began to have difficulties in crossing, suggestions were made to the engineers and officials of the department to bring an icebreaker to break the channel to help her. I was informed by officers of the department in whom I have full confidence that the Prince Edward Island was just as powerful an icebreaker as there was in the government service, and, second, that the bringing of another one into that area would be simply a nuisance to her and would not help a bit in clearing the channel. For that reason, no other icebreaker

was taken into that area, and this was confirmed, I am told, by the captain of the Prince Edward Island, who did not want to be bothered by having another icebreaker in his way.
I agree that this has been a very severe winter, owing to ice conditions and adverse winds, which kept the channel practically full of ice, so that on many days the service was interrupted. There were very few days on which there were no crossings; on many days there were a few crossings, and it took all the power of the boat to wade her way through the ice, so that hardly any load of freight could be taken off.
This is a situation over which we have no control. Every consideration was given to cope with it, and officers of the department, who have been in the service for many years, engineers, marine agents, ship captains, were all consulted and all gave the same opinion.
The situation with regard to the ferry between New Brunswick on the mainland and the island since last Saturday up to yesterday had fortunately improved greatly, and on three days during this week the ferry took an average of 100 cars each way every day.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Well,
spring is here.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: But it was not spring there yesterday, unfortunately, if the hon. member wants to know. However, I hope that next week the situation will have cleared sufficiently to enable the car ferry to take its full quota of freight cars on each trip and carry on its average of from ten to fourteen trips a day, thus relieving the congestion of traffic on either side of the channel.


Gordon Graydon: My information last week, when I raised the question on the orders of the day, was that there were between 500 and
1,000	cars of farm products, to a large extent potatoes for seed for other parts of Canada. Could the minister indicate that the present position is in regard to the congestion? How many cars are waiting at Borden for shipment to Tormentine and vice versa?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: My hon. friend is slightly off in his estimate of the cars that were waiting for shipment to either side.


Gordon Graydon: I believe it was Premier Jones of Prince Edward Island who gave the figures, though I am not sure.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: On one day about two weeks ago there were 565 cars awaiting shipment to the island from the mainland, but they were cars of material which had not first or second priority for transshipment. During the winter, provisions and coal got

Supply-Transport
first priority to the island, and coming this way, potatoes and agricultural products of all kinds had priority.
I have the record for practically every day of the last two months. Of course, there may be 6,000 or 7,000 cars of goods on the island, not loaded. There might be a quantity sufficient to make up 6,000 or 7,000 cars; but as far as the records show, on March 27, three days ago, there were awaiting shipment at Borden six cars and no empties, and at Tor-mentine there were 182 loads ready to be taken over. At one time two weeks ago there were 565 carloads of goods waiting for shipment to the island, and that number was reduced to 182


Gordon Graydon: That would be natural. If such a large number of cars were waiting to go over to the island, there would not be such a large number waiting on the island because they could not have crossed to get their load.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: But the record shows that for days prior to the 27th the Canadian National Railways carried over empty cars which enabled them to cross over many more times than had the cars been full of merchandise, because the load was less on the boat, and this helped the farmers of the island to move their goods. For the last ten days the average of empty cars taken over was fifty a day, but for three days there were 100 cars each day taken over and for three days 100 cars each day taken back. I admit that if there had been more cars over and greater facilities, if all the cars which are loaded for transshipment had been taken over before the 27th, it would have greatly relieved the situation on the island.


