1945-03-29

Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following communication:
Ottawa, March 29, 1945.
Sir:-I have the honour to inform you that Hon. Patrick Kerwin, acting as deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to tile Senate chamber to-day, Thursday, the 29th of March, 1945, at 6 p.m.. for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
F. L. C. Pereira, Assistant Secretary to the Governor General.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. SENN:: 1.	To date, what properties have been purchased in Haldimand county to be used for the establishment of returned men on the land?
[Mr. Bryce. 1
2.	From whom were such properties purchased ?
3.	What was the total amount paid in each instance?
4.	What acreage was obtained from each purchase made?


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: 
ALBERTA IRRIGATION SCHEMES
Mr. GERSHAW:: 1.	What steps have been taken toward developing the St. Mary and lledeliff Ronelane irrigation schemes?
2.	Are negotiations under way with the province of Alberta regarding an agreement for the completion of this work?


Mr. GARDINER:: 1.	Progress has been made towards completion of the necessary plans and surveys. Construction of the Redeliff-Ronelane irrigation project will be commenced by the dominion in 1945 if conditions permit.
2.	The St. Mary River development is regarded as a post-war project. Steps will be taken to arrive at a formal agreement with the province of Alberta when the time has come that consideration may be given to construction of the works. Construction of the Redeliff-Ronelane irrigation project will be undertaken under a general agreement with the province of Alberta dated April 30, 1943, relating to water development projects.
wheat-crops of 1935-36 to 1944-45-storage Mr. PERLEY:
What amount was paid by the Canadian wheat board for storage on grain in each of the crop years 1935-36 to 1944-45 inclusive, (a) to interior elevato- companies; (b) to interior terminal elevators; (c) and terminal elevators?

Questions


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: (a) Storage on wheat paid and accrued to country elevator companies:
1935- 36	 S 2,300,942 89
1936-	37	
32,311	101937-	38	
-1938-	39	
5,002,872	411939-	40	
8,279,105	971940-	41	
14,509,003	281941-	42	
12,514,785	161942-	43	
9,978.455	821943-	44	
10,596,975	74

(b) and (c) Storage paid to terminal elevator companies:
1935- 36	 $ 1,402,132 57
1936-	37	
70,834	741937-	38	
-1938-	39	
1,807,670	181939-	40	
3,823,632	701940-	41	
7,158.510	721941-	42	
7,824,575	201942-	43	
6,233.418	301943-	44	
4,667,454	01
832,988,228 42
Payments made during the 1944-45 season,
up to February 28, are:
Storage to country elevators... $5,613,020 08 To terminal elevators	 3,096,144 40
(This last figure is exclusive of accrued storage).


JAPANESE NATIONALS-POST-WAR ALLOCATIONS
Mr. REID:: 1.	Have any representations been made by any province to the Japanese security commission or the government regarding the reallocating of those of Japanese origin or nationality following the end of the war?
2.	If so, what provinces have made such representations and what representations have been made?


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


INCOME TAX-RURAL INVESTIGATORS-COST OF COLLECTION FROM FARMERS
Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	Do rural investigators for the income tax department receive any payment on a commission basis?
2.	By provinces in the years 1943 and 1944, or for any convenient interval in that period, what was the cost of collection of income tax from farmers, based on $100 tax collected?


Mr. MacKINNON (Edmonton West):: 1. No employee of the taxation division, Department of National Revenue, receives
remuneration on a commission basis. All are paid on a salary basis only.
2. Information as to cost of collections from farmers or any other class as a class is not maintained. However the over all cost of collecting taxes by the taxation division in the 1943-44 fiscal year was 49 cents per $100 collected.


VETERANS' LAND SETTLEMENT-PURCHASES OF LAND
Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	What is the total acreage of land purchased by the government for veteran land settlement in each of the provinces of Canada to date, (a) small holdings; (b) permanent farm units?
2.	What is the total acreage approved for purchase but purchase not yet completed by the government in, (a) small holdings; (b) permanent farm units?
3.	What is the total number of units purchased to date in each province, (a) small holdings; fb) permanent farm units?
4.	What is the average cost per acre to date of land purchased in each province, (a) small holdings; (b) permanent farm units?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Return as of February 28, 1945
1.	(a)	(b)British Columbia ....	.... 8,727-77	11,246-80Alberta	.... 558-76	92,476-03Saskatchewan	.... 3-66	71,507-00Manitoba 	.... 552-14	70,655-45Ontario	.... 2,465-37	15,126-08Quebec	.... 81-75	2,743-00Maritimes 	.... 2,315-25	25,313-50
2. Information not available. Number of
properties approved for purchase but purchase not yet completed:
	(a)	(b)
British Columbia ....	.... 675	236Alberta	.... 32	602Saskatchewan	.... 18	423Manitoba 	.... 35	606Ontario 	.... 177	236Quebec 	.... 28	96Maritimes 	.... 127	3803. British Columbia ....	.... 650	227Alberta	.... 24	295Saskatchewan	.... 5	211Manitoba 	.... 29	258Ontario 	.... Ill	153Quebec 	.... 5	25Maritimes 	.... 94	2044. British Columbia 	.... $ 134 49	$ 66 60Alberta	.... 192 96	18 02Saskatchewan	.... 1,095 96	14 29Manitoba 	.... 170 90	18 70Ontario 	.... 214 86	44 51Quebec 	.... 308 00	36 00Maritimes 	
83 73	25 28
Questions


RADIO BROADCASTING-GOOD FRIDAY PROGRAMMES
Mr. CHURCH:: What church services, if any, will be broadcast on the C.B.C. at Toronto on Good Friday, March 30, next, or by private stations?
Mr. LaFLECHE: The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is arranging on its networks special programmes to mark Good Friday. The corporation is not in a position to indicate in advance whether or not private stations are planning to broadcast church services on that day.


Thomas Langton Church: The reply of the minister, as handed him by the C.B.C., is that they are arranging network special programmes, and the minister says he has no knowledge in regard to the private stations. The list of programmes for to-morrow does not include any services of this kind, and I suggest that the minister should consider applying the principles of the Lord's Day Act to Good Friday, because so far during this war there have been no special services broadcast on this day. My question remains unanswered.
Mr. LaFLECHE: I have already explained to the hon. gentlemaan that I gave him the reply as I received it from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. I added that I had tried to get what I believe is in existence-a copy of the printed programme for the week during which Good Friday occurs, that is this week. I wanted to give my hon. friend an answer this afternoon because Good Friday is to-morrow. As to the last remarks of the hon. member, I shall have great pleasure in passing them on to the board of governors of the corporation.


Thomas Langton Church: So far the programmes have been all grand operas, jazz, but since the war have come on this day principally from Hollywood.


Mr. HOMUTLI:: And soap and stomach
pills.


Thomas Langton Church: On this day, since the war started, religious broadcasting is here to stay whether the C.B.C. like it or not.
Mr. LaFLECHE:	I know I should not
speak too much at this time, but it is hardly fitting to belittle what the corporation is doing. In the reply I gave this afternoon the hon. gentleman will find that the C.B.C. is preparing special programmes in consequence of to-morrow being Good Friday. Good Friday is observed by the corporation by putting on special and appropriate programmes.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. BLACKMORE:: 1.	Did a delegation from The National Sugar Beet Producers Association of Canada tender a submission to S. R. Noble, J. L. Ilsley and J. G. Gardiner on or about February 7, 1945, in Montreal, in an effort to obtain assistance for beet producers of Canada?
2.	If so, what kind and degree of assistance did they ask for?
3.	Was their request granted?
4.	If not, why not?
5.	On or about February 12, 1945, diid a delegation of the same organization make a submission to Messrs. Ilsley and Gardiner in Ottawa ?
6.	If so, what kind and degree of assistance did they ask for?
7.	Was their request granted?
8.	If not, why not?
9.	What price does the dominion government pay at present for cane sugar refined?
10.	What price does the dominion government at present pay beet sugar refineries for beet sugar refined?


Mr. ILSLEY:: Return tabled.
R.	A.F.-PENHOLD STATION-DAMAGE TO PROPERTY


Mr. SHAW:: 1.	Has any department of government received, since September, 1944, a report respecting certain alleged property damage done to furnishings and/or installations at the Benhold
S.	F.T.S. (R.A.F.) ?
2.	If so, was an investigation made?
3.	What did such an investigation divulge?
4.	If property damage were done, what was the total cost of repairs and replacements?
5.	What action, if any, was taken against those responsible for such damage?


PERMITS TO CIVILIANS TO VISIT BATTLE AREAS
Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	How many civilians from Canada were given free transportation and accommodation to visit the forces in Britain and the battle areas in. (a) 1944; (b) 1945 (until March) ?
2.	Who were they, and how long did the visit last, including passage in each case?


UNITED STATES DEFENCE PROJECTS IN CANADA- FORT MCMURRAY
Mr. DECHENE:: 1.	Are some of the buildings erected by the American army at Fort McMurray, Alberta, not otherwise disposed of, being surrendered to the Canadian government?
2.	Has the government received a request from the war veterans of the Fort McMurray area for the use of one of these buildings? II so, what action is being taken?

Air Training Plan


'MNADIAN ARMED FORCES-CHECKING OF LEAVE PASSES AT TRAINS
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	How many soldiers are daily travelling on the trains throughout Canada and each military district, checking leave passes of members of the forces, (a) army; (b) navy; (c) air force?
2.	Do any of these come from the C.W.A.C., and how many of each class?
3.	Are separate ones for each of the services necessary?
4.	What is their pay and other allowances?



