1945-10-01

HEALTH AND WELFARE AMENDMENT OF ACT OF 1944-45

[Stage Direction]
Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Health and Welfare) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 9, to amend the Department of National Health and Welfare Act.
He said: The only change proposed by the amendment is to correct a typographical error in the act of last year as printed. It occurs in section 12 and involves the substitution of the word "eight" for the word "nine" in a cross reference to another act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 10, to provide for a prize court and prize law in Canada.
He said: The purpose of the bill is to put in statutory form and perhaps make clearer and more definite what is the common law practice in respect to prize courts and prize law jnd to replace the order in council which has oeen in force under the War Measures Act in that regard. I am informed that during the first war the exchequer court as a colonial court of admiralty had jurisdiction as a prize court, and that expired when the old admiralty court act was repealed in 1934. During this war an order in council to give it this jurisdiction was passed under the War Measures Act. It is felt that the jurisdiction of the court should be prolonged beyond the time when the order in council under the War Measures Act will be in force, and this bill is to set out what is the prize law in Canada and to make the exchequer court the court to administer that law.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS

[Stage Direction]
Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 11, to amend the Canadian National Railways Capital Revision Act, 1937.
iMr. Usley.]
He said:	This is a routine and simple amendment of the Canadian Railways Capital Revision Act, 1937. Section 12 of that act provides for the appointment of trustees, and it is therein stated that three of the trustees shall be deputy ministers and two others shall be officers of the Canadian National Railways. By virtue of a reorganization in the directorate one of these positions in the Canadian National Railways, that of vice-president of finance, has been abolished. It is therefore sought by this amendment to set up by way of resolution of the board of directors the two officers who shall be trustees representing that body. There is also a technical amendment which has to do with the three deputy ministers.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of
Transport) moved for leave to introduce bill No. 12, respecting the appointment of auditors for National Railways.
He said: This is an annual bill which provides for the appointment of auditors for the Canadian National Railways. Since the year 1932 the appointment of the auditors has been by bill in this manner, and for the year 1945 it is sought to appoint George A. Touche and Company as auditors for the Canadian National Railways.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

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

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	How many persons in each of the provinces and in the Northwest Territories were receiving old age pensions as at the latest date for which this information is available?
2.	What was the average monthly payment in each province at said date?
3.	Does this monthly average include any supplementary amounts paid by the provinces?
4.	What supplementary amounts are paid, and what other special provisions are made, by the various provinces?

Questions


Mr. CLAXTON:: 1.	The number of persons receiving old age pensions as at June 30, 1945, is as follows:
Alberta	 11,594
British Columbia	 15,505
Manitoba	 12,427
New Brunswick	 12,335
Nova Scotia	 14,135
Ontario	 58,323
Prince Edward Island	 1,881
Quebec	 49,645
Saskatchewan	 12,971
Northwest Territories	 11
2.	Alberta	
$24	13British Columbia	
24	38Manitoba	
24	47New Brunswick	
22	18Nova Scotia	
22	54Ontario	
24	45Prince Edward Island	
18	66Quebec	
23	94Saskatchewan	
24	63Northwest Territories	
24	093.	No.4.	Supplementary amounts are paid as follows:	Alberta, $5 a month to each pensioner; British Columbia, $5 a month to each pensioner; Manitoba, any amount up to $1.25 a month depending on the amount of pension granted; New Brunswick, nil; Nova Scotia, any amount up to $5 a month payable at the discretion of the pension authority, with maximum income limited to $365 a year; Ontario, fifteen per cent of pension based on a maximum pension of $20 a month; Prince Edward Island, nil; Quebec, nil; Saskatchewan, $3 a month to each pensioner.
Certain provinces provide free medical services for old age pensioners. At least three provinces, namely, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Ontario, have special plans for this purpose. Some of the other provinces work with the municipalities in order to provide medical care for persons who are unable to pay for it themselves.
Note:	The information given in the above
answer is based on information supplied by the provinces concerned. Provision by the provinces of supplementary allowances, medical care, etc., falls outside the scope of the dominion-provincial arrangements made under the Old Age Pensions Act.


PENSIONS FOR THE BLIND-NORTHWEST TERRITORIES
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	How many persons in each of the provinces and in the Northwest Territories were receiving blind pensions as at the latest date for which supplementary amounts paid by the provinces ?
47696-37i
2.	What was the average monthly payment in each province at said date?
3.	Does this monthly average include any supplementary amounts paid by the province?
4.	What supplementary amounts are paid, and what other special provisions are made, by the various provinces?


Mr. CLAXTON:: 1. The number of persons receiving pensions in respect of blindness as at June 30, 1945, is
as follows:
Alberta	 256
British Columbia	 338
Manitoba	 350
New Brunswick	 739
Nova Scotia	 651
Ontario	 1,491
Prince Edward Island	 112
Quebec	 2,445
Saskatchewan	 342
Northwest Territories	
2.	Alberta	
$24	52British Columbia	
24	61Manitoba	
24	75New Brunswick	
24	57Nova Scotia	
24	20Ontario	
24	73Prince Edward Island	
22	47Quebec	
24	69Saskatchewan	
24	96Northwest Territories	3.	No.4.	Supplementary amounts are paid as follows: Alberta, $5 a month to each pensioner; British Columbia, $5 a month to each pensioner; Manitoba, any amount up to $1.25 a month depending on the amount of pension granted; New Brunswick, nil; Nova Scotia, any amount up to $5 a month payable at the discretion of the pension authority, with maximum income limited to $365 a year; Ontario, 15 per cent of pension based on a maximum pension of $20 a month; Prince Edward Island, nil; Quebec, nil; Saskatchewan, $3 a month to each pensioner.
Certain provinces provide free medical services for blind pensioners. At least three provinces, namely, British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Ontario, have special plans for this purpose. Some of the other provinces work with the municipalities in order to provide medical care for persons who are unable to pay for it themselves.
Note: The information given in the above answer is based on information supplied by the provinces concerned. Provision by the provinces of supplementary allowances, medical care, etc., falls outside the scope of the dominion-provincial arrangements made under the Old Age Pensions Act.
Questions


CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-PERSONNEL IN CANADA AND OVERSEAS, ETC.
Mr. ROSS (Souris):: X. What was the total number of Canadian troops taken to Europe, with annual figure 1939 to 1945?
2.	The numbers recruited on that side?
3.	Total fatal casualties in Europe?
4.	Numbers discharged in the United Kingdom or elsewhere in Europe?
5.	Numbers returned to Canada on courses or other temporary duty and who subsequently returned to Europe?
6.	Numbers returned to Canada for category and other permanent reasons?
7.	Numbers transferred to other allied forces?
8.	Numbers remaining on strength in the Canadian army overseas in the United Kingdom, northwest Europe, and the Mediterranean, May
8, 1945?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1. Year of
Embarkation	Number
1939		 15,894
1940		 43,221
1941		 69,167
1942		 66,604
1943		 79,445
1944		 62,896
1945	to 31 Aug	 35,264
Total	 372,491
2.	1,340.
3.	19,917 as at Aug. 31, 1945 (including battle and non-battle casualties).
4.	1,554 to Aug. 31, 1945.
5.	See answer to question 6.
6.	138,124 sailed from the European zone for Canada up to Aug. 31, 1945. The total break-down of those who returned to Canada on temporary duty and subsequent return to Europe is not available.
7.	672 as at Aug. 31, 1945 in European zone.
8.	Strength as of May 8, 1945 is not available. Strength as at April 30, 1945 was:
United Kingdom	 94,569
Northwest Europe	 183,979
Mediterranean	 4,045
Total	 282,593
PAYMENTS ON 1943 WHEAT CROP Mr. ROSS (Souris):
1.	Has the 1943 wheat crop been disposed of by Canadian wheat board?
2.	If so, when will payments be made to producers on participation certificates and what amount per bushel?
3.	If 1943 wheat crop has not been cleared up, when is it anticipated that it will be sold and cleared up?
[Mr. Claxton-1


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Although all 1943 crop wheat has been disposed of by the board to shippers and mills, the mills have not yet completed their reports to the board as to whether the wheat was used for domestic, mutual aid or commercial flour sales.
Without this information the board cannot determine the amounts per bushel payable on the 1943 crop participation certificates.
Moreover, final payments in respect of the 1940, 1941 and 1942 crops are still being made, and it is estimated that from 65 to 75 thousand cheques have still to be issued covering producer's certificates which have been lost. A further payment will also be made during the current crop year in respect of barley equalization fees, and also for the export fees received in respect of Ontario winter wheat for last season.
These operations are all in addition to the current work of the board, which is extremely heavy, and it does not appear that the necessary equipment will be available for the purpose of making this payment until the other payments referred to have been released.
It is now anticipated that the 1943 crop payments will probably begin in June or July, 1946.
3.	Answered by (1) and (2).


Mr. JAENICKE:: When does the Canadian wheat board expect to make the final payment to farmers in respect of the 1943 wheat crop?


Mr. MacKINNON:: Answered by the answer above to the question of the hon. member for Souris.


PRISONERS OF WAR
Mr. REID:: 1.	How many nazi German prisoners of war are still in Canada?
2.	How many prisoners of war of other nationalities are in Canada?
3.	How many nazi German prisoners of war have been returned to Germany or their homeland since the surrender of Germany?
4.	How many prisoners of war are located in internment camps, and how many are employed in agriculture and other industries?
5.	What steps have been taken by the government to return all prisoners of war to their own countries ?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	There are at present 30,710 prisoners of war of the German armed forces held in Canada.

Questions
2.	All prisoners of war in Canada are members of the German forces. However, they include some persons of other than German nationality, the majority of these being Austrian.
3.	No prisoners of war have been returned to Germany or to any other homeland since the German surrender.
4.	As of August 31, 13,073 prisoners of war were employed on farms or at work projects outside prisoner of war camps. The remaining 20,986 are held in the camps. A large proportion of the latter are employed in camp duties.
5.	The repatriation of German prisoners of war is not a matter on which the Canadian government can take independent action but will have to be undertaken in concert with the allied control commission in Germany.


HOGS AND BEEF CATTLE
Mr. ROSS (Souris):: 1.	What was the number of hogs in Canada by provinces during 1939-1944 and 1945?
2.	What was the number of beef cattle in Canada by provinces during 1939-1944 and 1945?


James Angus MacKinnon: 


MAITLAND, N.S. AIRPORT-PURCHASE OF LAND
Mr. STANFIELD:: 1.	What was the total cost of land purchased for the Maitland airport, Hants county, Nova Scotia?
2.	What was the total cost of (a) draining, g-ading and roadways; (b) construction of runways; (c) buildings and improvements; (d) equipment?
3.	What has been the total cost to date?
4.	What is the estimated cost to complete?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton. West):: 1.	$29,405.00.
2.	(a)	$400,138,83;	(b)	$850,705.36;	(c)
$1,079,594.41;	(d) Equipment-heating and
kitchen equipment included in (c) above.
3.	$2,505,667.25.
4.	$800,000.00.


EMERGENCY SHELTER REGULATIONS-BRITISH COLUMBIA
Mr. REID:: 1.	Who is the chief official in British Columbia in charge of emergency shelter regulations?
2.	How long had he lived in the province before being appointed to the position of administrator of emergency shelter regulations?
1.	Numbers of All Hogs on Farms at June 1, 1939 to 1945
1939	1940	1941	1942	1943	1944	1945Prince Edward Island ..	43,500	47,700	48,200	57,800	65,000	65,700	60,500Nova Scotia	
41,900	49,200	44,300	53,900	65,500	69,300	58,700New Brunswick	
79,100	86,800	68,000	84,500	94,400	104.300	82,300Quebec	
758,900	958,200	808,000	859,300	978,900	1,001,000	843,700Ontario	
1,536,500	1,985,500	1,882,000	1,861,300	1,885,600	1,900,000	1,979,000Manitoba	
322,900	506,000	503,400	708,000	877,000	624,000	457,000Saskatchewan	
511,300	879,700	943,700	1,325,400	1,754,600	1,599,400	1,006,600Alberta	
1,024,900	1,414,600	1,705,600	2,093,000	2,337,700	2,278,900	1,469,300British Columbia	
44,800	74,000	78,200	82,000	89,800	98,200	68,500CANADA	
4,363,800 6,001,700 6,081,400 7,125,200 8,148,500 7,740,800 6,025,600
2. Number of Cattle (other than milk cows) on Farms as of June 1, 1939 to 1944
1939	1940	1941	1942	1943	1944Prince Edward Island .	. 50,500	46,600	48,000	51,800	54,300	58,700Nova Scotia 	. 112,700	105,100	96,800	99,900	108)200	122,900New Brunswick 	. 102,100	96,100	92,200	95,600	107,400	114,400Quebec 	. 813,400	766.600	758,800	784,300	886,200	958,700Ontario 	. 1,409.400	1,442,300	1,483,700	1,489,300	1,524,000	1,557,200Manitoba	. 387,500	388,400	399,000	477,100	557,500	605,500Saskatchewan 	. 705,700	756,500	803.400	927,500	1,099,600	1,356.300Alberta ...'.	. 920,400	928,800	978,500	1,102,200	1,251,000	1,357,300British Columbia 	. 191,800	199,700	233,000	236,500	282,300	282,000CANADA 	. 4,693,500	4,730,100	4,893,400	5,264,200	5,870,500	6,413,000
1945 figures will be available September 28.
Questions

3.	At whose suggestion was the municipality of Surrey included in the area under the emergency shelter regulations?
i.	Was any advice sought from local authorities or other bodies before including the municipality of Surrey?
5.	How many officials have been appointed in charge of emergency shelter regulations?
6.	What has the cost of each of these offices been up to the end of August?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	For Victoria, D. K. Kennedy; for Vancouver, Air Vice Marshal L. F. Stevenson.
2.	Mr. Kennedy, 34 years; Air Vice Marshal Stevenson, 7 years.
3.	The Administrator of emergency shelter for Vancouver.
4.	No.
5.	Sixteen officials.
6.	Amount paid Amount
by wartime paid by prices and Dept, of Office	trade Public
board	Works
Emergency Shelter Co-ordination (Ottawa Hdqs.). .8207,000*	$ 500
Ottawa	
24,000	2,000Hull	
7,500	4,500Toronto	
36,000	2,500Hamilton	
10,500	1,000Winnipeg	
950	NilVancouver	
29,000	2,000Victoria	
11,500 Nil
This total includes approximately $189,000 for advertising emergency shelter regulations.


CHARTERED BANKS-TRANSFERS TO CONTINGENT RESERVE FUND
Mr. QUELCH:: '
1.	What was the total of the transfers made to contingent reserve fund from the earnings of each of the chartered banks in excess of their reasonable requirements for each of the years 1940 to 1944?
2.	What was the amount that each bank was called upon to pay in additional taxation as a result of these excess transfers in each of the years 1940 to 1944?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	(a) 1940, nil; (b) 1941, nil; (c) 1942, nil; (d) 1943, in the case of two chartered banks the amount added to their general contingency reserves during 1943 was "in excess of the reasonable requirements of the bank having regard to all the circumstances." At the time these banks published their annual financial statements for 1944 the exact amounts involved had not yet been determined and each bank made an estimate in round figures of the amount to be transferred from general contingency reserves, which amount in the case of one bank was $2,200,000 and in the case

of the other $412,000. Subsequently the amounts of the required transfers from general contingency reserves were determined, which amount in the case of the one bank was $1,965,566.14 and in the case of the other $324,000; (e) 1944, nil.
2.	(a) 1940, nil; (b) 1941, nil; (c) 1942, nil; (d) 1943, as the result of the above transfer from general contingency reserves the one bank paid additional taxes of $1,965,566.14 plus interest of $57,329 and the other bank additional taxes of $324,000 plus interest of $9,542.50; (e) 1944, nil.


WHEAT PRICES
Mr. FAIR:: What is the average price received each year by the Canadian wheat board for No. 1 northern wheat f.o.b. Fort William for the crops of 1935-36 to 1943-44 respectively?


James Angus MacKinnon: 1935 crop, 85-09577 cents; 1936 crop, no deliveries to the board; 1937 crop, no deliveries to the board; 193S crop, 61-2662 cents; 1939 crop, 77-29546 cents; 1940 crop, 84-32204 cents; 1941 crop, 91-59995 cents; 1942 crop, $1.09-64994; 1943 crop, not available*
* The prices for the 1943 crop cannot be determined until the final reports are received from all agents of the board and the ultimate disposition and class of the grain is shown.


ROYAL MILITARY COLLEGE
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	Is the Royal Military College, Kingston, to be opened again as a military college?
2.	If so, when ?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: It is intended to resume the training of cadets in 1946 under conditions which are now under consideration.


MEAT AVAILABLE FOR EXPORT
Mr. SENN:: 1.	What is the estimated amount of meat Canada will be able to ship, (a) to Great Britain; (b) to oth'er European countries, in the next twelve months?
2.	What proportion of this amount will be, (a) pork and pork products; (b) beef and beef products; (c) mutton and lamb?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	It is impossible to provide information on meat exports for the next twelve months since the shipping programme operates on a calendar year basis.
Commitments to the British Ministry of Food for beef and pork are for minimum quantities, and for the year 1946 these are: Beef, 60,000,000 pounds; pork, 450,000,000 pounds.

Questions
It is impossible to estimate what the actual deliveries will be with any degree of accuracy so far in advance.
Following the tri-partite food conference in the spring of this year, Canada undertook that in addition to the amount previously contracted for she would endeavour to provide an additional quantity of meat to bring her total shipments for 1945 to the United Kingdom and liberated European countries up to at least the following amounts:	Beef, 225,000,000
pounds; pork, 450,000,000 pounds; canned meats, 114,000,000 pounds; total, 789,000,000 pounds.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


Mr. REID:: 1.	What nations signified their willingness and agreed to assist the people of devastated countries in Europe under the organization known as UNRRA?
2.	What countries up to the present time have contributed and in what amounts?
3.	What countries have representation on the organization who are handling the collecting and distribution of the various supplies of food, clothing, other supplies, etc.?
4.	Have any of the countries who have not so far contributed any direct representation in the distribution of food, clothing, and other supplies, etc.?
5.	If so, what countries?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1 and 2.
Total contributions authorized or in
process of
Government	authorization
Australia	8	38,400,000
Belgium*	 175,000
Bolivia	 95,238
Brazil	 30,000,000
Canada	 69,369,369
Chile	 2,153,312
China*	 875,000
Colombia	 2,356,493
Costa Rica	 400,000
Cuba	 35,000
Czechoslovakia*	 175,000
Denmark*	 18,750
Dominican Republic	 350,000
Ecuador	 150,000
Egypt	 4,255,833
El Salvador	 128,750
Ethiopia*	 8,750
France*	 700,000
Greece*	 87,500
Guatemala	 8,750
Haiti	 48,750
Honduras	 58,750
Iceland	 717,975
Total contributions authorized or in process of
Government	authorization
India	 24,042,072
Iran	 17,500
Iraq	 17,500
Liberia	 8,750
Luxembourg*	 8,750
Mexico	 3,601,500
Netherlands*	 262,500
New Zealand	 8,476,000
Nicaragua	 128,750
Norway*	 52,500
Panama	 408,750
Paraguay	 38,449
Peru	 1,000,000
Philippines*	 8,750
Poland*	   175,000
Union of South Africa	 4,130,000
Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics*	 1,750,000
United Kingdom	 322,400,000
United States of America ... 1,350,000,000
Uruguay	 520,000
Venezuela	 1,017,500
Yugoslavia*	 122,500
* Liberated country. The council has recommended that contributions for operations be made primarily by member governments whose home territory has not been occupied by the enemy. Liberated countries are only assessed for administrative expenses.
At the recent council meeting in London the Byelo-Russian S.S.R. and the Ukrainian S.S.R. were added to the membership listed above, bringing the total membership up to 47, of which 16 members represent countries recently liberated.
3.	All countries listed under 1 and 2 and only they, are represented on the Council of UNRRA.
4 and 5. Answered by Nos. 1 and 2.


CANADIAN ARMY-COURTS-MARTIAL
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many convictions were registered by courts-martial in the army between 1939 and September 1, 1945, wherein the penalty was (a) death: (b) imprisonment from one year to three years inclusive; (c) imprisonment of more than three years?
2.	In how many eases was the verdict of a court-martial reversed or varied in each year during the period 1940 to 1945 inclusive?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	(a) Three, the death penalty being carried out in one case only, the other two being commuted to penal servitude; (b) 2,776; (c) 302.
Questions

2.	1940, 18; 1941, 85; 1942, 148; 1943, 259; 1944, 270; 178 (From 1 January, 1945 to 1 September, 1945). Total, 958.


CANADIAN ARMY-OFFICERS LOANED TO BRITISH ARMY
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	How many officers of the Canadian army were loaned to the British army during .the war?
2.	How many of these officers were casualties?
3.	How many of them are now with the British army?
4.	How many have been discharged since V-E day?
5.	What steps have been taken to have Canadian officers, who are now with the British army on loan and who want to be discharged, returned to the Canadian army?


Hugues Lapointe: Below is given the information insofar as the loan of officers under the Canadian loan plan is concerned. In addition, other officers have been on loan at various times and for varying periods to the British army. It would take a great deal of research on the part of Canadian military headquarters to determine the exact number of officers who have at some period been loaned to the British army for such duties as operational planning, civil affairs, medical services, etc.
1.	Under Canadian loan plan, 673.
2.	(a) Battle casualties, 291; (b) ordinary casualties, 56.
3.	175.
4.	Struck off strength in Canada, 34.
5.	All officers were circulated to find out their wishes after V-E day. Those who expressed a desire to return to Canadian control are being brought back to the Canadian army.
(a)	if their points are sufficiently high for repatriation then they are returned to Canada on the same basis as if they were serving with Canadian forces, or (b) as they can be absorbed into the Canadian army.


CARGO SHIPS
Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	How many "4,7(H)'' ton class cargo ships have been ordered built in Canada during the war?
2.	(a) At what yards were orders placed;
(b)	on what date was each keel laid and ship completed for service; (c) what was the cost of each completed; (d) for whom were they built?
3.	Have any been sold? If so, (a) to whom; (b) what was the price for each and terms of payment?
4.	How many have been managed or operated by the Park Steamship Company, stating the Canadian agents, commissions and fees paid?
5.	Who are the other managing and operating firms and agents in Canada?
IMr. Lapointe.]


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Forty-three.
2.	(a) Company	No. of Ships
Geo. T. Davie & Sons, Ltd., Lauzon,
Levis, P.Q	 7
Quebec Shipyards (Morton Division),
Quebec, P.Q	 4
Foundation Maritime Ltd., Pictou,
N.S	 24
St. John Dry Dock & Shipbuilding
Co., Ltd., Saint John, N.B...	8
(b) Ship No.-Keel Laid

Delivery Made Geo. T. Davie & Sons, Ltd.
4301	January 24, 1942; May 15, 1943.
4302	January 24, 1942; June 14, 1943.
4303	January 24, 1942; August 5, 1943.
4304	May 8, 1944; November 24, 1944.
4305	May 31, 1944; December 20, 1944.
4306	October 3, 1944; June 4, 1945.
4307	November 8, 1944; August 8, 1945.
Quebec Shipyards (Morton Division)
4201	May 15, 1944; June 13, 1945.
4202	June 1, 1944; July 12, 1945.
4203	November 10, 1944; August 29, 1945.
4204	November 28, 1944; September, 1945
Expected date.
Foundation Maritime Limited
4401	February 28, 1942; April 27, 1943.
4402 February 28, 1942; June 2, 1943.
4403 February 28, 1942; July 8, 1943.
4404	April 15, 1942; August 11, 1943.
4405	January 2, 1943; October 6, 1943.
4406	January 7, 1943; October 21, 1943.
4407	March 21, 1943; December 7, 1943.
4408	March 21, 1943; December 13, 1943.
4409	July 5, 1943; January 19, 1944.
4410	August 7, 1943; March 29, 1944.
4411	September 17, 1943; April 24, 1944.
4412	October 20, 1943; May 13, 1944.
4413	November 26, 1943; June 3, 1944.
4414	December 23, 1943; June 30, 1944.
4415	January 31, 1944; July 25, 1944.
4416	February 26, 1944; August 28, 1944.
4417	March 28, 1944; September 26, 1944.
4418	April 26, 1944; October 25, 1944.
4419	May 25, 1944; November 24, 1944.
4420	June 15, 1944; December 22, 1944.
4421	August 30, 1944; April 13, 1945.
4422	September 29, 1944; April 17, 1945.
4423	December 1, 1944; May 31, 1945.
4424	January 16, 1945; July 5, 1945.

Questions
Ship No. Keel laid Delivery made St. John Dry Dock and Shipbuilding Co. Ltd.
4101	January 15, 1942; February 15, 1943.
4102	January 28, 1942; April 29, 1943.
4103	October 9, 1942; January 21, 1944.
4104	January 7, 1943; April 17, 1944.
4105	September 1, 1943; September 2, 1944.
4106	December 18,1943; December 30,1944.
4107	June 15, 1944; June 18, 1945.
4108	October 13, 1944; October 15, 1945
Expected date.
Ship No.	Cost-To Nearest
Thousand
St. John Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Co. Ltd.
4107		 1,153,000
4108		 Costs not yet completed.
Quebec Shipyards (Morton Division)
4201	1 ...
4202	j.... Costs not yet completed.
Dominion Type Foundation Maritime Ltd.
2.	(c) Ship No.	Cost-To Nearest
Thousand Gray Type
Foundation Maritime Ltd.
4401		 81,766,000
4402		 1,558,000
4403		 1,613,000
4404		 1,694,000
4405		 1.549,000
4406		 1,429,000
4407		 1,431,000
4408		 1,408,000
4409		 1,275,000
4410		 1,296,000
4411		 1,236,000
4412		 1,214,000
4413		 1,139,000
4414		 1,112,000
4415		 1,050,000
4416		 1,046,000
4417		 1,061,000
4418		 1,051,000
Geo. T. Davie & Sons, Ltd.
4301		 1,086,000*
4302		 1,100,000*
4303		 1,100,000*
St. John Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Co. Ltd.
4101		 1,206,000*
4102		 1,220,000*
4103		 1,126,000*
4104		 1,131,000*
4105		 1,102,000
4106		 1,134,000
Revised Gray Type Foundation Maritime Ltd.
4419		 1,062,000
4420		 1,043,000
4421		 1,059,000
4422		 1,067,000
Geo. T. Davie & Sons, Ltd.
4304		 1,144,000
4305		 1,081,000
4423		 1,128,000
4424		 1,119,000
Fixed Price basis contracts.
Geo. T. Davie & Sons, Ltd.
4306		 1,119,000
4307		 1,104,000
Quebec Shipyards (Morton Division)
4203	1....
4204	J.... Costs not yet completed.
2.	(d) Department of Munitions and Supply.
3.	No.
4.	As of March 31, 1945.
Management Fees and Commissions paid.
Canadian National Steamships-
11 vessels	 $231,174.05
Montreal Shipping Co. Ltd.-
5 vessels 		70,671.23
Pickford & Black Limited- 4 vessels 		69,575.76
Inter-Provincial Steamships Co. Ltd.-1 vessel 		450.68
H. E. Kane & Co. Ltd.-1 vessel 		412.33
Saguenay Terminals Ltd.-2 vessels 		24,533.39
Union Steamships Ltd.-2 vessels 		34,195.50
5.	There were no other managing operators operating 4,700 ton vessels except those shown in reply to No. 4.


CANADIAN HOME DEFENCE ARMY
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	How many officers and men were in the Canadian home defence army on August 14, 1945?
2.	Where were they stationed on that date?
3.	How many of them have received promotions since that date?
4.	What is the present strength of the Canadian home defence army?

Questions


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1. As at August 15, 1945, the nearest date to August 14, 1945, on which a strength return was rendered to national defence headquarters:
N.R.M.A. Officers-Nil.	There are no
N.R.M.A. Officers.
N.R.M.A. Other Ranks-35,950 in Canada and adjacent territories, including 8,235 on
extended leave.
2. National Defence Headquarters	 186
Military District	No.	1...	898Military District	No.	2..	1,658Camp Borden	
627Military District No. 3...	1,101Petawawa Camp	
727Military District	No.	4..	4,734Military District	No.	5...	4,214Military District	No.	6...	3,976Military District	No.	7...	981Military District	No.	10..	1,114Pacific Command	
4,053Military District	No.	12..	1,076Military District	No.	13..	976Total in Canada	
26,321Newfoundland	
594Labrador	
85Jamaica	
446Nassau	
120Bermuda	
149Total in adjacent territories	1,394Total other than on extended leave	
27,715Extended leave	
8,235Total	
35,9503.	Promotions of 328 N.R.M.A. personnel appeared in Part II Orders published subsequent to August 15, 1945 and received at National Defence Headquarters up to September 12, 1945.4.	As of August 29, 1945, the last date on which the strength return of N.R.M.A. personnel has been compiled:
35,276 in the army in Canada and adjacent territories including 8,422 on extended leave.


BRITISH COLUMBIA CANNED SALMON
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	What quantities of British Columbia canned salmon were bought by the Department of Munitions and Supply in 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944?

2.	What quantity does the Department of Munitions and Supply expect to purchase this
* year?
3.	How was this salmon distributed during 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	1940, 4,908 cases; 1941, 4,349 cases; 1942 3,180 cases; 1943, 13,248 cases; 1944, 28,410 cases; 1945, 3,271 cases to July 31, 1945.
The figures for 1942, 1943 and 1944 cover all purchases of canned salmon by the department. The figures for 1940 and 1941 cover all individual purchases but do not include quantities of canned salmon that may have been purchased with miscellaneous grocery items.
2.	The Department of Fisheries were requested by the Department of Munitions and Supply to set aside 12,000 cases for distribution to the armed services. These figures have since been revised in view of the cessation of hostilities to 8,670 cases.
3.	Distribution was as follows:
Ottawa, 1,871 cases; Montreal, 153 cases; Halifax, 2,343 cases; Vancouver, 313 cases; Victoria, 228 cases; total, 4,908 cases.
Ottawa, 1,159 cases; Montreal, 457 cases; Halifax, 1,977 cases; Vancouver, 349 cases; Victoria, 296 cases; Newfoundland, 111 cases; total, 4,349 cases.
Montreal, 167 cases; Halifax, 1,935 cases; Vancouver, 10 cases; Victoria, 818 cases; Newfoundland, 250 cases; total, 3,180 cases.
Toronto, 312 cases; Montreal1, 9 cases; Halifax, 3,481 cases; Winnipeg, 1,306 cases; Vancouver, 1,471 cases; Victoria, 2,413 cases; Regina, 641 cases; Calgary, 1,585 cases; Newfoundland, 2,030 cases; total, 13,248 cases.
Toronto, 5,453 cases; Ottawa, 5,286 cases, Montreal, 2,372 cases; Quebec, 1,482 cases; Halifax, 6,022 cases; Winnipeg, 1,332 cases; Vancouver, 1,883 cases; Victoria, 1,796 cases; Regina, 1,142 cases; Calgary, 1,642 cases; total, 28,410 cases.
1945-to July 31.
Toronto, 1,000 cases; Ottawa, 750 cases; Montreal, 750 cases; Winnipeg, 200 cases; Vancouver, 150 cases; Regina, 150 cases; Edmonton, 74 cases; Calgary, 197 cases; total. 3,271 cases.

Questions


CLOVER SEED
Mr. SENN:: 1.	What was the total production in Canada of, (a) alsike seed; (b) red clover seed, for the years 1942, 1943, 1944?
2.	To what countries have exports of, (a) alsike seed; (b) red clover seed, been sent from Canada in each of the years 1942, 1943, 1944, and how much to each country?


James Angus MacKinnon: 1.
	Alsike seed	Red clover seed
	lb.	lb.
1942. . .	. . 913,000	1,598,0001943. . .	. . 4,760.000	7,297,0001944. . .	. . 1,905,000	8,960,0002.	Canadian exports by countries of clover seed during the calendar years 1942, 1943, 1944.Clover seed, alsike 1942	1943	1944lb.	lb. lb.United Kingdom.	. 1,058,340	-	658,300Eire	. 9,600	-	-Newfoundland. .	. 60	-	270Totals. . . .	. 1,068,000	-	658,570Clover seed, red	United Kingdom.	. 1,422,780	-	100,050Newfoundland. .	. 300	-	660United States. .	. 60	22,740	-Totals. . . .	. 1,423,140	22,740	100,710


PRESENTATION TO EX-MEMBERS OF CHAIRS
Mr. HANSELL:: Will the government give consideration to presenting ex-members of parliament with chairs which they occupied in the house, in order that they may have a suitable memento of their services as members?
Mr. ILSLEY; The suggestion is one to which the government does not regard it advisable to accede.



PURCHASE OF LAND UNDER VETERANS' LAND ACT

Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	How many parcels of land have been purchased under the Veterans' Land Act in areas in which P.F.A.A. assistance was paid in the year 1937-38?
2.	What is the total acreage involved?


Mr. WRIGHT:: After consultation with the department I would ask that this question be withdrawn for rewording.
Question dropped.



FOOD AND TOBACCO SHIPMENTS TO BRITAIN

Mr. SENN:: 1.	How many pounds of, (a) pork and pork products; (b) beef and beef products; (c) mutton and lamb; (d) poultry; (e) tobacco; (f) cheese, have been shipped from Canada to Great Britain in each of the years 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945?
2.	How many dozens of eggs in the shell or in powdered form have been shipped from Canada to Great Britain in each of the years 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945?


James Angus MacKinnon: 1 and 2.
Canadian exports to the United Kingdom of specified products during the calendar years 1941
to 1944, and	the	period from	January 1	to August 31	, 1945	Jan. 1 to Aug. 31,Unit	1941	1942	1943	1944	1945Item	qty.	qty.	qty-	qty.	qty.	qty.Pork, fresh, chilled or frozen Bacon and hams, shoulders	lb.	14,912,400	10,375,100	and sides 	lb.	460,800,200	524,951,900	560,309,300	692,310,300	399,851,300Lard 	
Beef, fresh, chilled and	lb.	4,426,700	8,921,300	1,443,400frozen 	
Mutton and lamb, fresh,	lb.	385,600	98,080,000	104,772,700chilled or frozen	lb.	1,135,600	Poultry 	lb.	58,230	2,165.048	Tobacco 	lb.	3,637,421	10,347,030	9,743,526	8,528,844	12,180,744Cheese 	lb.	89,089,100	131,374,000	126,604,700	128,872,900	56,040,000Eggs in the shell	doz.	15,257,279	4,374,640	27,317,858Eggs, dried 	lb.	7,661,817	13,449,395	18,951,651	18,228,451
47696-38i
Questions



DEVELOPMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What sources in Canada of uranium and other materials used in the development of atomic energy are owned or controlled by the federal government?
2.	Are there in Canada any known sources of uranium or other materials used in the development of atomic energy which are privately owned? If so, where are they located, and by whom are they owned?
3.	Are there in Canada any plants engaged in the development of atomic energy which are not owned by the government? If so, what plants, and by whom are they owned?
4.	Has the government made any contracts or agreements respecting the development of atomic energy, (a) with Canadian Industries Limited and/or Defence Industries Limited; (b) with any other private firms?
5.	Are there annon-Canadian private firms with investments or other interests in, (a) the production in Canada of materials used as indicated above; (b) plants in Canada engaged in the development of atomic energy? If so, what firms, and rvhat are their Canadian interests ?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited.
2.	No.
3.	No.
4.	Defence Industries Limited is providing engineering services at no fee or profit in connection with the construction of the plant under the direction of the national research council.
5.	(a) No.
(b) No.



WINNIPEG AIRPORT


Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Have any arrangements been made for the sale of the buildings built by the government for MacDonald Bros. Aircraft Limited, at the airport in Winnipeg?
2.	If so, to whom and at what price or prices?
3.	If not, are any negotiations for such sale under way, and with whom?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Certain property located on Robinson street, Winnipeg, has been sold by War Assets Corporation to MacDonald Bros. Aircraft, Limited. This property consists of an extension or additions to the original buildings owned by MacDonald Bros. Aircraft, Limited. No other buildings have been sold.
2.	(a) Answered by 1.
(b) $25,000.
3.	Negotiations between War Assets Corporation and MacDonald Bros. Aircraft, Limited have been under way concerning the purchase by the latter of certain other buildings. Advice was received on September 14, 1945, that the company does not intend to proceed with this purchase.


Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What was the peak number of workers during the 3var employed by MacDonald Bros. Aircraft Limited of Winnipeg (a) at its airport properties; (b) at Robinson street, and what was the period of said peak employment?
2.	What -was the number employed ast both
(a)	and (b) above as at the end of each month thus far this year?
3.	How many former employees of MacDonald Bros. Aircraft Limited enlisted in the armed services, and how many of the same have secured reemployment with this firm?
Mr. MITCHELL;
1.	Peak number of workers during the war employed by MacDonald Bros. Aircraft Limited of Winnipeg and period of said peak employment, (a) at its airport properties- 3,506 during January, 1944; (b) at Robinson street-1,157 during October, 1944.
2.	Number of workers employed at end of each month thus far this year:
(a) at airport properties: January, 1,401; February, 1,092; March, 799; April, 804; May, 805; June, 711; July, 628; August, 273; (b) at Robinson street: January, 572; February, 482; March, 461; April, 448; May, 418; June, 400; July, 397; August, 132.
3.	Number of former employees who enlisted in the armed services at airport properties, 521; at Robinson street, 376; total, 897.
Number of former employees who secured reemployment with this firm at airport properties, 20; at Robinson street, 15; total, 35.



PACIFIC COAST MILITIA RIFLES-RIFLES USED IN WAR AGAINST JAPAN

Mr. PEARKES:: 1.	Has the Minister of National Defence received a request, from or on behalf of the Pacific coast militia rangers, that they be presented with, or permitted to purchase at a nominal price, the rifles they used during the war against Japan?
2.	If so, vha.t action has been taken by the government in this matter?


Mr. ABBOTT:: Perhaps I may be permitted to answer this question verbally. The Minister of National Defence has received a great many requests from hon. members on this side of the house asking that the members of this force be allowed to retain their rifles or to purchase them for a nominal consideration. The force, as hon. members from British Columbia know, has rendered very valuable service. They served voluntarily and without pay. In some cases they were issued with service rifles and in some cases with sporting rifles, 30-30 carbines. The matter has been under consideration for some time. It was felt that for fairly obvious reasons they

Questions
could not be allowed to retain the service rifles; but I recommended a short time ago that they should be allowed to purchase the sporting rifles at a nominal price. I made that recommendation to my colleague, the Minister of Munitions and Supply, with a view to his passing it on to War Assets Corporation, and he agrees that that can be done. The details will now be worked out and arrangements made to allow them to purchase those rifles at a nominal price.



WINNIPEG AIRPORT-MACDONALD BROS. AIRCRAFT LTD.

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What is the total amount of money invested by the government in plant and equipment at the airport establishment of MacDonald Bros. Aircraft Limited, Winnipeg?
2.	What is the total value of contracts awarded this firm during the course of the war?
3.	On what basis were these contracts awarded?
4.	What is the total amount of profit received by this firm on the contracts indicated above?
5.	Is MacDonald Bros. Aircraft Limited at present working on any government contracts? If so, of what nature and what is their value?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Airport, St. James, Man., $1,527,143.52; Robinson St. Plant, Winnipeg, Man., $196,530.72; total, $1,723,674.24.
2.	Total sales, exclusive of sales tax, $20,872,957.99.
3.	Contracts were awarded on "a fair and reasonable profit" basis the rate of profit to be determined by the minister after government audit.
4.	Allowed costs, $19,405,977.09; amount of profit, $967,408.87; rate of profit, 4-9851 per cent; excess profit fully refunded to the government, $499,572.03.
5.	No.



SICK MARINERS

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	How many vessels paid dues into the sick mariners' fund for each of the calendar years 1938, 1942 and 1944?
2.	What was the total amount of money collected in dues from the vessels for each of the above years?
3.	Has the sick mariners' fund any other source of income and if so, what amount was received by the fund from such source or sources in the calendar year 1944?
4.	What was the total expenditure of the fund in each of the calendar years, 1938, 1942 and 1944?
5.	What was the balance in the fund as at December 31, 1944?


Mr. CLAXTON:: 1.	There is no sick mariners' fund. Duty or dues collected under the authority of Part V of the Canada Shipping Act are credited to the
revenue account, consolidated revenue fund. The cost of treatment of sick mariners and of administration of Part V of the Act is charged to funds appropriated each year by Parliament. The total number of vessels which paid dues for the calendar years 1938, 1942 and 1944 were 3,720, 4,427 and 4,285, respectively.
2.	1938. $210,594.97; 1942, $276,373.64; 1944, $201,150.20.
3.	There is no other revenue accruing to the government under the authority of part V of the Canada Shipping Act.
4.	Total expenditures for the calendar year: 1938, $187,090.98; 1942, $349,593.77; 1944, $239,332.36.
5.	See answer to No. 1.



* AD RIAN ARCAND

Mr. IRVINE:: When is Mr. Adrian Arcand to be tried for alleged nazi activities prior to his internment in 1940?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: In view of the large number of inquiries that have come to the department with regard to this question I think I should read aloud the answer that is being made to the question.
The opinions of the deputy minister of justice and of Mr. Gerald Fauteux, K.C., special prosecutor, now tabled, are that it is not advisable that federal authorities proceed further with charges against Adrian Arcand based on his activities prior to his internment. I beg leave to table the opinions where the matter is discussed, and the reasons for the opinions are given. I am making a certain number of mimeographed copies of these opinions available to the gentlemen of the press. If any hon. member wishes to have a copy I shall be glad to furnish it.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: In view of the public interest would it not be possible to put the opinions on Hansard? I do not know how long they are, but the minister says he has had a large number of requests for them.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I have had a large number of inquiries. It covers five or six pages. I have no objection to its being printed as an appendix-


Mr. COLD  WELL@: Make it part of the answer.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: -or making it part of the answer to the question.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: I think that would be better.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Then with the consent of the house the opinions will be made part of the answer to the question.
Questions

I have considered the advisability of taking further criminal proceedings against Adrien Arcand, who in May, 1940, was charged, by way of indictment, under sections 39 and 39A of the defence of Canada regulations with having spread and published reports and statements intended or likely to cause disaffection or to be prejudicial to the safety of the state or the efficient prosecution of the war. Before the preliminary inquiry was completed and the accused could be committed for trial, the judge directed that the situation disclosed by the evidence should be brought to the attention of the attorney general of Quebec. The latter in turn communicated with the Minister of Justice, who, 'with a view to preventing Arcand from acting in a manner prejudicial to the public safety or the safety of the state, directed that he should be detained, and he was so detained until July, 1945.
It may now be stated that Arcand was the recognized leader of an organization known as the national unity party, declared by the defence of Canada regulations to be illegal. The national unity party had objects and ideals very similar to those of the fascist and nazi parties, and there is evidence of some connecting link between members of those parties and Arcand.
Whether or not the national unity party had any real numerical strength or potential possibilities, the prompt action taken by the Minister of Justice effectively quelled the movement, and the purpose of Arcand and the misguided people whom he sought to influence wholly failed. There is no evidence that his activities or those of the party in fact did any injury or in the slightest degree prejudiced the successful prosecution of the war. My information is that since his release from internment Arcand has not been engaged in any political activity and no complaints have been received with reference to his conduct.
To the question whether further criminal proceedings should be taken against Arcand, the following observations of a legal nature would seem to be relevant:
First, responsibility for the prosecution of indictable offences rests with the provincial attorney general, and, while it would be open to federal authorities to proceed with the charges under the defence of Canada regulations with the object of having Arcand committed for trial, I would not advise this course without first consulting the attorney general of the province, since he must assume responsibility for the trial if the accused is committed.
Secondly, defence of Canada regulations 39 and 39A have been revoked, and, while such revocation does not relieve from liability a person who committed an offence prior to revocation, nevertheless in the case of such a stale offence as this the fact of revocation might be expected to affect the course of the trial.
Thirdly, the maximum sentence which could be imposed for the offences charged is five years' imprisonment. Arcand has already been subjected to confinement for a period in excess of five years.
Fourthly, a proposal to prosecute for a seditious offence under the criminal code would be subject to the same considerations as apply in the case of the charges under the defence of Canada regulations, namely, that the provincial attorney general would be responsible since the proceedings would be by way of indictment, and

that the offence is stale, and that the accused has already suffered a lengthy period of confinement.
Fifthly, Arcand could not be tried for treason for the reason that any such offence has long since been prescribed by statute. In this connection it should be remarked that the Treachery Act of Canada was only assented to on the 7th of August, 1940, after Arcand was interned, and so would not apply to Arcand's activities prior to internment.
Having regard to the foregoing, I would not advise that further criminal proceedings be undertaken by federal authorities, and in this respect I concur in the view recently expressed by Mr. Gerald Fauteux, K.C., who acted as crown prosecutor at the time the charge was laid against Arcand.
F. P. Vareoe,
Deputy Minister of Justice.
Copy :MJC:14:9:45 Fauteux and Mathieu Advocates
Gerald Fauteux, K.C.
Auguste Mathieu, K.C.
Transportation Building 132 St. James Street West Suite 420
Montreal, September 7, 1945.
Canada.
Mr. F. P. Vareoe, K.C.,
Deputy Minister of Justice,
Ottawa.
Re: Adrien Arcand, Jos. C. Farr et al -Further prosecutions.
Dear Mr. Vareoe,
I have examined the brief submitted for opinion, in relation with the above matter.
This brief, I understand, after a recent interview with Inspector C. W. Harvison of the R.C.M. Police is definitely a general outline ot the case, and cannot be taken as definite and exhaustive as far as evidence is concerned.
Furthermore, I had a conference yesterday, in Ottawa, with Mr. Robert Forsyth, K.C., of your department, with whom I discussed the matter, and who, I may say, agrees with the views which I now beg to express as follows:
1.	The matter during the war:
In the spring of 1940, and as the result of the execution of a number of search warrants, truckloads of documents were seized in various places and in various provinces in Canada.
At that time, more than sufficient evidence was gathered to justify a prosecution under sections 39 and 39A of the defence of Canada regulations. And as a matter of fact, on the 29th of May, 1940, a number of warrants were issued for the arrest of the leaders of the so-called "national social Christian party" and "national unity party of Canada".
According to their own publications, their programme, I quote:
"in its main lines, and even in many details, is identical to the programme of the principal corporatist organizations of other countries:
"Fascists of Italy,
Nazis of Germany,
Cuzists of Rumania,
Francists of France,
Fascists of Great Britain,
Guardists of Australia,

Questions
Nara-ists of Poland,
Nationalists of Switzerland,
Gadja-ists of Yugoslavia,
Rexists of Belgium,
Fascists of Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Portugal, etc." The procedures before the court were by way of indictment. In the course of the preliminary inquiry, the presiding judge, after the filing of a number of exhibits, interrupted the procedure, called the attorneys for the prosecution and the defence, for a short conference in his chamber, and immediately after resuming the procedures in court, declared that there was prima facie evidence of a conspiracy against the safety of the state, and suggested that the matter be immediately referred to the attorney general of the province; the inquiry was then adjourned to the following week. This action of the court brought no protests from the defence counsels, (sic)
Accordingly, the matter was immediately referred to the attorney general who, in turn, advised the then Minister of Justice of same and of the extension of the alleged conspiracy beyond the limits of the province of Quebec. An order for internment under section 21 of the D.O.C.R. followed.
The preliminary inquiry was then adjourned sine die.
Later, the question of prosecution for offences under the criminal code of Canada was considered. It was thought that any trial under circumstances then prevailing, would have possibly led to certain agitation and perhaps, and to an unmeasurable extent, defeated the very purpose which the defence of Canada regulations were meant to achieve.
The national emergency prevailing at that time could hardly be met otherwise than by emergency steps which, as stated, were immediately taken.
2.	The matter since the cessation of hostilities:
I have been asked to express an opinion on the actual possibility of prosecutions.
For that purpose, I have considered the Treachery Act and the criminal code of Canada.
(a)	With regard to the Treachery Act:
To supplement for the inadequacy of legis-ation on treason, Canada, like England, has adopted at the beginning of this war, the Treachery Act, 4 George VI, chapter 43. This act was assented to on the 7th of August, 1940, consequently after the internment of Arcand and others. The statute having no retroactive effect, cannot therefore have any application in the matter.
(b)	The Criminal Code of Canada:
1.	Treason and treasonable offences:
I cannot say that the activities of the above group could not reveal evidence of treason or treasonable offences. To express a final and definite opinion, as to a conviction without *doubt, would necessitate a more complete and minute examination of the mass of documents :seized.
The provisions of our code on treason and treasonable offences have their source in the English statute known as the Treason Act assented to in the year 1351, and are far from *suiting modern conditions.
Their enforcement is not, consequently, with

out difficulty.
For practical purposes, however, our Canadian law as well as the English law provide for a limitation of action, and in both countries, it has ahvays been and still is impossible to prosecute after three years.
Under such circumstances, prosecution for treason or treasonable offences cannot be entered.
2.	Drilling:
Drilling was also in the programme of these organizations, and for that reason, provisions of section 99 were examined.
The operation of that section depends upon the existence of an order in council prohibiting training or drilling to the use of arms or for the purpose of practising military exercises, movements or evolutions. I am not aware of the existence of an order in council covering the case.
Be it as it may, these provisions are also subject to a limitation, under section 1140, paragraph "b", subparagraphs "i" and "ii".
In such eases, prosecution may be commenced within six months after the commission of the offence.
S.	133-
3.	Seditious offences: S. 134-
I have also given consideration to the question of sedition. Of that, there is evidence. And in such matters, there is no limitation of action.
To decide whether it is in the best interest of Canada and particularly of justice to the accused as well, you may like to consider the exculpatory clause of section 133A-which I do not believe has, in fact, any application in the matter, but is, in law, nevertheless opened to the accused for their defence at trial-and also the fact that the maximum penalty for the offence is two years imprisonment, while the leaders of the movement have actually been deprived of their liberty for a period of five years, more or less.
Our legislation being inspired by the same principles of justice animating the English legislation, you may also consider that the leaders of a like movement in Great Britain, particularly Sir Oswald Mosley, have not been prosecuted after suffering internment.
Our penal laws operate by punishment, the purpose of -which is double, to wit: punishment to individuals and deterrent for other people.
In view of the length of internment which is more than twice the authorized maximum sentence for sedition, I doubt what more could be achieved in prosecuting for sedition.
And the judgment given by the civilized nations on the ideologies professed by these groups is and shall ever be far more impressive than a judgment of one of our local courts of Quebec or Ontario against a limited number of individuals Treasonably attracted by and promoting these now universally condemned ideologies and purposes.
It is again a timely question whether the publicity attached to trials by the will of the legislator, would not, in this case, be used to serve a purpose much beyond its true object.
Personally, and if I may be permitted to express an opinion as to the advisability of proceeding for sedition, I honestly believe that
Questions

the national interest and the Canadian justice would equally be served adequately by following the policy adopted in the very country from which flows our legislation in similar matters. Yours very truly,
Gerald Fauteux.
GF/NA
P.S.-I have been asked by phone, to further express my opinion on the possibility of a prosecution under sections 39 and 39A of the D.O.C.R. There is no doubt that in view of section 66 of the D.O.C.R., such prosecution can still obtain. I beg to draw your attention on paragraph 2 of section 39B affording a defence more or less similar as under section 133A of the Criminal Code.

BUILDINGS ERECTED AT CANADIAN CAR & FOUNDRY PLANT, AMHERST, N.S.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	What buildings or other structures were erected during the war by the government at the plant of the Canadian Car & Foundry-Company Limited, Amherst, Nova Scotia?
2.	What was the cost of each such building?
3.	Were these buildings under lease to the company and, if so, for what period and at what rental charges?
4.	Have any such buildings been offered for sale to the company' or to other parties, if so, state the price for each?
5.	Is it proposed to offer these buildings for sale through War Assets Corporation or other agency of the government? If so, when?
6.	Has the government and the company made proposals to lease any of these buildings for storage of naval supplies and equipment or other materials? If so, for what period and what rental charges?
7.	Were the municipal authorities at Amherst consulted in regard to any proposals for sales or leases?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	The following buildings were erected during the war by the government at the plant of the Canadian Car & Foundry Company Limited, Amherst, Nova Scotia, and the cost was as follows:	Aircraft overhaul depot,
$134,206.30; Guard house building, $2,953.00; Cafeteria building, $30,825.00.
2.	Answered bv 1.
3.	No.
4.	Yes, to Canadian Car & Foundry Company Limited who intimated their desire to negotiate for the buildings and equipment. Another party has shown an interest in leasing the property with option to purchase. It would be prejudicial to the successful sale of this property to disclose the price offered or the negotiations in detail with either party.
5.	It is not proposed at present to advertise these properties in the open market if a proper sale can be negotiated with the present occupants.

6.	No proposals to lease for storage has been or will be considered until every effort has been made to sell or lease for industrial
purposes.
7.	No.



ALTERNATIVE SERVICE WORK CAMPS

Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Are persons detained to-day in alternative service work camps?
2.	If so, what is the number?
3.	What plans, if any, are going forward for the release of such persons?
4.	What reasons are given for the continued detention of such persons?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	Yes.
2.	290.
3.	It is kept constantly before the men who are occupying alternative service work camps that arrangements will be made to transfer them from the camp at once if they will agree to enter into a contract whereby they will be making contribution to the national welfare.
4.	Their refusal to conform to those alternative service regulations under which they may be directed to employment other than
in camps.



PAMPHLET &quot;JUSTICE FOR POLAND&quot;

Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Has the government distributed any copies of the pamphlet "Justice for Poland" to any army units or personnel?
2.	If so, what quantities are involved and when were they distributed?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.



MALTON AIRCRAFT PLANT

Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Has a contract been concluded for the sale by the government of the Malton aircraft plant?
2.	If so, who is the purchaser and what is the purchase price?
3.	What are the other terms or conditions of sale ?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	No formal contract has yet been signed for the sale of Victory Aircraft Company Limited to the Hawker-Siddeley Aircraft Company. Negotiations, which were started prior to V-J day, are however continuing and are substantially complete.
2.	(a) Answered by 1; (b) It would be prejudicial to the sale to disclose the price, terms and conditions until the contract has been concluded.
3.	Answered by 2 (b).

Questions



NEW FLAG ON PARLIAMENT BUILDING TOWER

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	On whose instructions is a new flag being flown from the tower of the houses of parliament; w'ho authorized it, and when?
2.	Who is in charge of such matters, and of this building?
3.	Was such an innovation ever authorized by parliament? If so, when?
4.	Who authorized and gave the order to haul down the Union Jack?
5.	Have instructions been issued for similar action on other government buildings throughout Canada? If so, at what cost?
6.	Why is this innovation carried out without the knowledge or consent of parliament now in session?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	The red ensign is being flown from the tower of the houses of parliament under authority of order in council P.C. 5888, passed on September 5, 1945, copy of which appears below.
2.	The Department of Public Works.
3.	The red ensign flew from the tower of the houses of parliament from the days of confederation until 1904.
4.	5, and 6. Answered by No. 1.
, At the Government House at Ottawa
Wednesday, the 5th day of September, 1945.
Present:
His Excellency
The Governor General in Council:
Whereas the Right Honourable W. L. Mackenzie King, the Prime Minister, reports that by order in council P.C. 134 of January 26, 1924, authority is given for displaying the Red Ensign with the shield of the coat of arms of Canada in the fly (commonly known as "the Canadian Red Ensign") on suitable occasions from all buildings owned or occupied by the Canadian government and situated without Canada;
That the Canadian Red Ensign was employed by Canadian forces during the present w-ar; and
That, until such time as action is taken by parliament for the formal adoption of a national flag, it is desirable to authorize the flying of the Canadian Red Ensign on federal government buildings within as well as without Canada, and to remove any doubt as to the propriety of flying the Canadian Red Ensign wherever place or occasion may make it desirable to fly a distinctive Canadian flag;
Therefore, His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, is pleased to order and doth hereby order that the Red Ensign with the shield of the coat of arms of Canada in the fly (hereinafter referred to as "the Canadian Red Ensign") may be flown from buildings owned or occupied by the federal government within and without Canada;
His Excellency in Council, on the same recommendation, is further pleased to declare and doth hereby declare that it shall be appropriate to fly the Canadian Red Ensign within and
without Canada wherever place or occasion may make it desirable to fly a distinctive Canadian flag.
Nothing herein shall be deemed to alter in any way the provisions now in force with respect to the flying of the Blue Ensign with the shield of the coat of arms of Canada in the fly on Canadian naval vessels and other government vessels, nor with respect to the flying of the Canadian Red Ensign on Canadian merchant vessels.
A. D. P. Heeney,
Clerk of the Privy Council.
veterans' land act


Mr. PROBE:: 1.	How many applications have been made as of September 1, 1945, for benefits under the terms of the Veterans' Land Act, 1942, for
(a)	small holdings; (b) full time farming;
(c)	combined small holdings and commercial fishing?
2.	How many applications in each of these categories have been approved as of September 1, 1945?
3.	How many veteran families were actually enjoying possession of their holdings provided under Veterans' Land Act, 1942, in each of the above categories as on September 1, 1945?
4.	How many houses intended for occupation on small holdings under terms of Veterans' Land Act have been completed or building begun as at September 1, 1945, (a) in Ottawa district;
(b)	Regina, Saskatchewan, district?
5.	How many of the small holdings being provided in Ottawa and Regina districts have actually been sold on Veterans' Land Act basis to veterans as of September 1, 1945?
6.	What is the basis on which the allocation of the small holdings thus far secured by Veterans' Land Act in Ottawa and Regina districts is made?
7.	How many unfilled applications for small holdings benefits under Veterans' Land Act are there as of September 1, 1945, in Ottawa and in Regina?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	Statistical records do not divide applications for qualification into the types of establishment proposed by veterans as original proposals are frequently changed during interview with regional advisory committees. The total number of applications for qualifier tion is 11,343.
2.	Number qualified (a) 3,175; (b) 1,694;
(c)	60.
3.	The number of applications for financial assistance that were approved is (a) 657, (b) 451, (c) 15. A total of 1,123. Reports obtained from all district offices indicate that a total of 811 had signed settlement agreements.
4.	(a) Under contract, 140; Construction under way, 82; (b) Under contract, 25; Construction under way, 20.
5.	No small holdings, where homes are under construction on subdivided areas in the vicinity of Ottawa or Regina, have been
Questions

sold to veterans. The number of approved applications for financial assistance submitted by veterans who have been qualified for small holdings in the Smiths Falls region, which included Ottawa, is 22, and in the Regina region 8.
6.	A system of allocation of small holdings within subdivided areas is under consideration. The system of allocation adopted will depend on the demand by way of specific application from veterans for homes within particular subdivisions.
The small holdings thus far sold to veterans have been purchase proposals submitted by qualified veterans which, on examination, were found to be suitable and within the scope of the act and regulations.
7.	Number qualified for small holdings:
(a)	Smiths Falls region including Ottawa, 155;
(b)	Regina region, 30.
Applications for financial assistance to become established on small holdings:	(a)
Smiths Falls region including Ottawa, 56; (b) Regina region, 9.
Number approved: (a) Smiths Falls region including Ottawa, 22; Ob) Regina region, 8.
Number declined: (a) Smiths Falls region including Ottawa, 6; (b) Regina region, 0.



ARMEO SERVICES PERSONNEL ON RAILWAY MAINTENANCE DUTY

Mr. PROBE:: 1.	Were members of the armed forces, while still in the services, detailed for duty on railway maintenance with any railway company in Canada?
2.	Have members of the armed services been given leave of absence for the purpose of working on railway maintenance for any railway companies in Canada?
3.	If so, (a) how many service personnel were released to each railway for maintenance work; (b) on what basis and at what rates of pay were they engaged on railway maintenance work in Canada?
4.	Were the wages which were received by these men paid them by the railway company or were they paid by the Department of National Defence?
5.	If paid by the Department of National Defence, did the railway company concerned make up the difference between service pay and the usual pay for that type of work, and to whom was the difference paid?


Hugues Lapointe: 1. Yes.		
2. Yes.		
3.	1944	1945(a) Canadian Pacific....	. 250	346Canadian National..	. 150	725
(b) (i) Prior to Sept. 8, 1945, soldiers were detailed to perform this work as a duty under fhe provisions of P.C. 6434 dated August 13, 1945.

(ii)	Subsequent to Sept. 7, 1945, soldiers who volunteered to do this work have been granted leave without pay and allowances.
(iii)	The wages paid by the railways for the soldier's services: (a) C.N.R., 53 cents an hour less $5.75 a week for board and lodging provided by the railway; C.P.R., 53 cents an hour less $6 a week for board and lodging provided by the railway.
(iv)	Prior to Dec. 1, 1944, when P.C. 9148 of 1944 was passed, soldiers detailed for duty on railway track maintenance received their army pay and allowances plus any difference between such pay and allowances and the wages paid by the railways, after deduction of the cost of board and lodging. If, owing to bad weather or other reasons, the amount due from the railway for his services, was less than his pay and allowances, the soldier still received his army pay and allowances.
(v)	Subsequent to Nov. 30, 1944, under the provisions of P.C. 9148 of 1944, soldiers detailed for industrial duty in the national interest received only their army pay and allowances including dependents allowance.
(vi)	Subsequent to Sept. 7, 1945, a soldier who voluntarily proceeds on leave without pay and allowances including dependents allowance for the purpose of accepting employment with a railway on railway track maintenance receives the wages paid by the railway for such work.
4.	At all times the railways paid wages of fifty-three cents (53 cents) an hour, less cost of board and lodging, in respect of all soldiers detailed for duty on railway track maintenance. The total amount payable by each railway was paid to the receiver general of Canada.
Up to, and including Nov. 30, 1944, a soldier engaged in railway track maintenance received full pay and allowances or, alternatively, the wages earned by him for the period and paid by the railway as above, whichever was greater. In either case the amount was paid to the soldier through his army pay account.
Subsequent to Nov. 30, 1944, until Sept. 7, 1945, in accordance with P.C. 9148, dated Dec. 5, 1944, men on industrial duty received only army pay and allowances.
On Sept. 7, 1945, industrial duty, as such, was discontinued. Thereafter soldiers were engaged in civilian industry on a voluntary basis only. They were given leave without pay and allowances from the army and were paid wages at current rates direct by the railways.
5.	Answered by No. 4.

Questions



PRISONERS OF WAR-GERMAN AND JAPANESE IN CANADA

Mr. PROBE:: 1.	On what basis and at what rates of pay are German and Japanese prisoners of war at present working for corporations or for individuals in Canada?
2.	In what general types of work are these enemy prisoners engaged?
3.	Are civilians available in Canada for the type of work now being done by enemy prisoners of war?
4.	Is the pay allotted by individuals or by corporations for prisoner of war services paid to the prisoners themselves or to the government of Canada?
5.	How many, (a) Japanese; (b) Germans, were absent from prisoner of war camps m employment to corporations or individuals m Canada as of September 1, 1945?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	There are no Japanese prisoners of war in Canada. German prisoners of war so engaged are employed under contract entered into between the Minister of Labour and the employer. The rate of pay which the private employer pays the government for use of prisoners varies with the type of employment, and is based on the estimated value of the prisoners' services in terms of the established rates payable to civilians in like employment.
2.	In essential employment for which civilian labour is not available and in areas where security conditions permit. The great majority of prisoners are employed in woods operations or in agricultural work. A small number are employed as unskilled labour in other industries.
3.	No.
4.	Paid to the government of Canada.
5.	(a) See answer to 1; (b) 13,464 prisoners housed in work hostels or on individual farms; 196 prisoners going out to work daily from internment camps.



WAR ASSETS CORPORATION-JEEPS

Mr. McCUAIG:: 1.	Has War Assets Corporation sold any jeeps up to this date?
2.	What is the corporation's policy for disposing of jeeps?
3.	Will jeeps be made available for purchase by the public; if so, how and when?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	No.
2.	The general policy of War Assets Corporation in disposal of motor vehicles is to dispose of them through recognized dealers. When jeeps have been declared surplus by
the Department of National Defence and are made available to the corporation, they will come within this general policy.
3.	(a) Yes, if and when they are declared surplus and are turned over to the War Assets Corporation for disposal; (b) Answered by 2, and 3 (a); (c) answered by 2, and 3 (a).



VOLUNTEERS FOR GENERAL SERVICE- COMMISSIONS

Mr. McCUAIG:: 1.	What is the number of persons who volunteered (general service) for the army from each military district in Canada between September 3, 1939, and June 1, 1945?
2.	What is the number of persons who were brought into the army undier the N.R.M.A. from each military district from the time of its coming into force and June 1, 1945?
3.	What is the number of persons granted commissions in the army from each military district between September 1, 1939, and June 1, 1945?
4.	What is the number of "other ranks" serving abroad who were granted commissions, giving the military district of enlistment?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Military District	Number
	1	48,250
	2	145,583
	3	55,495
	4	72,597
	5	22,183
	6	49,487
	7	32,268
	10	54,061
	Pacific command	54,746
	12	44,684
	13	46,919
	Outside of Canada	1,415
	Total		627,688
The	above figures include officers and other	
ranks,	male and female, and	also include
N.R.MA. soldiers who enlisted		for general
service.		
2.	Military District	Number
	1	11,631
	2	25,037
	3	6,098
	4	38,519
	5	16,391
	6	7,210
	7	7,139
	10	12321
	Pacific command	10,703
	12	12,221
	13	10,714
	Total ....	. 157,9S4
Questions

Military District	Number
1	3,099
2	10,379
3	5,392
4	6,739
5	1,844
6	2,778
7	1,912
10	3,478
Pacific command	4,291
12	2,426
13	2,737
Outside of Canada	261
Total . . .	. . 45,336
The figures above include males and females. In the case of other ranks granted commissions in Canada and overseas, the allocation by military district is according to the military district of original enlistment.
4.	Military District	Number
1	352
2	1,041
3	622
4	627
5	140
6	215
7	149
10	517
Pacific command	662
12	361
13	479
Outside of Canada	57
Total	5,222
The above figures include all personnel, male or female, granted commissions who at the time of being commissioned, had had service overseas in the present war. The figures are for the period up to June 1, 1945.



INTERNATIONAL LABOUR CONFERENCE IN PARIS

Mr. LAPALME:: 1.	On what date will the international conference of labour be held in Paris?
2.	Is Canada to be represented?
3.	If so, who is to represent Canada at this conference ?
4.	Are provincial ministers of labour invited to ^attend an international conference of labour?
5.	If so, are the expenses of such ministers paid by the federal government?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	October 15, 1945.
2.	Yes.
3.	Canada will be represented by a delegation of representatives of the federal government and of Canadian employers and workers

Mr. J. G. Turgeon and Mr. Alfred Rive will be the Canadian government delegates, with Mr. V. C. Phelan as alternate.
4.	The provincial governments have been invited to send representatives to accompany the delegation at the expense of the provinces, as has been the practice since the I.L.O. was set up.
5.	No.



HOUSING-LIMITS ON DWELLING UNITS ERECTED BY ANY ONE BUILDER

Mr. NICHOLSON:: What limits, if any, are placed on the number of dwelling units approved by the construction controller for erection by any one builder?


Mr. HOWE:: Licences for houses to be
erected by an individual builder are governed by the following policy of construction control: (a) for low cost houses being erected as part of an integrated housing project there is no limit; (b) for other low cost houses the limit is 50 units; (c) for higher cost houses, the limit is 5 units.



FEDERAL DISTRICT PROJECT

Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	Who are the technical advisers chosen bv the government for the federal district project and how were they chosen?
2.	What opportunity is to be afforded for review and discussion of proposals for the federa1 district project, (a) by public hearing.,, (b) by representations from tile city of Ottawa and other people residing in the proposed district; (c) by debate m parliament; (d) by authorities set up answerable through a minister to parliament?


Mr. MACKENZIE:: 1. The federal district commission is, by statute, the government agency directly responsible for development of the district of the national capital. Its administrative organization includes several technical experts. The technical services of the Department of Public Works are' also made use of by the government in this connection.
The chief technical consultant, chosen by the government to advise with regard to the development of the national capital and its surrounding area as a national war memorial, is Mr. Jacques Greber, architect and town planning expert of Paris, France, who was previously employed by the government in this capacity. In addition to the permanent technical experts of the commission and of the Department of Public Works and Mr. Greber, it is probable that it will be necessary

Questions
to obtain additional expert assistance from time to time with regard to particular aspects of the project.
In the past, various technical experts have been called in- to advise the government as to planning and reports have been made such as the Todd and White report of 1912, the Holt commission (federal plan commission) report of 1915, the Ewart plan of 1920, the Wright and Adams report of 1920, and the first Greber report of 1937.
2. (a) Opportunity has already been afforded for review and discussion of proposals by public hearings at the proceedings of the joint committee of the Senate and the House of Commons, appointed in 1944 to review speciai problems arising out of the location of the seat of government in the city of Ottawa. The committee considered the question of development of the Ottawa area. At that time representations were made by the city of Ottawa.
(b)	Answered in part by above. By order in council P.C. 5634 of August 16, 1945, the federal district commission was authorized to appoint committees to discuss development of the district of the national capital with rep-presentatives of municipalities, or private persons, or any other body, within the district.
(c)	The same opportunities for discussion of the work of the federal district commission, including that relating to the general plans for the development of the federal district, will be afforded as is given other projects in which the government of Canada is interested.
(d)	By order in council P.C. 5943 of September 7,	1945, the Prime Minister, as
President of the Privy Council, will report to parliament for the federal district commission.



NAVAL SERVICES-COFFEE

Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	From whom was the coffee purchased that have been supplied to the naval services over the past five years?
2.	What price was paid per pound?
3.	What grade or quality was demanded?
4.	What coffee substitutes were supplied naval services during the same period?
5.	What was the price per pound?
6.	From whom was this purchased?


Mr. HOWE:: 1. G. E. Barbour Co., North Market Wharf, Saint John, N.B.; Wilson & Keith, 429 Sparks street, Ottawa, Ontario; T. H. Estabrooks, Saint John, N.B.; Bakewell's Tea and Coffee Co., Edmonton, Alberta; W. H. Schwartz & Son, Halifax, N.S.; Gateway Grocers Ltd., Fort William, Ontario; Pure Gold Mfg. Co., Toronto, Ontario; T. B. Hayhoe & Co., Toronto, Ontario; Club Coffee Co., Toronto, Ontario; Dickson Importing Co., Regina,
Sask.; Boudrias Freres, Montreal, P.Q.; General Foods Ltd., 1800 Stirling Tower, Toronto, Ontario; Standard Brands, Montreal, P.Q.; Kearney Bros. Ltd., 147 St. Peter street, Montreal, P.Q.; Gamble Robinson, Ottawa, Ontario; Kelly Douglas Co., Vancouver, B.C.; Hudson's Bay Co., 325 Water street, Vancouver, B.C.; Can. Spice Mills, Quebec, P.Q.; Burnyeats Ltd., 157 Alexandria street, Vancouver, B.C.; Blue Ribbon Company Ltd., McFarland Bldg., Edmonton, Alta.; A. Jameson Coffee Co., Vancouver, B.C.; T. & M. Winter Ltd., St. John's, Nfld.; Harvey & Co. Ltd.. St. John's, Nfld.; Steers Ltd., St. John's, Nfld.
2.	Prices ranged from 26J cents to 35 cents per pound.
3.	According to naval specification V.14, sample of each shipment being analyzed through Department of Munitions and Supply.
4.	None.
5 and 6. Answered by No. 4.



ESTEVAN AIR TRAINING CENTRE

Mr. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: 1.	How' many men, if any, are still employed by the government at the former air training centre situated six miles south of Estevan?
2.	What makes of planes and how many of each have been dismantled at this place up to the present time?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: 1.	Two (2) officers and forty-four (44) other
ranks.
2.	Seventy-four (74) Anson aircraft.



