1946-03-25

INCREASE OF WHEAT DELIVERIES-1946-47 PROGRAMME FOR OATS, BARLEY AND OIL SEEDS

Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to make a statement in regard to a special measure to increase wheat deliveries in western Canada and to announce the government's 1946-47 programme for oats, barley and oilseeds.
As the Prime Minister has stated, the government desires to make available the utmost quantity of food to help meet the needs of people in less fortunate parts of the world. While we have been working on a very large wheat and flour export programme during the present crop year, we hope to be able to increase shipments over the quantities originally planned. To accomplish this, it will be necessary for producers' in western Canada to deliver promptly their remaining farm surpluses of wheat. Deliveries of grain have been exceptionally good this year and marketings have exceeded estimates, month by month. However, there is still a substantial quantity of wheat on farms, available for early delivery, that can be moved abroad to needy areas.
There is some wheat being held on farms in western Canada, principally due to the present levels of income tax combined with the uncertainty of yields from the new crop to be harvested in 1946. The amount of wheat so held on farms is not large in relation to the quantities which have already been shipped abroad, but if made available now would be of material help in meeting the present food situation. With this objective in mind the government has made an arrangement whereby wheat, which producers may not have intended to deliver at the present time, can be marketed and' sold over the
next three months, with cash settlement made at any time the producer may choose in 1946, 1947 or 1948. The arrangement will become effective on April 1, 1946, and details will be announced shortly by the Canadian wheat board. There may be a few days' delay in getting the new emergency wheat receipt forms into the hands of the elevator companies, but producers need not delay their wheat deliveries on this account. They may continue to deliver, taking storage tickets for later conversion into emergency wheat receipts. Of course those farmers who wish to deliver their wheat and take cash tickets in the usual way can proceed as in the past. There is no change in this respect. The new arrangement merely provides a means whereby producers may elect to deliver wheat between April 1 and June 30, 1946, with cash settlement taken at their option in 1946, 1947 or 1948.
Special transportation arrangements have been made to move the additional wheat forward to mills and seaboard.
I now desire to deal with the government's programme for oats and barley for 1946-47.
The 1945-46 oats programme will be continued in 1946-47. The government, through the Canadian wheat board, will guarantee a minimum price of forty-five cents per bushel for No. 2 C.W. oats, basis in store at Fort William and Port Arthur. The oats equalization fund will again operate in 1946-47, and producers will receive advance equalization payments of ten cents per bushel at the time of delivery.	>
In the case of barley the government will guarantee a minimum price of sixty cents per bushel for top grades basis in store at Port Arthur and Fort William. The barley equalization fund will operate in 1946-47, and advance equalization payments of fifteen cents per bushel will be made on delivery. In addition, premiums up to five cents a bushel may be paid for barley accepted as suitable for malting.
During the present crop year all barley produced and marketed in Canada was needed for our own requirement, and exports were prohibited except for small quantities sold for export prior to July 31, 1945. With exports eliminated, the government felt that producers should be protected on premiums they would have received on barley accepted for malting purposes and exported to the United States. For this reason, the advance equalization payment was increased to twenty cents per bushel for the present crop year. The producer of feeding barley received the same price as the
Grain

producer of malting barley. This policy was announced to meet a feed emergency in Canada and has served a useful purpose this year. The government, however, does not desire unduly to limit exports of barley for any longer than necessary, and hopes that barley supplies in 1946-47 will be sufficiently large to permit the resumption of ex'ports. The government must, however, reserve the right to reexamine the barley situation when the extent of 1946 production is known.
During the greater part of the war there has been an urgent demand for vegetable oils, and the government has endeavoured to encourage the production of oil seeds. At the present time there is a world-wide shortage of both fats and vegetable oils. In order to assist in meeting oil seed requirements the government proposes to increase the present guaranteed price of flaxseed from $2.75 per bushel to $3.25 per bushel, basis No. 1 C.W. flaxseed in store Fort William, Port Arthur or Vancouver, effective August 1, 1946, for the crop year 1946-47.
In announcing the new price for flaxseed the government wishes to emphasize the importance of this drop during the present crop year and to urge producers to seed a larger acreage in 1946.
The 1945-46 rapeseed programme will be continued in 1946-47. Producers will be guaranteed six cents per pound for'top grades basis country shipping points.
In 1946-47 producers will be guaranteed five cents per pound for top grades of sunflower seed basis country shipping points.
In announcing the government's programme in respect of feed grains and oil seeds, I should like once again to appeal to producers in the prairie provinces for prompt delivery of their remaining supplies of surplus wheat. Up to the present time wheat producers in western Canada have exceeded all estimates for the delivery of grain. Marketings have been high throughout the present crop year. There is still a large volume of wheat to be delivered. Wheat is urgently needed in Europe and elsewhere.


Mr. COLDWELL:: May I ask the minister a supplementary question, to clarify what I think is an important point? On the deliveries of wheat after April 1 in 1946, 1947 and 1948, the farmer may take payment at his option. Does this mean that he must declare, in each year when he delivers the wheat, when he will exercise the option, or may he exercise the option at any time during the years mentioned?


James Angus MacKinnon: My understanding is
that the farmer exercises his option in the year in which he wishes payment.


Mr. QUELCH:: Does he have to pay storage charges-


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order.


Mr. BRACKEN:: Mr. Speaker, it is occasionally my responsibility to criticize the government for certain of its acts, but when I can, I am glad to offer words of commendation. At a later time I shall take occasion to criticize the minister for the shortcomings of his statement to-day. For the moment I wish to commend both him and the government for the action they have decided to take with respect to getting marketed now a considerable proportion of the wheat that is being held by the farmers, because, as the minister has said, they do not like the present burden of the income tax, and because of the possibility of smaller crops in later years. Considering the needs of the world to-day and the wheat held back by some farmers in western Canada, this action of the government is in the right direction and I am glad to commend them for it.


Mr. BURTON:: Has the minister given consideration to increasing the flow of wheat


James Horace King: Order. I have permitted the leader of the opposition and the leader of the C.C.F. party to put questions to the minister following his statement, but I must call the attention of hon. members to the fact that the minister's statement is not debatable.


Mr. BENTLEY:: Is it not possible to ask the minister a question arising out of his statement, Mr. Speaker?


James Horace King: The statement is not debatable, but an urgent question can be put with the permission of the minister.
(On the orders of the day):


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: May I ask the
minister a question arising out of his statement? Suppose the farmer decides to dispose of his wheat and delivers it to the elevator, and he has not determined on the sale until 1947 or 1948. Is he subject to storage fees and expenses at the elevator between the time he delivers the wheat and the time he determines to sell it?


James Angus MacKinnon: My understanding is that the wheat so delivered will, before storage charges start to accrue, be sold for forward sale, with the storage charges being assumed by the purchaser.

Conscientious OBjectors


John George Diefenbaker: So the farmer will not be subject to storage charges?


James Angus MacKinnon: He would not be
subject.


Joseph William Burton: Has the minister considered increasing the flow of grain by -making more railway cars available so that the farmers may have greater freedom in delivering to the elevator of their choice?


James Angus MacKinnon: Avery serious situation exists in western Canada on account of the shortage of grain cars. We have a large number of them in the United States, and have some difficulty in bringing them back. We are taking steps to get them back.


Mr. WRIGHT:: In cases where wheat is delivered this year and certificate accepted, will payment for that certificate be made on basis of the price of the wheat in the year in which the certificate is issued, or in the year in which -the certificate is cashed?


James Angus MacKinnon: I would think the price would be based on the year in which the certificate is issued.



PRINCE RUPERT DRY DOCK


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. G. ARCHIBALD (Skeena):: I
should like to ask the Minister of Transport a question, of which I have given him notice as well as the reason for my -putting it. What steps have been taken by the government to make use of the Prince Rupert dry dock?


Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport):: That question has already been put on the order paper by the hon. member, and I am afraid that he will hav-e to await the reply until the question is answered-. If he wants a reply now, all I can say to him is -that the policy of the government will be announced in due course.



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Postmaster General. Is he in a position to state when the twice-daily house to house mail deliveries will again be put into effect?


Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Postmaster General):: ! I cannot say exactly on what da-te, but the officers of my department are working on it and we hope to be able very soon to reestablish the two deliveries a day.



CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS


[Stage Direction]
agricultural labour
On the orders of the day:
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, under the national selective service regulations, men who were called under the mobilization regulations and who were recognized as conscientious objectors by mobilization boards, were required to perform alternative service work subject to specific conditions. One of the requirements was that a portion of the conscientious objector's earnings (which was designated under contract) must be paid by the employer to the Canadian-Red Cross society. Conscientious objectors in alternative service work number 10,870, and 6,749 are employed in agriculture. Contributions to the Red Cross society from the inception of the regulations to January 31, 1946, amounted to 82,248,913.84.
I do not intend, nor do I believe that the citizens of this country would agree, to relieve conscientious objectors from alternative service work until all enlisted men in- the armed forces, or at least the majority of them, have been discharged.
However, in- view of the urgent need for increased agricultural production, it has been decided: that some relaxation of the regulations should be effected which would encourage greater effort in agricultural production and to assist in furthering the supply of available agricultural labour. Therefore, under authority vested in me under the national selective service regulations, an order has been issued providing:
(1)	Every postponed conscientious objector at present engaged in agriculture, or who becomes engaged in agriculture after the date of the order shall at the conclusion of the employment period ending March 31, 1946, be relieved of further payment to the Canadian Red Cross society, provided he continues to be engaged in agriculture.
(2)	Every qualified agricultural worker at present engaged in the performance of alternative service in alternative service work camps shall be granted leave of absence for work in agriculture and will not be required to contribute from his wages to the Canadian Red Cross society so long as he continues to be engaged in agriculture.
(3)	No postponed conscientious objector or alternative service worker to whom the order applies may work for an employer other than the one with whom he is at present engaged',
Veterans Affairs

or with whom he enters employment except by first obtaining the consent of a divisional alternative service officer.
It is understood, of course, that any conscientious objector who leaves agriculture will immediately become subject to the regulations as they have applied heretofore.
Under the plan as proposed, I am confident there will be no movement of farm labour to the city in so far as conscientious objectors are concerned, but I believe there will be a definite movement of these workers from the city to the farm, as a result of this change.



DAYLIGHT SAYING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. PAUL MARTIN (Secretary of Stately Mr. Speaker, numerous inquiries have been received as to whether or not it is the intention of the government to take measures for the establishment of daylight saving time throughout Canada during the summer season of 1946.
These inquiries are no doubt prompted by the fact that in 1940 an order was made under the War Measures Act providing that daylight saving Should be observed in the province of Ontario and in the province of Quebec primarily for the purpose of conserving power in connection with the war effort of Canada. Subsequently a further order was made under the War Measures Act, on the 28th January, 1942, providing that beginning with February 9, 1942, daylight saving time should be observed throughout Canada. This order became effective at the same time as measures taken in the United States went into effect and was based upon the desirability of synchronizing the time in the time zones of both countries in relation to the production and transportation of munitions and in relation to the war effort generally.
The order under the War Measures Act providing for daylight saving time was rescinded in September 1945, effective on the 30th September of that year. At the same time the similar measures taken in the United States came to an end.
Statutes as to time and the fixing of the boundaries of the various time zones have always been enacted by the provincial legislatures and not by the dominion parliament. Under provincial legislation, various municipalities throughout the country have, by by-law, provided for daylight saving time in those municipalities during certain periods of the year.

It seems to the government that since the subjects of time and of defining the time zones have been a matter of provincial legislation, there would not be justification this year for dominion legislation or for the making of an order under the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act. The matter seems peculiarly one which should be dealt with by the provinces and the municipalities.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. A. TUCKER (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Veterans Affairs):: On Friday last the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. McCullough) asked the Minister of Veterans Affairs the following question:
Will _*he consider an immediate change in the-regulations governing the Veterans Land Act which compel joint approval by the board of the veteran and his wife before issuance of a certificate of qualification under the Veterans Land Act, and discarding the present regulations which prevent a veteran with an overseas wife from taking advantage of the act without hardship and long delay?
On January 28, 1946, the following instructions were issued by telegram to district superintendents by the director, Veterans Land Act:
Reference qualification veterans with wives overseas and confirming views set out recent conference please make known all regional supervisors immediately that policy laid down head office letter October tenth now modified and that veterans who by virtue of their maturity, soundness of outlook and experience in farming or stability in- ,a job are well qualified in their own right for establishment oh a farm or small holding and who have suitable proposition in view which might reasonably be purchased for backlog purposes may be set up on -a rental basis and bailment agreement and supplied with essential stock and equipment provided they make necessary initial payment as evidence of their bonafides. Qualification certificate should not be issued until after -arrival and satisfactory interview^ of wife at which time consideration ca-n be given to establishment on regular purchase contract. Rental should be such that veteran will not suffer financially as result deferred establishment. These instructions intended to meet in a reasonable way the problem confronting veterans in securing homes in advance of arrival -their dependents from overseas and -also to protect the veterans rights under the act in cases of dissatisfaction.
The general run of applications are being satisfactorily handled in accordance with the foregoing.
When the veteran is a man of mature judgment and experience, the proposition he has in mind is sound and within the spirit and scope of the act, and information available in regard to the wife is such that it

The Address-Mr. Pouliot
appears an unreasonable risk would not be taken in proceeding with establishment under the purchase contract, settlement on a permanent basis may be completed before the wife arrives.



HOUSING-RECOMMENDATION OF APPLICATIONS BY VETERANS AFFAIRS OFFICIALS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. NORMAN J. M. LOCKHART (Lincoln): Arising out of the statement of the Minister of Reconstruction, and based on release No. 27, and several letters which I have received, may I ask the Minister of Reconstruction, and perhaps the Minister of Veterans Affairs, if the situation can be clarified as to the coordination between his department and that of veterans affairs. I have already received three or four letters, Mr. Speaker, pointing out that the veterans are very anxious to start the erection of houses, but they are alarmed at the instructions which require that they will first have to be recommended by other officials. Can the minister amplify these instructions so that the veteran may know whether they can proceed or how quickly they can proceed? They are in desperate need of houses.
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Is my hon. friend referring to housing under the small holdings portion of the Veterans Land Act?
Mr. LOCKHART:: Release No. 27, just sent out from the Minister of Reconstruction, reads-I quote the last paragraph:
The veteran is required to certify that he will occupy the house in question, and applications will be accepted by the priorities officer only after they have been recommended by an official of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
They are all at sea as to what the procedure is.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: Instructions have been sent out to all district officers in regard to the very point mentioned by my hon. friend, and the object is to ensure from the records of the Department of Veterans Affairs that the applicant is in fact a veteran and entitled to priority.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: May I ask one supplementary question: there will not be any undue delay?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Oh, no.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Because there are scores ready to go ahead.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: No, there will be none at all.



GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, March 22, consideration of the motion of Mr. Fernand Viau for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Bracken, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Coldwell.
Mr. JEAN-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temiscouata):	Mr. Speaker, I congratulate very
sincerely the mover (Mr. Viau) and the seconder (Mr. Winters) on the address, who have spoken very well, and who deserve every praise for having performed excellently that duty.
I will ask you, sir, to make a correction in the prayer that you have just read. You mentioned the governor general. We have none at the present time. The former governor has left us, and his successor has not yet arrived and has not been sworn in. We have an administrator, however, and I hope that at the next sitting you wild substitute the administrator for the governor general or will add the name of the administrator until the new governor is sworn in.
I desire to offer my congratulations to the two ministers who have been appointed to the privy council at Westminster. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) has received a reward for the work that he has done for Canada, for the British empire and for the countries in the sterling area, and as regards the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent), I do not believe it is an honour, but rather a recoignition of his excellent work in the government.
There has been some controversy in the press about decorum in the House of Commons. The journalist who wrote it, and general subscribers who wrote to their papers, are not familiar with what happens at Westminster, because once I saw a gentleman of great distinction, Mr. Anthony Eden, with his feet on the clerk's table during a sitting, and when Lord Baldwin made his last speech at Westminster, Mr. Attlee, who is also a gentleman of distinction, had his derby on his head and his feet on the table while Lord Baldwin was bent over the treasury box about a foot and a half from Mr. Attlee's feet. But that did not disturb him. Of course he was a great agriculturist.
One must not forget that disagreement is no offence and that the best way to be taken seriously by others is for a man not to take himself too seriously. When I am at home, far away in the province of Quebec, I read even the western papers, and in the Regina Leader of February 8 I saw a report
The Address-Mr. Pouliot
[Stage Direction]
of a talk given by my genial friend the member for Regina City (Mr. Probe). He said, and I thank him for it, that I was the most striking character in the House of Commons at Ottawa. He went on to say: "He is a Liberal who invariably criticizes the government", which is not always true, "but always votes with it", which is not always true. "He deliberately breaks all the rules of procedure", which is not true, "but has the faculty of obtaining all he wants for his constituency." I hope he will be right at the end of this session. Apart from all that, what my hon. friend said was correct.
I will tell my hon. friends, through the chair, that I wish to cooperate with all of them, and to be useful to them as a member of parliament, and that is why I have asked certain questions on the order paper. They are not intended to embarrass the government. There is a purpose and a motive behind these questions. The first question in my name on the order paper is intended to find out what precisely we have done for Russia. It is difficult to answer that question, because for a time Russia obtained Canadian help through Great Britain. Everything that we had to send them passed through Great Britain. However, it would be well to know it.
The questions on international policy are intended to find out where we stand now with all countries. I ask about cultural relations with Russia, and of course we have such relations-we have the ballet Russe. I am wondering however whether we have any other cultural relations with Russia.
There is another question, one that has to do with the British commonwealth air training plan. Members of parliament were not informed at first about that plan. It was only a long time afterwards that we got information, and the reason why the plan was delayed was that some English industrialists-Nuffield, the iron lung man, or someone else-had to supply aeroplane propellers, which he did not do. At any rate, no member of the house was informed about it, and we did not learn anything until much later.
There is another question, No. 48, which may seem strange because it asks whether any trainees from Australia and New Zealand * were killed or lost on their way to Canada to follow the B.C.A. training and, if so, when, and who were they. I also asked:
Did the then minister of national defence for air declare to press reporters that the Hon. R. B. Hanson, K.C., M.P., and former leader of the opposition, was "Hitler's new recruit"?

