1945-10-25

[Stage Direction]
Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs): In reply to a question from the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) on October 11, I stated that the Canadian government had accepted the invitation to be represented at the conference which will meet in London on November 1 to consider the establishment of an educational and cultural organization of the united nations. I am now in a position to announce the composition of the Canadian delegation. The delegation will consist of the Right Hon. Vincent Massey, High Commissioner for Canada in London, as chairman, with Principal R. C. Wallace of Queen's University and Mr. Edmond Turcotte of Montreal as delegates. Since Mr. Massey will not be able to attend the opening sessions of the conference, Principal Wallace will act as alternate chairman of the delegation.

Export Credits
The advisers to the delegation will be Mr. T. W. L. MacDermot of the Department of External Affairs; Dr. J. G. Malloch, senior liaison officer of the National Research Council in the United Kingdom, and Dr. J. E. Robbins, of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
I mentioned to the house on October 11 that this conference will be mainly concerned with considering a draft constitution for the proposed organization, and this has been borne in mind in determining the composition of the Canadian delegation. If' the conference succeeds in its objects and a new international ' agency is set up under the auspices of the economic and social council of the united nations, I have no doubt that consideration will be given by the government to the development of means for ensuring that the Canadian share in the activities of the organization are carried out in close consultation with the provincial departments of education and with the associations and institutions in Canada that are concerned with educational, cultural and scientific activities.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. H. A. BRUCE (Parkdale):: Mr. Speaker, I am not quite sure that the subject with which I wish to deal for a moment is quite within the rules of the house, but I would ask your indulgence with the permission of the house. It arises out of the statement that was made a moment ago by the Minister of Justice in regard to the appointment of a chairman of the Canadian delegation to the cultural and educational conference of the united nations which is shortly to meet in London. The time would seem to be opportune to express through this parliament the appreciation of the people of Canada of the invaluable services rendered by the Right Hon. Vincent and Mrs. Massey to members of our armed forces during their stay in England. We particularly desire to commend them for the leading part they played in establishing the Beaver club for other ranks of the three services and an officers' club in London, where Mrs. Massey personally helped to serve meals d-aily, as well as for their initiative in taking over a large house in Herefordshire which they converted into a convalescent home and maintained at their own expense and where many of our wounded were restored to health.
In their eagerness to promote the social welfare of our men, they have been completely and heroically forgetful of themselves and their
own anxieties We desire to extend to Mr. and Mrs. Massey our grateful thanks for the personal contribution they have made to the happiness and well-being of our men overseas during these six trying years of war.



EXPORT CREDITS INSURANCE


Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make an announcement regarding credit agreements which have been concluded under the Export Credits Insurance Act. These agreements have been entered into by the Minister of Finance under part II of the act, on behalf of the governor in council upon the joint recommendation of the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Trade and Commerce.
At noon to-day a loan agreement was signed with the Belgian government. The amount of the loan is $25 million, and it is to be used for the purchase of Canadian-produced goods. The credit is repayable in thirty annual instalments, commencing in 1947. This credit will bear interest at three per cent.
As hon. members will recall, the authority of the governor in council to make loans to foreign governments under the terms of the Export Credits Insurance Act was limited to $100 million. The Belgian loan to which I have just referred exhausts the lending authority of the government. At a later date the Minister of Finance will request the house materially to increase our lending capacity under the act, and full details of the lending programme will be available at that time.
Meanwhile, I thought that the house would appreciate knowing in a general way what has been done under the act of 1944. During the first half of this year, credit agreements were entered into with Czechoslovakia and the Netherlands. The amounts and terms of these loans were made public at the time. Loan agreements have more recently been made with the Netherlands, Netherlands Indies, Norway, and a small loan has been made to the U.S.S.R. I have arranged the details of these loans in simplified tabular form, as follows:
When Interest
Country	Amount	repayable rateBelgium	
$25,000,000	1947-1976	3 %Czechoslovakia.	19,000,000	1950-1954	25%Netherlands ..	25.000.000	1950-1954	21%" Indies	15,000,000	1950-1954	2.|%Norway	
13.000.000	1951-1959	2J%L.S.S.R	
3,000.000	1950-	2 %
I should like to draw to the attention of the house the fact that the interest rates which are shown in the table are all equal to the rates
Export Credits

at which the dominion government itself can borrow for a term equal to the average term of the loan plus a small margin to cover overhead costs of borrowing in addition to the interest charges. The government is following this pattern as a policy in making loans to allied nations for reconstruction purposes. As a consequence the interest rate depends upon the average length of the loan.
In addition to the loans which I have just announced, the government has agreed with certain foreign governments to increase the size of the loans and to enter into loan contracts with other governments, if the necessary legislative authority is obtained from this house allowing us to do so. Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the Netherlands Indies, all wish to purchase goods which are available in Canada, greatly in excess of the amounts which so far the government has been able to make available to them for this purpose. The comparatively small loan to the U.S.S.R. was made to cover a specific group of purchases, and consideration is being given to future and larger credits.
France wishes to make large purchases to assist her in her very difficult problems of reconstruction. If the necessary authority can be obtained, the government would be prepared to negotiate a loan with France to enable her to purchase Canadian goods to a value of nearly $250 million in addition to those goods which she is able to purchase for cash.
Discussions regarding a credit have also been held with representatives of the government of China. As yet there has not been an opportunity to complete negotiations regarding the terms of this credit, but I would hope that in this case, as well as in the case of the other countries I have mentioned, it would be possible to give the house further information before it is asked to approve an increase in the amount which may be loaned.
A condition attached to all these loans is, as hon. members will recall, that the proceeds of the loans shall be used in the purchase of Canadian produced goods.
It has not been found advisable, except in one case, to include in the loan agreements specific schedules of goods to be purchased with the proceeds of the loans. In a general way the amount of the loans has been related in each case to considerations of the probable availability of the goods which our allies desire to purchase from us. But it is to the advantage of both the buyer and the seller to have a certain amount of elasticity in these large purchasing programmes. From the buyers' point of view considerations of price,

supply, delivery dates, and many other factors which may change from time to time, make it undesirable to commit them to specific programmes of purchases too far in advance. And from our own point of view, it has not been thought advisable or even possible, to make firm commitments to supply large quantities of goods-for example, wheat-up, to say, the end of 1946.
From a study of the proposed purchasing programmes it is clear that the goods which will be required will be mainly foodstuffs, raw materials, and equipment for the reconstruction and rehabilitation of transportation and communication systems. These loans may in a very real sense be called reconstruction loans. We in Canada have a very real interest in the reconstruction efforts of our war-time allies, not alone on business, but also on humanitarian grounds. Only as the economic wounds of war are healed shall we return gradually to a healthy world, the life-blood of which, as Canadians are among the first to realize, is a strong and vigorous international trade.


Mr. BRACKEN:: I understand from the
statement just made by the minister that the total credits allowed under this legislation have been exhausted, provision having been made for amounts up to $100 million. The minister advises that later he will be asking for authority to advance further credits.


James Angus MacKinnon: The Minister of Finance will.


John Bracken: Can either minister say
to-day what the total amount of those credits to be asked for will be?


Mr. ILSLEY:: No, I am sorry; I cannot
give a figure to-day.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. PEARKES:: 1.	How many men of the Canadian forestry corps are still in the army in Canada?
2.	On what work are the men of this corps, stationed at or near Lachute, employed,?
3.	On whose property are they working?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	276 all ranks. (This does not include forestry personnel returned from overseas and presently on strength of district depots.)
2.	Constructing camps and cutting fuel wood.
3.	A. D. McGibbon & Sons Ltd., and C. G. Turner, Esq.

Questions


WHITEHORSE, YUKON, FEDERAL BUILDING
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: What steps have been taken by the government to erect an appropriate federal building at Whitehorse, Yukon?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: On September 14, 1945, a report was -received from the district resident architect at Victoria, B.C., in which he stated that the public building at Whitehorse was far too small and congested for the proper carrying out of the work of the Post Office Department, and recommended that a new public building be erected to take care of the Post Office Department, National Revenue Department (customs division), court house, unemployment insurance commission, R.C.M.Police, and other dominion government departments in that district.
In view of the above the different departments interested have been contacted, with a view to obtaining' their combined requirements. When same are received plans and estimates will be prepared for a public building to house the various services. After the preparation of the plans these will be submitted through regular channels for authorization.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. COLDWELL:: 1.	Are there any patents owned by German, Japanese or Italian nationals or corporations in the possession or control of the custodian of enemy property, or any department of the government?
2.	If so, how many from each enemy country?
3.	Are any of such patents being used by government agencies or Canadian industries?
4.	If so, are any royalties payable for the use of such patents, and by whom?
5.	W'hat amounts have been paid or are payable to the custodian of enemy property on enemy controlled patents?
6.	What steps have been taken by the government regarding, (a) the disposition of such patents when peace is declared; (b) the disposition of the royalties?


Mr. MARTIN:: Return, tabled.


TRIAL OF PERCY SULLIVAN, R.C.N.V.R.
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: 1.	What naval officer appeared on behalf of Percy Sullivan, V. 16947, R.C.N.V.R., at his trial in Halifax?
2.	Was counsel provided for this man's *defence?
3.	Did the naval representative present any *evidence on behalf of this sailor?
4.	What opportunity for obtaining naval counsel for appeal exists for this sailor in case he has not sufficient funds to pay for civilian counsel ?
5.	What steps have been taken by the government to obtain remission of sentence?


CANADIAN FLAG
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	Are the arms of the Dominion of Canada in the fly of the Canadian red ensign?
2.	If so, what are they?
3.	If not, why?
4.	Are the badges of the nine provinces on the fly of the flag that is flown over the peace tower of the parliament buildings?
5.	If so, what are they?
6.	If not, why?
7.	What is the description of the Canadian red ensign referred to in R.O. of May 10, 1944?
8.	When, how and by whom was it approved?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.


Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	Referring to'the Canadian blue ensign with . the badges of the four mother provinces, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick in the fly and approved by dispatches from the Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated 16th December, 1865, and 16th July, 1870, for Canadian.'government vessels, (a) was that flag ever changed; (b) if so, when, how and by whom?
2.	Referring to the flag of the Canadian mercantile marine, as authorized by admiralty warrant dated 2nd February, 1892, "to be used on board vessels registered in the dominion," and with the badges of the aforesaid provinces in the fly, (a) was that flag ever changed; (b) if so, when, how and by whom; (c) what is it now?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Return tabled.


STRIKE OF STEVEDORES IN GREAT BRITAIN
Mr. POULIOT:: 1.	Referring to the month-old stevedores'
strike in the United Kingdom, what quantity of perishable food, (a) arrived in the ports of the United Kingdom and was not unloaded on account of that strike; (b) was shipped from Canada to the United Kingdom during the said strike?	-
2.	(a) What was it; (b) for what countries?
3.	Was the shipment of perishable goods to other European countries handicapped by the said strike?
4.	If so, (a) how; (b) to what extent?


CIVIL SERVICE-APPOINTMENTS IN LAST SIX MONTHS
Mr. DROPE:: 1.	How many civil servants have been appointed in the last six months by the federal government?
2.	How many were ex-service men or women?
Questions

PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE-4*1-8 BUSHEL TOWNSHIPS
Mr. ROSS (Souris)-*
1.	HHow many farmers in the 4*1-8 bushel townships or part townships who received prairie farm assistance for the 1944-45 crop year had wheat yields of, (a) 8 bushels per acre or less; (b) more than 8 bushels per acre?
2.	What was the total amount of assistance paid to farmers in each of the above yield categories (a) and (b) ?
3.	In how many townships or part townships in the crop year 1944-45 with final average yields of over 8 bushels per acre, and declared ineligible, did the prairie farm assistance administration collect yield data from individual farmers?
4.	In the above townships or part townships (3), how many farmers had yields of 8 bushels per acre or less and did not receive prairie farm assistance?
5.	From the 1939 crop to the 1944 crop-how many farmers have received assistance under the act for the following number of times: once, twice, three times, four times, five times?
6.	From the crop of 1939 to the crop of 1944-how many townships or part townships were eligible for assistance the following number of times: once, twice, three times, four times, five times?



PROPERTIES LENT TO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DURING THE WAR

Mr. CHURCH:: What properties were loaned to the government during the recent war by the city of Toronto; where are they located, and when will they be returned to the city?



TORONTO EXHIBITION GROUNDS

Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What steps are being taken by the government to return the Canadian exhibition grounds and buildings to the city of Toronto?
2.	Has the government or any department thereof had any correspondence with the city of Toronto regarding this matter?
3.	What residential properties in the city )f Toronto were taken over for the forces during the war; are they still occupied? If so, by whom and for what purpose?
4.	What sums have been spent during the war on any of these properties; under whose supervision was the money spent, and for what purpose?
5.	Has the city of Toronto asked for the use ol any of these properties in connection with emergency housing? If so, what properties?



NINTH VICTORY LOAN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ALAN COCKERAM (York South):: Before the orders of the day are called I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. I hold in my hand a very 
elaborate poster which was issued by the ninth victory loan committee, and on this poster appears the following:
The government of the Dominion of Canada forever has gone too far to be of any good, because they are no good and are not sincere.
1.	My question is:	Who authorized the
poster in the present form?
2.	How many of those posters were printed at the expense of the treasury, and at what cost?
3.	Have they been recalled?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: That is a rather lengthy question, and I think the hon: gentleman should put it on the order paper.


Alan Cockeram: With all due deference I do not agree with you, sir, and I must appeal from your ruling. This is a matter of great urgency.


James Horace King: Those in favour of the ruling of the Speaker being sustained, will please say yea.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Yea.


James Horace King: Those opposed to the ruling of the Speaker being sustained, will please say nay.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Nay.


James Horace King: In my opinion the yeas have it.


Alan Cockeram: Mr. Speaker-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Alan Cockeram: -I call for a recorded vote.


James Horace King: The hon. member must resume his seat. I have given my ruling, which has been sustained by the house.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for York South has raised a question which in accordance with Your Honour's ruling should be placed on the order paper, and which I am not in a position to answer. At the same time I think I should make some reference to the poster to which the hon. member referred.
That poster unfortunately does contain on the facsimile reproduction of the bond which appears on it some almost indecipherable scribbling, which to say the least, does not reflect favourably on the government of the day. I very much doubt whether the translation of those hieroglyphics which- the hon. member gave to the house to-day is the correct one. Certainly he has been able to

Housing
read something into it that I have not been able to read, although I have examined the poster very carefully.
The poster got by officials of the national war finance committee organization. It got by because it is not usual, I suppose, to scrutinize with great care details of that kind in a poster. It was brought to my attention a week ago Saturday. I made inquiries about it and found that instructions had been given to recall the poster, but it was too late to do that, and the poster has appeared in various parts of Canada, although in some parts it has been entirely recalled. An attempt is being made to ascertain who was responsiblei in the beginning for this attempt, either facetious or malicious, to mar a poster to be used in a good cause.
I think I should say that the national war finance committee officials and possibly I myself should take the responsibility for that poster being issued. It is a most unfortunate incident, but I do not think it is doing any harm, really, although it does, as I say, reflect unfavourably on the government.


Mr. HOMUTH:: Of course that does not
matter.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not think it is being
taken seriously by a single Canadian.


Alan Cockeram: I have a further question in that respect to ask the Minister of Finance. I believe that this poster won the competition for posters which were submitted in connection with this war loan.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: It is the one we
used in Nova Scotia.


James Lorimer Ilsley: The poster won an army
competition, and was originally designed for use among the armed forces alone. But when the Japanese war ended, and so. many posters had to be scrapped, and plans changed, the national war finance committee set about getting the best posters they could, and they usedi this poster which had won the army competition.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):: Before the orders of the day are called I should like to1 direct a question to the leader of the government regarding the motion to appoint a select committee to inquire into the activities of the War Assets Corporation and war expenditures. This motion is not 47696-94
being moved and the session is going on. Why it is not being proceeded with, and has the government all the nominations from the different parties in the house to enable it to appoint the committee?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether we have all the nominations or not. The only reason the motion is not being proceeded with is that there always seems to be something more urgent to come before the house. We were being asked by the opposition the other day to get ahead with the war appropriation, but it is well known that if the motion to set up this committee were moved there would be very considerable debate upon it.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not think so.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I feel sure there would be.
It is like some other resolutions that we would like to move and get through in one day if we could, but always something more urgent seems to come up. We will get to this motion just as soon as we can.


Major James William Coldwell: It is an important
motion.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I think it is too, and there
are others.


Mr. GRAYDON:: It is important that the committee should meet in the open.


Major James William Coldwell: That is agreed, is it
not?


Gordon Graydon: The government will
not give that undertaking-I am sure they won't.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Munitions and Supply, notice of which I sent to him earlier to-day. In view of the fact that a large number of the Ford employees at Windsor live in houses built by Wartime Housing Limited, will the minister see that all necessary steps are taken to prevent the ejection of any of these workers from their homes in case they are unable to pay their rent while the present strike is in progress?


Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):: Mr. Speaker, Wartime Housing is in my opinion a model landlord, with an excellent record. It has not been its practice to eject tenants for temporary lapse

Canadian Armed Forces.

in the payment of rent. While I can make no commitments on the subject, I have heard no complaints from Windsor.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I would call the attention of the minister to the fact that some of these employees are now receiving notice to vacate, and they are beginning to fear that ejection may be the next step.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. R. KNIGHT (Saskatoon City):: I should like to address a question to the Postmaster General. Has the minister been notified by the president of the Saskatchewan committee for war relief that people of Scandinavian origin are greatly concerned because the post office department cannot accept parcels for transmission to Norway, where many of them have relatives and friends? As the deadline date for the sending of such parcels has been announced, can the minister assure the house that something will be done at once about the situation?


James Horace King: Order. The hon. member knows when a member asks a question on the orders of the day it should be brief and to the point. He is not allowed to make a statement.



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. ROSS THATCHER (Moose Jaw):: I would like to direct a question to the Minister for Air. In view of the urgency of repatriating personnel of Canada's armed forces still overseas, will the minister tell the house what consideration has been given to the using of R.C.A.F. bombers and other large aircraft for this purpose?


Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Minister of National Defence for Air):: Mr. Speaker, the hon.
member was good enough to send me notice of his question. The suggestion was first made by the Minister of National Defence, General McNaughton, shortly after V-E day, and it was fully considered by the R.C.A.F. at that time, but it was not recommended. There were several factors to be considered, one of them being that the Lancaster plane, which is available, is notoriously ill-equipped with deicing equipment, and icing conditions are very bad over the Atlantic in the latter part of the

year. In any large scale operation it is considered that some losses are inevitable, and it was felt that the risk involved was out of all proportion to the benefits to be gained.



ADDRESS OF JACQUES GREBER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Alexander Bruce: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. Would he consider having published in Hansard a copy of the interesting and informative address given by Mr. Jacques Greber in the railway committee room this morning? I am sure it would be of great interest to the members of the house as well as to the general public.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not think it would be in order to have a speech made outside this chamber published in Hansard. I may have copies of the speech printed and distributed to* members of the house if that is agreeable to hon. members.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Does the minister say
that he may or will?


Alphonse Fournier: I will have it
printed and distributed.


Herbert Alexander Bruce: That will be quite satisfactory.



P.C. 6238-EFFECT ON PRODUCER OF HIGH-GRADE MALTING BARLEY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: I have a question to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Having regard to the urgency caused by the heavy shipment of barley from western points to Winnipeg, and to order in council P.C. 6238, passed on September 25, which penalizes the producer of high quality malting barley, will the minister inform this house what action is being taken to rectify this injustice?


James Horace King: Order. This is a question which should be put on the order paper.