WARTIME OILS LIMITED

Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	Is the company known as Wartime Oils Limited still in active operation; where is their head office and what size of staff is employed?
2.	What are the names of the directors, their occupations and places of residence?
3.	For what sum was this company capitalized and what amounts have been advanced to it from the public treasury since it came into being?
4.	What are the names of the companies, their general fields of operation and the sums of money advanced to each for oil drilling and exploration in Canada by Wartime Oils Limited up to March 31, 1945?
5.	What method of recovery is adopted to recover advances made to these companies?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	No. The company was wound up as of March 31, 1945. The affairs of the company are now carried on by the field manager, Mr. C. J. Stewart and one stenographer, at the head office in Calgary.
2.	The officers of the company were: president, Judge A. A. Carpenter, barrister, Edmonton, Alta.; vice-president, Grant Spratt, vicepresident Anglo Canadian Company Limited,
Questions

Calgary, Alta.; directors, Colonel L. D. M. Baxter, president Osier, Hammond & Nanton Limited, Winnipeg, Man.; A. H. Mayland, president, Gas & Oil Products Limited, Calgary, Alta.; secretary-treasurer, K. J. Morrison, chartered accountant, Calgary, Alta.
3.	This was a crown company, all of the shares being held in trust for His Majesty the King. Up to March 31, 1945, there had been advanced under drilling contracts the sum of $3,979,011.72.
4.	All of the financing done by this company was for the drilling of wells in the marginal area on the west flank of Turner valley, in the province of Alberta. Advances as of June 30, 1945, by wells were as follows:
Well
Total Advance
Anglo No. 10	 $184,118 41
Anglo No. 12	 174,370 04
Anglo No. 13	 183,489 81
Anglo No. 14	 178,307 62
Calmont No. 1A	 181,498 60
Oalmont No. 2A	 155,764 80
Chinook No. 1	 193,601 00
Chinook No. 2	 194,294 58
Lion-Sunray No. 3	 202.894 80
Okalta No. 12	 180,607 19
Okalta No. 13	 177,786 07
Okalta No. 14	 173,354 66
Okalta No. 15	 191,538 78
Okalta No. 16	 256,967 24
Okalta No. 17	 167,388 17
Okalta No. 19	 159,341 60
Okalta No. 20	 213,044 22
Okalta No. 21	 172,932 82
Pacific No. 6	 201,002 41
Pacific No. 7	 177,850 61
Valley No. 1	 176,109 85
Valley No. 2	 151,045 97
5.	The total production from all wells drilled under financing by Wartime Oils, less one-half of the landholders royalty, less production costs, is paid to the company in reduction of advances made. Up to March 31, 1945, there had been repaid to the company the sum of $608,400.00.



CANADIAN FIRE FIGHTERS CORPS

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	What was the total number of men sent from Canada to the United Kingdom in the Canadian fire fighters corps?
2.	What was the average (approximate) length of service for the men in this corps?
3.	How many were killed, wounded, injured or died of injuries or illness while overseas?


Mr. McCANN:: 1.	408.
2.	2 years, 8 months and 14 days.
3.	3 killed, 5 wounded and 3 seriously injured.
fMr. Howe.]



HUDSON BAY WATERS AND AIR SURVEY

Mr. KNIGHT:: 1.	Did the United States government at any time in the years of the late war make a survey of the waters and of the air over the waters of Hudson's Bay and its outlets?
2.	If so, did the Canadian government receive a copy of a report resulting from such survey?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	Yes. The United States army air forces, with the permission of the Canadian government, conducted aerial surveys of the northern and eastern approaches to the bay and along the west shore of the bay itself during the summers of 1942, 1943, and 1944.
2.	The Canadian government has been provided with copies of all aerial photographs taken in the course of these surveys.



WASCANA CREEK, SASK., WATER CONSERVATION PROJECT

Mr. McKAY:: 1.	Have submissions been received by the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act officials relative to a w a t e r conservation project along Wascana creek in the area between Tyvan and Regina, Saskatchewan?
2.	If so, what action has been taken thereon?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Agricultural investigations and reconnaissance surveys are being made.



LIVE STOCK-SLAUGHTERING CAPACITY OF INSPECTED PLANTS

Mr. McLURE:: 1.	What is the estimated slaughtering capacity of cattle, hogs, sheep and lambs in all the inspected plants in Canada?
2.	Is any attempt made by the Canadian meat board for the orderly receivings and marketings so as to avoid a glut on one cattle market and a scarcity on another?


Mr. GARDINER:: 

VALCARTIER CAMP

Mr. DORION:: 1.	What contracts were awarded by the Department of Munitions and Supply, from September 1, 1939, to April 1, 1945, for the erection of buildings, permanent or temporary, at Valcartier camp?
2.	What tenders were received by the Department of Munitions and Supply for each such contracts?


Clarence Decatur Howe: 1. Contracts were awarded
by the Department of Munitions and Supply, from November 4, 1940 to April 1, 1945, for the erection of buildings, permanent or temporary, at Valcartier camp as follows: (No contracts were awarded by Department of Munitions and Supply prior to November 4, 1940.
No. Contract Description of No.	Work
1	23-V1- 3 Construction of six Magazines	
2	23-V1-32 Construction of
Nurses' Quarters.
3	23-V1-33 Construction of
Lecture Huts, Training Centre .
4	23-V1 34 Construction Textile Refitting Shop	
5	23-V1-37 Construction Additional Hospital Accommodation .
6	23-V1-42 Construction of
Fire Hall	
7	23-V1-45 Construction Military Post Office .
8	23-V1-47 Construction Additional Accommodation	
9	23-V1-49 Construction of Addition to Detention Barracks ...
10	23-V1-52 Construction O.M.E.
Workshop	
11	23-V1-54 Construction Officers' Mess Bldg..
Name of Contractor
Compagnie de Construction Laviolette Ltee, Three Rivers,
P.Q	
Magloire Cauchon Ltd.,
Quebec, P.Q	
Magloire Cauchon Ltd., Quebec, P.Q	
A.	DesLauriers & Fils Ltee, Quebec, P.Q	
Lemelin & Walters,
St. Romuald, P.Q	
Magloire Cauchon Ltd.,
Quebec, P.Q	
Syndicat de Construction Moder-ne, Ltd., Quebec, P.Q	
Page Equipment & Construction Co., Ltd., Three Rivers, P.Q. ..
Page Equipment & Construction Co., Ltd., Three Rivers, P.Q. ..
Magloire Cauchon Ltd.,
Quebec, P.Q	
S.	F. Walters, Quebec, P.Q	
Date of Value of Award Award
Nov.	4/40	$90,965.00Jan.	29/42	10,939.00Feb.	5/42	13,636.00Mar. 17/42	6,622.00Apr. 24/42	16,981.00July 28/42	12,917.00Sept. 22/42	9,528.00Sept. 24/42	265,552.00Nov. 7/42	27,747.00Mar. 13/43	73,689.00Mar. 12/43	11,672.0012	23-V1-58 Construction Isolation Magazine and Transit Shed.13	23-V1-60 Construction six
Firing Shelters ..
14	23-V1-63 Construction of
Two Buildings ..
Magloire Cauchon Ltd.,
Quebec, P.Q	
Syndicat de Construction Moder-ne, Ltd., Quebec, P.Q	
Magloire Cauchon Ltd.,
Quebec, P.Q	
Apr. 21/44
Sept. 22/44
Mar. 23/45
19.695.00
8,733.00
20.820.00
Questions



DISPOSITION OF WAR MATERIALS

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What properties or assets, the ownership and control of which was vested in the crown, as set out in the report issued by the Department of Munitions and Supply on Government-Financed Expansion of Industrial Capacity in Canada as at December 31. 1944, have been sold or disposed of in any way?
2.	To whom was each such property or asset sold, and at what price?
3.	Which of the above sales were arranged and/or consummated, (a) by War Assets Corporation; (1>) by the minister or the Department of Munitions and Supply?
Mr. BLACKMOKE,:
1. Up to September 15, 1945, how many military (a) jeeps; (b) cars; (c) trucks; (d) machines of other kinds, have been sold by the government to farmers or other private users m each of the nine provinces of Canada?
2.	How many military buildings, such as barrack buildings, training school buildings, have been so sold, up to September 15, 1945?


Clarence Decatur Howe: These two questions refer
to the internal management of War Assets Corporation. It is proposed that a committee of the house will investigate this corporation, and call before it officers both of the corporation and of the department to go into these matters thoroughly. I may point out that it is customary, where a committee of the house does investigate a corporation such as the Canadian National Railways or 
the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, that questions are not asked in the house but rather are asked in the committee. Therefore I would request that these two questions be dropped and asked again in committee, where ainswers can be given by officers of the corporation, rather than in the house.


Mr. GRAYDON:: May I just bring up
one point? In the first place, this committee has not been set up; no notice has been placed upon the order paper so far that it will be set up, and until government policy in that regard has been made known, surely members of the house have a right to ask questions, rather than to follow the procedure now outlined by the minister.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Technically, that is true, but
I understand the committee will be announced this week. I could ask that the questions stand, and bring up this point later on. A tremendous amount of work would be involved and the answers to the questions probably would not be satisfactory unless they could be accompanied by an explanation by the officers of the crown company. Another factor is that these questions deal with current transactions, such as the sale of properties. Questions asked in the house are very disturbing to the interests of the government in carrying out such sales. There is no one so skittish as a man about to spend

Questions	________
a million dollars in the purchase of a new factory. We have had a good many disappointments, and we do not like to give reports on transactions of that kind until we actually have the agreement signed. Therefore these questions might stand.


Mr. KNOWLES:: Do I understand from
the minister that it is the intention of the government to set up a special committee to which these matters will be referred?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Provision will be made for
setting up the war expenditures committee with reference which will include War Assets Corporation. I presume a special sub-committee will be set up for that purpose.


Gordon Graydon: May I ask if we are to
have a repeat performance of what went on during the last few years in the war expenditures committee, with the committee sitting in secret?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I always thought that was up to the committee itself.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Since the minister is
agreeable it might meet the desire of all concerned if these questions were allowed to stand for another few days.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Questions stand.



ROYAL COMMISSION ON VETERANS' QUALIFICATIONS

Mr. McLURE:: 1.	Has the royal commission on veterans' qualifications been abolished; if so, when?
2.	When was said commission appointed?
3.	Who were or are the members of said commission?
4.	What were their salaries?
5.	What were its duties as a commission?
6.	In what provinces did they hold sittings?
7.	Did they finish their sittings in the province of Prince Edward Island?
8.	If not, why were they recalled from Charlottetown to Ottawa?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	No.
2.	By order in council P.C. 2486 on April 10, 1945.
3.	Wilfrid Bovey, Esq., member of Legislative Council of Quebec, Montreal, P.Q.; D. S. Lyons, Esq., Montreal, P.Q.; Hector Dupuis, Esq., Montreal, P.Q.; J. C. G. Herwig, Esq., Ottawa, Ontario; S. R. Ross, Esq., Windsor, Ontario; F. W. Smelts, Esq., Vancouver, B.C.
4.	Each member receives a fee of $20 per diem for each day engaged in the work of the commission, with the exception of Messrs. Smelts and Dupuis who receive no remuneration additional to that payable to them as
regional directors of national selective service. All members are paid actual and necessary travelling expenses while absent from their places of residence.
5.	To examine into the'problems involved and appropriate measures which may be taken to enable members of the armed forces to obtain appropriate credit in re-entering civilian occupations upon discharge, for trades, technical or other educational training or experience gained while in the armed forces and to report to the Minister of Labour thereon together with their recommendations as to what measures are advisable and appropriate in cooperation with the provinces, employers, or trades and labour organizations or otherwise to this end.
6.	All provinces.
7.	Yes.
8.	See answer to No. 7.



HAZELTON, B.C., POSTMASTERSHIP

Mr. ARCHIBALD:: 1.	Who is the present postmaster at Hazelton, British Columbia?
2.	When was he appointed?
3.	Is the present postmaster a veteran of the 1914-18 war, or of the last war? _
4.	Was the position advertised in the town of Hazelton? If so, by what means?
5.	Were any other applications for the position received?
6.	If so, were other applicants veterans of the 1914-18 war, or of the last war?
7.	By whom was the present postmaster r ecommended ?
8.	What was the revenue of this post office * for each of the years, 1942, 1943 and 1944?


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: 1.	Mathew Arthur Myros.
2.	22nd July, 1945.
3.	Yes (1914-18).
4.	No. Notice of the vacancy was sent in accordance with the regular practice to the provincial command of the Canadian Legion.
5.	Yes.
6.	Yes.
7.	Ed. T. Upplewaite.
8.	Fiscal year 1941-42, $2,034.37; fiscal year 1942-43, $2,356.27; fiscal year 1943-44, $3,374.30.



CORNWALLIS NAVAL STATION

Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	What is the cost of the Cornwallis naval station, at Deep Brook, Nova Scotia, (a) land;
(b)	improvements; (c) buildings; (d) total costs ?
2.	What has been the cost for supplies, upkeep and maintenance?
3.	How many naval personnel were in training on September 1, 1945?
4.	How many, (a) naval personnel; (b) civilians were on the staff and payroll on September 1, 1945?
Questions


Mr. MACDONALD (Halifax):: 1.	(a) Land, $65,00.00; (b) improvements
(grading, services, etc.), $1,974,618.44;	(c)
buildings, $7,124,025.19; (d) total, $9,163,643.63.
2.	From the 1st July, 1943, when directorate of maintenance was set up, to September 1, 1945, the costs for maintenance supplies, upkeep and maintenance, including fuel was $894,999.13. To segregate the costs incurred for supplies, upkeep and maintenance prior to the 1st July, 1943, would involve a tremendous amount of time and work.
3.	623.
4.	(a) Naval personnel borne in the pay ledgers of H.M.C.S. Cornwallis on the 1st September, 1945, totalled 11,446.
Note.-H.M.C.S. Cornwallis is now one of the largest Royal Canadian Navy discharge transit centres. Apart from the staff and those under training the majority of personnel borne for pay are in process of being demobilized. Many are on leave prior to final discharge.
Supply and medical personnel required to demobilize these large numbers form part of the present staff. In addition the usual barracks and maintenance staffs are required to accommodate personnel drafted to this establishment for demobilization routine.
(b)	12 Civil servants, 317 hourly rate civilian employees.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: 1.	What quantity of fuel was purchased for the Cornwallis naval station, Deep Brook, Nova Scotia, for each of the fiscal years ending March 31, 1943, 1944, 1945 and the current year to date?
2.	What was the grade and where produced?
3.	What was the cost per ton, the freight, demurrage, commission and total cost of each purchase?
4.	From whom were purchases made, and what tenders or alternative bids were received?
5.	What was total quantity and delivered cost each year of, (a) Nova Scotia fuel; (b) imported fuel?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Fiscal year ended 31st March, 1943, nil; fiscal year ended 31st March, 1944, 13,698 tons; fiscal year ended 31st March, 1945, 20,921 tons; 1945-46 to date, 5,934 tons.
2.	1943-44-Two types: Run of mine and slack. Both grades were produced in Nova Scotia.
1944-45-Purchases confined to one grade-slack. All purchases produced in Nova Scotia with the exception of 4,859 tons imported from

the United States, at a time when there was no suitable coal in the maritimes and to ensure a supply prior to a threatened strike in the maritime area.
1945-46, to date-Purchases confined to one grade-slack. Produced in Nova Scotia with the exception of 140 tons imported from the United States.
3.	1943-44

1,288 tons at $7.77 per ton f.o.b. Cornwallis; 461 tons at $6.07 per ton f.o.b. Cornwallis; 6,023 tons at $7.07 per ton f.o.b. Cornwallis; 2,156 tons at $7 per ton f.o.b. Cornwallis; 3,246 tons at $4 per ton f.o.b. mine, Westville, N.S.; 524 tons at $2.50 per ton f.o.b. mine, Alma, N.S.
1944-	45-1,082 tons at $6.12 per ton f.o.b. mine, Sydney, N.S.; 1,887 tons at $7.62 per ton f.o.b. mine, Sydney, N.S.; 1,371 tons at $8.02 per ton f.o.b. Cornwallis; 4,859 tons at $14.85 per ton f.o.b. Cornwallis; 222 tons at $3.86 per ton f.o.b. mine, Joggins, N.S.; 700 tons at $386 per ton f.o.b. mine, Joggins, N.S.; 300 tons at $3.86 per ton f.o.b. mine, Joggins, N.S.; 10,500 tons at $5.40 per ton f.o.b. mine, Westville, N.S.
1945-	46-140 tons at $14.85 per ton f.o.b. Cornwallis; 5,794 tons at $5.40 per ton f.o.b. mine, Westville, N.S.
Freight rates were as follows: Alma, N.S., to Cornwallis, $2.10 net ton; Westville, N.S., to Cornwallis, $2.10 net ton; Sydney, N.S., to Cornwallis, $2.60 net ton; Joggins, N.S., to Cornwallis, $2.60 net ton.
Demurrage rates were as follows:
First 48 hours, free; next 24 hours, $1 per car per day; next 24 hours, $1 per car per day; each 24 hours thereafter, $5 per car per day.
The above freight and demurrage rates are standard rates approved by the board of transport commissioners for Canada. No commissions were paid by Naval Service.
4.	Purchases were made from the following firms: S. Cunard & Co. Ltd., Halifax, N.S.; Old Sydney Collieries, c/o Dominion Coal Co., Montreal, P.Q.; A. P. Kelly, 436 Barrington St., Halifax, N.S.; Intercolonial Coal Co., New Glasgow, N.S.; Maritime Coal & Power Co., Ltd., Amherst, NS.; P. Burns & Co. Ltd., Toronto, Ontario.
It was neither practical nor economical to call for tenders on this coal. The department purchased coal direct from the producer and the distributor in the maritimes whenever possible and wherever the coal was available. All prices were set and allocations made by the coal controller.
5.	Answered by No. 3.

Questions



R.C.A.F.-NO. 8 REPAIR DEPOT

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	Are R.C.A.F. service personnel being used at No. 8 repair depot in Winnipeg to remodel war planes into civilian transport planes?
2.	If so, what rates of pay do such personnel receive ?
3.	What disposal will be made of the remodeled aircraft?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: 1.	No.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.



RESEARCH ENTERPRISES-DISPOSAL OF RADAR EQUIPMENT

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	Have instructions been given for the destruction of any or all parts of radar equipment at R.E.L. plant in Toronto?
2.	If so, on whose authority were these instructions given?
3.	Did any of the employees ask permission to buy material which is being destroyed?
4.	If so, were they granted the opportunity?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Yes. Research Enterprises Limited, however, has no authority to sell any crown property. When and if such is declared surplus and is transferred to war assets corporation for disposal, the rules governing disposal of war materials will apply.
4.	No, answered by No. 3.



CANADIAN ARMT OF OCCUPATION

Mr. MERRITT:: 1.	What was the total strength of the Canadian army of occupation in Europe on the 1st day of September, 1945?
2.	Of this total, how many were, (a) NRMA personnel; (b) general service personnel who, when given the opportunity of election, gave as their first preference for further service- service in the army of occupation; (c) general service personnel who gave service in the army of occupation as second preference; (d) general service personnel who gave service in the army of occupation as third preference?
3.	How many of the total of 2 (c) and (d) above had served six months or more in the theatre of war during actual operations against the enemy?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	1,177 officers; 19,088 other ranks.
2.	(a) 1,778.
(b) Number who did not wish to volunteer for service in the Canadian far east force (later known as the Canadian Army Pacific force) but indicated a desire for service with the Canadian occupation force; 594 officers; 5,489 other ranks.
(c)	Number who wished to volunteer for service in the Canadian far east force but who indicated that if not accepted for that force they desired to serve with the Canadian occupation force: 88 officers; 208 other ranks.
(d)	Number who (i) volunteered for service in the Canadian far east force and who indicated that if not accepted for that force they wished to be reallocated in accordance with individual priorities and the requirements of the service
or
(ii) did not volunteer for service in the Canadian far east force and who indicated a wish for reallocation in accordance with individual priorities and the requirements of the service: 495 officers; 11,613 other ranks.
3.	4,622 all ranks.



R.C.A.F.-PENHOLD STATION

Mr. CASTLEDEN:: 1.	What is the total weight of, (a) freight; (b) express shipments, received at the R.C.A.F. station at Penhold. Alberta, from March 1, 1945, to September 1, 1945, from other R.C.A.l. and R.A.F. stations in Canada?
2.	What quantity of, (a) radar equipment;
(b) other instruments, was included in these shipments?	.
3.	What instructions were given to the omciala at the R.C.A.F. station at Penhold, Alberta, regarding the disposal of radar equipment and other instruments at that station?
4.	What was the amount of such equipment on hand at that station as of September 1. 1945?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: 1.	512,990 lbs.
(b) 46,667 lbs.
2.	(a) 140,953 lbs.	_
(b) Other wireless equipment including instruments-418,704 lbs.
3.	Instructions were given to No 2 technical signals unit, Penhold, to route for repair all repairable spares required by the R.C.A.F. and to dispose of the remainder as follows: (a) Repairable spares previously indicated by War Assets Corporation as being saleable, to be shipped to a surplus equipment holding unit for subsequent transfer to War Asset Corporation ; (b) Unserviceable airborne spares which War Assets Corporation had indicated as not being saleable to be reduced to their predominant metal and disposed of as produce. Later this instruction was cancelled and superseded by an instruction whereby these spares were also to be held pending further advice from War Assets Corporation as to their disposal.
4.	(a) 8,260 lbs. (178 sets) of unserviceable radar equipment; (b) 17,240 lbs. (306 sets) of unserviceable wireless equipment.
Questions



RESEARCH ENTERPRISES-RADAR AND OPTICAL GLASS EQUIPMENT

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	Has any part of R.E.L. plant at Toronto been sold to the Corning Glass Company?
2.	If so, what was the sale price?
3.	What other bids were received, and for what amounts ?
4.	Will the R.E.L. plant continue the production of radar and optical glass equipment?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes, building No. 14 with services as
follows:	Lands, 8-185 acres; buildings, one
storey, 182 feet by 454 feet; two storey office, 31 feet by 125 feet; lavatory, 27 feet by 27 feet.
2.	8150,000.
3.	No other tenders were called.
4.	This is a matter that has not yet been determined.



VETERANS' LAND ACT-SASKATCHEWAN

Mr. BENTLEY:: 1.	How many veterans of this war have been settled in Saskatchewan under the Veterans Land Act, in (a) the park areas; (b) the prairie areas; (c) the Swift Current electoral district ?
2.	What is the largest farm settled on under the act and at what cost?
3.	What is the smallest farm settled on under the act and at what cost?
4.	What is the average sized farm settled on under the act and at what cost?
5.	In each ease, what are the locations by land descriptions and nearest trading point?


Mr. TUCKER:: _ L Financial assistance approved for establishment on full-time farms: (a) 56; (b) 30;
(c)	none.
2.	Area: 1278-8 acres; Cost: $4,800 for land and buildings, $1,200 conditional grant for equipment; Location: Pt. S.E. 24-13-6-W. 4th; Pts. NE 24-13-6-W. 4th; NW 24-13-6-W. 4th; Pts. SE 25-13-6-W. 4th; SW 25-13-6-W. 4th; Pt. NW 25-13-6-W, 4th; Pts. NE 25-13-6-W. 4th; NE 26-13-6-W. 4th; SE 35-13-6-W. 4th; NE 35-13-6-W. 4th.; Trading point: Medicine Hat 6i miles.
3.	Area: 10-92 acres; Cost: $5,000 for land and buildings, $1,000 conditional grant for equipment; Location: Lot 15, map 301, S.D. YD.; Trading point: Keremeos, B.C., 2J miles.
4.	Area: 201-85 acres; Cost: $4,071,10 land and permanent improvement, $1,095,46 conditional grant for equipment.
5.	See answers to 2 and 3.



AGRICULTURE AND COLONIZATION-SEPARATE STANDING COMMITTEES

Mr. WINKLER:: In view of changed conditions, will the govern* ment consider dividing the standing committee on agriculture and colonization into one on agriculture and one on immigration?


Mr. ILSLEY:: The government is willing
to give consideration to any changes in the constitution of committees such as those requested., but at the moment it is not obvious to the government what advantage would be gained by making this particular division of functions. Perhaps if the hon. gentleman would communicate with the government, setting out his reasons, the matter could be given consideration.



APPLE PRODUCTION

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	What was the total apple production in Canada in 1944?
2.	What was the apple production for each of the provinces in 1944 in, (a) barrels; (b) dollars and cents?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	The total apple production in Canada in 1944 was 5,943,000 barrels.
2.	Production and value of apples in
Canada, 1944 Production bbl.*
Nova Scotia	 1,754,000
New Brunswick	 99,000
Quebec	 300,000
Ontario	 873,000
British Columbia ... 2,917,000 * One barrel equals 135 pounds.
Note: Figures for the other four provinces are not available.



VETERANS LAND ACT-PURCHASE OF LAND IN ESSEX COUNTY, ONT.

Mr. CASTLEDEN:: 1.	Did the officials of the Veterans' Land Act purchase land in Essex county, Ontario, from a Mr. Oliver?
2.	What was the quantity of land purchased, and what was its location?
3.	What price was paid for this land?
4.	How was the value of this land determined?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	79-16 acres. Parts Lots 3 and 4 in the 5th Concession (L'Assumption) township of Sandwich West.
3.	$20,000.
4.	Land was carefully inspected by experienced departmental field officer. His appraisal
Value $ 4,872,000 348,000
1.197.000
2.660.000 13,730,000

Questions
report was reviewed and property examined by regional advisory committee. Committee recommended purchase at price paid and recommendation concurred in by district superintendent, Veterans Land Act, Toronto.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	What was the number of wage and salary earners insured under the Unemployment Insurance Act as at June 30, 1945?
2.	What was the number of wage and salary earners not insured under the Unemployment Insurance Act as at June 30, 1945?
3.	What was the amount to the credit of the unemployment insurance fund as at the same date?
4.	How many persons made application for benefits under the act during the year ending March 31, 1945?
5.	How many applications were, (a) granted; *(b) refused?
6.	What was the total amount of unemployment insurance benefits paid for the year ending March 31, 1945?
7.	What was, (a) the average time for which benefits were paid; (b) the average benefits paid?
8.	What wras the number of applications for benefits for the month of July in each year, 1943, 1944 and 1945?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	Estimated 2,282,000.
2.	Estimated in. armed services 762,000; estimated non-insured wage earners 620,000.
3.	$279,820,690.06.
4.	104,904.
5.	(a) 83,175; (b) 18,979. Claims pending as at June 30, 1945-2,750.
6.	$4,980,929.02.
7.	(a) 16 days; (b) $30.54.
8.	July, 1943, 1,087; July, 1944, 3,106; July, 1945, 10,886.



VETERANS' LAND ACT-PURCHASE OF PROPERTY NEAR RED DEER, ALTA.

Mr. SHAW:: 1.	Did the Department of Veterans Affairs or any other department of government purchase a block of land adjacent to the city of Red Deer, Alberta, for the purpose of establishing small holdings under the Veterans' Land Act?
2.	If so, what was the total acreage purchased and what was the total purchase price?
3.	How many small holdings are to be established in this block and what is the total actual or estimated cost of all improvements which will be made prior to sale to ex-servicemen? What will be the total sale price of each small holding?	_
4.	How many applications have been received for the purchase of small holdings adjacent to the city of Red Deer?
5.	Is it the policy under the Veterans' Land Act to accept applications for small holdings adjacent to Red Deer from those who did not reside in the Red Deer district at the time of enlistment?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Two such blocks have been purchased:
(a)	75 acres at cost of $5,625; (b) 61.64 acres at cost of $5,550.
3.	Block (a) has been subdivided into 62 lots, Block (b) has not been subdivided. The construction of 25 houses on block (a) has been contracted for at average unit cost of $4,438. Laying of water mains and sewers contracted for at cost of $34,184. Construction of roads under discussion with city authorities. It is not possible at the present time to give total sale price of each small holding.
4.	One application for financial aid to become established on a small holding property adjacent to Red Deer has been received and approved. There has been no allocation of properties within blocks (a) or (b).
5.	Yes.



ENLISTED MEN ON RAILROAD WORK, M.D. 10

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Were any enlisted men sent from M.D. 10 to Armstrong, Ontario, for railroad work during August and/or September, 1945?
2.	If so, how many men were involved, how long were they detailed to this -work, what was the nature of the same, and how many hours a day did they work?
3.	What pay did these men receive for such work?
4.	What rates were paid by the railroad for such service, and to whom?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	(a) 70; (b) The men were dispatched on Aug. 11, 1945 and were, originally, to remain until "freeze-up". However, with the change in policy in respect to industrial duty, to a voluntary basis, the detail finished on Sept. 7, 1945. Thereafter, any men employed at Armstrong were there on leave without army pay and allowances; (c) Railway track maintenance; (d) Ten.
3.	During the period Aug. 11, 1945 to Sept. 7, 1945: full army pay and allowances including dependents' allowance. See also answer to question No. 2 (b).
4.	During the period Aug. 11, 1945 to Sept. 7, 1945: (a) Ffty-three cents each working hour per soldier less $5.75 a week per soldier charged for board and lodging; (b) Receiver General of Canada.



*CEILING ON EXPORT PRICE OF PRAIRIE WHEAT

Mr. COLDWELL:: In view of the announcement to-day that a five-year ceiling is to be placed upon the export price of prairie wheat, are all other exports of Canadian products, including textiles, lumber
Questions

and pulp to be subject to similar decreases for the long-term maintenance or possible reduction of their war-time price ceilings?


James Angus MacKinnon: It appears to me that this question is based upon a wrong premise, because in my announcement with regard to wheat prices I did not say that there would be a five-year ceiling on wheat prices. In view of that circumstance I suggest that the question be dropped and possibly reworded.


Major James William Coldwell: Yes, reworded.
Question dropped.



KHAKI UNIVERSITY IN UNITED KINGDOM

Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	Has the Department of National Defence established a Khaki university of Canada in
the United Kingdom?
2.	If so, will the minister give the house full particulars in regard to cost, site, staff and functions ?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Cost: Costs additional to regular pay and allowances and maintenance of the troops while stationed overseas awaiting repatriation are as follows: (a) Civilian instructors at $12 per day plus expenses; (b) Modification of accommodation to provide suitable studying facilities estimated at $15,000; (c) Text books, etc. from the Canadian Legion War Services.
Site: Leavesden hospital, King's Langley, Hertfordshire, England.
Staff: As of 5 September, 1945: (1) An administrative executive of 7 officers under Brigadier G. E. Beament, O.B.E., BA.Sc.; (2) Heads of departments to the number of 10 Officers and an instructional staff of 45; (3) Six part time lecturers provided by the university of London.
Note: To assist in the organization of the departments, four professors from Canadian universities spent six weeks at' the Junior College. Three of them have returned to Canada.
A small group of civilian professors from Canada have been attached to the staff of Junior college-the number, at present, is four. With the exception of this group, the staff is made up entirely of service personnel.
Function:	The object of the Khaki
university of Canada is to provide, on a voluntary basis, facilities in certain university studies (including post-graduate studies), and vocational extension for selected personnel of the Canadian Army Overeas, other than the Canadian Army Occupation Force. The primary purpose of these facilities is to assist the student in effecting the process of readjustment involved in entering upon, or

resuming university studies or vocational pursuits in Canada after repatriation. Without prejudice to this primary object, and in appropriate cases where the progress made in a particular subject warrants, the secondary purpose is to provide, on a voluntary basis, an opportunity for students to write examinations leading to a credit in such subject at a recognized Canadian university.
It is organized in three branches: (1) The Junior college; (2) University Extension; (3) Vocational Extension.
Re (1)-The Junior college provides opportunity for students to take 1st and 2nd year work in Arts and Science, according to courses offered for extramural study by Canadian universities.
Candidates are recommended by commanding officers to the rehabilitation training selection board of their division, or equivalent formation. The function of the board is to pass upon the candidate's eligibility and qualifications and make recommendation to the authorities of the Junior college. Candidates accepted by the registrar of the Junior college are then posted to the college for a term of three months (with provision in certain cases for a second term). During the term, a student may study not more than two subjects. During his attachment to the Junior college, the student receives pay and allowances of his rank. Rations and quarters are provided.
Re (2)-The department provides opportunity for attachment to British universities in any faculty, or students of 3rd and 4th year standing or those qualified for postgraduate study.
Candidates are screened by a committee at Canadian military headquarters with the High Commissioner of Canada as chairman. On being accepted as possessing the qualifications necessary to profit by attachment to a British university, candidates are certified to the principal of the university of their choice, or, if no vacancies remain at that institution, places are secured at some other university offering the studies desired by candidates. All students attached to British universities receive pay and allowances of their rank together with a ration allowance. They must themselves pay for all tuition and all living costs.
Re (3)-The department provides opportunity for attachment to British technical institutes, agricultural schools, industries, of those deemed qualified to profit by such attachment.
Vocational attachments are on the same terms as those of university attachments, with

Questions
this exception, that personnel attached to industry or agriculture may receive a nominal honorarium from their temporary employer for work done.
Enrolment at Junior college level:
British Columbia	 69
Alberta	 51
Saskatchewan	 90
Manitoba	 51
Ontario	263
Quebec	 60
New Brunswick	 19
Nova Scotia	 16
Prince Edward Island	 2
United States	 10
British Empire	 7
Czechoslovakia	 1
Total all ranks	639
(Officers 3 per cent; other ranks 97 per cent; under 25 years 73 per cent; in 1st year 50 per cent; in 2nd year 50 per cent).


Mr. WINTERS:: 1.	What was the total Canadian fish catch in
1943	and 1944?
2.	What was the total fish catch for each of the provinces for the same period in dollars and cents?
3.	What was the total cod catch in 1943 and 1944?
4.	What was the total cod catch for the same period for each of the provinces in, (a) weight; (b) dollars and cents?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	12,358,757 cwt. in 1943.
11,743,167 cwt. in 1944.
2.	Quantity and value of fish caught and landed in Canada, 1943A4.
Note: In these tables, values are "as landed",
i.e. values to fishermen before fish are canned, dried, or otherwise processed. All figures for
1944	are subject to revision.
	Quantity	Landed Value
	cwt.	$
Prince Edward Island ..	. 332,405	1,869.266Nova Scotia 	. 2,995,929	12,827,765New Brunswick 	1,815,208	5,192,472Quebec 	1,148.645	3,879,186Ontario 	305.932	4,703,655Manitoba	358,646	3,427,614Saskatchewan 	104,866	773,181Alberta 	66,431	393,227British Columbia	5,230,536	15,643,941Yukon 	159	2,495
Landed
	Quantity	Value
	cwt.	$
Prince Edward Island .	. 272,227	1,797,308Nova Scotia 	. 3,345,591	14,851,376New Brunswick 	. 1,747,333	5,377,841Quebec 	, 984,960	3,377,205Ontario 	. 310,392	4,389,273Manitoba	293,231	2,830,060Saskatchewan 	. 129,588	1.032.061Alberta 	76,338	464,798British Columbia	4,583,226	17,333,347Yukon	281	3,1313.	2,155,179 cwt. in 1943.
2,364,672 cwt. in 1944.
4.	Quantity and value of cod caught and landed in Canada, 1943-44.
Landed
	Quantity	Value
	cwt.	S
Prince Edward Island ..	62,225	250,568Nova Scotia 	. 1,368,860	4,704,807New Brunswick 	156,255	539,301Quebec 	, 552,040	2,022,358British Columbia*	15,799	79,5711944 Landed	Quantity	Valuecwt.	$Prince Edward Island ..	. 42,237	153,986Nova Scotia 	. 1,659,945	5,796,408New Brunswick 	. 153.376	549,497Quebec 	. 499,700	1,872,275British Columbia*	9,414	52,260
* Grey cod only.



* WINNIPEG GRAIN EXCHANGE

Mr. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: Has the government any information with regard to the early reopening of the Winnipeg grain exchange?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.



WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-WESTERN CANADA

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	What is the unit cost of houses, (a) built; (b) in process of building, by Wartime Housing Limited in Fort William, Winnipeg. Regina, Saskatoon, Moose Jaw, Vancouver, in 1944 and 1945?
2.	Are building specifications for these houses the same in each of the cities mentioned?
3.	Were tenders asked for construction of 100 war-time houses in the Elmwood area in Winnipeg?
4.	If so, who submitted bids and what amounts were bid?
5.	To whom was the contract awarded?
Questions


Mr. HOWE:: 1.
(a)
Fort William	 Nil
Winnipeg	_	 Nil
Regina	 Nil
Saskatoon	 Nil
Moose Jaw	 Nil
Vancouver	 Nil
(Estimated)
(a) Project (b) Project
	No. 1		No. 2
Fort William 	.... Nil	Nil	NilWinnipeg 	
Nil $2,930	$3,347Regina 	
Nil	2,861	3,250Saskatoon	
Nil	2,950	NilMoose Jaw 	.... Nil	2,954	3,251Vancouver	.... Nil	3,300*	Nil
(Estimated)
Note: There are two housing projects in Winnipeg, Regina and Moose Jaw during 1945, one in the Spring and the other in the Fall. There was a greater proportion of larger houses in project No. 2 and an increase in the cost of labour.
2.	No.
3.	Yes.
4.	Two contractors, Bird Construction Company and Claydon Company Ltd., tendered on project No. 1 for 100 houses in Winnipeg. The lowest and chosen contractor was Bird Construction Company, amount of tender $293,035.00. It is government policy not to give the amount tendered by an unsuccessful tenderer.
5.	Answered by 4.



AGRICULTURAL PRICES SUPPORT BOARD

Mr. BARRETT:: 1.	What is the name, address and occupation of each member of the agricultural prices support board as set up under Bill 168 passed in 1944?
2.	What is the salary of each member of the board?
3.	Are any of the members of the board engaged in the public service?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	J. G. Taggart, Ottawa, chairman of agricultural prices support board, chairman of meat board; A. M. Shaw, Ottawa, director, marketing service, department of agriculture, temporary member; J. F. Booth, Ottawa, associate director, marketing service, agricultural economics, department of agriculture, temporary member.
2.	J. G. Taggart, $8,000.

3.	Yes. Mr. Shaw is employed full time as director of marketing service, for which he receives a salary of $8,500. Dr. Booth is employed full time as associate director of marketing service, agricultural economics, for which he receives a salary of $5,220. Mr. Taggart is chairman of the meat board.
I should like to make some further explanation with regard to this question and answer. The names as set out in the answer to the first question are J. G. Taggart, who has been appointed permanent chairman, and two members of the staff of the Department of Agriculture. These men are appointed only pro tem, and are not permanent members of that board. With that explanation the answer is suitable.



WHEAT PRICES

Mr. BURTON:: 1.	Did the government confer with any farmer organizations with regard to the setting of the price of wheat, as announced by the Minister of Trade and Commerce on Wednesday, September 19?
2.	If so, what organizations, and did anyone on behalf of the organized farmers agree to the price as announced?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	The government from time to time received the representatives of the various farm organizations on floor prices and individual members of the government have consulted with individual farm leaders. By the nature of the government's announcement on the price of wheat no prior disclosure of the actual terms could properly be, or was, made to farm organizations, the government accepting full responsibility for the terms of the policy announced.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
assistance in organization of provincial



CIVIL SERVICE

Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	Have any provincial governments asked the government of Canada to provide dominion civil service personnel to assist in the organization of the civil service of such province?
2.	If so, what provinces, and what numbers of personnel has each such province requested?


Mr. MARTIN:: May I reply to this question orally. The answer to the first question is yes. The governments of Manitoba and Saskatchewan have asked the federal government to lend some of its civil service personnel to assist these provincial governments in connection with classification and advising generally on technical matters. In respect to Manitoba the government has lent one official, and with regard to Saskatchewan consideration is now being given as to exactly
(b)
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
Nil
3300*

Questions
what officers the government of Saskatchewan would like to have help them in an advisory capacity.



MEMORIAL CROSS TO FOSTER MOTHER OF SERVICEMAN KILLED IN ACTION

Mr. SHAW:: What consideration, if any, has been given to the amending of order in council P.C. 4210 (as amended by P.C. 2135) to make possible the granting of the Memorial Cross to the foster mother of a serviceman who gave his life while a member of the Canadian armed forces?


Hugues Lapointe: The question of extending the award of the memorial cross to foster mothers and others was carefully reviewed in June, 1944 and is was considered inadvisable to extend the scope of issue for the reasons following:
The governing orders in council (P.C. 4210 of 27 August, 1940 as amended by P.C. 2135 of 28 March, 1943) provide for the issue of the cross "as a memento of personal loss and sacrifice on the part of mothers and widows of Canadian sailors, soldiers, airmen or merchant seamen who have laid down their lives fpr their country during the present war", from which it will be seen that the cross is intended as a recognition of the great sacrifice arising from the closest family ties.
Whereas the sacrifice does not permit of tangible recognition, nevertheless the memorial cross was instituted as a symbol of the personal loss suffered by a mother or widow whose sense of loss is necessarily deeper than that of others, and in order to preserve the underlying sentiment of the award it is felt that it must be restricted in this manner to those bearing the very closest and most clearly determinable ties of relationship.



DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Mr. HERRIDGE:: 1.	How many persons have been appointed to positions in the Department of Veterans Affairs since its inception in 1944?
2.	How many positions have been established where the official concerned is in receipt of $3,600 per annum or more?
3.	What was the previous army, navy or air force rank held by such persons holding these positions?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	5,594.
2.	104.
3.	Brigadier General 2; Colonel 4; Group Captain 1; Lieutenant-Colonel 10; Wing Commander 7; Major 43; Squadron Leader 4; Captain (Army) 12; Flight Lieutenant 4; Lieutenant (Army) 3; Flying Officer 1; Sergeant 2; Corporal 1; Private 7.
Without service in forces 3; two of these are female employees, the other is a medical officer who was rejected on application to join the armed forces.



COMMODITIES SOLD BY CANADA TO TJNRRA

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	What is the value of all commodities sold by Canada to UNRRA up to September 1, 1945?
2.	Of this amount, what was the value of, (a) manufactured products; (b) agricultural products?


Clarence Decatur Howe: 

TRADE AGREEMENTS

Mr. BAKER:: 1.	How many new trade agreements were entered into between Canada and other countries between 1935 and 1940?
2.	With what countries were such agreements made and in what year?
3.	How many new trade agreements has Canada made since 1940?
4.	With what countries were such agreements made and in what year?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	Twelve.
2.	1935 United States of America.
1936	Germany (provisional).
1937	United Kingdom; Haiti; Guatemala.
1938	Uruguay (modus vivendi); United States of America.
1939	Uruguay (2)	(modus vivendi);
United States of America (supplementary).
1940	Dominican Republic; United States of America (supplementary).
3.	Three.
4.	1941 Chile; Argentina; Brazil.

Questions



LAY-OFFS IN AUTOMOBILE INDUSTBY

Mr. FULTON:: How many workers were laid off in the motor industry of Canada as a result of cancellation of war contracts or of change over of plant equipment from war production to peace-time production types, between V-J day and September 17, 1945, inclusive?


Mr. MITCHELL:: Employment in Ford
Motors, General Motors and Chrysler Corporation at August 14, 1945, was 25,023; at September 17, 1945, it had dropped to 21,600, thus showing a net decrease of 3,423 between these two dates.



SALE OF WAR PLANTS

Mr. FULTON:: 1.	How	many war	plants	owned	by	theCanadian	government	were sold up	to	and
including September 17, 1945?
2.	How many of the war plants thus sold had been fully converted to peace-time production at that date?
3.	How	many war	plants	owned	by	theCanadian	government	were in	process	of	sale
as at September 17, 1945?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Ten.
2.	This information is not available in the department.
3.	Nine.
veterans' insurance


Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	How many offices for the issuance of insurance policies under the Veterans' Insurance Act have been established in Canada?
2.	Where is the office for the province of Alberta situated and who has been appointed to take charge of said office?
3.	When was this appointment made, and what salary and other expenses go with the position?
4.	Will the terms of the act be extended to cover the wives and families of all returned men?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	No active sales campaign has been anticipated for veterans insurance. Application for insurance may be made through the 19 district and sub-district offices in Canada of the Department of Veterans Affairs or by direct application to the superintendent of veterans insurance, Ottawa.
2.	Ttfo district offices are located in Alberta: District office "I", 217, 7th Ave. W., Calgary; District office "R", Redwood Bldg., 11250 Jasper Ave., Edmonton.
The officer in charge of each district office is the district administrator of the department.
3.	See answers to questions 1 and 2.
4.	This question relates to matters of policy and it is not the government's practice to disclose policy in giving answers to questions.



PROVINCIAL AIR CONFERENCE AT KAMLOOPS

Mr. FULTON:: 1.	Has the government received a copy of the proceedings of the first provincial air conference held at Kamloops, British Columbia, on May 24 and 25, 1945?
2.	Has the government received a request that consideration be given to the implementing of certain resolutions contained therein with a view to encouraging Canadian commercial aviation?
3.	If so, what action has been taken by the government ?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, I should like
to withdraw this question, and offer my apologies to the minister concerned. Two days ago I received from the body concerned, on whose behalf I asked the question, a wire asking that it be withdrawn. However, since receiving that wire, I have not had an opportunity to speak to the minister and indicate to him my intention to withdraw the question. I did send him a note this afternoon, which possibly he has not yet had time to open.
Question dropped.



AVAILABILITY TO FARMERS OF ARMY TRUCKS AND TRACTORS

Mr. JAENICKE:: 1.	Was the sale of army trucks and field artillery tractors to farmers in Markham, Ontario, by the War Assets Corporation, as set forth in a Canadian Press dispatch of September 20, held with the approval of the government?
2.	Is it the intention to hold sales of such trucks and tractors on a similar basis in western Canada?
3.	Will a priority be given in the purchases of such trucks and tractors?
4.	If so, to whom?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	These direct sales are conducted for farmer purchasers only who are certified by the Canadian Federation of Agriculture.
4.	Answered by No. 3.



AGRICULTURAL PRICES SUPPORT ACT

Mr. MARSHALL:: 1.	Has the government proclaimed section 9 (the section which provides the authority to buy and sell agricultural products and to make deficiency payments) of the Agricultural Prices Support Act?
2.	If not, when will this be done?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	No.
2.	This is a matter of government policy which will be announced in due course.

Questions



RADIO BROADCASTING-STATION CKEY

Mr. COLD WELL:: 1.	Does tlie Canadian Broadcasting Corporation own stations CBL and CJBC in the city of Toronto?
2.	Who are the owners of CKEY?
3.	Has CKEY been granted authority or permission to broadcast commercial American network programmes over their facilities? If so, what programmes and what financial arrangements are involved?


Mr. McCANN:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Toronto Broadcasting Co., Limited, 44 University avenue, Toronto, Ontario.
3.	Yes temporarily in respect to programs which can not be carried on CBC networks and as supplementary station for certain Dominion network programmes on CJBC. So far RCA Victor-CKEY receives 50 percent network rate after deducting frequency discount.



MOUNTED POLICE PERSONNEL-REGULATIONS RESPECTING MARRIAGE

Mr. CROLL:: 1.	Are R.C.M.P. personnel not permitted to marry until after they have served seven years on the force?
2.	If so, what is the reason for this regulation?
3.	Is the R.C.M.P. the only service in which this regulation is in force?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	No. The marriage regulations of the
R.	C.M. Police were modified in April, 1945, by increasing the married establishment from 45 per cent to 50 per cent of the total uniformed strength of the force, which, in normal circumstances, may permit marriage after a minimum service of five years.
2.	The reasons for the existing regulations are: (a) To ensure receipt of an adequate salary, in order to maintain a home. (It should be remembered that a Constable of the force does not receive the maximum pay of his rank until his eighth year of service.) (b) Mobility.
3.	No. Paragraph 936 of the King's Regulations and Orders, 1939, fixes a married establishment for "other ranks" of the permanent force, Canadian Army.



NO. 6 S.F.T.S. MOWING EQUIPMENT

Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	Will the mowing equipment at No. 6
S.	F.T.S., Dunville, Ontario, be declared surplus and released for sale?
2.	If so, when?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: 1.	A survey of all aerodrome maintenance equipment is presently being conducted with 47696-39'J
a view to ascertaining that portion of equipment, including mowing equipment at No. 6
S.F.T.S., surplus to R.C.A.F. requirements.
2.	It is expected that this survey will be completed within thirty days at which time any surpluses will be declared to War Assets Corporation for disposal.



RESEARCH ENTERPRISES BUILDING NO. 14, LEASIDE

Mr. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: 1.	Was building 14, Research Enterprises, Leaside, sold?
2.	If so, to whom?
3.	What was the date of sale?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Corning Glass Company.
3.	June 15, 1945.



PRISONERS OF WAR IN CANADA

Mr. FLEMING:: 1.	How many enemy prisoners of war are now held in Canada?
2.	How many have been returned to Europe (by nationalities) ?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	34,051.
2.	1,245 in all. Of these 848 were members of the German armed forces, 302 German merchant seamen and 95 Italian merchant seamen.



DOMINION BONDS PURCHASED BY U. S. CITIZENS

Victor Quelch: What is the amount of dominion bonds purchased by American citizens non-resident in Canada since the declaration of war in each of the years from 1939 to 1945?


James Angus MacKinnon: Total sales of direct dominion issues of bonds to residents of the United States reported by Canadian security dealers and banks to the Dominion Bureau of Statistics follow:
(Millions of
Year	Can. $)
1939-Sept,	to Dec	 7-8
1940		 17-2
1941		 15-1
1942		 28-0
1943		 74-0
1944		 35-9
1945-Jan.	to June	 49-6
These figures do not include the sale of new dominion issues in the United States in 1941 and 1943 in connection with the refinancing of some issues redeemed in the United States. There were also issues called for redemption in the United States in 1943 and some purchases by Canadians from nonresidents in connection with "switches" in their holdings of outstanding securities.
Questions



OTTAWA HOUSING PROJECT NORTH OF CARLING AVENUE

Mr. PROBE:: 1.	Is the housing project north of Carling avenue, about one-half mile west of McKellar golf club, Ottawa, being sponsored by the Veterans' Land Act?
2.	Has the department authorized a "no admittance" sign to this project? Is there a watchman at the entrance and does he allow inspection of this project by veterans and their families?
3.	Are continuous inspections being made by land act inspectors of the buildings?
4.	What interim payments to contractors have been authorized on this project?
5.	What explanation for the collapse of the foundation of the second building from the southwest corner in this project has been received by the department?
6.	What percentage mixture of concrete or other binding material is specified for use in the basement of this building? What percentage mixture is being used?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1.	Yes.
2.	No-this is the general contractor's responsibility. A "No trespassing" sign has been erected by the general contractor. A watchman is employed by the general contractor in accordance with the terms of the contract. Inspection has been allowed but is not encouraged as it would interfere with the contractor's operations. Permission would be the contractor's responsibility during course of construction. When houses are completed inspection by interested veterans will be encouraged.
3.	Yes.
4.	Monthly progress estimates are paid upon submission by the contractor and audit by the treasury department.
5.	The foundation did not collapse. A foundation wall was accidentally knocked down by impact of a five-ton tractor and bulldozer working in wet clay in back-filling operations.
6.	Standard make of pre-cast concrete block, laid in cement mortar 1 to 3 mix is used for the foundation walls. Strength of block is 100 lbs. per square inch. 2000 lb. concrete is used for wall footings, all as specified.



INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK-LOANS

Mr. MANROSS:: 
Mr. MAYHEW:: The Industrial Development bank is not a branch of the dominion government but a subsidiary of the Bank of Canada.
Section 29(1) of the Industrial Development Bank Act requires that "the bank shall, within twenty-one days following the end of each calendar month, make up and transmit to the Minister of Finance in such form as he may prescribe, a statement of its assets and liabilities at the close of business on the. last day of the preceding month." This statement as at August 31, 1945, appeared in the Canada Gazette of September 22, 1945, and showed Loans and Investments, (excluding dominion government securities) at $711,965,87.
In addition, section 29(2) provides that "The Bank shall make up and transmit to the Minister of Finance at least once ini its fiscal year or more frequently if so directed by the minister, in such form as he may prescribe, a classification of its loans and investments and of the loans guaranteed by it." Provision is made for the publication of this statement in the Canada Gazette following its receipt by the minister.



FREE PORTS IN CANADA

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	Has a special committee been appointed by the government to study the question of establishing and exploiting free ports in Canada?
2.	If so, (a) at whose request; (b) what are the names, addresses and occupations of members of the committee?
3.	Is there a member of the committee presently residing in any portion of Nova Scotia? If so, what is his name and address?
4.	What are the powers of this committee?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	An interdepartmental committee has been formed consisting of representatives of the departments interested.
2.	(a) The city of Quebec has made recommendations to the government that legislation be introduced to provide for the establishment of free ports, and the above mentioned committee has been appointed to report on the matter; (b) J. E. St. Laurent, vice-chairman of the National Harbours Board, chairman; Dr. C. A. Annis, Department of Finance;
H.	W. Brighton, Department of Trade and Commerce; G. N. Bunker, Department of National Revenue; and a representative of the Department of Munitions and Supply, not yet appointed.
3.	No.
4.	To study and report on the specific recommendations submitted by the city of Quebec and on the general question of the establishment of free ports in Canada.

Questions



FAMILY ALLOWANCES-CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	Are children within the age brackets of the Family Allowance Act, denied the family allowance benefits if living in charitable institutions?
2.	Are parents of children living in charitable institutions denied the benefits of family allowance?


Mr. CLAXTON:: Payment is made to
parents maintaining children in accordance with the provisions of the act and regulations, even though such children may be in institutions; but the act does not permit direct payment to institutions as they are defined in the regulations.



PETITCODIAC RIVER POWER DEVELOPMENT

Mr. HAZEN:: Has a report been received by the government on the proposed Petitcodiac river power development plan?


Mr. GLEN:: No. It is expected the report will be received within the next few weeks.



WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-PROVISION FOR RETURNED SERVICE PERSONNEL

Mr. FLEMING:: 1.	How many houses have been constructed by Wartime Housing Ltd.?
2.	How are they distributed by provinces?
3. How many of them are earmarked for occupation by, (a) returned personnel; (b) families of deceased service personnel?
4.	How many houses are, (a) now- in course of construction; (b) contracted for, by Wartime Housing Ltd., or under contract with Wartime Housing Ltd.?
5.	How are they distributed by provinces?
6. How many of them are earmarked for occupation by. (a) returned service personnel; (b) families of deceased service personnel?
7.	What is the contract price of such housing, and by what method is it determined?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	18,992 houses as of September 15, 1945.
2.	British Columbia, 2,135; Alberta, 350;
Saskatchewan, 50; Manitoba, 400; Ontario, 10,531; Quebec, 2,882; New Brunswick, 400; Nova Scotia, 2,244; total, 18,992.	.
3.	The last 1,287 housing units constructed were earmarked for servicemen's families and any vacancies occurring in the remaining 17,705 units were and are likewise earmarked. Families of deceased service personnel are given first preference when the deceased was the head of the home.
4.	(a) and (b) 4,598 houses. A house is considered to be under construction when the contract is awarded.
5.	British Columbia, 800; Alberta, 400; Saskatchewan, 600; Manitoba, 450; Ontario, 1,400; Quebec, 578; New Brunswick, 100; Nova Scotia, 270; total, 4,598.
6.	All are so earmarked as the need arises. Refer also to answer for question 3.
7.	The contract price of such housing now being built under lump sum contracts varies from an average of $2,860.86 to an average of $3,749.73 depending on the location, time of letting the contract and types of houses built. The final cost of cost plus fixed fee contracts can not now be determined since the contracts have not as yet been completed, but the fixed fee per house for these contracts varies from $90 to $125 depending on the number of houses to be constructed under the contract.
The contract price is determined by competitive tenders whenever satisfactory tenders can be obtained. Cost plus fixed fee contracts are awarded only when unsatisfactory tenders have been received or where the urgency of commencing work is such that there is not sufficient time to call for tenders.



INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK-LOANS

Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	What are the locations of the branches of the industrial development bank, and what is the name of the manager of each?
2.	How many loans have been made by the bank?
3.	What is the total amount of such loans?
4.	What amount has been loaned in each province?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Montreal, S. R. Noble, general manager; Toronto, J. C. Ingram, supervisor; Vancouver, N. C. Tompkins, supervisor.
2,	3 and 4. The Industrial Development bank is not a branch of the dominion government but a subsidiary of the Bank of Canada.
Section 29 (1) of the Industrial Development Bank Act requires that "The bank shall, within twenty-one days following the end of each calendar month, make up and transmit to the Minister of Finance in such form as he may prescribe, a statement of its assets and liabilities at the close of business on the last day of the preceding month." This statement as at August 31, 1945, appeared in the Canada Gazette of September 22, 1945, and showed loans and investments (excluding dominion government securities) at $711,965.87.
In addition, Section 29 (2) provides that "The bank shall make up and transmit to the Minister of Finance at least once in its fiscal year or more frequently if so directed by the minister, in such form as he may prescribe, a classification of its loans and investments and
Questions

of the loans guaranteed by it." Provision is made for the publication of this statement in the Canada Gazette following its receipt by the Minister.



WARTIME HOUSING LIMITED-PRIORITIES

Mr. FLEMING:: 1.	What priorities are now in effect in favour of Wartime Housing Ltd. with respect to the purchase, acquisition of control of building materials of all kinds?
2.	When did each of such priorities come into effect ?
3.	When does the government intend to abolish such priorities?


Mr. HOWE:: 1.	Priority assistance is given to Wartime Housing Limited with respect to the purchase of plumbing supplies, roofing, lumber, mill-work, wood shingles, gyproc, rock wool, asphalt shingles, cedar grain asbestos shingles, roofing materials, furnaces, nails.
2.	April, 1941.
3.	These priorities will be abolished when Wartime Housing Limited no longer requires assistance in building low rental houses for veterans and their families.



STEAMSHIP SUBSIDIES

Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	What amount of money by way of subsidy or other assistance was paid to the North Shore Steam Ship Company Limited, in 1944, and what is the expiry date of the present contract?
2.	What amount of money was paid by way of subsidy or other assistance to the New Bras D'or Steam Ship Company Limited, in 1944, and what is the expiry date of the present contract ?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	$25,000, plus $3,857.66 from Steamship subsidies war stabilization fund. Present contract expires close of navigation 1945-46.
2.	$18,000, plus $2,681.77 from Steamship subsidies war stabilization fund. Present contract expires close of navigation 1946-47.



POSTAL SERVICE-PREFERENCE TO RETURNED SERVICE PERSONNEL

Mr. BRYCE:: Does the Post Office Department give preference to ex-members of the armed forces when letting mail contracts?


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: No. Section 67 of the Post Office Act requires that contracts shall be awarded to the lowest tenderer who offers sufficient security for the faithful performance of the contract.



VETERANS LAND ACT-PROPERTY EAST OF BOWMANVILLE

Mr. STEPHENSON:: 1.	Did the government purchase land on highway No. 2, about two miles east of Bowmanville, for soldiers' small holdings, under the Veterans' Land Act?
2.	If so, (a) how much land; (b) at what price?
3.	How many houses will be built on this property and of what size?
4.	When will such houses be ready for occupancy?


Mr. TUCKER:: 1. Y'es.
2 (a) 11} acres; (b) $1,468.75.
3.	Property subdivided into ten lots. Four houses are under construction. Average size 14,172 cubic feet. Two of the houses have four rooms and bath and two five rooms and bath.
Plans for next year's building programme have not been definitely settled.
4.	About December 15, 1945.



TORONTO MAIL SERVICE

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What is being done to give a better mail delivery to the residential districts of Toronto?
2.	What steps have been taken by the department to employ more letter carriers and resume pre-war mail service in the city of Toronto?


Ernest Bertrand: It is intended to resume the two delivery letter carrier service to residential districts when a sufficient number of experienced postal employees, who are on active service, return to civil duty.



DOMINION ELECTIONS


Mr. FRASER:: 1.	How many ballot boxes were bought for the 1945 federal election?
2.	From whom were they bought, and what was the cost per box?
3.	Were any of these boxes made in the United States of America? If so, how many and who supplied same?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	2,000.
2.	These ballot boxes were made at the Kingston penitentiary from material secured from various sources, at a cost of $1.32 each.
3.	No.



FAMILY ALLOWANCES


Mr. FRASER:: What action has the government taken with regard to the granting of family alloivances to wards of Children's Aid society?


Brooke Claxton: Where Children's Aid societies are maintaining children within the meaning of the Family Allowances Act, they may on application qualify for payment.

Questions as Orders for Returns



DAMAGE BY STORMS TO TORONTO ISLAND LAKEFRONT PROPERTY

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has the attention of the Minister of Public Works been called to the inroads made by storms, and the washing away of part of the breakwater and some groynes on the south shore and lagoons of Toronto island, on the lake front, and the heavy damage done to private property and the government breakwater there?
2.	If so, what action has been taken in the matter to save further damage, (a) of a temporary nature; (b) of a more permanent shore protection?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: 1.	Yes.
2.	Report being obtained from the district engineer at Toronto.
houses OF PARLIAMENT-DISTRIBUTION OF WORK


Mr. CHURCH:: What has been done to carry out the proposals made in this house for a conference of the two houses of parliament so as to increase the efficiency of parliament by an arrangement to give the other branch in another place more useful and additional public work to do?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The government has not
considered it appropriate to arrange a conference of the two houses of parliament with a view to increasing the efficiency of parliament, but arrangement of the work is a matter of continual consideration by the leader of the government in this house and the leader of the government in the senate.


Gordon Graydon: And some progress is
being made?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Oh, yes.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. CAMPBELL:: 1.	Did the government through the Indian department or otherwise, about 1906, purchase the original Thunderehild Indian reserve, situated between the Battle and North Saskatchewan rivers, w'est of the town of Battleford, in Saskatchewan?
2.	If not, did the government direct, or through the Indian department, sell the same reserve for the Thunderehild band?
3.	If sold, who were the purchasers?
4.	What was the purchase price?
5.	What amount has been paid up to date?
6.	What amounts, if any, are now owing the Thunderehild band in (a) principal; (b) interest?


James Allison Glen: Return tabled.


PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE-SASKATCHEWAN- FIELD INSPECTORS AND SUPERVISORS
Mr. JAENICKE:: 1.	What wrere the names of the field inspectors and supervisors operating in the
province of Saskatchewan under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act in 1944?	_
2.	How long was each of them employed in
1944?	.	.
3.	What salary did each of them receive in
1944?	.
4.	What was the amount of the travelling expenses paid to each of them in 1944?


Mr. GARDINER:: Return tabled.


JAPANESE NATIONALS
Mr. REID:: 1.	How many of Japanese race and origin are resident in each of the nine provinces?
2.	Of the twrenty-three odd thousand Japanese resident in Canada, how many have signified their willingness to return to Japan?
3.	How many of Japanese race and origin were interned at the commencement of the war with Japan and how many are still in internment camps?
4.	Has the government any record of the number of Japanese citizens, who left Canada from 1938 to December, 1941?
5.	How many of these were born in British
Columbia ?	.
6.	Is the government aware that a Canadian born Japanese has been named as one of the most brutal persons in dealing with our members of the forces in Japanese hands?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: Return tabled.


PRODUCTION OF PORK AND BEEF
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	What was the total production in pounds of pork and beef in each of the years 1943, 1944 and up to July 1, 1945, (a) in Canada as a whole; (b) in Manitoba; (c) in Alberta;
(d)	in Saskatchewan?
2.	What floor prices, if any, have been set on the said products at any time during the present year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.


CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-PERSONNEL SENT TO GREAT BRITAIN SINCE V-E DAY
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	How many officers and other ranks, including women, in the Canadian navy, army and air force, have been sent from Canada to Great Britain or Europe since Y-E day?
2.	Why were they sent in each case?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.


HOUSING
Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	How many houses will be built during 1945,
(a)	under National Housing Act supervision;
(b)	by Wartime Housing Limited; (e) by municipalities; (d) by private builders; (e) by limited dividend corporations; (f) by veterans land administration?
2.	What is the estimated total number of housing units being built in Canada during 1945?
3.	How many limited dividend corporations have been formed in accordance with the National Housing Act of 1944?
Questions as Orders for Returns

4.	How many agreements with municipalities have been entered into in accordance with the National Housing Act of 1944; and with what municipalities have agreements been made?
5.	What grants have been made for research purposes as provided by the National Housing Act of 1944?
6.	Who has been appointed as director of lousing; and what are his qualifications?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.


SOLDIER SETTLEMENT-REQUESTS FOR FREE TITLE WITHOUT FURTHER PAYMENT
Mr. FAIR:: 1.	From January 1, 1943, to June 30, 1945, were any requests from (a) organizations; (b) individuals, received by the Prime Minister, the Minister of Mines and Resources, the Minister of Veterans Affairs, the director of soldier settlement and Veterans Land Act or any other department of the government asking that veterans of great war I who hold land under contract with the soldier settlement board be given clear title without further payment?
2.	If so, how many, and what are the names and addresses of those from whom such letters were received?
3.	During the same period, were any letters or other communications received by the individuals and departments enumerated above, stating that if clear titles, as requested, were granted, requests for refunds by those who have already paid up o>r are continuing to make payments would be made?
4.	If so, how many, and what are the names and addresses of those from w'hom such letters or communications were received?


RIDING MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK TIMBER LIMITS
Mr. ZAPLITNY:: 1.	What are the names and addresses of all firms or individuals who have bought, or contracted for, timber limits in the Riding Mountain national park in each year 1940 to 1945, both inclusive?
2.	How many feet of lumber were taken out in each case?
_ 3. What was the price paid to the government in each case?


James Allison Glen: Return tabled.


CIVIL SERVICE-EMPLOYMENT OF WOMEN
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	How many women civil servants, (a) permanent; (b) temporary, were employed by each department of the government in Ottawa, at March 1, 1945?
2.	How many women civil servants, (a) permanent; (b) temporary were employed by each department of the government in Ottawa, at September 10, 1945?


CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-GROCERIES AND FOODSTUFFS ON HAND
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	What stock of staple groceries and foodstuff had the Canadian army on hand in Canada, Great Britain or other countries at September 1, 1945?
(Mr. Nicholson.]
2.	What stock of staple groceries and foodstuff had the Canadian navy on hand in Canada or other countries at September 1, 1945?
3.	What stock of staple groceries and foodstuff had the R.C.A.F. on hand in Canada or other countries at September 1, 1945?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.


N.R.M.A.-DESERTERS AND DEFAULTERS-FARM LEAVE, ETC.
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	(a) How many (i) deserters, (ii) defaulters, of the N.R.M.A. personnel, by provinces, still remain unaccounted for? (b) How many have been prosecuted, by provinces, and of these how many have received sentences of imprisonment?
2.	(a) How many N.R.M.A. personnel were in
the army as of September 1, 1945?	(b) How
many as of September 1, 1945, were absent on (i) farm leave, (ii) because of being needed in industry, and (iii) for other reasons? (c) How many N.R.M.A. personnel have been discharged since V-E day (i) upon medical grounds, (ii) on any other grounds?


AIRCRAFT &quot;f&quot; FOR FREDDIE
Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	Under what auspices was the aircraft known as "F" for Freddie, flown across Canada?
2.	Was the government aware that this aircraft was stunt-flying over cities endangering the safety of Citizens? If so, were any instructions given in respect to the conduct of this aircraft during its exhibition tour?
.	3. What are the government regulations
respecting the flying of aircraft over towns and cities, and what are the military regulations respecting the same?
4.	Is stunt flying permitted by any aircraft flown under government or defence supervision?


MISS HELEN DOHERTY
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	Is Miss Helen Doherty writing a report on her trip to Europe?
2.	If so, is it finished?
3.	Was it sent to any women's voluntary organizations in Canada?
4.	If so, to what women's voluntary organizations was it sent?
5.	Did any of these organizations comment on the value of the report?
6.	If so, what are the names of the organizations?
7.	When will the report be published?
8.	Is Miss Doherty doing any ivork in connection with repatriates?
9.	If so, is she making a report on this work?
10.	When will it be published?
11.	What experience has Miss Doherty had in connection with repatriation?


Mr. McCANN:: Return tabled.

Questions as Orders for Returns


AIRPORTS-CANADA, NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1.	How many cost plus contracts were given by the government in Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador, for construction of airports of R.C.A.F. stations?
2.	What was the amount of each of these contracts and where were those stations located?
3.	What is the total amount of overpurchases (surpluses) on each of these contracts of goods and materials not used and turned over to the construction equipment valuation board to be turned over later to the War Assets Corporation?
4.	What percentage of those surpluses have been disposed of, and by what department or corporation?
5.	What was the total value of construction equipment such as shovels (power), caterpillars, trucks of all kinds, rollers and cars, purchased by the government in connection with airport construction in addition to that rented from the contractors?
6.	What are the total rentals for plant and equipment used or rented by the contractors on those contracts which were on a cost plus basis?
7.	What amounts have been charged to the government for repairs to such equipment (rented) at each of these contracts, (a) repair parts; (b) labour or mechanics' wages; (c) freight or aeroplane charges on such repairs?
8.	What instructions were given by the minister, if any, to the engineers in charge of the works at these stations as to control or limiting the charges for heavy equipment?
9.	Are there any instances where more than the new price of equipment has been paid to contractors for rental?
10.	If so, did the government take over such equipment, or what disposition was made of it?
11.	If same was taken over, to what department was it transferred?


WATSON LAKE, YUKON, AIRPORT
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1.	At the construction of the airport at Watson Lake, Yukon, R.C.A.F. station, were the contractors for this station the same as those who had the contract for Tofini station?
2.	If not, were any of the directors on boards of construction companies which interlocked?
3.	Who were the directors of the construction company which held the contract for Watson Lake station?
4.	Are any of them also, or were they, directors of the Coast Construction Co.?



HOUSING-ELIGIBILITY FOR LOANS  NATIONAL HOUSING ACT

Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	Are municipally-owned limited dividend corporations eligible for loans under part two of the National Housing Act?
2.	What criteria have been applied to ensure that the 50,000 houses to be built in Canada within one year after V-E day will be in the localities and for the families, including veterans' families, whose needs are greatest?
3.	What is to prevent the wealthy from outbidding the rest for materials and skills?
4.	What safeguards apply to prevent collusion between owners of high-priced slum property and the financial institution or its subsidiary offering a nominal price to a municipality for the same site in cleared condition?
5.	Of the five million dollars appropriated for research and information by the National Housing Act in August, 1944, (a) what sums have been spent on research; (b) on dissemination of the results thereof?
6.	Are the Department of Labour and the wartime bureau of technical personnel files being used to secure personnel for reconstruction projects?
7.	How many professional persons have been added to N.H.A. staff in the past six months?
8.	How many professional persons have left N.H.A. in the past six months?



TOFINI, B.C., AIRPORT

[Stage Direction]
Mr. BLACK (Yukon,!:
1.	Who were the contractors on the construction of the airport at Tofini, B.C., R.C.A.F. station ?
2.	Who are the directors of the contracting company ?
3.	Are any of the directors members of the senate of Canada?
4.	What was the fee paid the contractors for this contract?
5.	Was there much over-purchasing on this contract?
6.	When the job was finished how many tons of bolts, nuts and cap-screws which were not required were on hand and surplus?
7.	Was the contractor paid a fee or commission on those surplus goods?
8.	How many trucks were engaged on this work and who were the owners of each?
9.	How many new motors for trucks were purchased on this contract?
10.	In what condition were the trucks shipped in by the contractor?
11.	What rental was paid for same?
12.	Were new motors installed in them and what became of those motors?
13.	What was the total amount paid by the government for truck and tractor repairs on this contract?
14.	What was the amount of wages charged for repairing such equipment?
15.	Has the government checked to see if any oil, gas or other charges were made on this contract, including up-keep and/or repairs to a palatial yacht which hovered around this airport?
16.	Was this yacht owned by the contractor? If so, when and from whom was it acquired?
17.	If not owned by the contractor was same rented by the owner, and if so, who is the owner?
18.	What was the cost of upkeep of this yacht per month during the construction period?
19.	How did this yacht come into the possession of the contractor?
20.	How many of a crew- were employed on this yacht?

Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: 1. Who was the contractor on the construction of Goose Bay, Labrador, airport, R.C.A.F. station?

Questions as Orders for Returns

2.	What was the figure stated by the government for the construction of this station?
3.	Did the cost exceed that amount?
4.	What was the total cost?
5.	What were the surplus purchases by the contractor when the job finished?
6.	Did the contractor receive a cost plus fee on those excess purchases?
7.	Did those surpluses include over-purchases on the following: commissary and food supplies, kitchen supplies and kitchen equipment, electrical supplies?
8.	If so, what were the amounts charged by each?
9.	Did the construction equipment valuation board register any complaint to the minister about such purchasing?
10.	Did the minister take any action, or is
any action contemplated to check up on these expenditures?	[DOT]
11.	Did the Department of Transport have any checker on this contract? If so, who?
12.	Was any complaint registered or any action taken by the engineer, or engineers in charge of the work?