I asked that because he had said that some young men from the Antipodes were coming here for training. Another question was:
4 Was it said because the said Mr. Hanson had just referred publicly to the partnership of any sister dominion to the said plan?
This was struck out but I would like to have it answered.
There are thi;ee problems of major importance now before the house. There is the UNO matter, and you know we must read it instead of hearing it said to realize what it is, because UNO means that no one knows about it but UNO.
As regards UNO, I always think of Mr. Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt at Casablanca, as they were planning the future of the world, making a distinction between great and small countries on the basis of what was said by the kaiser during the first world war, that might is right. The idea was to give more importance to the more powerful. It is not a question of right is might; might is right.
Then there was the Atlantic charter, which was a palliative. Then the big three met at Teheran, Yalta and Potsdam, and we learned afterwards that in spite of what Woodrow Wilson had said about open diplomacy, secret promises had been made to Stalin. On March 13, 1944, I asked whether Canada had been represented at Teheran and Cairo, and the answer was "no." Then I asked another question:
If not, as Canada bound by the decisions taken at such conferences? .
The answer was:
No, but obviously any conclusions relating to the conduct of the war reached by the representatives 'and -heads of governments participating in these conferences will carry very great authority with all memfoeirs of the united nations. ,
Afterwards we had the San Francisco conference. It started eleven months ago to-day. Then there was the conference at London, and another one is starting to-day in New York. Iran will be the No. 1 issue. At London there was a rumour that Canada was to be on the security council. Canada was not elected to that council on the understanding that we would have the secretaryship of the organization which we did not get.
If we do not have anything on that, it is due precisely to the theory that might is right, that great powers have to decide the destiny of'the whole world.
Let us see who is in New York to-day. The names of these gentlemen have appeared in the press. Who knows Lieutenant Colonel W. R. Llodgson of Australia? Who knows

The Address-Mr. Pouliot
Doctor Pedro Leao Yelloso of Brazil? Who knows Doctor Quo Tai-Chi of China? Who knows Mahmoud Hassan Pasha of Egypt? Who knows Ambassador Henri Bonnet of France? Who knows Foreign Minister Francisco Castillo Najera of Mexico? Who knows Eelco N. van Kleffens, of the Netherlands? Who knows Ambassador Oscar Lange of Poland?
An hon. MEMBER:: Everybody.


Mr. POULIOT:: I am very serious. Who knows Mr. Byrnes? Who knows Edward R. Stettinius, Junior, of the United States? And who knows Sir Alexander Cadogan of Great Britain? Who knows Andrei A. Gromyko, of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics? The hon. member for Cartier (Mr. Rose) may be the only one who knows him, but he is not in the house to-day.
At this conference Iran is the number one issue, and what is it? It is that at the end of the second world war we have not gone any farther than at the end of the first world war. In the first world war everybody was trying to get the oil wells of Iraq. At the end of the second world war the cause of trouble is precisely the oil wells of Iraq again, and the oil wells of Iran. We may hear a lot about democracy, about this and that, and future happiness and prosperity, but it is a matter of oil. Oil is the most expensive thing in the world because it has cost so many lives. The Russians are there, and they say: "We want it." The British are there, and they say: "We want it." The Americans are there also, and they also want it. The fight is around oil wells. Is it not incredible to think that the world has sunk so low as to forget all spiritual values and we are coming to the stage where we may have another war? Some people speak of it; some hon. gentlemen have mentioned it in the house during this debate. We hear a lot of people speak of it on the street, and it is just to serve either British interests, Russian interests or United States interests that we may be on the verge of a new war. It is unbelievable.
What is the use of arguing with these people? The diplomacy of Churchill and Roosevelt has failed lamentably. They had their qualities. Roosevelt was a man with a big heart. Churchill is a powerful orator, but they had several opportunities to come to some definite understanding with Stalin when they met him. Nothing was done. To-day Roosevelt has gone to a better world; Churchill is completely out of the picture because the English, the Scottish and the people of Northern Ireland no longer had confidence in his
government. He has no right to speak for the United Kingdom unless he has a mandate from the present government of the United Kingdom. But I have something to ask him as the survivor of those conferences with Stalin, and it is this: When you were representing not only the interests of your own country but the interests of other countries of the world, why did you not come to some definite arrangements with the Russians so that to-day we should not be in just as bad a position as we were during the war? The war is not finished; the war is still going on, in spite of the fact that our two most powerful enemies, Germany and Japan, have been brought to capitulation. There is still some trouble in China; there is still some trouble in Europe, and there is plenty of trouble in Asia. It shows that these men who had the fate of the world in their hands were not equal to their task. It is evident, too. How is' it that no one will say that, when it is the truth? I do not question their motives. Their motives were surely good, but they were not equal to the occasion.
We come now to another matter, namely, the British loan. It is incredible to think that Canada has financed the whole British empire during the war. She has financed not only the United Kingdom but also the sterling area, meaning all the countries which had British currency, the pound sterling. How was it done? It was done by increasing the national debt to an astronomical figure and by imposing upon the Canadian people the heaviest burden of taxation we have ever had-imposing it not only upon this generation but upon generations to come. And it is not finished; it is not settled. We financed them during the war. The war is over, yet we have to finance them again. And what do we get in return? We get the jumping up of members of parliament at Westminster, saying, "Good. That is very good. That is fine. Canada is a great country." What about the securities which were given by Great Britain to Canada for the special loan of. $700,000,000. the finest and most profitable of securities; Canadian Pacific Railway stock, Eno's fruit salts, et cetera.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Jean-François Pouliot: One may laugh, but that stock brings in good revenue; and also all sorts of industrial securities. What happened? They were given as a guarantee of the loan, but through some Toronto brokers some of those securities were sent to New York via Toronto. When I suggested that the banking
The Address-Mr. Pouliot

and commerce committee should investigate the whole matter, I was not allowed to go on. A great deal of research work in that connection could be done. Smuts, who is a great imperialist, got back all the South African stocks from London. In the same way all the Indian stocks were taken back from London to India. The same thing has been done by the United States, and now Canada is the only country in the world which is willing to impose a burden upon its taxpayers without asking anything in return.


An hon. MEMBER:: They did not pledge the C.P.R. stock, did they?


Jean-François Pouliot: I did not mean to mention any particular stock; I mentioned the whole thing. They should come here; we should have them. We should have possession of everything that was given by way of guarantee. Instead it goes to the United States little by little, and we shall be left with nothing. It is just as silly as when the former minister of national defence for naval services refused to accept two ships which were offered as a gift by Great Britain. He would not accept anything. Well, any hon. member can make a gift from his own pocket. It is his own money; he is free to dispose of it as he wishes, but how can the government make a gift like that without first consulting the members of parliament or, if not all members, at least those who support the party, who are the bumpers for any reaction that may result in the country?
Mr. Speaker, Canada is the moon of the British sun. When the British sun sets in glory below the horizon it is time for the moon to rise; otherwise we shall be in complete darkness. There shall be no half-breed citizenship. If this country had not reached the stage where one is not ashamed to call himself in the first place a Canadian, then we shall have no legislation conferring a hyphenated citizenship. And the question of our citizenship should be decided before that of a Canadian flag. It is only after it is decided that we shall be in a position to decide whether or not we shall have a distinctive Canadian flag. I want hon. members to think a little about questions of citizenship; to realize that Igor Gouzenko, though Russian by birth, is a good Canadian, and that the hon. member for Cartier is more of a bolshevik than a Canadian. Those who are imperialists can hardly blame the hon. member for Cartier. He does not think first of Canada; he thinks first of another country. The imperialists think first of another country; they think first of the United Kingdom, and we cannot tell them any-

thing. If we say, "Well, that is the way it is done in Great Britain," they bow their heads in great respect and it is all right. They live in another age. They are Victorians. They are not up to date; they do not belong to modern times. I do not say this in any offensive way, but I believe we shall never be able to have good government in this country so long as we have that small group of imperialists, who are just as noisy as the Tories are in my county, where three Tories can cry as loudly as a whole parish. They say, "Let us not speak of Canada; let us not speak of Canadian citizenship; let us not speak of a Canadian flag. Let us remain colonials so that we will not deceive anyone." Then we shall have a big union jack, the biggest possible, which will be the emblem of colonialism and serfdom. Then we shall know where we are; we will make the point, as navigators say.
Hon. members will remember that last session I complained bitterly about the strike of stevedores in Great Britain which prevented the British people from having food. Now according to the newspapers there is another strike, of tugs, and again the British people will not have food. I was informed that before Christmas a shipment of turkeys was sent to Great Britain. It was not landed there because of the strike. The shipment was brought back to Canada; and when those turkeys which had made the return trip to the United Kingdom were served, they tasted of the ocean salt. If the only purpose of the loan were to feed the British people, unquestionably I would be for it. I do not know yet what I will do. But if it is to be used to carry on war in Indonesia and throughout the world, then I am against it because I want peace. I will not vote for the granting of money to Great Britain in order to encourage imperialism, because I am against it.
I am in full accord with what has been said by a very capable journalist, a member of the press gallery representing L'Action Catholique, Mr. Lorenzo Pare. He has been elected vicepresident of the press gallery, and I congratulate him upon that election. My dear friend, Mr. McDougall, has been elected president of the gallery, and I want to congratulate him. Mr. Pare has written masterly and powerful articles opposing the loan on the grounds of patriotism. As he states, a man cannot have patriotism for a country other than his own. One must have patriotism for the country of his birth, the country in which he lives, the country in which he has chosen to bring up his family, the country in'which he expects to be buried. Such a man is a patriot. But the

The Address-Mr. Pouliot
man who always thinks of another country before making any decision is unquestionably wrong.
Here in Ottawa we live in an atmosphere different from that of the rest of the country. My good friend the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church), has rightly said that the atmosphere of Ottawa is different from that of the rest of the country. We live under an illusion. The government is undhr the illusion that it governs, but government is really in the hands of men whom nobody knows. Certain men will decide just what our contribution will be to the UNO. Those who will decide that will be, among others, the representatives of the trouble-maker, Russia. They are the bosses, and we agreed to that without thinking of what was right and without thinking of spiritual values.
Then there is a third question, the arrest of a member of parliament who has been accused of being a spy for another country. This is a delicate matter to discuss, because I have consideration for all members of parliament. He is a colleague; he has been elected by the electors of his constituency. I disagree strongly with what the hon. member for Quebec South (Mr. Power) said in his most contradictory speech the other night. My friend the leader of the C.C.F. (Mr. Coldwelf) thought that it was one of the finest speeches ever delivered. It reminds me of a judge whom I once asked to let me have some of his unreported judgments to include in the Municipal Code which I published years ago. He sent me a number of these judgments and I quoted a few of them. When the book was published I sent him a copy and the next time he met me he said, "My boy, that is the finest book I have ever seen." Perhaps the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar has the same reason for thinking that speech was so good.
Salus populi, suprema lex is an old Latin' axiom of law-the salvation of the people and the security of the people are the supreme law. It is a fine thing to talk about the magna eharta, but I do not believe that all the walls of the old Irish home of the father of the hon. member for Quebec South were papered with the magna eharta. Probably there was a picture of the hon. member for Quebec South playing hockey somewhere around the place, instead of the magna eharta being on all the walls of the room.
Centuries after the magna eharta, history records that there was what w'as called the gunpowder plot in Great Britain. The purpose of that plot was to blow up the king and parliament. This conspiracy has not been forgotten; for in England at the beginning of each session Mr. Speaker inspects the cellars
to make sure that there is no conspirator anywhere in the parliament buildings. That is exactly what the government has done. My only regret is that we were not informed earlier about it. The government must defend the state against any one who attacks it. The Tories may attack the Liberals; I may attack the Tories or criticize the government; that is our right. But no one in this country can be against ali of us; no one in this country can be against this country. The government was right in making an investigation which has unfolded the threat of this conspiracy. It shows how careful we must be with diplomats; it shows how careful we must be in checking the relations, social or otherwise, of the civil service with outside powers.
The hon. member for Quebec South complained of the shock to his ideas of liberty. This order in council was passed by virtue of bill No. 15, which was introduced by the Minister of Justice and had its first reading on October 5, 1945. On that same day the hon. member for Quebec South spoke in connection with another matter. A copy of bill No. 15 was delivered to the hon. member, as it was to every one of us. If he thought it was so important, why did he not stay here and discuss the measure with all the power he has at his command when he wants to say something? He did not do it.
On looking at the index for Hansard of last session I find that there are only two references under the name of the hon. member for Quebec South. These are:
Royal Canadian Air Force, 836-37
War expenditures and demobilization bill, 836-37.
That is all; he just made a little speech. Then I will go further. Tim Buck was imprisoned at a time when the hon. member for Quebec South was a member of the cabinet. He did not resign. Mayor Houde was imprisoned, and the hon. member for Quebec South did not resign although Mayor Houde was a member of the Quebec legislative assembly as well as being mayor of Montreal. The hon. member shared the responsibility for that. One of our most esteemed colleagues, the hon. member for Portneuf (Mr. Gauthier) was arrested. He was confined to gaol, accused of a crime of which he was not guilty. The member for Quebec South was then a minister, but he did not resign from the government. How, then, does he protest vigorously now against the arrest of one of our colleagues, an arrest which was a state necessity at the time?


The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr. Golding):: Order. The hon. member has exhausted his time.
The Address-Mr. Pouliot


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Go on.


Jean-François Pouliot: I do not want to take up too much time, but there is another thing that I do not understand. I have a clipping here of December 13, 1944. It will be remembered that someone who ivas very close to the big powers left the plans for the invasion of Normandy in the library at the Chateau Frontenac in Quebec. The clipping is dated September 13, but naturally the incident happened the year before, and we see that a major got a decoration and a non-commissioned officer was also decorated, but no one was arrested for such grave carelessness. Action should have been taken against any general, however big and powerful he might be, to have him arrested because he was compromising the success of the plan for the invasion of Normandy, which resulted in victory over Germany. But nothing of that sort was done. It was treated as just an ordinary matter. In that case justice was not severe enough.
I gave an interview in February last to a paper which is published in my constituency. The interview was about the atomic bomb and the Canadian loan. But I will say only this, that I am not at all surprised at the Russian conspiracy, because at the time of the padlock law I notified the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) of the intrigues that were being carried on by the Russians, and told him that although some of his ministers- the present Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) was not a member of parliament at the time were in favour of disallowing the padlock law, I opposed such a step. I told the Prime Minister that the cardinal has more influence than Tim Buck, and the Prime Minister understood that it would have been very unwise to disallow the padlock law at the time. It was left on the statute book, and there was no trouble. But I gave names to .the Prime Minister, and I told him that that was the way in which Russia was handling diplomatic business. It is all right to do business with any other party provided the other party acts like a gentleman. But let us stop all aid to Russia if they will not compromise and come to terms.
There is something else that I want to say. What the leader of the Social Credit group said in this debate was right, and the confirmation of what he said about McGill can be found in the fact that Doctor Boyer has been suspended from McGill. It is not the first time that there have been seditious professors at McGill, Toronto and Queen's. One professor at Queen's has just been arrested. I remember the time when King
[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Golding).]
Gordon was a professor in Toronto. I complained about him, also about the teaching that was being given to McGill students, and in the Montreal papers that same night there was a protest from Colonel Bovey, the man who makes molasses peaches that pay him well. He said I was wrong. But what happened after that? Sir Edward Beatty, who was the chancellor of McGill, took the first opportunity to go to Queen's university to give a calling down to the students of his Alma Mater. I asked him for some of his speeches to the youths and he sent me all those speeches except the one that he had delivered at Queen's after Colonel Bovey's protest.
What is happening in the case of the member for Cartier, and what is happening now in this country, should be a lesson for us. We should be very careful in our dealings with other nations. We should develop a Canadian spirit so that our people will start to think of this country before thinking of anyone else. If I disagreed- with -the member for Quebec South on some points, there was one on which I agreed with him and that was when he spoke of various political affiliations and putting some other country before one's own. I know that it will be very hard for some members to extirpate that obsolete feeling of inferiority that exists in some places, but every time they attempt to do it they will be satisfied that they have performed a national duty.
Mr. W. CHESTER S. McLURE (Queens): I had intended if His Honour the Speaker were in his seat to say at the beginning of my remarks that I was not rising to ask any questions for which I might be called to order. But to relieve your mind, sir, I will say the same to you.
The hon. member who preceded me (Mr. Pouliot) would not expect me to follow him i-n his fluent remarks, and my reference as such to his speech is all that he can expect from me at the present time. If I attempted to follow him I should not have time to get my own remarks on the record.
This debate, Mr. Speaker, may be called one of the chief conventions of parliament, since it affords to a great many of us an opportunity to speak on almost any subject and to mention some of the major problems we have in our respective constituencies.
Last session, when speaking on the address, I extended due congratulations to those who in my opinion deserved them. This time I will follow the time-honoured custom, and I sincerely congratulate the mover (Mr. Viau) and the seconder (Mr. Winters) of the address. The mover of the address deserves special