NATIONAL HOUSING ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to present a measure to incorporate the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for the purpose of (a)

Housing Act
acting in the place of the Minister of Finance in the operation of the National Housing Act, 1944, and (b) providing discounting facilities for loan and mortgage companies; to provide for the appointment and salaries of the officers and staff of the corporation and the appointment and fees of the directors; to authorize the payment out of the consolidated revenue fund of sums not exceeding twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) for the provision of paid-up capital for the corporation; to make available for the housing functions of the corporation moneys appropriated under the National Housing Act, 1944; and to make provisions with respect to the functions and powers of the corporation.
He said: Mr. Speaker, as stated in the resolution, the purpose of this legislation is to create a Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation which will, first, act in place of, or on behalf of the Minister of Finance in the operation of the National Housing Act; second, provide discounting facilities for the loan and mortgage companies.
To illustrate the reasons for the proposed change in the form of administration of the housing act, let me summarize briefly the kind of operations authorized by the act. First, the government is authorized to make loans for house construction purposes. Some of these are joint loans (the government's share being 25 per cent) made through private lending institutions. Some are direct government advances up to 90 per cent of the value of a low rental project. All are secured by mortgage. Second, the government is authorized to take a share of losses incurred on joint housing loans and to provide minimum guarantees to life insurance companies on housing investments approved by the minister. A third type of operation is the authority to enter into contracts for the production of new types of building materials and components. Then there are the grants for slum clearance purposes. Finally, there is authority to engage in a wide variety of promotional and research activities associated with housing, community planning, et cetera.
It will be noted that apart from promotion and research, these operations are of a commercial or quasi-commercial character. Under the National Housing Act, the government is in business

principally in the business of lending money on long term for the construction of houses. Bargaining and negotiation are involved. Risks have to be appraised.
* Questions of litigation arise from time to time. If sound investments are to be made, those responsible for the administration of the act require a background of commercial knowledge and an intimate day by day contact with development in mortgage lending throughout 47696-94i
the country. Quite obviously a minister of the crown cannot carry on the administration personally, yet the National Housing Act requires the Minister of Finance to make every important decision and to sign his name to innumerable assignments, releases and other documents relating to the mortgaged properties.
During war years, when housing activity was limited, there was no particular occasion for making a change in the form of administration, but with the end of the war and the coming into effect of the far-reaching 1944 legislation the advantages of transferring administrative responsibility from the minister to a government-owned corporation are becoming more evident. The government has therefore decided to recommend that the pattern laid down for the administration of its other lending activities through such corporations as the Canadian farm loan board, the Bank of Canada and the industrial development bank, be followed in the case of housing finance. As I shall outline later, Canada is just at the beginning of a very large, possibly an unprecedentedly large, housing programme. To deal with the greatly increased volume of housing loans and to carry out the other purposes of the housing legislation, it would have been necessary in any case greatly to enlarge the housing administration. The present time is therefore a unique occasion on which to give the administration the form which will enable it to carry out its functions most effectively.
In general, and I think rightly so, parliament has been reluctant to transfer authority from a responsible minister to a corporation, but in this case the National Housing Act lays down clearly the limits within which the administration may act and requires the approval of the governor in council on the most important matters of general policy. It will also be provided in the bill that the governor in council shall approve the by-laws of the corporation.
The corporation will take over the administration of the housing act in full except for one item, namely, grants for slum clearance. In this case, since it is a grant and not an investment, the corporation will do the preliminary work of investigation, but the Minister of Finance, with the approval of the governor in council, will retain authority to make grants directly out of the housing act appropriation.
Rediscounting facilities. The second function of the proposed corporation is to provide a supplementary source of credit for the loan and trust companies to which they can turn in time of need. In some respects, therefore,
Housing Act
[Stage Direction]
the corporation will provide for these lending institutions the kind of rediscount facilities made available by a central bank for the ordinary commercial banks. Because the trust and loan companies are for the most part in a highly liquid position, these facilities may not be extensively used in the immediate future, but the knowledge that they are available will give the private institutions confidence and thus enable them to meet more effectively the borrowing needs of the public. In establishing these mortgage discounting facilities now, the government has in mind particularly the desirability of maintaining an adequate flow of mortgage loans in all parts of the country and of working steadily in the' direction of lower rates and more suitable terms on all kinds of mortgage lending, both rural and urban.
It will be apparent from this brief description that the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will revive some of the functions of the central mortgage bank which, because of the war, remained dormant and will now be dissolved. In many respects, however, the facilities are on a simpler basis, the highly unsound and top heavy situation in farm mortgages which was the immediate occasion for the formation of the central mortgage bank in 1939 having been largely corrected during the intervening six years of rising farm incomes. The corporation will be empowered to buy mortgages from the lending companies and to resell them; to lend to loan and trust companies on the security of mortgages and to buy their debentures.
The capital of the corporation has been fixed at $25 million, subscribed by the Minister of Finance. About $12 million will be invested in joint housing loans now outstanding in the name of the Minister of Finance. As supplementary funds are required they will be advanced by the minister out of funds appropriated by the National Housing acts at suitable rates of interest, the intention being that there should be a margin between the rates charged by the minister and the rates charged by the corporation sufficient to cover operating expenses.
Since the corporation acts in place of the Minister of Finance uqder the National Housing Act, losses on housing loans or under any guarantee or contract will be met out of moneys appropriated under the act, leaving operating expenses and any losses in connection with the mortgage discounting business to be met by the corporation out of its own earnings. The profits of the corporation after

the establishment of a reserve fund of $5 million will be paid over annually to the Receiver General.
The success of the corporation, both in administering the National Housing Act and as a supplementary source of credit for lending institutions, will depend in large part upon having access to sound advice from all parts of the country. It is therefore, proposed that the board of directors should include five directors, one from, each of the main regions of Canada, in addition to the two executive officers, and directors representing the departments of Finance and Reconstruction and the Bank of Canada.
These are the general principles of the legislation which this resolution seeks to introduce. At a later stage when the bill, has been read, there will be an opportunity to deal with the provisions in detail.
Since the two resolutions on the order paper relate to the only housing legislation which the government intends to introduce during the present session, I think that I should at this time, in view of the very great interest in the subject both within this house and in the country at large, make a few general observations on the housing problem and on the measures which the government is taking to deal with it.
May I say at the outset that in my view, and in the view of the government as a whole, there is no problem before the country to-day more important than the provision of additional housing accommodation, particularly for those who have served with the armed forces and who are now returning to civilian life. Nor, may I add, is there any problem w'hich presents so many practical difficulties in reaching a speedy and satisfactory solution.
In this Canada is not alone. Fortunately we have been spared the destruction wrought by enemy bombs and shellfire. But in countries as immune from enemy attack as the United States and' Australia, to mention only two, are to be found much the same conditions of over-crowding and congestion, much the same shortages of labour and building materials, much the same symptoms of high construction costs, as we in Canada are struggling to cope with at the present time. I venture to say that in all countries that have taken an active part in the war will be found a greater or less degree of housing shortage and for very much the same reasons. I venture to say alar>
that no government in this or any other major belligerent country, no matter what preparations it had made in advance, could have come out of the war with sufficient accommodation to house its population in a satisfactory manner.

Housing Act
I say this to suggest that the problem should be viewed in its proper perspective as, in a very large degree at least, an inevitable consequence of the fact that for nearly six years we, like other belligerents, had to put other and more vital considerations ahead of the provision of housing.
It should be recognized, too, that the end of the war, though it released men and materials for house building, actually intensified rather than relieved the'congestion, for it meant the early return to civilian life of hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, and airmen, many of whom had married wdiile overseas, intended to get married immediately or were returning to their wives and families. To illustrate the impact of demobilization on the available supply of housing, I may say in this connection that, on the basis of recent confidential surveys by the Department of National Defence, a very substantial proportion, around 40 per cent, of the married army personnel are likely to be seeking separate accommodation for their families.
. Well in advance of VE-day the government made preparatipns to speed the construction of houses. As my colleague, the Minister of Reconstruction, indicated the other day, a surprisingly large number of houses had been built during each of the years 1943 and 1944, probably more than in any of the previous thirteen or fourteen years. But it was expedient to set our sights high and the goal was fixed in the first instance at 35,000 new dwelling units for the calendar year 1945 and then at 50,000 for the first full construction year following VE-day, almost as many as had been built in any previous year in Canada.
This goal of 50.000 new dwelling units was fixed not by reference to the number of new dwellings required-from that point of view it was far short of the mark-but rather in terms of the probable supply of materials and labour over the twelve month period. It was estimated that, with the necessary cooperation from labour and industry, it would be possible to get sufficient material and labour for 50,000 houses within that period.
There is reason to believe that this goal will be substantially attained. From the evidence now available it is clear that a large house-building programme is under way. For example, in the Toronto area nearly 2,500 dwelling units were in course of construction when the labour department made its survey in midsummer. To give a few other examples: In the Montreal area over 3,200 dwelling units were under way, in the Vancouver area over 2,200 and in the Edmonton
area over 1,300. These were the numbers in course of construction at the time of the survey. Many more had been completed before the survey began and others were started after the survey was completed.
We hear many complaints these days about the difficulties being experienced by builders in obtaining certain scarce materials. I do not doubt for a moment that these complaints are in many instances well founded. But the basic reason is not that the production of building materials is at a low level. Output of most of the principal items considerably exceeds pre-war levels. Rather the difficulties stem from the fact, which I have already mentioned, that the demand for houses far exceeds even the increased supply of building materials. Since early summer the interdepartmental housing committee, which coordinates the activities of the various departments concerned with housing, has had the building materials situation under close review, and I have with me a few figures prepared by the wartime prices and trade board on present and projected production of certain relatively scarce items which indicate the steady improvement in output now taking place. Here are a few of the items that have been difficult to obtain. Output of bathtubs will probably be 12,000 units in the final quarter of 1945 and 14,000 in the first quarter of 1946; lavatories, 16,500 in the final quarter of 1945 and 18,000 in the first quarter of 1946; soil pipe and fittings, 5,700 tons in the last quarter of 1945 and 6,100 tons in the first quarter of 1946; furnaces, 22,000 in each quarter. Mineral surface shingles show a projected increase of over 10 per cent in the first quarter of 1946 as compared with the final quarter of 1945; insulated siding 16 per cent; panel wall board over 10 per cent; plaster base wall board 12 per cent; gyproc board and lath about 30 per cent., and rock wool over 30 per cent.
The lumber situation is very much improved because of cutbacks in war orders, though dry lumber and millwork may still be relatively scarce temporarily. Brick is one of the really difficult items because of labour shortage, but output is rising.
To illustrate the point that we in Canada are not alone in our troubles about building rfiaterials, I have here some figures on the supply of, and demand for, soil pipe in the United States. They show that, whereas the output of soil pipe has been fairly well maintained during the past twelve months, unfilled orders have more than doubled, increasing from 48 thousand short tons in June of 1944 to 165 thousand short tons in June of 1945.
Housing Act
[Stage Direction]
While I am on this subject, I should perhaps say a word or two about the specific complaints that government house building agencies, namely, Wartime Housing Limited and the veterans' land administration, are robbing private builders of supplies. Again I think that there is need for maintaining a proper sense of perspective. As I have said, the objective of a 50,000 house programme in the year following VE-day will probably be attained. How much of this will be built by government agencies cannot be exactly forecast, but the immediate objective of the veterans' land administration is 3,000. houses while about 7,300 houses have been approved under the Wartime Housing programme, most of them since July. In other words, these'government agencies require only a relatively small fraction of the supplies available during the present year, though the impact of their demand has been more or less concentrated in the later part of the building season and this is causing immediate difficulties in some lines.
Occasionally there are allegations that Wartime Housing is stock-piling scarce materials in anticipation of requirements, thus interfering with -the completion of private projects. As my colleague, the Minister of Reconstruction (Mr. Howe) pointed out the other day, whenever such complaints are received they are investigated by officials on the spot. So far no evidence has been found to support them.
Reasons for wartime housing. One thing has been abundantly clear during these past uew months and that is that, for the time oeing at least, private individuals and corporations are willing and anxious to build at least the 50,000 houses for which materials and labour will be available. The limitations on the housing building programme are physical rather than financial. Why, then, it may be asked, has the government considered it necessary to engage in building through Wartime Housing and the veterans' land administration? I do not think I need plead the case for veterans' homes on small holdings under the Veterans' Land Act. This was part of the parliament's rehabilitation programme for veterans and had to be got underway without delay.
As to wartime housing, the considerations were of a different order. The government does not, in general, believe that public housing with dominion ownership represents a sound approach in a country of divided1 jurisdiction in which property and civil rights are the unquestioned field of the provinces under peace-time conditions. Nevertheless, the dom- ,
[Mr. Ilsley.)
inion had, during war time, built some 18,000 houses for war workers, and when certain municipalities requested additional houses for rent to returning veterans and were willing to provide the land without cost and to agree to relatively low payments in lieu of taxes, the government offered to extend its war-time programme, which has been the means of providing decent accommodation at modest rentals for returning servicemen, a need which is urgent and which is not being adequately met otherwise.
This need for rental accommodation for veterans is one of the chief reasons why the government encouraged and made it possible for life insurance companies to get into the rental field immediately. When the National Housing Act amendments are under discussion, I shall explain the technicalities of the various clauses but perhaps it would be useful for me to give a general outline of the problems that arose and that led the government to bring these changes into effect by order in council under the War Measures Act. Hon. members may recall that there are two sections of the act dealing with low rental housing projects. Under section 9, the government is authorized to advance ninety per cent of the lending value of a low rental housing project to a limited dividend housing corporation. The limit on dividends, it wall be recalled, is 5 per, cent. Under section 11, parliament authorized Canadian life insurance companies under dominion jurisdiction to invest up to 5 per cent of their Canadian assets in low or moderate rental housing projects, and guaranteed a net return of 2J per cent per annum on such investments.
Early this summer, when the end of the war with Germany had made it possible to direct more of the country's resources of men and material into housing, conversations were held with officials of the principal life insurance companies in Canada, with a view to ascertaining whether they would be prepared to take advantage of the facilities of the act by embarking at an early date upon a large scale rental housing programme for which there was, and still is, a very great need. The response was favourable though the companies, naturally enough, pointed out that they would prefer to make their major housing investments in the moderate rental field and during periods when building costs were relatively low. It was suggested, however, that in the ordinary course of events it would be desirable if the companies could conduct their operations under section 11 through the medium of subsidiary corporations, and that, if such permission were granted, it would be possible for them to spread the dollars which they were prepared to invest at once over several times

Housing Act
as many houses, by confining themselves for the time being to the low rental field in such a way that their subsidiary corporations would qualify as limited dividend housing corporations thereby becoming eligible for the ninety per cent government advance under section 9.
While a method of operation of this kind had not been anticipated when the act was drafted, it did not appear to do violence to the principles of either section 9 or section 11 of the act. On the one hand, parliament had decided, in order to give a reasonable degree of security to the investment of policyholders' funds, to provide a minimum guarantee of 2| per cent. On the other hand, there seemed to be no reason why a limited dividend corporation owned by a life insurance company should not be eligible for the ninety per cent advance.
Incidentally, one advantage of this type of operation under both sections 9 and 11 of the act is that it will probably result in somewhat lower rentals than if the companies financed the full cost of the project out of their own resources. This follows the fact that a limited dividend corporation is limited to a five per cent dividend on its equity of around ten per cent of the cost, the remainder, financed by the government advance, bearing interest at only three per cent; whereas if the whole of the cost were financed by the companies, the act contemplates that rentals would be fixed at a level sufficient to result in overall earnings of around five per cent.
Moreover, it is well to bear in mind that section 11 limits life insurance company investment in housing projects to five per cent of their assets in Canada, namely an amount of roughly $125 million for all the life insurance companies combined. If the companies were to appropriate a substantial portion of this limited amount during the present period, it would have the effect of circumscribing their operations severely in the years to come and at times when it might be most beneficial to the economy that large scale investments of this kind should be underway. In other words, the forthcoming programme of the life companies may be looked upon as in the nature of an experiment undertaken in a time of emergency which will be of great value in facilitating their own normal operations under section 11 of the act, and will also furnish much needed information in different parts of the country in respect of operations by limited dividend housing corporations under section 9 of the act. I should make it clear that in the contract with these companies there will be a provision that ex-servicemen be given preference as occupants of the projects during the period of shortage.
May I now say a word or two about operations under the National Housing Act. The first point to be noted is that the volume of loans under part I, that is the part of the act dealing with loans for individual house construction, has risen very sharply since the 1944 act came into effect in January of this year, and, although they relate to only a comparatively small fraction of current house building, I think that the act is fulfilling its function in this field and will play an increasingly important role in the months to come. Incidentally, one of the chief purposes of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will be to make the advantages of the National Housing Act more widely available throughout the country. On the other hand, apart from the projected emergency operations of the life insurance companies, no loans have been made under those sections of the act relating to low rental projects and no grants have been made for slum clearance. From this the inference might be drawn that these sections of the act have proved to be ineffective and should be recast. I do not want to suggest that the Government would not be prepared at an appropriate time, on the basis of continuing experience, to consider amendments. But it should be borne in mind that one of the chief purposes of these provisions is to stimulate large scale housing operations and that such stimulus is hardly necessary at the present time. As I said earlier, the limitations on house construction at the moment are physical, not financial. The real test of the legislation will come when the present acute congestion begins to disappear, and it becomes feasible to undertake those projects for the improvement of the housing conditions of the lower income groups of the population (involving the replacement of existing buildings), which are so evidently needed.
While this is so, the government is actively interested in the use of all the facilities provided for by the act for increasing the limited supply of modest rental accommodation.
The government's activities in the field of housing have been many-sided and I cannot, in a statement like this, pretend to deal adequately with all phases of it. Control of rentals has been an essential element in the stabilization programme, contributing more probably than any other single control to keeping down the cost of living for tenant families. Some have suggested that we should have gone further and attempted to give the purchaser as well as the tenant of a house protection against rising prices. This was examined most carefully on several occasions, but the conclusion was reached that control on real property values was imprac-
Housing Act
[Stage Direction]
tical, though the door has never been definitely closed against some sort of action. I would direct the attention of those hon. members who are interested to the reference book on economic controls prepared for the dominion-provincial conference which contains a section dealing with the problem. I might mention a few of the more obvious difficulties:
1.	Serious discrimination would be involved unless all other forms of capital assets such as the prices of stocks and bonds, were brought under control. House owners would have genuine reason for complaint if house values were controlled while other forms of investment-including for example the prices of farm lands-were not similarly regulated.
2.	It would be extraordinarily difficult to find a suitable yardstick for control. Basic period values are not available generally since only a very small fraction of existing houses is sold in any one year. Local assessments have been investigated but show too much variation as between municipalities to be reliable. Special valuations of each house would take a veritable army of assessors.
The United Kingdom government which, like the United States government, has never attempted to control property values, recently appointed a commission to investigate the problem, and its findings, while not passing judgment on the expediency of introducing controls, confirm our own views as to the difficulty of the task from an administrative standpoint. As I have said, however, it may, in spite of the administrative difficulties, be necessary to institute some form of control.
I should mention, however, that we are now experimenting with a method of getting some control over the prices of some of the new houses by offering to enter into an agreement with builders to take any unsold houses off their hands at a predetermined price, based on estimated costs, if they will undertake to build a substantial group of relatively modest houses approved by the national housing administration, limit their profits on each house and give preference to veterans. This is to be done under the War Measures Act and if it proves to be effective, a suitable amendment to the housing act will be proposed at the next session of parliament.
Closely associated with rental control are the measures taken to protect well-behaved tenants against eviction. These were adopted late in the war and only when it was clear that the situation demanded such a drastic interference with ordinary property rights. It should be possible to restore these rights before long, but under present circumstances we

believe that the action taken was necessary and has helped to stabilize the situation pending relief from the prevailing congestion. I have heard it suggested that both rental and eviction control are hampering house construction, but the fact that all the materials and labour available for building purposes are being used for that purpose indicates that this is not, for the present at least, a significant factor.
To assist municipalities in coping *with their shelter problems by making the most effective use of available unoccupied houses and other suitable buildings, the wartime prices and trade board has had a system of emergency shelter administrators in effect for some time and has recently extended the system to cover the entire country. These administrators have an unenviable and often thankless task, but I have seen enough of their work to know that they are making a real contribution by assisting local bodies in finding accommodation for some of the most urgent cases. As a further contribution the government Is putting buildings which are surplus to war requirements at the disposal of the municipalities and provinces, either at a fraction of their original cost or on a lease basis.
This has been a long statement and I shall say just one word in conclusion. There can be no doubt in anyone's mind, least of all in the minds of those of us who carry the burden of administration, that the shortage of housing is acute and that with the imminent return of further thousands of our men from overseas the situation may well get rvorse before it gets better. This is the situation which we face even though there have been very few periods when so many houses were building as during this first postwar year. But we know that if houses are built at least as quickly as at present-and there is reason to believe that the rate will continue to accelerate for some time-the situation should, after a time, become progressively easier. For its part, the government is determined that it will do all within its powers to assist and to carry into full effect its plans for the better housing of the Canadian people.
Mr. DONALD M. FLEMING (Eglinton): Mr. Speaker, in what I have to say to-day I do not propose to anticipate the provisions of the bill which the Minister of Finance will ask leave of the house to introduce. Of that bill I will say this: We will reserve our judgment upon it, and most of our comment. We will scrutinize it carefully. If it promises improvement in the present unhappy situation,