Gordon Graydon: Whoever is responsible, I think it is generally recognized by those of us who do not come from that part of Canada, that the situation is at best terrible so far as the island is concerned. Anyone who goes there recognizes at once that the place is insular not only from the point of view of geography but from the point of view of confederation itself, and something will have to be done pretty soon, having in mind what the premier himself says. When the premier of a province starts talking about damages which that island could claim against confederated Canada the situation must be pretty serious, and I think the minister must have been well apprised of that.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I have been apprised of the situation.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am sorry I have not with me at the moment the language used by Premier Jones of Prince Edward Island. Everything I have said relative to this service would be trite in comparison with what he has said about it, and I have no doubt the minister fully understands his language. The trouble, however, is that they did not do very much about it; they waited for nature to take care of the situation. What the minister told me about the icebreaker was just that he allowed his own judgment and that of his officials to be overruled by the master of the Prince Edward Island and the other engineer. The minister's own instincts were good, but he did not follow them up. They never tried the experiment of having the Saurel or some other icebreaker in there. That is the fault I find with the minister. They allowed the condition to remain and did not even experiment in trying to break up this ice in the winter months. Therefore I think the minister is reprehensible for not having tried to carry out his own suggestion. I suggest that the Prince Edward Island is an old ship. How many times has she broken down this winter? How many days' delay has been due to break-downs in the mechanism of the ship herself? If the minister has the record with him I think it will show that a good many trips were lost because of break-downs in the mechanism of this old ferry which is now in use.
I do not know what the war necessities are of which the minister speaks in connection with the use of bigger icebreakers out in the St. Lawrence, and possibly it is not proper that he should tell us, though I cannot conceive why. I do not think there are any enemy submarines in the St. Lawrence in midwinter. Of course, if merchandise has to be taken to Newfoundland, as I assume is the case, an icebreaker is necessary to keep open the lines of transportation. But I suggest that the people of Prince Edward Island are equally concerned about their communications and their right to uninterrupted traffic. I know that no fighting is going on in Newfoundland; I know we have a number of draftees there; I know there are United States armed services in Newfoundland, and I suppose the Canadian government has some obligation to them, though I do not know just what it may be. I suggest to the minister that he has failed in his duty in not making an attempt that he himself thought was the right thing to do. Therefore I say he deserves the censure of this committee.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Nevertheless I submit that I did not fail. If my views were not carried out it was because of the advice and counsel

Supply-Transport

of experienced men in charge not only of the icebreakers but of the ferry as well. I could not prevail upon men with years of experience in winter navigation on the St. Lawrence to do things which, in their very best judgment, they would not want to do. I made a suggestion which as a layman I thought was feasible and practical, but I was told by men who were supposed to know better that it was not practical, and I accepted their views.


Percy Chapman Black: I have had many communications this year and in previous years with respect to the inadequacy of the service between Prince Edward Island and the mainland. The people of the maritime provinces are not satisfied; certainly the people of Prince Edward Island have no reason to be satisfied with what has been done to serve their necessities during the last two years. The general opinion, which is widely supported, is that steps should have been taken to meet the situation immediately after the Charlottetown was lost. I believe that ship was lost through gross carelessness, while the person responsible for the loss was bonused or subsidized or pensioned off as a result. A new boat should have been arranged for immediately. Every person in the maritime provinces was pleased when it was learned that an appropriation was being provided and a new boat was being contracted for, but this house has been given no definite information with respect to what has been done. On February 1, at the instance of people in Prince Edward Island, I placed some questions on the order paper, asking for particulars with respect to this new boat, which I understand is now under contract. Those questions remained on the order paper until February 11, when they were made an order for return. Some weeks later I asked when that information might be expected, and the minister informed the house that it was on its way, but up to the present it has not been brought down. That information is desired by everyone in Prince Edward Island and the people of the maritime provinces generally; it is due the members of this house, who are responsible for voting this very large amount of money. A clerk in the office of the minister could give us the information in reply to the questions I asked. The first was:
1.	Have tenders been called for the construction of a ferry boat to serve Prince Edward Island?
That can be answered by yes or no; I should say the answer would be yes.
2.	If so, who were asked to tender, stating tender prices of each?