The Address-Mr. McLure
commendation, because he spoke fluently and with great eloquence in his mother tongue. I hope that he can do the same when he comes to speak in the English language; he will have a distinct advantage over most hon. members. The seconder of the address always makes a good speech. His speech on this occasion was free from any of the embarrassments which attend some of the rest of us when we speak in this chamber. I therefore congratulate both hon. members. I know full well that the leader of their party was greatly pleased with their remarks, as these gentlemen came through and kept to the straight and narrow path of liberalism.
The text before me to-day is the speech from the throne. I have read it several times. It is of great length, but it does not offer as much as I thought it would. It makes several offers of something for nothing, but has very little for the jobless citizen of Canada. It is a brief prepared by the cabinet and placed in the hands of His Excellency to be read to the House of Commons and the Senate; consequently any remarks I may make in criticism of it are not a criticism of the governor general, because this document was handed to him by his constitutional advisers.
Criticisms of this speech have to do with some of its omissions and also some of its commissions.
As I have said, the speech is lengthy, and it was prepared by the cabinet; but when I read a few days ago the speech recently made by the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) in his constituency of Renfrew South, I began to think that either the speech from the throne was not prepared by the cabinet, or that while it was being prepared the minister was asleep. No doubt the minister has been rapped over the wrists for his expressions with reference to taxation. He is reported as having said that there were great things coming in the speech from the throne in this respect, that there were to be large reductions in the corporation tax, personal income taxes, and taxes of all kinds. So optimistic was he on this matter that he is reported as having said that "it will be about fifty per cent reduction." That must have been a pleasing announcement for his constituents to listen to. How popular he must have been on that occasion! But in view of what the speech from the throne has to offer them, what will they say to him upon his next visit? However, when the subject of taxation comes up under the budget we shall have-perhaps I may have-an opportunity of contrasting the enthusiastic minister's speech with the realities as disclosed by the budget.
The speech from the throne allows us some latitude in our remarks. During the fall session of 1945, speaking in the debate on the speech from the throne, I said that our province had been neglected under the terms of confederation. I was pleased to find that I had proved to quite a number of ministers that we are really neglected. In fact I thought I was getting along fairly well when the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie), the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier), and the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) were quite liberal in what they did for my province, and for all of which I was very thankful. But within the last few days there has come an advertising blast which has rocked us right down to the ocean. Last Friday I endeavoured- to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. MacKinnon) a question in reference to a map and pictures which appeared in the New York Times of March 17, and from which map Prince Edward Island is entirely deleted. The Minister of Trade and Commerce did not have an opportunity to reply at that time, as I was called to order by Mr. Speaker and required to sit down; but to-day I am glad to report that I have in my possession

it was handed to me as I came into the house-a letter from the minister which practically answers my question. With his permission- I have already asked for it-I am going to read the letter.
Dear Mr. McLure:
My secretary notified me of your intention to ask about some map -that had -been published, presumably by -this department, in the New York Times and that had omitted Prince Edward Island.
I -purpose seeing the map to which you refer. Map publications of this department -are trade routes maps; map in the -hand book we publish, and our travel bureau map, ail of which show Prince Edward Island in its proper place.
I can asure you th-at I would join- you in protest a-gainet -the omission from any map of Canada of Prince Edward Island, -Canada's smallest -province but in many ways one of -its loveliest.
I am so-rry that I did not have an opportunity to say on the floor of the house just what I have sai-d now.
This is signed by the Hon. James A. MacKinnon. It is much better, and I know that he will look into this matter and not allow such omissions of our province, the cradle of confederation, from advertising by the department.
I might mention another matter with reference to this advertising. I have before me a beautiful little -calendar. I have not been able to find out who put it out, who authorized it, or anything else, but it is made up of tourist scenes and tourist views throughout Canada, starting on the first page with the
The Address-Mr. McLure

majestic parliament buildings, and it gives two or three views from every province except one, Prince Edward Island.
This adverse advertising, when we are all looking for tourists, when our province has been struggling year after year to better conditions and to obtain greater tourist traffic, is certainly something for us to complain about. Looking at the map I was disturbed, because I had a constituency when I came here and I did not know whether I -was going to have one when I got home, if I was to judge by the map. I should not be able to sing that old song which is familiar to all hon. gentlemen, "I had a hat when I came in, and I had a hat when I went out." I did not know whether I should be able to sing that I had a constituency when I came in and that I had a constituency when I went out. The tourist industry is of such importance to us that we should like to have the very best for our share of the advertising which the travel bureau, or whoever puts out this advertising, can possibly give us.
May I now refer to one of our problems. I do so because I have some figures which I wish to put before the house. I refer now to our truck transportation problem. The handicap to Prince Edward Island and her participation in the advantages of truck transportation from and to the mainland via Borden and Tormentine are practically prohibitive to us according to the rates we are charged. I quoted these rates in detail last year, and now I will submit only the rates on a five-ton truck carrying a load from and to. I will give simply these particular rates. The rate for a five-ton truck loaded with a first class commodity, return trip with a similar load, crossing the straits, is $60.65. For second class material it would be $54.65; for a third class commodity $50.65; for a fourth class commodity $44.65. If the truck were to return empty the rates for the different classes would be from $40.65 down to $32.65. This is for a distance of IS miles. It costs for a five-ton truck with a first class commodity $3.37 per mile to cross the straits. These rates that 1 have just given are based on the assumption that the truck can be transported without-loading from a platform. If it is driven onto a platform there is an extra charge of $10.
Let me discuss this with reference to the authorities that have to do with it. First of all, the agreement that my province entered into was made with the Dominion of Canada, and I am going to put on record again one 
clause which provides that our transportation system shall be kept up to date. You will find this in the agreement:
That the Dominion of Canada shall -assume and defray all the charges for the efficient steam service, for the conveyance of -mails -and passengers, to be established -and -maintained between the island-
Meaning Prince Edward Island.

and the -mainland of the dominion, winter and summer-, thus placing the island in continuous communication with the Intercolonial railway and the railway system of the dominion, and such other charges as may -be incident to and connected w-i-th the services which -by the British North America Act of 1867 -appertain to the general government and as are or -may be -allowed to the other provinces.
That binding term of our agreement is the one on which I base my remarks. In the fall session of 1945 I endeavoured to place this truck problem before the Minister of Transport, but it was in the hit-or-miss days when estimates were going through at the rate of millions per minute. However, on page 3685 of Hansard of December 17, 1945, I find that I asked the Minister of Transport a question. I made this statement:
I want the Minister of Transport to set the -rate himself.
The minister replied:
The Minister of Transport cannot set the rate.
Mr. McLure:	Does the minister tell this
committee -that he has no authority over rates?
Mr. Chevrier:	I said that the miister could
not set the rate.
M-r. McLure:	Does the minister -mean by
that, that the government cannot set -the ra-te*?
Mr. Chewier:	I will explain what I mean
when I answer the -hon. gentleman.
Then on page 3686 of the same Hansard,
the same day, the minister, replying to some remarks of mine, said, referring to myself:
He is of the opinion -that the Minister of Transport should eliminate what lie calls these prohibitive rates. I say to him -that the minister has no -authority to do that. The rates are -filed with the board of transport commissioners on automobiles -and trucks carried by the -Canadian National Railways on the ferry between the island and the -mainland, and it would a-ppea-r from -the information I -have at hand that -anyone who wishes to complain about these rates can do so before the -board. I am -not prepared to disagree with the hon. gentleman upon the amount of these -rates. The explanation given before the railways -and ship- p-in-g committee by -the president of the Canadian National Railways was that in fixing the rates on the ferry regard had to be had to similar railway rates.
I should now like to refer to what the president said. We can find it at page 86 of

The Address-Mr. McLure
the report of the railways and shipping committee. The hon. member for Rosedale (Mr. Jackman) asked this question:
Are the rates on the ferry high, and does the C.N.R. set them?
He was there referring to the Northumberland ferry. It was a very good question. Here is- the reply given by the president of the Canadian National Railways:
We do not think the rates are 'unusually high. Of course, everything that goes over on the ferry is in direct competition with the railway.
He does not think that a rate of $3.37 per mile for taking a truck is prohibitive or high. He then goes on to say this, which is a classic:
We think we are generous in .allowing the trucks to go on the ferry at all.
This is a ferry owned by the Dominion of Canada. The boat and equipment were built by the Dominion of Canada, and yet the subcontractor makes the statement that we ought to be pleased to be allowed to take our trucks over, even though the rate were twice as high as it is.
I have no complaints against the Canadian National Railways; they are running the service. But I do complain that the government are not doing justice to Prince Edward Island in permitting those excessive rates to be charged. I could hardly believe that the president of the Canadian National Railways would say "we think we are generous in allowing the trucks to go on the ferry at all," this man who occupied the position of president of the Canadian National Railways could not have known what the rates were when he spoke thus. I have confidence in his ability and common sense, and I am sure that if he had known of the rates which I have put on the record to-day his reply would not have been as I have stated. Instead it would be something like this: Yes, the rates are ridiculously high, and no province with a guarantee from the dominion government should stand for such treatment. I feel certain that he would have put it in still stronger terms. This year I 'hope to have an opportunity to appear before that committee and to give them a true picture of our transportation problem.
Let me for a moment refer to what some of the prime ministers and leaders of the different parties have said, and how they have viewed our situation. For thirty-five years we made practically no advance whatever in our transportation problem. In 1911 the province began to exert itself with regard to the fulfilment of the agreement of union. At that time Sir Robert Borden came to our province. He had made a study of our problem, and he made definite promises to us with regard to the
ferry. I am proud to say that through these promises and the study he had made of them we have our present ferry system. Sir Wilfrid Laurier said in the House of Commons in 1912, as reported at page 5680 of Hansard:
Prince Edward Island has not profited by confederation. For some years past it has been losing its population by reason of its connection with Canada and going backwards instead of forward.
The Right Hon. R. B. Bennett also studied our problems and gave us a further fulfilment of our contract. The present Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has made a study of the matter, and definite promises were made by him for further fulfilment. I was unable to locate to-day his exact words, in Hansard and on the public platform, but he did give assurance of further fulfilment of our contract. To show you, Mr. Speaker, that the present Prime Minister is in accord with the view we hold that the agreement is not being lived up to, I shall quote what the Hon. Charles A. Dunning, a former Minister of Finance of the Liberal government had to say when he was seeking election in my constituency. He was not speaking without the consent of the Prime Minister. Mr. Dunning contended, as had all others, that the water separating Prince Edward Island from the mainland of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia was the king's highway, and that we were entitled to have it negotiated at the" expense of the federal government. Here are his exact words:
It is in tlie bond of confederation agreement and .must be honoured and its obligations fulfilled.
He was elected by acclamation. Your humble servant chose not to oppose him. I am not presuming too much when I say that on that occasion Mr. Dunning was the mouthpiece of the Prime Minister. Therefore I give the Prime Minister credit for these encouraging words with reference to our problem.
We had other men come down there time after time and study our problem. For instance, the leader of my party in this house (Mr. Bracken) made a study of this problem prior to the 1945 election. He spent considerable time there, and he had practical experience with the ferry which gave him fuller knowledge of our transportation problem. In his opening campaign speech the hon." gentleman promised that if his party were elected there would be proper fulfilment of the terms of confederation with regard to our transportation; and I believe that had he been elected,, this would have been done.
*m
The Address-Mr. McLure

During the same campaign the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) was in our prov-[DOT] ince, no doubt in behalf of the Prime Minister who was unable to come there. I did not hear that fluent gentleman at that time, but from what I read in the newspapers he was not far behind anyone else in making promises in regard to our transportation. He is here in the chamber at the present time. I will say that I believe he was sincere, and according to what appeared in the press his statements were to the same effect as those of Mr. Dunning, when he said, "It is yours by right, because it is in the bond of agreement." I may not be quoting nearly all that was said by the hon. gentleman on that occasion, but I am sure if there was more' he will say so when I am through.
In addition to the matter of automobiles and trucks we had other promises made in reference to our roads and the things that should be given to us. As well as the ferry we should have a highway to connect us with the mainland by the Tormentine-Borden route; and some day I hope we shall be given that highway under the terms of confederation. It should be a super-highway, such as all the other provinces have; it should go from Borden to Charlottetown, the shortest route to the capital city, which would save us a drive of fourteen miles. This would require 'the construction of one bridge, the Brighton bridge, which according to some estimates would cost nearly a million dollars. I do not know how far the Minister of Agriculture went in his remarks in reference to that subject, but I do know that at several meetings the Liberal candidates in our constituency said this bridge would be built as part of the highway. All the candidates gave the same pledge, so when the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe) begins his task I hope we will have an opportunity of presenting this matter in connection with our highway.
I might mention many other things in connection with our transportation. Last session the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) dealing with this matter, said at page 3685 of Hansard for December 17, 1945:
My hon. friend is not unmindful of the fact that already we have made 'commitments for improving the facilities at Tormentine and Borden. . . .
It does not matter under whose department it is. At the moment it is under the Department of Transport, but that is aside from the question. We are spending on these facilities somewhere in the neighbourhood of $5,500,000. That is over and above the new ferry boat, which will cost between $4,500,000 and $5,000.000. That is over $11,000,000 fo-r these facilities. So that I am sure the hon. gentleman eannot say that we are not looking with interest into the transportation problems between Prince Edward Island and the mainland.

I say now, as I said then, that I appreciate the interest the minister is taking in our problem, but I want to tell him now it will require another $12,000,000 to bring our transportation up to the standard guaranteed to us in our terms of agreement with the dominion government.
If time permitted, Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a few words in reference to the other ferry and its system of operation, but in conclusion may I say that for over fifty years my province has been deprived of the efficient, continuous service which was guaranteed by confederation. How therefore can any government expect us to be fully satisfied with a service operated by a subcontractor who is not interested in the terms of confederation? As I said before, when I make that statement concerning the subcontractors I do not intend to criticize them, but I do criticize the dominion government for not seeing to the fulfillment of the terms of confederation as they deal with us. Public opinion is behind us. During the past year I have noticed editorials in some of our leading newspapers, all voicing the opinion that this stretch of water must be treated as a highway, as a bridge, as part of the trans-Canada highway, with no cost to traffic other than the normal cost of moving a truck or other vehicle nine miles on the highway. Public opinion will support that; and not until we get a better service at a proper rate can we be content; nor can we be satisfied until our agreement with the dominion government has been fulfilled.


Mr. ANTHONY HLYNKA (Vegreville):: Mr. Speaker, on September 24 last, six months ago, I introduced into this house a subject relating to one of the gravest problems that have arisen out of world war II, and I had earnestly hoped that there would be no necessity of bringing the matter up again this session. I refer, of course, to the tragic fate of displaced persons and their forced repatriation from western Europe to regions behind "the iron curtain which to-day divides Europe in twain," to use Mr. Churchill's dramatic description. I had hoped, too, sir, that Englishspeaking countries would eventually take a firm stand against this inhuman repatriation and that all persons who consider themselves stateless would be given asylum and protection in the western world until they could find permanent homes. I firmly believed also that the British and United States governments would take the right course in this matter, not only for humanitarian reasons but also because of the long-established practice of international law under which protection and asylum have always been extended to refugees in the past, and because the use of force against defence-

The Address-Mr. Hlynka
less people is incompatible with the principles of freedom and justice to which the western allies have pledged themselves. Unfortunately, my hopes were not realized.
To my great disappointment, and to the disappointment of many Canadian citizens, including thousands of our returned men and women who are deeply concerned about the fate of their relatives now in western, Europe, forced repatriation of displaced persons continues despite the assurances by the British and United States governments to the contrary. Alarming but authentic reports continue to reach Canadian citizens to the effect that United States, British and Canadian soldiers not only are permitting Soviet authorities to comb British and American zones for refugees, but are actually aiding the Soviet authorities in this man-hunt of defenceless peoples.
Contrary to the general belief that the displaced persons problem has been partly solved, the grim fact is that the problem has gradually become even more serious. This was recognized by Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, that great American lady, and also by the Hon. Hector McNeil, British parliamentary under-secretary of state for foreign affairs, when they considered the displaced persons problem of sufficient importance to voice their stand on it at the recent united nations conference held in London, England, and in their stand they were supported by Premier Peter Fraser of New Zealand. A press report on Februay 9, 1946, said that "the refugee debate was the highlight of the work of the assembly committee apart from the debate on the headquarters site". The London Times of February 13 of this year described in the following words the conference proceedings of February 12:
The .assembly rose at the end of the afternoon sitting without having reached a vote. The debate was resumed at 9 p.m. with the galleries crowded and the public flowing into the press seats. It was a dramatic sitting . . . Mrs. Roosevelt went to the rostrum.. 'She was given a great ovation, and in the course of a speech in which she pleaded eloquently for the right of the refugees to make their own choice she was repeatedly cheered. She was followed by Mr. Hector McNeil . . . with a speech which also moved the gathering. He recalled the words of the charter pledging the united nations to practice tolerance and to .respect the worth of the individual. "These," he said, "are the lamps that light this assembly." If the words "tolerance" and "pity" were to be eliminated then the English tongue would no longer be the English tongue. The right of asylum had to he preserved, he remarked.
Supporting the British and American case, Premier Peter Fraser of New Zealand warned that "we must be careful that in the attending of the birth of the united nations we are not also attending the funeral of liberty and free-63260-15
dom." The references which I have just quoted are a fair indication of the importance that was attached at the united nations conference to the problem of displaced persons.
On January 19 and February 23 of this year, His Holiness Pope Pius XII issued two protests against forced repatriation of displaced persons and the persecution of the Ukrainian church. Following these protests, Eugene Cardinal Tisserant made two further protests on March 1 and 5, 1946, against allowing Soviet authorities to kidnap displaced persons, and against persecution of the Ukrainian church.
The hon. member for Rosthern (Mr. Tucker), now parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, spoke on this subject in this house on September 26 last, and by his impassioned appeal on, behalf of the homeless displaced persons endeared himself to thousands of Canadian citizens across this country. The hon. member for Dauphin ('Mr. Zaplitny) made his worthy contribution on this matter on. September 27 last.
The Ukrainian Canadian committee, which is the coordinating body of all non-communist Ukrainian Canadian organizations in Canada, comprising more than eighty per cent of all Canadians of Ukrainian origin, and whose first objective was more effectively to aid Canada in the winning of the war, has also made several presentations to the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) and the Canadian government on behalf of relatives of Canadians who find themselves among the displaced persons in Europe. On October 22, 1945, twenty-five members of this parliament sent a telegram to the Prime Minister of Canada while he was in London, appealing to him to make representations to the British and American foreign offices to cease forced repatriation of displaced persons to the east.
Within recent months further appeals were sent to the Prime Minister by Canadian church organizations. On January 28 of this year the chairman of the social service committee of the Baptist church of Canada urged the Prime Minister "to take a firm and Christian stand against forced repatriation of refugees." His appeal reads in part as follows:
There are constant _ and disquieting reports that, .in violation of international law but in alleged conformity with_ the dictatorial Yalta pact, the military authorities in the British and and American zones are forcing such refugees- especially Ukrainians, Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians and Esthonians-into Soviet repatriation camps for compulsory transportation . . . At a time when American, Canadian and British troops abroad are clamouring for speedy repatriation, these millions of displaced (persons in