AIR TRAINING PLAN


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE ICING (Prime Minister):: As hon. members are
aware, ceremonies are being 'held today at stations of the Royal Canadian Air Force throughout Canada to mark the winding up of the British commonwealth air training plan. These ceremonies will be a vivid reminder of how world-changing in their effects have been the events which have filled up the months and years since the original agreement was signed on December 17, 1939, by representatives of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The air training plan has been one of the most striking achievements in Canada's contribution to the organization of victory. More than 150.000 men have graduated under the plan as trained aircrew. All of them have shared in that comradeship in arms which is perhaps the proudest possession among the great fraternity of fighting airmen. Not a few have laid down their lives in defence of the great cause of the world's freedom. They belong to the chivalry of God.
When the principle of a joint air training plan was first agreed upon, but a few weeks after the outbreak of war, the then Prime Minister of Great Britain, the Right Hon. Neville Chamberlain, said in a message to me that "with the facilities, which Canada possesses this cooperative effort may prove to be of the most essential and decisive character." The progress of the plan has attracted the commendation and praise of leaders of many of the united nations. Hon. members will recall that when the Right Hon. Winston Churchill spoke in this House of Commons chamber on December 30, 1941, he referred to "the wonderful and gigantic empire training scheme" as "another major contribution made by Canada". A little later, President Roosevelt spoke of Canada as "the rerodrome of democracy"
Throughout the perils and fortunes of war, fighting airmen trained in Canada have daringly and gallantly carried the battle for freedom with increasing vigour and effect far across and above enemy lines in all parts of the world.
A sense of history surrounds the winding up of an enterprise as extensive and powerful as the British commonwealth air training plan has been. May the comradeship in arms be carried by our fighting airmen far beyond the days of war into the years of peace. Through the sovereign air may they continue to pass, not as messengers of winged death to those who have betrayed their fellow men, but as harbingers of peace for all mankind.
I have received to-day from the Prime Minister of Great Britain, the Prime Minister of Australia and the acting Prime Minister of New Zealand messages which I think it is of importance to record and which I shall now read. First I shall read a message from the Acting Prime Minister of New Zealand, the Hon. Walter Nash:
The ceremonies to-day mark the conclusion of one of the most outstanding enterprises in the history of the commonwealth in this war. The scheme providing for the training in Canada of air and grounderew personnel from all parts of the commonwealth was bold and imaginative. The men who were responsible for its conception have done an outstanding service to the peoples of the commonwealth and the memory of their work will never be forgotten.
We cannot pay too high a tribute to the Canadian government and people for their work in the execution of this scheme. From all parts of the British commonwealth thousands of young men trained in Canada have joined the forces in Britain, and from bases there have assisted in the magnificent air defence of Britain and in the great bombing missions against Germany which are yielding such tangible results to-day. Men trained in Canada have operated on every front in this war. They have all executed their tasks with high distinction and great gallantry. They have given an earnest of the solid training which they received in Canada.
Not only has the air training plan played a signal part in the victorious progress of the nations of the commonwealth but it has brought closer together the peoples of our countries. We in New Zealand have grown nearer to the government and people of Canada and the friendships made by our men in Canadian homes-where they were ever hospitably received-will long endure. Though our union in this great venture comes to an end to-day our association will remain in the concluding years of the war and through all the years to come, intimate-and should this be possible-even closer than to-day. It will inspire the cooperation which if progress is to be maintained must prevail through all the years to come between the nations and peoples of all parts of the commonwealth and empire. We are, by working together, learning to live together.
Next is a message from Right Hon. John Curtin, Prime Minister of Australia:
Australia has been proud and privileged to have been a partner in the British commonwealth
Air Training Plan

air training scheme which is now terminating. Our men who have been trained there have an indelible mark in operation in every theatre to which they were subsequently posted and their record is one of which this nation is proud.
Australia salutes men of our fellow partners who have been trained under the scheme. The comradeship established by Australians with their fellow-Britishers is something which offers a great hope for peacetime cooperation.
The Australian people and government offer to the Canadian people and government their warmest thanks for the wonderful hospitality shown to Australia. It will never be forgotten.
Finally, there is the following message from the Right Hon. Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of Great Britain:
At this moment, when the memorable British commonwealth air training plan is being brought formally to an end, I send you, the Canadian government and the Royal Canadian Air Force, my warmest congratulations on the successful accomplishments of a spacious task imaginatively conceived and most faithfully carried out.
This master plan has done much to speed us along the road to victory. In Canada alone trained air crews, of whom more than half were Canadian, have been turned out at an average rate of twenty-five thousand a year over the last five years.
Moreover, the quality of the training has been outstanding and has shown itself triumphantly in superiority which we have gained over the enemy in every type of air combat.
In witnessing, as we now do, consummation of a fine achievement, it is fitting that we should recall the training which has been carried out with equal success, though necessarily on not so big a scale, in Australia, New Zealand, South Airica and Southern Rhodesia, and, of course, advanced training which has been carried out in this country for all parts of the British commonwealth. Ail alike have done magnificently.
I am glad to learn that, although the joint training plan is being wound up, the training in Canada of air crews from this country is to be continued and I thank the Canadian government and the Canadian people most warmly for this further help.


Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):: Associating our party with the
remarks of the Prime Minister on the occasion of the ending formally of the British commonwealth air training plan, I should like to indicate to the house that not only has this been a successful adventure in wartime cooperation among the various units of the commonwealth, but, if I may say so, it augurs well for the future relationships between commonwealth nations, because what we have been able to do together in time of war we shall surely be able to do similarly in time of peace in collaboration and cooperation.
The closing of the plan brings to my mind at once two things. One is that while these boys have been trained to the extent, as the Prime Minister has said, of 150,000, there have been, if my memory serves me correctly-I have not the records with me-losses among

Canadian boys who have participated in that plan to the extent of something like 12,000 since the plan went into operation. We must to-day recognize that the loss in men is heavy in war; and the fact that we have lost 12,000 from the flower of our manhood' in air operations shows the heavy drain that is made upon our nation in times like these.
Then there was the other matter mentioned by some of the prime ministers of other dominions, namely, the associations that have been built up and cemented and welded by the fact that so many of the boys from other parts of the commonwealth have been received in such a cordial manner and shown the splendid hospitality of Canadian homes. That seems to me to be one of the practical results of the commonwealth air training plan from the social angle. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, in joining with the Prime Minister's remarks I say to you that we are hopeful in Canada that many of these young men will be Canadian citizens in the future. Having sampled our hospitality and knowing something of the great resources and opportunities of our country, we are hoping that they will come here, settle down and become citizens of Canada. If they do they will be royally welcomed.


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: We, too, would like to associate ourselves with the remarks of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) and the leader of the opposition (Mr. Graydon). As this great plan draws to an end it is indeed gratifying to the people of Canada that the Prime Minister has received the messages he read to the house to-day. As I sat listening to these messages I thought of the young men from all the commonwealth countries, and indeed from countries that were occupied by the enemy, who have not only trained under this remarkable scheme-and I think the department responsible, and if I may say so, the former minister, should be remembered as having played a great part in this scheme-but who have sacrificed their lives. Quite a number of boys whom I had taught, and who were among the brightest lads that I have ever known, were trained under this plan. Many of them have sacrificed their lives. We should remember that- some of these boys could find no place in our social life before this war began. I think that we owe a debt to the educational institutions that prepared these boys. I hope that even if times become difficult again when the war ends, the views sometimes expressed in criticism of what were known as educational frills, or the suggestion that education was too

Air Training Plan
extended, will be largely silenced because of the part played by the products of our educational institutions in this great war.
Those of us who have travelled across the country during the war and have met these fine young Canadians and indeed young men from all the united nations, on the trains and in other places ought to pay tribute to their splendid behaviour. We are glad indeed to join in congratulating the department upon the planning of this remarkable scheme, and to say how pleased we are that we have been able to contribute in this important and successful branch of our armed services. The Prime Minister said it was one of the great contributions of this country. I am inclined to believe that history may regard it as Canada's greatest contribution to the common war effort,.


Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: This is an occasion on which we can all justifiably feel much satisfaction. No matter what may be the party to which we belong, we must grant and should grant freely without grudging that it was a great move on the part of the government to establish this commonwealth air training plan. I think it calls, too, for a feeling of gratitude that Canada was guided to embark upon this plan which was ultimately found to- be sc* important in the final outcome of the war.
I cannot help thinking, however, that we should perhaps have sounded somewhere in parliament on this occasion a note of warning. I hope that the winding up of the commonwealth air training scheme does not indicate a disposition on the part of our government or of the British commonwealth in general to relax their effort too soon, before they are positive that this war is over. We British peoples have made many grievous mistakes in the past by failing to be adequately prepared for what might be a sudden and unexpected menace. I trust that we just do not wind up too soon, that we keep ourselves girded until we are positively sure that danger's dreadful night is past.


Mr. J. G. ROSS (Moose Jaw):: I have not had an opportunity before to mention this, but this is the opportunity. Along with three other colleagues, the hon. member for Dan-forth (Mr. Harris), the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis), and the hon. member for Wood Mountain (Mr. Donnelly) I visited Australia and New Zealand last summer. We went to practically every city in these two dominions, and everywhere we went we were asked to take back with us an
expression of appreciation on the part of the people of those two countries for the way in which the Canadian people had treated the boys who were over here training under the air training plan.


Mr. E. G. HANSELL (Macleod):: I have had reason to observe the progress that has been made in this commonwealth air training scheme, having had no less than six air training schools situated in my constituency. The people of Canada through the respective administrations and the staffs of the various countries involved have indeed done a great job, and I am only a little sorry that the former Minister of National Defence for Air (Mr. Power) was not able to carry out his duties up to the present time. I think a good deal of credit is coming to him. I am pleased that the Prime Minister and others have made reference to those trained under this plan who have given their lives on the altar of sacrifice.
While the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) was reading a tribute to this air training scheme I happened to open a letter from a lady in Edmonton who had just lost a son. Enclosed was a little card in memory of her son, Donald F. McDonald, sergeant observer. As the Prime Minister was paying tribute to the boys who have lost their lives, I could not help thinking of the sacrifices that had been made by the mothers who had given their sons in their country's cause. I wonder if I may be permitted to put on Hansard two or three verses that evidently were written by this boy's mother:
In the sombre land of Germany,
They have laid my son to rest;
The 'wings' he won while here on earth Lie still upon his breast,
But his soul, the indestructible,
Flew far above the sod And joined the throng of worshippers Right at the feet of God!
Sleep peacefully, beloved son In earth's last little bed.
What matter that 'tis German soil Supports your lovely head-
Your Soul, by His eternal grace.
Hath seen the beauty of His face.
So rest, my dearest one, rest,
Your loved "crew" by your side,
That hallowed plot in Germany By your young blood sanctified,
Shall always and forever be Of Canada a part-
Your Canada, our Canada.
To -which you gave your heart!


Thomas Langton Church: In any air training plan the empire should come first as a unit, and then you can branch into the international field. All the bases should belong to the British empire. It is all right to let others use them, but we should retain sovereignty over all of them.

Labour Conditions-Farm Labour



LABOUR CONDITIONS

[Stage Direction]
STATEMENT IN REGARD TO FARM LABOUR On the orders of the day:
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: On Tuesday the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Johnston) and the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell) asked about the provision of labour for the opening farm season, and I would like to supplement what I stated in the course of the discussion on the supplementary estimates last evening.
Instructions were sent to all selective service offices across Canada that farm workers on temporary permits in other essential industries during the winter months must return to agriculture on April 1 or at subsequent dates mutually agreed upon by the provinces and ourselves. We shall appeal to men in other industries to reciprocate by assisting whenever possible during peak seasons on the farm. Local selective service officers have been given authority to direct any male worker from sixteen to sixty-five years of age into specified agricultural employment. Steps will be taken to move farm workers from less to more productive farms. Officials of the Department of Labour have already discussed a draft farm labour agreement with five of the provincial departments of agriculture, and the remaining discussions will be held very shortly.
We expect that the total commitments through these agreements for sharing expenditures on recruiting, transporting and placing farm labour within the provinces will exceed the total of last year, namely 3660,000. We plan again this year to arrange for the movement of workers between provinces to help meet urgent harvesting needs. The cost of this is borne by the dominion government. In addition we expect there will be a greater movement of farm workers within the provinces. One substantial incentive toward this end is a reduction in transportation charges, recently agreed to by the railways. This cost is shared by the dominion and the provinces.
Negotiations have already begun with farm labour officials in the United States for the movement of labour and harvesting outfits across our common border. We are also considering in cooperation with the provinces the recruiting of farm workers in Newfoundland to help in the maritime provinces.
We are now devising methods for a more complete check of men on farm postponements. This is being done to ensure that these men are making the type of contribution to farm production that we have a right to expect of them.
We plan to expand the use of prisoners of war labour in agriculture. Several new projects are now under consideration. No stone 
will be left unturned in utilizing all other special sources of labour such as Indians, conscientious objectors and Canadian Japanese.
Members have knowledge of the reinforcements required for overseas. In view of this we cannot depend on as much assistance during the coming summer from the three services as we have secured during the past two seasons. I have, however, discussed this matter with each of the ministers of national defence. In the case of the air force the provisions for spring leave have again been put into effect. In view of increased commitments we shall not be able to count on any substantial assistance from the navy. From the army we have the assurance that the representatives of the district officers commanding appearing before the mobilization boards will be instructed not to oppose the postponement of men who are employed in the production of dairy and live stock products. Farm leaves, including special spring and harvest leaves, will continue to be granted. They will naturally be limited by the fact that many men formerly available have been sent overseas. However, men who have returned from overseas on rotation leaves will be eligible this year to help on the farm.