That question could be answered without waiting two months.
3.	If contract has been let, what is the date, name of firm, contract price and time of delivery?
Those are simply questions of fact, which members of this house and those interested should have.
4.	What is the tonnage, dimensions and speed?
Those questions could be answered in a few minutes.
5.	What type of power plant is called for, stating horse-power and names of builders?
Hon. members are entitled to that information, and the producers of coal in the maritime provinces are entitled to it. Some time in December a delegation of four specially appointed delegates of the United Mine Workers of America, interested in the production of coal in the maritime provinces, from Springhill, and other representative citizens waited upon the minister at Moncton to make representations that this new ferry boat should have a power plant using coal rather than oil. Rumours were current that it was to be an oil-driven boat. It was pointed out to the minister that according to the best information the supply of oil from all known sources in North America will last for a matter of only about fourteen years. Therefore it is simply a business of precaution to have a coal-operated boat, especially when this would provide a home market, practically at the bank-head of the mines, for up to forty thousand tons of coal. Not only are the miners as a body interested in this matter; the association of mayors, the maritime board of trade and other public bodies have asked that this boat be operated by coal. We are entitled to that information but we have not yet received it.


Richard Burpee Hanson: What date?


Percy Chapman Black: February 11.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Two
months, and it would take ten minutes to answer it.


Percy Chapman Black: Question
No. 6 is:
Is the boat to be completed by one contractor? If not, state names or any other tenderers of components with cost and description of such equipment.
What is the power plant, the boilers and the engines? Steam engines, I hope, or otherwise diesel engines. That is just a matter of fact. We should have that information and, if it is not available, answers should have been brought down as complete as possible. We are entitled to the information.

Supply-Transport
Question No. 7 was:
What will be the total estimated cost of the boat fully equipped and delivered?
If the department is entering into the contract, the minister must have that information, but it is denied to the membership of this house. It is denied to the people of Prince Edward Island and the people of the mari-times.
Question No. 8 read:
Who are the architects and designers, and what fees will they receive?
This is a matter which a clerk'in the office could furnish. It is a matter of record. Surely we should have the information. We should not have to wait until April Fool's day or after to get the information. That is the situation. I should like to know from the minister why the information to which the members of this house and the people of Prince Edward Island are entitled has not been brought down.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Whatever information was available to the department in reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Cumberland was sent out of the department early this week to the usual channel, the Department of the Secretary of State, I am surprised that the information has not yet been tabled. It was sent out and approved by the deputy minister.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Why was it made an order for return in the first place? It all referred to one department. Why should it take eight weeks to get this information? It must be a matter of immediate record in the office of the Minister of Transport; yet we have been denied it. That is the way the minister is treating parliament. It is not good enough. Certainly it is not good enough for the people of Prince Edward Island to have this information remain sealed within the offices of the minister and his department for eight solid weeks. Why all this secrecy about this matter. They know they have let a contract to a shipbuilding company on the St. Lawrence to build this boat. They know exactly what the terms of the contract are. They know whether she is to be an oil burner or a coal burner. The minister must know the answer to that question and I would put it to him now. Is this boat to be an oil burner or a coal burner?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: It is to be an oil burner.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is the answer. What about the other questions?
100-128*
Give me the list and we shall have them all. On the 11th of February the following questions were passed as an order for return:
1. Have tenders been called for the construction of a ferry boat to serve Prince Edward Island?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No tenders were called for the boat.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No tenders were called, but a contract was let?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: After the debate on this very question in the house last
session?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Who fixed the price of the boat, because a figure was arrived at? I assume that the contract calls for a specific figure. How was that reached?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The contract is cost, plus fixed fee for construction.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Cost, plus fixed fee?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Cost estimated by marine architects and officers of the department.


Richard Burpee Hanson: And
employed by the government. What is the fee?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: It is S250,000.


Olof Hanson: On an
estimated cost of what?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: 



Of 84,500,000.

Richard Burpee Hanson: Five per cent?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Nearly five per cent.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I suggest that fee is too high on a contract of that size. I speak subject to correction. The Minister of National Defence laughs.


James Layton Ralston: I do.


Richard Burpee Hanson: When I asked his colleague the other day what commissions were paid on cost-plus contracts he said five per cent was the maximum but that on large items the fee was generally much less.