The Address-Mr, Hlynka

western Europe dread repatriation worse than death and are committing suicide or starving dn the forests in order to escape the horrors of coming under Soviet rule. These are not war ' 'criminals . . .
To hand them over to the red army and the N.K.V.D. is to murder them. He who deliberately surrenders an innocent man to his murderers is himself guilty of the felony. It would be a moral calamity of the first order if our Canadian government should share in the responsibility for these crimes.
Never before, to my knowledge, have Christian nations connived at such an atrocity on such a scale . . .
May I urge, Mr. Prime Minister, that the Canadian government should make itself the voice of the conscience of Canada, and actively try to prevent these crimes against humanity? And may I urge that Canada should bear its share of an offer of asylum to these fugitives from death?
Another appeal, bearing the date of February 22, 1946, and signed by Mr. W. A. Cameron on behalf of the sub-executive of tlm general board of missions of the Presbyterian church in Canada, was sent to the Prime Minister. This appeal urged that all orders authorizing forced repatriation of displaced persons be revoked. Finally I should like to mention the speeches and writings of Doctor Watson Kirkconnell of McMaster university. Doctor Kirkconnell's articles on this subject have been authoritative and instructive.
Let me mention what has been done in the United States in an effort to secure justice for the displaced persons. On November 21, 1945, Hon. Clare Booth Luce read into the congressional record important documents and extracts from letters concerning the fate of Ukrainian displaced persons, and urged the revocation of forced repatriation orders. On December 11, 1945, in an effort to prevent the displaced persons in the American zone of occupation from being repatriated by force, Senator Arthur Vanderburg and Mrs. Clare Booth Luce introduced in congress a joint resolution requesting an immediate and a thorough investigation into the whole refugee problem.
Recently, on March 7, 1946, Congressman Michael J. Bradley, of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, delivered a strong address in the house of representatives in the United States capitol, against forced repatriation and political persecution of Ukrainian displaced persons.
The Ukrainian congress committee in the United States, which is also a coordinating body of all non-communist American Ukrainian organizations, comprising the large majority of Americans of Ukrainian origin, made similar requests to the President of the United States and the United States government.
Again, the writings on this subject of such outstanding men as Doctor Clarence A. 
Manning, a professor at Columbia university, and William Henry Chamberlin, one of the foremost journalists of this continent, are in line with the true principles of freedom and will remain a tribute to the men of learning in the United States.
But in spite of these numerous appeals, protests, requests and representations, the Soviet authorities are still being extended the privilege of combing the British and American zones of occupation in search of their victims. It is extremely painful and disappointing to learn that United States, British and Canadian soldiers are being used to assist the Soviet authorities in forcing the unfortunate displaced persons to surrender to' the Soviets, even though most of them come from territories which never were a part of Tsarist Russia or the present communist empire. Some of the letters which I receive from Canadian and American soldiers describing the treatment that is meted out to large numbers of displaced persons defy the imagination. After witnessing one of these massacres in one of the displaced persons camps', an American officer said, "It just wasn't human," and "there weren't men in the barracks when I reached it-they were animals. Nothing has ever affected mq like that scene."
In. view of the well-organized campaign which is being carried on against these tortured people by persons with the definite purpose of diverting the sympathy of Canadian citizens and confusing the issue, I am compelled to deal with this matter for the second time in this house. On this occasion I should like to document my arguments so as to leave no doubt whatsoever in regard to the whole question. It is obvious that these people cannot speak for themselves. This fact alone, I think, justifies my discussing the problem. And because the subject is so immense I can deal with only a portion of it; I shall leave other aspects of it to other hon. members.
I shou!4 now like to call three witnesses to testify in this matter, to describe from their own knowledge the conditions in which displaced persons find themselves and indicate something of the agony which unfortunate refugees experience. I will first call on Emma Birkett to give her story to the house. In the September 6, 1945, issue of the Weekly Review, London, Emma Birkett says:
The period from October, 1939, until June, 1941 . . . (the period when Russia and Germany were on the same side) will forever remain in the memory of western Ukrainians as that of their greatest sufferings.
Executions combined with, mass deportations into the depths of the Soviet Union filled the

The Address-Mr. Hlynka
whole population with terror. Many political leaders essentially nationally-minded, were deported into Asia and soon died in exile.
To-day these people, of whom there are millions, are scattered all over Germany, Austria, France, Belgium, Holland, Poland, Ro-umania and the Balkans.
To-day, all Ukrainians, regardless from- which part of their country they come, are in tragic position. By nature individualists and western-minded, imbued with fanatical love of personal freedom, they find themselves geographically squeezed between two totalitarian systems, both of which they feared and hated.
To-day, when .the guns are quiet in Europe, the future of Ukrainians scattered across the continent is still very dark.
The problem of all these wretched people is one of the greatest magnitude. Their fate in Europe is one of the terrible consequences of this waT. They do not claim any priority in getting help from the outside world. But should not their case, simply for reasons of humanity, receive more 'attention than until now.
I am certain that Miss Birkett's testimony requires no comment; it is a document whien speaks for . itself and will remain in the permanent records when the story of the agony of millions of displaced persons is written.
The second witness upon whom I wish to call to testify briefly is a United States army MJP., Harry Polche. This soldier's testimony in part is as follows:
... I have been travelling through Europe and have seen many sights, tout -there is one in particular I want to tell you about ... It was only recently that I was stationed in Ingol-stadt, Germany. I happened to take a walk through the park, and suddenly I heard Ukrainian voices. I looked into a grove of trees and there I saw about thirty children, ranging in age from three to seven . . . and a teacher.
They were saying a prayer in Ukrainian ... I approached the group and introduced myself. The teacher then had the pupils recite for me and sing familiar Ukrainian songs. They sang very well with their childlike voices.
They were all poorly dressed.
It made me very sad to see the Ukrainian children reduced to this. I visited the barracks where they lived, -and it was pitiful to see where they slept. Many people slept -in a room and on straw mattresses. I do not know how they will be able to spend the cold winter . . .
They are a homeless people . . .
I feel sorry for these people and something should be done to help them. They need food, clothing and most of all encouragement.
The third and last witness whom I wish to call cannot now be named, for obvious reasons, but his testimony can be relied upon. The letter is dated September 11, 1945* and written from Diel, near Coblenz, Germany. He says:
To the camp at Manheim, south of Frankfort, where there are 3,000 Ukrainians from eastern Ukraine and from Galicia, Soviet officials came there -recently and demanded the surrender of Ukrainians to them. The American -authorities ordered -the Ukrainians to prepare themselves to -leave. The Ukrainians -refused to obey 63260-151
the order. A tug-of-war ensued. Women and children began to cry and threw themselves -at the feet of the American officers. But to no avail. The American officers threatened to shoot . . . Finally one American officer ordered them once more -to prepare -to -leave -and -those who refused were beaten with -rubber cl-ubs . . . The Ukrainians did not give in ... To this the officer said: "If .that is the case I will give yon four days to think the matter over." What of the future no one knows.
This, Mr. Speaker, gives us some idea of what the displaced persons must go through. I need hardly say how Canadians or Americans must feel when they receive such letters, especially when persons near and dear to them are in one of these camps. Indifference on their part is unthinkable.
I know there are those who will argue that the conditions which I have described may have been true in the past, but that forced repatriation has now ceased and conditions have greatly improved. One such Associated Press dispatch, dated October 4, 1945, announced that General Eisenhower had issued an order to United States .officers to stop forced repatriation of persons who did not wish to place themselves in the custody of the Soviet officers.
In the same dispatch one United States officer is quoted as having said:
Possibly for a -time some of -them were pushed into -trains without our -asking many questions, but that's all stopped now.
That report was indeed very encouraging and was -happily received by Canadian and American citizens. A few days later, however, heart-breaking reports continued to come in, to the effect that there was no marked change in the policy in regard to forced repatriation of displaced persons. In a letter dated November 21, 1945, which I personally received from a Canadian officer .stationed in London, England, he said:
With regard to the Associated Press dispatch that General Eisenhower had issued an order to cease forceful repatriation of displaced persons from -t-he American zone, I am -afraid that I cannot give you m-u-ch more information -than what we have received from certain territories in Germany, which is to the effect that there is no m-arked change in the genera] attitude of the authorities ... In other words, the initiative and decisions are a matter of -local commanding officers, because they, and only they, represent the military authorities and therefore they are the only semblance of law and order in -their -respective districts.
After receiving a number of distressing telegrams and letters, such as I have just quoted, I asked the Prime Minister a question in this matter on December 18, 1945, which is in part as follows:
Has the government -anything to say on the subject of further forceful repatriation of
The Address-Mr. Hlynka

Ukrainians from military occupation zones to the east? They are toeing refused food unless they agree to go.
The Prime Minister was kind enough to give me this reply:
The subject to which the hon. member has referred is one which relates to Europe. I am not in a position to say whether the representations made are wholly correct. I would suppose in that respect that my hon. friend is in the same position as I am. I can assure him however that the government has watched this whole Ukrainian situation most carefully, and so far as it is within our power to control matters, we have sought to see that the course taken would be such as would protect their interests.
I am now in possession of a copy of the United States zone order of December 5, 1945, to which I referred when I directed the question to the Prime Minister. In brief the order says:
It is hereby announced that from 08.00 hours December 8, all food, shelter, etc., for those displaced persons who . . . are Soviet citizens are to cease forthwith. (They) are instructed to report ito the Soviet camp at Stuttgart . . . Those who do not report will be seized . . . and brought to Stuttgart under armed escort . . . All local burgomasters have been informed that Soviet citizens are not to be employed and the German population must refuse them food.
I have two other copies of Similar orders which I will not take time to quote, but one is a United States order dated November 27, 1945, signed by Captain Robert Wallach, and the other is a British 30th corps zone order (No. 219DP) of December 29, 1945, issued in a similar sense.
I confess, Mr. Speaker, that I cannot reconcile such orders as these with the words of the president of the preparatory commission and temporary president of the general assembly of UNO which he used when addressing the united nations conference at London, England on January 9, 1946. He declared:
The San Francisco charter, which torniorrow we shall start to bring into effect, repeatedly stresses the vital importance of stimulating in the world real respect for fundamental liberties, individual rights, and dignity of man and the dictates of justice as an indispensable basis for the maintenance of peace.
I quite realize that the western allies are anxious to lighten the load which they are carrying in feeding and clothing several millions of people, but I feel that apart from humanitarian and Christian considerations we should also take into account their sacrifices for us. I should like to quote in this connection two or three sentences from an article which appeared in the Saturday Evening Post of January 27, 1945, written by Edgar Snow while in Kiev. Mr. Snow said:
. . . .it was not till I came here on this sobering journey into the twilight of war that I quite realized the price which Ukrainians have paid

for Soviet victory. This whole titanic struggle, which some are so apt to dismiss as "the Russian Glory," has, in all truth and jn many costly ways, been first of all -a Ukrainian war. No fewer than 10,000,000 people, I was told ... by a high official here, have been "lost" to the Ukraine since the beginning of the war. That figure excludes men and women mobilized for the armed forces.
If we take into consideration, therefore, the sacrifices of these people we may perhaps come to the conclusion that we, too, owe them a small debt of gratitude. I hope that Canada does not dismiss this tragedy by merely saying that it is a European problem.
I am pleased, however, that Canada has carried its share of the burden by way of contributions to UNRRA and other similar agencies. I am pleased, too, that all parties in this house have in their recent references included Canada among the powers of the world. In the farewell address to their excellencies the Governor General and Princess Alice the house unanimously agreed, as reported in Hansard of March 15,- that Canada is now recognized as a foremost world power. May I read one sentence from the address:
... .It must be a source of profound gratification to you, on your retirement, as Governor General, to realize that your years in Canada have witnessed victory over the enemies of freedom, and the emergence of Canada as a world power, with a foremost place among the united nations.
I am sure that it is a source of deep satisfaction to all hon. members that Canada has reached this position, for there is hope now that Canada, occupying the foremost position among the united nations, will have a stronger voice in the councils of nations concerning international matters.
I am pleased, also, that in the speech from the throne considerable emphasis is placed on the need of supplying of food to the starving peoples of Europe, and indeed to the world. The speech says:
The turmoil which has followed in the wake of war has created new problems for governments in all parts of the globe . . . Hunger, privation and sufferings have become the lot of millions. Other millions are homeless, many of them in exile.
Of world problems demanding immediate action, the most pressing is the provision of food to those people facing acute shortage, and, in some regions, widespread famine. Unless the need is met, grave disorders, endangering peace itself, must Be anticipated.
In view of Canada's recognition of the widespread shortage of food in many countries of the world, I would also urge upon the government not to overlook the needs of displaced persons and to do all in its power to assist these people by all practicable means.

The Address-Mr. Hlynka
We must take into account that in time the work of UNRRA will be terminated. It is definite that UNRRA cannot feed, house and clothe millions of people indefinitely. A permanent solution of this problem must be sought, and without delay. Canadian citizens are not only now worrying about the present lot of their relatives; they are also concerned about their future.
Having outlined the grim conditions under which so many relatives of Canadian citizens find themselves, I should now like to place before the government four specific requests.
1.	That the Canadian government make further representations to British and United States governments requesting the revocation of all forced repatriation orders which are applied to Ukrainian and other refugees; and, further, that in compliance with international law the right of asylum and protection be granted to all persons who consider themselves stateless, regardless of their origin or religious belief. I shall cite but one reference to international law relating to the refugee problem.
On page 238 of "The Refugee Problem" (A report of a survey), by Sir John Hope Simpson, it is stated:
The political and juridical protection of .refugees has .been the subject of international agreements-such as the arrangements of 1928 for "Nansen" refugees and of 1936 for refugees coming from Germany-secured :by the action of the league of nations, and the binding convention of 1933 and 1938.
Time does not allow me to quote further references in regard to this matter, but I should like to quote article 129 of the U.S.S.R. constitution of 1936. It clearly states:
The U.S.S.R. grants the right of asylum to foreign1 citizens .persecuted for defending the interests of the toilers or for their scientific activities or for their struggle for national liberation.
I submit that in view of the international law which, if unobserved, denies any protection to persecuted peoples and persons whatsoever, and in view of the fact that the U.S.S.R. reserved to itself this right under its own constitution, the English-speaking countries should insist that this law be observed. Surely the U.S.S.R. cannot expect us to deny, to persons who look to us for protection, the protection which they guarantee to their supporters.	[DOT]
2.	(a) In view of the heavy load which UNRRA is carrying in the matter of feeding and clothing the people in displaced persons camps, the government should take immediate steps to making proper arrangements to make it possible for Canadian citizens to send food and clothing parcels to their relatives in the
camps until such time as they are permanently resettled and are able to support themselves. In the United States, arrangements for sending mail and parcels were made as far back as November 23, 1945. This was reported in the New York Times of November 24, last. And in the New York Times of February 28 of this year, Lieutenant General William N. Haskill announced that a cooperative organization will soon have several millions of food parcels available to be sent to relatives of Americans.
I should ask, too, that the Postmaster General (Mr. Bertrand) confer with the British postal authorities in the matter of lowering of postal rates for this purpose.
(b)	To give serious consideration to allowing Canadian citizens to send to their relatives in large quantities flour and perhaps other imperishable foodstuffs and to allow them also to send clothing.
(c)	To make immediate arrangements for personal and direct mail service between Canada and displaced persons camps. Here, again, this has already been done in the United States as from November 23, 1945. The war is over and we owe it to our people at least to allow them to write to their relatives. It is now seven years since most of them have not had a letter from those - dear to them. I need hardly emphasize the fact that people, who have gone through war and who have been living in camps for months, are most anxious to locate their relatives and to write to them.
3.	The third request is that the Canadian government make proper representations to British and United States governments to rescind the following order:
HQ 30 Corps District 219/DP
29th December, 1945 British Zone Subject-Ukrainians
To: Mil. Gov. Detachments-(enumeration follows) .
1.	H.M.G. do not recognize Ukrainian os a nationality, .and persons coming from the Ukraine are classed as citizens of the country in which they had their residence on 1st September, 1939. No recognition can be given to any Ukrainian organization, or representation as such.
2.	All such persons who lived in Soviet .territory are compulsorily returned to the U.S.S.R. under the terms of the Yalta agreement as soon as they are proved to be such.
3.	Ukrainians of other than Soviet citizenship receive education and welfare facilities in the language appropriate to their citizenship, and for the time being it is impracticable for a variety of reasons to publish books or other literature in Ukrainian. _	_
4.	All Ukrainian organizations will be disbanded forthwith, and where they are established outside camps, the representatives will be
The Address-Mr. Hlynka

brought into camps as normal D.P.'s. AM stationery pertaining to these organizations will be confiscated.
5.	Continuation of such activities is punishable under articles 26 and/or 34 of ordnance 1.
Brigadier,
Chief of Staff 30 Corps District.
Ref:
Ten days after this order was issued, Prime Minister Attlee made the following statement to the united nations conference, as reported in The Times, London, of January 11, 1946:
I am glad that the charter of the united nations does not deal only with governments and states or with politics and war but the simple elemental needs of human beings whatever be their race, their colour, or their creed. In the charter we reaffirm our faith in fundamental human rights. We see the freedom of the individual in the state as an essential complement to the freedom of the state in the world community of nations. We stress, too, that social justice and the best possible standards of life for all are essential factors in promoting and maintaining the peace of the world.
I want to believe, that either the order to which I referred was issued without the knowledge of British and United States governments or they must have been tragically misled. One cannot imagine British or United States governments denying human beings the most elementary human rights of having their own welfare organizations.
4.	The fourth and last request which I should like to direct to the Canadian government has to Jo with immigration. I should like to make an earnest appeal to the government to make provision for admission to Canada of a generous number of close relatives of Canadian citizens.
As hon. members are aware, even the United Kingdom, having suffered devastations on a colossal scale, made provision on November 13, 1945, for admission of close relatives of persons residing in Great Britain and have offered to share their meagre supplies with those who have none.
Then let me draw the attention of hon. members to an item in Time magazine, New York, of February 19, 1946, concerning Australia's immigration policy:
Australia has plans for the greatest immigration project in history. It's a drive for an eventual threefold increase in the country's population of 7,000,000. An Australian delegation has been in Europe making a survey to determine how many British, Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch, Swiss, and other emigrants can be attracted to the island continent. To deal successfully with the economic problems posed by such a mass migration, Australia has set the number to be admitted 'at 70,000 a year for the first few years.
	,
Let me now turn to the United States immigration policy as announced by President Truman on December 22, 1945:
The war has brought in its wake an appalling dislocation of populations in Europe. Many humanitarian organizations, including the united nations relief and rehabilitation administration, are doing their utmost to solve the multitude of problems arising in connection with this dislocation of hundreds of thousands of persons. Every effort is being made to return the displaced persons and refugees in the various countries of Europe to their former homes. The great difficulties is that so many of these persons have no homes to which they may return. The immensity of the problem of displaced persons and refugees is almost beyond comprehension.
... The United States shares the responsibility to relieve the suffering . . . everything possible should be done at once to facilitate the entrance of some of these displaced persons and refugees into*the United States.
In this way we may do something to relieve human misery and set an example to the other countries of the world which are able to receive some of these war sufferers. I feel that it is essential that we do this ourselves to show our good faith in requesting other nations to open their doors for this purpose.
... I consider that common decency and the fundamental comradeship of all human beings require us to do what lies within our power to see that our established immigration quotas are used in order to reduce human suffering. I am taking the necessary steps to see that this is done as quickly as possible.
... This period of unspeakable human distress is not the time for us to close or to narrow our
gates.
What is Canada's immigration policy? Here are two paragraphs from a letter from the Department of Immigration in reply to a request to allow three displaced persons to join their relatives in Canada. This letter is dated March 6, 1946.
Literally hundreds of similar applications are being received in the department from residents of Canada who are anxious to assist relatives in distressed circumstances in Europe. Practically all of the proposed immigrants are inadmissible under existing regulations and, after careful review of the whole situation, it has been decided that the entry to Canada at this time of *any considerable number of aliens would not be advisable. With the return to civilian life of our servicemen and women, it is considered they are entitled to first priority in the matter of rehabilitation and establishment.
It would not be possible to offer any encouragement on behalf of your relatives above named, when we are obliged to refuse so many applications which present at least equal merit ffom a sympathetic standpoint. I can only express regret, therefore, at being unable to let you have a favourable reply.
I do not wish it to be understood that I am pressing the government to decide now on the general immigration policy for Canada for the next few years. I am merely appealing to the government to admit a generous number of displaced persons to Canada purely on the basis of humanitarian consideration.