Housing Act
then, so far as we can we will give it encouragement. To the extent that it does not guarantee some improvement in present conditions, we will criticize it.
We are dealing with a proposal to introduce certain amendments to the National Housing Act. The resolution apparently will also affect other legislation, namely that of 1939 providing for the establishment of a central mortgage discount, bank. In what I have to say to-day I shall try to confine myself largely to the National Housing Act, and, in the light of the statement the minister has just read, to offer some comment upon the form of administration that has been given to that measure.
The National Housing Act is divided into five parts. Part I has to do with encouragement to home ownership. It was designed. to make available substantial loans to those wishing to build houses for their own occupation.
Part II is designed to assist in the creation of rental accommodation, and some terms of that part hold out some hope of assistance in respect of low rental accommodation.
Part III of the act has to do with improvements in rural housing.
Part IV has to do with home improvement and home extension loans.
Part V makes provision for research in the matter of housing and community planning.
The measure was introduced with some fanfare on the part of the government in the session of 1944, and received the royal assent on August 15 of that year, nearly fifteen months ago. It was not proclaimed for five months.
That is the first point, Mr. Speaker. The government waited five months after this statute had received royal assent before it . proclaimed it; and then it did not proclaim the whole act. Part IV of the act has never been brought into effect by proclamation. The concluding section of the statute provides that the various parts shall come into effect by proclamation, and part IV, to which I have referred, has never been brought into operation.
It would be well for us to observe the results of this statute, particularly in the light of the rosy promises that were made and the hopes held out for it by the government at the time of the introduction of the measure. The picture presented to us to-day in the minister's statement might almost be described as a rosy picture. But let- us examine in some detail just what has been accomplished under the administration given
to this measure by the government through the department of the minister who has just delivered the statement. I want to refer particularly to sessional paper 36C tabled in the house on October 10 in reply to certain questions which I had placed upon the order paper. Question 3 was:
What is the total number of houses for which loans have been authorized under part I.
Those were houses to be occupied by owners, and the number given was 3,708. That was the total of the assistance given toward the construction of houses to be occupied by owners from the date this act came into effect until the date of the return. Question 4 was:
How many of such houses have been completed and are now occupied?
The answer was that that information is not in the official government record. In other words, all that has been accomplished, so far as the government's records indicate, is that 3,708 loans have been authorized. There is no information whatever as to the number of houses constructed, or as to the number on which construction has been begun. When we hear rosy statements such as we heard this afternoon, and such as we heard from the Minister of Reconstruction (Mr. Howe) some weeks ago about 50,000 houses being constructed or under construction within the year, it would be interesting to know what small part of that represents houses constructed and what large part represents houses under construction which may not be completed for goodness knows how long, or houses for which loans have been authorized but on which construction has not yet begun. What did this all add up to? Question 5 was:
What is the total amount of the loans authorized under part I?
The answer given was $14,142,185. That was the total amount provided in the entire period during which this statute has been in effect under the present administration in connection with the construction of houses to be occupied by owners.
Let us turn to part II of this act and see just how effective this measure has been in the hands of the present administration in providing for a need that is very sore indeed in the Dominion of Canada, the provision of housing to be occupied by tenants. Question 8 was:
What is the total number of rental housing projects for which loans have been authorized under part II?
The answer was 83 loans for 426 units. A total of 426 housing units for the assistance of people who cannot find homes to rent. That is all the assistance given during the entire period
Housing Act
[Stage Direction]
this act has been in effect. Does that sound like very energetic administration of this act?' I leave it to the house to judge. Then No. 9:
How many of such rental housing projects are low rental housing projects?
The answer was "none." That is the measure of assistance which has been provided to those who ar'e in need of housing accommodation among people in the lowest income brackets. Is it any wonder amendments are overdue? Then I asked another question:
10. How many of such rental housing projects have been completed and are now occupied . . .
That is, how many of those 426 units. I was told that that information was not part of the official government record. Apparently the government does not keep a record of the completion of houses or the construction of houses once the loans are authorized under any part of the act; consequently they cannot give us figures except for the number of loans authorized. Of course if they can put before the house figures that indicate the number of loans authorized, perhaps it would be a matter of inference on the part of some that that represented houses constructed. The fact is that the figures do not mean anything of the kind; they simply represent bookkeeping entries in the Department of Finance.
Let us try to reduce the accomplishments under part II to dollars and cents. Question 11 was:
What is the total amount of the loans authorized under part II?
The answer given was $1,567,040. When the measure was introduced in the 1944 session, part II was said to ' be an essential feature designed to give assistance to people who were badly in need of rental housing accommodation. Yet the government has allotted only a million and a half dollars for this purpose. Section 13 of the act provides that the minister may make loans and payments under Part II not exceeding in the aggregate $50,000,000 out of the consolidated revenue fund. The act provided for $50,000,000, but in the time that the measure has been in effect only one and a half millions have been allotted by the government. Does that sound like very energetic application of this act to meet a known need? I leave it to the house to judge.
In his statement this afternoon the minister outlined the government's legislative programme with reference to housing, and we . are to be asked to increase the provisions of section 13 to a total of $125,000,000. As a parliament we are to be asked to increase the amounts that can be provided under that section from $50,000,000 to $125,000,000. Let us measure that in relation to the use the 
government has made of the $50,000,000 it was authorized to use. It has used a million and a half dollars.
Let us look a little further into these answers. Part III had to do with rural housing. Anyone who has made a study of rural housing conditions knows that those conditions are just as much in crying need of redress as are the conditions in our cities and towns, and they are serious in many places. What is the record of the government in its administration of part III of this act.? Question 16 reads:
How many contracts have been entered into by the minister under part III?
The answer given is "one." Only one contract is the record of the administration. I beg your pardon; I am wrong-the answer is "none". I was doing the house, not the minister, an injustice, in making that mistake. Question 17 read:
What is the total number of houses for which loans have been authorized under part III?
The answer given was "one". How a loan was provided for one house under part III and yet no contract was entered into under part III is not clearly indicated, but there is the answer. Then another question:
How many of such houses have been completed?
Again we are told that is not on the government records. Then I asked for the total amount of loans authorized under part III, and the answer given was $5,700.
This is the amazing record of the administration in a field that the minister in his statement this afternoon has admitted to be a field of crying need in the Dominion of Canada.	x
I have indicated what I conceive to be one of the reasons for this dismal failure, and I make no apology for calling it a dismal failure. The reason I have indicated already is that there has been no drive to make the provisions of this act effective to meet a crying need. There has to be a much more sympathetic approach on the part of the administration to the housing problem if anything effective is to be done in this field.
Then I should	like to	refer	to anotherreason, because I	do not	want	to lay	theentire blame for	the situation upon	theshoulders of my	friend,	the Minister	of
Finance. I suggest that that responsibility must be shared also by the Minister of Reconstruction. In this respect I point to the plight in which private, builders in Canada to-day find themselves as the result of the measures being applied by the Minister of Reconstruction and his department. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the way in which the minister has been apply-

Housing Act
icg priorities through departmental administration has had a good deal to do with the situation in which we find ourselves to-day, where private enterprise has been dried up and where private builders feel frustrated by government action at every turn. Talk about encouragement for building! The private builders in this country have been getting in the main nothing but discouragement from the government by its actions.
I want to refer to an answer given by the Minister of Reconstruction to certain questions I put on the order paper, and which will be found at page 614 of Hansard of October 1. M3r question was this:
What priorities are now ill effect in favour of Wartime Housing Limited with respect to the purchase, acquisition or control of building materials of all kinds?
The answer was:
Priority assistance is given to Wartime Housing Limited with respect to the purchase of plumbing supplies, roofing, lumber, mill-work, wood shingles, gyproc, rock wool, asphalt _ shingles, cedar grain asbestos shingles, roofing materials, furnaces, nails.
I take it that that was a considered reply, prepared by the officials of the department with due regard for the record.
Now I turn to an answer dealing with the same subject to be found at page 801 of Hansard of October 5. It was a statement made by the Minister of Reconstruction in reply to a question put to him by my leader. The minister said:
There is a great misconception about the matter of priorities. In so far as I am aware, there are no priorities in building materials.
Just to complete this picture of disharmony we have this statement by the minister on page 832 of Hansard of October 9. He is referring to his own remarks which I have just quoted, and says:
In my remarks I stated that there are no building material priorities at all in favour of Wartime Housing Limited. This was not correct.
I should have explained that the government is in fact, giving assistance to Wartime Housing Limited where necessary, and requires producers and distributors in certain cases to deliver to Wartime Housing Limited in priority to other u..ers.
There certainly are priorities in favour of Wartime Housing Limited, and they certainly are being administered in a way which is frustrating builders right along the line. Is it any wonder, that private builders find themselves in such a muddle when the minister himself, in giving the picture to the house of the priorities he administers, gave it in such muddled terms? With the government itself in such a muddle, how can the building industry be in anything but a muddle?
The situation to-day is this, and anyone who has had any contact with building or has made any study of the housing situation in Canada well knows it. Wartime Housing Limited, ipart from priorities, has, as the Minister of Finance said to-day, been a large buyer of material, and let us not underestimate the effect that that has had on the supply of building materials in Canada. What is the effect when Wartime Housing Limited goes to a supplier of building materials and wants to place a big order? Just put yourself in that position, Mr. Speaker. You have certain contacts which have been established over a long period of years with people who depend upon you for their supplies and you want to continue to supply them as they need supplies. Then along comes Wartime Housing Limited, and back of Wartime Housing Limited is always the government. The Minister of Reconstruction is back of Wartime Housing Limited all the time. The result is that these building supply houses to-day are so afraid of ruthless treatment by the administration that they are supplying the demands of Wartime Housing Limited at the expense of private builders all over Canada.
Mr. BROWN:: Would the hon. member say that the government should withdraw from Wartime Housing Limited?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Yes.


Mr. FLEMING:: I will answer that question a little later, if my hon. friend will permit me, as I am coming to Wartime Housing.
There are many examples before us to-day of bureaucracy rampant, but I wonder if there is a more striking example of bureaucracy rampant than in the administration of priorities with respect to building materials. An answer was tabled yesterday in reply to a question of mine, and it will be found at page 1444 of Hansard. It shows that the total amount expended to date in the past four and a half years through Wartime Housing Limited aggregates $94,948,875.33. Now if hon. members will refer to page 613 of Hansard they will find an answer given to another question I asked, which shows that up to September 15 a total of 18,992 houses had been built by Wartime Housing Limited.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Just to prevent my hon.
friend from doing some division there and coming out with a wrong result, let me say that the expenditure by Wartime Housing Limited includes the construction of a great number of staff houses, cafeterias and other accommodation, which are included in the figure given.
Housing Act

So I hope my hon. friend will simply not divide one figure by the other and say: that is the result.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am sure the house will be glad to hear from the minister in due course just what those expenditures he has just mentioned amount to, so that we may arrive at the net result. I submit that we must not omit from the total expenditure the overhead cost of Wartime Housing Limited. In order to show the cost to the Dominion of Canada of the individual houses built by Wartime Housing Limited, temporary houses in the vast majority of cases, overhead costs of Wartime Housing must properly be charged.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Wartime Housing is the only institution to-day and the only builder to-day that is building low rental houses for veterans, and I hope my hon. friend will keep that in mind. We hear a great chorus that Wartime Housing should cease. I am trying to get out of the housing business-ever since the purpose for which Wartime Housing was set up was fulfilled.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I do not mind a question in the ordinary course, but I do not think a statement should be interpolated by the minister, because he will have his opportunity later. When he speaks, as I expect he will, I ask him to tell the house why, if private builders were given equal opportunity with Wartime Housing Limited and all building materials were made available to them, they could not do as good a job as Wartime Housing Limited, and better.
We of the Progressive Conservative party are not alone in calling for fair play for the building trades. The Trades and Labour Congress of Canada in its brief submitted to the government on August 20 last, recommended this:
To meet this crisis we recommend that . . . restrictions be lifted from building materials and that the construction of homes be carried on with the same effort, ingenuity and dispatch as was displayed, in the production of urgently needed war materials.
If the minister will give the private builder fair play in the matter of acquisition of building materials, the private builder will do as good a job-yes, a far better job, and one less expensive to the people of Canada than the minister's pet hobby, Wartime Housing Limited, will do, if the conditions of competition are equal.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Will they build houses for rent?


Donald Methuen Fleming: If the government will confine itself in this instance to its proper

function of making possible through financial arrangements the provision of low rental housing, private industry can do it; otherwise why is part II of this National Housing Act on the statute book? The government put it there; it was the government's measure. They contemplated that financial assistance from the Dominion of Canada would be brought to bear to assist in the construction of low rental housing accommodation by private builders. Is the Minister of Reconstruction not in sympathy with the government's measure? I do not know.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am in sympathy with it, yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The government itself has admitted more than once that it is dependent on private enterprise, first, to supply the bulk of the employment needed in this difficult period of reconversion, and, second, to provide the construction of the great majority of houses which are needed. The Minister of Reconstruction said, if I recall his words as reported in Hansard, page 226-I am not going to take time to quote his statement- that only about twenty per cent of the' construction of the needed housing in Canada would be carried on under government auspices; the government was going to depend on private enterprise to build about eighty per cent of the housing needed; and we have had similar information this afternoon from the Minister of Finance. In the face of that, is it not ordinary common sense that the government should give equal opportunity, a fair opportunity, to the private builder upon whom they are relying for eighty per cent of the houses which the government itself admits are needed in Canada to-day?
It is not only that, Mr. Speaker, but there has been no restriction of the export of building materials. Look at lumber. In the remarks I made during the debate on the speech from the throne I ventured to suggest that the government ought to give consideration-yes, immediate consideration-to the question of curtailing exports of lumber. We have heard nothing about it since. Vast quantities of lumber are being exported from this country, and these exports are not all going by any means to countries which were devastated during the war. Approximately fifty per cent of our lumber exports are going at the present time to the United States.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Nonsense.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am referring to the minister's own figures.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is absolute nonsense.

Housing Act


Donald Methuen Fleming: Half of our exports of lumber. I will give the minister his own figures.


An hon. MEMBER:: He will correct them to-morrow, anyway.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I do not know whether I ought to take time to refer to the minister's own statements. If he will take the trouble to look at sessional paper No. 138A, tabled October 17, he will see that, in reply to a question, it was stated that in 1944-take the last complete year, for instance-we exported to the United States lumber having a dollar value of S44J million out of the total export of 890 million.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Take the board feet.


Donald Methuen Fleming: In 1945 to date, in the first eight months of the year, we exported to the United States over 831,000,000 out of a total of $60,000,000. That is a little better than half. I say this with deference to the minister, that if he-


Mr. CLEAVER:: Does that include pulp-wood?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Sit down.


Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:: An hon. member is permitted to ask questions only with the permission of the hon. member who is speaking.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, I do not
want to be discourteous, but I do not wish to be interrupted right now in what I am saying. There will be a better opportunity later to ask questions.


Hughes Cleaver: Do these figures include
pulpwood?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I do not pretend for one minute that the things I have said and am going to say this afternoon will be to the liking of hon. members opposite.


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: We do not
care.


Hughes Cleaver: Perhaps my question is
of the same order.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That is one of the things that is wrong with the present government; they do not care: but it is high time, in matters of this kind and in the face of the crying national need, that the ministry and its supporters did care.


Hughes Cleaver: That is absolute nonsense.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I was speaking about the
causes of this situation, this deplorable situation which we find to-day in the field of housing. I have indicated that the responsibility rests in large measure upon the Department of Finance which is administering the National Housing Act; but it does not rest there alone. I have indicated, I believe, and I think I have given cogent reasons and ample figures to show, that much of the responsibility rests also upon the Minister of Reconstruction. Going back of it all, this situation can be traced to the lack of foresight and lack of courage on the part of the government. Surely they could see that this situation was developing. Why did they not do something about it? This and many of our other problems in this country to-day are traceable to the government's failure to apply a correct and courageous manpower policy in the time of the war. It is small comfort to the people of Canada who badly need housing to-day, who are suffering grave hardship, to be told, "Oh well, after all you are better off than the people in the devastated areas." Well, I should hope we would be. That passage in the statement of the minister this afternoon, I think, will not bring great comfort to our people to-day. It will not bring a great deal of comfort to some of those veterans who, coming back from overseas service, find that they cannot even live with their families. I had a case brought to my notice this week of a man coming back from overseas who could not find accommodation with his family; and this is not an isolated instance.
There are housing conditions of great distress in this country, especially among men from overseas, the men to whom this country owes most. It is on those men that the brunt of this burden is being cast at the present time, traceable to the government's lack of foresight. To-day many of them are buying houses, are devoting their gratuities to the purchase of houses which are really beyond their means, and they are doing it out of sheer desperation. We hold the government largely responsible for the housing crisis in this country.
Moreover we shall welcome an opportunity, and perhaps these proceedings will give us the opportunity at a later stage, of obtaining a great deal more information concerning the situation than has yet been made available to the house.
I have already on three occasions during the present session drawn attention to the provisions of section 30 of the National Housing Act. I am going to read it again:
30. As soon as practicable after the end of each calendar year, the minister shall prepare a report with regard to the administration of this act and the loans made thereunder during the preceding calendar year and the report
Housing Act

shall be laid before parliament forthwith or, if parliament be not then in session, within fifteen days after the commencement of the next ensuing session thereof.
If we are not to have a report for the year 1944, because the government was so tardy in proclaiming the measure, why are we not so told? I asked on September 24 when we were to have the report. The minister said he would look into it; and on September 28, as reported in Hansard, page 540, he said that the report would be brought down at the end of the next week. I referred to it again on October 11; the reference may be found on page 956 of Hansard. But we are still waiting for the report. If there is a report coming, let us have it. Why have we not had it before this? If there is no report coming, why should we not be so told?
I want to offer this suggestion to the Minister of Finance. Since parliament last dealt with the National Housing Act, amendments have been introduced into the act on two occasions by order in council. I refer to order in council P.C. 392, dated January 18, 1945, and P.C. 5794, dated August 30, 1945. I suggest to him that he should give consideration to the status of these amendments. He is proposing certain amendments to the National Housing Act which apparently will completely recast the sections having to do with the administration of the act. It has also been intimated to the house that an amendment will be introduced in connection with the section I referred to earlier, section 13.
Now there is a grave question as to whether the emergency still exists which permits the government to legislate by order in council under the War Measures Act. If the amendments made to the act by order in council depend simply on order in council, then they automatically will come to an end the moment the emergency passes upon which the government's jurisdiction under the War Measures Act depends. If these are good measures, the amendments ought to be introduced in this house, so that parliament may consider them.


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is to be done under resolution No. 11.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am very glad to hear that. I think the procedure is absolutely sound that, in connection with anything that the government has done by order in council to amend existing legislation, if the amendments have any merit the government ought to submit the legislation to this parliament to give effect to those amendments, and then parliament will have its opportunity of reviewing the legislation and putting the amendments in proper form.
[Mi. Fkming.]
I said that so far as the bill is concerned we will resei've our judgment upon it until we receive it and carefully scrutinize its provisions. If the bill does not yet make proper provision for slum clearance measures, I earnestly suggest to the minister that it should not be introduced into the house until proper provision has been made by this measure to undertake in an adequate and concerted way the clearance of slums in Canada. The present National Housing Act does not make provision for the clearance of slums. You will never clear slums under that act as it stands, and if w7e are going to undertake the revision of the act I say that we must make sure that the great omission from the act of 1945 is remedied and cured now.
As I said earlier, I do not want to anticipate the provisions of the bill, but if it should result that the administration of housing is confided to a corporation presided over by a board of directors, I hope the minister will see to it that women and veterans are represented on the board. I am naive enough to say to the house that I do not believe you will ever have an adequately sympathetic or energetic application of the provisions of the housing legislation to meet the needs of the country unless you have women participating in the administration of the measure.


Mrs. STRUM:: Hear, hear.


Donald Methuen Fleming: There is no man in Canada who has all the information on housing, and women are very close to this problem. I repeat therefore that you will never have a properly balanced administration, if you are going to appoint a board of directors, unless you have women represented on that board. I offer that suggestion to the minister, and I hope that veterans also will be represented on any board that is set up-veterans, those on whom, most unfairly, the burden of housing conditions is being cast to-day.
When we approach this bill we shall want to be shown how housing and the business of a mortgage discount bank or corporation can be combined. We do not want to see any more confusion introduced into the administration of the national housing policy. Goodness knows there is enough confusion there now; let us not create any more. Again, and on this I take it I am on common ground with one observation at least that fell from the lips of the Minister of Finance this afternoon, we want to see the housing administration so set up that it will not be farther removed from the control of parliament, farther removed from the place where parliament will have its opportunity to discharge its

Housing Act
duty to the people of Canada and to review the policy being applied by the national housing administration.
Parliament has a great responsibility in this matter, but I am not speaking only of parliament's responsibility in the matter of supervision of expenditures, because in my humble opinion that is not the most important consideration in respect of housing. There is a consideration far more important, and that is the provision of legislation to meet the social need, the need for decent housing accommodation for people who in many cases are unable to provide that accommodation for themselves. We have also a responsibility as parliament to see to it that everything is done that can be done to assist these people.
And now, Mr. Speaker, I have finished, but for a word in conclusion. If the bill the minister introduces offers any hope of emancipation of the country from the muddle into which the housing policy has been allowed by the government to fall, we will welcome it as far as it goes. If it does not hold out any such promise, we shall have to discharge our duty and give it close and critical scrutiny.