James Layton Ralston: I am laughing at my hon. friend being so anxious and so sceptical as to whether there was a contract with reference to a ferry service to Prince Edward Island. Now he finds that a contract has been made or is being made and a fee is being paid, and he is starting to kick about it.
Supply-Transport


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not kicking about it. I am just saying the fee is too high. Of course, I realize that a large amount of this fee will come back in taxation; I hope it will.


James Layton Ralston: He is sorry that the contract is made.


Richard Burpee Hanson: No; I am not sorry the contract is made. The minister has no right to impute motives to me.


James Layton Ralston: That is just what I am doing. I never saw so many tears shed by anyone as are being shed by my hon. friend about Prince Edward Island until it happened that he found out that the people of Prince Edward Island were unfortunate enough to have lost a boat.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I speak for the people of Prince Edward Island because the hon. members for Prince Edward Island are consistently silent.


James Layton Ralston: The hon. members for Prince Edward Island do not take up the time of the house in talking about it. They do something. They are making every possible effort to get service to that island, but they are not advertising it the way it is being done on the other side of the house.


Richard Burpee Hanson: They are concealing their activities.


James Layton Ralston: I will tell my hon. friend about activities when the time comes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I do not care what the minister says; he cannot abuse me.


James Layton Ralston: I know he does not care.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I am not shedding any tears, but we have been communicated with by the residents of Prince Edward Island. I will say this to the minister: no one has condemned this government any more than has the Premier of Prince Edward Island in the statement which he made the other day.


James Layton Ralston: I saw the statement.


Richard Burpee Hanson: So did I. How did the minister like it?


James Layton Ralston: I enjoy all the statements made by the Premier of Prince Edward Island.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Now we are getting somewhere. I repudiate the suggestion that I am sorry a contract was made. I say it should have been let eighteen months before.


James Layton Ralston: Where would you put it? What yard would you put it in?


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is a question I cannot answer; but if I had the responsibility I would have seen that it got into some yard.


James Layton Ralston: You would?


Richard Burpee Hanson: Make no mistake about that. Now we have some information with regard to the price of the boat. We have the price of the fee. The minister has' not yet told me what the estimated cost is to be.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes; I said S4,500,000.
Mr. iiANSON (York-Sunbury): I beg your pardon. I take that back. The minister is quite right. I am wrong. When is the time of delivery to be?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: If everything goes well, November, 1945.


Richard Burpee Hanson: If there are no more acts of God that enter into the matter?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: That is right.


Richard Burpee Hanson: It is now contended that the last ferry was sunk by an act of God notwithstanding the findings of a judge appointed by this government to inquire into the matter. Will the minister answer question No. 4, which is:
What is the tonnage, dimensions and speed?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Yes.


Richard Burpee Hanson: That is good.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Length 348 feet between perpendiculars, and 272J feet over all.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Quite a big boat?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Oh, yes. The Charlottetown was 310 feet, and the Prince Edward Island is 285 feet. Beam, sixty-one feet. The Charlottetown was fifty-nine feet and the Prince Edward Island is fifty feet. Draught, nineteen feet; that cannot be changed because of local conditions.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I	can
understand that.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: Power: 12,000horse-power. The Charlottetown was 8,000, the Prince Edward Island is 7,000. The new car ferry is supposed to take nineteen loaded modem freight cars. The capacity of the Charlottetown's load was sixteen and the Prince Edward

Supply-Transport
Island's is ten. Automobiles: The new car ferry will take sixty cars. The Charlottetown took about fifty-six cars, and the Prince Edward Island, I think, takes forty cars.


Richard Burpee Hanson: I ask the minister this question: Was not all this information sent down to a little country newspaper in Summerside and published to the world, while the department refrained from giving the information to the hon. member for Cumberland. It was published to the world at a time when they would not give the information to the hon. member for Cumberland. I read a Canadian Press dispatch, dated three or four weesk ago, in a paper called the Summer-side Pioneer, giving this information at a time when these questions were lying unanswered in the minister's office. Did that information come from the department?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: I do not know.