CIVILIAN PERSONNEL IN CERTAIN WAR DEPARTMENTS

Mr. THATCHER:: What was the total civilian personnel employed:	(1) by the wartime prices and trade
board: (2) the national selective service; (3) the Department of National Defence, (a) on the day preceding V-E day? (b) what is the total number employed at the present time?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.



BAGOTVILLE, QUE., AIRPORT

Mr. GAGNON:: 1.	WThat was the total cost of the land purchased for the airport at Bagotville, Chicoutimi, Quebec?
2.	From what person or persons was this land purchased?
3.	What was the price paid to each?
4.	What was the total cost of the airport?
5.	Under what financial conditions are the Canadian Pacific Air Lines using such airport for carrying mail and passengers?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.



ALUMINUM

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What quantities of aluminum in all its various forms have been exported from Canada during the calendar years 1939. 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944, and thus far in 1945?
2.	To what countries have such exports been made, and what is the quantity exported to each country in each of the above years?


James Angus MacKinnon: Return tabled.



ENLISTED SERVICE PERSONNEL ABOVE RANK OF CAPTAIN

Wilbert Ross Thatcher: What was the total number of enlisted personnel in the armed forces in Canada, above the rank of captain in the army, and corresponding ranks in the navy and air force, (a) on the day preceding V-E day; (b) what is the total number at the present time?



PORK AND PORK PRODUCTS

Mr. HATFIELD:: 1.	What was the total production in pounds of pork and beef in the years, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944 and up to July 1, 1945, in Canada?
2.	What was the amount processed by the packing companies in pounds of pork and beef during the above mentioned years?
3.	What was the amount in pounds of pork and beef, bacon and hams exported during the above mentioned years?
4.	What was the average in pounds of pork and beef and pork and beef products held in cold storage in Canada during the years in question?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.



ASSISTANCE TO PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED CIVILIANS

Mr. McCUAIG:: What provision has been made by the government for assistance to physically handicapped youths and adult civilians, i.e.. those mentally fit but handicapped in earning full maintenance by reason of amputation, deformity, partial paralysis, etc., by way of, (a) vocational training; (b) pension; (c) employment?


Humphrey Mitchell: Return tabled.



MANITOBA MILITARY AND AIR FORCE STATIONS

Mr. ZAPLITNY:: 1.	What decision has been reached as to the retention or disposal of, (a) the main aerodrome at Dauphin, Manitoba; (b) the relief fields at North Junction and Valley River; (c) No. 7 bombing and gunnery school at Paulson, Manitoba?
2.	Have any offers been received for the purchase of building or equipment on any of the above?
3.	If so, from whom, and what amount was offered in each case?



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-HOSPITALIZATION

Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	What hospital bed accommodation is, (a) now ready; (b) in preparation, for our sick and wounded veterans returning from overseas, exclusive of beds occupied by veterans of the war 1914-18 and this war, as of August 31, 1945?
2.	How many sick and wounded from, (a) the war of 1914-18; (b) the war of 1939-45, are now occupying hospital beds?
3.	How many sick and wounded were being hospitalized overseas as of July 31, 1945?



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-NUMBERS REJECTED AS MEDICALLY UNFIT

Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	How many men examined for enlistment in the armed forces of Canada were rejected as medically unfit from the beginning of September, 1939, to end of May, 1945?
2.	What percentage of the total number examined does this constitute?
3.	How many of these were in the navy, army and air force respectively?
4.	What medical reasons were given for rejection?

Questions as Orders for Returns



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-HOSPITALIZATION- MEDICAL, DENTAL AND NURSING SERVICES

Mr. BRUCE:: 1.	How many beds, in how many hospitals and where situate, are provided for our sick and wounded by the Department of National Defence for, (a) navy; (b) army; (c) air, respectively?
2.	How many, (a) medical men; (b) nurses;
(c)	dentists; (d) other personnel were on the strength of the navy, army and air force overseas and in Canada?
3.	How many in each category have been demobilized?



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-CLOTHING

Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	From June 1 to July 31, 1945. what orders were placed by the Department of Munitions and Supply on behalf of the Department of National Defence for, (a) army uniforms and greatcoats; (b) R.C.A.F. uniforms and greatcoats; (e) naval uniforms and greatcoats;
(d)	underwear; (e) hosiery; (f) naval white broadcloth shirts; (g) . R.C.A.F. dress shirts; (h) khaid cloth; (i) naval serge?
2.	What are the names of persons or firms receiving these orders and on what date was each order placed?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Return tabled.



EXPORTS OF LIVE STOCK AND OTHER COMMODITIES

Mr. PROBE:: 1.	Have permits been issued in 1945 for the export of live stock, dressed or processed meats, building lumber, or other building materials, to countries other than to Canada's combatant allies?
2.	What amounts of each of the following commodities have been shipped from Canada during the first eight months of 1945; live stock, dressed meats, processed meats, building lumber, other building materials?
3.	To what foreign countries were these commodities exported, and what amount to each, during the first eight months of 1945?


James Angus MacKinnon: Return tabled.



GROSS AND NET ANNUAL INCOME OF INDIVIDUALS

Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: 1.	What were the gross and net annual wages, salaries, profits, interest, rents, received by individuals in Canada for the years 1926, 1931. 1936, and 1941?
2.	How many people in Canada received
incomes, (a) under $569; (b) between $500-$1,000;	(c) $1,000-$1.500;	(d)	$1.500-$2,000;(e)	$2,000-$5,060:	(f?	$5.006-$10.000;	(g)$10,000-$25,000;	(h) $25,000-$50.000;	(i) over
$50,000, during the years 1926, 1931, 1936, 1941, and what was the total income of each group?



WHEAT PRICES-SUBSIDIES FOR EXPORT

Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	How many bushels of wheat have been purchased by the millers in Canada from the Canadian wheat board since the closing of the Winnipeg grain exchange, for (a) home consumption; (b) export?
2.	What was the price per bushel paid?
47696-40i
3.	Were any subsidies paid to the millers? If so, how much?
4.	How much per bushel are Canadian millers paying to the wheat board for wheat being milled for export to-day?
5.	Are any subsidies being paid to Canadian millers on wheat milled for export? If so, how much?



EIGHT-HOUR DAT

Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Is Canada a signatory to the convention of the international labour organization dealing with the eight hour day adopted at Geneva in 1936?
2.	Has the government taken steps to enforce the eight hour day as it applies to merchant seamen sailing on inland and coastal ships?



ARMED FORCES-INDUSTRIAL SECTION AND RELEASES COMMITTEES

Mr. FLEMING:: 1.	How many men have been granted releases from the armed services on the recommendation ot industrial selection and release committees?
2.	How were such persons distributed by trades and occupations?
3.	How many of such persons had not served overseas?
4.	How many of such persons were N.R.M.A. troops?



CANADIAN OVERSEAS FIRE FIGHTERS

Mr. KNIGHT:: What action has been taken by the government in answer to requests that treatment of discharged Canadian overseas fire fighters should be identical with that given to discharged members of the armed forces?


James Joseph McCann: Return tabled.



BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	What is the total number of employees of the government of Canada, including employees of boards and commissions appointed by federal authority as of the following dates-namely, March 1, 1944; March 1, 1945; September 1, 1945?
2.	What is the total amount of salaries, wages and allowances paid to such employees in each of the following months, namely, March, 1944; March. 1945; September, 1945?
3.	What is the total number of employees who have been appointed since March 1, 1944, (a) for work not directly associated with the war; (b) for work directly associated with the war?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, the first and second parts of this question should be passed as an order for return. It is quite impossible to answer the third part of the question because many of these employees are both war-time and peace-time employees. I would suggest that No. 3 be dropped.


James Horace King: Then it will pass as an order for return, so far as the first and second questions are concerned.
Questions as Orders for Returns


Paul Joseph James Martin: And the third question would be dropped.


Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: As the hon. member who asked the question is not here, would it not be proper to allow it to stand?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I should be glad to accept that suggestion.


James Horace King: Questions 1 and 2 will stand as an order for return; question 3 will stand.



RETIREMENT OF CIVIL SERVANTS AT STATUTORY AGE LIMIT

Mr. ROSS (Hamilton East):: 1.	What is the total number of civil servants who have reached the retiring age?
2.	How many in each department?
3.	What steps have been taken with respect to the retirement of these persons?



POSTAL SERVICE-WINNIPEG DISTRICT

Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	How many postal employees over the retiring age are still being retained in service in the Winnipeg postal district?
2.	What was the total number of letter carriers in the Winnipeg postal district as at, (a) September 1, 1939; (b) September 1, 1912; (c) September 1, 1915?
3.	How many, (a) letter carriers; (b) other postal employees, from the Winnipeg postal district enlisted in the armed forces for world war II? How many of these have returned to the service?



CANADIAN SERVICE PERSONNEL-LEAVE FOR MORE THAN THREE YEARS' SERVICE

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	Do our R.C.A.F. personnel receive thirty days' special retirement leave for more than three years' service?
2.	Do (a) naval and (b) army personnel receive the same leave for equivalent service?
3.	If not, what is the reason for the difference?



FERNIE, B.C., HOTELS-GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE

Mr. MATTHEWS (Kootenay East):: 1.	What total amount was spent by the government in cooperation with the city of Fernie, British Columbia, in the reconstruction of the Napanee hotel and the Queen's hotel, in that city?
2.	How many suites were thus provided in each building?
3.	How many suites were occupied in each building in each of the months of May, June, July, August and September of this year?
4.	Will rentals of above-mentioned suites be set at local rental levels?



SHIPMENT OF FOOD PRODUCTS TO UNITED


Mr. RAYMOND (Beauharnois-Laprairie):: 1. Since June 1, 1945, what quantities of food products have been sent to England, France, Belgium, Holland, Norway, Italy, Greece and
[Mr. Speaker.l
other Balkan countries, either as a gift or loan under lend-lease, or by way of sales or otherwise, with details concerning each product and country as well as the mode of payment provided (gift, lend-lease, export credits, ordinary commercial transactions between individuals or governments) ?
2.	In addition to the quantities of food products already sent, have said countries made application to the government of Canada or attempted to negotiate agreements to obtain additional quantities? If so, what was the nature of such applications, with details concerning each product and country?
3.	Apart from negotiations between governments and in addition to the quantities sent, have Canadian merchants or exporters applied for permission to export such products?
4.	If so, for what amount of exports to each of these various countries have such permits been required, and in what proportion have same been granted or refused for each country?



HOUSING IN TORONTO

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Since the house met in April this year, what steps have been taken to relieve the serious housing situation in Toronto, (a) for soldiers' families; (b) for civilians?
2.	What has been done in 1944 and 1945 to build houses in Toronto for, (.a) wartime housing; (b) for civilians, by any government authority?



WARTIME INFORMATION BOARD

Mr. DIEFENRAKER:: 1.	How many persons are, or were, employed by or connected with the wartime information board, (a) as of September 27, 1945; (b) as of 1st of January, 1945?
2.	What was the total amount paid to the said officials or employees for salaries and expenses, (a) during the month of January, 1945; (b) during the month of August, 1945?



ORDERS IN COUNCIL

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: How many orders in council have been passed, (a) between September 1. 1939, and May 8, 1945; (b) since May 8, 1945?



LUMBER EXPORTS

Mr. FLEMING:: 1.	What was the annual volume of Canada's exports of lumber of all kinds, by countries, from 1938 to 1945 inclusive, (a) by measurement; (b) by price?
2.	What were the prices paid by the United Kingdom for Canadian lumber of all kinds in each of the said years?
3.	Did the timber controller participate in the negotiation of the said prices?
4.	Did the Department of Munitions and Supply or any other government department participate in the negotiation of the said prices?
5.	Did the Minister of Munitions and Supply or any other government department approve the said prices?

Motions for Papers



FOREST PRODUCTS

Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	What was the total production of forest products in Canada for 1939 to 1944 inclusive, under: (a) pulpwood; (b) ties, pit props, fuel w'ood; (c) lumber and lumber products; (d) any other items?
2. What were the total exports of forest products from Canada from 1939 to 1944 inclusive, under: (a) pulpwood; (b) ties, pit props,	fuel	w'ood;	(c)	lumber	and	lumber
products; (d) any other items?
3.	What was the total production of forest
products by provinces for the years 1939 to 1944 inclusive, under: (a) pulpwood; (b) ties, pit props,	fuel	wood;	(c)	lumber	and	lumber
products; (d) any other items?
4. What was the total export of forest products by provinces for the years 1939 to 1944 inclusive, under: (a) pulpwood; (b) ties, pit props,	fuel	wood;	(c)	lumber	and	lumber
products; (d) any other	items?


James Angus MacKinnon: Return tabled.



INCOME TAX-DIVISION AX OFFICES

Mr. PEARKES:: 1.	In what cities in Canada are divisional offices of the income tax department located?
2.	What were the amounts collected through each office during the past fiscal year?
3.	Has the minister received a request from the city of Victoria, British Columbia, that a divisional office be located in Victoria to meet the needs of the taxpayers on the southern portion of Vancouver island?
4.	If so, what action is being taken by the government?


James Joseph McCann: Return tabled.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, reports and other documents in the possession of the Post Office Department, regarding complaints arising out of the administration of the post office at Amsterdam, Saskatchewan, since January 1, 1940.



RED DEER WATER DIVERSION PROJECT

Victor Quelch: For a copy of any report or reports in the possession of any department of the government on the progress of the survey of the Red Deer diversion project, along with a statement showing (a) the estimated cost of completing this project; (b) when construction will be started; (c) the possibilities of power development.


James Garfield Gardiner: I have no objection to
any information being brought down which is available, but any information that does exist is in the offices at Regina. It will be necessary for me to get the information from Regina in order to make it available. I am not sure that all the reports will be in shape so that they can be brought down immediately,
but whatever reports can be properly brought down will be brought down as well as any information based) upon them.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all correspondence, reports and surveys since 1935 in connection with measures that could be undertaken to elevate the level of Last Mountain lake in Saskatchewan, and/or the partial diversion of the waters of the South Saskatchewan river into the valley of the Qu'Appelle river.



CANADA'S ATTITUDE. PRIOR TO 1939 RESPECTING OUTBREAK OF HOSTILITIES

Douglas King Hazen: For a copy of all correspondence, letters, cables and other documents exchanged between His Majesty's government in the United Kingdom and His Majesty's government in Canada from September 1, 1938, to September 15, 1939, relating to the attitude of Canada in the event of an outbreak of hostilities betwen His Majesty and any other power.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: The consent of the government of the United Kingdom has been asked for the production of the correspondence that would come within the terms of the motion. I am informed that it would be more convenient if this motion were extended to October 1, because during September, 1939 the matter was dealt with by correspondence (and there were exchanges subsequent to September 15, which are required to complete the disposition of the matter referred to in the correspondence. Perhaps the hon. member will have no objection to having the date extended to October 1, 1939, so that the correspondence may show how the matter being discussed was disposed of.


Douglas King Hazen: I have no objection to that, but what I was most interested in was to find out what had occurred up to the outbreak of the war.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: It will be subject to the consent of the government of the United Kingdom being obtained for the porduction of the documents in question.
Motion as amended agreed to.



POSTAL SERVICE-LETTER RETURNED FROM TIMMINS TO OTTAWA

Stanley Howard Knowles: For a copy of all correspondence between Mr. A. W. Stewart, of Timmins, Ontario, Mr. E. H. King, postmaster of Timmins, Ontario, and the Post Office Department at Ottawa, with reference to the return to Ottawa of a letter addressed to Mr. Stewart, by the Post Office Department.
Motions jor Papers



ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY

Mr. CASSELMAN:: For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the governments of Canada, United States and the province of Ontario or between any officials of the said governments from December 30, 1940, to the present time, referring to the development of the international section of the St. Lawrence waterway.
Mr. ST. LAURENT:	Correspondence
tabled.



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY-DISPOSAL OP EQUIPMENT PURCHASED FROM AUTOMOBILE COMPANIES

["I would remind the hon. gentleman that it is eleven o'clock."]
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: For a copy, of all contracts made by the Department of Munitions and Supply for the purchase of, (a) trucks; (b) jeeps; (c) passenger automobiles; (d) station wagons, with (1) General Motors; (2) Ford Company of Canada; (3) Chrysler Corporation, together with a copy of any agreement with the said companies concerning the repurchase or disposal of such equipment.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I suggest that this motion pass subject to the understanding that copies of the master contracts and amendments thereto are tabled now, but not the acceptances of the tenders pertaining to them. The master contracts with the companies mentioned in the motion form the basis on which all automotive vehicles were purchased. The master contracts with the companies mentioned in the motion form the basis on which all motor vehicles were purchased. There are, however, thousands of formal acceptances of tender, all subject to the terms and conditions of the master contracts, the tabling of which from the standpoint of work involved could hardly be justified. There is no agreement with the said companies concerning the repurchase or disposal of motor vehicles.


James Horace King: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the remarks made by the minister?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. ISNOR:: For a copy, in English, of all letters, telegrams, reports and other documents exchanged between the Prime Minister of Canada, the Minister of Justice or other ministers of the cabinet and His Worship Mayor Lucien Borne, Quebec city, from October 1, 1943 to date, in reference to the establishing of a so-called free port at Quebec.


DISALLOWANCE OF PROVINCIAL LEGISLATION- SASKATCHEWAN
John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all petitions made by any corporation, person or persons, in connection with the disallowance of certain acts passed

by the Saskatchewan legislature, namely, the Farm Security Act. the Local Government Board (Special Powers) Act, and the Mineral Taxation Act, and of all correspondence relative thereto as passed between the Department of Justice, the petitioners and the government of the province of Saskatchewan.


HOSPITALIZATION OF VETERANS, P.E.I.
Mr. McLURE:: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, reports and other documents in the possession of the Department of Veterans Affairs, exchanged between any person or persons and the said department, or any other department of the government, or between the different departments of the government, during the past six months, relative to hospitalization of veterans in the province of Prince Edward Island.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: I have no objection
to the resolution passing, subject to the customary reservation regarding confidential documents passing between different departments of government.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Edmund Davie Fulton: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, memoranda or other documents dated since June 1, 1944, exchanged between the Prime Minister or any member or official of the federal government and the premiers or officials of the provincial governments, relative to the holding of the dominion-provincial conference, the agenda of such conference, the holding of the adjourned meeting on the conference, or any other subject related to the conference.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: There is no objection to this motion being passed, on the understanding that it will be satisfactory to produce only the correspondence since August 14, 1944, on which date all previous correspondence was tabled and published as an appendix to the Votes and Proceedings of that day, and that it will not be necessary to produce the voluminous correspondence between federal and provincial officials on such technical matters as the preparation of comparative statistics or correspondence relating to train schedules, hotel reservations and other preparations for the conference, the distribution of documents and so forth, which correspondence is very voluminous and can be of no general interest.


RESIGNATION OF MINISTERS OF THE CROWN SINCE NOVEMBER 1, 1944
Mr. FLEMING:: For a copy of all correspondence between the Prime Minister and any minister of the crown who resigned subsequent to November 1, 1944, regarding the resignation of such minister.

Soldier Settlement


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of
the Prime Minister I should like to comply with this order of the house immediately, and I now place the correspondence on the table. In doing so I should like to make clear one point. The government has been advised that that there is a long standing rule that it was under no obligation to table letters of resignation or correspondence relating to resignations of ministers before the general election which resulted in the election of the parliament in which the motion is made. However, there is no disposition on the part of the Prime Minister to take advantage of the rule in this case and I am therefore tabling the correspondence. Included in the correspondence are the letters from the Hon. A. G. L. McNaughton and the Hon. D. L. MacLaren, together with the Prime Minister's replies. To some of the letters of resignation there were no written replies, the replies being made orally.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. COLD  WELL@: For a copy of correspondence, report or reports under the dominion trade and industry commission, regarding a complaint made in 1937 that the Coleman Lamp Company had refused to supply the Merchants Consolidated Limited, of Winnipeg, with their products.


James Angus MacKinnon: The dominion trade and industry commission do not make reports regarding complaints of this kind. The procedure is that the complainant writes to the commission, and the commission in turn write to the alleged offender. This correspondence is carried on more or less in confidence, and I am warned that if the exchange of correspondence were made public it might defeat the objective. If the hon. member will accept the offer of the use of the file in order that he may read it, I shall be glad indeed to make it available to him now.


Major James William Coldwell: I thank the minister very much, but my purpose in placing this motion on the order paper was rather to get the kind of reply that I have just obtained so that the house would understand the position. I have raised this complaint before in the house. I wanted to have access to the correspondence in the proper way, but was refused. Complaints of this nature made in parliament, or even outside of parliament, should be subject to review by parliament, and the reports should be before us here. That is why I put the motion on the order paper. I shall be glad to see the correspondence, but it does not really meet what I required.


Gordon Graydon: What does the minister mean by "more or less" confidential?


James Angus MacKinnon: Just what it says.


Gordon Graydon: It does not mean anything.


James Horace King: Motion dropped.


Major James William Coldwell: Under protest.


SOLDIER SETTLEMENT
Robert Fair: Whereas veterans of great war I who settled on land under the soldier settlement scheme as well as their wives and families, have in many instances suffered severe hardships because of purchase of land, live stock and equipment at inflationary prices, and low prices received for farm products brought about by lack of adequate policy for agriculture;
And whereas we are now embarking on another land scheme for veterans of the present war, under a government policy that does not guarantee cost of production, the success of which scheme may be jeopardized by the apparent failure of the former soldier settlement board scheme;
Therefore be it resolved.-that, in the opinion of this house, the government should take into consideration the advisability of giving clear titles to all soldier settlers who on March 31, 1944, held land under contract with the soldier settlement board.
He said: I am very glad to have the opportunity of again taking up this question on the first private members' day made available after the close of the war, which I believe is now finished. I want it plainly understood in regard to what I shall have to say on behalf of the soldiers for whom I am speaking that they are not asking for any charity. I also want it plainly understood that I am not a soldier settler, nor am I in any way indebted to the soldier settlement board.
This question, as I have stated before, is one of long standing, and I hope that in the very near future it will be disposed of to the benefit of those interested and to the credit of the Canadian people.
Some people may feel that there is no justice in this matter. Personally I feel quite differently about it, and before I am through I hope to show that several other Canadians feel exactly the same as I do.
I am bringing this matter up at this time, as I have brought it up in past years, because the men who return from this war and who are going to settle on the land under the present Veterans' Land Act will be in a position similar to that of the veterans of the first
Soldier Settlement

great war unless we take care now to see that the old veterans are dealt with as they should have been years ago.
In order to show that these men have some claim, as have the men who are coming back from this war, I am going to read from an address delivered by the late Sir Robert Borden to the Canadian expeditionary force away back in 1917. This may sound old, but in my opinion it forms a basis for the claim that is made by these old soldier settlers. I quote:
You are the men actually facing the enemy day and night. You are suffering greatly from fatigue, overstrained, and lack of rest. The marvel of it is that men could undergo such a strain without breaking; but you have never yet broken, and history will appreciate that in days to come.
You are men about to enter one of the most serious engagements that ever faced the Canadian corps. I cannot, at this moment, give any information as to where this attack will be staged; whether it be successful or not, it is to be borne in mind1 that it will not be an easy success. . . . We feel confident that you will succeed where others failed, for you have neveT yet failed in anything you have set your hand to, as a Canadian corps.
You can go into this action feeling assured of this, and as the head of the government, I give you this assurance; that you need have no fear that the government and the country will fail to show just appreciation of your service to the country and empire in what you are about to do and what you have already done. The government and the country will consider it their first duty to see that a proper appreciation of your effort and of your courage is brought to the notice of the people at home, and it will always be our endeavour to so guide the attitude of public opinion, that the country will support the government to prove to the returned man its just and due appreciation of the inestimable value of the services rendered to the country and empire; and that no man, whether he goes back, or whether he remains in r landers, will have just cause to reproach the government for having broken with the men who won and the men who died.
This matter of granting simple justice to the veterans of great war I is not a new one. I have in my hand a copy of a brief which was presented to the members of the Senate and the House of Commons in 1938, after quite a lot of work had been done by a committee at that time. Let me read one paragraph from the introduction:
It is only fair to state at the outset that it is our opinion that the large expenditure of taxpayers' money on these remedial measures and for the settlement scheme has failed utterly to accomplish its purpose, viz.-the ultimate ownership, within a reasonable period of time, of his home in the country for which he fought during the war.
That is from the brief presented by the Soldier Settlers Union, with headquarters at Lloydminster, of Saskatchewan and Alberta.
rMr. Fair.]
I will not dwell on that, but I have a number of figures which I think it is necessary to place on the record in order that the case of the old veterans will be studied by the many new members we have here, and I hope they will give us the backing which the old veterans deserve. I am asking this because many service personnel have returned irom overseas, and there are a number of men elected to this house whose duty it is to see that the men who come back from this war and settle on the land and in other occupations are properly dealt with by the government.
This is not a political matter. The men for whom I am speaking are all Canadians, as are the men who are returning now and who have returned from the recent conflict. The total number of settlers under the old soldier settlement board scheme was 25,017. The total amount advanced by the government of the day for the purchase of land, live stock and equipment was $109,034,331. The rate of interest on that amount was five per cent on current account, seven per cent as soon as the account went into arrears; and I think it will be readily understood that, because of the conditions that obtained at that time, namely, the high prices paid for land, live stock and equipment and the low prices that very soon prevailed for agricultural products, the men went into arrears and as a result were faced with the problem of paying seven per cent interest on their debts.
Here may I say that had the government of the day done its duty it would not have been necessary to pay seven per cent on that money, or five per cent, or even 3i per cent. It would appear however that the golden calf, or the golden bull as some people call it, had to be worshipped instead of the rights of the men who went and fought for Canada, being preserved. I will give the total principal repaid from the inception of the scheme up to March 31, 1944-and I am making that cut-off because, if we let this thing drag on for a little while, we shall find the old saying coming true, that-
Old soldiers never die, never die. never die;
Old soldiers never die; they simply fade away.
That will be realized, I say, and the government will have some more land for sale, perhaps to aliens, and at much less than the amount against it at the present time.
The total amount of principal repaid by everybody under that scheme, that is, the settlers themselves, civilians to whom land was sold after the soldier settler had vacated it, and British families and others, was $50,507,493.20. The total amount of interest was $25,381,060.13, making a total of $75,888,-

Soldier Settlement
553.33. Because of the conditions that existed at that time the government found it necessary to take many methods of reducing the debts of the settlers, in other words of rectifying the unjust contract into which these men had entered. As a result of seven or eight different processes there was a total amount cancelled on account of soldier settler debts of $24,867,637.64 of principal, and interest to the amount of $19,234,239.77, making a total of $44,101,877.41. Up to the end of March, 1944, the cost of administration of the soldier settlement part of the scheme alone amounted to $27,340,763.64. That, I might say, represents an annual expenditure of cost of administration of approximately $1,100,000. The amounts that I have just given total $71,442,641.05.
Then again we have other cancellations that were made necessary because of the civilians, British families and others, who bought this land after the soldier settlers got off. These amounts were as follows: For civilians, principal $2,403,489.46; interest $2,518,264.86; British families, principal $4,485,087.05; interest $3,304,596.49; other families for principal $383,656.07, and interest $294,244.17. These items added together make a total of $7,272,232.58 for principal, and $6,117,105.52 for interest. The grand total $13,389,338.10.
We now add to this the amounts of cancellations of the soldier settlers, which totals $71,442,641.05, and also the general land administrative expenses of $3,376,548.32. Adding all this together gives us a total of $88,208,527.47. This is the amount of cancellations and administrative expenses, and we have up to the end of March collected only $50,507,493.20 in principal and $25,381,060.13 in interest, making a total of $75,888,553.33.
From these figures I think it will be clearly seen that the scheme was a sadly and badly improvised one and impossible right from the start. As I have pointed out on other occasions, the government would have saved money, and the soldier settlers who settled under that scheme would have been saved a whole lot of misery, poverty and punishment, if the government had adopted a scheme of giving them the land without one cent being charged against them.
At the end of March, 1944, the soldier settlers owed a total of $7,715,954.01; the civilian settlers under that scheme owed $6,999,197.40, the British families owed $1,895,612.66, and others $122,333.98, making a total amount outstanding at the end of March, 1944, of $16,733,098.05. The total amount of arrears owed by soldier settlers at that date was
$1,054,269.30; civilian settlers $616235.77; British families and others $205,794.91, making a grand total of arrears as at March 31, 1944, of $1,876,269.98. At that time there were 6,153 soldier settlers still holding contracts with the board, or approximately 25 per cent of the original number of settlers. At the same time we had 5,715 civilian settlers and 1,163 British families and others, making a total of 13,031 settlers still on the land and holding contracts with the board.
I am not making any plea to-day on behalf of the British families and others. What I am principally interested in is the old soldier settler, but I had to bring in these figures to give a complete picture of the financial standing of the soldier settlement board.
The average original debt at the time these men took up the land was $4,358.40. The average balance owing by the settlers still on the land at the end of March, 1944, was $1,254, which represents 29 per cent of their original debt at the time they settled on the land. The number who acquired title during those twenty-five years is 4,130 settlers, or 16 per cent of the 25,017 who originally settled on the land. I think this should make some people sit up and take notice.
I think it should be noted that a number of the old soldier settlers enlisted for service in the war just ended, and in many cases the reason was not patriotism. In fact I know of some who enlisted who could not make a living on the land for their wives and families, and because of the inducements in the form of dependents' allowances and pay for the soldier himself, many of those men enlisted. I may say that they could not make a living on the land, for different reasons. One of the reasons is that we had seventy cent wheat at Fort William until the first of August, 1942. That meant an average of about forty-five cents a 'bushel on the veterans' farm in the prairie provinces. Then we had corresponding prices for other farm produce. After these men enlisted, their wives and families were left home to look after the land. Perhaps the crops were not as good as they should have been, and payments were not coming into the board. The then minister of mines and resources, perhaps prompted or prodded by his director of soldier settlement, decided that something must be done about it, and as a result on March 19, 1941, order in council P.C. 138/1936 was passed by the treasury board on the recommendation of the then minister of mines and resources. The effect of that order in council was to permit the soldier settlement board to deduct up to $20 a month from the money paid the dependents
Soldier Settlement

of these men who had enlisted for the second time, though that money rightfully belonged to the wives and families of those soldiers, for the purpose of making good the payments to the soldier settlement board. In view of the address made to these men in 1917 by the late Sir Robert Borden I wonder if we as a government were keeping faith with the men who went over and fought, particularly when they offered their services and joined up for the second time.
Then on November 19, 1942, another order in council was passed, supposedly for the benefit of these old soldier settlers. You will note that up to this time they had been given some twenty-three or twenty-four years in which to pay for their land, but were not able to do so. During those years they were giving the very best they had; they were in the prime of life. At the end of that time their land was run down to a certain extent, and their implements and live stock had not improved over the years. So in order to make it possible for them to continue to worship the golden calf, order in council P.C. 10472 was passed on November 19, 1942, providing for the setting up of a committee which, if it saw fit, could recommend to the treasury board that the time for payment of the debt on the land could be extended another twenty years. That meant a total of forty-five years for a veteran of the first great war to pay for his farm. The committee also could recommend to treasury board that the debts of various settlers be reduced, and it had also power to recommend that the interest paid by those settlers who enlisted for the second time might be reduced to 3i per cent.
Those things were brought about because of pressure put on the settlers by the officials of the soldier settlement board. If anyone wants to get a picture of the conditions under which many of these settlers are living, it will be found that a large number are living alone, putting up with things which Canada should not allow any of its citizens to put up with, and particularly old soldier settlers. Several attempts have been made to get action; I think we all realize that when we are hard pressed we are liable to do something about it. So in April, 1943, the settlers of the prairie provinces called a meeting at Saskatoon, at which I believe four resolutions were passed, and again in November of 1943 a meeting was held in the same city. Among other things, those attending that gathering decided to circulate a petition during the winter. Those men had no money; they had to start out on their own, but by raising nickels and dimes they were able to obtain enough money to send a delegation to Ottawa a little later on.