RADIO BROADCASTING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. DIEFENBAKER (Lake Centre):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Munitions and Supply, under whose jurisdiction apparently licences are granted to firms operating radio stations, during the period of the war. A day or so ago the Free Press carried a news item to the effect that a radio station would be opened immediately at St. Boniface, Manitoba, and that stations were planned for Gravelbourg and Prince Albert, Saskatchewan, and Edmonton, Alberta. In view of the fact that there is already a ninety-eight per cent coverage by CBK and the private stations, is it a fact that the minister has granted permits for the opening of these additional stations, as set out in the article to which I have referred? If not, is he now giving consideration to the question whether or not they will be opened?


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: Mr. Speaker, my duties are
simply the administration of the radio act, which is the technical allocation of air waves. Recommendations in the matter of new broadcasting stations come from the C.B.C., through the Minister of National War Services. My recollection of the facts is that a licence has

Supply-Mines and Resources
been issued for a station at St. Boniface, and that at the same time applications were made for licences for the three other stations referred1 to by my hon. friend. The permit for the station at S't. Boniface was issued, with the distinct understanding that it was without prejudice to the applications for licences at the other points. That was on, the recommendation of the C.B.C. When further recommendations come forward from C.B.C., they will be considered by the government.


John George Diefenbaker: If I may ask a
supplementary question, has the C.B.C. recommended to the minister, who as he says is in charge of the allocation of wave lengths, the issuance of licences for Prince Albert, Gravel-bourg and1 Edmonton?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The answer is no.



FARM PUMPS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. A. ROSS (Souris):: Mr. Speaker, I
should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance, based on a letter from the Brandon Pump and Windmill Works stating that they have ninety orders for farm pumps, some dating back to last October, and that they are definitely needed. They have asked for an increased quota, as they have on hand materials to continue the supply. The application was refused, with instructions that they could make up stock and hold pumps until after July 1. This equipment is urgently needed now by farmers, in Manitoba at least, in order that they may continue to do their part in the food production programme. Will the minister have the order altered so that these pumps can be obtained?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I will bring the request to the attention of the wartime prices and trade board, but I know from the correspondence that passes through my office that the demand for pumps far exceeds the supply, and the equitable allocation of the available supply of pilmps is a very difficult matter to arrange satisfactorily. For instance, I was just reading in- the office last night or this morning a bitter complaint from the owner of a triplex house, in which there were families comprising fifteen children, who was unable to get a second pump for the property, although it was badly needed-because, as he put it, farmers were given the preference in the allocation of pumps. In other words, he said, the government puts the
interests of cattle above the interests of children. I just cite that instance to show how difficult it is to distribute pumps in a way that will be satisfactory to all those who require them.



POWELL RIVER WHARF


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley):: I should like to ask the Minister of Fisheries or the acting minister whether any request has been received from the fishermen of Powell River for suitable docking facilities. This is very important to them.


Clarence Decatur Howe: As the Minister of Fisheries
is not in his seat at the moment perhaps the question can stand as a notice, to be answered at the next sitting.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Bradette in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
Indian Affairs branch-
Jibe. Indian hospitals and general care of Indians-further amount required, $240,000.
Mr. BRYCE:: Before adjournment last night I was trying to get certain information from the minister which I failed to receive, but to-day it has been supplied by his department, so that is quite satisfactory.


Mr. MacINNIS:: Some time ago I saw a report that the minister was going to appoint a commission to look into the incidence of tuberculosis among the Indians. Has that commission been appointed, and if so, who are its members?


Hon. T. A. CRERAR (Minister of Mines and Resources):: I think my hon. friend must be under some misapprehension in thinking that there was any proposal to establish a special commission to investigate the incidence of tuberculosis among the Indians. Last summer special investigations were carried on among the Indians in the northwest territories and the Mackenzie river country, from the point of view not only of health but also of education. Possibly that is what my hon. friend has in mind.
Tuberculosis among the Indians is under constant review. The department has the advantage of the experience of the health departments of each of the provinces; I think I am correct in saying that almost every province has one or more special institutions for
Supply-Mines and Resources

the treatment of tuberculosis, and many Indians are treated in these institutions. In addition several sanatoria have been started by the department especially for the treatment of Indians afflicted with tuberculosis, and that programme is being extended. Ten years ago there was no special attention given by the department to tuberculosis among the Indians, but during the present fiscal year something like S700,000 has been spent on this particular phase of Indian health. It is the programme of the department to expand that work steadily. Tuberculosis among the Indians affects not only the Indians themselves but has a vital bearing on the health of the white population.


Angus MacInnis: I must accept the minister's explanation, but I was under the definite impression that I heard over the radio or read in the press of the appointment of such a commission. If there has been no such appointment, the matter can be discussed at some other time. Two or three years ago I drew the minister's attention to tuberculosis among the Indians, and I am glad that investigations have taken place to the extent that he has indicated.
There is one other matter I wish to bring up, and if it has already been rectified, a simple affirmation to that effect will be quite satisfactory. I bad word from the secretary of the British Columbia hospital association that certain hospitals on Vancouver Island, the Port Alberni hospital, the hospital at Duncan and the hospital at Nanaimo, had notified the Department of Indian Affairs that they would accept no more Indian patients unless the department paid the standard per diem rate asked for. The department paid it in the case of these three hospitals, but St. Joseph's hospital at Comox made a similar request, which was refused. Why was the request refused in connection with one hospital when it was granted in connection with the other three? Or perhaps the request has been granted as far as St. Joseph's hospital is concerned.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am afraid I am unable to give a specific reply to the question asked. My recollection at the moment is that the rates have been increased in a good many hospitals, if not in all. There are factors of operating cost to be considered. A hospital may be located at a point where the costs of operation are higher than those of a hospital located at another point. Several Indian hospitals are administered by the department, and one of these is located in British Columbia about sixty miles east of Vancouver. Our officials think that through the operation of these
fMr. Crerar.l
hospitals they get a reasonable check on operating costs. The increase we are asking in this supplementary vote is accounted for to a considerable degree-just how much I cannot say -by the fact that rates of payment have increased.


Angus MacInnis: Would the minister at some time give me in writing a detailed answer to my question?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: If my hon. friend will give me in writing details of the information he wants, I will see that the department supplies the answers if it is possible to do so.


Angus MacInnis: I rather think they will be in Hansard, but I shall give them to the minister.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Health branch-[DOT]
H7. Combating venereal diseases; administration-further amount required, $90,250.
Major James William Coldwell: Could we hear just what the situation is with regard to this particular scourge and what steps are being taken to educate the people?


Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: This item of $90,250 relates wholly to an educational campaign that was conducted last year by the department in an effort to combat venereal disease. A meeting was held as far back as 1943 and a special committee was set up composed of representatives of the armed forces, the provincial departments of health, other interested parties and the dominion health council. These meetings led on to a meeting on August 9, 1944, at which this special campaign was decided upon, and the campaign was authorized by an order in council passed the same day.
The campaign consisted of newspaper advertising, radio programmes, publicity by way of films and other educational material along the same line. It was worked out by the department in cooperation with other government departments and the armed forces. This was carried on under the direction of my predecessor, the present Minister of Veterans' Affairs. The result of the campaign was that public opinion was awakened, and we believe that it helped to create more favourable conditions for the provincial and other agencies to tackle the job. There has been close cooperation between the division of the department having to do with venereal diseases and the provincial health officers and the armed forces.

Supply-Health and Weljare
The 'hon. member asked what the present situation was with regard to this scourge. I think I can say that there has been a steady and fairly marked improvement with regard to venereal diseases in the army and other armed forces since 1942, and we believe also that there has been a considerable improvement in the civilian population. Statistics of venereal diseases in this country and in all others are notoriously unreliable because of the failure to report all cases, and so it is really impossible to say -with any accuracy what the situation is so far as the civilian population is concerned. The belief is that there has been an improvement.
Since I had nothing to do with the planning of the campaign which was entirely to the credit of my predecessor, I think I can tell the house that the publicity was very well received throughout the country. It met with approval in other countries and several foreign health authorities have indicated that they would like to use the same material in similar campaigns.


Major James William Coldwell: Has any plan been
worked out by the department in cooperation with the provincial health and educational authorities to provide some education along these lines to the senior students in our high schools, technical schools and universities? As we all know from the statistics that have been brought to our attention, in the United States this scourge has been prevalent among children in the late adolescent years. One of the difficulties facing the authorities has been to find the carriers, who are not in many cases of the type that were supposed to be carriers in former years. During the war there has been a considerable relaxation of morals, and I was wondering if any plan had been worked out to inform students in our high schools and universities, or possibly senior groups outside of our educational institutions. The facilities are already available through our schools and universities.


Brooke Claxton: The plan I referred to was designed to appeal to all classes of the community, which would include senior students in the high schools and colleges. Publicity was carried on in -the newspapers and magazines, over the radio and by means of films. A federal-provincial conference of venereal disease control directors was held between August 8 and August 11, 1944, and I understand that it considered the question raised by my hon. friend. This is, of course, ultimately a matter for the provincial authorities. I am not aware of anything that this department has done toward making specific suggestions along that line to the provincial authorities, but I can assure my hon. friend
that we will take his suggestion into consideration. I shall see that it is brought before the dominion health council at its next meeting.


Major James William Coldwell: I am anxious that this government should do something along this line. In some of the provinces the appropriations that have been made for this work have not been spent. I think there has been some neglect on the part of certain provincial authorities. During the last several years the federal authorities have tried to do something to improve this situation.


Mr. FRASER (Peterborough West):: I
understand that Hon. R. P. Vivian, minister of public welfare in Ontario, has carried on a campaign in this respect for over two years. He has taken it to the schools, and he has also had lecturers going around.


Major James William Coldwell: I was not referring to Ontario.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: No, but I wish to mention that this has been done. I know it has been taken up with the local councils of women throughout Ontario.


Major James William Coldwell: Frankly I was thinking of Saskatchewan.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: There is no doubt that similar work is needed all over the country. I -wanted to ask the minister if it is being carried on at all by the national health associations, of which, I understand, he is trying to form industrial and other branches.