James Joseph McCann: I would call the attention of hon. members to the rules of the house which state that speeches in committee of the whole must be directly relevant to the item under consideration. Both the minister and the hon. member for York-Sunbury are entirely out of order, and they both know it. The item before the committee has to do with an entirely different expenditure from one on an ice-breaker which will be made in 1945.


Richard Burpee Hanson: Mr. Chairman, technically speaking you are right, but my remarks arose quite naturally and I should like to say this in extenuation. If you will apply your same ruling to the Minister of National Defence and the tongue-lashing he gave me, I shall be content.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
449.	Construction, maintenance and supervision of aids to navigation, including salaries and allowances to lightkeepers-further amount required, $21,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: This item refers to light-keepers, and I should like to know if it covcts those in the lighthouses on the Mackenzie River?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Railway service-
450.	Hudson Bay railway-to provide for the difference between expenditures for operation and maintenance, and revenue accruing from operation during the year ending March 31, 1944-further amount required, $141,000.
Ernest Edward Perley: Can the minister tell us just how near the expenditures and revenues are.


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The following is a comparison between the estimated operating results for 1943-44 and the original estimates:
Maintenance . Operation ....	Estimated results 1943-44 ..'$418,856 .. 580,000	Original estimate 1943-44 $367,856 446,000	Increase over amount provided $ 51,000 134,000Less gross	$998,856	$813,856	$185,000revenue ....	.. 644,000	600,000	44,000Deficit ...	.. $354,856	$213,856	$141,000


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Civil aviation division-
454.	Airways and airports-operation and maintenance, including lighting, radio and meteorological services-further amount required, $47,000.
Richard Burpee Hanson: This item will not preclude any discussion on civil aviation on the war appropriations of the Minister of Munitions and Supply?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Radio division-
455.	Administration of the Radiotelegraph Act and regulations-further amount required, $11,695.
Gordon Graydon: Is there any special
reason why these items should have been taken out of the Department of Transport and placed under the supervision of the Minister of Munitions and Supply?


Joseph Enoil Michaud: The leader of the opposition will see by a note in the estimates that this was done under order in council dated July 8, 1940. Most of the aviation services were used almost exclusively for war services; the Minister of Munitions and Supply was supervising the maintenance and expansion of these services, and therefore they were placed under his department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Marketing service-
416. Marketing service administration-further amount required, $2,275.
Mark Cecil Senn: Is the minister in a position to answer the question I asked about floor prices?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I have some additional
information which I think will help to answer the question asked this afternoon by the hon. member for Haldimand. This matter was explained in a food bulletin issued by the
S upply-Agriculture

wartime prices and trade board on June 7 last, and I do not think I can do better than read the statement contained in this bulletin on floor and ceiling prices on beef. The statement reads:
Steps to ensure a steady supply of beef for the meat trade have been completed by the wartime prices and trade board, which has also finalized regulations for year-round pricing.
Last October the board stated that wholesale ceiling prices for beef reached on'May 27 would remain in force for an indefinite period. These prices were defined for carcasses, sides and quarters in order 252 in March. Ceilings on wholesale cuts are now set in order A.734, covered elsewhere in this bulletin.
At any time in the coming year when the market is not well supplied, retailers will be protected by these wholesale ceilings.
Wholesalers and producers also are protected. Floor prices have been set on dressed beef which next fall and winter will correspond to the seasonal ceiling prices of last fall and winter. The Department of Agriculture will prevent beef prices from falling below these levels by buying dressed beef whenever a surplus supply appears to endanger the market. Otherwise the market will be permitted to take its normal course.
From these purchases the department will build reserves. The reserves will be used in periods of scarcity to meet requirements of meat dealers under rationing. What is left will be used for possible Allied needs.
From May 27 to August 14 the floor price for carcass beef will be one-quarter cent per pound less than the wholesale prices set in order 252. From August 16 to September 18 the floor price will be one cent below the ceiling and from September 29 to December 18 it will be at the level of last year's ceiling for the same period, that is, two and one-quarter cents below this year's ceiling. On December 20 the floor price will be raised by one-half cent per pound. Further one-half cent increases will take effect February 7. March 20 and April 24. On April 24, 1944, the floor price will be back to one-quarter cent below the ceiling.
That, I think, gives the information which was asked for by my hon. friend. The ceiling price on beef is a flat price and it applies, I understand, the year round. The price of beef wholesale cannot go above the ceiling price fixed. That naturally governs the retail price, and in that way the consumers are protected. When the wholesale price of beef declines according to the terms of these orders, the element of competition comes in and the sale price of beef in the butcher shops falls owing to the operation of ordinary competition. I believe it is correct, although I have not verified it, that the prices are checked through steps taken by the wartime prices and trade board. If the price of beef in any one of these periods goes below the base set the Department of Agriculture through the meat board steps in and buys the beef.