Mr. A. M. NICHOLSON (Mackenzie):: I find myself in agreement with much that has been said by the member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming). His analysis of the shortcomings of the National Housing Act as it has operated to date has been carefully presented. I think he has performed a valuable service in placing on the order paper certain questions that have been answered. I was disappointed, however, that he did not have some more constructive suggestions to offer in connection with Canada's very critical housing problem at the present time. Within the memory of most of us we had in Canada at one time a Conservative government. It was not then Progressive Conservative, but there was a Conservative government when there were no war-time controls, when we did not have a shortage of lumber or of building materials, when there was no shortage of labour; and yet the Conservative administration seemed to be even more completely paralyzed than the present government.
During the years from 1930 to 1935, when we had the Conservative government in office in Canada, when there was a world-wide depression, the governments in the United Kingdom, the United States, Sweden, France and Holland realized that there was an opportunity then to clear out some of the disgraceful slums that have been a blot on society. In the United Kingdom for example, taking 1929 as the base, they increased the construction of houses from 100 in that year
to 114 in the worst year of the depression, while in Canada we dropped from 100 to 70 in 1930, to 47 in 1931, to 16 in 1932, and we reached an all-time low in 1933 of 9-7.
We had a slum problem in 1933 that was practically identical with the slum problem that now exists, and, as I said, we did not have any controls to worry about. If the private builders were able to do the job, there was no reason why they did not do it during the thirties. I agree with the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) that if we could remove those controls, the private builders would really go to work. I have no doubt that we would be building some $25,000 to $35,000 houses immediately, but we have only a limited amount of building material available and if this material is to be available in all parts of Canada as fairly as possible someone has to take the responsibility of seeing that no one will be building a $25,000 house until something is done for people in the lower brackets.
I am not offering any defence for the administration; I am trying to get across the point that the removal of our controls would add to the problems rather than solve them. We would enable the real estate dealers and contractors to have a field day. They would be able to make up for the war years, although some of them did fairly well even during the war years.
Let me remind the house that there was nothing to stop the private builders from entering this field in 1940, 1941 and 1942. The shortage of materials was not very critical at that time; and believe me, this administration we now have did not set up Wartime Housing for the fun of it. They have friends in the building trades too. The only reason we have Wartime Housing Limited in Canada is that the contractors, the private builders, just were not prepared to build houses in Windsor, Hamilton, Halifax and Vancouver, in the centres in Canada where we had a serious shortage. I think it is unfair to suggest [DOT] that if they now had the green light they would step into the breach and solve our problem.
If we divide the population of this country, or of any country, into three groups, the people in the upper third of our income bracket will be able to finance and build their houses without assistance from the government in any shape or form. Until we have a change in the supply situation it is important that rigid controls be maintained to see to it that those in the upper third of the bracket do not have four or five rooms per person in the home while in Ottawa returned veterans have to live eight to nine persons in a one or
Housing Act

two-roomed house. Therefore I think the speech delivered by the hon. member for Eglinton has focused attention on an obvious weakness in the government's housing programme, but it did not offer any solution.
Members of this group always welcome any legislation that will face up to the problem. It is unfortunate that, although the National Housing Act was assented to on August 15, 1944, people in Canada have not been able to see that this legislation has made any material difference to our situation.
I might draw'the attention of hon. members to an interesting article in the last issue of Maclean's magazine which was written by Blair Fraser under the title of " Hovels for Heroes." I believe this article says everything that needs to be said about Canada's housing problem. I have tried to get across these ideas all during the war period, emphasizing, in addition to participating on the battlefield and supplying materials, the necessity of providing adequate houses for those working in war industries and in the areas that have become congested as a result of shifts in our population.
The Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) indicated there were other more pressing responsibilities. In my opinion the government of the day failed to attach sufficient importance to the providing of adequate housing as a part of our war contribution. He mentioned that every country of the world has a situation similar to the one we have in Canada; but I venture to say that in most countries they have past experience that will enable them to deal with the problem much more quickly than Canada.
The Minister of Finance mentioned certain constitutional problems that exist in Canada; that the provinces would no doubt object to the federal government carrying on activities such as Wartime Housing as a part of our permanent policy. I have repeatedly suggested that the federal government should take the initiative in convening a conference of representatives from the provinces and municipalities to face up to this problem.
As I said before, I think those in the upper third of the income brackets would be able to get all the materials and labour that would be their fair share. Legislation such as is provided by the National Housing Act would be very useful in seeing that the lending institutions are kept happy, serving the third of our population in the middle group. Private builders have a chance to cater to these sections of our economy, but fully a third of the Canadian people cannot look forward to
rMr. Nicholson.]
having modern low-cost housing under any legislation that now exists or that is being proposed.
The last time I discussed the question in the house I suggested that the federal government should take the initiative in setting up five experimental units in Canada. I feel sure that the provinces and municipalities concerned would give full cooperation to this kind of experiment, so that in Toronto and Montreal, for example, a model section of the city might be planned and five hundred low cost houses built and made available to people in the lowest income brackets in the community. It would require a subsidy. I believe that the provinces, the municipalities and the federal government should all participate in seeing that the housing was made available, so that returning veterans and lower paid workers could look forward to having modern, comfortable housing at rents that they could afford to pay.
I suggested that in Winnipeg, Vancouver and Halifax from two to three hundred permanent houses might be built as a part of an overall experimental plan. The federal government would be justified in appropriating sufficient funds to undertake to do this job under a set-up similar to that of Wartime Housing.
I have been critical of a good deal of the work done by Wartime Housing, but I never for one moment suggested that it would be a good thing if we -had not had Wartime Housing, and I cannot share the opinions expressed by some of the Progressive Conservatives this afternoon that the administration should wash its hands of Wartime Housing and not take responsibility for the eighteen or nineteen thousand families in Canada who are living in those houses. I know that some of the private builders in the country insisted that those houses should be torn down six months after the cessation of hostilities. It would probably provide a better market for those interested in real estate and in the building trade to have those eighteen thousand houses tom down, but I submit it would not be a popular move in Canada with winter coming on.


An hon. MEMBER:: They will fall down.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: That has been my
opinion, that they will become potential slums. But in the meantime they are more comfortable than houses available at similar rents, or in many instances double the rents, in the centres in which they are now located.
I suggest that some organization such as Wartime Housing might be given authority to construct some experimental units, so that on

Housing Act
our own soil in Canada we might have a demonstration of what town planning, mass production and a plan would mean. If that were done we would have some basis of deciding whether or not the claim that C.C.F. members have made in the past is true, namely, that private builders will never in Canada do anything effective to clear out slum areas and to make living quarters available for people who live in those slum districts.
I also wish to mention the failure to deal with the problem in rural Canada. During the summer a family in my constituency had the misfortune to lose their house and the contents thereof by fire. Their only son was soon expected back from overseas, and they wondered if it would not be possible to obtain a loan under the new legislation which had been passed. I got in touch with Ottawa and outlined the details. It was suggested that if these people would get in touch with the local bank it should be possible to obtain the necessary loan. They carried out those instructions, but they found that the local bank was not interested in making a loan.
My information is that the people who can get assistance under the legislation for rural housing are those who do not need it. They could go to a bank on their own account and borrow money, or they might have sufficient resources without securing a loan.
When the bill is before the house I suggest that the minister should be prepared to give us a great deal more detail as to what machinery he has in mind to make it possible to tackle rural housing in a progressive fashion. He should give details, too, as to what we can expect from ihe lending institutions.
The hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) might have gone a good deal farther than he did in criticizing the government for going to the private lending institutions, and giving them out of the federal treasury ninety per cent of the - capital to be invested in housing. To me that appears to be an abdication of responsible government. It is an admission that we are bankrupt of ideas, that we cannot face up to this problem ourselves, and that we have to turn it over to the insurance companies of Canada so that they may set up subsidiary corporations to look after our business.
Since the government's policy seems to t>e fairly well decided upon, I suggest that the minister should be expected to give some indication as to what provisions will be made for the building of houses in congested centres on the prairies or in smaller communities anj'-where. I have no doubt that in the large centres I have mentioned loans will be made
available, I fear, however, that under the present legislation, as in the past, people in rural communities and small towns and villages will find it difficult to benefit from the act. The minister should give us some details in that respect.
I hope, too, that he will give particulars regarding the over-all plan for the next year. He has mentioned that the aim is to have 50,000 houses constructed during the first twelve months after the cessation of hostilities. It is not too soon to expect him to tell us how many will be built in the second twelve months. I hope when we have the bill before us, the minister will give us information on these points.
In conclusion, may I express my regret that the government has not seen fit to provide legislation to ensure that definite action is taken in clearing slums and providing adequate shelter for those large numbers of Canadian people in the lower income brackets, who have not a chance in the world of looking forward to being able either to rent, or to build a house, or to buy one, with building costs as they are at the present time.


Mr. C. E. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: Mr. Speaker, I had not expected that the debate on the resolution would have been prolonged to this extent. I had thought that such debate would take place on the motion for second reading. However, since the matter is now being discussed in full I shall take a few minutes to express my views.
We have listened to two speeches and, like the hon. member who has just taken his seat, I should like to congratulate the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) upon his presentation. Although the hon. member for Mackenzie (Mr. Nicholson) criticized the hon. member for Eglinton for not having offered any constructive ideas, I must say I looked in vain for any such suggestions in his own speech. So far I have been unable to discover any.
The government has sponsored three types of building, namely national housing, wartime housing and veterans housing, and I should like to say only a brief word in respect of each type. As most hon. members know I come from the west, near the city of- Calgary, in which a good deal of this type of building is taking place, and I have watched with interest what has been done. On several occasions I' have looked into the building of these houses, and I want to say about national housing-and I speak only from the point of view of construction-that I believe the houses built under that programme are far superior to those built under either of the remaining
Housing Act

two types. It is true, though, that even under the national plan improvements could be made.
There are many criticisms in connection with national housing concerning points which I believe to be of only minor importance. For instance, before coming to this session I visited a house being built under the national housing plan, and found that the contractor in charge was criticizing the government severely for stipulating ten-inch cement walls in the construction. He thought that such construction increased the price unnecessarily. I pointed out to him that while to a degree I could agree with him that ten-inch walls in the construction of residences, and especially in western Canada, were unnecessary, the fault, if it could be so described, was a good one.
The material being used in the construction of national houses is the best that is being used in any of the government housing projects. When I say it is the best, I mean that it is only a cheap, second-grade material. I am referring to the dimension lumber. Of course that is true not only of houses built under the national scheme, but of every type of house being built in Canada, of which I have visited a great number. Surely this is a shame.
The hon. member for Eglinton referred to the exporting of Canadian building materials. I am told by reliable lumbermen in both Calgary and Edmonton-and I take it that the same condition applies throughout Canada -that the best of our number one building material is being shipped out, and that we are being given second and third grades. Yet the people of this country are paying first-grade prices.
I have seen materials sent back to lumber yards-and I am not blaming the yards-[DOT] which should not have been put even in the construction of a garage, but which were supposed to be used in the construction of national, wartime, and veterans houses. There is nothing they can do about it. The lumber yards simply say, "You will take this material or nothing," or in a great many cases they say, "Send it back." Generally speaking, the people who are building these houses are having to pay big prices. Houses being built under national housing now cost around $6,000, when in my opinion they should cost from $4,500 up to not more than $5,000. Some of these men are veterans and they are building under the national housing plan, but particularly is this true of veterans' houses and, more so, wartime houses. In my estimation they are getting a pretty raw deal

because they are being charged much more for these houses than they are actually worth.
I think the government should be informed about one thing in case they do not know it already. In many instances the owners, in the case of national housing, and the prospective owners, in the case of veterans' houses, are not satisfied with the plans and specifications. After a house is started a man may go to the contractor and say that he does not want a certain plan, that he wants a room changed, that the kitchen is too small and he wants it in another position. What happens? Quite often the contractor will agree to make certain improvements in the house. I do not know how he gets around the inspector because he is certainly getting away from the plans and specifications; I know it is being done because I have been in the houses and seen it.
The result is that because of these extras the owner must pay the contractor about $1,000 more than the contract calls for. When the lending company comes along to put a mortgage on the house it does not mind because the house is much more improved; it is a finer house than the original contract called for, and their protection is that much greater. But it puts the owner of the house in an untenable position and I think the government should put more protection into effect.
As I indicated, the materia! going into national houses is, in most instances, very good. I think in all instances where I have seen national houses being built they were being built by private contractors. In those particular instances the workmanship was good and the material was just as good as that going into private houses being built, possibly just across the street. I think they will be worthwhile projects. But in the case of veterans' houses the material is not so good, nor is the plan of construction.
The hon. member who just resumed his seat was, I think, a little in favour, if not wholeheartedly in favour of mass production. I do not know whether he has watched this closely or not, but in the case of veterans houses which are being built under a mass production plan the workmanship is very much inferior. In the case of national housing, the material is good in most cases. Fir is used where they can get it, but in the case of wartime housing, spruce is used exclusively. Anyone who has had any experience in housing knows that it is almost impossible to keep spruce from shrinking. In ninety-nine per cent of the cases the spruce used is exceedingly wet and green, and in some cases they have almost forgotten to cut off the leaves.

Housing Act
Full basements are being put under these new veterans houses, and that is a good thing. However, as far as the dimension stuff that is being used is concerned, I think the returned men who are putting their last cent into homes -mind you, these homes are running from $4,000 to $6,000-will get an awful stinging. These houses will be cold and they will start pulling away. They are bound to do that when the green lumber begins to shrink. Just ordinary nails were used instead of coated nails which would have assisted a little bit when such green lumber was being used. I think these are some of the things that should be looked into.
As far as wartime housing is concerned, the material Being used is much on a par with that used for veterans houses; it is exclusively spruce. Along with' the shrinking and twisting of the material this is certainly not going to be conducive to good homes.
Another thing that should be mentioned with regard to the general construction of these houses is the continued use of footings rather than complete basements in connection with wartime housing units. Especially in the west, I do not think any house should be built unless it has a full basement. If a veteran buys a home under Wartime Housing it will be only a matter of time before he will want a full basement. It will be an exceedingly difficult and costly proposition to put a full basement under the house once it is erected. It can be done, but it means unnecessary expense. The construction of proper basements would prove a great asset to wartime houses. [DOT]
Some of these house are being built on posts. Surely the government knows from experience what happens when a house is built on posts. We only have to go to Hull to get an example of what has happened to some of these wartime houses. I visited some of the houses in Hull, and I found that in less than a year after they were constructed it was impossible to close the outside doors because one corner of the house had sunken away, the floor had buckled or something else had happened. Why we should go ahead and continue to build houses on footings, even though they may be of cement blocks of eighteen to twenty-four inches in thickness, is more than I can say.
I do not want to detain the house too long, but I should like to speak for a minute about the difficulties some builders are having in obtaining building material. The first speaker this afternoon referred to priorities. I think he covered that subject fairly thoroughly and I shall not go into it any farther. I agree with what he said in that regard. Wartime Housing has the priority. I think it is perfectly all right to give priorities to returned men; I am not criticizing that at all, but under the priorities scheme for wartime and veterans' houses the government has made it possible for large quantities of scarce building materials to be piled up and allowed to stay for months on end without being used. I have actually seen this because I have kept close watch.
I have seen building materials set aside for veterans' houses, materials such as lath, shingles, plumbing fixtures, and other things of that type, piled up on the premises with just a few boards over them and allowed to stay for months at a time without being used, when right across the street would be a private dwelling, with the roof on and completely enclosed1, already stuccoed if it is to be a stucco house. These buildings are just sitting there waiting because they cannot get the materials that are piled up just across the road. In a case of that kind, when the house is ready for plumbing or lathing or shingling, the materials required that are there in existing stores should be made available so that construction can proceed. If there are two houses equally near to being finished- they both need gyproc lath, we will say-the veteran undoubtedly should be given priority. There are cases like that right now in the city of Calgary. I think I am conservative- and I do not mean Progressive Conservative-


Mr. MacNICOL:: You are improving.


Charles Edward Johnston: Improving in my teachings perhaps because I think we have been able to teach the Progressive Conservatives some things. I was going on to say that there are at least a hundred houses in Calgary waiting to be finished and unable to get the necessary materials. They could be occupied within two months if they had the lath and the plumbing. They have the roof on; all the outside work is finished, but they lack these other materials. The government may say that these materials are in short supply, but I say that this stuff in short supply has sat there on the hill for two or three months.
As I said, if there are two houses that are ready for lathing, and one is a veteran's house and the other a civilian's, I would not hesitate a second to give the veteran priority. But why hold up all these other houses until the veteran's house reaches the stage where it needs the materials which the civilian house could use at once?
I have already brought to the attention of the minister of supply this question of shortage of materials when the materials are actually in storage. I am told on good authority, by a reliable businessman who has a large interest in this kind of work, that he has
Housing Act

seen three carloads of gyproc lath stored in Calgary for Wartime Housing. It is sometimes hard to find out just who owns this material or whether it is stored to be used later in veterans houses. At any rate, this particular material has been stored there for a long time, and without breaking any confidence I can say that the minister of supply received a long-distance phone call about it and promised to investigate immediately, *which he did. He sent a man out there, and so far as I can learn the man made a proper report. Unfortunately, however, when he came to investigate where the material was located, the material was no longer there but had been moved somewhere else, and the minister, I understand, is now investigating that. I do not blame the minister particularly for that, because I can see how it might happen. He is being given the run-around. That is with regard to gyproc lath.
Take plumbing. The same is true there. A plumber told me that he had shipped several wash-basins which are in short supply, to the Currie Supply depot in Calgary or the place up there on the hill. It stood there for some considerable time, and he told me that up to the time he was speaking to me they had not been used. But he was compelled to supply them.
I am told that between four and five hundred bath-tubs are stored in Calgary. Whether that is true or not I do not know. I have asked the minister to get the information for me. The man who told me that is a reliable businessman, one of the largest in the city of Calgary. I wanted to know the facts in that case, and so I went to the only proper place, to the minister.
Here is another thing which may assist the minister in getting some of these houses finished. About two weeks ago I was talking to a plumber who had great difficulty in getting bath-tubs. He went for a trip to the United States, and when he came back he told me there was no shortage of bath-tubs in the United States, that you could walk into any store and buy one. That is just what he did. He went into a big store in Seattle and asked about bath-tubs. They said, "Yes; -we have lots of them." Accordingly he bought a bath-tub and shipped it to one of his customers in Calgary. Under the regulations he could get only one. so that he got someone else to get another one for him. But that is not a good way of doing business. The government might well look into this matter and make it possible to have plumbing equipment that is available in the United
[Mr. Johnston. J
States shipped to Canada where it is in short supply. That should apply to any type of plumbing equipment which is in short supply in Canada and in long supply in the United States.
The hon. member who preceded me this afternoon spoke of private builders not doing a very good job in trying to clear away slum areas. But that has not been my experience.
I 'think the finest type of house being built to-day is being built by private contractors for private individuals. When a contractor gets a contract to build fifty or sixty houses he is producing on a mass production scale.
I do not think that is a good plan when it comes to building private houses. The minister has had some experience in this matter and knows that you cannot build the side of a house out of ordinary spruce lumber, spruce ship-lath, spruce siding, using ordinary two and a half inch nails. Yet they are building that side down on the floor; then they put the windows in, set it up on the rough floor, then build the other part, set it up on the rough floor, and then nail the two together. That is not good construction. I do not think it will stand up. I have watched very carefully this type of houses under construction. Not only do I think it is a poor type of construction, but I think the wrong principle is involved in distributing contracts for the mass production of private homes. I have heard many complaints, especially in the city of Calgary, where I live, by competent contractors who have proved their worth in the field and who cannot get a share of this contract work. They say: "Why should such-and-such a contractor" -I am not going to name him because the * minister will know some of those to whom I am referring-"get a contract to build fifty or sixty houses and we cannot get any?" I suppose it is'because he goes in for mass production, but there are other contractors who want a share in this work but who for some reason or another do not get any of these contracts.
Of course, when a man goes in for mass production and builds fifty or sixty houses, he gets a priority on labour and on building materials, and he can go ahead and pile up his building materials so that the progress of his work will not be hindered. But the private contractor across the street cannot get anything, even though he sees that material piled [DOT] upon the hill and not being used, and it may not be used for five or six weeks or two or three or even six months. That is discourag-

Housing Act
mg to private builders. Some of the things I have heard them say about the government's plan of building in that way I would not want to repeat here, because they would be unparliamentary. But I think the private builder has a logical complaint, and it is something which should be looked into.
The remarks I have made are the result of actual experience I have had in visiting these buildings. As I have said, I think the national houses are good houses considering the type of material-which is only second-grade lumber-that they have to put into them, and which should not be in houses costing around six or seven thousand dollars apiece. That is a lot of money to invest in a private home, and the materials should be good. But the workmanship is satisfactory. As regards the wartime housing and that allocated to veterans, I do not think the lumber used is of a type which should be used at all. The boys are getting an awful stinging. I do not understand why, if we are to build these houses and the fellows are spending their hard-earned money to buy them, we do not put in good material, because these are the homes in which these men are going to live and raise their families.
Not only that, but if you build these houses of cheap construction-they are not financially cheap-in some of these city areas you will create the very thing which the last speaker attributed to the operations of some private contractors; that is, you will have slum areas, for in no time at all these houses will go to rack and ruin, and five to ten years from now they will look like old shacks. That statement is not true of the national houses. The [DOT]ones 1 have seen are a good type, and while they are costing more than I think they should, they are much better built than either the veterans houses or the wartime housing.
I am not going to detain the house any longer, but I shall have a few things to say when the bill comes up.