As a result of their work 12,500 signatures were obtained to a petition, and on May 23, 1944, a delegation of nine, representing that organization, came to Ottawa and met members of the cabinet.
That meeting was presided over by the then minister of mines and resources, who has since gone to a place of rest; and I may add that with the exception of the chairman all the members of the committee expressed the opinion, either privately or publicly, that this thing should be cleaned up. These men were promised consideration, and we expected they would get it; but of course being promised consideration by members of the cabinet does not always mean that the consideration is going to be in the interests of those asking for it. That consideration was promised in spite of the fact that in the May 1944 issue of The Legionary, the official organ of the Canadian Legion, an article appeared dealing with this very matter. In the pages preceding those containing this article we find advertisements dealing with International Nickel, Canada Post Office, O'Keefe's Brewing Company, Canadian Legion cigarettes, and so on. Then on page 10 we see a picture of the governor general and a little girl under which this caption appears:
Five-year old Carole Louise Hooey, of Toronto, proudly clings to the Distinguished Flying Cross won by her father, the late F/O Gilbert Hooey, who lost his life serving as a pilot overseas.
Then in the lower right hand corner we see a picture of Lieutenant General Sir Richard Turner, V.C., of Quebec City, extending the glad hand of welcome to Major Paul Triquet, whom we had the honour of welcoming here in Ottawa. This is a beautiful setting, interesting and patriotic, for one of the most scurrilous attacks that could be waged against the old soldier settlers by one of our civil servants, who apparently is in good financial circumstances and whose security in old age no doubt is provided for. I am just going to read the opening and closing words. The body of the article deals with figures which are entirely onesided. The article is beaded, "Soldier Settlement" and is written by Gordon Murchison, director, Soldier Settlement and Veterans' Land Act. The first paragraphs of the article read:
Editor, The Legionary-
During the last several months a number of representations have been received by my minister, the Hon. T. A. Crerar, and by myself from and/or on behalf of an organization formed in Saskatoon last summer and known as the soldier settlers association. This association has declared its policy by a resolution, part of which calls for the cancellation of all unpaid balances due or accruing in the agreements between soldier settlers and the director representing

Soldier Settlement
the dominion government. I understand the dominion executive of the Canadian Legion has received similar representations, and so that the situation from the standpoint of the government-
I ask hon. members to note those words-
-and the administration may be placed fairly before the Canadian Legion and the readers of The Legionary, the Hon. Mr. Crerar has authorized me to furnish you with an official statement.
A statement, let me repeat, of arrogance and impudence.
First of all there is lack of evidence that the resolution and representations above referred to reflect the serious views of more than ten per cent of soldier settlers and, knowing the situation as I do, I am sure the great majority of the remaining ninety per cent must feel somewhat humiliated by the publicity being circulated by the few who for reasons best known to themselves and their friends endeavour to paint a dark and gloomy picture. What are the facts?
Before going further I am going to give some of the facts, to disprove some of the information, or misinformation, as you may prefer to call it, contained in this article. Those supporting the request of the old-veterans include over 12,500 signers of a petition; the Alberta legislature; the Saskatchewan legislature; the Alberta farmers union; the Saskatchewan association of rural municipalities; the Saskatchewan wheat pool; the United Farmers of Canada, Saskatchewan section; the United Farmers of Alberta and the Alberta branch of the Canadian Legion. In case there should be any mistake about some of the resolutions, I shall read one or two passed by the Canadian Legion at a provincial convention held in Memorial Hall, Edmonton, on June 6 to 9, 1943. This is the first:
Whereas the majority of original soldier settlers, who are still endeavouring to carry on under the soldier settlement scheme have now found it, owing to advanced years and the adverse conditions prevailing in agriculture, particularly the lack of parity prices, increasingly difficult to liquidate their indebtedness to the settlement board,
And whereas the settlers have struggled on through the years of drought conditions and low prices unprecedented in the agricultural history of this country and have now nothing to show for their years of toil and struggle but whatever equity they may have in the land which is liable to foreclosure,
Therefore be it resolved that w-e now petition the government to relieve the soldier settler of any further payments and that they be given the title deed to their land or, failing this, that a parliamentary committee in conjunction with representation from the dominion command of the Canadian Legion, review the whole situation of the soldier settler with a view to alleviating their present financial difficulties.
The second resolution was as follows:
Whereas it has come to our notice that by order in council the soldier settlement board has been permitted to order deductions made from the pay and allowances of dependents of men now serving in the armed forces to be applied against land and taxes,
Therefore we ask that this order in council, be rescinded immediately, and that any sums of money so deducted be refunded.
In addition to the organizations to which I have referred, we also have the executive of the British Columbia branch of the Canadian Legion, and several others which I shall not take time to list. After giving the side of the story pleasing to the director and the government, the director concludes in this manner.
In the face of the above factual information, what is the logic behind the argument that soldier settlers of record to-day should have their contract indebtedness cancelled, which means in effect legislation into ownership? Do the sponsors of the petition believe that this would be the end of the matter? Do they think for a moment that those who have paid for their farms, and all those who are meeting the terms of their agreements in full and on time or are prepaying their agreements, would stand quietly by and make no demand for a refund? I have received direct assurances that such demands would be made.
In reply to the last argument I have asked for the names and copies of the letters which would justify or back up this claim; ajid the answer I got in July, 1944, I believe it was, was to the effect that the representations were made in confidence to the director and members of his organization. To my mind the letters are not there, and cannot be produced. Then, to proceed with the quotation:
Do the petitioners behind this movement consider that they alone have rendered service to the state which outshines the service of tens of thousands of other veterans of the last war who have paddled their own canoes during good times and bad but never asked for or received a dollar of state aid toward the purchase of a home?
These are the questions which give some food for thought and illustrate -why legislation into ownership involves a great deal more than appears at first glance.
Under the heading "No change" we find this:
In conclusion I am authorized to say that the proposal is not deemed to be in the public interest and, consequently, it is not being entertained by the government. Therefore, the best advice I can offer to the soldier settlers concerned is to get into step with those who manifestly prefer securing title to their farms by complying with the terms of their agreements.
Let me point out here that those old soldier settlers are not in receipt of guaranteed government salaries. They have to fight the elements in producing crops, and after they
Soldier Settlement

have done that they have got to fight monopolies on each of the markets on which their produce is sold.
Nothing was done until parliament was prorogued. Then late in August the Minister of Mines and Resources made a radio announcement to the effect that the petitions of the old soldier settlers would not be granted.
In October, 1944, feeling that the Prime Minister did not know the exact situation, I made a special trip to Ottawa, at which time I laid the case before him in his own home in this city. He told me that in the following week the Department of Veterans Affairs would be set up, and that he would turn the matter over to the minister of that department.
I am quite satisfied that the Minister of Veterans Affairs is sympathetically inclined to the granting of titles. If he is not sympathetic, I should like him to tell us now. If he says no, then we shall have some argument at a later time. Apparently he is satisfied that those titles should be granted.
In the next week the department was set up, but nothing has been done up to the present time. As a result of no action being taken, the president and secretary of the settler's organization accompanied me when I visited Ottawa in March of this year, upon which occasion we called upon the Minister of Veterans Affairs and afterwards upon the Minister of Finance. The Minister of Veterans Affairs who apparently had certain objections prepared for him told us that payments were being made, and also that if titles were granted to the old settlers, the new settlers would want free titles also.
I shall deal later with the question of payments; but in connection with the new veterans not wanting to pay up, may I say I would not think the Minister of Veterans Affairs would admit that the new scheme had proved to be a failure, and that the veterans could not pay up; because if they could pay I am quite satisfied that every one, both new and old, would pay. They want to live up to their agreements if at all possible.
After a little while we went on to see the Minister of Finance. While we were received very cordially we did not get very far. He told us that payments were coming in freely, and that he also believed in the sanctity of contract. In connection with payments coming in freely, my comment would be that we have had three good crop years in western Canada, and that prices have been better than they were in other years, both for grain and for live stock. In many instances the families of those old settlers were engaged in war industries, and many of the boys had gone over-
TMr. Fair.]
seas. Well, they were pouring money home to make the old homestead safe for their folks, so that those old people would have a roof over their heads and the boys would have a home to come to when they returned.
Those are some of the reasons. Then, again, dependents' allowances are being used in some cases to make payments. Many of those old settlers and their families went without the necessities of life. One of the delegates who came here in May, 1944 had, shortly before that time, lost his wife. If she had had proper medical attention he would not have suffered that loss.
The fear of eviction will drive many people to do things they would not do otherwise. I think all hon. members can realize the position in which the old settler would find himself if he had no home. Some say, "Oh, well, the soldier settler would not be evicted." Let me contradict that suggestion, because in a return brought down to this house we find that between 1930 and 1942 soldier settlers to the number of 1,006 signed quit-claim deeds. I do not wish anyone to think that they signed those quit-claims voluntarily, because in many cases a good deal of pressure was put upon them, and after signing quit-claim deeds, they got off. And in nearly a thousand cases during the same period, settlers were served with thirty-day notices to get off. That is no worse than the mortgage companies have done -those fellows against whom many of us in this house have railed. Between April 1, 1941, and March 31, 1943, no less than 253 settlers signed quit-claim deeds and 108 settlers were served with thirty-day notices. During the war those men were forced to pay up-or else.
In connection with the sanctity of contracts I want to say that the government made agreements with these men to pay a certain amount for the land. At that time the price of the land was based upon the price of the produce that was being raised on the land. For instance, in many cases wheat was selling at close to $3 a bushel; cows were worth $125 to $150 apiece and horses were worth up to $500 a team and perhaps more. Those are the prices that prevailed at the time those land contracts were made. If the government saw fit to allow those prices to drop down to 20 cents a bushel for wheat, $50 a team for horses and $10 for milch cows, then it was their duty to drop the price of the land in accordance with those prices.
In conclusion I am once more, and I hope I will have plenty of company, asking for clear titles for these men, these old settlers, who held contracts with the soldier settler board at March 31, 1944. In doing that we will be granting nothing more than simple

Soldier Settlement
justice. We will be placing human values before money values. To sum up, 25,017 settlers had an average credit of $4,358.40 under the scheme. At the present time 6,153, or 25 per cent, have an average debt of $1,254. A total of 4,130, or 16 per cent, were able to secure titles in twenty-five years. The rate of interest under the old scheme was five per cent on current debts and seven per cent on arrears, while under the Veterans' Land Act it is 3i per cent or one-half the old rate. Under the present scheme a settler who takes full advantage of the scheme will get a clear grant of $2,320 provided he lives up to the terms of his contract during the first ten years, which is equal to 39 per cent of the total amount of his credit. The average amount owed by the old settlers is only twenty-nine per cent.
Why not give them all a square deal? As I said before, these old fellows were Canadians. I am not speaking of them as being Liberals or Conservatives or of any other political faith. They are Canadians who fought for Canada. The average debt of these old vets is only twenty-nine per cent of original credit extended to them. The shooting war with the enemy is over; let us conclude our war with the old vets, because war it has been for a number of years. The average age of these old settlers is close to sixty years, and to my personal knowledge some of them are over eighty years of age. Yet we are giving these old fellows another term extension of twenty years in which to pay up their debts. Do I see many red faces around here? Can Canada afford nothing better?
The record of payments during the last few years has been obtained at the expense of the health and welfare of the settlers and their families. Coming back to monetary values, we know that during the heat of the war it was costing us more than $16,000,000 a day to send presents to Mussolini, Hitler and Tojo. A total of $7,715,000 will clear off these debts, less than the cost of one-half day of war. If you want to treat it as a direct tax, it amounts to sixty-five cents per capita for the population of Canada. Can we afford it?
I do not feel that I should say very much more about this matter, but there is one thing I want to emphasize. I hope the men who settle on the land under the Veterans' Land Act will not find themselves evicted as many of these old settlers have been. If the land is purchased on the basis of prices being paid for agricultural products to-day, the government should see that credit is made available for the difference between prices that are existing to-day and those that may exist in
the future. If that is not done, we will have a bunch of bankrupt veterans of this war. Let it never be said of us:
We love our nation's heroes dead,
We very much adore 'em;
And since they haven't to be fed,
We build grand tombstones o'er them.
We want our heroes alive; we want them living in the prosperity which this country can very well afford. The welfare of the old vets is inseparably bound up with the future success of those settling under the Veterans' Land Act. Issue those clear titles now and ensure success for the veterans of this war.


Percy Ellis Wright: Mr. Speaker, I wish first to compliment the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) upon his persistence in keeping this matter before this house. He did so during the life of the last parliament and he is doing so again in this new parliament. As a matter of fact, one of the results of his persistence was that the minister who was dealing with this particular matter in the last parliament was induced to retire to the senate. I hope the present minister, who I know is sympathetic, will not be forced to make a similar decision before this parliament is over.
This matter is not political; it is a case of dealing with the men of the last war. I intend to deal with it from just a little different angle from that of the hon. member for Battle River. He stated in his opening remarks that he was not a soldier settler and therefore was not primarily interested in the matter from a selfish point of view. I am a soldier settler who settled under the act in 1919. For twenty-three years I made payments to the settlement board. I settled in a part of Canada where ther was the greatest concentration of settlers under the act in all the dominion. I have been intimately connected with these men in veterans' and farm organizations for the past twenty-three years, and I know something about the conditions under which they have lived and endeavoured to pay their debts. I want to deal with the matter more from a humanitarian or personal angle.
The hon. member for Battle River gave some figures which I am not going to repeat. He placed many of these figures on the pages of Hansard during the last parliament and has repeated many of them this afternoon. This matter was raised in the committee which dealt with veterans' affairs in 1941 and at that time various objections were raised by the government. One objection was that we were starting a serious conflict which would require all the resources of Canada, both financial and material, and that it was a poor time to drop payments to the dominion government when
Soldier Settlement

the government was entering into financial obligations which would strain its every endeavour. We are now through that period; we have spent millions, if not billions, and that excuse cannot be used.
Another excuse given for not dealing with this matter was that the men who had completed their payments under the act would feel that an injustice was being done and might think that the government should pay back to them some of the money they had paid. As an old settler who has met and talked with many other old settlers, many of whom made a success under the act and met their obligations and many others who failed and took other positions in which they made successes, I believe I can safely say that I do not think there would be one per cent of the old settlers who would object to some alleviation being granted as far as the present debts are concerned. The men who have not been able to meet their obligations and who under the legislation passed recently have had their debts spread over another twenty to twenty-five years have done their best but have met with circumstances over which they had no control which made it impossible for them to meet their obligations. To bear me out in that, I am going to quote extracts from letters which I have received from soldier settlers during the past few years, and I quote them, not to support individual cases, but because they represent a class of case and because the reasons given for failure to meet obligations apply not only to the individual writer but to a large group of soldier settlers.
In the first place, a large number who were settled under the act were settled in the drought area in Saskatchewan, in the Pelliser Triangle, where for years they suffered under drought conditions which made it absolutely impossible for them to meet their obligations under the act. I quote from a letter from one of these men:	The amendment which provided dollar for dollar payments was made, I think in 1937, and there were a large number of the soldier settlers in the south of the province who in that year and in the year following were unable to meet their payments because of drought conditions over which they had no control. This soldier settler writes:
During the drought period a dollar for dollar bonus on arrears was offered. As we had no crops at all we could not take advantage of it. and now when things are a little easier it is discontinued, which is distinctly unfair to the people who need it the most.
Hon. members know that it was 1941 or 1942 before we had a real crop in western Canada and before many of these settlers had a chance

to meet their obligations. But in 1941 the dollar for dollar bonus was discontinued. He
goes on to say:
Secondly, the soldier settlement board paid the taxes w'hich were afterwards cancelled, but are still charged against us with accruing interest, placing us in a worse position than civilians.
As the writer states, the soldier settlement board in 1938 or 1939 took over and paid all the taxes owing and charged1 them against the principal of the loan. A year or so later these taxes were cancelled for civilians but remained a debt so far as the soldier settler was concerned. He goes on to say:
To illustrate this, my original loan was $1,500. I reduced this to $800 before the drought. It now stands at over $1,7DO. These figures may not seem very large, but they are to us.
There is another class of settler, those who were unable to meet their obligations because of sickness in their family or their own sickness. I quote from one of these letters, which shows quite clearly the position in which a large number of these settlers found themselves. The writer says:
Then, seven years ago, came my wife's illness, lasting over three years, with several operations and then her death. This easily added one thousand dollars to my debt and to-day I am paying a housekeeper in wages nearly as much as the payment to the soldier settlement board comes to in a year. Besides my two children, I have my father, nearly ninety years of age. to care for, so I am badly handicapped, and I have fifty per cent disability myself.
This man has a fifty per cent disability. Yet the soldier settlement board, under an order in council passed on March 19, 1941,
states:
The director of soldier settlement has no authority to carry such accounts indefinitely and it is considered desirable to provide for deductions from dependents' allowances to cover local taxes and interest due.
And the board took $10 a month out of this man's pension to meet the payments on bis loan.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Shame 1


Percy Ellis Wright: Yes. There is another class of case. A great many of our settlers under the old act were settled on unsuitable, marginal land, and because of that fact were unable to meet their obligations to the government. I state these things because they show in a great many cases that "hard core" which the department speaks of, was caused by circumstances over which the soldier settler had no control, such as drought, sickness, unsuitable land.
Another factor which operated against the old soldier settler was lack of capital with which to break his land and bring it under

Soldier Settlement
cultivation. The soldier settlement board made a certain allowance for the breaking of the land, but there was so much red tape that many settlers could not take advantage of it. I have letters here which, if I read them to the house, would prove definitely that the red tape which was attached to these loans often made it impossible for the soldier settler to take advantage of them.
Another factor has been the interest rate which was charged on the old loan, six per cent once the payments became overdue, and five per cent on the original loan. This meant that many settlers paid the original loan several times over. Here is a letter which illustrates that point. The writer says:
As you are aware, there have been several adjustments since the original scheme was introduced. The last adjustment was made in my case in 1939, under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act. and then my quarter was revalued at $1,800. although I had paid over $3,000 under the original agreement. Since then, although the price of wheat has been very low, I have been able to keep up my payments, but not when due. viz.. October 1. For the last two years it has been impossible, through restricted deliveries and quotas to make payments when due, but the board charge compound interest, which I have refused to pay. It sems incredible that the government should take advantage of this situation to make additional profits, but this is the case. I would point out that since 1939. not including due payment this fall. I have paid the board four payments of each $124.23, some $496, but you will notice I have not reduced the principal yet by $100-some $80 in fact. Surely this would appear to be heavy interest without charging compound interest on top.
That is the position in which many of these old soldier settlers find themselves, and I think it is only simple justice that we in this parliament should take action to relieve them. Under the new land settlement act we have provided much better conditions for the soldiers coming back from this war than were provided under the old act, and in simple justice this parliament should take action to relieve some of the suffering of many of these old soldiers under the old act.
There is another injustice under the old act, and while there are not many cases in which this has happened there are some where the soldier settler under the old act had two quarter-sections of land, one of which he bought through the board and one which he had as a homestead before going overseas. Later, when he came back the board took a mortgage on both pieces of land before they would give him stock and equipment under the act, and in some cases the soldier disposed of one of these quarters to another settler or another individual. Later, this particular individual made application under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement
Act to have his debt reduced and in some cases the board allowed the reduction. Strange to say that reduction was charged back against the old quarter of the soldier settler. That seems to me to be absolutely unjust, because under the old agreement, under the Soldier Settlement Act, the soldier was liable to the board for the full amount of indebtedness; he had disposed of one quarter and later on, perhaps three years after he had disposed of it, that quarter came under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act and the debt was reduced, the amount of reduction being charged back to the original quarter of the soldier settler.
I do not know how many cases there were of this kind but there were some. The fact that there is this old core of dissatisfaction under the old act is causing many of the younger soldiers, younger men coming back from this war, to hesitate about again entering into any agreement with the government in regard to land, and I think it would be to the advantage of the government to clear up this matter immediately and to start with a clean slate under a new act. If they do not do so it will simply mean a lot of grief and trouble to them later on, because in areas where you get a few old settlers who have a just complaint, and a group of new men coming in under the new act, invariably the older men will get in contact with the new men and tell their story and dissatisfaction will arise among the newer group. I am sure the new men who settle under the new act, seeing they are getting a better deal than the old soldiers received under the old act, would not use that as a pry to try to get some further consideration from the government as far as meeting their obligations is concerned.
I hope that the new minister will take this matter into serious consideration. As the hon. member for Battle River stated, a delegation came here over a year ago to interview the government. They were certainly given some encouragement by the government to believe their case would be considered after they had gone home, but they found, through the article which the hon. member has just quoted, and from what took place in the veterans' convention in Vancouver, that their case was being passed up as far as the government was concerned. They again came to Ottawa and placed their position before the government. I do not know what the result of the last interview was. I do not know whether they were given encouragement in that last interview, but certainly they have a just case, and I would urge the government to take that case into consideration and do
Soldier Settlement

as suggested in this resolution-cancel the old debt that remains. It is a very small amount in comparison with the expenditures that are made to-day, and I am sure that any action along that line would be appreciated by the old settlers and would be an encouragement to the new men who are returning to settle under the new act.


John George Diefenbaker: In rising to give my support to the resolution moved by the hon. member (Mr. Fair), may I join with the hon. member for Melfort (Mr. Wright) in complimenting him for his persistence and consistency over the years in asking for what is requested in this resolution. I have had occasion to meet with soldier settlers, particularly those settled near the city of Prince Albert, where conditions have been such that they have been unable to carry on and to reduce their indebtedness. There they were settled in sub-marginal land for the most part, and many to-day are in a position that is little improved over that in which they were ten or fifteen years ago. Not only do they request consideration along the line of this resolution, but many soldier settlers with whom I come in contact, who are in the same position as the hon. member for Melfort and who have discharged their indebtedness, are asking, in the interests of the morale not only of those who to-day are still delinquent but also of those who are returning from overseas and are desirous of taking up land under the Veterans' Land Act, that consideration be given by the government to the cancellation of the indebtedness that exists.
There were 25,017 returned men who chose to go farming after the last war. Of that number twenty-five per cent remain on the land to-day, and many even since the beginning of this war are being forced, either directly or indirectly, to leave the land upon which they have been settled for a period of twenty-two to twenty-five years. The figures were given in a return tabled in this house, showing that as between the beginning of the war, September 1, 1939, and December 31, 1943, 2,418 settlers either left their land voluntarily, as it is said, or were actually removed as a result of the institution of the law in that regard by the board officials.
There have been reductions in principal and interest, but these reductions have applied not only to the soldier settler but also to the settler who has taken land under the act. The purport of this resolution has received the support of outstanding public institutions in the prairie provinces, including the wheat pool, the Alberta legislature, the Alberta farmers' union, the united farmers of Canada, and

the united farmers of Alberta. Whenever there is a legion meeting, a zone meeting, in the province of Saskatchewan, support is given to the request of these men. Therefore, as the hon. member for Melfort says, it is not a partisan matter. It is a matter that cuts right through partisan considerations and it merits and has secured the support of authoritative and responsible bodies all over western Canada.
What are the arguments that can be raised against it? One argument would be that it means the repudiation of the indebtedness of these men, and the cancellation of the terms of the contract. Well, Mr. Speaker, parliament has recognized the principle that where through drought or difficulty or poor prices the farmer is unable to carry on and to meet the indebtedness he may apply under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act for a reduction. As far as the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act is concerned its operation will not meet the needs of the soldier settlers and their peculiar problems.
Another matter which strikes me as of great importance is that while to-day there is a great modicum of their original indebtedness remaining due, there is still a very large expenditure being made in the collection of the accounts outstanding of soldier settlers. I was struck with the figures that were given in a return that was brought down on March 10, 1943, in answer to the question: "What is the cost of administration of the board during the years 1930 to 1942?" We find that in 1930 and 1931 the cost of administration a year was $1,300,327. It amounted to $757,507 for 1935-36, and for 1941-42, with a very small indebtedness proportionately to the amount originally outstanding still due, the government of this country had to expend the sum of $646,446 for administration. That is a very large sum, about $650,000 a year for the collection of an amount that has been reduced to a matter of only a few million dollars. I mention that for this reason, that only recently, in a desire on the part of the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie) to alleviate conditions under which these soldier settlers have been operating, extensions have been provided for whereby the indebtedness ha3 been amortized over a period of twenty or twenty-five years. The soldiers who served in the last war are approaching fifty years of age or over. Many will not live to see the day when their indebtedness will be discharged. The administrative expenses will have to be continued throughout those years. In other words, you can multiply twenty-five years more by approximately $600,000, which is the average amount expended in the last few years for

Soldier Settlement
administration, and you reach a total of $15,000,000 in all for the collection of an indebtedness but little more than that. There is a consideration that would appeal to the people of the country as a whole. We are simply, by amortizing the indebtedness, going to collect approximately the amount that in that period of time will have been expended in extra administration. On the basis of ordinary good business my submission is that this resolution deserves the support of the house.
There are other grounds upon which it could be supported. Some of them have already been mentioned by the hon. member for Melfort and by the hon. member who moved the resolution. These grounds were set forth in a memorandum that was delivered to the government by the committee of soldier settlers who were here on May 23, 1944. It will not benefit the house to re-read the grounds that were then advanced by these men for the cancellation of this indebtedness. They are known to hon. members. Repetition does not make them any stronger, nor does repetition make them any clearer. I believe, sir, that all over the prairie provinces-and in the main these settlers are in the prairie provinces- and without regard to political persuasion, there is a general agreement, in the interests of those men, in the interests of morale, above all in the interests of removing any suggestion that too often pervades the mind of the soldiers returning from the war just ended that the men of the previous war did not receive a fair deal, and also in the interests of good business, that this resolution should be supported, and I am supporting the intent of the resolution moved to-day by the hon. member.
I have not yet had an opportunity to do so on a previous occasion and before concluding I wish now to convey my best wishes to the hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker) in the honour he has received in being appointed parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. With his record of service in two wars, with his interest in the welfare of the veterans of this country, with his capabilities as a parliamentarian, I, speaking for the members in this part of the house, say that we compliment him on his appointment, and we wish him well in the work that he will do on behalf of the veterans of this country.


William Irvine: Mr. Speaker, I shall take just a few moments of the time of the house to add my views to those of the other hon. members who have preceded me on this issue, and if the opportunity affords itself, I shall also give my vote in favour of the motion which is now before us.
I cannot imagine any hon. member having very serious objections to the motion. It asks that the soldiers who have survived the economic conflict of the last twenty-five years or so shall at this hour be granted what I think they should have been given at the outset. The most important argument for correcting the mistake which was made at the very beginning is this, that it has cost the people of Canada perhaps more to try to collect the uncollectible than it would have cost us to have made a free gift of land to the soldiers who settled on it. That condition, as the previous speaker pointed out, still pertains. If we continue this policy we shall continue only to badger men who will not be able to meet their obligations, and it will be done at a very high cost to the nation. I believe that we are all looking forward to the birth of a new social order based on social justice, as has been mentioned in the speech from the throne. This is an excellent place for us to begin. If there is any justice in us it should be manifested first toward the men who fought in the first great war and who have, as I have said, suffered so much in the economic conflict which has taken place since then.
To some extent the history of the soldier settlement project has been given by the hon. member who introduced the resolution. Figures have been quoted as to the number of settlers who took advantage of the Soldier Settlement Act, and as to the number of those who were able to meet their obligations and who at last got their title, and the numbers who are still struggling in a vain hope of securing those titles. Figures have also been given as to the amount that has been paid by the government in administrative costs and in other ways. There is no need for me, or for any other hon. member, to take up the time of the house in further reiterating these facts; but I want to bring this to the attention of hon. members. I know they all know it, but it will not do any harm to remind ourselves of it again. Our soldier settlers bought their land and equipment under inflated prices, and they were compelled to sell their products, by which alone they could pay for their land and equipment, at deflated prices. In addition to that, they had to pay a very high rate of interest on their borrowings. It was just as impossible for them to do that as it was for a large percentage of the civilian agricultural population to do so, and they fell by the wayside just as many of their fellow farmers did.
Soldier Settlement

The returned soldier of the last war who fought for his country should have a little bit of it to call his own. I do not know of anyone who has a better right. I venture to suggest that the economic conflict which these farmers have sustained since their return has been more difficult to bear, more grievous, fraught with greater heart-burnings and despair, than the three or four years they fought in the trnches in Flanders, in France and in Belgium. Not only had they to fight the econmic battle, with the assistance of their wives and families, and watch their loved ones suffer deprivation which hurt them deeply; they also had to watch their families fighting with them a losing battle. It is true that four thousand of the twenty-five thousand or so came through, but that is true of every battle. A thousand men may go into a real battle. Four hundred may come through; three hundred may be killed and the remainder wounded. The four hundred were lucky to come through; and the four thousand who came through in this case, in the economic battle, were also lucky. Perhaps in some cases they were better farmers; the chances are they were settled in better communities; they were closer to markets, or they may have had better land. They may have missed the frost or the hail storm or some other hazard of agriculture, and so managed to come through. But there were a great many who did not come through this economic battle; they lost out, and have gone from the picture.
Now some six thousand remain. They are old men and unable to continue to put up the vigorous fight they have been carrying on during the past twenty years. In a great many cases their children, who have been helping them in the past, have grown up and left home to take up jobs and responsibilities of their own. So that these soldier settlers, who are now becoming old men, are being left pretty much alone. I wish to impress upon the minister that if these men in the vigour of youth and with the assistance of their young families have been unable to meet their obligations up to this time, certainly they will not be able to meet them from now on. In view of the fact that the actual cost to the people of Canada will be a paltry sum in comparison with what we have had to expand during the last five or six years, I would urge that these men be now given free title to the land they first strove so hard to win in Flanders and then worked so hard to hold in Canada, the country for which they fought.
Not only are these men getting old and losing the help of their children, who are moving into new pursuits and raising families of their own; we must not forget that the

health of these men, which in many instances no doubt was impaired by their service, is growing worse as they grow older. So that the problem becomes increasingly acute for them. It is true, as someone has said, that some are still trying to pay, but I wonder if we stop to ask at what cost they are trying to pay. I know some returned soldiers who would rather die than fail to meet their obligations, but I do not think we should demand the last drop of blood from these men even if they should be willing to continue to make the sacrifices they made in years gone by. As I have pointed out already, most of them never will be able to get clear title. Let us be magnanimous to them; let us remember their service to Canada and give them free title now to the land they have fought so hard to earn. It has been suggested that it would be against the sanctity of contract for us to do anything like that, but surely we have the right to alter a contract ourselves if we so desire. We are not asking these men to violate a contract; we are asking ourselves to draft a new one which will give them free title to their land. It has been said that some who have paid may object. I do not believe that will happen, and if it does there will be very few such cases. But even if it should happen, let it: let them object if they wish. This is a case where we have a right to act in spite of such objections and I urge, sir, what this resolution be passed and that the government act in accordance with the terms.


Mr. T. J. BENTLEY (Swift Current):: Mr. Speaker, I hesitate to labour the point. I had expected a little more debate from other quarters of the house either for or against this motion, and left my notes upstairs intending to use them this evening. Consequently I shall be very brief in my remarks, but I should like to emphasize just a few things which, although they have been brought out already, have not been emphasized quite as much as I believe they should be.
The mover of the motion (Mr. Fair) made an excellent address, giving all the figures necessary to convince anyone who is open to conviction, so that there is no need for me or anyone else to recapitulate what he said. The next speaker, the hon. member for Mel-fort (Mr. Wright), gave a good picture of the actual position of the people outside the financial field. The hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) carried on from there, while the last speaker (Mr. Irvine) summarized what had been said previously.
Hon. members have been told already of the organizations throughout the country which have supported this resolution. These

Soldier Settlement
include the Alberta legislature, by no means all of whose members are returned soldiers. Hon. members have mentioned also the legislature of Saskatchewan, which is not composed entirely of returned men either. They have mentioned the Saskatchewan wheat pool, not all of whose 165 delegates are returned soldiers. They have mentioned also a very important body, the association of rural municipalities of Saskatchewan, which is composed of men who are councillors and reeves of rural municipalities, men who cannot be called softheaded or soft-hearted when dealing with the finances in their trust.
Hon. members have supported this resolution for a variety of reasons. One which was mentioned only once during the debate today-and was not then emphasized-is that the plight of these old soldier settlers has an emotional appeal. I should like to be able ;o draw a picture of conditions; if I were like an hon. member who sits opposite me, I would do so. I would describe some of the homes in which these people have had to live during the years, homes in which they have endured struggles, fighting climatic conditions and sickness in the families.
I should like the house to realize that those chaps went through a terrific strain many years ago. In the light of the war just passed, perhaps our little effort of 1914 pales into insignificance. But do not forget the boys who clamoured around the Glory Hole, the M and N trenches, the boys who were up around Sanctuary Wood, and Ypres, the boys who were down at Regina trench and other places on the Somme; the boys who were at St. Albert, Amiens, Passchendaele, and all those other places. They went through tough times, too. And they come home- many of them-not as vigorous as some might judge from outward appearances.
Those chaps settled on these soldier settlement farms. The percentage who now need assistance is not very great. The financial outlay will not be great because, as other hon. members have said, the cost of collection will use up a great deal of it, anyway. So that the necessity for spending the whole
87.000,000 in doing this is not going to be there.	_	_
It has been said by some people, in private conversation-and I believe this statement has been attributed to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley), while in conversation with the delegation last spring-that these men should live up to their contracts, and that if they cannot they should apply for veterans' allowances, or should come under some scheme of that kind. People have said to me that that would be better-"Give the old duck his $60
a month, or whatever it will be under the veterans' allowances provisions, and let him live in comfort in some small village."
Well, maybe he would live in great comfort; but remember the necessity for human association. He has lived in his little log shack, or his small farm home. He may have raised a family. That is his home, and he does not want to come in under any veterans allowances scheme which would make him live away from home. While the soldier settlers are not all of one mind in these matters, yet I believe the great bulk of them are just like you and me. These are the homes they have lived in through all the years; surely now they have earned them.
Those men risked their Lives to get that land. Not many years ago in the history of this country a great organization risked money to build a railroad across the country. They got tremendous grants of land to take care, as they said, of the risk they were taking in case the venture did not turn out well. They did not risk anything in the way of life or death. True, there may have been a few shot at with arrows by some Indian who was a little bit too well-filled with fire water. They may even have had to dodge a few stones thrown by some exuberant workman on pay day when the Canadian Pacific railway was being built. However, the risk was not very great, and these people built a great transportation system. They did receive tremendous grants of land. Every soldier settler in the west, and many others besides, know that from the time they cut cordwood at $1.25 a cord, and put it into boxcars on the railway, they were making revenue for one of our great transportation systems. When they sold a pig or a cow or some cream or a few bushels of wheat, they made a further contribution to that transportation system. So, that, even though we gave them title to their land at the present time, we could not say we gave them everything, because they have made their contribution.
Many of them are now old. It has been pointed out that a twenty-year extension of their debt might possibly mean that much less extension on their hope of living, because the worry would probably kill many of them before the twenty years had expired.
I should like to hear other hon. members indicate their support. I realize that many of them are not close to this problem, and we cannot expect them to be as sympathetically inclined as we are. But I believe I can say for the four hon. members who have spoken that we would like other hon. members who are not so well acquainted with the problem
Soldier Settlement

to lend their support. We have spoken earnestly and sincerely on behalf of the soldier settlers this afternoon.


Mr. A. J. BROOKS (Royal):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member who has jyst taken his seat mentioned that he would like to hear some observations from other hon. members representing other sections of the country. The remarks to which we have listened thus far have been confined mostly to western Canada. May I point out that we who come from the maritime provinces face a similar problem, although our problem may not be as acute as it has been in the western provinces because we had fewer soldier-settlers.
May I take this opportunity to congratulate the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) who has so consistently brought this subject before the house, and has persisted in his efforts on behalf of the soldier settlers. His has been a worthy cause, and one which I am satisfied should receive the sympathetic attention of the house.
As I said, there are not many of those settlers whose farms are still unpaid left. One hon. member has said that only the hard core remains. I shall not repeat the arguments which have been presented this afternoon. All have been logical and sane, and I believe they will commend themselves to all members. I have known many of the young men who returned from the last war with high hopes of taking part in the farming industry of this country. As we know, many of them have been greatly disappointed. I have in mind three men in my own district who took up land not far from my own town. To-day those farms are abandoned. When this war came along these three men gave up hope of carrying on their farming operations. Some joined the veterans guard, and others found work around the camp at Sussex. They have had a difficult time, just the same as the men in the west.
As has been pointed out, these men bought their farms at very high prices, prices which were perhaps almost double what they should have been. That was a condition of the times. Then, when they bought their stock it cost them possibly twice what it should have cost. I believe that the men who are returning from the war which has just ended, and who are coming back to Canada with the intention of taking up farming, will find the same conditions their fathers found when they returned after the first great war. That will be the condition, if we do not watch very carefully.
For instance, cows are selling to-day for as much as $125 and $150. In a few years there

is no doubt that those cattle will bring much lower prices. Farm machinery is costing today twice as much as it did some years ago. These are the conditions which made it difficult for men who returned from the last war, and they are the conditions which will make it just as difficult for men who are returning from this war with the intention of taking up farming.
We must remember, too, that the men about whom we have been speaking this afternoon had to go through one of the worst depressions the world has ever experienced. I do not agree, as has been suggested on the floor of the house at different times, that that depression was due to the policies of any political party. Any man with ordinary common sense and judgment must know that it was not; it was a world-wide condition and Canada could not escape any more than any other country.
These men, burdened as they were, tried to make a success of farming under those conditions. However, they could not do so and they abandoned their farms. They were patriotic enough to go overseas during the last war. During the time they have been on their farms they have raised families and to-day their sons are coming back from this war. They would like to see some one of these sons continue on the farm. I was much impressed by the statement made by the hon. member who has just taken his seat that there is sentiment connected with a farm on which a man has lived for twenty-five years, on which he has raised a family, sent his children to school and tried to make a living. That place has become home to his children. These farms should not be abandoned, not only in the interests of the farmers but in the interests of their sons and the country generally.
Just lately I drove through certain sections of Ontario and I was amazed at the number of vacant farms. People are flocking into the towns and cities, a condition which should not be. These men would like to have their sons take up farming again, but they do not want to see them take it up under the burden of debt that they have at the present time.
In my province we have small school districts, and when two or three farms are vacated it becomes difficult for those who are left in the district to carry on. The district loses its taxes, the children are taken away from school, and there is in general a bad effect.
I do not think there is much more that I wish to say this afternoon. I am heartily in accord with the resolution moved by the hon.

Soldier Settlement
member. I feel there is much of justice in it. I have talked to many other veterans regarding it and some few say that we should treat the veterans who have paid for their farms the same as it is proposed these men should be treated. However, I believe if a census were taken of those who have paid for their farms, ninety-five per cent or possibly one hundred per cent would be willing to have justice done to these men who have struggled for so long to bring up their families and provide a home. For many years the hon. member has brought this matter before the house and I sincerely hope that it will receive favourable consideration and that justice will be done.