Brooke Claxton: The Health League of Canada is one of the organizations which has carried on a very active work in this field. It is assisted by an annual grant of S5.000 from the federal government, and also, I believe, by very close cooperation from the officers of the department. A number of other organizations are actively concerned with this matter, but do not receive a specific grant from the federal government. In addition to Ontario, to which my hon. friend referred, a number of provinces and many educational authorities conduct lectures and give demonstrations of the type suggested by him and by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It was found in Ontario very hard at first to break down the prevalent hush-hush feeling with regard to venereal disease. Eventually, largely by taking it up with the local councils of women all over the country, and especially in Ontario, this attitude has been changed, and I know that the subject is openly discussed at their meetings.
Supply-Health and Welfare


Brooke Claxton: The committee may be interested to learn that this campaign of publicity was quite new in the history of health advertising anywhere in the world, and it was entered upon with, I believe, some trepidation by my predecessor in office. The advertising dealt with this matter with great frankness, although in quite a proper and unsensational way. I can tell my predecessor, and I am sure he will hear it with satisfaction, that the campaign was not only greeted with great praise from all parts of Canada, but no single complaint was received from any source, and I think it did a great deal, as the hon. member for Peterborough West suggested, to break down the hush-hush attitude toward this disease.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I agree that it is time to get over this hush-hush attitude, but I do not like what has been said about the armed services. I am not apologizing for anything which happened in Ontario; nobody can account for what happens there.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It is the cleanest province in the country.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Not from all we have seen; but an allusion has been made to the armed services which I entirely resent, and I want the minister to correct any impression it may create. No one in Canada has anything to fear from the armed services, and as an old soldier I object to any intimation that this trouble is confined to the armed services.


Angus MacInnis: I understand that Colonel Williams, who was in charge of venereal disease control, has returned to his former practice in Vancouver. Has anyone taken his place here, carrying on what he was doing?


Brooke Claxton: I am glad to say that Doctor Georges Leolerc, who was Colonel Williams' assistant, and who was brought into this work in the army first, and then into the department by Colonel Williams, who had himself done such fine work, is acting as his successor. Major Leclerc, after graduating from the university of Montreal, did postgraduate work in this field at New York, at Johns Hopkins, as well as a long interneship in Montreal, and he is thoroughly competent in his field.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: May I say a word in connection with the wonderful work carried on by Colonel Williams, not only in British Columbia, which has pioneered in reforms in this direction, but also for the Department of National Defence and for the former department of pensions and national health. As my hon. friend knows,

Colonel Williams' services were requested on several occasions bj' international authorities to undertake this work in a large international way. In regard to his successor, who has been mentioned by the present minister, when this campaign was launched last year I felt it my duty to address a great meeting of some fifteen hundred people in Ottawa. This very able gentleman was present and addressed the same meeting, and I can vouch for everything the minister has said as to his excellent qualifications to succeed one of the greatest authorities in the world*-Colonel Williams.


Mr. FULFORD:: About a year ago all hon. members were invited to the railway committee room to hear Doctor Williams lecture. It is a crying shame that there were only a handful there. At this lecture motion pictures were shown which were prepared for the armed services-I have special reference to those prepared for the air force. I think that those pictures in a modified form could and should be shown in every high school in the dominion. They were by far the best material on the subject, of venereal disease that I have seen.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I agree.


Brooke Claxton: Since the hon. member asked me about the educational campaign to be carried on among schools, I have received a note that programmes which are being designed and worked out for them will be discussed with the provincial authorities at a very early day.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OP NATIONAL REVENUE Income tax division
[Stage Direction]
V,8. District offices-further amount required, $775,000.
Mr. PERLEY:: Will the minister give us a little information with respect to this amount, which, is quite large? In the detail found on page 8 the larger amount is for temporary assistance. What is the nature of this temporary assistance? Does it include special inspectors in the income tax branch?
In this connection I may say that I was recently in the income tax office at Regina, trying more or less to help out some farmers who were having a little difficulty in making out. their forms; and the official in charge told me that quite a number of special inspectors had been appointed to go through different districts and municipalities and confer with farmers, not only from the point of view of getting complete statements from them, but in some measure to assist them, which I think is all right, I am proud of the fact that the department's statement shows that of the total income tax paid by farmers in the whole

Supply-Revenue-Income Tax
*dominion, nearly half was paid last year by the farmers of Saskatchewan. No doubt the minister has seen that statement; and I want to commend the farmers of Saskatchewan and express the pride we feel regarding what they have done. But I was just wondering if more of these inspectors had been put on in Saskatchewan than in other provinces; for in the statement issued by the department it may be seen that last year in one province the farmers' payments were as low as $5,000. although that province has as many farmers as we have in Saskatchewan. I hope that the increased number of inspectors who are operating in Saskatchewan is not accounted for by the fact that our farmers pay so much more income tax than those of other provinces. I trust that a special raid is mot being made upon them owing to that fact. Will the minister say whether the item for temporary assistance includes these inspectors?


James Angus MacKinnon: This supplementary
estimate for $775,000 is to take care of the tremendously increased staff in the department. When the estimates for 1944-45 were being prepared there were 3,964 employees actually working in the various district offices across Canada. Actually the staff in all the district offices on January 31 of this year numbered 5,606. This item is purely for the payment of salaries and cost of living bonus for these temporary employees, running into these large figures in all the districts in Canada, from the Atlantic to the Pacific. There is no concentration of new employees in any particular province or in any particular district. It is just the increase in staff throughout Canada to take care of the enormously enlarged volume of taxation work resulting from the great prosperity in the country.


Ernest Edward Perley: I got it direct from the
chief of the inspection office in Regina that there were ten or twelve going around Saskatchewan. Would this include those inspectors?


James Angus MacKinnon: If
those men have been taken on in this past year they will be temporary and will be included in this figure, but I cannot tell without knowing who they are and looking up the records to see when they were taken on.


John George Diefenbaker: Are there any working on a commission basis?


James Angus MacKinnon: I
have already answered' that question to-day. There are none working on a commission basis They are working on salary.


James Arthur Ross: This seems a large
item for temporary assistance. As representative of the constituency I have been asked many pertinent questions with reference to this matter, because in the last two years in my province the inspectors have spent a great deal of time at every municipal office in my riding. I am not objecting, but I wish to make a comparison. They hold sittings at every municipal office in my constituency and have got in contact with every farmer and it has probably paid the government very well that they have done this. But in the constituency adjoining mine, in a different province for that matter, I have conferred with the municipal officials and I gather that they have never heard of a taxation inspector being in the municipality, and in some instances they do not know- whether the farmer is sent any income tax forms. Yet they are producing much the same as the people in my district. As a result of that experience I have been wondering whether the same policy is followed in every province or whether a certain latitude is given to different provincial administrations under the federal income tax set-up. I should like to know whether certain provincial administrations are given the latitude to work out their own policy and their own system of inspection under the provincial jurisdiction. If a little later the minister could give us the number of employees in each province it would be very useful, but what I am particularly keen to find out is whether a different policy is being followed in each of two different provinces side by side, because the amount of money collected in comparable districts is not the same. These questions are being asked me and I cannot answer them.


Major James William Coldwell: Those of us who come from Saskatchewan have all been asked these questions, because it is an extraordinary thing that nearly fifty per cent of the income tax paid by farmers has been paid by the farmers of Saskatchewan.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Nonsense.


Major James William Coldwell: Am I right?


James Angus MacKinnon: The year before last, I believe.


Ernest Edward Perley: Forty-five per cent.


James Arthur Ross: Forty-two per cent.


Major James William Coldwell: We have been wondering whether the methods vary or what exactly the difference is, because when we look across the country and realize that our farmers in Saskatchewan in the last couple of years have enjoyed good crops and, I will not say high
Supply-Revenue-Income Tax

prices, but better prices than before, nevertheless it does seem strange that the conditions should be as indicated. It emphasizes the need, in provinces like Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta, where the returns fluctuate so much from year to year, of some proper method to be applied over a long period of years. Apart altogether from that, I may say to the member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Gruickshank) that we are being asked why it is that the farmers of Saskatchewan are paying so much more in income tax than the farmers of other provinces, and we cannot give a satisfactory answer.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Last
year I brought up a matter which I will again bring to the minister's attention. I hope that when the minister is spending this money next year-as a matter of fact I do not think he will be in that position next year-
Mr. MacIvINNON (Edmonton West): No, back to my Trade and Commerce department.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I was going to say I hope Peterborough will be considered. At the present time the individual has to go to Kingston, seventy-five miles away to get any satisfaction at all; otherwise it has to be done by letter, and letters are not satisfactory. It costs the chartered accountants in Peterborough a great deal of money every year telephoning and writing to Kingston, and in view of the fact that the staff at Kingston is one of the smallest in the country it is hard for them to get the work out. I am not blaming them, because they have been short-staffed. In fact, last year they put on an extra man to look after succession duties. I trust the minister will consider sending a man to Peterborough when it comes to tax payment time to help in the filling out of returns, because the people should have somebody to guide them. We are the largest city in the whole district and we have not had any consideration at all when it comes to the payment of income tax.


James Angus MacKinnon: Several members have mentionel the total amount of taxes paid by farmers in the various provinces, as recently announced in one of our financial papers. I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that I also have asked questions, only I have asked them of the department. I was assured, and I am fully convinced, that exactly the same basis of collection is in vogue in all the provinces. There has been no particular concentration of collection agents or individuals connected with the various district offices in any province. The figures I quoted show, however, an increase across Canada of from 3,961, when these estimates for the present
(Mr. Coldwell.]
year were made up, to 5.606 on the last day of Januarjr of this year, and that increase has taken place in all the offices throughout Canada.
In reference to the question asked by the hon. member for Peterborough West, I did not quite catch what he said but I shall see it in Hansard, and if it is what I think it is I will take the matter up with the deputy minister in charge of income tax. I will see that it is brought to his attention.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Thank you very much.


Mr. HATFIELD:: Is the report published in the press correct? It says that the payment in New Brunswick was only $449. I know of one farmer who paid $2,500 in 1943.


James Angus MacKinnon: He may not have been classed as a farmer; I cannot say. I shall be very glad to have the name of this individual so that I can look it up and report to the hon. member.


Ernest Edward Perley: I did not say as much as I should like to have said with respect to the special inspector, because the hon. member for Souris came near to saying what I had in mind. I understand that the special inspectors are working in some constituencies in Saskatchewan more than in others. I am not going to name the constituencies, but I wish to protest against these special inspectors and the temporary assistants. How many are working in Saskatchewan and in what areas or constituencies? We may not have the opportunity until late this fall to say anything further on this.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Perhaps not even then.