Thomas Langton Church: I wish to refer briefly to the position of the municipalities, urban, suburban and rural, on housing. Away back in 1935, as the result of my resolution, a committee of the House of Commons was appointed to consider .the whole question of housing and reconstruction to aid building. It held quite a number of meetings and heard some of the most prominent of officers-Mr. D'Arcy Leonard among others-of the principal loan and mortgage companies and, indeed, experts from all over the world, and made its report to the high court of parliament.
Housing is probably the most important problem which any country has to deal with.
The way in which it has been handled in this country amounts to a public scandal. So far as the housing situation is concerned, I do not believe in the present cumbersome policy of the government; it has been weighed in the balance and found wanting. Take, for example, ward1 9, Toronto, the district in which I live; it has been a paradise for the loan companies and the mortgage companies with the highest interest rates. The people who live there have been charged as much as 6i and 7 per cent for loans, and they are sick and tired of loan and mortgage companies.
The city of Toronto has pioneered in the matter of housing reform. No agency relates more to public health than proper housing. We have had splendid health officers in Doctor Hastings and those who have succeeded him.
What was done? From 1937 to this war $82 million was spent on housing by the government through the banks. I opposed in this house the government of Canada going into vast expenditures for the creation of a large public housing body centred here in Ottawa, with clerks and stenographers and officers all over the country. I contended that the work could be done far better, first, by aiding the municipalities, and second, by lending the money, through a government guarantee, to the banks at a low rate of interest, not to exceed three per cent.
As I mentioned, some $82 million was spent on that policy, and there was a big building wave all over our city and suburbs. One reason it was a success in Toronto was that the city provided by transportation, water, sewers, health laws and suburban good roads, the key to modern housing schemes. The city also started its own civic street cars and bought out the radials, started the buses and gave at cost and a single fare all Toronto by a civic system, whereas before that there were six or seven different fares in greater Toronto, now the present city, and it carried out a good road programme for fifteen miles outside. And let me say that housing in any community, be it urban, suburban or rural, cannot be separated from the problem of roads and transportation generally, of light, water, schools, sanitation, police and fire protection. The city of Toronto went to work north, east, south and west and cleaned out a lot of light and power and all transportation franchises, not only in the city but in the counties of Ontario, York and Peel, and linked those places up in a' civic system of transportation with radials and buses.
Housing Act

a new front. If, as the Canadian Corps say, they had the labour and materials, it would help them materially.
If the government would give the municipalities some help along the lines I have indicated, it would be far better, because Toronto has had to do all this work alone. Transportation is the key to the housing problem because without it houses cannot be built, and there must also be proper services available.
The other day I had a return with regard to a soldier about -whom I had asked some questions. He wanted to go into a retail shop, but there were no such shops that he could rent. I asked, what aid is the government giving to ex-servicemen to go back to their retail stores, and would it not be far better if they did? No aid is given. The soldiers received a long letter from the wartime prices and trade board telling them what to do. If that is all they can do they might as well not have answered. It was just a scrap of paper. No soldier can get a retail store with that; for want of a housing policy nobody can help them.
The government ought to do something about housing. They ought to remove the irksome controls on property holders. I represent a district where sixty-seven per cent of the people in- the district used to own their own homes. Pretty nearly two-thirds of the population of the city owned their own homes. The control system and irksome controls have ruined real estate. If the government wants to do something they should remove some of the irksome controls which have been fastened on the real estate -owners, large and small, of the larger cities.
I believe that this resolution is too late. It will not facilitate the building of houses. It will lead to a large amount of money being spent on organization and head office staff. It mentions the sum of $25,000,000. I do not believe it will aid one iota in solving the housing situation in any municipality. If the gov-erment would do something to control and regulate further the loan and mortgage companies, get cheap money, put some body over them to control them, they would do far more for housing than the proposed resolution does.
I regret very much having to offer these criticisms to the proposed resolution. But having had an extensive experience in the housing situation and in supplying municipal services in a large city, I feel I must give voice to my beliefs. The city from which I come was the pioneer city in housing and social work; it has branched out; it has given sewers, water and health services, police protection, fire protection and other things to the suburban municipalities. It is doing the
[Mr. Church.1
same to-day with buses, radials, roads and all these things. I believe that the government should go to the support of the larger municipalities like Toronto with direct federal aid for these works along the lines I have indicated. In that way we will do more to get houses built than by any other agency.
In conclusion, I wish to say that I noticed two years ago Mr. Churchill had a proposal to build in Great Britain five hundred thousand pre-fabricated houses. As a result of our not being ready with labour and materials, industries in Canada received very few of those orders from the old country; the United States got pretty nearly the whole.
The housing situation is the key to good health for men, women and children. Without a sanitary house there can be no other freedom or liberty for the toilers and workers of this country. I do hope that something will be done to aid the larger municipalities that I have mentioned to accomplish some relief in the coming winter, because it is going to be a very severe one. If we get a cold winter like last winter I do not know what we shall da. The government no doubt will have to provide some form of direct relief and give some direct aid to the larger municipalities aj a relief measure to tide them over the coming winter.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I shall endeavour to address my remarks, which I shall try to keep brief, to the specific resolution now before the house.
The Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) is proposing to introduce a bill to provide for the setting up of a central mortgage and housing corporation together with $25 million for the paid-up capital of this corporation. In his remarks this afternoon when presenting the resolution to the house the minister said that the government had now reached the stage where it was going into the housing business, and that that was the reason for having made the decision to set up a corporation which, in part, would take over the functions of the Minister of Finance, as set out under the National Housing Act.
It is only partly true, it seems to me, to say that the government is going into the business of housing, so far as this piece of legislation or, indeed, the National Housing Act itself is concerned. What the government is doing is to go into the business of seeking

Housing Act
to finance the building of homes. To the extent that the government at least feels that it is going into the business of housing, I offer my commendation. I feel that it is being pressed by events to realize that there is a responsibility on the part of government in connection with this important phase of the life of our people.
I shall not take time to add further to what my desk-mate, the hon. member for Mackenzie (Mr. Nicholson) had to say in reply to the remarks of the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming), except that I wish to add that surely this is no time for our turning the clock backwards. We have had plenty of experience with the failure of private enterprise to provide homes for our people. On the other hand we have seen, under the necessities of war, that when there are things that are absolutely needed for the country as a whole, the responsibility to get those things done rests upon the government.
The government during war years did face up to the responsibility of seeing to it that the needs of the war were met. We in this group consider-and in that, of course, we'are not alone, so far as our feeling is concerned; it is in the matter of getting these things done that we differ-that the provision of homes for the Canadian people is just as imperative a peacetime need as were munitions and supplies imperative war-time needs. So, to the extent that the government is moving in the direction of setting up the machinery for going into the business of housing, I cannot but. welcome this measure.
I suppose hon. members will feel I atn simply saying the same old thing when I add that to me it does not go far enough. But that is exactly the case, and it is the principal criticism I would offer about this measure. This afternoon in his speech the minister gave some of the details as to how this new corporation might function. First of all, he pointed out that it would take his place as Minister of Finance, in the operations listed under the National Housing Act; and then he said that it would perform a discounting function for loan and mortgage companies.
He referred to discussions or conferences that had been held with the life insurance companies as to why they had not taken fuller advantage of the National Housing Act for the building of homes. If I understood him correctly, out of those conferences came the proposal that the life insurance companies might set up subsidiary corporations which, in effect, would be limited dividend housing corporations, and that in turn this central 47696-95
mortgage and housing corporation could assist those life insurance subsidiary companies in the business of housing.
It is at that point the government has not yet been sufficiently impressed by the events of our time. Rather than having the central mortgage and housing corporation, which is to be a crown company, deal with other new bodies to be set up by private life insurance companies, it seems to me that the functions of the corporation the minister now proposes to set up should be enlarged to those of a public housing authority.
I believe I must make with regard to this proposal the same criticism of its shortcomings that I made in August, 1944, when the National Housing Act was presented to parliament. I complained at that time that the measure then under consideration was more in the nature of an act to assist the mortgage companies and the life insurance companies than it was to provide for the building of homes. On that occasion I went on to express my fear that the act would not result in the thing we really want, namely the building of homes for the Canadian people.
I feel quite frankly that the action of the minister now in bringing in these proposals, and also in his proposed amendment to the National Housing Act, is an admission that, to put it mildly, there were shortcomings in his earlier legislation, and that it has not done all he had hoped it would do. In other words, it has failed to do the job.
I thought when he was describing this afternoon the discussions with the life insurance companies that in a mild way he was telling of what amounted to a strike on their part, a refusal or the contention that under the terms of the act they could not do the thing the government wanted, namely, facilitate the building of homes in this country. Recognizing the shortcomings of the act passed in 1944, the minister makes the further proposal for setting up this central mortgage and housing corporation. Having been right in my former criticism, I offer it again. I fear that the minister is still fighting shy of the real solution of this problem when he refuses to set up a central public housing authority with funds and power definitely to go into the building of homes for our Canadian people. Nonetheless, I certainly want to support this measure, partly on the theory that half a loaf is better than none and partly because I believe that this is the beginning of the setting up of the kind of governmental machinery that can be used in the name of the people as a whole to do something that (he government should do for the people of Canada.

Housing Act

In connection with this whole question of housing it seems to me that we have become bogged down in technical details; we have been too much hampered by a concern to use the existing machinery, the mortgage companies, the insurance companies and so on rather than allowing ourselves a little play of imagination as to what we should be doing in the field of housing. To me the providing of really good homes in the best locations with all the community facilities that can be provided in terms of modern community planning should be the major concern of this government in the matter of housing. It is not good enough to talk about a few slum clearance projects here and there, or the building of temporary accommodation. I repeat what I said in an earlier speech in this present session; we should have the imagination to take an area such as I could indicate in my own constituency, clean out the kind of homes that are there and build in their places a modern, model community with the best homes, and the best of educational, recreational and health facilities for those who do the country's work and deserve for themselves and their families the best of living conditions.
It takes imagination to do that sort of thing, but it has been attempted with a considerable measure of success by some of the public housing authorities in the United States. It has been attempted also on quite a large scale in the United Kingdom. It could and should be done here; in fact it should be one of our major post-war concerns. We are all interested in maintaining full employment ' in the years that lie ahead, and I suggest (hat this is the place to use a little imagination and launch, not just the building of a few thousand homes, but the creation of housing projects all over this country so that our Canadian people can be placed in the best kind of homes, in the best kinds of communities that modern architects and engineers can design.
That will never be done with the appropria-ating of such a small sum as $25,000,000. It will never be done by setting up only an intermediary crown corporation and expecting private enterprise, which has so failed our people in the past, to- do it. It will be done only by using the same kind of imagination that this government used-I say this without hesitation-in setting out to meet the needs of the war.
I was a little surprised this afternoon when the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) quoted from a letter dated August 20, 1945, addressed to the government by the Trades and

Labour Congress of Canada. If I heard him correctly, his inference was that the quotation was in support of giving private enterprise a free hand in the matter of housing. I should like to quote again the item he read; it is the fourth item in a series of proposals which were made by the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada to the government. It reads:
That restrictions be lifted from building materials and that the construction of homes be carried on with the same effort, ingenuity and dispatch as was displayed in the production of urgently needed war materials.
That might be said to be entirely neutral on the question as to whether housing is to be undertaken by public or private enterprise. However, I would point out two things. First, this is an appeal to the government for action; there is no reference to private enterprise at all. Second, it reminds the government that when war came and there were things that were urgently needed, the government used effort, ingenuity and dispatch. Now that peace is here and we all recognize the tremendous need for rehousing the people of Canada .in the finest and most modern communities we can build, I should like to see used the same effort, ingenuity and dispatch. I should like to see the employment of the imagination and capacities that our architects, engineers, scientists and technicians have.
Whether or not the government will accept immediately my suggestion that the powers, of this corporation be enlarged to those of a public housing authority, I dare to hope that the step we are taking to-night by way of setting up this corporation foreshadows better things to come. I say once again that I am glad to support this measure because it indicates the setting up of a governmental body with some measure of power to go into the business of housing. I hope the day is not far distant when that measure of power will be increased and when the government of this country, in the name of the people, will give strong leadership and show real imagination toward the building of better homes for the Canadian people.


Mr. J. A. BONNIER (St. Henry) (Translation) :: Mr. Speaker, I have heard with pleasure many young hon. members discuss the housing problem. In my opinion, they have done so most eloquently. Eloquence is a quite desirable talent, but it should not be forgotten that in speaking one must be not only eloquent but practical.
I know something about housing. In the town of Lachine twenty-five houses have been built and a loss of money has resulted. To-

Housing Act
day the government wants to do the same thing. Let me tell you that within ten years those houses will be offered for sale at ten per cent of their value. This means that in the end the people must always foot the bill. Workmen do not like to pay too much in taxes, but the government cannot make expenditures without levying taxes. They have to find money. There are people who earn $60 a week to whom I said "You are getting along well, since you have a good job." They replied "Yes, but we have to give everything to the government." A friend of mine has built an eight-unit apartment house. The cost to him has been $20,000 incliTding the lot. Each one of those apartments has four rooms and the rental is $25 a month. The eight apartments bring him $2,400 a year, that is twelve per cent on his investment. Out of this amount, of $2,400 he must provide for interest, insurance and upkeep, and pay municipal and school taxes.
All these expenses come to five per cent of his capital, which leaves him with a revenue of only seven per cent. If he entrusts the management of his property to an agent, he must pay him three per cent for collecting the rent alone, aside from the cost of repairs; by now, only four per cent remains. If he has not engaged an agent to look after the rent collection and the maintenance of his property, he himself must take those matters in hand. Indeed, he can make a success of his business only if he attends personally to his property. Yet, the man who has saved a small sum of money by his hard work naturally looks forward to a bit of a rest; he will do without it, however, if, the minute he sets foot in the house in the evening, his wife says: "In such and such an apartment upstairs, one of the doors will not shut. In another, there is something wrong with the plumbing and a pipe has sprung a leak." In other words, if this man does not entrust the management of his property to someone else, he is compelled, three or four nights a week, to do all the repair work. Moreover, he must collect the rent himself. When he calls on the tenants, a few may be unable to pay him, and he has to go back two or three times. I know something about it. As far as that man is concerned, where does he make his profit?
All the housing the government plans to build will cost the taxpayer a good deal of money. Green wood will be used, and ten years from now, the doors will not shut and the houses will sell at ten- per cent of their value. It is a problem which the authorities will find difficult to solve. It is an easy matter to talk about building when one does 47696-95i
not have to do it. Those who talk the loudest are those who are barely out of school. They are full of enthusiasm and they claim that they know everything but they know nothing.
I started working as a labourer when I was still a boy and I earned 25 cents per day; later when I had reached manhood I earned 10 cents per hour. I worked ten hours a day in order to earn one dollar. To-day a labourer earns $5 per day but he is no better off. The man who works 45 hours per week now wants a 40-hour week. Everyone knows that when a man works 10 hours a day his output is much greater than when he works but 40 hours a week. If men work fewer hours, they do less work and the goods cost more. Why is lumber so expensive to-day? In the old days, lumberjacks earned $20 per month; to-day I believe they earn $50. Then there is the hauling of the lumber to the railroad station and to the contractors' yards. All that costs money. Indeed, I believe that the dollar which I earned when I was working for 10 cents per hour was worth as much as the $5 which labourers earn to-day. And that is not all. When we earn little, we spend little. "In my youth, a glass of spruce beer cost 1 cent; to-day, beer sells for 5 cents or 10 cents, according to the size of the glass. Therefore, one might ask: Are working men better off to-day than they were in my younger days? Is the worker in a better financial situation now than in my time? I wonder. I am very favourably inclined toward the workers for they are really deserving. We owe them the street cars, the sewers, the buildings of all kinds which we enjoy: they have built them. I am anxious to take their interest, but they must be made to 'understand that the less they will work, the higher the cost' of living will climb and the less money they will have in the end.
In my time, bricklayers were getting from 40 cents to 50 cents an hour; to-day, they get $1.25. Lumber is not the only material that has gone up in price; the trend has been general, it is evident in plumbing and all other fields of construction. Everything contributes to the high cost of housing. Twenty-five dollars a month for a four-room house is dear enough for any worker. We must therefore find a formula making it possible to build homes at reasonable prices so that the worker may be able to pay his rent. Otherwise, he will have to leave the premises. Even if he is in a position to pay, the landlord will have no return whatever from the property unless the tenant is able to make small repairs himself in the evening, such as painting a veranda, fitting a door, changing a washer on
Housing Act

a, .water faucet, and so on. If, tire government is the builder, they certainly will not attend to such small repairs. I am sure the hon. Minister, of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) would not do it. Thus, you can get an idea of what the cost of such, an undertaking will be for the government. I am wondering what good may come of all this and I leave it to you.
(Text)
Mr. ANTHONY HLYNKA (Vegreville)I:
Mr. Speaker, the government's proposal in this housing resolution is still a debt-finance proposal, and for that reason it is doomed to failure. The minister's scheme will fail to meet the needs of all those who need homes the most, simply because their incomes will not be sufficient to cover either the rent or the cost of these dwellings. The government, I believe, must undertake to subsidize house building if it is to be a success. There is no other way. I think the Edmonton Bulletin puts the case perhaps better than I have heard it put in the house. In an editorial in its issue of July 5, 1945, it has this to say on the subject of housing:	.
No one can afford to devote, it is calculated, more than one-fifth of his income to housing accommodation. This means that most Canadians, servicemen and civilians, must limit their monthly rent to between twenty and thirty dollars or else upset tlmir entire household economy.
It seems obvious, then, that the only answer to the pressing problem is adequate government ^subsidy.
: There are three essential factors in the matter <of government housing subsidy'.
First, speed is essential. Unless something on a sweeping scale is done immediately, hundreds of thousands of Canadians and certainly thousands of Edmontonians are going to be homeless next winter.	.
Second, adequacy is essential. There is no use half doing it. Enough money must be provided so that everybody in Canada may live in a decent home.	.
Third, beneficiaries under the housing subsidy must not be loaded with unpayable debt or unpayable rentals. Permanent bankruptcy is just as bad as homelessness. What is needed, then, is a plan that operates immediately, provides adequate funds to house everybody and supplies the money on a non-interest-bearing basis w'ith a loss if need be of some of the invested capital.
The Bank of Canada is the repository, created by parliament, of the national credit. The government should borrow money from the Bank of Canada, without interest, and devote it to the immediate construction of houses at low rentals.
This progressive Edmonton newspaper has championed low-rental housing and low-cost housing for many years, and for that reason I believe that I cannot improve on the wording or the clearness with which this paper states
[Mr. Bonnier.}
the case. I should therefore like to quote from another editorial which appeared in the Edmonton Bulletin of July 10, 1945:
The additional 300 war-time houses to be constructed in Edmonton this year for veterans, complete with basements and other permanent fixtures, will probably rent from $32 to $40 per month, it is announced. The temporary war-time houses, without basements and full-length chimneys, rent from $22 to $30 per month. No one, particularly a service man who deserves every possible comfort, should be asked to take his family into a primitive and uncompleted structure. At the same time the rent of the completed houses, running from $32 to $40 per month, is much too high. It is calculated that the cost of accommodation should never exceed 20 per cent of the individual's income. These rentals, then, can only upset the entire household economy of most of those who will have to live in them.
From another editorial which appeared in the same paper, dated July 31, 1945, I will quote only the last paragraph:
What is needed Is a low-cost modern house adapted to low rentals, because the returned man, like 80 per cent of other Canadians, can neither buy an expensive dwelling nor pay more than $18 to $25 per month rent for it. But under existing circumstances there is no such thing as a modern low-cost house. If houses are to be provided at rents the servicemen and most other Canadians can pay somebody must take a. loss on the building of them. And the only agency that can absorb this loss is the dominion government which represents all the people of Canada.
I should like to quote from another editorial which appeared in the same paper on August 14, 1945:
The lamentable failure of the National Housing Act to meet the actual home-building needs of discharged servicemen has been amply-proved in Edmonton and presumably throughout Canada. The failure emphasizes the extremely urgent need for another plan, financed on public money', which will provide for veterans the type o' accommodation they need at prices they can pay. . . .
The theory was that an equity of $400 would get a serviceman a loan of $3,600, which would enable him to build a home for $4,000. It does not work out that way. In practice, the serviceman requires a cash equity of at least $1,200 to $1,500. Even if he gets the full gratuity ot $1,800, which implies five years service in Europe, lie still has not enough to provide for furniture. No modern house can be built to-day for less than $5,000. To borrow $5,000 he must have $1,450. That leaves $350 for furniture in the unlikely event that he has the full $1,800 gratuity. The whole point is that the plan has. failed because modern low-rental homes can only be built to-day at a loss. Only the people-of Canada as a whole are capable of absorbing that loss. The sooner Mr. Ilsley decides on adequate subsidies, without regard to profits or returns, the sooner will a start be made towards solving the most vexatious problem facing Canada.
OCTOBER 25, 1945	i499
Demobilization-Naval Services
May I quote one more passage, from an editorial which appeared in the same paper on August 24, 1945:
In spite of the clear-headed statements of the Hon. C. D. Howe on the housing situation, that major problem still remains unsolved, because the circumlocution of debt finance has yet to be surmounted. The Hon. J. L. Ilsley clings to his obsolete bookkeeping system like grim death. Debt is still the incubus on house building. It should be possible to get desperately needed housing built just as desperately needed ships were built in Canadian yards during the war. Debt finance was set aside in the case of the ships. Debt finance will have to be set aside in the case of the houses.
I simply wish to emphasize the point that until and unless the government undertakes to subsidize housebuilding, our people will not have the homes in which to live, for the simple reason that the average Canadian does not receive an adequate income to enable him to purchase a home which would be comfortable for him'and his family, and by the same token a soldier who comes back from overseas and receives only his gratuity is not in a position to invest large sums of money in order to build a proper home. No one knows whether these men will obtain jobs which will bring them sufficient incomes to take care of their needs and at the same time to house their families.	.
Having made these suggestions, I maintain-that the minister and the government would be well advised to consider some scheme whereby the building of houses for individuals of limited means who desire them may be subsidized, and in that way necessary homes will be made available for our people.
I was not surprised that the group to my immediate right supported or showed their anxiety to support the measure because it appears to them that the government is going into house building. Anything which has the appearance of being state-controlled or state-owned would naturally be acceptable to them. They have taken the same attitude toward such measures as civil aviation. But so far as we of this group are concerned, we are never too anxious to give our unqualified support to any scheme, whether it appears to meet the situation or not, until and unless it is shown to us that it can be made financially possible, and until the government can indicate that the purchasing power in the hands of the average Canadian will be increased to purchase a home or rent a house at a reasonable cost. That is something that we of this group often repeat on the floor of the house, and there is no getting away from it. Unless the people of this nation have sufficient money with which to buy the things they need, whether it be housing or anything else, all
schemes that are brought forward will simply fail. We shall not have to wait very long to find that a great number of our returned men will be unable to pay the high rental costs that will be demanded of them,' because there is no guarantee that their incomes will be kept at a high level. Therefore, unless the government is willing to assure the Canadian people that everything possible will be done to keep that income at a high level, there is no chance that any scheme which is based upon debt finance will succeed. I again urge the government to consider this problem very seriously, because I believe that every Canadian is entitled to a home and that nothing should stand in the way of our people if they wish to build homes or to rent low-rental houses, provided that they are accommodated and their families are happy, so that we may have a happier and more satisfied nation.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Ilsley thereupon moved for leave to introduce bill No. 23, to incorporate the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. WAR AND DEMOBILIZATION



PROVISION FOB APPROPRIATION OF $1,365,000,000 FOR WAR PURPOSES, DEMOBILIZATION, PROMOTION OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY, ETC.

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, October 23, consideration in committee of a resolution to grant to His Majesty certain sums of money for the carrying out of measures deemed necessary or advisable in consequence of the war- Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.