The Address-Mr. McKay
I am glad that there are Canadians who take a sympathetic attitude toward the displaced persons. May I read a few sentences from a letter written by a Canadian officer:
I am a Canadian of British parentage ... In our displaced persons camp here ... we have two thousand Ukrainians and in the short time I have had the pleasure of associating with these people I have come to like and admire them greatly, I suppose I need not tell you of the many hardships and privations these folks have undergone in the past few years but I would like to tell you a little of what they are doing and are trying to do now. Our camp is composed completely of Ukrainians and we moved into a rather badly bombed German barracks.
I have never seen such industry and ambition shown by a group of people, as these put forward in making the camp not only livable but as near to -home as a military barracks can be made to be.
There are -two things that prompted me to write this letter. It was part of our work to register all people living in the camp and one of the questions asked on this registration card was the person's choice of a place to settle. Many answered "Canada" and I don't mind admitting I felt very proud it-hat my Canada was so well known among these people ... A school was opened in the camp and I beg consideration of your sending these people dictionaries. Also considering the great interest shown -in Canada any available -literature would be-more than welcome, especially anything to do with immigration to Canada or plans for it, and also daily newspapers for very news-starved people.
I would like it understood that I am not writing this as an officer but rather as a Canadian who would like to see a good -many of these people come to Canada -and help it to become the really great nation iit is destined to become and for -them to know the peace of -mind that comes from living in a free country.
I should like to quote, in conclusion, from an article in the Ottawa Citizen of March 23, 1946, .entitled "Displaced Persons 'Good Citizens'
That it would -be a sound move on Canada's -part to put in a bid for some of the "best" of *the displaced persons still in Germany, is the opinion of a deputy director of the displaced persons programme in Germany, William Bagnall.
Mr. Bagnall, who -arrived in Ottawa yesterday en route -to his home in Calgary, -after eight months -in Munich with UNRRA, told the press that there were 'still many displaced persons in Germany.
He believed -the solution to t-he problem of what to do with citizens who -had no place to go, or couldn't return to their own land with safety, lay in the hands of the -united nations.
Mr. Bagnall said it was up to each country to -take its share of -this displaced population. He was sure m-any of these -people would like to go to -other countries outside Europe, particularly to Canada.
Many of the displaced -persons were good citizens, he claimed, who were in their present position through no fault *f their own.
If Canada offers a welcome to a number of these homeless people, if she offers them freedom and homes, I am sure they will be forever grateful to the people of Canada and to this land.


Mr. E. B. McKAY (Weybum):: I believe it is my duty at this time to make several observations with reference to problems facing our ex-servicemen and women; but first I wish to congratulate the mover (Mr. Viau) and the seconder (Mr. Winters) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. Both these veterans have made an able contribution to the debate, and I am glad they were privileged to serve in the capacity for which they were selected. Ex-service personnel throughout the country were signally honoured in the selection of two veterans for this important function-. I believe it is also a recognition of the debt this nation owes to men- and women who served her so conscientiously during six years of devastating war. However, veterans have never wanted to be a privileged group. They served Canada as a duty in her hour of trial and sacrificed in order that Canadians might pursue their way of life. They have no regrets. The most of them would gladly serve again should Canada ever be in need of their services. But to-day they are facing the problems of the return- to civil life. They are entitled to a consideration of their problems. They hope for a square deal; they are anxious to obtain jobs, procure homes and become firmly established in the home community which it was their lot to defend in the greatest war in history.
That they have become accustomed to the economic security of service life has been most apparent. Adjustments to civil life which lack that economic security have not been an easy task. Satisfactory employment at adequate wages has aided that adjustment but that alone is not sufficient. Some employers, fortunately not a great many, take the attitude that the veteran must again prove his worth in order to hold his job. He has already proven his worth to his countiy once, and the employer should have some regard for his new status. Other employers consider they have performed a patriotic duty by accepting the veteran back in- his job. Many forget, however, that he is more mature now than when he enlisted-. He is often a changed man, and for him to adjust himself to the quiet life of a routine job after an exciting life in the services is not easy. Every employer should recognize this fact and be prepared to. bear with the veteran until such a time as he finds his niche in civil employment. I am certain
The Address-Mr. McKay

that if this is done every veteran will cooperate with his employer and give his best, as he has done before.
I am greatly disturbed by the fact that unemployment exists in the ranks of our returned personnel. Thousands are drawing unemployment insurance; other thousands are in receipt of out-of-work benefits, while many others are dissipating their savings and gratuities in forced idleness.
On the day the veteran received his discharge this government should have implemented its promise to the veteran and to the nation of "jobs for all". Veterans do not want charity. What they desire is employment with adequate wages. Private enterprise now has its chance to prove that there can be full employment under this economic system. Let the veteran have a practical demonstration, without delay, that private enterprise has the ability to provide him with work. Many a veteran is still waiting, for the job he was promised while he served on the European front, on the high seas or over the hostile skies of Europe and Asia.
May I at this point draw the attention of the house to the extensive report made by the interdepartmental rehabilitation information committee of Montreal district? This survey of conditions amongst veterans in that area is a good example of what is happening everywhere in the dominion. More than four thousand veterans were interviewed on this occasion. One sixth of them were unemployed, and only one-third of those were drawing out-of-work benefits because, as they expressed it, "they were unwilling to seek charity." Fifty per cent of the veterans examined had serious housing problems, and only four per cent owned their own homes. Of those renting, only half had adequate accommodation. Of those who while in the services had expressed a desire to take vocational courses, about fifty per cent were unable to do so because of difficulties they had encountered on returning to civil life. Many had hoped to utilize service-acquired trades or skills, but few have realized their ambition. Of those employed less than half were found satisfied with the long-term prospects of their jobs.
That is not a very pleasant picture. It is one that should cause grave concern to every hon. member in this chamber.
No one needs to emphasize the fact that housing conditions throughout this country are deplorable. It is small satisfaction to the veteran to be told that people like himself are homeless in Russia and the United Kingdom, This country never suffered the ravages of war. But we are told that Canada has a
fMr. McKay.]
housing scheme. I am afraid most of that scheme is on paper. The one thing lacking in it, but an essential part of it,' is the small cottage or bungalow which it was set up to provide, the small cottage that the veteran so urgently needs to shelter his wife and children. This shortage of homes exists while stocks of materials lie idle in various parts of the country. Business blocks, hotels, factories and even theatres are being constructed while many ex-service men live in single rooms. The export of building materials continues, exports to the United States to provide luxury homes, while men who fought for the Canadian way of life go from house to house seeking shelter for their families.
I insist, Mr. Speaker, that stocks of materials, whether held by government agencies or private concerns, should be immediately released for veterans' housing. We are facing a national emergency, and it must be treated as. such until the needs of our own people are met. Numbers of houses located on small holdings under the Veterans Land Act . stand uncompleted because of lack of finishing materials. The government should place an embargo on the export of all construction materials, except perhaps for housing in Britain, until the present situation is relieved.
Now, Mr. Speaker, just a word about land settlement. The settlement of veterans under the Veterans Land Act is anything but successful if figures released by the Department of Veterans Affairs are accurate. Under this act only some 1,800 veterans were actually established on farms in Canada by November 30, 1915, and certainly few would be settled during the winter months. Thousands of young men have been unable to procure farms under the act. Many veterans are becoming disgruntled and are either purchasing land with money borrowed at high rates of interest from private sources, or are seeking other fields of endeavour. Settlement under this act must be accelerated, or another season will slip by with veterans still standing in queues for the privilege of securing the bit of land which it has been their heart's desire to obtain.
The major reason for the slow settlement under the act is the inadequacy of the loan provided by the government for the purchase of farm land. Land prices now throughout the country are considerably inflated. In western Canada the economic farming unit is considered to be a minimum of 320 acres. At the present time it is doubtful if a halfsection of land, even without buildings, can be purchased anywhere in the west for $4,800 or even $6,000, which sum may be provided

* The Address-Mr. McKay
under the act if no machinery is involved. Even if such land could be purchased at this figure, the veteran then would have the problem of obtaining construction materials for farm buildings.
I suggest that the loan be increased to $10,000, with an additional $3,000 allocated for farm equipment. This amount is not excessive, and would enable the veterans to settle in some of the better farming communities. It is not excessive, when one considers that the estimated cost of training a Royal Canadian Air Force pilot was $25,000. Surely Canada can afford to spend half as much to rehabilitate properly the same young man on his return to the civil occupation of his choice. Loans should be granted to veterans who desire to farm cooperatively. Veterans have been used to cooperating for their common advantage in the fighting services. They are used to comradeship, which the isolated farm unit does not always provide. The trend in farm operations everywhere is toward large, mechanized farm units. ^ This is quite impossible for the beginner owing to the excessive cost of farm equipment, unless veterans are able to combine in a cooperative undertaking.
I question the policy of refusing permits to veterans desiring to settle in southern Saskatchewan on land generally classified by soil tests as sub-marginal. Not all the land in this area is poor. It is now recognized that a large part of that region can be profitably farmed. Much has been done in recent years by way of experimentation and improved farming methods in that area. Thousands of farmers are prospering -throughout this district in southern Saskatchewan. During the war millions of tons of foodstuffs were produced there, and tens of millions of dollars were contributed by the farmers of that area . to victory loans. Surely farm boys brought up in such localities would have better prospects of success on land with which they are familiar than on timber or bush lands of the north, where it appears to be the present plan to locate them.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Eric Bowness McKay: Mr. Speaker, I have been discussing the problems confronting veterans. I now wish to discuss briefly the matter. of pensions. Many returned servicemen are dissatisfied with the handling of war pensions. A great injustice is caused veterans by the
difficulty many have of proving eligibility for a pension. In no case should the onus of proving that a disability is associated with war service be upon the applicant for a war pension. If a member of the armed services was accepted as physically fit it should be assumed that he was fit unless the department of pensions can prove otherwise.
Furthermore, there should be an upward revision of the scale of pensions. A single veteran with 100 per cent disability receives no more than $75 a month, an amount totally inadequate to maintain a decent standard of living at present living costs. Why a private with complete disability should only receive $75 a month while a general requires $300 a month to live is difficult to understand, especially when one compares the service incomes of these individuals.
The government claims to be providing an adequate educational allowance for veterans attending our seats of higher learning. However, the situation of veterans at our universities with regard to maintenance allowances is becoming increasingly acute. As a result of a survey conducted by veterans associations in Saskatchewan, western Ontario and Queen's universities it was revealed that the average expenditure for a single veteran attending courses in these institutions was $90.90 a month. The-maintenance grant provided by the government is $60 a month. The single veteran is therefore short $30.90 every month in meeting his normal expenses. The average expenditure for a married veteran was $123.89 a month,, with a maintenance allowance from the government of $80 to offset this expenditure. Obviously a student attending a university under this plan must have a considerable amount in personal savings in order to carry on. Even so, few married veterans can continue an educational career with an average deficit of $43.89 every month, although they have some personal savings and gratuities from which to draw, and these veterans are not on the whole extravagant. According to data supplied by "Family income and expenditure in Canada 1937-38," plus the added (jost of living as indicated by statistics issued in November, 1944, the average Canadian wage-earner with one child expended $135.43 a month, which is more by $5.22 than a veteran of the same marital status spent while attending the three universities surveyed. It has been suggested that veterans can obtain remunerative employment during the recess between terms and thus bolster their incomes. The probability of employment with fair wages for transient labour is becoming increasingly difficult. The

The Address-Mr. McKay

expenses of a married veteran are fairly constant. He would be fortunate indeed to secure employment which would pay enough to keep him and his family, far less enable him to replenish his depleted savings.
When a student discontinues university training because his savings become exhausted his reestablishment credit will have been dissipated by absorption in educational benefits. Therefore, not only does the student lose his reestablishment credit, but the money provided by the government for his education is lost since the ends desired in the matter of rehabilitation will not have been achieved.
Several veterans associations have suggested that the maintenance grant for a single man be increased to $80 a month, with $100 monthly for married personnel; allowances for children to be arranged at service rates. I suggest to this house that this is the bare minimum and that it would be better still to continue service pay to the veteran while undergoing his training programme and until such time as he is established once again in a satisfactory civilian occupation.
I wish to appeal to the house at this time on behalf of the veterans of the first world war, particularly those who were settled under the old Soldier Settlement Act. Many of these older veterans of another war are still in debt to the treasury of -this country. Is it too much to ask that this parliament cancel their indebtedness and grant these men a clear title to the land upon which they have laboured for more than a generation? This nation can well afford to be generous to these people who have contributed so much to this country. If Canada can cancel war debts of the United Kingdom, and veterans generaly commend this action, surely we can afford to cancel the few millions of dollars still outstanding against these early soldier settlers.
The lack of a business loan for veterans has caused real hardship and is one of the weaknesses of the government's rehabilitation programme. I do not believe it is too late yet to rectify this error. There should be provided for veterans business loans similar to those employed in the United States. Veterans setting up small businesses are obliged in many instances to negotiate loans with private companies at excessive rates of interest. This will definitely handicap the prospects of ultimate success of their business enterprise.
Finally, this parliament should give some thought to the plight of the many widows and dependents of men who made the supreme sacrifice. Some assistance should be provided

by the government in order that these war victims might be able to provide themselves with homes.
On the way to parliament hill this morning, I was forcibly impressed by an attractive hand-painted sign over the door of a drab little home. A son was apparently about to return from overseas service. Many hon. members have seen such signs of welcome. It reads, ''Welcome home, son; we are proud of you." Of course they in that little home were proud of their son. We should all be proud of such boys. But actions speak louder than words. What sort of reception does this lad often receive? He comes home to a deadend street of unemployment where he has to beg for a job. He searches in vain to obtain shelter for his wife and family. If he is ill he frequently has to argue with the pension commissioners in order to secure an adequate pension for disabilities incurred while serving his country. Let us begin now to put into effect the words accredited during the first world war to Sir Robert Borden, "Our soldiers shall never want after fighting so gallantly." But I am sure our returning sons want action, not idle promises.


Mr. NORMAN JAQUES (Wetaskiwin):: Mr. Speaker, may I congratulate the mover (Mr. Viau) and the seconder (Mr. Winters) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I can only hope that time will justify their optimism. I should like to endorse the speech that was made by my friend, the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Low), who leads this group, and also the speech made by the hon. member for Port-neuf (Mr. Gauthier), which I think was an excellent one. But I did not wait until I reached the House of Commons before making public my ideas on espionage in Canada.
I happened to be in Victoria when the news broke, and I wrote a letter to the press which has been published in various papers in this country and which I will now read:
The existence of -a "Communist Spy Ring" should surprise no one. To-day Marxian socialists, internationalists and other totalitarians occupy key positions in government, organized religion and education.
The communist party is an organized concern with unlimited funds, directed by a permanent general staff, many of whom have been trained in Moscow in the arts of moulding the thoughts and actions of the workers.
The communist party holds key positions in most labour unions, has infiltrated all channels of publicity. They have penetrated the teachers' federations, the theatre, all avenues of education, instruction and entertainment. That is true of every democratic country.
The police are exposing not merely a ring of professional spies, but a nation-wide con-

The Address-Mr. Jagues
spiraey inspired by Marxian socialists who, for years, have been undermining our Christian and democratic ways of life, thus threatening the sovereign rights and freedoms of Canada.
Only a few weeks ago the Canadian Soviet friendship council (one among the fifth column identified by the police) held mass meetings across Canada which were sponsored by the leaders of church, state and business.
For years columnists and commentators of press, and radio, the "Red Network", directed by the "Hidden Hand" of world bolshevism, have been poisoning the minds of Canadians with anti-Christian, anti-democratic propaganda without let or hindrance.
I do not blame the Russian: government for carrying on this espionage. I continue to quote: *
It is the men entrusted with the safety and welfare of church and state, and not their underlings, who must be held responsible for the existence of "Communist Spy Rings" composed of men and women who have been systematically taught by socialists that Christianity has failed, that patriotism and- loyalty are national vices, and treason a virtue.
That, I maintain, is no exaggeration of the situation in Canada to-day.
Nobody has mentioned the fact, the amazing fact to me, that we practically had to apologize before we arrested the enemies of this country. Nobody has remarked on the equally remarkable fact that, so far as we are told, no arrest of spies has been made in the United States and only one, I believe, in the United Kingdom. Are we to suppose that there are no spies in the United States? Or are we to suppose that their police arrest them and that they then disappear without anybody's knowledge? Or are we to suppose that this communist movement has become so powerful that its adherents can defy the police and government authorities? It must be one of these three things, and from what I have read in United States papers the fact is that the control exercised by these people is such that so far they have carried on with impunity.
Criticism has been made, I believe, of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) in the first place, coupled with the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) also the mounted police or, if you like, the police commissioner. Nobody hates tyranny more than I do, but I think those people who have criticized the steps taken by the Department of Justice and the police have failed to realize the dangers that face us. Surely everybody knows that the honest Canadian need have not the slightest fear of either the Minister of Justice or of the police or of the commissioner. To-day in Canada no honest Canadian need fear the Department of Justice, and might I add tha t that cuts both 63260-16J
ways, that the Minister of Justice and the commissioner of police need fear no honest Canadian.
Let me quote two statements by two of the world's great -men. The first is a very short one by his holiness the Pope, from an encyclical by Pope Pius XI on "Atheist Communism". These are his words:
No one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever. Those who permit themselves to be deceived into lending their aid towards the triumph of communism, in their own country will ibe the first to f all victims of their error.
Then we have this statement which was written by Winston Churchill just prior to the war. It is taken I believe from his book, "Great Contemporaries". He says:
Communism is not only a creed. It is a plan of campaign. A communist is not only the holder of certain opinions; he is the pledged adept of a well-thought-out means of enforcing them. The anatomy of discontent and revolution has been studied in every phase and aspect, and a veritable drill book prepared in a scientific spirit for subverting all existing institutions. The method of enforcement is as much a part of the communist faith as the doctrine itself. At first the time-honoured principles of liberalism and democracy are invoked to shelter the infant organism. Free speech, the right of public meeting, every form of lawful political agitation and constitutional right are paraded and asserted. Alliance is sought with every popular movement towards the left.
The creation of a mild Liberal or Socialist regime in some period of convulsion is the first milestone. But no sooner has this been created than it is to be overthrown. Woes and scarcity resulting from confusion must be exploited. Collisions, if possible attended with bloodshed, are to be arranged between the agents of the New Government and the working people. Martyrs are to be manufactured. An apologetic attitude in the rulers should be turned to profit. No faith need be, indeed may be, kept with non-communists. Every act of good will, of tolerance, of conciliation, of mercy, of magnanimity on the part of governments or states: men is to be utilized for their ruin. Then when the time is ripe and the moment opportune, every form of lethal violence from mob revolt to private assassination must be used without stint or compunction. The citadel will be stormed under the banners of liberty and democracy; and once the apparatus of power is in the hands of the brotherhood, all opposition, all contrary opinions must be extinguished by death. Democracy is but a tool to be used and afterwards broken, liberty but a sentimental folly unworthy of the logician. The absolute rule of a self-chosen priesthood, according to the dogmas it has learnt by rote, is .to be imposed upon mankind without mitigation, progressively forever. All this, set out in prosy textbooks, written also in blood in the history of several powerful nations, is the communists' faith and purpose. To be forewarned should be forearmed.
And then, to those who think that the Prime Minister took a liberty or a risk when action was started in this espionage case,
The Address-Mr. Jaques