Ernest Edward Perley: I venture to say that we may have more to do with it than the hon. members sitting opposite now. A number of farmers have come to my office, after travelling quite a few miles, complaining about the income tax that they are paying and of their having been put into a higher bracket this year on account of the products they have raised on their farms, the stock, and so on. They ask me to bring it to the attention of the minister. This may not be the proper time, but I should like to mention it now. I am thinking of one farmer who is short of help. He has no sons. He was not able to get a man, but he was able to conduct his farm operations by tractor and combine and do all the work himself with the help of a man in the fall when he was combining and trucking it away. His wife and two daughters milked the cows, fed the

Supply-Revenue-Income Tax
chickens and hogs. The result of their work in milking ten cows and feeding the hogs increased his receipts some $1,500, along with the wheat and other products. That put him into a higher bracket, so that he paid nearly $800 more tax. This is what he asked me to put before the minister. Consideration should be given to the type of farmer who was carrying on farming operations such as his. He claims that the milk and cream from those ten cows put him into a higher bracket and cost him $700. He said, "Do you think that my wife and daughter are going to milk those cows this summer? Not at all. We will' allow the calves to suck the cows." A farmer such as the one I have mentioned should be given some consideration. He might be exempted in respect of the income from the dairy products. If he had a certain number of cows he should be taken out of the class of a dairy farmer who milks twenty or thirty cows. Because his wife and two daughters milked those ten cows he had to pay an additional $700 or $800 income tax. He told me that his wife and daughter would do no milking this summer. One of his daughters is not very well. I have two or three other similar cases that I could bring to the attention of the committee, but I am not going to take the time now. Consideration should be given to farmers such as the one I have mentioned, so that they will not lose the whole income by being put into a higher bracket.
I should like the minister to give me information as to where the inspectors are working in Saskatchewan. I know he has not the information at hand at the moment, but if he can get it for me I shall appreciate it. It is not necessary to put it on Hansard, but I should like to have it.


James Angus MacKinnon: I shall be very glad to look it up and give it to the hon. member. I may say for his benefit, and for the benefit of a couple of other hon. members' from Saskatchewan who have interjected remarks, that I have been approached by my colleagues, not in the government, but representatives from Saskatchewan sitting on this side of the house, who have complained to me that they believe the inspectors referred to by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle have been concentrated in their constituencies, working to their disadvantage.


Angus MacInnis: They may have gone in there inadvertently.


Mr. LEADER:: If I am in order I should like to make a few comments with regard to farmers paying income tax. I hope you will
be a bit lenient with me, Mr. Chairman, because I may not have the opportunity of addressing the committee again on this or any other important matter.
I came into the chamber a few moments ago in time to hear the last part of the statement made by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. He said that he had been asked why the farmers of Saskatchewan were paying most of the farm income taxes in Canada. Well, I can suggest this to him-


James Angus MacKinnon: In 1941.


Harry Leader: I think it applies to the present day, Mr. Chairman. I suggest to him that he answer the farmers of Saskatchewan and of any other province in this way, that if they would go into the more intensified system of farming they would have some expenditures to set against their income. That would help the people of our country, give them a more secure foundation and make for permanent agriculture than constantly growing wheat and doing all the work with the combines, and not even having hired help to pay as they would have on those diversified farms. That is the answer I would give to the Saskatchewan wheat farmer and also to the wheat farmer of Manitoba.
We are concerned about the question of farmers paying income tax in Portage la Prairie. We have an assessor and I think he gathers up quite a lot of money there. I think he is trying to carry out his duties to the very best of his ability. I believe the farmers are agreeable to paying income tax; if they are in that category I myself think they are very lucky.
I wish to tell you, Mr. Chairman, that when the assessor meets a farmer they meet on this basis. The assessor asks the farmer some questions and the farmer admits he did not keep an account, that it is more or less guesswork. This gives the idea to the assessor that the farmer is trying to beat the government. Then he questions the farmer further and asks him why he has not kept records. The farmer gets the idea into his head that this assessor is trying to make out that the farmers are all crooked. That is the basis on which they work when they start- to review their income tax returns. I think that we as farmers should keep proper records, and if the assessors were doing their duty-and I think they are-a lot of dissatisfaction which now exists would disappear.
We in Portage la Prairie are quite concerned about this, and we had two or three meetings. I have some resolutions that were passed at meetings dealing with farmers' income tax. With your permission, Mr. Chairman, and with
Supply-Revenue-Income Tax

the indulgence of the committee, I should like to read these resolutions and perhaps make one or two comments. There are four or five of them.


The CHAIRMAN:: This discussion may come up again on the war appropriation resolution. I am afraid if it continues now we shall have it repeated.


Harry Leader: I am aware of that, and it was because I wanted to be fair that I asked the indulgence of the committee. If I can get that indulgence and am in order I will take perhaps five or six minutes to deal with these points.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Go ahead.


Harry Leader: The first recommendation is:
That the income of farmers for income tax purposes be averaged over a period of four years.
I know the farmers have asked that their income be averaged over a period of five years, and I was rather surprised that our local of the federation of agriculture in Portage la Prairie had cut that down one year. I did not say anything but this just Shows their anxiety to have something done to take care of the losses which they suffer during the bad times. The second recommendation reads:
Whereas the application of income tax to the proceeds of live stock dispersal sales is causing severe hardships; therefore be it resolved that seventy-five per cent of such proceeds of dispersal sales of live stock raised on farms be exempt from income tax as return of capital and twenty-five per cent be recognized as current income.
I believe that is exactly what was submitted by the federation of agriculture two or three years ago, that seventy-five per cent of the proceeds of live stock sales be classed as capital rather than income, but the department persists in classing it as income. I can cite one case, that of a man who over a period of thirty years built up an excellent herd of dairy cattle. When he got older and was unable to get help, he disposed of his herd together with his farm equipment. The cattle brought a return of $5,000, and he is still fighting with the income tax department because they are asking him to pay tax on the $5,000 worth of cattle which he sold. He gathered that herd together over a period of years, and if anything is capital I submit that should be classed as such. Oh, I know the assessors can spread it over a period of five years, but certainly that is not good enough. The farmers have to pay the tax in the long run; there

is a great deal of bookkeeping to it and not very much saving to them. The third recommendation is:
That the farmers be relieved of the requirement of deducting income tax from wages paid to hired help, as past experience shows that the farmer has to bear this tax by paying higher wages.
In the discussion on this point I was given to understand that if a farmer goes out to hire a man-and they are hard to get-offering him the going wages, the man will say, "What about deductions from my wages for income tax purposes?" The farmer replies, "Well, I have to do it," to which the man says, "Then you will have to 'pay me what you deduct." So the farmers claim they are paying higher wages as a result. The assessor comes right back and says that can be charged as wages against your income. So it can, but in many of these cases it will mean that the farm labourer will not pay any tax, and he should not pay any tax, and it all makes unnecessary work for the farmer. The next resolution is:
That discrimination exists between a farm couple who are only exempt $1,200 and a city couple who may claim exemption up to $1,860. Therefore the exemption should be at a parity with the city couple, provided such amount is earned on the farm.
I see the Minister of Finance in his seat, and he may wonder what they are driving at. On the printed form it states that a man's wife can get a job and claim the exemption of $660 which is given a single person, without the husband losing his status as a married man, with an exemption of $1,200. Therefore the total exemption they may claim is $1,860. That is being done right along. The farmer's wife cannot leave home and get a job. They have not a restaurant right around the corner, like people living in the city, and they are allowed only $1,200. But, as the hon. member for Qu'Appelle stated a short time ago, it is the farmer's wife and his small boys and girls who are milking the cows and feeding the hogs, trying to keep up production in this country when hired help cannot be found. They would be glad to pay hired help, but it is unprocurable. So the farmer's wife, his daughters and small boys undertake to do this work, yet that couple are exempt to the extent of only $1,200. If they were living in the city the wife could get a job somewhere else, and their total exemption would be $1,860. Is it not possible to give that to the farmer whose wife stays on the farm and helps maintain production in this country, instead of seeking a job somewhere else? I say it is possible. The farmers

Supply-Revenue-Income Tax
of Portage la Prairie are asking for this, and I endorse their request whole-heartedly. The next recommendation is:
That a fixed price of $1 per day be allowed for board of hired help on the farm.
I think at present an allowance of up to SI a day may be made, but many of these assessors interpret that provision in different ways. They may allow 75 cents a day, 85 cents a day or perhaps SI. They have the authority to allow up to that amount, and the farmers are asking that this be placed on the income tax form, so that the assessors will not be able to interpret it differently, as they are doing now' in many districts.
The sixth recommendation is:
That the income tax should be so clear and specific that all decisions of assessors should be uniform in their application.
These assessors are given discretionary powers, and they make different adjustments. Sometimes these people get together and wonder what is the reason for the difference.
I got this right from the head office in Winnipeg. One man may be allowed only $15 as pin money for his wife, while another assessor may think a farmer's wife should be granted $100 to $150 as pin money. When that situation exists you can see the confusion it causes in the minds of these people. They are asking that this be made statutory and placed right on the income tax form, so that the assessors will not have this discretionary power, though I think they use that power to the best of their ability. From the experience I have had with the assessors I believe they are trying to do their best.
The seventh recommendation is:
That dependent children under eighteen years of age paid up to $400 per year (board included) be exempt. This should be inserted in the income tax form.
That is something a great many of the people in Portage la Prairie did not know a thing about. I believe it was only through my own efforts that they found they could allow as much as S400 to a dependent child, including board, which could be charged against income as expense. Some of them were getting that; others did not know a thing about it.
I do not think the assessors are very much concerned with pointing out these things. They are concerned with how to get hold of the money which they believe the farmers are trying to gyp them out of, in a good many cases. So they are asking that this be stated plainly on the income tax form.
I want to apologize for having said this much, Mr. Chairman, though it really was not such a great deal after all. However, I have only done my duty as I see it, and I thank the committee for its indulgence.



REVISED

James Arthur Ross: In addition to what I have said already and the questions I have asked, I want to support the arguments advanced by the hon. member for Portage la Prairie. When the budget was under discussion a year ago we argued these same matters pretty strenuously. This is perhaps the next important item, as far as the farmers are conr cerned, to the shortage of farm labour which has brought about the reductions I mentioned last evening in the production of hogs and dairy products. I can assure you that in my part of the country the percentages I mentioned last evening do not begin to give a picture of the reductions that have taken place in hog and dairy production.. I have met farmer after farmer who, after interviewing the tax inspector at the municipal offices, have said, "We are going to put the calves on the cows as quickly as we can," and they have done so. I have one neighbour whose wife and children help him with the milking of twenty cows. After he interviewed the tax inspector last fall and received his assessment, he commenced milking only enough for his own family and delivering perhaps a little can of cream once a week; the calves got all the rest. That situation prevails throughout my part of the country. Where farmers were raising perhaps more than a hundred head of hogs, they have cut down to one brood sow. These people say, rightly or wrongly, that milking these cows and feeding these hogs, without help, is on the same basis as overtime work for organized labour. In the busy seasons at seeding and harvest time they have to milk the cows and feed the hogs before daylight and after sundown. We are not going to do it and be assessed to the extent we are by the federal government, although we are agreeable to paying our share.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Labour pays income tax on overtime, and for the most part they do not refuse to work overtime on account of the tax.