Mark Cecil Senn: They are supposed to, but they do not.


John Horne Blackmore: They do not, and that is the trouble.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The deputy minister of agriculture is in the gallery and I will ask him to come down. The maximum price is in May, and as the months go by, the wholesale price for beef declines until it reaches the low point in December. Then it commences to rise again. Increases have taken place in the price on February 7 and on March 20 and another increase will take place on April 24. These are the orders issued by the wartime prices and trade board, after the subject had been under discussion between the board and the Department of Agriculture. I hope I have made the procedure reasonably clear to the committee.


William Earl Rowe: Can the minister say whether the Department of National Defence has purchased meat at other than the floor price?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The Department of Munitions and Supply does the buying for the defence services, and I am informed that a good deal of their purchases are made at the ceiling price.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: And above the ceiling.


Mark Cecil Senn: 
James Layton Ralston: To the floor price, not below.


Mark Cecil Senn: Within a quarter of a cent of the floor price, or at the floor price. I do not think that has been done. It has not been possible for the government or the meat board to do it. I wish the minister would state whether they have done it or not, because unfortunately our barns and stables are full of cattle.


James Layton Ralston: Does my hon. friend mean that the board is not prepared to buy when the price gets down to within one quarter of a cent of the floor price?


Mark Cecil Senn: I do not think it is possible for them to do it.


James Layton Ralston: Why is it impossible?


Mark Cecil Senn: Because the freezers are full and they have not the transportation facilities to ship it to the old country.


James Layton Ralston: In that event it would not make any difference what the price is.


Mark Cecil Senn: If they are going to stabilize the price-and that is their duty-I can only say that that has not been done. Our barns are full of cattle that have to be held because the farmers cannot get a price that will pay.


James Layton Ralston: Does the hon. member say that there is not an offer out by the board to buy it?


Mark Cecil Senn: There may be. If the minister says that that offer stands good and that they are prepared to buy all this beef, that is a different story.
I should like to ask one more question of the minister. One of the powers of the meat board is to determine prices to both packers and other persons as provided for, to establish the differentials in prices which will be paid for official grades. Has that been done? As I understand it, there are only one or two different price ceilings for the different grades. If these floor prices are to be governed by the official grade, as the minister well knows, there are a dozen grades of meat and there has not been that number of ceiling prices set. Will the minister explain just how they do determine the prices as mentioned?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The first point raised by my hon. friend may be answered in this way. It is well to understand the principle upon
which these prices operate; that is, there is a ceiling price for beef which remains stationary throughout the year.


William Earl Rowe: That is for the retailer.


Mark Cecil Senn: How many different grades?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: For both the retailer and the wholesaler. That is what I am advised, and I think it is correct.