there >
is quite a pertinent editorial in the Saturday Evening Post. It is headed, "Is it immoral to trip up a spy?"
When the Canadians could no longer keep the well-known secret that' Soviet agents had long been operating on this hemisphere, former ambassador Joe Davies rushed up to declare that Stalin had a "moral right" to spy upon America because America has the atom-bomb secret and Russia, so far as is known, hasn't... One could point out that Joe Davies, who endorsed Stalin's murders of thousands of .Russians without trial, is an odd man to mention morals in this connection, particularly as it seems not to have occurred to him that, if Russia has a moral right to steal our secrets, we have a moral right to prevent her from stealing them. Furthermore, officials in this or the Canadian government have a moral duty to protect the interests and security of their country, and not use government time to think up excuses for other nations' spies.
The mention of Mr. Davies and the Moscow trials reminds me of a statement which I put on Hansard a few years ago. In July, 1943, I called attention to a letter which had been recently published in the New York Times dealing with a motion picture called "Mission to Moscow". I quoted a letter which was signed by Mr. John Dewey and Suzanne LaFollette, who were the chairman and secretary of an international commission that .went to examine into the Moscow trials. In the light of what has happened since, this letter is certainly prophetic. I will read only the first and last paragraphs:
. The film "Mission to Moscow" is the first instance in our country of totalitarian propaganda for mass consumption-propaganda which falsifies history through distortion, omission or pure invention of facts, and whose effect can only be to confuse the public in its thought and its loyalty. . . . The film is anti-British, anti-eongress, anti-democratic and anti-truth. It deepens that crisis in morals which is the fundamental issue in the modern world. . . . "Mission to Mosetqv" is a major defeat for the democratic cause. In putting out this picture the producers, far from rendering the patriotic service on which Mr. Davies compliments them, have assailed the very foundations of freedom. For truth and freedom are indivisible, as Hitler knew when he expounded his method of confusing public opinion through propaganda. The picture "Mission to Moscow" makes skilful use of the Hitler technique. To quote Matthew-Low of the New Leader, "This kind of 'truth' is on the march, and God help us if nothing can stop it."
Mention has been made, I believe by the Prime Minister, quoting the judges who are investigating the activities of these alleged spies, that the accused excuse themselves for their spying pn the ground that their loyalties are not inside this country, their loyalties are outside; and I say that the reason for that is very largely the propaganda which has been put over by every possible means for the IMr. Jaques.]
past many years to confuse the people in their loyalties. I have repeatedly in this house protested against it. I can only say that I got very little support either inside or outside the house; in fact I might say that there has been great deal more sympathy shown to the spies than to those who have tried to enlighten public opinion on this dangerous situation. Three years Ago this next week I called attention to a statement which was made by a well-known editor in this country, Mr. Sandwell. He said-at least he is reported to have said-at a meeting of the league of nations society in this .very building, though not in this chamber:
A supranational authority with power to settle questions of immigration, natural resources, treatment of minorities, repudiation of debts, finance, etc. To bring about Canada's acceptance of the new ".authority" it would be necessary to bring all the people to a diminution ot their loyalty to the crown by substituting a ne\v loyalty to an authority wider than Canada, than the British commonwealth of nations, or all the democracies together.
When I called attention to this in this chamber and asked if that were not treason, I was greeted with either ridicule or jeers from one end of Canada to the other. I say that these few spies who have been caught in the net are not the danger; it is not these few men, misguided as they are, who constitute our danger; the danger is that these opinions are shared by, I should not like to say how many, but altogether too many Canadians in this country. Their loyalty is no longer to Canada but to something outside the country, something outside the British empire, outside democracy. It is the direct result of a lying propaganda which has been used in every possible way to confuse the loyalties and the thoughts of the Canadian people.
Now a few words about the idea of a world government, of which we have heard so much in the past few years. Both Lenin and Stalin have declared that "the prolonged existence of the Soviet republic side by side with the imperialist states is unthinkable and in the end either one or the other will be victorious, and until this happens a series of terrible conflicts between the Soviet republic and the bourgeois states is inevitable." What is the result? What has been the big idea, these past many years, if it is not the dissolution of the British empire-because there are three great powers in the world to-day. There is the British empire; there is the United States of America, and there is the U.S.S.R. How, then, is it possible or conceivable that a world government can be made up of these two contrasting ideologies? Has anyone ever read a statement by Premier Stalin or any

The Address-Mr. Jaques
other Russian indicating that they have any intention of surrendering one atom of their sovereignty to any world government? No. All the surrendering has been done by the others. There has been appeasement, and the idea has been to drive a wedge between different members of the British empire, destroy their strength, and then drive a wedge between them and the United States. Thus there would be only two to decide the issue.
That cuts both ways. Can one wonder that Premier Stalin and the Russians are suspicious of the rest of the world, the bourgeois states, as he calls them, or the imperialist states? Imperialism is of course another word for anti-communism. Can one wonder that they are suspicious when we are doing all we can to spread the idea of one world government? They know very well that government will never be theirs; that is, if we can prevent it. It will never be from Moscow, and is it not only natural therefore that they should think that before there can be a world government the power of Moscow will have to be eliminated? Do we not fear exactly the same thing? Is not that what it has come to? What else was the reason for Churchill's speech at Fulton? I heard the speech; Mr. Churchill was speaking beyond the shadow of a doubt, if not with the approval of the government of Great Britain, with that of the majority of the people in the old country; and beyond question he spoke with the full approval of the President of the United States.
If you sum that all up in one' sentence you can say that Churchill made this statement: If we do not hang together we shall hang separately. That is where the idea of a one world government has brought us, to the verge of a third world war. That is the position we are in to-day. Had we kept to the Atlantic charter and. guaranteed all countries their sovereign freedom, then no country would be afraid of any other. But that was where the tragic mistake was made. What happened when the President of the United States and Mr. Churchill stepped off their battleship? Why was that charter tom up? Who tore it up? That is something we have never been told.
One thing is certain, that no people in the world to-day wants war. The British people do not want it; the American people do not want it; the Russian people do not want it and never did want it. We have had two wars. Why are we faced with a third? Because there are people who are determined upon world power, and in order to get it there will be another war and another after that until there is only one power left on earth. That is what we face.
I would riot for a moment accuse anyone- I would not name anyone-of deliberately helping that along. I am quite willing to believe that the majority of the world's people have been frightened into the conviction, by these horrible stories of atomic bombs and so forth, that they have been put into a frame of mind where they are willing to surrender everything they have, including their liberties, in order to prevent another war. But that will not prevent it. There are people, whose names perhaps will come to light, who are and have been for a long time deliberately plotting and planning just that thing.
I said that the big idea has been to eliminate the British empire, using, as an excuse Greece or Palestine or India or some other place. Always the socialist is against British action and British control. I remember a year ago last Christmas when Britain was having trouble to keep order in Greece. I was, I believe, the only member of this house who publicly made a statement endorsing the British action. For that I was abused more than these spies have been abused. I was the subject of an abusive editorial in the Citizen, for instance, because I said that very thing.
The Cooperative Commonwealth Federation at their national convention a year ago last Christmas or thereabouts issued a statement, which was published in the press, that they condemned British action in Greece, saying that Canadians were not dying to restore discredited governments or reactionary monarch?. When the representative of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation was over in London at the' united nations .organization conference he had the great pleasure of hearing Mr. Bevin call Mr. Vishinsky "a damn liar" for using those very words.


Major James William Coldwell: Oh no.


Norman Jaques: Yes, he did.


Major James William Coldwell: Quite different.
' Mr. JAQUES: Exactly the same.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Bevin did not say he would restore discredited monarchs or discredited governments; quite a different thing.


Norman Jaques: I shall not mention Palestine because I intend to make some further remarks on that country later on. Then we have the Argentine. At the peace conference in San Francisco the admission of the Argentine was opposed by I do not know how many people, but I know it was opposed by the leader of the C.C.F. party.


An hon. MEMBER:: Hear, hear.

The Address-Mr. Jaques


Norman Jaques: I will tell you why, because the Argentine is not a communist government. That is the real reason.


An hon. MEMBER:: Fascists.


Norman Jaques: We now have the proof of what I say. They have had a perfectly democratic election without bloodshed. It was in perfect order and they have elected the government they wanted. That is their business, not ours, may I say, unless we want to bring about another war. So it is with Spain. I hold no brief for Spain,-but I believe that the Spanish people are perfectly capable of running their own affairs. Whatever one may say about Spain or the Spanish people, they never interfered with us during the late war. I know I have heard them accused-


Mr. COLD  WELL@: They tried to.


Norman Jaques: I have heard them accused of certain things, but when you consider the position in which the Spanish government found themselves when only the British empire stood against the might of Germany and" all Europe was overrun by Hitler, do you think it was any great sin, for the Spanish government to play along with Hitler to the extent that they did in order to preserve their own people?


An hon. MEMBER:: Certainly.


Norman Jaques: They dad not do anything
to us.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: .Oh, oh.


Norman Jaques: Where was the C.C.F. when Britain stood alone against the might of Germany? What did the C.C.F. say? "Not a man overseas".


Mr. PROBE:: At that time members of the C.C.F. were in the armed forces.


Thomas John Bentley: Our boys were over there.,


Norman Jaques: "Not a man overseas"; not before Russia came into it.


Major James William Coldwell: That is a lie.


Norman Jaques: It is true.


James Horace King: Order. I must call the attention of hon. members to standing order 34, which reads as follows:
Every member desiring to speak is to rise in his place, uncovered, and address himself to Mr. Speaker.


Norman Jaques: I heard the B.B.C. broadcast last night. I hope what they said is not true, and coming from the B.B.C. it may very well

not be true. When I was over in England two years ago I heard that the B.B.C. was a sort of code name for Beelzebub's Brethren Calling.


Major James William Coldwell: That is what Hitler said.


Norman Jaques: Well, he was not far out. However, I was going to say a word on behalf of General Mihailovich, who, I am sorry to say, has been captured. I know the stories that have been told; I know the other side, too. Let me quote a statement of the British ambassador to Yugoslavia, which is good enough for me. What did he say?
All the accusations of the partisans that Mihailovich is a fascist, collaborating with the occupational forces, are completely unfounded, [DOT]and spring entirely from the efforts of the partisans to blacken Mihailovich among the Serbian population, and frustrate him when the moment comes to seize power in the country. General Mihailovich from the beginning of the struggle *has loyally collaborated with the allies and no one can doubt his loyalty ,as an ally or as the representative in the country of the Yugoslav government.
That is the statement of the British ambassador with regard to General Mihailovich. If he has been captured I suppose he has not long to live and I should like to pay that tribute to a gallant and honourable man.
Before I resume my seat I should like to make an appeal if I may. An appeal has been made on behalf of Canadian unity. I should like to appeal to French and English, Catholic and Protestant, to unite in their loyalty to the truth. Let us be true to ourselves and we can be false to no man. "Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free."


Mr. L. W. SKEY (Trinity):: May. I commence my contribution to this debate by offering my congratulations to the mover (Mr. Viau) and the seconder (Mr. Winters) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I must say I was surprised at some of the praise they had for the government, but perhaps that is understandable. I was also particularly interested in one reference which the mover of the motion made to the four freedoms of the Atlantic charter, and I should like to refer to it later on in this debate.
Turning to the business of the government, after listening to the speech from the throne I was reminded of my one and only meeting with Sir Robert Borden, that illustrious Canadian whose record is written in the annals of this house. It was on an occasion when Sir Robert was exchanging some money. He had reason to complain of the rate of exchange which- he was receiving, just as to-day we may have reason to complain about the rate of

The Address-Mr. Skey
exchange we receive when, we purchase United States dollars. Sir Robert Borden said, "Well, what can I do? A corporation has no body to be kicked and no soul to be damned." After listening to the reply of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) when he dealt with the speech by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) and when he defended the failures of the government's policies, I would venture to suggest that we can now say that "the government has no body to be kicked and no soul to be damned." I say this chiefly because of the inadequacy of the replies that have been made up to the present time. Those who were present when the leader of the opposition spoke will remember that he challenged the government on several issues. So far, the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe), the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), the Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) and the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) have replied; but this house and the country still have to hear from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Usley), the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) and the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) on major policies which may be proposed by this government.
When the Prime Minister replied to the remarks of the leader of the opposition it struck me, as a young member of this house, that it was hardly right for him to say he had expected one big blast. Personally I would say he was not disappointed; but he went on to ask the leader of the opposition to confine himself to one topic, though when challenged on that subject he admitted that the leader of the opposition had a right in this debate, to discuss anything at all of interest in the country. I must say, too, that I felt it was rather inadequate for him to say, "Well, all you may say is true, but still Canada is better off than any other nation." I felt that it was a negative approach. When there was so much more that could be done I felt it would have been better had he said "We are glad to have your suggestions," or " We can do more."
Turning first to the Department of Labour, that department which is so much in the public eye in the United States of America and which hangs in some ways like the sword of Damocles over our fate in Canada in regard to reconversion, I should like to point out again to this house just what has been proposed. We suggested that a dominion-provincial labour conference be called at the earliest possible moment. The leader of the opposition drew a distinction between a labour conference to clear up a legislative difficulty
created by the British North America Act and a conference such as that dealing with the taxation problems which are under discussion at the present time. He pointed out the necessity of having such a conference, the necessity of the federal government giving the provincial governments some lead in their own labour legislation so that the Provinces will be better able to deal with the problems now confronting them. He called for the relaxation of wage controls on the lower wage groups because, as every lion, member knows, the lowering of the wages of the working men, while prices have remained the same or tended on the whole to be inflated, has created a hardship and has actually lowered their standard of living. I am sure the working man would prefer to see a slight inflation in prices, a slight rise in the cost of living, and have the ceiling taken off his wages in order that he might get a better return for his efforts.
Then I come to immigration. The leader of the opposition called attention to a report No. F-4, called, "The Future Population of Canada", by one of the government's own agencies, and traced for us the growth in Canada's population as this report sees it, showing that by the year 2,000 Canada will have reached the magnificent total of some fifteen million and that thenceforth her population will decline. I would recall to the house the remark of the leader of the opposition in that connection: "I do not believe that Canada's future is limited by any such narrow horizon." Neither do I believe we are limited by an such narrow horizon, especially when I read in the Letter-Review of March 25:
Emigration from Britain to Australia is being actively encouraged by the United Kingdom and Australian governments. There will be free passages for all service men and merchant navy personnel, assisted passages for others approved. Migrants will be given rights under social security plans, but will not receive service preference for employment for seven years. No limit ia set on the number to move during the next two years.
The same review points out:
Canada, meanwhile, has no immigration policy, and lack of a policy means exclusion.
This is only one class of immigration. What of the others? What of those Canadian girls who are engaged to men of the allied armed services, those men now prohibited from coming to Canada because of our immigration laws? What of the families of Canadian citizens who cannot leave Europe to seek the protection of their qwn people here, their own Canadian blood relatives who will guarantee to support them? This country needs an immigration policy, and the sooner
The Address-Mr. Skey

Only democracy seems to offer this hope to mankind at large, * the opportunity to regain their Christian concept of human dignity and worth.
The thing that challenges us here and challenges men in all governments and in all parliaments of the world is how to proceed to bring about better conditions which will offer greater hope to the peoples of this world. I would suggest that the answer is to be found in Mr. Churchill's speech on March 5 at Fulton. But first let me go back in years and call attention to the history of the British navy, a navy which helped to keep peace in the world during the century prior to 1914. It was its dominance of the sea lanes and the fact that both Britain and America sought trade, and not war. They were keeping the sea lanes open for commerce. Had Great Britain or the United States been aggressive, warlike nations, their two navies during the past century undoubtedly would have clashed, but they were both dominated by the same thought, that by keeping the sea lanes open for commerce they would produce a better livelihood for all and would raise the standard of living of all the peoples of the world. We can bring the same idea down to our own communities by showing the necessity for law enforcement. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that but for law enforcement we would to-day be harricading our homes or building walls around our industry. We might be unable to trade at all. Mr. Churchill showed a solution when he said:
I have, however, a definite and practical proposal to make for action. Courts and magistrates cannot function without sheriffs and constables. The united nations organization must immediately begin to be equipped with an international armed force. In such a matter we can only go step by step; but we must begin now. I propose that each of the powers and states should be invited to dedicate a certain number of air squadrons to the service of the world organization. These squadrons would be trained and prepared in their own countries but would move around in rotation from one country to another. They would wear the uniform of their own countries with different badges. They would not be required to act against their own nation but in other respects they would be directed by the world organization. This might be started on a modest scale and grow as confidence grew. I wished to see this done after the first world war and trust it may be done forthwith.
As an airman I have flown over a good part of this world and I have a realization of how small it is. Mr. Willkie has given us a lead as to the size of the world to-day when he said:
Continents and oceans are plainly only parts of a whole, seen, as I have seen them, from the air. England and America are parts. Russia and China. Egypt, Syria and Turkey, Iraq and Iran are also parts. And it is inescapable that 
there can be no peace for any part of the world unless the foundations of peace are made secure throughout all parts of the world.
With all the force that I have I endorse the suggestion that Mr. Churchill made that we should start law enforcement throughout the world to-day, on a small scale, not so large that any country could say it was an aggressive force. But let us have the beginning, the nucleus, just as the British navy had its beginning in policing the world and played such a part in keeping the peace and expanding the trade of all nations.
I conclude by quoting again from Mr. Churchill:
Our supreme task and duty is to guard the homes of the common people from the horrors of another war.