James Arthur Ross: I have known a lot
who do, and some of them belong to the best paid and best organized trades. They not only do not work overtime, but more than that, they take a holiday. They do not admit why they are doing it, but I know why; it is to avoid the heavy income tax. I know you have to have the money, but you have overdone this thing. I cannot see how you are going to overcome it so that it will not be a racket, but I do say that where you are satisfied that a farm couple are working and doing so much they should be allowed the same exemption as the married couple in the town gets where both husband and wife are working. Farm production is definitely on the decrease, and you are



EDITION

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Revenue-Income Tax
[Stage Direction]
only beginning to see the effects of your taxation. I gave some percentages on that last night, and before this time next year the situation will be greatly aggravated). The thing is overdone and the effect on production should be taken into consideration now.
James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not want to prolong
the discussion on the supplementary estimates. I had hoped they would be finished by six o'clock so that we could get a bill over to the senate and obtain royal assent. But matters have been opened up which are of great importance, and I am sorry that we have not sufficient time to enable the house to give them full discussion. If we did that with all these items we should never get our supple-mentaries through, because we are dealing with practically every department and the committee. is discussing each item as if it were an item in the main estimates and covering a very wide field.
I want to say just a word about some of the suggestions that have been made with regard to the taxation of farmers. The farmers are taxed like everybody else in business. At the present time I do not think there is any difference. I do not think that the farmers receive any favours, nor do I think they are discriminated against' in any respect. There was in the Income War Tax Act last year or the year before the privilege of carrying backward or carrying forward losses, which was more favourable to farmers than to other businesses, but now I think that situation is equalized.
With regard to the allowance to a wife who helps her husband in the store, she is not allowed for that income taxwise, nor is the wife of anybody else who helps her husband in a profession or business. In the early part of the war we made a change in that principle, which we could not very well justify on a basis of principle, in the case of the wife who goes out and gets a job and earns money. But you know how much she gets. You know she is working every day straight along, and we found that if we were to get married women to go into the factories and work-and we needed war production in the worst way

we would have to allow them to be taxed as if they were single persons without asking the husband to sacrifice his married status for income tax purposes. At that time the married women were beginning to flock out of the factories and go home, and1 so we made that change.
In the case of the farmer's wife it would be impossible-though I am willing to consider it again-to extend that rule to a case where no money is paid to the wife who works part of the time on the farm and part of the time in the house, and where no check is

possible as between individuals. So it would have to be universal, I think, and if that- were done, it would have to be extended to women doing housework in towns and cities for their husbands. The result would simply be that the exemptions would be increased by that additional amount. If members can work out some way of administration that does not lead to that result, I should like to hear it.
In the case of the children, the children may be paid for working without losing their status as dependents, if they are not paid more than S400 a year. As I understand the law, and I think I am correct, if they are paid more than S400 a year, or paid beyond a certain amount, they lose their status as dependents, but it can be deducted from the income of the farmer and shown as a deduction.
With regard to averaging income over four or five years, a great deal of thought has been given to that. I do not know of any country where incomes are averaged now. I am not sure about other countries but my recollection is that in the United States losses may be carried back or carried forward two years. In this country they can be carried backwards one year or forward three years.


James Arthur Ross: Are they not averaged in Britain? I understand that they are.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I am very doubtful of that; I am not sure. There are certain disadvantages about averaging. It means that a farmer may be called upon to pay a heavy income tax in a year in which he has no income whatever because he had a large income perhaps three or four years before. A farmer who retires and has no income would have to continue to- pay income tax beyond the period when he was earning an income. I have not made a study of the situation to see what all the disadvantages of averaging are, but we do not do it for business and we do not do it for farmers because of those objections. It would be very hard to administer because there would be this bringing forward of the back years.
With regard to herds, on principle I do not see how the increase in the value of a herd can possibly be regarded as an increase in capital. If a person is in the business of buying and selling cattle or of buying cattle and fattening cattle and selling cattle or of milking cows and later selling the cows, what he makes includes the increase in the value of the herd as well as the current receipts in the case of a dairy business. I do not see how it can possibly be regarded as an increase in capital, with this exception, that if he pays income tax on the same basis as that on which a business man pays income tax-that is what

Supply-Revenue-Income Tax
is called the inventory basis-it is only an increase in the value of his herd which is regarded as income, just as the increase in the inventory of a merchant is what is regarded as income. So the income tax authorities have tried to give every facility to farmers to enable them to get from a cash basis back on to an inventory basis, and when they do that, they may regard some of the original investment there as capital, but of course any increase in the value is regarded as income, just as current receipts are regarded as income. When a farmer buys farm machinery he is not in the business of buying and selling farm machinery and the same when he buys a farm, and any increase in the value is an increase in the capital and is not taxable. But any increase in the value of his herd is not an increase in the value of a capital item but an increase in something which it is his business to buy and sell and make a profit out of. I think the income tax authorities have gone as far as they can to assist agriculture in getting from a cash basis on to an inventory basis. Had agriculture been on an inventory basis throughout the years, the question would never have arisen. It arises simply because agriculture has been on a cash basis.
Those are some of the difficulties that confront the authorities when they are dealing with this matter. There is not so much difficulty about the income tax or its application as there is about the weight of the tax. It bears very heavily on everybody, on the salaried individual, the wage-earner, the member of parliament, the farmer and everybody else.
There may be a certain discouragement of production, but I think of what the people have done during this war. I think of how they have paid their income tax without any question, perhaps in some cases it has been because they could not avoid doing so. Many have been perfectly willing to work overtime; they have been willing to put forth extra efforts to the stage of nervous collapse. These people have been willing to pay income tax on their overtime earnings. Of course, there have been some who would not do so. However, I think the record of the Canadian people under this heavy income tax in time of war has been pretty good.
I look forward to the time when the income tax may be lightened. I think that is the change that will be most welcome rather than to attempt to put the farmer in a preferred position in regard to these matters as compared with other businesses.


Harry Leader: Why not accept the recommendation that was made to the minister some years ago by the federation of agriculture and supported by farmers? This was 32283-234
that in the case of live stock twenty-five per cent would be counted as an increase for income tax purposes and the other seventy-five per cent would be considered as capital. Otherwise we are going to have this trouble continually because every assessor will make a different adjustment. That is what is creating all the trouble. I want to say definitely that the same condition exists in my part of the country as the hon. member for Souris depicted a moment ago.
Hog production is down at least thirty per cent, and I think the main reason for this is the fact that the department does not recognize that the" farmer's wife and family are entitled to some pay for the work they do while the farmer is doing perhaps two or three men's work. The difficulty could be overcome if that one condition was changed. I know the answer will be that we cannot have class discrimination, but when the department attempts to put agriculture on the same basis as that of a storekeeper it is wrong.
The ordinary business man does not have to face the same hazards as the farmer. If you gave a married man an exemption up to SI,860 that would help to take care of much of the discontent and dissatisfaction and misunderstanding there is at the present time. You would also increase food production because these people are willing to work if they are paid for it.


Mr. HARRIS (Danforth):: The minister mentioned that a great number of people were willing to work overtime although the major portion of their overtime earnings might go into consolidated revenue fund because of taxation. The minister has had two years to think up some formula to take care of those who will not work full time knowing that if they do they will get into a higher taxation bracket. Has the minister anything in mind that would take care of that?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The elimination of the
compulsory savings made a great improvement.


John Horne Blackmore: It is unfortunate that this discussion has come on at this time. I am as anxious as any one else to see the supplementary estimates passed. However, since the question has been raised I want to associate myself with what has been said by the hon. member for Portage la Prairie and the hon. member for Souris.
Regardless of any theoretical consideration as to the justice or injustice of the effect of the income tax structure on the farmer, at the present time we are confronted with one
Supply-Revenue-Income Tax

great problem, that of getting production. I have listened to pleas over the air by officials of the Department of Agriculture urging farmers not to go out of hog production because they will lose the British market. You would think that the people who were making those pleas had never lived on the land at all; you would think that they lived in a realm of nebulous vapour instead of realizing that the farmer is confronted with hard, cold business facts. He must try to make a profit out of his work. The farmer considers that there is a tendency on the part of the federal authorities to take the full value every time he makes anything, while they will not help the farmer or assume any responsibility when he takes a loss.


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is clearly wrong. By the amendments made to the income tax act last summer losses are permitted to be carried ahead three years and carried back one year. There is no tax on capital gains in this country. It is entirely improper to say that we want to take the gain when the farmer makes one, and that we give him no advantage when he makes a loss. When he makes a loss he does get an advantage, and when he makes a capital gain it is not taxed.


John Horne Blackmore: Let me present this concrete case. When my father died we had a herd of cows that were worth $135 each. That was in the autumn of 1919. We paid $45 a ton for the feed to feed them during the winter, but we had to sell them in the spring for $45 a head. What provision is there in the income tax structure to provide for such a terrible loss?


James Lorimer Ilsley: There would be a loss in the year's operation. Will the hon. gentleman suggest a figure for the total loss?


John Horne Blackmore: It amounted to about $15,000.


James Lorimer Ilsley: If there had been a profit in the year prior to that or in any of the three following years the $15,000 could be subtracted. It could be extracted from the profits of the previous year to the extent of those profits, and then further subtractions could be made for the succeeding three years. In that way the loss would be spread over a five year period.


John Horne Blackmore: But suppose the
farmer was driven into liquidation as a result of that experience. Would there be a return of the taxation he had already paid?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Certainly not.


John Horne Blackmore: That is the point; the farmer is faced with that sort of thing. I should like to read a resolution which was passed by the united farmers of Canada, Saskatchewan section.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Surely this discussion is going far afield. We are now on the supplementary estimates and I think we should try to keep within the item.


John Horne Blackmore: Since other resolutions have been read I should like to read this one. It will take me only a minute.
For income tax purposes farmers' incomes must be paid on a five-year income average, and any incomes used to make payment in respect of principal on the home half-section of land and interest (other than debts incurred for normal current living expenses) to rank as production costs and shall be exempt from income tax. Payments made out of current farm income on all debts incurred prior to crop year 1939-40 to be exempt from income tax.
At the present time I will say no more than to associate myself with hon. members who have already spoken; but when the time comes for the regular discussion of this matter I shall probably have a great deal to say, because much must be said if the production of food in this country is not going to be lessened to a dangerous degree.


Ernest Edward Perley: On the third day we were here I directed a letter to the deputy minister and asked him to give special consideration to the case I set out. I am not going to state now what it was, but I wish he would please look that up and give me a reply.


James Angus MacKinnon: I shall make an inquiry.


Mr. FAIR:: I want to associate myself with the hon. members who have already spoken on this question. I do not think it is necessary to go into it in detail, because in 1942, when the budget was discussed, I placed before the house several arguments to which proper consideration has not yet been given. The figures quoted by the minister are very fine in theory, but in practice, when it comes to making good the farmers' losses, I do not think they are any good whatever. Until the farming industry is placed on a proper and sound basis we are going to have inequalities, injustices and dissatisfaction. I want to emphasize particularly that because of our taxation structure, as well as other things, farm production is being restricted to a very great extent.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Trade and Commerce

[Stage Direction]
450. Post offices, including salaries and other expenses of headquarters and staff post offices and supplies and equipment for revenue post offices-further amount required, $2,071,056.
Mr. HAZEN:: Last autumn-I do not know the exact date-a petition was sent, I am informed, by certain persons who live on what is known as the Cottage road and the Old Black river road in the village of Simonds, in the county of Saint John, New Brunswick, asking for a free delivery mail service. No reply was received to this petition and no action has been taken. On February 7 I wrote the Postmaster General at the request of some of these petitioners, pointing out to him that there are over fifty families living on these roads who have no mail delivery and that in order to get their mail they have to go to the Little River post office, which means a trip for some of them of about seven miles. I pointed out that a service of this kind is badly needed in the vicinity and I hoped that he would give the matter favourable consideration. I received a letter from him in reply, dated February 14, in which he said that he would look into the matter and see what could be done. My question is. has he had an opportunity to look into this matter and consider this request; if he has done so, what conclusion has he come to; if he has not yet come to a decision, will he give the matter his immediate attention?
Hon. N. A. . McLARTY (Secretary of State): I shall be very glad to call this matter to the attention of the Postmaster General. It is more or less localized, and I imagine that if he advises my hon. friend as to the proper answer to the question he asks, that will be sufficient.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mail subsidies and steamships subventions.
Eastern local services.
457. Mulgrave, Arichat and Canso. service between-further amount required, $27,000.
Gordon Graydon: With respect to eastern local services across the strait of Canso, it may be that "1 am on the wrong item when I ask about this, but I wonder whether any department of government has given consideration to the reconstruction programme in connection with better transportation across the strait. It was a matter which, when I visited the locality a year ago, was most prominently in the minds of Cape Breton island people. Has some further move been made to build a bridge or provide some permanent means of transportation from Cape Breton
island to connect it with the mainland of Nova Scotia? Perhaps the minister will indicate whether the government has something in mind, because it seems to me that it is a pretty urgent project, one to which attention should be given as soon as war conditions will conveniently permit.