Mr. LANGLOIS:: Before the committee proceeds to study the various items of the estimates, I wish to make some remarks of a general nature. I had not considered taking part in the present debate before hearing the speeches made by various members of this house. Since the estimates have been placed before the committee, I have listened carefully

Demobilization-Naval Services
to what has been said and I think I can summarize what has taken place so far as follows.
We have heard some hon. members criticize the government for not doing enough toward the formation of a peace-time navy, while on the other hand some others have considered that we are doing too much in the very same respect. I believe that the whole principle in medio stat virtue should apply in this case and that we can in all sincerity say, after having listened to the members of the house, that the government is just doing enough.
Of those who claim that we are not doing enough I must ask if they are prepared to admit that the government is not therefore spending enough. It is all very well to ask the government to have a large navy with a greater number of personnel and better ships, but in order to have such a navy we must be prepared to pay for it. No one wishes more than I do to see Canada with a large navy, a navy of such a size that full protection of our coasts, both east and west, shall be assured. However, we must not lose sight of the fact that our country is only a small nation and cannot spend forever as we did during the emergency that has existed in the last six years. It is difficult to understand hon. members who ask the government to provide a larger peace-time military establishment and yet do not hesitate at the same time to blame the same government for not cutting down the heavy taxes which our people must pay.
I always understood that the main reason for having opposition parties in parliament was to give to those in charge of the administration of the country the opportunity of receiving constructive criticism, which means the receiving of practical suggestions. I do not think this end has been achieved so far in this debate by our hon. friends on the other side of the house.
If Canada cannot afford a large navy we must therefore endeavour to look for quality since quantity is beyond our reach. How can we attain this maximum of quality in the formation of a peace-time navy without imposing too heavily on our budget? To my mind the first step to be taken toward this end is a careful selection of officers and men who are to form our peace-time personnel. At the present time our navy is being demobilized at an accelerated speed. In going through this demobilization period I hope that naval service headquarters will take into consideration first the qualifications of officers and men who wish to remain in the naval service. We must not forget that during the period of peace which followed the last great war we were too

much inclined to forget that Canada had a navy and, moreover, we did not pay enough attention to the fact that it might ever need one. It was only when war suddenly broke out in 1939 that we woke up to the fact that Canada had for all practical purposes almost no navy at all. We must not forget this historical moment in the history of our navy, when, at the outbreak of the conflict, the British admiralty wired our then chief of naval staff asking when Canada would be ready to send across the ocean the first convoy to the British isles. Less should we also forget the historical answer which was sent from naval service headquarters and which marked the beginning of the battle of the Atlantic by a single but brave word, " immediately.'-
I must here pause to pay high tribute to our then chief of naval staff for his courageous answer and also to those officers and men who did not hesitate to embark on our obsolete ships in order to deliver to our allies the badly needed goods. We have afterwards seen brave sons of this country go to sea for the first time in their lives, forgetting their lack of sea experience, but listening only to their brave hearts which were called to serve their country. Our losses were heavy, and Canada suffered a greater loss than that of ships and materials, because we then had to suffer the loss of some of the bravest men who ever lived on this continent.
I sincerely hope that this will never happen again, and the way to prevent it is to see that Canada keeps ready for any emergency which may occur in the future. That is why, as I have said previously, I hope that the nucleus of our peace-time navy will be based more on quality than on quantity of personnel to offset the disadvantages we had at the beginning of the war owing to the fact that we lacked trained personnel.
At the beginning of the conflict training establishments were rapidly opened throughout the country, and I must here pay another tribute to the personnel who taught in these training establishments at Halifax, Esquimalt, and later at Cornwallis, not mentioning our various reserve divisions all over Canada, which looked after preliminary training of recently recruited personnel.
After receiving, in a relatively short period, extensive training, our men were sent in ships where they acquired in actual warfare priceless sea experience for five or six years. In addition to preliminary training in gunnery, navigation, torpedo communication, and so forth, our training establishments were giving specialist courses which were of a very high standard. I must here mention in

Demobilization-Naval Services
particular the lung navigation course which was given in H.M.C.S. Kings under the direction of that hard-working officer, Commander Siverts. I myself had the great advantage of benefiting by the good work of that officer. The result of this training, combined with sea experience, contributed greatly to the fact that toward the end of hostilities we had a navy of qualified personnel. I do not hesitate to add that a single year of sea experience during the conflict which has just ended counts for more than three years of experience and training under peace-time conditions, no matter how highly trained is our peace-time personnel. That is why I say that in demobilizing our naval personnel we must do our best to keep within the ranks of our permanent force officers and men who have acquired experience during the war. How can we retain this personnel? This brings me to another consideration which must be taken into account during this demobilization period. That is, the consideration of the age of officers and men who are to be retained in the navy. We have had so far a lieutenant navy. Believe me, this was not due to the fact that top-ranking officers, in charge of the administration, voluntarily barred promotions, but rather due to the class of ships in which our officers were called to serve.
As everybody knows, the rank of a sea-going, officer goes with the class of ships in which he sails. We therefore have officers who have served for five or six years and now hold only the rank of lieutenants or acting lieutenant-commanders. If we do not give them an opportunity of seeing ahead of them a chance of rapid promotion so that their financial status may be compared with the standard of wages being offered at the present time to civilians, we consequently cannot expect these officers to be inclined to join our permanent force. On the other hand, if we do consider the question of age and give them the advantage of earning as much in the navy as they can expect to earn in civilian life, then we shall ipso facto interest them. The means to achieve this end is to set an average age for our permanent navy. I must add that the United States navy has followed this practice and has recently promoted a large number of its junior officers.
The third and last consideration which I suggest should be taken into account in the formation of a permanent navy is that of national representation. I believe that Canada and national unity will gain a great deal if the various racial groups in this country are proportionately represented in our permanent navy.
One has to serve his country to realize the deep love for it which beforehand might have lain dormant in his heart. If we see to it that our sons, no matter what racial groups they represent, serve together, we have every reason to hope then that these sons will become strongly attached to each other and will form the nucleus of a truly united nation, which we have for so long endeavoured to form in Canada.	-
Before closing these brief remarks, I must congratulate the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services (Mr. Abbott) upon having given the officers oi the Royal Canadian Navy, permanent and reserve personnel as well, the same distinctive stripes, and for having combined the R.C.N.R. and R.C.N.V.R. under a single reserve. This will eliminate, I think, this friction which has existed to a certain degree between permanent and reserve officers and even between the two former reserves and will, I hope, contribute to give Canada, if not a large, at least a united and strong peace-time navy.
Mr. COCIvERAM: Is the minister in a position to reply to the charges made by Commander Carr? He said he would make a statement in the house.


Mr. ABBOTT:: Yes; I should be glad to make that statement. Commander Carr made a very large number of statements or charges in various articles published in a certain periodical which is issued in Toronto. I have no intention of attempting to give an omnibus answer to those charges. However, I shall be glad under the various items in these estimates to do so. I think every one of the charges can be dealt with. If my hon. friend will put to me certain queries he has in mind, I shall make answer. I shall be pleased to do so, if he will quote the statement referred to. However, I am not prepared to make an omnibus answer to those articles as a whole.


Alan Cockeram: That is entirely different from what the minister said the other night. On October 22, as reported at page 1386 of Hansard he said:
I am prepared to make a full statement on that, but it is a little late to do so to-night. The articles related to certain yachts that were taken over and to the developments at Shol-bourne. I shall be delighted to give a full statement in answer to the article by Mr. Carr.
I take it that the minister is reneging on ' his word.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No; I shall be delighted to make a statement. I want the hon. member to put his particular questions either under this item or under other items, and I shall answer each one fully.
Demobilization-Naval Services


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: I should like to ask the minister a question having to do with the manner in which the navy regards naval personnel who run afoul of civilian authority, something which quite often happens. We had a rather sad experience this summer in the Halifax riots, when a sailor found himself picked up by police. In the trial next day he found that certain evidence was given against him. I understand from the man that he had difficulty in finding someone to conduct his defence, because there appeared to be no one there who was authorized to plead his case for him.
This man understood the situation he was in, and thought the best thing to do was to plead guilty, and to take what he thought would be a fine of $50 or $100. He was surprised, however, when he found that, upon pleading guilty, he was sentenced to three years imprisonment. The man found himself in the predicament that he must try to appeal his case in order to get justice, and again he found the difficulty of getting the right kind of legal defence which would be afforded by an able lawyer. The man may be in such a position in regard to his own defence that he cannot afford a really first-class lawyer. The result has been that this man has lost his appeal, and now faces the reality of having to serve a three-year sentence, thereby bringing disgrace upon himself and his family, and losing all his gratuity. I believe that probably the only resource left to him is in the matter of remission, through the Minister of Justice.
How many cases are there where naval personnel arq sentenced and left in civilian gaols for civilian offences? How many cases are there where naval courts have sentenced men :o punishment, and where the punishment is *arried over and completed in civilian gaols? What can the department do, or what regulations has it with regard to the defence of these men? Has the department any plan to rectify this matter, and what is it doing toward bringing justice to these men?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think the particular case to which the hon. member refers is the one-


George Hugh Castleden: Percy Sullivan.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes. I believe the hon. member has a question on the order paper. The answer is being prepared and will probably be filed to-morrow.
With regard to the general question as to how many naval personnel are serving in civilian prisons, and in respect of the other details concerning which questions have been asked, obviously I cannot be in a position to

give that information to-night because, as the committee knows, in the navy and in the other armed services, where military or naval personnel commit offences which are triable before civilian courts they are frequently sent before those courts for trial, and are committed to civilian prisons if found guilty. I can get the information for which the hon. member has asked. I shall be pleased to do so, and probably I can have it for him later in the debate. If not, I shall see that it is put on record.
As to the procedure for seeing that these men are defended, the usual principle applied is that no man in any court in Canada is allowed to stand trial without the benefit of counsel, if he wishes to have it. I do not know the circumstances of the particular case to which my hon. friend refers, but I assume that, as happens in every case, he was offered counsel, had he seen fit to avail himself of it. However, the hon. member has placed his question on the order paper, and I believe a full answer will be given within a day or two.


George Hugh Castleden: Does the department
provide any counsel?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, the department does
not provide counsel for naval personnel as such. If the trial is before a court martial, of course he is entitled to counsel. If he is tried in a civilian court he has the same right in his defence as anyone else, in that if he does not retain counsel on his own behalf, the court will provide him with that service.


George Hugh Castleden: Is there not a provision whereby there are officers in attendance who will give information in a civilian court as to a man's conduct and character?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That information would be made available; and of course it may be assumed that the bar associations of the various provinces-in my province I know this is So- have made provision for looking after the legal interests of service men, including, of course, naval personnel. Then, the judge advocates, general in the various naval divisions are available to give advice to any naval ratings who may find themselves in need of it.


Mr. FRASER:: I have before me information put eut by the rehabilitation information committee of, I presume, the wartime information board. This information concerns naval discharge procedure, and it says that, first, a man is drafted to a discharge transit centre and, second, that he receives a complete physical examination in the following respects: medical, X-ray, dental and blood test. In talking to many naval men I have been informed that in connection with their medical

examination they are given X-rays of the chest, but no other X-rays are taken. There is no X-ray taken of their teeth. The naval dentists are all doing a good job, and the men say that they are good dentists, but are overworked. The hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat said that demobilization in the navy was being carried on at an accelerated speed. It is because of that accelerated speed of demobilization that the dentist, instead of X-raying the teeth of a man being discharged, takes his instruments, merely taps the teeth and if the man yells he puts down on the chart just what teeth need attention. When that man is discharged or sent home on leave he may go to his dentist to have his teeth checked up according to the chart given him by the naval dentist. He may have two, three or more teeth filled according to that chart, when he may have half a dozen or more abscesses under his teeth. I have known of cases where these naval men have had to pay out of their own pockets, not $5 or $10 but ten times that much in order to have their teeth taken out and a new set of star teeth, the kind that comes out at night, put in.
When men are discharged and given charts by the naval dentists they should be given a blank certificate good for a month or two after their discharge, so that if their teeth are defective by civilian dentists they can have them fixed up. X-rays should be taken"not only of the chest and lungs for T.B. spots, but of the whole body. I understand that blood tests are taken, but in some cases it is only a blood count and the blood is not tested for sugar or other purposes.
The third item is the rehabilitation lecture. I know some of these men have had this, but others have not. With this accelerated speed of demobilization many men do not get the proper attention in regard to rehabilitation.
The fourth item has reference to final discharge establishment. That is all right. If the man is entitled to discharge, he proceeds oc leave. If he has been a good man, he gets his leave; if he has not, he gets it in the neck.
The next item is the final medical examination. This examination is carried on just like sausages going through a sausage machine. The final examination is not a thorough one.
I do not get these complaints from just one man who has been discharged; I have had them from dozens of men.
The next item refers to the counsellor. When a man is discharged from the navy he asks if he can interview the Department of Veterans Affairs counsellor. I am not sure, but I believe these counsellors would b.e navy men to interview men being discharged from the naval forces. However, the men find that 47696-96
Demobilization-Naval Services
they must wait two, three or four weeks for an interview. They do not want to stick around that long; they want to be doing something. This should be checked up.	,
The ninth item is in regard to the discharge certificates, et cetera. The men are given clothing priority slips good for thirty days. Would it not be wise to extend these to sixty days? During the first month a boy may continue to wear his service clothes, at least for part time. Quite often many parties are given to him because he has just come out of the navy; people are glad to see him home, and sometimes the thirty days have elapsed before he realizes he has to have a suit of clothes.
While I am on my feet I should like to ask the minister if his department, like the United States government authorities, are going to experiment with the atomic bomb as it affects the navy. In the United States they are testing the effect of the atomic bomb upon targets in the water, and they are carrying on other tests to decide whether the present bombs used by the United States navy are as good as the atomic bomb. I should like to know also whether the ships of the Canadian peacetime navy will all be equipped with the new seven-eleven gun-sights and how many of those gun-sights the department has in storage.


William Ross Macdonald: I would remind the committee that we are dealing with the different items. Item 1 covers civil salaries. The hon. member for Peterborough West is now asking about bombs, which I think would come up under item 7. I am not criticizing the hon. member, but I think it might expedite the proceedings of the committee if we would deal only with the various items. At the close of the committee's sittings the other night it was suggesed that we might carry item 1.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Oh, no.


William Ross Macdonald: It was sugested that
we might carry it and proceed with the other items. I would draw to the attention of hon. members the fact that there are various items and, if matters they intend to refer to could be discussed under a particular item, I think it would expedite proceedings.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I think you are quite right, Mr. Chairman, in regard to the bomb sights, but I do not see any item under which I could discuss the medical check-up.
I should like to mention another matter which has been a sore subject with the men in the navy. It is in regard to men on shore at Halifax and Victoria. The shore patrol of the Royal Canadian Navy or the volunteer navy were given orders-they did it anyway, if not under orders, on their own-to pick up



Demobilization-Naval Services
all Royal Navy men who did not salute on the streets of those two cities, and evidently the Royal Navy men were given similar orders to pick up our men in the same circumstances. But the procedure in carrying that out is what the men object to. What happened was that the shore patrol were given credit marks depending upon the number picked up, which sped up their promotion. A sublieutenant or warrant officer would walk along the street with two shore patrol men behind him and they would pick up every man they possibly could. The men do object to that. That is one practice which should certainly be done away with in peace time. The rules and regulations should prohibit that sort of thing from happening again.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have taken note of my
hon. friend's remarks with respect to various general matters, including dental and medical inspection. I am not familiar with the routine of dental inspection. I thought it was fairly thorough in comparison with the inspection that I got after the last war. I got no dental . services, let alone an X-ray. I do not think an X-ray is taken of all a man's teeth before discharge. Perhaps the X-ray takes place if a particular tooth is bothering him. It would be quite a job to X-ray all the teeth of every rating before discharge.
I am surprised to hear that the medical examination is not thorough. That does not coincide with my information. I have had a number of complaints that we are keeping too many medical men and too many dentists in the navy and that we should be discharging them more rapidly, and I have answered by saying that we need the medical men to assure a prompt and thorough examination of the men.
I will take note of my hon. friend's other suggestions, for instance, that the time in which a man can purchase clothing should be extended from thirty to sixty days. That would apply to all the services. I will bring that to the attention of the proper officers.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The men are X-rayed before entering the navy but not X-rayed again until they are discharged from the navy, except in Newfoundland. There are many men on different Canadian ships who have perhaps a touch of T.B. They might have served on the Atlantic, winch plays havoc with some of them. The medical officers should be given permission to X-ray the men coming in off these ships if they have a bad cold or show any signs of T.B. The minister might know that at Naden there were at least twenty-five men found with .T.B.; in fact, there were some deaths there from it.

The men should not be allowed to go for a whole year but should be X-rayed every six months at least, because they are out in all kinds of weather, and in my opinion the department should check on them in every way possible.


Mr. PEARKES:: Just before this committee adjourned on the 22nd instant the minister said that he would'answer the questions which had been asked by the hon. member for York West with reference to the Royal Canadian Naval College. Before he answers those questions I should like to say a word regarding the college, which is located at Royal Roads on Vancouver island. I do not believe it would be possible to find a better situation for that college. It has delightful surroundings and is situated on the strait of San Juan, where there are various types of water and where one can very easily pass out from the strait into the Pacific ocean. Near at hand there is a lagoon on which elementary training can be done. I was pleased that the minister was able to say that the college would continue at Royal Roads.
Other questions referred to the extension of that college and1 to whether there would be any change in policy. At the present time the college takes in approximately one hundred cadets, some thirty of whom are permitted to go into the Royal Canadian Navy each year, the rest going into the Royal Canadian Navy Reserve. While the college education deals partly with the training of a naval officer in the particular subjects required of him in the navy, it also gives him a basic education on broad general lines as well as on scientific lines. It provides a good education for the cadet whether upon graduation he goes into the Royal Canadian Navy or into the Royal Canadian Navy Reserve or into civil life, because the curriculum includes such subjects as English, French, history, mathematics, physics, chemistry, engineering, in addition to the more particularly naval subjects such as seamanship, navigation, gunnery and torpedo work. Thus they get a sound theoretical and practical knowledge, and that course as it has been to date has fitted the boy for whatever career he may desire to take up upon leaving the college. To those cadets who do not go into the Royal Canadian Navy upon graduation a certificate is issued which is recognized by a great many Canadian universities, and cadets who hold that certificate of graduation are permitted certain academic credits when entering a Canadian university.
I was hoping that there was no intention to change the policy so as to restrict this broad outlook which the graduates have been given

Demobilization-Naval Services
in the past, because I believe that their outlook should be at least as broad as that of the boy entering a university from the ordinary college and that the cadets' general cultural background should be at least as good as that of his contemporaries in the university to which he goes.
The Royal Canadian Naval College is administered by a board of governors but partly owing to war conditions, I suppose, the board has seldom been able to call to its meetings the commandant of the college or his chief instructor. I would rather like to compare that situation with the condition which existed at the Royal Military College at Kingston, where there is an advisory board composed not only of soldiers but also of educationalists representing either the universities or the educational authorities in the various provinces. Has the minister any plans for bringing closer together the instruction which is given in educational establishments other than that of the Royal Canadian Naval College, with the Royal Naval College itself? I hope that we are not going to have too much professional control of that college.
Since applications for entry to the college have to be in the hands of the naval secretary early in the year, I think of parents who are considering sending their boys to this college, and are anxious to know whether there will be any change in the policy, and also whether there will be any increase in the number of cadets to be taken into Royal Roads during the coming year. With the expansion of the navy .over the pre-war navy, one might hope that the opportunity will be given to more boys to attend what I believe is an educational establishment of which this country may well be proud.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The question which has just been	raised	by the hon.	member	forNanaimo is one which I proposed to deal with. It was raised, as he indicated, the other evening by the hon. member for York West. I stated then that the Royal Canadian Naval College at	Royal	Roads would	be continued.He asked,	as the	hon. member	who has	justtaken his	seat has indicated,	whether	the
scope of instruction at the college would be extended and whether a larger number of cadets would be taken in next year. I am not in a position to make any definite statement as to those two points. The matter is under active consideration at the moment. Captain Grant, the present head of the college, was here last week. The possibility of extending the college course from two to three years is under consideration. As the committee will realize, the present college was not in existence prior to the war, and 47696-964
in order to speed up the turn-out of naval officers the course was fixed at two years. If, as is quite possible, the course is extended to three years, it will involve reconsideration of the number of cadets that will be taken in each year. As I say, I am not in a position to make any definite statement as to that, but I hope to be able to do so at an early day.
One or two other matters have been raised on which I promised to get information and give it to the commitfee. The first was by the hon. member for Yale, who asked how many applications had been received for service in the interim force, the two years' * service. That figure stands at present at 508 officers and 673 ratings who have applied for two-year extension of service, a total of 1,181, which in my judgment is very satisfactory indeed. As I indicated to the committee the other night, we have not pressed and are not pressing this service at the moment. He also asked me how many officers and men, hostilities only, had transferred to the permanent force since April 1 last. The answer lo that question is that from April 1, 1945, to October 22, 1945. inclusive, thirty-six hostilities only officers .have transferred to the permanent force, and from April 1 to October 10. 1945, sixty-five hostilities only ratings have transferred. I have not any report since October 10 with respect to ratings from the various commands who were authorized to accept such transfers. I think those are the principal questions on which I promised to give the committee further information.


George Randolph Pearkes: Would the minister answer the question as to what stops are being taken to keep the college education in line with that of the other educational establishments?


Douglas Charles Abbott: 1 had intended to include that in my general statement, that the who! question of the curriculum of the college the length of the course, and the intake each year is now under active consideration by the naval staff and myself, and I hope to be able to make a statement on that at a fairly early day.