William Earl Rowe: Not for the producer, though.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There are times when these prices decline, and then ordinary competition will bring the retail price of beef below the ceiling price for beef. That continues until a certain period, and then prices commence to rise again. That means this, as I understand it, that there is a ceiling price and a floor price, and the floor price is the essential thing. Some may think there is too great a difference, that the floor price should be higher, but the basic fact is that there is a floor price of beef below which it is not permitted to go. I am advised that the prices have not reached the minimum point, and that is why the activities of the board of the Department of Agriculture which supervise this have not been greater than they have been. I think that is a correct statement. The thing to remember is that there is a floor price. If the price tends to drop below the floor price, the government through the Department of Agriculture steps in and buys the beef, and maintains the price, and it ships the beef overseas or makes what disposition it can of it. I understand that there has been, largely because of difficulties of transportation, an accumulation of beef. Those are difficulties which probably are inherent in the kind of situation and the sort of conditions under which we live and work, but the probability is that that condition will clear up. I believe it is clearing up now. I have noticed, for instance, on the Winnipeg market that certain classes of beef cattle have advanced in price in the last several weeks, and I dare say that that is true elsewhere. The important thing to keep in mind is that there is a floor price and that the price of beef will not be allowed to go below the floor price.


John Horne Blackmore: With respect to the minister's remark, may I read part of a statement which was recently submitted to the government by representatives of 289 farmers who met in Lethbridge on March 15. It was presented by three men called E. Burton, A. B. Haarstad and R. H. Dahl. I quote from page 3:
. . . prices offered for fat cows ranged between $6.50 to $7.25 per hundredweight. These values
Supply-Agriculture

are below the level at which it had been promised by Ottawa that market supporting purchases by the wartime food corporation would be made.
That is conclusive evidence, if it is true, that this ideal which was to be built up just simply was not working in practice. There is no time this evening to go into considerable' detail on this question, but I promise that I will bring this matter up and we will go into detail just as soon as the opportunity arrives. The minister, however, has been misinformed: he has been told how the thing ought to work, but he has not been told how it has worked. There was reported a great shortage of space and the packing plants were all supposed to be filled. It is observable all through my area, however, that whenever the price went down low enough, packers could buy the cattle all right whether they could ship them or not, and the policy of the packers was to force prices down so that farmers in many cases were compelled to sell at a loss.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I see that several hon.
members are anxious to participate in the discussion, but I wish to clear up these points as we go along. On the point made by the hon. member for Lethbridge, I am advised it has this much foundation, that there was one period, several weeks ago, when because of congestion in shipments the condition which he refers to did happen, but only for a very short time.


John Horne Blackmore: It is happening now, in respect of fat steers.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My information is different. It is all very well to have statements appear in the newspapers-


John Horne Blackmore: We can support it.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: But statements made, one way and the other, should be carefully checked and verified-


John Horne Blackmore: We are going to check them.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: -before they are made on the floor of the house.


William Earl Rowe: The best way to check them is to try to sell a few cattle.


Mr. BRYCE:: I am very sorry this
has come at this late hour. We do not have an opportunity to say what we want to say about it. The minister has explained the scheme which was intended to work, but it did not work, because there was only a ceiling and a floor on dressed beef. The farmer does not sell dressed beef; he sells cattle, sheep and hogs. The minister pointed out that on March 20 there was a rise in the price of beef of one

dollar per hundredweight. That day on the Winnipeg market cattle went down fifty cents per hundredweight; that is, the same price. That system did not work. So that we have the situation which the hon. member to my left referred to at Lethbridge when the congestion occurred there. That congestion has come about by the farmers supplying the government with what they wanted. A year ago they asked us to keep back our light steers and feed them another year to get that extra meat. We have done that, but the government has failed to make arrangements to take these cattle off our hands. I was ruled out of order the last time I spoke in this chamber, because I referred to seventy-eent sheep. Where was the meat board when you could buy a whole sheep in Winnipeg for seventy cents? There is something radically wrong with our system when that takes place. I wrote to the Minister of Agriculture and pointed out where cattle were selling on the Winnipeg market below the floor. When you have no floor on live cattle the price can go anywhere. The situation in the west now is that pressure has been brought to bear on the government to take some of that cow beef which has come along. What has happened? The price of our steers has dropped. I ask the minister if the government or the meat board are still carrying on the system that they will not buy red or blue ribbon beef, they are only buying commercial beef to-day. If they are doing that, that good beef we produce, through lack of space, is left on the farmer's hand. Food is getting short, and men in the west are feeding nothing but wheat and straw because the cattle should have been away two months ago. I do not want to take up the time of the committee. I am sorry that the Minister of Agriculture is not here, and what the other minister has said does not explain the situation.
Mr. AYLES'WORTH:	The minister has
explained that the government has not been able to see anything but floor prices, and in answering an hon. member over here, in regard to the condition we find ourselves in at the present time, I am sure that eveiyone in this chamber will agree that the trouble goes back to the time when this government took steps to prevent our cattle from going out of Canada and at the same time instituted the rationing system. When one considers that we produce over 250,000 head of cattle a year more than we can consume, it does not take a lawyer to figure out that in a short time, in the course of a very few weeks or a few months, we were bound to find ourselves in the very mess that we are in to-day. We have more meat in this country at the present time than either the government or the packers or the