Hon. J. E. MICHAUD:: (Minister of Transport) : As a result of the recommendations of the reconstruction committee, and of representations made by the government of Nova Scotia and by members of parliament representing that section of the province, the Minister of Reconstruction has asked the Department of Transport to have the survey remade and checked up for permanent facilities - either a bridge or causeway-across the strait of Canso.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canada Grain Act-
459. Canadian government elevators including equipment-further amount required, $114,160.84.
William Scottie Bryce: I should like to know how many government elevators are operated by the government?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The Minister of Trade and Commerce is out of the chamber for a few minutes.	'


William Scottie Bryce: Perhaps I may ask my questions and put them on Hansard, and he can answer them.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: He will be glad to do that.


William Scottie Bryce: I want to know how many government elevators are operated by the government; which ones are rented, and to whom; the rent that is charged; and also the capacity of each elevator.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That will be drawn to the attention of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and I have no doubt he will be able to supply my hon. friend with the information.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Rehabilitation branch-
465. Rehabilitation division-further amount required, $173,000.
Joseph Henry Harris: Will the minister be good enough to inform us in a few sentences whether or not the rehabilitation services are set up in Toronto and the organization is established?
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans' Affairs):	Perhaps I had better briefly
explain, first, the purposes for which the vote is asked. This is entirely for salaries and cost
Supply-Veterans' Affairs

of living bonus for additional staff required to administer the war service rehabilitation services, in respect of which staff no provision had been made, and also for furniture and equipment required for such additional staff, provision for which was made by order in council on November 17, 1944, which authorized the expenditure of $50,000 from the war appropriation, subject to recovery from' supplementary estimates.
As regards the second item-I suggest that we deal with both, by consent of the committee, because that would be more convenient-the War Service Grants Act, 1944, came into force on January 1, 1945. It was necessary to engage staff to administer part II thereof, that is, the credits part, from that date, positions having been established for such purposes at head office and in the district offices as follows: director of war service grants; assistant director of war service grants; administrative district supervisor; rehabilitation grant department; solicitors; law clerks and other clerks.
Provision, has been made in the main estimates of 1945-1946 for their salaries for the coming fiscal year, so that these are the amounts already incurred to the end of the present fiscal year, and all the elements of discussion on these two items will come into the main estimates or possibly in the war appropriation estimates at the appropriate time.
In regard to the question asked by the hon. member for Danforth (Mr. Hams), we are making substantial progress in the Toronto area in connection with rehabilitation. We have, of course, problems of hospitalization, but we have an excellent advisory committee of private citizens who are assisting the boys as they come back and who are thoroughly familiar with the legislation passed by parliament in the last five years, both by statute and in orders in council. We have had the assistance of public spirited men like my hon, friend in regard to some hospitalization problems and the provision of accommodation for nearly two hundred boys in the Toronto East hospital.


Joseph Henry Harris: Toronto East General.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes, the Toronto East General. The hospitalization problem is well in hand. The hard weather we had some months ago kept us somewhat behind in the construction of S'unny-brook hospital, but Christie street has been completely renovated, and we have other accommodation in St. Thomas and elsewhere, so that we are reasonably satisfied that we shall meet the problem.

As regards the general problem, that will not be settled this year or next year. There are new problems constantly arising and they must be met as they present themselves. But we have the basic fabric of solid legislation for rehabilitation, and that will be constantly improved by discussion in this House of Commons.


Joseph Henry Harris: But there is a district office actually functioning now in Toronto?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes. Our main difficulties, however, have been twofold: first, the question of adequate space, and, second, adequate staff. Once we solve these two, I think the legislation is sufficient to look after all other considerations as they arise.


Joseph Henry Harris: Up to the moment you have not the space required or the full staff?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No; we have not the eventual space which we are looking for in order to function.


John Horne Blackmore: I do not desire to delay the passing of the estimates, but although I believe the minister has done a good job in making progress in his department, I wish to point out that the general situation as regards treatment of veterans leaves a good deal to be desired. I am sure the minister himself will agree with that statement. I should like to read to the house a brief excerpt from a letter from Lieutenant-Colonel John Wise of the Disabled Veterans Association, Vancouver, written on March 27, 1945:
Hansard records the statement from the Hon. Ian A. Mackenzie, Minister of Veterans' Affairs, as follows:
"Men do not need to apply for pensions: They will be granted automatically when medical examination shows the need."
That statement is utterly discredited, since in innumerable cases no such award, or entitlement, has been granted.
The crux of the situation is revealed by the factual records of this association, which shows that many eases have already been presented to the Canadian pension commission covering a period of so-called adjudication, totalling, for the 1914-1918 veterans, a quarter of a century without obtaining any finality in the proper adjudication of claims.
I will not give any details to support these statements. I merely put the excerpt on record as bearing out my assertion at the opening that there is much yet to be desired.
I am not satisfied with the way we have treated our men of the last war and I am afraid we are beginning to mistreat a good many of the men who are returning from this one.

Supply-Veterans' Affairs


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I appreciate the remarks of my hon. friend.
I have had several letters from the same gentleman from whose communication he has quoted. We have investigated every single case submitted to us and he has entirely misconstrued my public statement. My statement was that there was automatic examination of all cases now, without the necessity for an application for pension. That was not a statement that all pensions would be granted in all cases, for that would be impossible, and that is the effect of the sentence read by my hon. friend. I think it will be agreed that this house-I do not say any government or any party-has done a tremendous amount of good thinking in regard to legislation for soldiers in the last five years. The task is not yet complete, and I hope that, whoever comes back after the next election, there will be immediately set up a committee on soldiers legislation in this house to deal with pensions, veterans allowances, training, vocational and educational, covering the whole scope and sweep of what we have been doing in the last five years, so that we shall have a consolidation by the next parliament of all that has been enacted, some of necessity by order in council, during that period. Moreover, I hope that many men in the present war will be members in this house so that they can bring their fresh thoughts to bear upon the problems. In that way we may achieve a splendid consolidation of soldier legislation which will not be equalled by that of any other country.


John George Diefenbaker: I join with the minister in what he has stated. One of the shining things in parliament is the fact that, in so far as veterans' affairs are concerned without regard to party, all of us have endeavoured to contribute our part to the end that ' the rehabilitation plan evolved by parliament shall be parliament's plan, belonging to no party in the house.
In regard to rehabilitation, there is one particular matter I wish to bring to the minister's attention, for the reason that if anything causes ill feeling or concern it is very difficult to gain the support of people for any claims of rehabilitation when they believe that there is unfairness in any one phase of what has been done. What I have in mind is the War Service Grants Act. Under that act at the present time those who return from service are entitled to a service grant. It is payable, however, only to those who return, excepting in certain specified cases. One of the causes of major complaint in regard to the whole situation of veterans rehabilitation, and also the consideration of dependents' rights, has been the
fact that there is no provision for the payment of this grant to the mothers and fathers or to the estates of soldiers who, had they returned, would have been entitled to the grant, but who having given their all in the service of their country are unable to leave their rights to their estates.
This is a matter one hears on every hand and veterans organizations throughout the country are asking that something be done. But there is no fairness in the fact that while their loved ones would have earned this gratuity for the service they had given had they survived, because they have made the supreme sacrifice their estates are being denied the payment that these men had justly earned. I know the minister has given consideration to this, but I ask him not only to give consideration but at the earliest possible day to bring in an amendment and not to wait until the next parliament. An amendment in this one case could not be brought before parliament but it could be brought in by order in council-[DOT]


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Would the hon. member approve that course?


John George Diefenbaker: Well, no one on this side of the house has been more critical of order in council government than have I. I have pointed out the dangers and difficulties. I realize that there are, however, cases where order in council is necessary. I am not in any way excusing the government for waiting until this late date to convene parliament, thus preventing the full discussion of these matters that would otherwise take place. But realizing the shortness of the time that is available to parliament and knowing the general demands for just this piece of legislation, I for one, while taking the stand that I have always taken that orders in council have been used altogether too much during the past five years, would be the last to hold back from those who are entitled to it the payment of this gratuity by the technicality of opposing the bringing into effect of the legislation by order in council.
There is a second matter to which I should like to refer, namely, the payment of the grant to the loved ones of young men from this country who saved civilization in May, June, July and August of 1940, in the air over London. Numbers of those were Canadians who went over in 1938 and 1939 and joined the Royal Air Force. When they make the supreme sacrifice the payment cannot be made to their dependents. I know of a case where an only son was one of that valiant band of heroes who saved Britain at that time.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: With the Royal Air Force?
Supply-Veterans' Affairs


John George Diefenbaker: Yes. That boy
paid the supreme sacrifice. There is no provision for the payment of the grant to his estate.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Is he entitled to the British gratuity grant?


John George Diefenbaker: His people were not so advised. I think consideration should be given to the inclusion of such cases as that.
I should1 like to refer to hospitalization. In that connection I hear that so far as the men who are coming back to-day are concerned, not in great numbers but in an ever-increasing stream, there is a considerable degree of criticism of the available facilities for their hospitalization. During the last session of parliament I mentioned a place in Saskatchewan where there is mineral water that has been found very valuable in the treatment of neurological diseases. That was in the town of Manitou Lake, Watrous, Saskatchewan. I again bring this to the attention of the minister. The soldiers from Saskatchewan who have returned from overseas suffering from neurological conditions naturally would like to have an institution as near home as possible. We have the facilities at Watrous. According to scientific opinion the mineral waters there are equal to a spa. Curative benefits have been shown on a number of occasions. There is an available place there to start a hospital which was set up by the Saskatchewan government in 1931 or 1932. It could be extended. I know much benefit would come to those men suffering from these diseases.
I should like to bring a third matter to the attention of the minister in the same spirit in which he made his remarks a few minutes ago. All of us who served in the armed forces of this country in the last war are as anxious to cooperate together as any group in this house. One of the things that I will always remember, and one of the things that has most appealed to me in parliament is the wonderful spirit of fellowship that prevails among all in this parliament, irrespective of party, who had the honour of serving in the armed forces in either the last war or this one.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Just a word; I want to thank my hon. friend not only for his remarks but for the spirit and tenor of them. With regard to the hospital situation, on the 3rd of March, 1945, there were 2,315 in hospitals from the last war; from national defence this war, undischarged 2,918; discharged this war 3,337; and others, 208, making a total of 8,778. They were disposed as follows: in departmental hospitals, 6,653; in contract hospitals, 2,125; IMr. I. A. Mackenzie.]
making a total of 8,778. Hospital accommodation is as follows: patients in departmental hospitals, 6,653; vacant beds, 1,425, or a total of normal beds, 8,078. Emergency accommodation: departmental hospitals, 1,381, making a total departmental accommodation of 9,459. Under construction, to be completed by July 1, 1945, 2,623 beds; to be completed by December 31, 1945, 2,650; to be completed by July 1, 1946, 2,330; an additional number 1,050; total under construction, 8,653 beds. If you combine these two totals, normal beds 8,122 and the total under construction 8,653, you will get a total 16,775.
May I say to my hon. friend that, as he very well knows, the problem is not a national one, it is a regional one because of the natural sentiment of relatives to have the cases coming back in close vicinity to their own homes. That is very understandable and a very human reason too.
On the point raised by my hon. friend with regard to the war service grants, I think he asked me a question in the house the other day, and I believe I told him on that occasion the matter was now receiving the active attention of the government. My hon. friend is aware that in February of the present year an amendment to the gratuities legislation was passed in England to make the cash part of the gratuities-they have not the credit that we have here-available to the estate of the deceased.