Mr. ISNOR:: There are one or two questions I should like to ask the Minister of Defence. Before doing so, I wish to refer, as did the hon. member for Temiscouata, to the very fine service given by Doctor Macmillan in connection with the Department of National Defence for Air. I, too, would like to pay tribute to Doctor Cyrus Macmillan and at the same time to express appreciation of one or two other outstanding maritimers. I refer first to the former minister of national
Demobilization-Naval Services

defence, Colonel J. L. Ralston, who, as all hon. members will recall gave up his private practice and entered the cabinet, first as minister of finance and later as minister of national defence in the early stages of the war. I know that the people of Nova Scotia and the maritimes generally, and more particularly his comrades of "the fighting 85th", would want me, when the estimates on defence are being considered, to pay tribute to his outstanding loyalty and the manner in which he so unselfishly gave of his time and talents.


Mr. JACKMAN:: And so would the whole of Canada.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: And the whole of Canada; quite right.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Why is he not here now?


An hon. MEMBER:: That is a S64 question.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I refer also to one other outstanding Canadian, also a maritimer, and I hope the hon. member who has just referred to the rest of Canada will pay the same tribute to the other party whose name I am about, to mention. I refer to the former minister of national defence for naval services, Hon. Angus L. Macdonald,-	,


An hon. MEMBER:: Where is he now?


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: -who during a period of some years occupied the position of Premier of Nova Scotia, but at the call of his country came to Ottawa and established or organized from a very small beginning and developed .into a magnificent organization the navy department-


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Are you readopting him?


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: -a man who recently returned to Nova Scotia, his native province, and was honoured just a few days ago by being returned to power as the premier of that province with a very heavy majority. I do not mention that in a political sense at all; it is to acknowledge an outstanding Canadian who did his share during the war period.
It is not my intention to go into figures as regards any particular branch of the service, but I wish to say to the Minister of National Defence that I believe the people of the maritimes, and in fact the whole of Canada, were a little disappointed at the figures he mentioned for the army, the air force and the navy. I hoped that the navy, at least, would be represented by very much larger numbers. As the minister has said, we have a very long coast-line on the Atlantic and another on the Pacific, and the division of the present forces into these two sections does not in my opinion .give us as large a force as we should have.

I mention that to the minister so that he and his experts can give the point further consideration in the future.
I am going to speak again, as I always do, about our fine harbour on the Atlantic.


Mr. BROOKS:: How many?


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I said, our fine harbour. I had in mind one harbour in particular, but I might mention as well the other one in New Brunswick, the port of Saint John. We in Halifax particularly are perhaps navy conscious because we have been so closely identified with the war effort. During the very early days when some of my hon. friends who may say "hear, hear," were hardly conscious that there was a war going on we were actively engaged in war work in Nova Scotia. Well do I recall the time in July, 1940, when a number of members, irrespective of party affiliations, went on a trip to Halifax and saw that city in its war garb actively engaged in the war effort. I felt then that it was a fine thing to have those members come to Halifax and see what was taking place. It gave them an insight into what was going on in the naval and other branches of the defence forces. I often felt sorry that they could not make a similar trip in 1944 or 1945 to see the progress that had been made in fortifications, and the .splendid work that had been carried on by the navy and the other branches of the defence services. I bring this matter to the attention of the minister because I believe that greater use should be made of the facilities of H.M.C. dockyards at Halifax. We have a very fine plant there, well equipped and well able to handle all repairs necessary for the ships of the Canadian navy, and I suggest that greater use be made of the facilities provided in the machine shop, so that general repairs may be carried out there instead of being sent elsewhere. I also suggest that the floating dock, which it is proposed to do away with through the War Assets Corporation, be kept there and made use of by H.M.C. dockyards. At the present time it is used for general ship repairs, but it should be there particularly for the use of the navy.
I am now going to speak about a matter which I hesitate to bring up, but it is necessary to do so. It is in connection with the Bedford basin magazine. As all hon.-members know, we had an explosion there in 1917 which resulted in the loss of 1,600 lives, besides property damage. That was brought about by the collision of two ships which were in a place where only one should have been. With that in mind I brought to the attention of the Department of National Defence, at a

Demobilization-Naval Services
very early stage of this war, the fact that I was fearful of what might ensue should such a thing happen again. The people of Halifax in that vicinity were concerned about the magazine. They were wondering whether necessary precautions were being taken, whether proper safeguards were being maintained in the handling of explosives. This year, in the middle of the summer, we had an unfortunate explosion there which might have been very much more serious so far as loss of life was concerned. As it was, it was very serious in respect of property. To show that this was a matter of concern to the people of Halifax and to members particularly, I will place on file a letter that was written by me to the then minister of national defence, dated February 7, 1942; and I would ask the minister to note the date, because it was early in 1942, February 7 of that year:
Hear Mr. Ralston:
I am worried and disturbed in respeot to the manner in which ammunition and explosives are handled at Halifax. The information which I have received is to the effect that explosives are being brought by rail to Windsor Junction, switched to the Dartmouth branch and unloaded at Dartmouth pier, from where they are transported by scow or lighter to ships in the Bedford basin.
The Dartmouth pier, as you no doubt will remember, is located near the residential district of North Dartmouth, and while this in itself may not be a real hazard, the rehandling and the possibility of the scows or lighter being bumped or in collision going through the Narrows, is to me something that should be given most careful thought.
None of us would want to see a repetition of that awful catastrophe of 1917 when two ships met at a point where only one should have been.
Two suggestions have been offered. One is that a wharf should be constructed near the present magazine in Bedford basin. This, if 1 remember rightly, was under a protected cove just south of the track used by the magazine. The other suggestion was that the explosives should be routed through county harbour.
If you consider this important enough, would suggest that you might discuss same with the Minister of Munitions and Supply and the Minister for Naval Services.
I put that on the record so that the Minister of National Defence will know that it was brought to the attention of not only the then Minister of National Defence but of the Minister of Munitions and Supply, who advised me that the movement of ships came under the transport controller. I wrote to him somewhat along the same lines and I do not need to read that letter. Notwithstanding those representations made to the ministers, things were allowed to carry on in a manner, as stated in my letter, that gave grave concern to the people of Halifax.
I should now like to find out what steps have been taken and are being taken to prevent a recurrence of such an incident. I am not going to advocate, as certain bodies have done, doing away with the magazine. In my opinion, if we are to have a naval Atlantic base at Halifax, with ships coming in and going out, it is necessary that there should be a source of supply; but I say that every safeguard should be taken to prevent another accident such as that which we experienced just a few months ago.
I am now inquiring as to what steps have been taken with regard to an establishment such as they have in coastguard defence, or an establisment such as they have in the United States at the present time. A large number of men are being let out from the naval services and are anxious to continue their connection with the naval service. From the ranks of fishermen and those who have had experience in the navy I believe an efficient force could be formed w'hieh would be available in case of future need.
When the minister replies I should like him to advise us as to what steps, if any, are being taken in connection with the formation of an auxiliary branch such as I have mentioned. When the items are under consideration I propose to ask further questions with regard to certain expenditures. ,


Douglas Charles Abbott: The first question asked by the senior hon. member for Halifax relates to the steps taken to ensure so far as possible that there will not .be a recurrence of the unfortunate explosion which took place in the Bedford magazine. I covered that in part in my preliminary statement in introducing these estimates. There is no doubt that there was over-storage of ammunition at the Bedford magazine. The storage of ammunition, as it was in the open, was not safe and did contribute to the unfortunate explosion. The special committee which was set up under Colonel Ogilvie, in addition to the naval inquiry, has visited the magazine on two occasions. The damaged ammunition has now been largely removed. I think the area c&n now be taken as being safe so far as human precautions can make any magazine area safe. [DOT]
So far as the future is concerned, the quantity of ammunition stored in that magazine will be very much less than was the case during the war or was the case perhaps even prior to the war. The main ammunition stock, so far as the navy is concerned, will in future be stored at Renous which, as the committee knows, is in New Brunswick on the east coast, and Kamloops on the west coast.
150S

DcmobiliznI.ion-Natml Services
I have not had an opportunity to study in detail the report which Colonel Ogilvie made a week or ten days ago, but substantially he has advised us that he is satisfied with the steps that are being taken to clear up the magazine area. He has made certain recommendations which are being implemented, and I think my hon. friend and the people of Halifax can rest assured that every measure is being taken to make sure that there will be no recurrence of the unfortunate explosion which took place last June.
With regard to the second question as to coastal defence with some type of fishermen's reserve, I am afraid I am not in a position to make any statement at the moment, but I shall take note of the suggestion and discuss it with the staff to see what their views may be as to the suggestion which my hon. friend has put forward.


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: I think we are all in agreement that the Halifax naval explosion damages should be paid; the losses should be made good to those who suffered because of the explosion. I have a specific case on my desk of an indirect loss to a farmer in connection with this explosion. This farmer, who was a poultry raiser, shipped on the day before the explosion, 129 pounds of young chickens, broilers, to Halifax. He had them [DOT]on ice before shipment by express. The train was delayed because of the explosion, and the shipment was spoiled and was a complete loss so far as the producer was concerned.
He made a claim on the Canadian National Express, but they repudiated it, although they recognized the shipper's loss, inasmuch as the express company stated that they were not responsible for the delay and spoilage. This industrious farmer would like to know to whom he should apply for ledress with respect to this shipment. I understand that many or all the other claims have been recognized. The claim has not yet been filed because the shipper did not know to whom to submit the claim.
There is anothy matter to which I should like to refer. What is the policy of the minister or the government with respect to the loeation of the Royal Canadian Naval College, or such an institution for the Canadian naval services on the eastern coast? The Royal Canadian College was located on the eastern coast years ago. It was destroyed by another unfortunate explosion in 1917, to which the senior hon. member for Halifax has just referred. That college building and equipment were completely destroyed and not reestablished at the time. It has been felt in fMr. Abbott.]
Nova Scotia that that province is entitled to have the college located on the eastern Atlantic coast. While we are not envious of the Pacific coast, yet we do not want to be always the losers and have our establishments taken from us and be made to suffer for the benefit of other parts of Canada. I should like a statement from the minister as to the policy of the department with regard to the reestablishment of a naval college in Nova Scotia.


Douglas Charles Abbott: As to the claim for the loss of chickens I can give my friend a free legal opinion on it, but perhaps I had better not do that-


Mr. GREEN:: It might not be worth very much.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It would not be worth very much, no. As to where the claim should be made, E. L. Cousens, administrator of Atlantic ports, is in charge of adjusting claims resulting from the Bedford Basin explosion.
As to the sight of the Royal Canadian Naval College, the present location, as the committee knows, is Royal Roads on the west coast. It was established there during the war. What may be done in the future, I am not, of course, in a position to say at the moment, but I may say there is no immediate intention to move the college from its present location.


Percy Chapman Black: I must tell the minister that his predecessor gave this house to understand that at least some part of the Royal Canadian Naval College would be reestablished on the Atlantic coast. That is the impression he gave me. I am surprised1 and disappointed that the minister would repudiate our claims in Nova Scotia at this time.
. I said a few moments ago that this is one more case where the eastern provinces are the losers for the benefit of central Canada, the prairies and the Pacific coast. In this case it is to British Columbia. I believe the Atlantic coast is entitled to the reestablishment of this naval college. If there is to be only one such college it should be reestablished in Halifax and not on the Pacific coast. If reestablished in Halifax, on the Atlantic coast, it would be in close contact with naval ships, and other institutions of Great Britain, and they could work together in harmony, one for the benefit of the other. I repeat that we in the east, as a matter of right, are entitled to that. It was lost to us because of an unfortunate explosion,' and I say that the college should be reestablished in Halifax. The people of Nova Scotia will resent deeply the minister's refusal at this time to give an assurance that the Royal Canadian Naval College will be reestablished on the Atlantic coast.

Demobilization-N aval Services


Douglas Charles Abbott: I was not aware that my predecessor, Mr. Macdonald, had given the undertaking to which the hon. member for Cumberland has just referred. In fact my information is that he did not give such an undertaking; but no doubt the hon. member can give me the reference in Hansard, or wherever it was recorded. I have nothing to add to the statement I made a minute ago.


Mr. MOORE:: It was not my intention to speak about the navy, but at the last moment, and for several very good reasons, I decided to say a few words. I have noticed that in this debate there has been considerable men-_ tion of recruiting for the Royal Canadian Navy, and it has been pointed out that it is the intention of the government to maintain a peace-time navy of considerable proportions. A good many members have been wondering why we now find difficulty in getting recruits for the navy.


Douglas Charles Abbott: We are not.


Ronald Stewart Moore: As one who has had experience in the navy, I propose to tell the committee why we are having difficulty in obtaining those much needed sailors.


Douglas Charles Abbott: But we are not having
difficulty, if I may interrupt my hon. friend.


Ronald Stewart Moore: Well, several hon. members have been expressing a doubt.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, but perhaps I have better information than some others have.


Ronald Stewart Moore: I accept the minister's statement that he has sufficient sailors to man the navy. But I think all hon. members will be willing to agree that a number who have spoken in the last few days have stated that there has been difficulty in obtaining sufficient men to enlist in the navy.


Mr. McILRAITH:: But they were wrong.


Ronald Stewart Moore: I wish to state first that I am not blaming the government on this point. The reason why men do not wish to serve in the navy is that service in that branch of the armed forces is particularly hard. It is especially hard in the Royal Canadian Navy, not because of anything the government has done to make it hard and, I might say, not because of anything the government could do to make it better. It is on account of the fact that we have a navy of small ships. I think all sailors will be willing to agree that service on small ships is quite difficult, and it is difficult because of extremely cramped conditions. When one starts out on a ship he finds plenty of food; the ship is clean and,
generally speaking, conditions are satisfactory. But before he approaches the end of that trip the food is almost gone; one is living on short rations and under conditions which could be described as anything but favourable.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: To what size of ship is the hon. member referring?


Ronald Stewart Moore: To the chief kind of ship used by the Royal Canadian Navy for escort duty during the last war, namely corvettes. I believe I am correctly stating the facts when I say that the corvettes were the chief escort vessel.
To go on from that point, I wish to repeat that we are not blaming the government for that condition. But after three or four years of service on such ships men do get tired of going to sea. I venture to say that when peace was declared many Canadian sailors fondly looked forward to the day when they would get out. of the Royal Canadian Navy.
I am not saying that everyone holds that view, because I have met a number of men who are willing to continue to serve with the navy. But the majority of them wish to get home. If we do have difficulty in maintaining our navy I suggest that we might compensate the men for those hard living conditions by increasing the pay of the lower ranks. For instance, an able seaman or a second-class stoker starts out at a pay of $1.25 or SI-35 a day. It may be $1.50; I am not sure, but it is around there somewhere, and it is difficult to get higher pay. It takes considerable time to work up to, let us say, a seaman petty officer, where there would be a considerable increase in the rate of pay. I would suggest that the rates for the men in the lower classifications should be raised to the point where their remuneration would be similar to what they would get for peace-time work.
I -would suggest, further, that we do something to remove tradition from the Royal Canadian Navy. I think we have reached the time when we must realize that Nelson is dead. I do not say that in any derogatory sense, but the view held by many sailors on the ships of the Royal Canadian Navy is that things are done in the way Nelson did them. In the Royal Navy it is quite common to hear them say that they are doing things in the way Nelson did them.
Another improvement we might make would effect what one might term the officer class. I think it is correct to say that there was a greater difference between the living and pay conditions of the officer and rating classes in the navy than there was between the officer and ordinary soldier classes in the
Demobilization-Naval Services

army. We have reached the point where men, especially those in the Royal Canadian Navy, feel keenly that they are an inferior lot, so far as their positions in the navy are concerned. I realize fully that we must have discipline in the navy1, but I think it would be quite possible to meet the suggestion I have made while at the same time maintaining efficiency.
I have only one more statement to make, namely, that the minister ought to remind the brass hats in the navy, if I may so describe them, that Nelson is dead, and that the Canadian navy should be reconstructed along modem lines.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am sure the hon. member for Churchill has not overstated the hardships of serving in small ships. I know, too, that he speaks from personal experience, something which only very few in the house can do. I simply wish to point out, however, that I hope in the future service in the navy will be in somewhat larger and very much more modem ships. As I indicated in my statement, the post-war navy will consist of two light cruisers of the most modern design, up-to-date destroyers and two large aircraft carriers. At least those two carriers will be the largest we have had in the Royal Canadian Navy. Therefore I say that the man who stays on in the navy may look forward to conditions very much better than those described by the hon. member for Churchill.
I will bring his remarks about Nelson's death to the attention of the staff.


Alan Cockeram: Speaking in the house
on October 22, as reported at page 13S5 of Hansard, I said to the minister:
If the minister desires to get his estimates through, as he no doubt does, there must be complete frankness on his part with the members of the house.
Later on in the debate the minister gave a promise to me that he would make a statement to-night. When he is asked to make the statement, he says he would prefer not to make it.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Just one moment; I rise to a point of order. I have not refused to make a statement. I did not say to my hon. friend I would make it to-night. I told my hon. friend I would be glad to make a statement with respect to the Carr charges. I shall be glad to make that statement, but I want him to repeat the charges from his place in the house under the proper items and I will answer every one.


Howard Charles Green: You did not ask that the
other night.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Whether I asked it the
other night or not, I am asking it to-night.


Alan Cockeram: That is all right, but
there was one question I asked the minister, and that was not a question of making charges. I asked the minister if he would let the house know who the Acadia Construction Company was. That company was born since the beginning of the war and has done possibly the greater amount of naval construction work done in the maritimes. That is information we should have. That is not a charge.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall be very glad to
answer my hon. friend. The Acadia Construction Company comes under the Minister of Munitions and Supply. As the hon. member knows or should know-he has been out of the house for some time-the Department of Munitions and Supply is the department of government which lets these contracts. So far as I am concerned or so far as my knowledge as Minister of National Defence for Naval Services is concerned, the Acadia Construction Company Is the contractor with whom the Department of Munitions and Supply has made a contract for work to be done at Shelburne, Nova Scotia, and elsewhere.


Alan Cockeram: You must have the
information.


Mr. MACDONNELL:: I shall take only a minute to refer to the comment made by the hon. member for Nanaimo about naval education, which the minister has already answered in part. The hon. member for Nanaimo expressed the hope that naval education would be conducted on a broad basis, and to my way of thinking that is a matter of great importance. It seem? to me there is only one thing we can say wdth confidence in looking forward to the future of military and naval and air operations, namely, that all kinds of new and unexpected things will arise. Our method of education should be very flexible. If the men are given merely technical education, that technique may pass away in two or three years. I was glad to hear the minister say that the matter was being carefully considered, but I would earnestly suggest to him that this education of our naval officers be carried on in the broadest way possible.
If we look back to the various climacterics of the war, to the crucial times, I suppose we will all agree that the battle of Britain in the late summer and early autumn of 1940-was the most critical of all. I think it can be said that we won that battle, not primarily because our airmen were braver or more skilful in the air. but because for years the air force had put forward great intellectual efforts in train-

Demobilization

Naval Services
ing their men. We were intellectually superior to the Germans in the air, and therefore we were able to win with smaller numbers. This question of military, naval and air education for the future is a matter of tremendous importance, and I hope the questions raised by the hon. member for Nanaimo will be dealt with in a thoughtful and not in an easy-going or perfunctory manner.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: The matter which I should like to bring to the attention of the minister follows somewhat along the line of the remarks of the last speaker. I wish to speak for a moment about what are commonly known as sea cadets. I do not know where that is covered specifically in this list, but I think it would come under either item 1 or item 2. I shall not be able to tell that until the minister has answered my questions.
When the naval estimates were last being debated, both the minister and the hon. member for Yale spoke about sea cadets. I should like to obtain some information about this work and about the remuneration of the instructors. The hon. member for Y'ale and the minister stated that the sea cadets were now recognized as being a most efficient body. I think it was the former who made it quite plain that the government should come to its support. The hon. member referred to the grave difficulties there were to keep this corps going. The very fact that he felt that would indicate that he considered that the government had not been supporting it very strongly.
Is it the fact that the air cadets and the army cadets are financed by the government while the sea cadets are not? The minister told us that he had a son in the sea cadets. I presume the minister contributes voluntarily to the navy league, but at the same time as a taxpayer he would be compelled to pay taxes to provide for the training of air cadets and army cadets. That does not appear to be an equitable situation.
Many of these instructors are teachers in the collegiate institutes. I understand that the air and army instructors are paid and are provided with uniforms and certain items of equipment. To my knowledge, several teachers in the high school system, because of -internal administration of the schools, were asked to transfer from the army or air cadets to sea cadet work. In a spirit of cooperation and patriotism, engendered I suppose by the necessities of war, they complied with that request, only to find themselves in the unfortunate position from a material point of view of not receiving like pay, as a matter of fact being actually out of pocket in the matter of at least some part of their uniforms.
I should like to hear the comments of the minister on this situation, particularly as to whether this condition is to be perpetuated in peace time. I would again refer to the remarks made to-night as well as those made by the minister himself as to the necessity of keeping up the fine work which has been done in this branch of naval education.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The estimates before the committee include approximately $600,000 for sea cadets. Perhaps I could place the different items on Hansard:
Civil salaries	 $ 5,200
Pay and allowances	 112,050
Travel, et cetera	 87,500
Repairs and operating expenses		14,000
Personnel supplies and services		154,000
Signal and wireless equipment	 3,000
Ammunition	 10,000
Armament stores	 23,130
Fuel for ships	 8.250
Repairs and upkeep of ships	 70,050
Naval stores	 86,000
Miscellaneous stores and services....	10,000
Sundries	 15,500


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I realize that a great deal of money has been spent on this branch of the work, but I have not had an answer to my question. Is it a fact that the man who gives his time to the training of sea cadets must suffer a pecuniary loss, or at least receives no pay for such work, when the army or air cadet instructor does? At least he is not paid for such work as the army instructor is. He has to provide himself with some part of his uniform, while the other has it provided for him. That is the point I wanted to bring out.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot say whether he does it at a financial loss or not. He is paid something, but whether it is comparable with what his opposite number receives who is training air force cadets or army cadets, I do not know, but I can make inquiries and try to get the information.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: The minister says that he is paid something. By whom is it paid?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is my information.