Mr. G. R. PEARKES (Nanaimo):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to indicate briefly my desire to support this resolution. I do so, first, because I am a returned man. These men who took up farms under the soldier settlement board were comrades of mine in the first great war and I feel that justice should be done to them. Therefore I should like to express my support of this resolution which I believe indicates the road to justice.
Second, I rise because I represent another part of the country. I come from Vancouver island, at the opposite end of the country to that from which the previous speaker comes. On that island there are a large number of veterans who settled under the soldier settlement scheme. I know for a fact that these men have had a trying and difficult time. They have honestly done their best to try to make ends meet.
Farming conditions on Vancouver island are not easy. There are no large farms. There are a few dairy farms, but mostly they are fruit, vegetable and poultry farms. These farms are encircled by the forest, and unless the farmer keeps hard at work, day in and day out, nature encroaches on the small clearing that he has made. You see the bracken and the fern growing up very thickly in the pasture. It is not an easy life.
I noticed that when the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) was speaking the other day he called attention to the fact that eggs were the only farm product which was not selling at parity according to the definition of parity as given that night. A great many of these returned men are in the poultry business and, as one can see from that statement, they must be having considerable difficulty as far as marketing their produce at reasonable prices is concerned.
I also endorse the statement that was made that a large number of these men left their farms at the beginning of this war, either for
motives of patriotism or because of dire necessity. Many of them felt that they would have a better opportunity of making a livelihood from the grants and pay they would receive for their services to their country. Whether it was from patriotism or because of necessity, they joined up in such organizations as the veterans guard of Canada and they did faithful duty in that corps in the way of guarding outlying forts and prisoners of war.
I think I am correct in saying that these men are not entitled to any consideration under the new Veterans' Land Act because they are considered to be too old and therefore not a good risk. As I understand this resolution, it would put that class of men on a parity with the veterans who will be discharged from this war and who may want to take up land under the Veterans' Land Act. I hope most sincerely that the house will give sympathetic consideration to the resolution.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Mr. L. A. MUTCH (Winnipeg South):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in this debate I should like to declare at once that I am in sympathy with the resolution, if not with its wording, presented by the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair). I would be happier in associating myself with this resolution if I did not find in the preamble, the introduction to the resolution, as one so often finds in resolutions presented in this house; namely, that a criticism applied to the original soldier settlement land scheme, a criticism which can be and has been justified by myself and by others, is by inference, or so it seems to me, intended by the mover of the resolution to imply the probability of the failure of the present Veterans' Land Act. The resolution says in its first paragraph:
Whereas veterans of great war I . . . have in many instances suffered severe hardships because of purchase of land, live stock and equipment at inflationary prices-
That is perhaps well merited as a criticism of the original scheme. The preamble goes on to say:
-and low prices received for farm products brought about by lack of adequate policy for agriculture.
Implying that policy or lack of it contributed to failure. I am perhaps unique in this house in that I have not in my constituency anyone who is a landowner or landholder, so far as I know, under the original
Soldier Settlement

scheme of land settlement. I fancy that the only constituents of mine who have had any connection with that scheme, if there be any, are those who decided that it would not pay and got out of it sooner or later. Because I have no constituents who come within the groups for whom relief is sought by this resolution I can speak freely and without any suggestion that I am addressing myself to them.
In its second paragraph the resolution says:
And whereas we are now embarking on another land scheme for veterans of the present war, under a government policy that does not guarantee cost of production, the success of which scheme may be jeopardized by the apparent failure of the former soldier settlement board scheme.
There again, I cannot see how the mover of the resolution hopes to win sympathy for those whose cause he pleads by introducing in the preamble to his resolution something which is an issue in current politics, apart from the cause of those whose relief he seeks.
I do not support the resolution with any thought that by doing so we in this house would be conferring any considerable favour, economically at least, on the 4,000 odd whom the member for Battle River described this afternoon as being still condemned to pay for their land. The reason I say that is this; I agree wholeheartedly with what hon. members opposite have said this afternoon about the ridiculousness of the prices paid for the land, and about the machinations of various agencies, civil and political, which resulted in soldier settlers being settled upon some of the least desirable of sub-marginal land at the time this scheme was initiated. That criticism has been developed and is well founded, but to suggest, and by inference it is suggested, that under those conditions had there been an agricultural policy-that agricultural policy is mot suggested but is hinted at-a large number of these people might have succeeded in paying for their land is in my own experience something which is open to grave doubt. I can remember farms being sold in that initial period to veterans of the last war who knew very little about farming, and sold to them when there was two feet of snow on the land. It was a good thing, too, for the seller because if there had been only one foot of snow the veteran would have been able to see the rocks. I remember also the inflationary prices that were paid for live stock to go on these farms often by men who hardly knew the business end of a cow. I remember investigations into land transactions in my own province and in other provinces which indicated all too conclusively that no proper selection was made either of the men who were to go on the land or of the land itself. I may be 
pardoned, if I derive some little amusement out of the circumstances in which some hon. members are now hastening to add their voices to the chorus of those who would give to these settlers who have put a large chunk out of a lifetime on what was often submarginal and useless land. Some of them represent groups which were instrumental in permitting the lack of organization which made possible the present situation.
I am a little at a loss to understand why the hon. member who introduced this resolution should imply in his introduction that failure to clear up the admitted injustices of selection and placement; the admitted inflationary prices of that earlier period which have induced almost countless failures and which still contribute to the difficulties of those who as late as March, 1944, were, after repeated demands to give them relief still in arrears, I am at a loss to understand, I repeat, why he should now imply that their situation would have bad effects on the Veterans Land Act which is at present on the statute books.
I am very much interested in that angle, because I am one of those who believe that we have very largely profited from the mistakes of the past. Not only are we guarding against inflationary prices for the land which is to be distributed, but much excellent land has been secured and is being held for the returning veterans of this war at prices which are at least commensurate with the expectation of returns from the land. I am reminded also of the very considerable differences which exist to-day with respect to the selection of the personnel who will go on the land. Perhaps some will regard this as a minor consideration, but I am very much impressed with the fact that in the selection of soldier settlers who shall go on the land under the Veterans' Land Act a great deal of attention is being paid by the selection boards to the desires and opinions of the wives of the men who will secure farms. I should not like anyone to take from my remarks that I feel or have felt that ineptitude of the wives of the men who have not made the grade under the soldier settlement scheme was a major contributing factor in their failure. I know of many instances of women without experience, without any knowledge even of the physical conditions of the part of the country to which they were called upon to go, who have made simply heroic contributions in keeping with the best traditions of the pioneer stock of this country. But I do know something of the western prairies. I know something of the territory which has been settled very largely by these

Soldier Settlement
soldier settlers, and I know that any man's chance of success under the circumstances which exist are very considerably enhanced by having associated with him in that enterprise a woman who not only understands what she is to be called upon to do, and to endure, but who is wholeheartedly and enthusiastically behind the project from the beginning.
We are terribly prone, I think, to look to the period after the last war and to say, not only with respect to soldier settlement but with respect to almost every attempt which was made to do something for the returned veterans of the last war, that the whole thing was thoroughly bad. I am reminded that there are at present in this house and have been in the last few parliaments men who under the conditions which then existed did achieve success, so much so that their natural leadership in their own communities eventually brought them to this house. I am reminded, too, that it is not possible by legislation or by grants to take someone who has no aptitude for farming and, by virtue of the fact that society is grateful to him for the contribution which he made in another branch of the public service, namely, the armed services, to ensure his success.
I have not much regard for the sentimental arguments which are sometimes presented. Arguments which have been presented at one time or another when each of the various relief measures has been initiated in connection with the soldier settlement board. I am impressed with the practical nature of the present suggestions. Perhaps it is the Scots blood which flows in my Canadian veins, perhaps it is just a little practical common sense, but I am impressed with the argument that it is futile and silly to throw good money after bad. I am impressed and satisfied with the argument that there is no probability of redeeming those sub-marginal farms under the control of their present owners with profit to the state. I have no hesitation on that ground, if on any other, in supporting the resolution of the hon. member for Battle River in which he says:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should take into consideration the advisability of giving clear titles to all soldier settlers who on March 31, 1944, held land under contract with the soldier settlement board.
I would support his resolution, I think, if couched in stronger language for the reason which I have given. I am not particularly impressed with the results which I have received from time to time when I have finally prevailed upon those in authority to give "serious consideration" to any matter. The phrase itself smacks of "brush off." However,
it is my privilege to stand here and urge with the hon. gentlemen who have done so that consideration be given. I do not believe that in most of the 4.000 odd cases which the hon. member cited this afternoon it will be possible under any other arrangement for men, most of them now in their late fifties, ever to get title to the property rvhich they now occupy. I doubt very seriously if very many of them will be able under present circumstances, and in view of the conditions under which they operate, to make anything even approximating an adequate living for the remainder of their days if we do give them clear title to the property which they now occupy.
I know, however, that there is something in the heart of man which responds to ownership of land. I believe it must be particularly true of one who through good season and bad season over a period of years, under adverse conditions, has striven and stayed with it for the length of time these gentlemen must have done to be still, nearly twenty-six years later, occupying the land which they originally took. I do not think we would be giving away anything. I think we would be bringing satisfaction to some of them, and perhaps we might be paying something in the nature of a tribute to them because they have played an exceedingly important role in the life of our country in the last few years.
It was my privilege to see a great deal of Canada, part of western Canada and all of eastern Canada, during the period of this last war. It was noticeable wherever one went, from one end of Canada to the other, that in almost every community the first man who tried to get into the army in this war was the chap who went through the last war; and right behind him was his eon and indeed eventually his daughter.
This country owes a not inconsiderable debt to these men in every community in which they live for the leadership which they showed when the war came and for the leadership which they showed within their communities during the period which some of my friends like to refer to as the hungry thirties. In times of dissatisfaction and stress as well as in times of national peril these men have been the hard rock centre in the community life of every part of Canada.
I promised when I began that I would not resort to sentimental appeals in this matter, and I submit that what I have just said is not a sentimental appeal but simply a statement of fact which will be recognized as such by everyone in the house who has had contact with these families during the last ten or eleven difficult years.
Soldier Settlement

I take it that, because of association of ideas, it is possible at this juncture to refer for a moment or two to the Veterans' Land Act as at present constituted in an attempt to show that a difficulty does exist beween the cleaning up of the soldier settlement board scheme and the present scheme. The hon. member for Battle River this afternoon said that 4,600 original settlers had completed their contract. I do not dispute the figure, but I realize that if to-day we are to go the whole way, for economic or for sentimental reasons, and give title to an almost equally large number who are still attempting to complete their contract, many of them in arrears, this or any other government will be faced with a problem of reconciliation and compensation. I do not agree with the hon. member who said this afternoon that in his view such a concession would not be questioned or resented by those who had completed their contracts. I do not think it is an insuperable barrier, but I suggest to this government, or to whatever government eventually carries out the undertaking called for in this resolution, that they be prepared with a logical and reasonable argument in order to be able to meet the objections that will be brought forward. I am perfectly sure that not only will those who have completed their contracts, but also some of those who were either released from their contract or who broke it themselves, feel, and with some justification, that they would be discriminated against. This situation can be met.
I would point out one other fact which I think must enter into the consideration to be given to this measure by this or any other government, namely, that we are at the beginning of what we conceive to be a bigger and better settlement scheme. The pitfalls and mistakes of the last scheme have been observed and have been reasonably well guarded against in the new scheme. I believe that whoever finally accedes to the request of this resolution should take particular care to establish what the hon. member for Battle River attempted to establish-and I think he did so-namely, that the old scheme was exceedingly unjust, and that in many cases, the circumstances under which those contracts were originally entered into were iniquitous. If that is not done we are going to begin a new scheme, which appears to have most of the elements which make for success, bedevilled with the now prevalent idea that over a period of time the settler may possibly be granted more than is in his original contract.
I do not now argue for the sanctity of the contract, as such, against all circumstances.

I do think it is exceedingly important that sons of farmer veterans, and those chaps returning to-day who wish to take advantage of this scheme, should be made to feel that everything which can be done in the way of security, everything which can be offered in the way of compensation for perseverance and persistence in the keeping of the contract should be offered at the beginning rather than at the end. Realizing as I do that inevitably the security of old soldiers becomes a problem of the federal administration, I also realize the inevitability of change.
I should like to think that the dominion is getting close cooperation from the provinces and from the officials of the provincial governments in the selection of land and in the selection of areas in which land can be bought. This was not the case twenty-five or twenty-six years ago. Some of the provinces are cooperating in that way to-day. Therefore, before I leave the problem of the effect of what happens to the old scheme in its impact on the new scheme, I should like for a moment or two to refer to some of the differences between the two schemes. I refer particularly to the section which permits the settlement of soldiers on small holdings. In my remarks on the speech from the throne a few days ago I said a word or two about the effect of settlement on small holdings near large urban populations. I was very grateful when I saw that in the present regulations the area in which people could take up small holdings had been reduced from one acre to half an acre. I have some knowledge of the amount of work required to cultivate one acre intensively enough to make it an economic asset no matter where the locality happens to be. I was one of those who felt that no one who held a job that was of any consideration at all would be capable of getting full development out of a larger acreage. Therefore it was a matter of pleasure to me-[DOT] and I think it will make for success of the small holding-when I saw that the acreage required under the plan was reduced to half an acre.
I should like to say one thing about the small holding aspect of this problem. There is a tendency in some parts of Canada and in some communities to hive the small holdings together. My conception of the rehabilitation of the soldier is to fit him once more into the communal life of the country with as little differentiation between him and his neighbours as is humanly possible. For that reason I am somewhat sceptical of the value of the veterans' communities in the small holdings programme. I realize the economic

Soldier Settlement
possibilities of that type of development, but if I may issue a word of warning based on experience with relation to the veterans of the first great war it would be to suggest that we walk warily in the establishment of veterans' communities, as such.
I have taken advantage of this resolution in the first instance to express my own personal view toward it and to give my reasons for supporting it, and also to inject into the discussion some other remarks touching on the present scheme. I do not know whether this resolution will be accepted at this time, but I venture to predict that we will not continue over the years to send good money after bad only to continue to make the declining years of these soldier citizens of Canada as difficult as they have been in the past.


James Arthur Ross: Soldier Settlement

great struggle, and they fought a great battle for us during those years. They are the type of citizens we should encourage in Canada if we want that national unity of which we hear so much in this country to-day. New settlers under the present Veterans' Land Act are given a clear grant of thirty-nine per cent of their total credit of $6,000, provided that they carry out their agreement for a period of ten years. I am happy to think I had the privilege of serving as a member of the committee which brought the present legislation into being. Perhaps it is not all we had 'hoped for, but I think it is an improvement over the old act, as a result of our experience under that legislation.
I believe these 6,153 settlers, who have laboured for the past twenty-five years and most of whom are now old men, should be granted clear title to their land by the government writing off the 29 per cent of the original debt still remaining. Surely these men are entitled to at least equal consideration, in virtue of their service to this nation, to those coming under the new legislation. This is a time of readjustment, both for nations and for individuals. Old settlers under the board should receive consideration equal to that being shown new settlers under the present act. I am one of those who believe that a proper adjustment for these settlers will mean a great deal to the young veterans now coming back, who are inclined to settle under the present legislation. I know some of these chaps feel a bit discouraged when they think of what their parents had to go through, what with the drought years, the depression and all the rest of it, and they are inclined to try almost anything but farming. I do not believe that is a healthy sign. Experience would indicate that a large portion of our population should be encouraged to live on the land, and that we should have decentralization as much as possible. In that connection the provision in the present act having to do with the small acreage settler, the man who perhaps has a position in a city but who wants to carry on gardening or a small poultry farm, is a very fine feature. In order to encourage the younger veterans to go on the land, and in order to diversify the citizenship of this nation, I believe the government should give immediate consideration to the problems of these 6,000 odd men who come under the settlement act. Apart altogether from sentiment, I believe it would be good business in dollars and cents for the taxpayers of this country, and on these grounds I support the resolution.


Mr. RENE JUTRAS (Provencher) (Translation) :: Before voicing these few remarks, I wish to join the hon. members who spoke before me in tendering you my most sincere congratulations and in assuring you of the confidence which I and the hon. members of this house place in you. Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to express a wish, which is that the heavy responsibilities that devolve upon you may never take away the smile which has always characterized you and which has gained you such a host of friends.
(Text): I join with those who have preceded me, in asking for sympathetic consideration on the part of the government for those who settled on the land under the settlement board. Every hon. member is fully aware of the great difficulties they encountered and of the many reasons why they found it so hard to get along at that time. Economic conditions were not to their advantage. Also in many instances veterans tried to settle on farms, without having had any experience whatsoever before. I would presume that unfortunately all those have fallen by the wayside before now. Those with whom we are now concerned are the ones who in some way or another have survived the economic chaos of the depression and even the weather which for seven years worked against them, particularly in the prairie provinces. They are the ones who must receive our attention and consideration this evening. That is why I wish to support the suggestion that a special study be made of their case at this time, that this matter be given consideration in the light of conditions as they exist to-day, and that their position should be made as secure as possible for the years to come, even if it means writing off certain sums of money.
The hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) presented his case well, and earns my commendation in that respect. He placed before the house a complete picture, and in his observations even anticipated the objections and answered most of them. I shall not weary the house by repeating what has been said thus far in the debate. I wish, however, that the hon. member for Battle River had worded his resolution somewhat differently, because I am afraid if it were accepted in its present form a wrong impression might leave this house, one which I feel sure would be to the detriment of the veterans.
When I first read the resolution as it appears on the order paper I felt that it conveyed a certain measure of defeatism, and that it may in some way, if misunderstood, harm to some extent the new Veterans' Land Act, which is

Soldier Settlement
now being put into operation. If hon. members will bear with me I shall read the first two paragraphs of the resolution as it stands:
Whereas veterans of great war I who settled on land under the soldier settlement scheme, as well as their wives and families, have in many instances suffered severe hardships because of purchase of land, live stock and equipment at inflationary prices, and low prices received for farm products brought about by lack of adequate policy for agriculture;
And whereas we are now embarking on another land scheme for veterans of the present war, under a government policy that does not guarantee cost of production, the success of which scheme may be jeopardized by the apparent failure of the former soldier settlement board scheme.
I know the hon. member did not want to convey the impression that the new Veterans' Land Act did not have a much better chance of succeeding than did the one which existed before. But I am afraid that that impression might be gained by people who would read or hear the resolution as it appears on the order paper. It -would be unfortunate indeed if that impression were gained, because I have great confidence in the land settlement act as it stands to-day. I suggest that every hon. member should guard his words and deeds so as to build up a still greater confidence in the new act as it appears on the statute books.
I have many reasons for that contention. First of all, agriculture to-day enjoys the confidence of Canadian citizens as a whole, something which I believe it did not enjoy after the last war. To-day it is recognized by all as a major industry of national importance, and by this I mean that Canadian citizens as a whole realize well that Canada cannot continue on an economically sound basis without having agriculture on an equally sound basis. That fact was brought to the attention of Canadians to a greater extent during this war than it ever was in the past. I feel that today there is possibly more public sentiment in the whole of Canada in favour of agriculture than there has ever been before, and there is the general feeling that agriculture should receive the true and sincere support of the whole nation.
I would hope that no hon. member would at any time say or do anything which would tend to hurt or possibly to destroy the public confidence we enjoy at this time. Further, we should do everything we can to encourage progressive young men with farming experience who wish to engage in farming. Let them begin their work with the greatest of confidence.
The Veterans' Land Act as it stands to-day offers a great many new advantages which veterans of the last war did not enjoy. It is 47696-41i
not my purpose this evening to review the operation of that act, because the debate is directed to the Soldier Settlement Act which operated following the last war. I would, however, point out a few facts which relate to the Veterans' Land Act, and I do so because of the bearing those facts may have on the resolution as it is now worded.
First of all, one of the chief reasons why many who settled under the earlier scheme-failed to make a success of farming was that they did not have the necessary experience,, and had not lived in the locality in which they settled. I remember the case of a veteran who settled next to my home. This man came from Ontario; he had never before lived in western Canada and had had no experience-whatsoever in farming. The result was that he-remained on the farm for only six or seven: months and then abandoned the project as hopeless, despite the fact that the land on which he settled was good.
To-day there are still a large number of very good farms in the Red River valley, and it is our hope that the young men of that district will avail themselves of the opportunity to begin operations on those farms. There is no doubt, however, that after having watched the operation of the Soldier Settlement Act which was passed after the last war, many of those young men have not any great amount of confidence in the new act which is now in operation. I take this opportunity to-try to point out to all these young men that they should avail themselves of the opportunity now offered to them. The Veterans'' Land Act offers them a good, sound business.. I believe the capital outlay will be smaller than that required- by any other enterprise in. which they might want to establish themselves.
As I pointed out before, they certainly have a reasonable chance of success on a farm to-day. There are many reasons why this is so. Unlike the veterans of the last war, they are not being asked to buy land at inflationary prices. Generally speaking, prices of farm land are very reasonable. I know of many pieces of land in the beautiful Red river valley from which I come. I know of several good farms-that are available at the present time at most, reasonable prices. But what is causing me concern is the fact that young people, even in that particular area, do not seem to be any too keen to settle down on farms at the present time.
These men will have a fairly definite assurance that prices of farm products will remain, at a reasonable level and to a certain degree
Soldier Settlement

their income will be more or less secured. If they wish to raise large families the family allowances will increase their security. I could go on and enumerate many other advantages, but I think it will suffice to say that to-day agriculture is in a far better position than it ever was. It is in a better position to-day than it was in the past when considered from the security point of view.
I hope that all young veterans who have been brought up on farms or who have had any experience in farming will settle on the land. But this time they should be careful in selecting the land, because that is one of the most important factors if they are to -make a success. They should try to settle on land in their own localities, on land that is similar to that upon which they have been brought up; in other words, on land that they know.
I am in full agreement that soldiers who settled under the Soldier Settlement Act should receive periodical consideration from the government. They settled on the land under most adverse conditions which were made worse at times by the weather. These conditions were aggravated still further by the economic collapse which occurred later on. They struggled through, and those who survived deserve a lot of credit and should be given immediate consideration. I feel sure that the minister concerned will try to give them his most sincere consideration and endeavour to see that they are placed in a secure position.


Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, the resolution before the house is a very important one. This matter has been discussed every year since 1930, when I first came into the house. [DOT] On many occasions it has been brought up by the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) and others. I have two reasons for rising to speak on this occasion. First, I had nine years municipal experience between 1922 and 1930, just when the soldiers were being settled on the land. Believing that with that experience I could add something to the debate, I thought I should do so to-night. Second, there are one or two things I should like to say about the present Veterans' Land Act as it affects the veterans of this war and there are one or two matters I should like to draw to the attention of the minister.
I should like to say to the mover of the resolution that I have always deprecated the fact that quite often a member will introduce a resolution or bring a matter before the house and not always place all the facts of the case before hon. members. On reading

the resolution, I was reminded that there are certain districts in Alberta and elsewhere that have suffered in part from the effects of drouth. However, if one reads the resolution he will find that a great deal of the blame if not all-is placed at the door of the government. The government should not and cannot be held responsible for what takes place in drouth areas. I may be wrong, but it is my opinion that if the present boards were in charge of placing settlers it is problematical if many of these dried-out areas would be settled.
The resolution is divided into two or three parts. I do not intend to take the time to deal with all of them. First, may I say that like most hon. members who have spoken I have every sympathy for the resolution proposed, which reads:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should take into consideration the advisability of giving clear titles to all soldier settlers who on March 31, 1944, held land under contract with the soldier settlement board.
Anyone who listened to the stories told this afternoon and this evening by the hon. member for Battle River and others could not help feeling sympathetic, but I began to wonder whether a voice would be raised on behalf of another class of settler that I have in mind and that I feel sure every hon. member has some knowledge of. I refer to those settlers who in the early years of the soldier settlement scheme worked and battled their way, those settlers whose wives and families in many instances were oftentime denied some of the necessities of life in order that after a time they might obtain titles to their land.
I am not going to raise any objection to titles being given to those who have not been able to obtain them, but I certainly am going to put in a plea for those settlers who in past years have suffered and worked hard in order to get title to their land. What is to be done? Will no one say a word on their behalf? I could mention case after case where the settler, his wife and family have stayed at home, where they have worked hard, where in many instances they have gone without some of the necessities of life, but who now stand with the titles to their farms in their hands. Is nothing further to be done for that splendid class of settler?
May I make it clear that I am not going to object to titles being given to those who have been unable to obtain them because of circumstances which intervened, but I am going to voice a plea for those who have fought hard to get their titles and who in my opinion are just as deserving. This afternoon many instances were given of failures of the last

Soldier Settlement
scheme. Every member of parliament could regale the House of Commons with speech after speech on that subject, but conditions to-day are not similar to those of 1921 and 1922. The officials of the veterans land board to-day, from what I know of them in British Columbia, through the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie), know all that took place in those earlier years, and from what I can see they are not repeating the mistakes of those years. They have the benefit of those mistakes to go on, and consequently to-day are preventing many of the same mistakes from occurring. I well remember that in 1921 and 1922 there was a move by the government of the day to get men settled on the land as quickly as possible. I know men of that day who were also just as determined to settle on the land as farmers, some of whom called themselves farmers, and if anyone dared to dispute it they had to be ready for trouble. I remember one settler in particular who after he was settled on a farm was looking forward to the time when he might have to increase his dairy herd and he actually bought a young steer. Although his herd did increase, may I tell you, Mr. Speaker, that it was not because he had bought that particular animal. I know another man who was very angry when asked: Did he know anything about farming? He said: "I was brought up on a farm. My father and grandfather before me were brought up on a farm." Although the board of that day had set a price of $4,000 on a farm this man put up $2,000 more of his own for the place, and he was on it for only a month when he asked his neighbour if he had to plant potatoes every year. But it is no good going back and rehashing the failures.
One thing I do not like in this debate is that the impression may go abroad that all the settlers were failures. Nothing of the kind. True, many mistakes were made by the government. There was a lot of land and stock bought at high prices, and some land was purchased which in my opinion should never have been bought. While there are certain faults in the present scheme, it is a great improvement over the 1922 scheme.
What is one of the complaints being made to-day of the new settlement board in my district? By the way, I have the honour to represent a district with more soldier settlers settled under the last scheme than most of the other districts in British Columbia. What criticism do I get now? I hear farmers, yes, and real estate men too, saying that the government is paying too little for the land bought. Is that not a fine recommendation of
the Veterans' Land Act officials, that they are out protecting the men from being robbed by preventing them from paying the high prices of 1922? Let me give an illustration from my own district. I need not mention names, but I could if desired.
A father and son wanted to settle close to my own home two months ago. The father was a veteran of the last war and of this war, and his son had been in the air force in this war. The son wanted a place for which the man who was selling it was demanding $3,000. The Veterans' Land Act officials had 'looked over the property and said they would allow more than $2,000 for the place. After negotiating with the officials, the son came to see me and he was in a very high-strung frame of mind. The names he was calling the officials of the government for all the red tape, as he called it, were harsh. If he wanted to pay $3,000 for the farm, he should be able to do so, he said. I investigated the matter myself, and this is' what I found. I found that it had been purchased a year previous for $1,200, and the present owner was wanting this soldier settler to pay $3,000 for it. The Veterans' Land Act officials, realizing that the owner had made some improvements to the property, were willing to pay $2,000 for the property, but nothing more.
I mention that one instance because the complaints which I have heard under the present scheme are not that land is being bought at too high a price or that the soldiers are being robbed. The complaint is being made by farmers in the district that the land is being bought too cheaply. They feel that such reasonable prices might depress the price of property they themselves might want to sell.
I should liked to have seen, and I proposed this in the house last year, that the soldier be given the land as a gift, or at least without any interest charges. I should like to see that matter discussed when the special committee is set up. I was very glad indeed to note that the Minister of Veterans Affairs has a motion on the order paper to set up a special committee where all these matters can be thoroughly discussed.
I have one or two criticisms, and it might be as well for me to make them now.
I think we had better be, careful about where we place the small holder under the Veterans' Land Act. There is a tendency, I believe to settle the veterans on property which is a little too far out from the city and from transportation. Ini the constituency of New Westminster at the present time they are building in one comer of Richmond muni-
Soldier Settlement

cipality seventy-five homes, ten or twelve of *which are now ready for occupancy. These homes are each on one acre of land. I think the veterans' land board paid something like $850 an acre for the property. To my mind, one acre of land is far too much for a man to look after who intends to make his livelihood in industry. If he works eight hours a day in the shipyard or anywhere else he certainly cannot do much if any farming after his working hours. The odd one will be found who with the help of his wife and family may perhaps take on some extra work, but generally speaking, if a man is faithful to one master he will not be able to cultivate much on a small fruit ranch or on one acne of garden land. I would suggest to the minister that he review these plots of land, and I suggest that where they are close to the city half an acre of land would be sufficient. The minister has just intimated to me that that is being done, and' I am glad to hear it, because I raised the same objection last year and I know whereof I speak as to what the soldier settler can do in the Fraser Valley and in other parts of British Columbia.
I cannot agree with those in the house and many outside who are endeavouring and have endeavoured to place the industrial worker on the same plane with the man who has fought our battles overseas. I am very sorry if I cannot see eye, to eye with those who do; to me there is no comparison between the industrial worker and the man who offered his life and fought on the battlefront so that we here may have the life we have. And so I say to you, Mr. Speaker, and through you to the house, that our first charge must be to rehabilitate. those who fought our battles. That at least is my thought and it is one of the thoughts I am leaving with the minister. While we shall probably not see what was witnessed in the last settlement under the Soldier Settlement Act, nevertheless we in British Columbia and particularly in the city of New Westminster have started something which, I believe, may be adopted by other cities. The city of New Westminster has the honour to have two men who won the Victoria Cross, and1 perhaps thinking of the days which followed the last war the citizens set on foot a scheme which, in my opinion is highly commendable. It is the first of its kind in Canada and has a great deal to merit its adoption by other cities. The citizens of New Westminster decided to grant annuities, at the age of fifty, to these two New Westminster boys who won the V.C., and in addition to that they have set up a fund for scholastic purposes to be known under the names of these two V.C. winners. The
response was extremely generous and the two holders of the Victoria Cross, one, Major Mahoney, V.C., and the other, Private "Smoky" Smith, will at the age of, fifty have an annuity of $100 a month for life, so that, never again,, so far as these two are concerned, will there be any fear of their looking for charity or even of seeking jobs as janitors or as a run-about in the House of Commons such as we heard about the other evening. What has been done by the city of New Westminster I commend to other cities which have the honour of having V.C.'a.
I am glad, Mr. Speaker, that a special committee is to be set up to discuss this and other matters affecting our ex-servicemen. I am not sure whether all the provinces have a scheme similar to that of British Columbia, but that province has set aside one million acres in the interior as a free grant of land in which each soldier will share who wishes to settle there, with the result that all soldier settlers who take advantage of that offer in British Columbia will be able to start in without a debt hanging over their heads and with a cash balance of something like $2,300, being a free grant. This is equal to what they would obtain under the dominion- Veterans' Land Act if they took up land elsewhere and stayed with the project for ten years, as called for under the regulations. There is no doubt that interest charges were a heavy burden on many if not all of the settlers who took up land under the old soldier settlement board scheme, and while there were many faults, nevertheless those faults have perhaps helped in large measure to lay the foundation for the present act. If the foundation has. been laid fairly well it can be still further improved, and I hope the minister will take note of all the suggestions that have been made.


Mr. L. E. BAKER (Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare):: I have been much interested in the remarks concerning veterans of the last war and have listened with interest to the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) and other hon. members who have spoken in this debate. What I am going to say I shall say without bias and it will be non-controversial from the political point of view, because matters concerning veterans are far too important to be put on any political or controversial basis.
I am a new member here and also a veteran of two days' standing, having received my discharge on Saturday. Therefore I do not know very much about veterans' affairs so far as men of the last war are concerned. I know quite a bit, however, about legislation

Soldier Settlement
passed with respect to men returning from this war, and I am particularly interested not only in what happens to our present veterans but also in what happens to the veterans of the last war. After all, we are all comrades in arms together, and I must speak without fear or favour, because in the final analysis, should I be called to the bar of that great body known as war veterans, I should have to acquit myself. Therefore I am careful of what I say now.
There is one thing of which I would remind the house. The other day, being a new member and being interested in these matters, I was pleased to hear certain, remarks that were made, as reported in Hansard at page 467:
Mr. A. J. Brooks (Royal):	May I ask the
Minister of Veterans Affairs if it is the intention of the government to set up a special committee on veterans affairs at this session of parliament, and if so, at what time we may expect the committee to be set up?
Hon. Ian A. Mackenzie (Minister of Veterans Affairs): The reply is in the affirmative. The intention is at once to set up such a committee, and I shall be asking the various parties and groups in this house for their selections of names for that committee, probably in a day or two.
I think that is the right way to tackle the matter. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that these things should be worked out properly from the start. If it was not worked out properly from the start the first time-and I am not saying either that it was or that it was not-then more time should have been spent in working out the details. There are about ninety-five new members apart from myself, the majority of whom, I venture to say, do not know very much about the Veterans' Land Act or the Soldier Settlement Act, and therefore it would be a good idea to allow this committee to get down to work and come to some sort of conclusion, because they will have all the details at hand and the committee will be comprised of members from different sections of the house, so that it will be able to arrive at a satisfactory solution. I think, however, that it would be a very dangerous thing to vote in favour of this resolution to-night. Frankly, I am a veteran and I would not support the resolution because I do not know enough about it and the matter is too important. If we pass wise legislation in matters pertaining to veterans I feel sure that we shall have public support. If we do anything hastily and make mistakes we shall not have public support, and I think too much of the veterans and their future to support anything with which I am not thoroughly conversant.


Mrs. GLADYS STRUM (Qu'Appelle):: I did not intend to take part in this debate. There seem to have been a great many opinions expressed and a great deal of information and data brought before this house. There are a few things that I as a new member fail to understand when we come to deal with this problem. It is very difficult for a new member to come to this house and find that all hon. members agree that something is desirable and yet nobody wants to tackle it. I think the hardest thing that a new member has to put up with in this house is frustration.


John Horne Blackmore: The old members too!


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: I do not think we need to have any more royal commissions to deal with what happened to the veterans of the last war. We have the evidence in every community, and anyone who has lived here since the last war, as I have, does not need any royal commission to find out what happened. I submit, Mr. Speaker, the thing that happened to the veterans is the very same thing that happened to everybody else in this country; they were the victims of a set of circumstances with which our governments failed to deal. There are a few things in the brief submitted to the Rowell commission by the Hon. T. C. Davis, who was the attorney general of Saskatchewan in 1937, that have not yet been mentioned, and I am going to bring them to the attention of the house for a few moments.
We have recently dealt with the problem of a floor price for agricultural products. I wish to draw the attention of hon. members to the fact that in the eighteen years between 1920 and 1937 wheat reached SI a bushel only six times. Only six times in eighteen years did those veterans get what we now say should be the floor price. I should like to draw the attention of the house to the fact that in those eighteen years cattle went as low as $18, $19, $20, $22 a head, and the highest price recorded was $59 a head. I wish to draw the attention of the house to the fact that those veterans who were selling eggs took, according to the report of the Saskatchewan government, as low as seven cents a dozen for the year's average, which meant that those eggs went as low as three cents a dozen when they hit the rock-bottom price in the summer months. I think, we must accept these figures; they are the figures submitted by a Liberal government to a royal commission, and I believe them. I lived through them, Mr. Speaker, and I know what they meant to the family income and to debt. These people have produced enormous quantities of wealth, huge surpluses and gluts,
Soldier Settlement

and the worst part of the whole picture was the price failure, not the crop failure. The result was huge burdens of unpaid interest that became principal and finally took the farms out from under the feet of those people who had saved us from the fate of the people of France and Belgium.
If I were a veteran coming into this country to-day and saw a parliament sitting here talking about what each speaker in all parts of the house has called simple justice; "simple justice" everybody says, and yet we sit here and do nothing. I have been warned that is what is called "talking it out." I have been warned that you can talk a measure out so that you do not have to deal with it, and then you do not have to account for your actions. I hope that is not what we are witnessing, although I have a horrible suspicion-if I were a veteran coming back to-day I would feel very jittery to think that the new government was that kind of a government, and that that sort of policy would affect my future in the next few years.
We hear references to family allowances, and that the family allowance is a means of farm security. I think the family allowance is a good thing; I never criticized it. The C.C.F. were the few people who talked about it in the last few years. I did not hear a popular demand in the country for family allowances aside from C.C.F. platforms, when we said that they had started them in New Zealand and that it would help the mother of a family-


Brooke Claxton: They were first suggested by the Liberals in this house.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: Perhaps in this house, but I first heard about them, not in Canada but in New Zealand when I visited there in 1939. But there is one thing that many people overlook, namely, that your children grow up; they do not stay under sixteen. And what are you going to do with the bachelors who are farming? What are you going to do with the married couples who have no children? The family allowance is not farm security. The family allowance will not buy underwear for the children, let alone take the place of a crop or decent prices. Therefore I hope that this house will not fail to deal with this thing which is just simple justice.
I am amazed at people talking about the weakness of sentiment. I want to ask the house, did we refuse to use sentiment in 1914, 1915 and 1916? Did we appeal to those boys on the basis of good business? Did we ask them to enlist because there was money in it, or did we appeal to them on the sentiments that were worthy of the occasion? The only 
reason why I am in this house is that I care what happens to people. I am not interested in the dollars and cents angle of this business. I would not be here if I did not care about people, and the sentiments that move me are the sentiments that have to do with how people live and work, and how governments discharge their obligations. Therefore I move, Mr. Speaker, that the question be now put.