Harry Grenfell Archibald: Mr. Speaker, my remarks are going to be short this evening. Last session in my first speech I made the remark that coming here'as a newcomer and an industrial worker this institution had for me an air of unreality, and that it was operating in a vacuum. I did not know at the time whether I had made a mistake or not in so describing it, but the more I have seen of it the more I realize that my first impression was right. We dealt on an international plane with such things as atomic energy-a beautiful phrase-it was to be used for the benefit of all mankind, but since that date we have had to arrest some of our leading scientists who have been dealing with atomic energy.
In the United States a great many scientists are quitting in disgust because all the research is going into the' bomb, not into peace-time uses for atomic energy. More and more the state is interfering with and hindering the development of science. We are rapidly moving into the conditions of which we accused the nazis. At one time Great Britain. and Canada were so sure of themselves that they could allow all the world to come in and witness what they are doing. We knew that our modem technology could keep us far ahead of the other fellow. But now there is a different set of conditions; we are frightened of the things we are creating. One thing I notice-and we can disregard the political set-up for the moment-atomic energy developed in Russia will not upset any capital structure, but atomic energy developed in this country is apt to upset too many people's apple-carts, and they want to keep it down. I am not so much interested in the political set-up or the words of men; I am interested in the development of science and what occurs in human society as that development con-

The Address-Mr. Archibald
tinues. In the United States scientists are afraid that we are heading toward a military dictatorship.
We also joined in the Bretton Woods agreement. Since that time Russia has had to go her own way and has been making bilateral agreements with all the border states. It is what is called the barter system of trading; bookkeeping is all that takes place; the great god gold does not interfere; there is no necessity of three per cent interest, for everything is settled with goods. Great Britain also signed the Bretton Woods agreement; but since then, through sheer necessity, she has been forced to enter into the same trading arrangements as Russia did, namely, to set up bilateral trade agreements throughout Europe on the bloc basis. Lord Keynes said when he was in New York that if Britain did not get the loan they would have to adopt the bloc system. In spite of the Bretton Woods agreement they still have to use it. It is a method which will yet be developed more widely on the international scale; we are not going -to be tied to this great thing called gold. Mutual Aid is a system which worked perfectly well during the war in the form of lend-lease, and we shall have to return to it and do away with interest rates. I say, therefore, that in spite of the acts of men, in spite of our attempts to put humpty-dumpty back on the wall, the development of natural laws forces, men in certain directions whether they like it or not.
When we were previously assembled in this house we dealt with certain internal problems of Canada. For example, we discussed veterans houses. We spent days arguing about it. The government hedged this way and that; "oh, it was a difficult problem; we were short of lumber; we were short of soil pipe", and everything else. The mayor of Vancouver went back and forth across the dominion; the dominion government sent wires back and forth about using the hotel Vancouver; it was owned by the Canadian Pacific Railway company, and these men, they thought, wanted to destroy it. There was that great god, private property. Then all of a sudden the ex-servicemen marched into the building and occupied it, and we had to recognize the act. After spending days here wasting our time, these men solved the question in a few minutes.
We also spent days in arguing the discharge system, how we should1 allot discharge points to the men overseas, and so on. The air force went on a sit-down strike, and according to Maclean's magazine it was this act which made the government come out with the discharge policy-not any act which was performed here, but the simple act of the
men sitting down. It gives me great pride that I belonged to the air force and that I was a Joe.


Humphrey Mitchell: Was my hon. friend overseas in the air force?


Harry Grenfell Archibald: I was in this country, and do not start casting aspersions because ' I stayed in this country.
In human society forces adjust themselves. If governing bodies do not administer laws in the interest of mankind, social forces adjust themselves just as forces do in nature. When a volcano has to blow, it blows, to relieve the pressure and adjust the equilibrium. That is what happens in human society. I have heard it stated on numberless occasions in this house that we must have laws, that we should respect them, and all that sort of thing, and lawyers here spend hours of time in expressing that point of view. Yet when a government cannot be respected because it is not administering the laws in the interest of the people, the only method open to the workers of this country is direct action. That is what it comes to, without plotting or planning just spontaneously; so do not start looking for red* herrings under bushes.
I should like to deal for a moment with this spy scare. It is a very opportune thing for the government that it came at this time, because of the weakness of the speech from the throne; the resultant publicity has hidden the real issue, which is the speech itself. I look on this spy scare with a rather jaundiced look, I will frankly admit. The labour movement has had so many things happen to it; for instance, the Zinoviev letter in Britain, shortly after the first war, which put the Conservatives in power and threw labour out because they were supposed to be hooked up with a red bogey. In this country, in 1940, in Saskatchewan a man by the name of Mr. Schneider was in a concentration camp because he had sympathies with the nazis. Of course, when the federal elections came on and he was needed in the election he was released during the election to help the Liberal party, and then he went back into the concentration camp again. We also had communists running around this country sabotaging the war effort: some were thrown into gaol and some hid themselves. However, when it became politically opportune for them to come out and split the labour vote, out they came under a new name, the L.P.P., and they were legal then. Just change your name and you are legal. They served their purpose. I would say to the government, I only hope that when you release the members of this political party once again, if they do go to gaol, you do it with a little more finesse
The Address-Mr. Archibald

next time. This is the kind of thing that goes on in the name of law and order; how can one respect them or reconcile such acts with the ethics by which we are supposed to be guided1? I listen to fine phrases expressed in this house, but I know that when an election comes' on I have to have a hatchet up my back, or I am going to "get it." The duality of the thing is what gets me; you use fine phrases here, but when an election comes you will use any weapon you can lay your hands on.
I should like to speak for a moment on the economic problems facing this country. I come from a frontier area, Skeena. Twenty-five or fifty years ago a Liberal regime would have had railroads going in there; townsites would have been laid out, land booms going on, and developments of all kinds. I should like to know what has happened to the Liberals. They have grown old. Where are the Jim Hills and the Sir Henry Thorntons? They are not with us any more. The Prime Minister. (Mr. Mackenzie King) came to Prince Rupert years ago and he could see hotels and drydocks and shops and everything else. Well, there is a big wheat elevator there; it was built before an election, and it is empty. There is a great big drydock there, run by the Canadian National Railways, and it is empty. I have been trying since last September to get a statement from the government on that situation. Good workers have been fired, scattered all over the country, forced into the cities where unemployment is acute. Also in Prince Rupert we have plenty of houses and skilled workers but no policy. The drydock is there; the men are there and the tools are there to do the job. Had the work been done, it would have relieved the housing shortage to the south and at the same time it would have built up something for the country. The poor C.N.R1 I sometimes think it is like the Missouri mule, without pride of ancestry or hope of posterity.
When you approach the government they tell you to go to the C.N.R., and when you go to the C.N.R. they tell you to go to the government. I know what is behind it. That institution exists simply as a butt for the C.P.R., so that we can spend our time criticizing the C.N.R. I post a letter in Jasper to Vancouver. The letter is taken off in Kamloops, held up a couple of hours and put on the C.P.R. That is what you call efficiency under the economy of our railway system. The same thing applies to the whole north country.
We have a railway problem across the north from Winnipeg right into the Peace River. When I was young and in my prime I went 
and filed on a homestead in Fort St. John. Thank goodness, I had enough sense to come out or I would still have been up there and I would have been in very poor shape. Those poor people went there and lived in sod huts in the middle of a side hill or in log shanties, through the cracks of which they could look at the scenery in all directions. They put up with that condition, half frozen, believing, as had been promised, that a railway would be built to the coast. They spent a lifetime hacking out brush and there are now hundreds of homesteads completely deserted. The life work of men and women, as well as human lives, has been sacrificed, just because of an empty political promise. That is all it meant to governments, but human lives were at stake. Some day the government will have to measure i up to its responsibility.	.
From Prince George to Prince Rupert we have what is known as the Skeena highway. Election after election you would see men with a few picks and axes up there chopping another ten yards and then they would drop it. All of a sudden Japan entered the war and started coming down the Aleutian chain, and then the government put in steam shovels, pouring in the material, with the result that the highway went through. Thank goodness, the wkr lasted long enough to serve that purpose. Since that time the road has been completely plugged with snow so that nobody can use it. Between Havelton and Terrace there ' is a stretch of twenty miles forming a C.N.R. right of way. What happens? The dominion government picks up the whole problem in connection with the highway and hands it over to the province, saying, "There it is". Well, people cannot use that stretch because it is a C.N.R. right of way. You cannot drive trucks over it. The result is that the provincial authorities throw it back to the federal government while we are sitting in the middle looking at it.
It is absolutely useless under the present set-up. This work was done as a result of the necessities of war, and it could be used, because the people need it and would like to enjoy the benefits of it. But they cannot. It is a pity there are not more of us up there. Then we could drive trucks through, and the government would see something^ such as happened in connection with the ex-servicemen in Vancouver. Unfortunately, there are not enough of us and I have to make an appeal here.
To-day transportation is the whole keynote of development in the west. You talk about food going to Europe. There are millions of acres there which could be settled; but two or three years from now we might have a glut on the market and prices would fall, and my

The Address-Mr. Gagnon
hon. friends do not like that. Again, if we went into that development it might result in too much money being put into circulation and the banks would not like it. It is a tragic situation, and it seems that the human element is of no consequence.
There is something else to be considered. The government is spending more on larger navies, armies and so on, in a day of atomic warfare, buzz bombs and all the rest of' it, but not enough attention is being paid to the economic side of it. We all know that we won this war because of our productive effort; we won the war because we smashed the productive effort of the enemy. Without decentralizing industry, in a period such as this-if the government believes in preparedness, as seemingly it does-we are building up a larger army, navy and air force, which is like hanging a voodoo sign outside a shack, and expecting that robbers will not enter, because buzz bombs can smash us overnight. And where would the armies be without supplies? This is national suicide. It is criminal negligence.
Not only for social use but to develop the natural resources of the north, we should run a highway from Atlin down behind the panhandle of Alaska to cover the ground-hog coal fields, where there is as good coal as can be obtained in Pennsylvania; also plenty of hydro-electric power. We want to see these things done, and I would urge the government to make the necessary effort so that we may have real freedom and social justice in this country.


Mr. PAUL EDMOND GAGNON (Chicoutimi) (Translation):: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member for St. Boniface (Mr. Viau), who had the honour to move the address in reply to the speech from the throne, performed his task most creditably, and I take pleasure in congratulating him. I must also commend the seconder, the worthy repre-' sentative of the constituency of Queens-Lunenberg (Mr. Winters) whose speech contained all the customary encomiums for the government. .
The matter which now transcends all others, although it has but a relative importance and should not make parliament forget the numerous problems for which we are in duty bound to find a solution and with which it behooves us to deal at once, is the espionage matter.	*
The right hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) on whom lies responsibility for the inquiry in that matter, deserves high commendation for the course of action he has taken. I find it difficult to understand that anyone should oppose the procedure followed in that matter, which involves a clash between
spies, traitors and communists on the one hand, and the authorities on the other hand, and that such an outcry should be raised against the action of the department of Justice. Because Russians, Doukhobors and Jews are involved, we hear protests against dictatorship and totalitarianism; because people in the pay of the foulest dictatorship are implicated, gentleness andi kind attentions are requested for them. As was said on Friday last by the honourable member for Labelle (Mr. Lalonde) if Canadians had been caught in the act of doing espionage work in Russia for the benefit of Canada, a firing squad would have liquidated them at once.
I feel that the Criminal Code is not stringent enough for that kind of offence, as , it does not .provide for a penalty sufficiently severe for the people guilty of such a felony. They should be sentenced to life imprisonment. With that thought in mind, I ask the Minister of Justice to remain firm and pitiless in his dealings with traitors. Let him be sure of the support of all citizens who, disregarding party politics and bitterness, want, once for all, to behead the communistic monster. Besides, as was recalled this afternoon by the honourable member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot), much severity was shown in the past, when at the beginning of the war the decision was taken to intern Camillien Houde, mayor of Montreal and member of the provincial legislature. They did not make that much -noise nor did they go to so much .trouble to secure for him a fair and just trial. A French-Canadiao dared tell the truth and denounce hypocrisy and blackmail, how sacrilegious! He was promptly put behind bars and denied the right of habeas corpus, the right to consult a lawyer or the privilege to see members of his family. Houde in prison and Tim Buck free. Other times, other ways. French Canadians were then considered as saboteurs, to repeat the words used by a minister of the Crown at the time of the Arvida strike; meanwhile, the citizens of my province were asked to contribute to a fund for needy Russian children The million dollars thus collected was spent here on bolshevist propaganda. Money given to feed and clothe the destitute children of the U.S.S.R. was used on revolutionary propaganda and constituted the pay of renegades and people without a country. According to newspaper reports, Gouzenko "had been amazed to find organizations in Canada during the war, which were collecting money and food for Russia. In Russia, he had never heard of this help." We have, to say the least, lacked prudence. I hope this will be a lesson to us and that henceforth we will be on the lookout. Some aliens are as
The Address-Mr. Gagnon


Mr. D. F. BROWN (Essex West):: I should like to speak on behalf of the constituency of Essex West, which comprises chiefly the city of Windsor. I also wish to associate myself with the mover (Mr. Viau) and the seconder (Mr. Winters) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne and to express my appreciation of being associated with these two hon. gentlemen in the same political party. .
In recent months Windsor has gone through rather dark and troubled days. We have seen dark waters. However, I am happy to say that the darkest cloud preceding the dawn has disappeared and we are again seeing daylight. Windsor's contribution to the winning of the

The Address-Mr. Brown
war is known throughout Canada. Our production of the sinews of war, tanks, trucks, automobiles, chemicals, guns and other things used in warfare is well known and contributed largely, I believe, to the overthrow of Germany. In addition, however, we have fought and won a labour war in Canada; and that war having been won, it is my opinion that now the city of Windsor is destined to become one of the. leading industrial centres of the British empire.
At this point I should like to pay my humble tribute to the work of the Minister of Labour (Air. Mitchell) who has stood so loyally, so faithfully and, shall I say, so serenely behind and on top of the principles he has advocated for so many years. On behalf of the city of Windsor I wish to express to him the appreciation we feel for his efforts in our dark and troublesome days. I should ' like also to pay my respects to Mr. Justice Rand who, through his scholarly and learned decision in the Ford Motor dispute, has won the acclaim of people all over Canada, because, after all, that labour battle has set the pattern for all in Canada, and I think all in Canada will show their gratitude to him.
I think we have made our start toward becoming one of the greatest industrial centres of the British empire. During the last session many statements were made in this house in connection with our labour dispute; in fact on one occasion we had a motion to adjourn the house for the purpose of discussing the situa-[DOT] tion in my city. But let me say that industry has shown its faith in the city of Windsor.. To-day the Ford Motor Company is building a $600,000 addition to its plant, and many other industries are constructing additions to their premises. For instance, the Packard Motor Car Company recently purchased property in Windsor on which it intends to erect a plant, and many smaller industries are coming into the city, some of which we hope will grow into large plants. In addition, the larger retail outlets of the Dominion of Canada and the United States of America have found it advantageous to purchase properties there, having in mind the erection of large retail establishments.
As I have said already, Windsor is the centre of the automobile industry of the British empire. In addition, we have some 260 industries, with scores of feeder plants supplying parts to the automobile industry. These plants employ many hundreds of men and played a great part in the winning of the war, especially as against Germany. It can also be said that we are the salt of the earth, because we are the largest producers of salt in Canada. In all probability the table salt
used in British Columbia and the rock salt used in Alberta and Manitoba in connection with dairying come from my city. The chlorine for purification purposes also comes from Windsor. Caustic soda, a product of the salt industry, is used for cleansing purposes. We are the centre of the pharmaceutical industry in Canada; we have the larger pharmaceutical plants, such as Parke Davis, Sterling Products, Frederick Stearns, John Wyeth, Jamieson, and so on. Our geographical location is such that we are bounded on the north by lake St. Clair, in front by the Detroit river and on the south by lake Erie. Strange as it may seem, we are south of the pity of Detroit. Essex county, comprising the constituencies of Essex East, Essex South and my own constituency of Essex West, is known as the sun parlour of Canada. We are served by water, by the busiest waterway in the world. We are served by air by both American and Canadian air lines. We have five railroads. We are also served by a tunnel from Detroit, and a bridge; and in addition we have a railroad tunnel, car ferries and so on. We have fine schools, fine churches, and we are rich in historic lore.
All these things, however, are not the reason for the greatness of this district. Our city is not made famous by its great industries, its geographical location or its fine buildings, but by the spirit of its residents in the hearts and minds' of our people. I think it would best summarize the type of people we have if I were to read a reprint from the Labour Gazette of January, 1944, containing the decision of Mr. Justice Rand as arbitrator in the issue between the union and the Ford Motor Company. At page 4 of the reprint Mr. Justice Rand said:
I have had an opportunity of sizing up the leadership of (this union so far as it is* represented by the committee of negotiation. The members are all of English-speaking origin and British citizenship. They have impressed me as being men of the stuff of which ordinary Canadians are made. With the exception of . . .
Then he mentions two individuals.
. . . who are on leave of absence from General Motors at Oshawa as international representatives of the union, they are men with seniority in the Ford plant ranging from ten to eighteen years. They conducted themselves in negotiation with intelligence and reasonableness. I have no doubt their dominating interest is the job of those they represent in that industry, and that their object is to attain for those employees and their families a secure and self-respecting living,_ which seems to be the object of most Canadians. That aim is legitimate, whether or not attainment is possible.
As I have said, that summarizes the opinion of one who has rendered his decision in an impartial and disinterested way.
The Address-Mr. Brown

Like other Canadian municipalities, we have our choral societies, our theatre guilds, our art associations and our handicrafts guilds. We are no different from the rest of the Dominion of Canada.
Situated as we are, the tourist industry is of vital importance. Across the river in the states of Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and Illinois there is a total population, as of the 1941 census, of 23,488,755 persons, and there has been a considerable increase since that time. Figures furnished to me by the department show that the number of tourists from the United States entering Canada in 1938 through all ports was 17,084,525, of whom 3,497,814 entered through the port of Windsor. I do not intend to refer to the figures for the years 1939 through 1944, but the figures for 1945 Show that 17,207,731 tourists entered through all ports and that 5,437,745, or almost one-third, entered through the port of Windsor.
We have many things to show those tourists who want to make short inroads into Canada, who want to stay for only a short period and travel only a short distance. Besides our fine buildings, there are many other things of interest. We have the Baby residence, the oldest building in the city, a building with a great historical background. Nothing has been done about this building by the dominion government, and I would urge the government to take whatever steps are' necessary, in conjunction with the Essex county Historical Association, to see that some funds are appropriated for the restoration of this building as a point of interest for tourists.
In the adjoining constituency of Essex South at Amherstburg there is the Fort Malden museum. This point is just eighteen miles from Windsor, and this locality has tangible memories of such men as Tecumseh, Sir Isaac Brock and Colonel James Baby. I am glad to say that this building has ben restored and improved and is being used quite extensively. Many tourists visit it each year.
There is also the Point Pelee national park, situated on the most southerly point of the mainland of the Dominion of Canada. I do not propose to go into the details of this park at this time, but I should like to mention that through it pass literally thousands of birds migrating to the south. Strange to say, bees also migrate through here to southern climates as well as literally millions of butterflies. This subject would take considerable time to discuss, but suffice it to say that this park is unique in many other ways. The flora found there are found in no other part of Canada, and the same can be said of the wild life.