Mr. LENNARD:: The sea cadet officer will receive a clothing allowance, I believe, of something over a hundred dollars. That is to say, so much is allowed per corps, and where the corps has more officers than its complement, the amount would be reduced for each officer. So far as pay and allowances are concerned, when a sea cadet officer attends camp or a regular training period he is paid, and he is also paid his transportation; but so far as the regular weekly training is concerned, I have never met a sea cadet officer
Demobilization-Naval Services

-and I am interested in this movement- who cared very much whether or not he received remuneration. He was in it because he liked it, and remuneration was a secondary consideration. I believe, however, that the naval service are contemplating some relief in that respect, but I have never yet met a sea cadet officer who worried very much about the pay he was getting.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps I should have added that the whole cadet question is under consideration. I might point out to the committee that this year's appropriation for sea cadets is about $600,000, approximately the same as was spent last year. I do not need to tell the committee that expenditures in these days have to be carefully scrutinized. We are being urged 'to reduce taxes, and we have to be sure that the money we spend is spent in the best possible way. I think what my hon. friend the member for Wentworth has said is true, that the great majority of sea cadet officers are glad to render this service without remuneration, and, if so, that is something which should be done on that basis. But I will give the matter further consideration.


Mr. HARKNESS:: I think the minister is unduly optimistic in thinking that he will get sufficient ratings to fill up the ranks of the permanent navy, and I was surprised to hear the minister's statement in reply to the hon. member for Churchill a few moments ago in view of the information contained in a return that was tabled in the house yesterday in answer to questions asked on October 18, when I asked:
1.	How many officers and ratings were actually enrolled in the permanent force of the Royal Canadian navy as of August 1, 1945?
2.	Of the ratings, how many comprised the seamen?
3.	How does this latter total break down as between chief petty officers, petty officers, leading seamen, able seamen and ordinary seamen?
4.	How many in each of these categories were enrolled in the permanent navy on August 1, 1939?
The return gives the number of able seamen in 1945 as 323, and in 1939, 359, or a reduction. The reduction in the ranks of ordinary seamen is greater, there being 268 ordinary seamen in 1945 as compared with 307 in 1939. These figures certainly do not seem to indicate that the ratings have been joining the permanent navy in any considerable numbers. As a matter of fact, our position so far as the last two categories I have mentioned is concerned is worse than it was in August, 1945.
I have had conversations with many young men out of the navy and with some still in it, and so far as the ratings were concerned I gained the definite impression that the service
[Mr. L- nnarrl.l
was not very popular with them, chiefly because they were subjected to a large number of petty annoyances which, as one of them expressed it were like a series of pin-pricks which eventually completely destroyed the very considerable enthusiasm with which he had joined the navy. I think that if anything like the 19,000 men required for our permanent navy are to be secured it will probably be essential to do away with a lot of the customs and traditions going back, as was said by the hon. member for Churchill, to the days of Nelson. No doubt they served a very useful purpose at that time, but many of them have ceased to serve a useful purpose to-day and serve only to irritate and discourage the ratings who are subjected to them. That must be coupled, I think, with an increase in pay to attract the men, which the minister spoke of the other day. This matter of old customs in the navy and petty annoyances apparently is a real grievance, and I would ask the minister whether any steps are being taken to remove these petty annoyances in order to make the service more attractive.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot answer that unless I know what the petty annoyances are. If my hon. friend *were to enumerate them I certainly could make inquiries and see what is being done to remove them. I would remind my hon. friend that ninety per cent of the officers in the permanent force are volunteers. I do not know whether my hon. friend was in his seat when I gave figures earlier to-day of enlistments in the interim force. The figure was 1,181, of whom 673 were ratings.


Douglas Scott Harkness: If the minister would like a list I think I could supply it readily in the course of a day or two.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps my hon. friend would give one or two examples now.


Douglas Scott Harkness: One example is in connection with the method adopted when men go on shore leave. Whether a man is in a ship or in barracks, apparently when he has an evening off he has to wait for the so-called "boat" before he can go, and if he misses one mythical boat he has to wait for [DOT] the next one, which may be an hour, or something else. I was told by two of these chaps that that was considered an annoyance. They were ready to go out for the evening but had to wait until the next mythical boat sailed.


Mr. PROBE:: I wish to bring something before the minister for naval services, supplementing what was said by my colleague the hon. member for Saskatoon City a few

Demobilization-Naval Services
moments ago. He drew attention to the fact that there was a lack of uniformity in the treatment of cadet instructors in the three branches of the service, and he was rather facetiously, I fear, put aside on the plea that teachers are serving as volunteers from a proper sense of public spirit. Having been a teacher myself, I know we have had to volunteer to do thousands of things without remuneration from a sense of public spirit. Teachers generally are brought up to do just that. But if there is one form of treatment for airforce cadet instructors, another for the navy and another for the army, I think we should bring them all into line, so that there would not be the urge of cupidity among these instructors which might make them want to jump from one service to another because a uniform was provided in the one case and they had to contribute in the other.
Further to that, I have here a copy of the Canada Gazette of September 29 of this year, containing naval order No. 5216, which states, under the heading, "Grant in lieu of leave on discharge", certain procedures to be followed for discharging Canadian Wrens from the service. I quote:
(1) Payment of the grant in lieu of leave shall be confined to:
(a)	those personnel who, in the opinion pf the commanding officer, will bo assisted in their rehabilitation by immediate discharge prior to completion of leave, and
(b)	those personnel who are discharged to care of the Department of Veterans Affairs and. as a result, are prevented from proceeding on leave prior to discharge.
It also states that in such circumstances the grant will be approved without application in all cases when such personnel are unable to take leave due on discharge by reason of discharge to care of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and that the grant is to bp considered as a right for these personnel. Also it sets a cut-off date for the payment of this particular grant in lieu of leave as starting subsequently to the 19th April, 1945. The question I wish to direct to the minister with respect to this is, is this regulation, which is here applicable to the Wrens, uniform throughout all three services; that is, it may be that is generally applicable to the navy, but is it also applicable to the army and to the air force; and, if so, since when has that been applicable; because I know of cases of army personnel who were returned to Canada at the request of the Department of Veterans Affairs and who had to assume duties immediately upon discharge without having the privilege of disembarkation leave in Canada?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The answer is in the affirmative.' The same rule applies to all three services, and from the same date, and it was put in to meet just such cases as those to which my hon. friend has referred. After April 19, in most cases, in the discretion of the department, the rating or the officer or man, as the case may be, can be paid the pay for the thirty days leave in lieu of the leave.


John Oliver Probe: May I ask why this should have been cut off at April 19, when these officers and other persons who were called back to assist to set up the rehabilitation section of the Department of Veterans Affairs last December did not receive the same consideration?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The answer to that is that, so far as officials in my department are aware, that was about the time the question first arose; and it was put through fairly promptly.
While I am on my feet, the hon. member for Cumberland is no longer in his seat, but I think I should point out what my predecessor. Hon. Angus L. Macdonald, said with respect to this naval college situation. It will be found in Hansard of April 4, 1945, at page 443:
As I indicated last night, while it may not be possible to establish two naval colleges in the country, and it may be that the naval college will continue in British Columbia, 1 would hope that there will be sufficient other naval activities in Nova Scotia more than to compensate for the loss of this educational institution. Nova Scotia has a great many educational institutions and perhaps we should operate this one in some other place.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The hon. member for Calgary East mentioned petty grievances. A grievance that at least some men have is that in the rules and regulations as laid down, if a man appears with a button undone or his shoes not shined, the captain or any of the officers can say, "You will have ten days in the brig". It is too much; it is too severe, and that is what the men object to, little things like that. The rules and regulations should be changed, and our Canadian navy should have a manual of its own. I do not know whether what we use now is the 1936-37 or the 1926-27' British manual.


An hon. MEMBER:: Edited by Lord
Nelson.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Well, Nelson would
know.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I believe the United States manual is kept right up to date. It is modem; it is stream-lined, and we should have one as much up to date.
Demobilization-Naval Services


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend is a little
behind the times in his criticism, because the -new Naval Act came into force on October 15. We have a new stream-lined act, Canadian from stem to stem.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I congratulate the minister
on that, because I have been after the navy department for the last five years, and eventually it has come round to thinking the way I do.


George Randolph Pearkes: Could the minister tell
us when we may expect, a decision regarding the policy for Royal Roads, because applications for next year have to be in early in the coming year? I am getting letters frequently from parents asking for this information.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I realize it is important
that an announcement should be made as soon as possible, but I cannot give any more definite undertaking than I did a few moments ago. I assure my hon. friend that it is under the most active consideration-to use the popular phrase-and I think I should be in a position to make an announcement very soon.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Just one more question and I am through. Have men serving in Newfoundland any priority for the civil service; are they classed with men overseas? I understand from the minister for air that in regard to his branch of the service there is some move to take Newfoundland in, and I wondered whether the navy would also provide for priority with regard to jobs in the civil service.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, there is no such
priority, unless they were serving afloat. I understand that the whole question is being considered by the veterans committee. I have not been able so far to attend the meetings of the committee, but that is my understanding.


Mr. ADAMSON:: I hope, with all this
urge for modernity and break with tradition, that the navy will not do away with the time-honoured custom of splicing the main brace.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think it may be taken
for granted that that custom will not be abandoned. Personally, like my hon. friend, I hope that it will not.


Mr. KIDD:: On Monday evening the
minister dealt in reply to questions with the policy as regards the interim army. Over the week-end a young non-commissioned officer with an excellent war record covering five years came to see me. Will these boys

have to be attested, or will they continue under present attestation papers, or have any instructions been sent out to the various commands across Canada as to how to deal with these boys who wish to stay in the interim army?


Douglas Charles Abbott: These are the naval estimates that we are on now. I may say that the same regulations apply, subject to necessary differences, to all three services. Perhaps I can answer my hon. friend by saying that, broadly speaking, the conditions in all three services so far as interim service is concerned are the same. Applications are being received in all three services by hostilities only personnel to continue their service up to September 30, 1947, on the conditions I outlined in some detail in my statement with regard to the army estimates. I do not know what particular form they fill out. I cannot say at the moment whether they sign a form, but I assume they do. I assume they must sign an enlistment form undertaking to serve until September 30, 1947, if accepted for that period. I made *an announcement in my army statement that if, when the terms of enlistment in the permanent forces are announced, they do not wish to avail themselves of the right to enter these forces they will be relieved of their undertaking to serve until September 30, 1947. Does that answer my hon. friend's question?


Thomas Ashmore Kidd: Yes, but there is one matter to which the minister has not referred. He has made reference to the two fine aircraft carriers. Is he aware that at No. 31 Collins Bay the fleet air arm, in the course of four years, has trained over 100 classes, averaging fifty to a class, making 5,000 in all? I did not hear him mention that.


Douglas Charles Abbott: When I was discussing that matter, in answer to questions put by the hon. member for Yale, I said that the matter of training for the fleet air arm was now the subject of discussion between the air force and the navy. I indicated that in all probability, although I did not know-in fact I know it has .not been definitely settled-an arrangement would be made with the air force to utilize jointly bases on the east coast and the west coast. There are a considerable number of Canadians now fully trained as fleet air arm pilots and we anticipate that a good many of these will continue in the service; but of course in the future it will be necessary to provide for the training of further personnel. I cannot say now, however, where that training will be carried out, although I can say I am sure it will be carried out in conjunction with the air force R.C.A.F. training stations.

Demobilization-Naval Services


John Ritchie MacNicol: Is the matter under the minister's department?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is a joint use of bases.


Mr. MARSHALL:: Mr. Chairman, are we engaged in a general discussion, or are we on item 1?


Agar Rodney Adamson: Before you decide that, Mr. Chairman, may I just be allowed to say a word about the fleet air arm. It arises out of a number of letters I have written to the minister about the position of Canadians who happen to be in the British fleet air arm. A number of Canadians have been in the British fleet air arm, and apparently they are receiving British rates of pay and are under British naval authority for discipline, discharge and so on. Could the minister make a statement to clarify the anomaly of these Canadians serving with the British fleet air arm?


Douglas Charles Abbott: There are a considerable number of young Canadians enlisted directly by the Royal Navy for service in the fleet air arm. I know that to be the case because I have a young cousin serving with the Royal Navy now in the fleet air arm, and my understanding is that these Canadians joined the Royal Navy-not the Royal Canadian Navy but the Royal Navy-subject to the terms and conditions which were offered to them by that force. We have also a number of Royal Canadian Naval Volunteer Reserve chaps serving with officers who are serving with the Royal Navy on carriers for training purposes. But my hon. friend's question, I take it, had reference exclusively to Canadians who are serving with the Royal Navy and on the strength of the Royal Navy.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes. What machinery is there; what liaison has the Canadian government with the United Kingdom government for discharge? I ask the question because I have received a number of letters from these fellows, and' I believe that some of them enlisted in the R.C.A.F. and then transferred to the British fleet air arm.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The Canadian government has no arrangement at all. They enlisted in the Royal Navy, made their contract with the Royal Navy, and that is the position they are in. My understanding is this-this is only hearsay, being the result of a letter I received from this young relative of whom I have spoken of-that he is being given the option of staying on with the Royal Navy, fleet air arm, or of obtaining transfer to the Canadian navy if that is available, or of getting discharge, but I cannot say that is generally applicable. Apparently that is the position in his case.


James Alexander Marshall: It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that if we are to get anywhere we might as well get down to the individual items before us. Every one of the questions asked in the last two or three hours could easily be asked on the particular items which appear on the list, and I think it is about time we discontinued the general discussion.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I thank the hon. member for his suggestion. We have nearly reached the question stage, all the speeches and remarks on general topics having apparently been pretty well exhausted. I would therefore welcome an effort to proceed with the items one by one.


James Alexander Marshall: Those of us who would stay with the item are being robbed of an opportunity of discussing particular questions later on, because we shall be told that the item has already been disposed of.


Douglas Charles Abbott: We have not passed any yet.


James Alexander Marshall: I realize that, and that is why I suggest that it is about time we got down to the individual items.


William Ross Macdonald: The point raised by the hon. member for Camrose (Mr. Marshall) is well taken. If I recall correctly, it was agreed that under item 1, which we have been discussing, there would be allowed a more or less general discussion. As the hon. member has said, we have had a very wide general discussion and it should now be possible for the committee to carry item 1.


James Alexander Marshall: No, Mr. Chairman, we have not yet discussed item 1. Item 1 states definitely civil salaries, and we have not been discussing civil salaries this evening.


William Ross Macdonald: May I interrupt again to suggest that the committee confine further discussion to item 1, civil salaries and wages.


Alan Cockeram: Item 1 has not yet been called.


William Ross Macdonald: Shall I call item 1 now?


James Alexander Marshall: Mr. Chairman-


William Ross Macdonald: The hon. member for Camrose has the floor unless the committee wishes me to call item 1. Before I call item 1, however, the hon. member for Wentworth (Mr. Lennard) would like to say something.


Frank Exton Lennard: The minister and the hon. member for Yale, earlier in the debate the
Demobilization-Naval Services

other evening, mentioned in a kindly way the Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps, and in view of the remarks made by the hon. member for Yale, I should not like the impression to go out that the Royal Canadian Sea Cadet -Corps were principally being maintained as a recruiting agency for the Royal Canadian Navy, because, while basic training, seamanship and communications are thorough-these boys receive a thorough training-nevertheless the Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps have a fine reputation as a youth movement in Canada. They are doing a great deal of good work in character building. They are perhaps one of the greatest deterrents of juvenile delinquency in our congested areas. I wanted to make that point clear and to tie it in at this time with the estimates.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I quite agree with all that the hon. member for Wentworth has said.


John Ritchie MacNicol: On a couple of occasions I wanted to ask a question along this line, but I deferred it because I thought it came under some other minister. The reply given by the minister to the question asked by the hon. member for West York is not correct so far as I understand it. Most of these young men who enlisted in Toronto were taken right out of the schools by the Royal Air Force.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is something completely different from what I was talking about. I am speaking of young aviators who were enlisted here by the Royal Navy, not by the R.A.F. They served in the Royal Navy as part of the fleet air arm. I know that because that was exactly what happened to a young cousin of mine. It was not the Royal Air Force; it was the Royal Navy, and he w'as in Royal Navy uniform before he left Canada.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I was wrong in designating the particular air force. It is the fleet air arm to which I had reference. They were enlisted right out of schools in Toronto. They were boys of seventeen to eighteen years of. age-. After considerable training they finally arrived at Pensacola, after going over to England and coming back again. I myself know of a number who made application by request at Pensacola to transfer, I presume to join the Canadian service. Later on, these ooys were scattered all over. Some of them finally arrived in the Pacific. Those who arrived in the Pacific and in the Indian ocean are the ones I have in mind. Others who did not get that far were gotten in touch with by the authorities who accepted their applications for the Canadian service. The other 
lads who were out in the Pacific and Indian ocean were too far away for the authorities to make contact with them and apparently their applications have not been accepted. What I wish to know is, are the applications that they put in at Pensacola still open to acceptance by the department? '


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall have to look into that to make sure. I think I can answer it by saying that unless they are willing and anxious to continue to serve, at least on an interim basis, they will not be accepted, because we are now taking enlistment transfers only of those who wish to serve in the post-war navy. We are having, of course, no more hostilities only transfers, as we had it up to the end of the war; but I shall make some special inquiries about the case.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does the matter come under the minister?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It would come under me if they want to transfer to the Royal Canadian Navy. If they want to transfer to the Royal Canadian Air Force, of course it would come under my colleague, the Minister of National Defence for Air.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I wish to know what is to happen to these young lads?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can answer that only in this way, that they are not on the strength of the Canadian army, navy or air force. If they apply for transfer to one of these forces there would be two factors involved: first, whether the Royal Navy would be willing to release them; and, second, whether the Royal Canadian Navy would be willing to take them. But I am answering the second question in this way: I do not think the Royal Canadian Navy would want to take them on unless they want to serve in our permanent force up until September 30, 1947.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister apparently
has not the facts because there is a number who have been taken on.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Apparently not after the
war. We were taking them up to the end of the war. We were taking what I referred to for brevity as hostilities only transfers. We would only take them in that case. Hostilities are over, and we are starting to build a permanent post-war force.


John Ritchie MacNicol: As I see it, un^gss you
treat them all the same you will treat some of them unfairly. All the boys that I have in mind made application at Pensacola, but afterwards got scattered too far away to be in contact with our officials here.

Demobilization-Naval Services


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not know how many
are involved. There may be far too many to come into the Canadian force. However, I shall make some further inquiries.


James Alexander Marshall: What item are we on,
Mr. Chairman?


William Ross Macdonald: I understand we are
now on item 1, "civil salaries."


James Alexander Marshall: According to the auditor general's report for 1943-44 an amount approximating $5,800,000 was spent and the number of civilian employees was 10,384. The hon. member for York South asked the minister last night the number of civilian employees there were for 1944-45. The minister was unable to give the figures, but he gave the figure to the end of September of this year as 4,240. In other words, there is somewhere a decrease of around 6,000 in the civilian employees, and yet we find that actual expenditures for civil salaries during the last year were $7,352,832, or a decided increase.
There is another matter I should like to draw to the attention of the minister. The actual estimate last year was $6,500,000, whereas the actual expenditures-and the only things We should deal with now are realities, not estimates-for last year were $7,352,000, or an increase from the estimate to actual expenditures of somewhere in the neighbourhood of $840,000. In the light of the fact that from 1943-44 to the present time it is evident that the number of civilian employees has been greatly decreasing, will the minister tell us that the decrease to the end of September was
4,000	civilians?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not know; I have not seen the auditor general's report to which my hon. friend is referring, but I think he must be including the civilian employees in all the armed services.


James Alexander Marshall: No, I am not; you will pardon me. For the minister's benefit I may tell him that what I am reading from is headed: "Department of National Defence- Naval Services, civil salaries and wages, $5,827,669.45." Then it goes on to say, "As of March 31, 1944, there were 10,384 civilian employees paid from this account." It has nothing to do with the army or the air force. The minister should give a clear and detailed statement as to the civilian employees and the amounts spent for this item during the last two years.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps I can clear that up very quickly. The salaries included in this item are only civil servants properly so-called. In addition, under item 10, "acquisition, construction, charter, repairs and upkeep of ships,"
there appears the very large sum of $50,000,-
000.	There is a substantial amount in there for civilian employees, because in the repairs of ships at various points there is a considerable number of civilian workers employed, as well as those who are on salary.


James Alexander Marshall: I realize that distinctly. If the minister will get the public accounts for 1943-44 he will see that there is a separate item which compares with the items as now set forth in these estimates. He will find an item exactly the same in the old auditor general's report.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot explain it at the moment. The figures which are given me show the number of civilian employees carried in 1944 when the estimates were prepared, the year my hon. friend is talking about; 4,798, that is a figure I did not have the other night when the hon. member for York South asked me the question too. The present number is 4,240.


James Alexander Marshall: Mr. Chairman, I am willing to allow the item-


William Ross Macdonald: It is eleven o'clock.


James Alexander Marshall: -to go through, if the minister will give me an assurance that he will give me the figures to-morrow.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will certainly look into the figures. I question whether the committee is ready to allow the item to go through. I shall be delighted if they are.


John Bracken: We might think up . another question.


William Ross Macdonald: Does item 1 carry?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
It being five minutes after eleven o'clock, the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Friday, October 26, 1945.