Mr. RALPH MAYBANK (Winnipeg South Centre):: I thought for a moment-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Question.


Ralph Maybank: I was in some doubt
as to whether I was in order when I rose. I did not understand that there had been any motion put before the house and seconded, and that the question which the lady member moved was not properly before the house. Have I the floor?


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:: There is just
one motion before the house.


Ralph Maybank: I did not think the
hon. member who has just finished made a motion which was seconded, and I did not think there was anything to prevent me from endeavouring to follow in her footsteps, which would be a difficult endeavour. The first thought that arose in my mind-I hope the hon. member will not take offence when I say this-was that there was a possible uncertainty of not obtaining the last word, and that she was endeavouring to effect some insurance that would give her the last word. I have not any objection to a lady having the last word; I think it is only right that she should.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It would not help you
anyhow.


Ralph Maybank: It would not help,
anyway.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: How about a little
cooperation?


Ralph Maybank: It would not make any difference-


Percy Ellis Wright: Why endeavour to talk
it out?


Ralph Maybank: I would be quite agreeable indeed to granting her another whack at it if there were any real desire on her part to have the last word.
Mr. Speaker, there are some features about this debate that are reminiscent of old-time revival meetings. I do not think there has ever been a question before the house on which there have been so many affirmative opinions given. It reminds me of a revival meeting in that one speaker after

Soldier Settlement
another rises to give testimony. So far as the effectiveness of the resolution is concerned I do not think it makes any difference whether it is or is not talked out, particularly after the display that has been given this afternoon and this evening.
I should like to join with others who have spoken in supporting this resolution, although as I read it there may be some detail in it, some point or another, with which I might disagree. When it comes to the resolution itself, however, I submit that it is in no way objectionable either under the rules and customs of this house or under the method adopted by the government in dealing with these matters. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) is not in his place at the moment; probably he is engaged in the very serious business of preparing the budget. But even if he were here I hardly think he could say there was in this proposal anything in the nature of an attempt to raid the treasury.
I would point out that the resolution does not ' ask that certain moneys be spent; it uses the much more diplomatic method of recommending to the government that they take into consideration the advisability of, in effect, giving clear title to this land, and for that reason I think the government might very well look upon the resolution in a kindly way.
There is no doubt in the mind of any person, I believe, that returned men after the last war were mulcted of untold sums of money by the operation of the Soldier Settlement Act of that time. I have worked with men who for many years were on farms obtained under that scheme, men who struggled until they could struggle no longer in an endeavour to make the payments, and who finally had to give up. I distinctly remember one man who had been on the land for ten or twelve years, paying money year after year on a contract which never, under any circumstances, could he hope to complete. That, of course, was only one case; I know of many others. In the interval between that time and the present many may have obtained title to their land, but many others have given up and lost out after having put a great deal into it. We now have this small number remaining who are in the position described by the mover of this resolution, and it would seem to me to be a matter the government should take into very serious consideration, as to whether they should not give some final relief to these people who have laboured under this disability for so long.
I have not spoken for very long, so that I cannot be accused of endeavouring to talk out this proposition. On the contrary I have 47696-42
probably taken less time than many who have spoken from the opposite side of the house. I do not know that there is anything more that can be usefully said by me at the moment. I suggested in the beginning that this was a matter of simply giving testimony, and I wish to place myself on record as being in favour of doing everything possible that can be done under the circumstances of this case.
Mr. F. W. TOWNLEY-SMITH (North Battleford): Mr. Speaker, I should like to express myself as being wholeheartedly in favour of this resolution. I suppose nearly everything that can be said about it has been said, but I wish to add just a few words. I happen to have lived among some of these men who took farms after coming back from the first great war; as a matter of fact, four of them were on quarter-sections immediately adjoining my own farm. I watched their efforts; I saw their struggles and understood their difficulties, because they were also mine. They faced the hazards of farming: weather, frost and hail, drought, insect pests, plant diseases; all these encompassed these unfortunate people in exactly the same way as they did the rest of us, but they were quite unable to stand up under the strain. I watched their efforts, their progressive difficulties and their progressive failures. I saw their wives die under the strain. I saw their children attending school ill clad and poorly fed. I watched one generation fail to secure a fair education because of the poverty and difficulties under which their parents were labouring. All this I saw from my own doorstep. These people never had a chance. It is quite true that the fault did not lie entirely with the government. The hazards I have mentioned can never be blamed on any government, but they were there just the same. Probably one reason for the failure of these men lay in the fact that in some districts a quarter-section of land is not an economic farm; the overhead is too high for that acreage.
As I said, four of these men settled around my farm; none of them is there now. They have all gone and others are on those quarter-sections. That was twenty-six years ago, and it does seem to me that if, after struggling with the problem for twenty-six years, these men have been unable to straighten it out, the very least we could do would be to straighten it out for them and give them this land. They are no longer young. When they came there they were ambitious and cheerful; many of them were strong. Now their ages are from fifty to sixty years; and if in the last twenty-six years they have not been able

Soldier Settlement

to make a go of it, they will never be able to get straightened out now. Some hon. members have spoken about agriculture being in pretty good shape just now. If they would read their newspapers they would see that western agriculture, particularly in Saskatchewan, is having its own difficulties this year. They would read about two and four bushel crops, and some districts where there are no crops at all. Some areas have been fortunate and are having good crops, but taking the province as a whole conditions are not good.
There is one particular instance I should like to mention. A quarter-section of land was sold to a veteran at the going rate of $25 an acre. After some twenty years the veteran was compelled to leave that land, broken and bankrupt. The same quarter-section was immediately sold to another man by the soldier settlement board for $10 an acre. At $10 in the first place the veteran could have paid for it; at $25 he was unable to do so.
Some hon. members have been distressed over the wording of the preamble. May I suggest to them that they are not voting on the preamble but on the resolution, which reads:
That, in the opinion of .this house, the government should take into consideration the advisability of giving clear titles to all soldier settlers who on March 31, 1944. held land under contract with .the soldier settlement board.
Hon. members, let us do this thing. Let us give these men one real good break.


Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley) :: Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak for forty minutes in connection with this motion.
I am entirely in accord with the principle, and would be glad to support it in every way.


Mr. GLEASON BELZILE (Rimouski) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise for the purpose of speaking on this motion, because I believe that what has been said so far did not touch the matter of principle which underlies the resolution. Without any doubt, our full sympathy goes to all those veterans who, after the first great war, took up land under the Veterans' Settlement Act. Those men, on their return from the war, certainly deserved whatever opportunities the government afforded them, but as I said a few moments ago, we are now dealing more particularly with a matter of principle and I think I am in a most favourable position to discuss it, since there are very few instances of such land settlement in the constituency I have the honour of representing.
The matter of principle Which underlies the present discussion seems to be the following: in taking up land the veteran entered with

the government into a contract which was perfectly free and quite voluntary. That contract was not forced upon him, it was signed under no pressure; everything was done on a purely voluntary basis. On the one hand, the government offered the veterans definite and distinct advantages, and on the other hand the veterans assumed some obligations, and agreed to terms and conditions clearly laid down in their contracts. Therefore, there is at stake a principle, which is linked up with the sanctity of contracts.
I do not believe we could interfere and ask that contracts that have been entered into in all freedom, and freely accepted by both parties be set aside merely on a resolution asking the government to take into consideration the advisability of giving clear titles to all soldier settlers for their land.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution appears to me as being prompted more by political considerations than by common sense. Indeed, it is only necessary to examine its wording to notice that it represents the present situation as being due to the "lack of adequate policy for agriculture". Of course I am not in a position to go over the whole farming policy of this government or of the liberal administrations which have preceded it, and I do not think this is the proper time to do so, but the least that can be said about the resolution is that it is an evidence of defeatism on the part of the hon. member who has moved it.
The motion before the house, rests on a question of simple justice: either the veteran has met his obligations, in which instance there are no complaints because every one is satisfied; or, he has failed to meet them for various reasons, such as bad weather, unfavourable international marketing conditions, competition and so on, but not necessarily from lack of an effective agricultural policy on the part of this country's government.
In that case, if the government grant a clear title to the veteran whose payments are in arrear, it will appear to me as a clear case of injustice to those who, under similar circumstances, have met their obligations. Then we might be confronted with the somewhat queer procedure of another motion asking the reimbursement of sums paid in by those who have not defaulted. No argument could prevent the moving of a resolution to that effect on the very same grounds. The parties concerned would have the same arguments of sympathy and sentiment; they could base their claims on their status as veterans and the hard times they have experienced. And then, for the second time, we would have to

Soldier Settlement
sanction an injustice flowing from the adoption of the motion before the house at this moment.
One thing is certain, the veterans of the first great war and those of the war just ended, do not ask for pity; all they want is fair treatment, nothing more.
Let us suppose for a moment that the present motion be carried. All the borrowers under the federal farm loan scheme, for example, who have defaulted in their payments, could come before the house, and, through another motion, request that their debts be cancelled, for reasons of sympathy, on account of hard times and especially because of the conditions engendered by the failure of the government to implement an efficient farm policy.
In the event the present motion is carried, we shall have established a precedent. Thus, there would be no valid reason to reject a similar resolution. From there on, whatever anyone would be in debt with the government, he could simply have to play on the sympathy and sentiments of the members of the house who would then be bound to grant his request.
Mr. Speaker, I believe sentimentality should be excluded from our discussions; we should take into account not the interest of a particular class of our citizens, but only the general welfare of the whole population. Everyone who would find it impossible to meet his obligations and would be faced with bankruptcy would have the right to apply to parliament for exceptional treatment and thus the House of Commons would become a dispenser of compassionate grants.
I respectfully suggest that the passage of such a resolution would inevitably lead us to state paternalism. Further, it would tend to give the veterans of this war, who are entitled to the advantages provided by the new settlement act, the wrong and false impression that if they fail to meet their obligations all they will have to do will be to come before Parliament in ten or fifteen years hence and request a remission or reduction of their debts. From a business standpoint, it would be creating a bad precedent; and I do not think that we should be moved by sentiment and become soft-hearted. Let us glance into the past and we shall find that the pioneers who came from France and who settled on the old lands of Quebec, on the island of Orleans and in the district of Riviere Ouelle and who, with their bare hands have built a whole country, did not receive any land clearing bonuses, or Government grants or remission of their debts 47696-m
from a paternalistic state; however, they built a whole country with the sweat of their brow, their labour and their devotion to duty.
Mr. Speaker, I feel we should recall the past and consider those facts. Accordingly, on a matter of principle, and disregarding any appeal to sentimentality, I place myself on record as being opposed to this resolution.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Mr. Speaker, may I express my sympathy for my * colleague, the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mrs. Strum), and what she has expressed in her brilliant little speech. I have no particular skill to stand upon my feet for forty minutes and say nothing, or to say those things which have already been said, nor do I intend to acquire such skill through practice. I think everything that can be said upon the motion has already been said. It would appear that hon. members from all sections of this house believe that the veterans of 1914-18 who now remain on the land should be given clear title to the land. We are all agreed; so let this government give it to them. The hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare (Mr. Baker) has said that as a new member he does not yet understand about such things as the veterans' acts and so on of the last war. I was reminded of Miles Sfandish whose friend spoke on his behalf and who was told, "Why don't you speak for yourself, John." The hon. member also advised against haste, but I would suggest that eight years of debate on this question should be sufficient, and there are still sixty minutes of this evening left.


Douglas King Hazen: Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with the wording of the preamble to this resolution for reasons-that I do not think it necessary to state this-evening, but with the resolution itself I am in wholehearted agreement. It asks the government to take into consideration the advisability of giving clear titles to all soldier settlers who on March 31, 1944, held land under contract with the soldier settlement board.
Surely no hon. member can object to the government doing that. Surely no hon. member can object to the government reconsidering the whole matter and reviewing the whole subject. Not only do I think the government should reconsider and review the whole matter, but after they do that I hope they will see their way clear to give clear titles to these veterans as the resolution suggests.
I believe that a man should live up to his agreement and meet his obligations, but there are cases when it is quite impossible to do
Soldier Settlement

this. I am convinced that the situation in which these veterans find themselves is one of these cases.
I met a delegation of veterans that came to Ottawa in June of last year to present a brief asking that these men be given clear titles. I was more impressed by the men composing that delegation than by their brief. One had only to meet them and talk to them to be impressed by the justice of their claim. One had only to look at them to realize that for years past they had faced a tremendously difficult task, that they had struggled with courage against great odds and had done the best they could under the most adverse circumstances. It was clear that the cards had been stacked against them and that fate had been unkind.
After talking to these men I realized that we could not afford to allow them to leave the land as they were doing. I realized we would be making a great mistake if we let men of their character and their racial origin and their families leave the land and perhaps have it taken over by other persons who might not and probably would not be so willing to come to the defence of their king and country in time of war.
I think the agreements that were entered into could well be changed in favour of the veterans on- the ground of mutual mistake. The mistake on the part of the board was that they overvalued the farms in the first instance and sold them to veterans at too high a price. The mistake on the pant of the veterans was that they thought the farms would produce a great deal more revenue than they did. The mistake was owing to the fact that the farms had been purchased by the board and sold to the veterans in boom times and in a period of inflation.
This matter does not affect veterans who live in the prairie provinces only, because, as the hon. member for Royal (Mr. Brooks) pointed out this afternoon, there are veterans in the maritime provinces who have faced similar difficulties. I could cite instances, although I do not propose to do so this evening. I would urge the government not only to reconsider and review the whole matter but to give these veterans clear title to their lands.


Mr. FERNAND VIAU (St. Boniface):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to take part in the discussion on the resolution now before the house as a soldier and not as a veteran, although the title of veteran has been attributed to me by the press ever since I have become a member of the House of Commons. I feel, however, that a veteran is one who has returned from

a theatre of war or has experienced action on the battlefield. Although I enlisted as a volunteer, I have never had the privilege, through no fault of my own, to go across the sea and fight with my comrades against the enemy which was trying to deny not only to Canada but to the entire world that peace and freedom which have always been dear to those who live under democratic government. Neverthelss, as a soldier, I feel that I should express my opinion on the resolution now before us.
The resolution asks the government to wipe out a legal debt owing to this country, and as such, it presents a very serious problem which should be given careful consideration, by all hon. members, no matter on which side of the house they sit.
I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) upon his sincerity and tenacity in bringing this resolution before the house. I was surprised to hear the hon. member for Melfort (Mr. Wright) ask that immediate consideration be given to the request as submitted by the hon. member for Battle River. As he did establish himself under the Soldier Settlement Act which was passed by the government in power after the great war of 1914-18, and being thrifty, hardworking and an honest and conscientious farmer was able to pay back his debt to the government, that does not mean necessarily that all the debts still owed to the government for the same privileges that he himself enjoyed after the war of 1914-18 should be wiped off.
I also wish to congratulate the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr,. Diefenbaker), whose political career in the House of Commons I have followed closely when an outsider, and for whom I have always had a great admiration for the attitude he has taken in this house in discussing this problem which concern the welfare of Canada's veterans.
It must be remembered that when the government in power after the last war introduced the Soldier Settlement Act, they did so without any experience whatsoever in that field. That was really the first time that Canada, had sent troops overseas to join with our allies in defeating the Germans. The government when they passed that act yvere very sincere and thought they had passed an act from which every veteran of the war of 1914-18 who came under it would benefit, and that no request would be made to have the act amended as has been frequently done from 1922 up until this day.

Soldier Settlement
It must also be remembered that during the period 1918-19 the wheat acreage in this country-I am speaking of western Canada- expanded, but in the southern area of the western provinces there was a large drought area where the board did not allow settlement by veterans who applied to get the full privileges granted by the Soldier Settlement Act. After the war of 1914-18 we had inflation for about a year and a half in Canada, and then the drought areas in western Canada came back. After the great war we still had a very large wheat surplus, but on account of the war ending so abruptly in 1918 there existed no purchasing power in Europe and we were unable to dispose of our agricultural products. That condition was accentuated by the fact that practically all existing governments, thinking they were placing their own economy on a sound basis, increased tariffs as high as Canada did under the regime of the Bennett government from 1930 to 1935. Therefore we were not able to sell our products to the other countries of the world.
In 1922, after many requests for amendments had been received from veterans of the war of 1914-18 who had settled under the Soldier Settlement Act, the government brought in an amendment which resulted in the interest on the debt owed by the veterans being waived for periods of from two to four years, depending upon the settler's date of establishment. Then in 1925 another amendment was made to the Soldier Settlement Act granting a reduction to the soldier settlers of forty per cent of the cost of the live stock purchased prior to October 1, 1920, and a reduction of twenty per cent of the cost of live stock purchased after October 1, 1920, and prior to October 1, 1921.
At a still later date, in 1927-in the meantime there had been a rise in the cost of living and in the cost of all commodities needed by every Canadian-a further amendment was made granting a reduction of the amount by which the price of the purchased farm exceeded 1927 values. That also was of great benefit to the soldier settlers. That was followed in 1930 by a reduction of thirty per cent of all the debts owed to the soldier settlement board.
Hon. members will notice that even though the Conservative government which was then in power was followed by the Liberals, and the Conservative government came back in 1930, an unbiased attitude was taken by all governments in power concerning the debts owed the country by the veterans who settled
under the act. From 1930 to 1935 when the Conservative party was in power a remission was granted of one year's interest on all charges and also a dollar for dollar bonus respecting payment of all obligations then owing to the board; that is, for all debts falling due before April 1, 1936, which date was later extended, on further representations, to March 31, 1941.
During the Bennett regime was introduced the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act which granted benefits not only to farmers but also to veterans who had settled under the Soldier Settlement Act, which legislation was brought into force by the Conservative party. I worked under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act and I know of the benefits received by the farmers of western Canada under that act. While I do not want to mention any case, I know of applications filed in the office, where I was assistant official receiver under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, of the benefits gained, when the case was brought before the board of review. The grants given to the veterans were really of great advantage to them. They consolidated the debt owing at the time at which the application was discussed before the board of review, and extensions for payment were granted up to ten, fifteen and twenty years at very low interest rates. But in 1942 there were still a great number of cases that remained unpaid through no fault of the veteran. Some soldiers had already reenlisted in the armed forces of the great war of 19391945, and there were others who, owing to sickness and also by reason of wounds received in the war of 1914-1918, or family troubles, or from other social causes, still had to apply to the government to receive certain relief in respect of debts owing under the act. That is why in 1942 the government authorized the treasury board, on the recommendation of the director, to reduce the indebtedness of the settler to the present and prospective value of the land. They were given time to file application until December 31, 1943, and even then, as I have stated, a great number of these settlers had reenlisted in this conflict and as such were unable to file application. But they were still granted the same rights, and recently I was informed that the government had given power to grant an extension; where no applications had been made, owing to no fault of the men; owing to service in this war or sickness, they were given the same privilege as granted those who applied in 1942.
I feel that the amount involved is not very high, but the fact remains that it is still a debt owing just like a debt owing to-day by
Soldier Settlement

a farmer who might apply for a mortgage to any company who might advance money to farmers to purchase land, stock, machinery or cattle. I feel that the resolution as worded should never have been brought before the house but that the government must give the matter consideration; and as I have stated, certain action has already been taken in that respect in granting extension to farmers to pay their debts owing to the country in respect of the benefit they received on settling on lands in Canada for their services in the war of 1914-1918. As such the veterans coming back from this war will then feel able to file application and receive the same benefits granted under the Veterans' Land Act which was passed in 1942 as granted to the veterans settled under the Soldier Settlement Act in connection with the war of 1914-1918.


Mr. J. W. MacNAUGHT (Prince):: I wish to express one or two sentiments on the resolution introduced so ably by the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair). I believe it was the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Pearkes) who said he represented an island in the Pacific. Well, I come from an island in the east, Prince Edward Island, and I think it might interest the house for me to tell of some 'of the experiences of veterans who took up land under the Soldier Settlement Act after the last war. I well recall many instances where these men were put on lands valued at three or four times their price. It was impossible for them to make good and they naturally failed.
I do not wish hon. members to misunderstand me. I agree heartily with most of the sentiments expressed this afternoon and evening, but I think the resolution as at present worded is most inadequate. In the first place, a measure of relief such as this should be uniform in its benefits, and the thing that strikes me about this resolution is the great disparity of benefits that will accrue from it. There will be no case where the equity in the land will be the same and therefore each individual will derive a different benefit under the resolution.
In the second place, some of the previous speakers have referred to the annoyances that may be expressed by those veterans who have already got title. Well, what about the poor lad who held on for quite a long while and then gave up? For that reason I submit that the resolution is totally inadequate because the benefits are not equal and fair.
iMr. Viau.]


Walter Adam Tucker: One of the impressions that have been created by some speakers who have taken part in the debate this afternoon and to-night is that previous parliaments have consisted of men who had no interest in the returned soldier and were quite callous to what was happening to him. In fact, one hon. member has given expression to this thought: "I am interested in people and that is why I am here in this house." I have the honour and privilege of speaking now in the third parliament in which I have been a member, and I think I can say to that hon. member that in those other parliaments there were members elected to speak here who were also interested in people and interested in trying to do what was right by the people they represented and particularly by those who fought for our country in the first world war.
I am very glad that an attempt has been made to indicate something of what has been done for the returned soldier since world war I. It has been a popular pastime of some people to pretend that nothing whatever was done for the returned soldier. It has been said so often that I am sure some people have been led to believe that, no matter how carefully parliament has endeavoured to provide for the rehabilitation and reestablishment of the returned soldier of this war, they will also find that they have not been properly looked after. That is a natural assumption to make from the talk that has gone on among so many people in the last ten or fifteen years. However, I do not think the boys who went overseas in the last war are convinced that all the parliaments between the two wars were callous about their condition and did not do the best they could, and that suddenly a new race of men, with one woman added, has come into being here and will make all the difference in this parliament. If the idea is created that parliament is helpless and unwilling to do justice to those who have fought for the country, then a service is not done to parliament in any way, shape or form, and confidence is not created in the ability of this parliament and the willingness of parliament and the government representing it to do justly by those whom we are going to reestablish during the next four or five years.
As has been pointed out in this debate, there is no doubt that the people who set up the Soldier Settlement Act after the last war thought they were setting up an act that would work. They ran into the conditions

Soldier Settlement
which are described in the resolution and with which most of us will agree. The preamble to the resolution reads:
. . . have in many instances suffered severe hardships because of purchase of land, live stock and equipment at inflationary prices, and low prices received for farm products. . . .
With that statement I think most hon. members will agree, and as a result the various changes were made which have been enumerated by the hon. member for St. Boniface (Mr. Viau). That is the first point which I would wish to make. All those parliaments were honestly endeavouring to deal with the situation as they found it. One of the things that moved those parliaments was that as between the returned soldiers who took up land under this act there should be an attempt to make adjustments which would benefit as much as possible all, that no adjustment would be justified if it discriminated between one group and another. I am satisfied that the only way we can justify in the eyes of the country any expenditure which we make is if it appears to deal justly with the people who have been endeavouring to pay for their land during the last four or five years. That is one of the things which I am sure will strike home to hon. members, namely, the fact that the man who during the last four or five years has struggled hard to pay for his land and has got clear title will say, if his neighbour next door, who perhaps has thought that ultimately the debt would be cancelled and has paid little or nothing, gets clear title, that he has not been dealt with justly. We then will have that claim made.
Be that as it may, I should like to lay before hon. members the effect of the various improvements which have been made in the situation from time to time and which have been enumerated by the hon. member for St. Boniface. Starting with the year 1922 and going on to the year 1944, these improvements have amounted roughly to $45 million, which were written off the debt of the soldier settlers of this country. The original indebtedness for the capital advanced was roughly $109 million. Therefore almost the equivalent of fifty per cent of the original capital advanced has been written off. I give this figure to do justice to previous parliaments; they were not callous about these things, and they did work for the returned soldier to the best of their ability.
With regard to the present situation, I would draw to the attention of the hon. members the fact that we have on the order paper a resolution which provides:
That a select committee be appointed,
1. To consider all legislation passed since the commencement of the war with the German reich relating to the pensions, treatment, and reestablishment of former members of His Majesty's armed forces and of other persons who have otherwise engaged in pursuits closely related to war.
I take it that this will provide for the setting up of a committee on returned soldiers' affairs, which will be very much like the committees which have sat in the last two parliaments and on which I have -had the great honour and privilege of serving. These committees were made up largely of returned soldiers. They were noted not only by the members of all parties on the committees themselves, but by those who watched their operations, as committees which were perhaps the most non-partisan of any which sat on any problem during that period of nine years. I would say this to the new members who come into this house and who are inclined to lecture those who sat here in previous parliaments, that we sat many, many hours and gave very anxious consideration to the representations which were made by the authorized representatives of the returned soldiers throughout the country. Many changes were recommended to the committee, changes which were consistent with the recommendations of those recognized returned soldiers' organizations. These changes were recommended by the committees and accepted by the government. The government has now provided for the setting up of another committee. I believe there are now eighty-four men in the house who have given services to the country in the armed service in the first world war and in this war. Unless we have a committee that is much larger than usual we shall not be able to put all the ex-servicemen on that committee. I am very proud that the government is ready to trust the legislation in regard to ex-service men in large measure to the hands of at least one-third of the membership of this house who have actually served their country in the armed forces.
I am satisfied, Mr. Speaker, that that committee will have a chance to study this whole question; it will have a chance to hear the representatives of the various returned soldiers' organizations in the country, and what they have to say about it. It will have a chance to go into the way the acts have been administered; it will have a chance to examine into whether the officials of the soldier settlement board have discharged their duties with a
Soldier Settlement

reasonable amount of consideration for the humanities of the situation. There will be on that committee returned soldiers from all parties and, if it is anything like previous committees, there will be the freest discussion on all those problems. Therefore I would say to the hon. member who moved this resolution that to have it properly considered I think it will be admitted that the place where that can be done will be before that committee where .we can get the actual facts, get witnesses in front of the committee and hear what actually has been done.
I would ask the house to consider all the legislation that has been passed in regard to those who served with His Majesty's forces. In that legislation there is order in council P.C. 10472. In that order in council it was provided that any returned soldier could apply to the director of the soldier settlement board for a reduction of his debt. Then the appraisers of the board made a careful examination of the situation. They valued the land and made a report not only on the land but on the chance of the returned soldier paying the debt within a reasonable time; on his health, and on his record during the previous number of years. On the basis of this report the director was able to recommend a reduction which would give that returned soldier a chance to clear himself of debt within a reasonable time, based not only upon the value of the land but upon personal considerations as well. Then the treasury board was given power, on the basis of the recommendation, to write down the debt accordingly.
I understand that that order in council has been given a very liberal application, but the facts in that connection can be ascertained when this committee meets. If it is proved that the policy of the government in this matter has not been carried out liberally it will be the business of this committee to find out the facts and recommend accordingly. In any event, under that order in council an amount of 1988,205.54 was written off the debts of the soldier settlers. Under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act a total of $6,808,536 was written off. As I understand the law, any soldier settlement farmer in the prairie provinces who has not applied for and obtained an adjustment of his debts can apply under that act for an adjustment; and anyone who has observed the workings of the boards set up in western Canada under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act will know that they have been very considerate and very liberal in their write-downs of debt.
So that the soldier had the chance to apply to the director of the soldier settlement

board or under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act for a write-down of his debt. He also has the right to make a second application under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act if he obtained an adjustment before December 31, 1938. Some people did not apply under either provisions. As I understand the law, they can still apply under the Farmers' Creditors Act, and have the matter of adjusting their debts brought under the machinery of that legislation. I have had a certain amount of experience of the basis on which the officials acting under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act write down debts in regard to soldier settlers. It is not done entirely on the basis of the value of the land. They take into consideration the record of the settler, his proved ability to discharge his obligations and so on, and they have written the debt down to a level where he could hope to be entirely free of debt within a reasonably short time.
Those provisions have been made, but in order to give another chance to those who have not made any application at all to have their debt written down, this government passed an order in council on the 28th of last month. I need not read the entire order in council, but it provided that those who had not applied through no fault of their own could still apply to the director of the soldier settlement board to have consideration given to the writing down of their debt, and gave the treasury board power to write it down.


Mr. MacNICOL:: Does the hon. gentleman mean the order in council was passed on September 28?


Walter Adam Tucker: Yes, three days ago. The effective part of the order in council reads:
The undersigned accordingly recommends that the period within which such settlers may make effective application for debt reduction under the aforesaid order in council-
That is P.C. 10472.
[DOT]-be amended to March 31, 194G; and that, decision as to whether the failure of any settler to make application on or before December 31, 1943-
That was the former cut-off date.
-was or was not due to reasons beyond the control of any such settler shall be at the discretion of the director of soldier settlement.
With the consent of the house, and in the name of the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie), since I have not read the whole of the order in council I should like to table it.
Bearing in mind all that has been said and what I have just mentioned to the house as to what has been done and what has been provided for, I suggest that a proper approach to this problem would be to say, we will

Soldier Settlement
have a committee made up, I expect, almost entirely of ex-servicemen, who will have a chance to go into the administration of these various orders in council and the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act. They will be able to look into these cases which are alleged not to have been properly dealt with under the existing machinery. Anyone who has had experience with the trial of cases knows that no judge will act in a serious matter on ex parte evidence, without hearing all sides That is a fundamental principle of British justice, that all sides of a case shall be heard. When I hear hon. members say, "We do not know what has been done; we do not know the actual facts, but we know someone claims to have been mistreated and therefore we are going to make a sweeping decision", then I suggest that at any rate it would do no harm to wait until a committee of this house composed of returned soldiers has had a chance to hear whether or not the returned soldier organizations of this country are in favour of this proposal. It can do no harm, to give that committee a chance to look into these cases and see whether the paid servants of the government are not properly carrying out their duties, whether they are actually abusing those who defended this country in the first great war.
These are matters in which I believe we, as members of parliament, should be interested. We should ask to hear both sides before we undertake to act. It has been suggested that this soldier settlement scheme has been an entire and utter failure. Well, I am free to admit that owing to lack of former experience and owing to a desire to put the act into operation too quickly, mistakes were made. It was attempted to settle some 19.000 of these soldiers on the land in a matter of about eighteen months. Now, of course, we have learned by the mistakes made after the last war. From what I have seen of the boys coming back from overseas, they are not going to rush into things quite as quickly as was the case with those coming back after the first great war. I have talked to several returned men recently, and their attitude is that land values may be a little higher now than they will be two or three years from now, that perhaps equipment costs a little more now than it will cost in another year or two. As I understand it, this act will be so administered as to encourage the boys coming back from overseas to take their time before plunging into this proposition; to look around for a piece of land where they feel sure they can make a success, and not go into it until the time comes when they can get their land and equipment at
reasonable prices. There will be no attempt to try to get all these gentlemen settled within a period of a year and a half. In other words, there will be an attempt to put everybody into a position where, if he is settled under the Veterans' Land Act, he will have a real chance of success-almost a 100 per cent chance of success.
There is a tendency to suggest that the various measures which this government -has put into force, and which, I would draw to the attention of those people who jeer at those measures, have been approved by the people of Canada in the last general election, are not sufficient. I see the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mrs. Strum) laughing at that. I will ask her this question: Did she get half the people of Canada to endorse her attitude toward this legislation?


An hon. MEMBER:: Did you?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: More than you did.


Walter Adam Tucker: I got the endorsation of those who elected me; and I got it on the basis of carefully laying before my people the government's programme, and asking for their endorsation of it. It will be time enough to suggest that the people of Canada did not know what they were doing and to laugh at their decision when we see whether or not those solutions actually work. So far as I am concerned, I am satisfied that they will work. Those who sneer at them and treat them as something only worthy of contempt are taking the attitude, indirectly, that the people of this country do not know what they are doing at the time of an election.
Well, that may be the attitude of my hon. friends in the C.C.F. I have heard the expression by hon. members of that party to the effect that, in this complicated system of government, the people cannot be trusted to decide their own affairs, that they must have boards of experts to tell them what to do, and that if they make decisions they will probably be foolish decisions. That sentiment was actually echoed on the floor of this chamber, when action this government has taken-action which was approved by the people at a general election-was sneered at as being unworthy of consideration and insufficient to meet the need.
As to the question of whether the old Soldier Settlement Act was a complete failure, let me say that I hold no brief for the board which operated under that act. But I do say that we should know the facts. Up to March 31, 1945, there were 5,028 accounts actually paid up under that act. During the past six years 2,436 were paid up, a good portion of
Soldier Settlement


An hon. MEMBER:: What scheme?
Explain.


Walter Adam Tucker: I am going to explain if
my hon. friend will restrain himself long enough for me to do so.


James Arthur Ross: Another man looking
for time.


Walter Adam Tucker: I am referring to the
Veterans' Land Act which was passed in 1942. I have already indicated some of the reasons why I am satisfied that that act will be a success. First, there is to be a careful examination into the qualifications of those who apply under the act. An effort will be made to see that they are fully qualified to make a success at farming. If not, courses in farming will be available in order that they may become qualified before they actually go on the land and risk their money.

Soldier Settlement
Then, no attempt will be made to place them on the land within the first twelve months after the war has ended. Time will be taken to make sure that land is obtained at fair prices and that people have a chance to select the land they want. The men will be given help to get settled on good land and an effort will be made to see that exorbitant prices are not paid for such land and for machinery and other items. It was in this connection that veterans of the last war found themselves at a great disadvantage. They paid high prices for land and machinery, and after a period of four or five years they found that the land and machinery was worth only a fraction of what had been paid for them. That was enough to discourage any one.
Another aspect of the matter is the protection given to the veteran in connection with what he will get for what he produces. A floor has been placed under farm prices. As the president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture said, this is the most radical reform measure that has ever been passed by any parliament in Canada. I have great faith in the effectiveness of the floor under farm prices bill, and I have great faith that it will provide real protection to the veterans in the years that lie ahead.
Then we have the Prairie Farm Assistance Act which will protect the veteran farmer on the prairies in the event of crop failure. I often think of the years from 1930 to 1939 when we had crop failure after crop failure in Saskatchewan and what it would have meant had we had the Prairie Farm Assistance Act at that time. Is it any wonder that thoughtful people think of the things that have been done by the present government? Is it any wonder that a good share of them stood by the Liberal party in the last election even though our election system resulted in only two Liberals being elected? However, I would remind my Tory friends that they managed to elect only one, so that there is nothing there about which they can crow. Incidently I will tell them that one of the reasons why that man was elected was, first, that he is an outstanding man and, second, that he assured his electors that he was just as liberal as any Liberal running in Saskatchewan.
There are other grounds, but I have not the time to go into them to-night. I regret that I have not the time. I have not mentioned the Family Allowances Act.


James Arthur Ross: Five minutes more
and you will have talked the farmers out.


Walter Adam Tucker: I wonder how I came to pass over the Family Allowances Act. I say that feelingly and for reasons which are
known to all hon. members. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle spoke feelingly and, perhaps, properly about the poor bachelor on the western plains. However, I could not help thinking that with all the surplus fine young women we are going to have in this country, any man who will not be satisfied to take a wife from that fine group of Canadian women will not deserve any sympathy such as the hon. member for Qu'Appelle has extended. I do not think there will be many returned soldiers who will actually be in that category when they get back from overseas or have been back for a year or so.


An hon. MEMBER:: Three minutes.


Walter Adam Tucker: Judging by what happened after the last war, I believe a large proportion, an overwhelming proportion of the men who take up land under the act will be in receipt of family allowances. Even a returned soldier cannot hope to have a family and have it grow up in much less than seventeen or eighteen years. During that time most of these men will be in receipt of family allowances which will provide a certain income and a basis for their living, no matter what may happen in the way of crop failure on our western plains.


John Ritchie MacNicol: They will have plenty of time to increase the size of their family and get more allowances.


Walter Adam Tucker: There may be a lot to be said for that. I have often said that the best immigrant is the one who arrives by way of the stork. I agree with the hon. member for Davenport and I am glad he is taking up this matter as well as the question of irrigation.


James Horace King: I would remind the hon. gentleman that it is eleven o'clock.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Tuesday, October 2, 1945.