I should also like to refer to the Jack Miner bird sanctuary which attracts tourists from the United States, Mexico and many parts of Europe. In 1906 Jack Miner started to band wild geese. He did not put a number on the bands of tin or metal which he placed on the birds he caught; he put on a verse of scripture. The birds were then freed and in the course of years they were found all over the eastern parts of -the United States and Canada, as far north as Baffinland, Hudson bay and other northern posts and as far south as South America. Those scriptural verses which were found in all parts of this continent aroused considerable interest. Preachers in northern outposts preached sermons on the verses which had come to them out of the air. The natives of South America have been helped and have learned about the Dominion of Canada and the Jack Miner sanctuary through birds which have come to them out of the air. So it is my hope that as this bird sanctuary has brought literally thousands of tourists who have spent millions of dollars in the Dominion of Canada, nothing will be done either by this government or by any succeeding government to impede the work of this late and great man but rather that the work will continue with the support of the government of the day.
I said a moment ago that we in Windsor have an art association and a handicrafts association. These associations are of vital interest to our tourist business, and they are very practical. The practical nature of the-art association can perhaps best be illustrated by the following incident, showing the effect which it has had on persons outside the Dominion of Canada who are desirous of seeing what Canada has to offer because of what they have seen done by the art association., also by the National Art Association and the National Gallery of Canada.
A short time ago a gentleman came to this city from India. He was asked what places he would like to see and his first request was to see the National Gallery. He was asked why he wanted to see it, and he said that he had just flown here from India and that at each stop he had found an interesting and beautiful painting of a Canadian scene, and at the bottom of each picture was the source, the National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa. So he wanted to see the national gallery. Probably if he did see it he was disappointed. I mention this because the National Gallery of Canada is of practical value to us in my constituency. It encourages the artists who will depict scenes in my own and neighbouring constituencies which will arouse interest outside the Dominion of Canada and make tourists want to see those scenes. Naturally they

The Address-Mr. Brown
will come to my constituency and, while there, will spend valuable dollars in foreign currency.
I should like to say a word about the National Gallery of Canada, an institution with which I have only recently become acquainted. I went there the other day and here are some of the things I found. The national, gallery is housed in one end of the museum building, five floors of it, if you include the basement. The space was never designed for a national gallery and is hopelessly inadequate. Most of the partitions are made of wood and beaverboard, carefully disguised with painted burlap, all that the government of the day thought it could afford after the first great war. It is not fireproof; it has not even the elementary conveniences of a public building. The storage and shipping space is even worse.
I am interested in the national gallery,' not because it is in Ottawa, but because I believe this work should be centred in one building under one head from which it can disseminate its work to the benefit of my constituency, and that of course applies to every constituency in the dominion.
The staff consists of the director and a crew of fifteen, all told. Yet that small group is responsible not only for the management of the national gallery in Ottawa but for the loan and educational system that covers the dominion from coast to cost. Approximately 150,000 people visit the national gallery every year, and that is a high figure for a gallery in a city of less than 200,000 population. But the really important feature of the gallerys work is that probably over a million citizens outside Ottawa have seen national gallery travelling exhibitions and received the benefit of its other extension services during the year.
I found that the national gallery had undertaken at least four major jobs during the war and successfully accomplished all of them.
First, it maintained its programme in Ottawa throughout the conflict and extended it as a morale builder, as did the national gallery in London and other public galleries nearer the firing line.
Second, it greatly increased its quota of loan exhibitions so that other Canadian cities should benefit during the stress of war.
Third, it planned and put into operation a unique project whereby the Canadian armed forces were generously supplied with pictures for the decoration of recreation rooms, messes and rest huts. These are the pictures that were seen by the gentlemen who flew here from India. More than 30,000 prints were distributed at no cost to the taxpayer, and the British forces were eventually included in the
scheme, which has made Canadian art known almost around the world. The same pictures were later made available to hospitals and also to schools and other educational institutions. I need not mention that even a great many hon. members of this house have availed themselves of the opportunity of obtaining a few of the silk screens and pictures from the national gallery for decorating their offices.
Fourth, at the request of the defence council the director of the national gallery undertook to chair a committee charged with the duty of selecting and directing Canadian artists in depicting Canada's part in the war. Under this plan a number of the foremost artists were commissioned and sent to the various fronts. Their works are now arriving and will be seen in. exhibitions in increasing numbers as the work develops.
Other services included the assembling and forwarding of exhibitions of Canadian arts to the United States, South America and other countries, and the arranging of return exhibitions for Canada. A system of broadcasts to schools has been established telling the story of Canadian art to young people, using small colour reproductions issued and distributed by the gallery at a nominal price.
Looking at the gallery premises and the small staff of workers, I do not know how it is accomplished. What could be done for this country if we had a gallery building worthy of Canada and^ a staff of, say one-tenth the size of the staff of the film board, a staff to include field workers and lecturers, as well as administrative officials. I understand the grant to the national gallery for all purposes has been about $45,000 a year throughout the war, having been reduced from a prewar figure of $135,000. This is no way to treat an institution with such vast potentialities for vital constructive work for Canada at home and abroad.
I am not specially interested in the national gallery as an ornament to the city of Ottawa, but I am interested in the national gallery as a centre from which the benefits of art can rgdiate to every part of Canada, including Essex county in Ontario. A new national gallery building with adequate storage space, shipping rooms, workshops and galleries is necessary if those of us who cannot come to Ottawa are to share in the great benefits a gallery can produce. Art centres are springing up all over this country, partly as a result of the extension wTork already done by the national gallery but also because of the steadily advancing educational level of the people as a whole. These centres need to be wisely fostered, and only an up-to-date national gallery and a staff with vision can do the job.
The Address-Mr. Jackman

I am convinced that a great deal has already-been accomplished to point the way; let the gallery be given the green light.
May I revert for a moment to the Jack Miner foundation. In addition to the advertising we get in Canada through the banding of birds, most of the more worth-while publication in the United States have given voluminous- space to advertise not only the Miner bird sanctuary but Canada in general. I hold in my hand a copy of the Saturday Evening Post of March 18, 1944, which gives in colour, advertising for the Dominion of Canada which no money can buy. I have here also a publication called the Christian Advocate, which I am told has a circulation of over a million readers in the United States, and which has given advertising to Canada which money cannot buy.
I am also interested from the point of view of fostering the tourist industry, in the handicraft guild. I believe that sufficient prominence and support have not been given to this practical organization which could be said to be part of the tourist business. The handicraft guild throughout the Dominion of Canada, and in particular in my own city, is instructing many of our residents in the native crafts, in the native arts of this country such as weaving, spinning, the making of ornaments of jewellery, pottery, bookbinding, woodwork and many kindred trades. I should like to see this government devote and appropriate funds to encourage these operations. Somebody has said that a dollar brought into this country by a tourist is just as valuable afe a dollar's worth of wheat going out. If we would give at least some attention to this industry, which I am told is now one of the leading industries of our country, a great service would be done not only to my own constituency but to the whole of Canada.


Mr. H. R. JACKMAN (Rosedale):: brought about means whereby that condition was rectified. I may say to him now that there are more ways than one of losing one's health and self-respect in this country of ours.
Where to-day is the social conscience of the Liberal party? The Progressive Conservatives believe that such conditions should not be tolerated, that no stone should be left unturned to force this government to take adequate action to remedy this housing crisis. I was not active in public life during the worst days of the depression, but when I learned of the conditions that existed I wondered that the people ever stood for them, and I wonder to-day why the people of Canada, in such large numbers, stand for the housing conditions that now prevail. I am quite sure that if they had any kind of leadership many of them would not stand for conditions like that when on every hand they see people who are not only comfortably well off and well housed, but able to acquire other possessions, some of which may be fairly necessary but certainly not of the same relative importance as a decent house over one's head.
What I have said is the personal side of the problem. How many times must these conditions be multiplied to encompass the housing shortage which fails to move the government to action? The pictures I have given may not be representative of all the housing shortage in Canada. They are true of parts of Toronto and I know they are true of parts of the capital city of thus country. They are probably general.
I wish to point out another aspect of this problem. Yesterday I called at a house. A veteran answered the door. He and his wife live there; the wife is expecting a child shortly. They have one room and the joint use of a kitchen. They pay $30 a month for that. In these days that sum is enough to provide that veteran and family with a house, not just a room and the joint use of a kitchen. For the most part the people are able to pay for decent accommodation, but that accommodation is not available and very little is being done to provide it for them.	*
As I have mentioned, there was a pre-war housing shortage. There was unemployment and there was a shortage of houses. It became worse during the war. There was no planning for the existing shortage, and perhaps for good reasons, because we could not make munitions and houses at the same time. But how the government expects to take care of a growing country and of returned soldiers whose families in the meantime had doubled up with in-laws and others, I do not know. What did the government expect to do with
TMr. Jackman 1
800.000	men and women returning from the armed services? How were they to be housed when there was an acute shortage already?
How great is the housing crisis? In the spring of 1944 the advisory committee on housing and community planning estimated a shortage of 600,000 family units. The government made no preparation for large-scale building. It offered insufficient inducements after the war to war workers who had come from the smaller centres to the larger ones to return to their original abode. As quoted last Friday by my colleague, the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming), Brigadier Storms, now general manager of Housing Enterprises Limited, said in a published statement on March 14 last, that there are 375,000 families in Canada who are involuntarily doubled' up because of the housing shortage. In addition to this, although there may be some duplication, the Curtis report of three years ago estimated 300,000 sub-standard dwellings in Canada, and I can point to many sub-standard dwellings in my own riding. The need is colossal; it is urgent. The housing crisis constitutes a national emergency of the first order.
Last year the Minister of Reconstruction (Mr. Howe) estimated that 39,000 new dwelling units. were built and 5,000 reconverted. That is an estimate, and many consider that it is substantially in excess of the actual number of houses which were provided. But even if we take it at its face value it is not enough, for it will never solve the problem which faces this country.
The economic system can be made to break the back of this housing shortage, but it will not be done by letting bad enough alone. An indignant people will not stand for it.
The government has never denied the responsibility for the housing crisis in Canada. No fewer than, three agencies of the government have helped to muddle the problem, the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation or its antecedent; Wartime Housing, and recently the Department of Veterans Affairs. Mr. H. C. Nichols, the retiring president of the Canadian Construction Association, stated on January 14 of this year that the capacity of the building industry in Canada to-day is
30.000	houses per annum, which is hardly enough to keep up with the current wear and tear without attacking the 375,000 backlog of needed houses.
What are the possibilities of solution at the government's present rate of progress? Obviously the people of Canada will not be decently housed in the near future.
In the face of this tremendous housing shortage there were 263,000 people reported

The Address-Mr. Jackman
as unemployed at the end of February, 1946. It seems almost incredible that we should at one and the same time have a housing shortage of such dimensions and 263,000 people on the unemployed rolls. I should like to ask the minister how many men are being trained for the construction industry in the Department of Labour's training schools? The Minister of Reconstruction said he was alarmed at the rate of expansion of industry in Canada. May I ask, is all industry expanding and what industry is entitled to a higher priority than housing, and what expansion have we to show in that field? The Minister of Reconstruction says he is alarmed at the rate of expansion, and yet we find that housing is apparently relegated to a secondary position.
All mercantile housing, with only the most pressing exceptions, and theatre construction should be eliminated until the housing crisis is over. The house might be interested in knowing that the dwelling which I described in some detail with fifty-three people in it is to be torn down presently if a building permit is issued by the city, which it has not issued so far, and in its place is to be erected a motion-picture theatre. Certainly in this day wre must have some idea of what comes first, and surely housing comes ahead of more amusement centres.
The figures given by the Minister of Reconstruction''on the export of lumber only indicate that in the face of the need for domestic building more lumber should be retained at home. We are on a new domestic standard as compared with the pre-war years. In my riding one-third of the people badly need more of the necessities of life; another third need more of 'the good tilings of life, and the remaining third would not refuse a higher standard of living. With a national income now increased from three and a half billion to eight or nine billion dollars, 'and the price level not excessively out of line with what it was before the war, the whole question of production for export and domestic consumption should be examined. We are trying to export to the whole world not only as a measure of temporary and urgent relief, but in order to build up future trade. If we do not retain some of our exports we may find that our people will have to do without housing permanently. Instead of exporting unemployment, we are importing shortages and doing our level best to make our own people have a lower standard of living.
Take, for example, the figures for the newsprint industry, which means that more and more men are being used to cut pulp wood who could be cutting lumber, and these figures have been showing a steady expansion. Surely
Canadian newsprint, which is an industry with which I am familiar and in which I am interested, was not severely dealt with during the war in comparison with that of other countries, and yet we find to-day that it is able to expand its exports and use men to cut-down wood for pulp; whereas these same men could be used for producing more lumber in this country. Where is the control? Where is the direction which this government should exercise to meet the essential needs of our people?
What else should the government do to solve this crisis? ' I suggest and urge that they should adjust wage ceilings. Building materials were not considered a war necessity, and the wages of workers in those industries were held at virtually peace-time levels. If you look at the figures for bricklayers, for instance, you will find that they were held pretty much at their peace-time level. The result was that men in that industry left for war-time occupations, where wage rates were higher. Now that war industry is over, there is little inclination on their part to go back to the building industry, even at wage rates which are slightly higher than those in effect when they left that industry, and which are substantially below those which obtained in war industry.
Wartime Housing priorities disrupted the building industry. Small builders and private owners found that they could not get the materials they required because of the priorities which the government, under Wartime Housing placed upon the lumber and building supplies industries. There has been a shortage of building supplies not only because of the wage ceilings but because of the price ceilings. We must treat the national housing emergency as a crisis and allow a reasonable increase in wages so that more workers will be attracted into that field. More of those unemployed workers who to-day are looking for work must be taught how to engage in the building trades in order to render an essential and worthwhile service to their fellow Canadians. That was the practice we followed in connection with war industry. Peace-time occupations were frozen;, wages could not be increased. But when it came to aeroplane factories, munitions factories and so on, wage levels were advanced. Workers flowed into those higher paid jobs, naturally, and we did a thoroughly commendable job when it came to munitions. Now we must use the same tactics, the same principles if we are to solve this housing crisis which is upon our doorstep at the present time.
Let me offer another suggestion into which I believe the government should look. During the war not only had we to pay higher wages

The Address-Mr. JackmaA
to attract workers to war industries; we also found it necessary to build more war plants, and we allowed private builders the privilege of writing off the cost of those war additions over a short period of years, on the basis that after the war they would not be useful for the particular purpose for which they were built. Now I recommend that the government allow manufacturers of building supplies to create additions to their factories to meet this emergency, which may last for five years. It may last longer than that, but I do not' see how it can last for less. Then the government should allow' the owners of these industries to write off that excess capacity during the period of the crisis.
As an emergency measure I should like to recommend that the government grant first mortgage building loans at a rate as low at two per cent if necessary. If wages in the building industries are increased in order to get more workers, and if the cost of building supplies rise, we do not want our people and particularly our veterans to have to buy houses at inflated values. One of the greatest factors in the cost of a house is the cost of money. To-day the government is borrowing at 2% per cent per annum, and to meet this crisis it could well afford to lend money on first mortgage loans on new houses at a rate as low as two per cent. That would go a long way toward absorbing any additional cost brought about by the emergency measures I have suggested. Possibly the government should even consider subsidizing new construction. Buildings and houses are being subsidized in Great Britain in order to meet the acute shortage there, and our people, particularly in the low-income brackets, must be allowed to have decent shelter over their heads. If because of the wage rates in this country it should become necessary to subsidize building, then the government should do so.
Then I believe the government should withdraw from the field of actual construction and cease its interference with private builders. If the government wishes to maintain supervision, then let private industry do the building and, if necessary, purchase the complete housing units from the builders, who understand the business and can get things done.
There is not time to go into the matter of local taxation, which has made housing unprofitable for both individual owners and landlords. I shall say only this, that Wartime Housing has not proved as efficient, from the many examples which have come to our notice, as construction by private builders. The wartime prices and trade board is also one of the evils at the root of this jam we

are facing to-day. That board cannot know everyone's business and how businesses are interdependent. There are shortages of 'furnaces, because furnaces may not be sold at high enough prices. Therefore houses cannot be completed. Or it may be a shortage of soil pipe, or of porcelain insulators, which are examples that have been brought to my notice. Wartime Housing certainly is not in as good a position to get skilled help as are private contractors, many of whom have had the same men working with them for long periods of years. Instead of wrecking industry, the government should learn how to utilize it.
Building tradesmen should be given an incentive to work holidays and overtime; but if they are to have from thirty to fifty per cent of their extra wages taken in taxation they will not work more than the straight forty-hour week. I well recall the memorable words of a C.C.F. member in regard to his constituent, who was a mixed farmer and who found that he was being taxed on the extra cream he was able to obtain by working before breakfast in the morning and milking the cows after dinner at night, and who said, "I'll not milk cows for Ilsley." So he got rid of his herd. Human nature being what it is, I say it is folly to make laws which fly in the face of increased production. There is plenty of capital for investment in buildings; and with more take-home pay not only can workers produce more, but more workers will join the building trades.
The Liberal government has .become a big, cumbersome nuisance. It is preventing Canadians from using their natural ability to look after their - own needs. The war with Germany has now been over for nearly ten months and the Japanese war for nearly seven months, but the controllers still want to control. If the government will only give the horse its head we can rely on Canadian workers and Canadian industry to supply our housing requirements. If there is one thing we owe our returning veterans it is decent homes for themselves and their families. That is the prime duty of any government. The people expect some government planning and some direction as long as controls remain in force. Let the government make.it possible for our people, our economic system and our democracy to deliver the goods.
On motion of Mr. Dorion the debate was adj ourned.


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

Food
Tuesday, March 26, 1946.