Supply Bill
people of Canada know what to do with. There are only two ways of getting rid of that meat; and if the government, through the meat board, is not able to ship this beef out to Britain, then in my opinion our only hope is to allow the cattle which have been coming east from Alberta and Saskatchewan in the last few months to go back to the market in the United States which the farmers have had for many years.
The whole set-up has been wrong from start to finish, and the longer it continues the worse it becomes. As far as the ceiling price is concerned, as I said two years ago it has never been fair. It has not been equitable from the very start. There is something which I cannot understand, and which I submit the minister ought to explain, namely, why, when we have a ceiling fixing a certain price for the producer, that ceiling is not kept. The first one who broke these regulations in regard to ceiling prices was the government itself. The government in the past two or three months have been setting a very bad example to other buyers of beef. They have been buying nearly all their beef, not at the ceiling price, but at floor prices. I refer to beef that has been purchased for the armed forces both here and elsewhere. In my opinion, if that beef had been brought at ceiling prices, the situation would not have been as bad as it is to-day. If the government had been paying ceiling prices, it would have avoided a great deal of dissatisfaction among the stock raisers of Canada.
What the producer receives and what the consumer pays are altogether out of line. As I said two years ago, the price the consumers pay could have been left at the same level and the producer could have been allowed a cent on the ceiling, because we all realize that there has never been such a spread in the history of the country as there is between the price which the producers receive and the price which the consumers have to pay. I am sure that if the government had set the ceiling on beef at a cent higher that ceiling could have been observed for the benefit of the producers, and yet the consumers would ' not have had to pay more.
Hon. members realize, I am sure, that with the retail price that is being charged to the consumer and the price that is being paid on the ceiling, the retailers of this country have never made as much money as they are making under the present set-up.
The time is coming when the government should see that there is a more equitable spread between the price the producer receives and the price the consumer pays. I repeat, in my opinion the price to the producer 100-129
could have been a cent higher and yet the price need not have been raised one cent to the consumer.


Mark Cecil Senn: There were a number of other questions that I should have liked to ask in regard to dairy products and other matters, but I have refrained from doing so because I do not want to hold up the estimates.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I thank my hon. friend. The agriculture estimates for the next year have still a good many items to pass and these points can be cleared up when the minister of Agriculture deals with them.


Gordon Graydon: Do not hold up the
estimates.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There will be full opportunity to discuss those questions, and I thank the leader of the opposition for the suggestion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Resolutions reported, read the second time and concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Acting Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of ways and means.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. McCann in the chair.
James Layton Ralston: Resolved, that towards making good the supply granted to His Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1944, the sum of $2,754,162.56 be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Resolutions reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Ralston thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 65, for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service for the financial year ending the 31st March, 1944.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. McCann the chair.
Bill reported.
Mr. RALSTON moved the third reading of the bill.
Mr. COLD WELL:: Before third reading is given, I hope that another year we may have the supplementary estimates brought down a little earlier than this, and that the ministers who are to be questioned will not be going

Post War Civil Aviation

away to the west before the house rises. I do not think the house has been treated fairly in this respect to-day.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) has not left for the west; le is on business in the province of Ontario.


Major James William Coldwell: That is what I was told.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.
On motion of Mr. Crerar the house adjourned at 11.07 p.m.
Friday, March 31, 1944