John George Diefenbaker: That is what I have in mind.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: We have been discussing it for three or four months, and the department has set up special committees in conjunction with the three national defence departments to study the whole thing. The matter is now receiving . the most active and sympathetic consideration. Whether we can take action by order in council in a somewhat limited way, or whether we decide upon the principle and introduce legislation here, is something yet to be decided.


John George Diefenbaker: What appears to be the argument against the granting of the payments to the estate?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: A rather strange thing is that last year when this legislation was put through to grant war service grants my hon. friend, who is very alert as a rule, and other hon. members, advanced no arguments along that line. The question was not advanced in the house. We put a definite limitation-

Supply-Veterans' Affairs


Gordon Graydon: May I say just a word on that? Of course the reason why there may be mistakes in the legislation of last year-and I am wondering that we have not found dozens of flaws, instead of the few that seem to exist-is that in the speech from the throne, in January, this government envisaged the introduction of this legislation, but it was not brought down until long after. We asked for it in the house continually, but right up to almost the very last minute the house was sitting the government was not ready to bring it down. Time after time I asked the minister when it would be brought in; and I do not think there was ever less opportunity to debate an important piece of legislation in this parliament than was the case in connection with this measure. It is all very well to say we had time, but if I remember correctly the bill was brought in and given first reading one day, and we were asked to debate it the very next day. There was no opportunity to get the reaction of veterans' organizations or of the country at large, and with the limited opportunities hon. members had to deal with that legislation I wondered when the first explosion would come with respect to flaws in it. That is the answer to the minister's question, as to why people were not alert to the flaws in the measure as it went through. When legislation is being rushed through parliament you cannot expect hon. members to do justice to it. The responsibility definitely rests upon the government, and nowhere else.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Certainly I do not appreciate the political angle being introduced into this very fine discussion I was having with the hon. member for Lake Centre. I want to tell my hon. friend the leader of the opposition that we worked on this legislation for two solid years. We worked in this very building until two and three o'clock in the morning. We consulted veterans' organizations all across Canada in regard to the terms of this legislation. I also want to tell the hon. gentleman that this is the most generous war service gratuities legislation ini the world at the present time. I do not like this sort of political sneaking such as my hon. friend interjects into what was a very fair-minded discussion with the hon. member for Lake Centre.


Gordon Graydon: But you said the hon.
member for Lake Centre was not alert when the legislation was passed, and I was answering that statement.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I am explaining certain matters which were raised in a very fine spirit of fairness by the hon. member for Lake Centre, and it has 32283-24
been twisted in a political piece of sneakery by the leader of the opposition. I resent that most bitterly.


Gordon Graydon: Now you are just playing politics.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: That is exactly what your interruption was, and we are not playing politics in this matter at all.


Gordon Graydon: Let us keep our tempers, and not do that sort of thing.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: "If you can keep your head when those about you are losing theirs-". However, that is the situation with reference to the first question raised by my hon. friend. The matter has not been disposed of as yet. This has been done in England, but last year the house imposed a limitation, as my hon. friend knows, in regard to those who were receiving benefits under the Dependents Allowance Act, and that may possibly cut away quite a lot of people who are entitled to benefits.


John George Diefenbaker: Does it look hopeful for the amendment?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I am afraid I am too much of a Caledonian to make any promises at the moment.
The third point raised by my hon. friend was in regard to the R.A.F. That matter also is receiving consideration at the present time, and it is a very difficult question. They have gratuity legislation over there, but I am going to look into the question of the extent to which our boys who went there before 1939 are protected by the gratuity legislation in the old land. Perhaps by Tuesday or Wednesday of next week I may be able to refer to the matter again.


John George Diefenbaker: Then there was the question of the facilities at Watrous, which I brought up last year and which the minister said would be investigated.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I shall be glad indeed to look into that at once.


Robert Fair: Since the minister is feeling happy again may I ask whether the brief presented on March 5 by the president and secretary of the soldier settlers association of Canada has yet been considered by the cabinet and, if so, whether the decision has been a little more lenient than was the case previously?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I must commend my hon. friend for his persistence and sincerity in regard to this

Supply

Veterans' Affairs

matter. This question was reviewed by the government on August 25 last, and the recommendation was rejected. About a month ago my hon. friend and a delegation of two, I think, met me in my office, and I promised that I would bring the matter again to the consideration of the government. The government has reaffirmed its former stand, but has decided that the rate of interest chargeable against old soldier settlers should be reduced from 5 per cent to 3J per cent. That will apply not only to those under the Veterans Land Act, not only to those who were old soldier settlers and reenlisted in this war, but also to all soldier settlers under the Soldier Settlement Act.


Robert Fair: Will that be made retroactive to 1919, or whenever the contract was entered into?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I am afraid not.


Robert Fair: Then I can tell the minister that after the election I will be back with a great deal more help, to fight this thing to a finish.


Mr. TUCKER:: As a member of the committee which dealt with veterans' affairs in the last parliament, and being very much interested in the problem, I should like to say that as far as I have any influence at all with the minister I would urge him sincerely to give the most favourable consideration possible to making war service gratuities part of a soldier's estate. Those who have lost loved ones in this war, who expected that when they came back they would receive this gratuity, cannot understand why it should be withheld because there sons lost their lives fighting for their country. I am sure the withholding of these gratuities will not be upheld by the government in the future, and I think the sooner this step is taken the better it will be.
The other matter I wished to bring to the attention of the minister is this. I understand that under the regulations a person who reaches England during this war will be entitled to the benefits of the War Veterans Allowance Act, whereas in the last war a man who reached England and was kept there through no fault of his own received no benefit at all. I realize that the number who would be affected by what I am saying may not be very large, owing to the fact that if a man draws a small pension he can come under the act even if he did not get out of Canada during the last war and also because of the provision that veterans of two wars receive the allowance. But I know a few estimable

people who served in the last war, who got as far as England but no further, through no fault of their own, who to-day are told that nothing can be done for them until they reach the age of seventy, the same as any other citizen who was not in the army at all. In view of the fact that presumably those who reach England during this war will receive the benefit of the war veterans allowance. I urge upon the minister that the old veterans of the last war should not be treated less generously.


Mr. KNOWLES:: On the question of the payment of gratuities to the next of kin, before we got off on a little by-path the hon. member for Lake Centre asked the minister to indicate the arguments against such payments. The only argument I heard him give was that certain limitations were contained in the legislation passed by parliament last year, although some of us did not understand it in that way at the time. Apart from that the rest of us cannot understand the objection at all, and neither can the people who are affected. I wonder if the minister would indicate what the arguments are against paying the gratuity to the next of kin without any question. Perhaps if we knew the arguments we could answer them. We would like to know the position of the government, and why it has taken so long to come around to the position which hon. members generally hold on this matter.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I think the committee had better wait for proper consideration to be given the arguments pro and con, before I endeavour to answer the question just addressed to me.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Direct payment to veterans and dependents-
JiSB. Widows' compassionate allowances to be paid under terms and conditions approved by the governor in council-further amount required, $20,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Is this item, by any
chance, to take care of any of the additional requests that have been made to the government from time to time by women's organizations representing the people covered by this vote? I will not take the time of the committee to go into the matter, although if we had more time I certainly would do so. The minister knows the various points these women have brought to his attention on several occasions, such as increasing the amount paid to these widows; lowering the age limit; making it available to the widows of veterans who served in the last war even if they only got to England; making it available to widows of imperial veterans who have established a

Ways and Means
certain period of residence in Canada; also free hospitalization and a number of other matters. I know that representations have been made to the government quite frequently by these women, and I should like to know whether this vote is evidence of any consideration having been given to these requests.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: As of December 31, 1944, there were 1,953 in receipt of this allowance. This legislation came into effect on April 1, 1943. The following awards have been made:
April 1, 1943-March 31, 1944	 1.298
April 1, 1944-December 31, 1944	 732
Reinstatements April 1, 1944-Deeember 31, 1944	 4
2,034
Cancellations	 81
Total number in receipt on December
31, 1944	 1,953
The expenditure to December 31, 1944, was $507,396.04. The amount voted was $700,000. It is estimated that an additional $20,000 will be required to meet expenditures to March 31, 1945.
The sum of $1,000,000 has been provided under vote No. 412 for the fiscal year 1945-46.
Representations have been made to me by the hon. member for Verdun (Mr. Cote), in regard to the same point as that mentioned by my hon. friend on behalf of the Canadian non-pensioned veterans' widows' association- non-pensioned, that is, until we gave them pensions-which has passed resolutions as follows:
1.	That widows' allowances be raised to $40 a month, payable to all non pensioned widows of Canadian servicemen whether they served in war theatres or elsewhere.
2.	That the dependent's allowance paid the mother of a serviceman in any British force be raised to $35 a month.
3.	That dependent mothers of sons who died as a result ot service in any of His Majesty's forces be granted a permanent pension of $60 a month.
4.	That veterans' children, irrespective of age, who are so incapacitated mentally or physically as to be incapable of earning a livelihood, be eligible for orphan's allowance.
The present addition is under the statute and the regulations previously passed by this house and does not represent any new benefits.


Stanley Howard Knowles: No action has been taken on those resolutions?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No; I think we have done very well.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Too little and too late.


Gordon Graydon: Perhaps you might consider doing a little better in the future.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE Marketing serviceiSIi. Marketing of agricultural products, including temporary appointments that may be required to be made, notwithstanding anything contained in the Civil Service Act, the amount available for such appointments not to exceed $15,000-further amount required, $3,000.
Gordon Graydon: I think this is the last of the agriculture items, and I just want to point out, in case some question may arise later, why we are not directing questions to the ministry with respect to these agriculture items. There were some matters that we wanted to take up with the Minister of Agriculture had he not been unavoidably absent, and we are reserving those until either the war appropriation estimates or the civil estimates are before the house. I state that so that there will be no misunderstanding of why these items have been passed as they have been to-day.


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