1946-05-20

Mr. A. L. SMITH (Calgary West):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. It is incidental only to myself, but I think it affects the rights and privileges of every hon. member of this house. On Thursday last I asked the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) if the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation were buying three large broadcasting outfits, and if it were the intention that the wave lengths of from one to three stations were to be taken away from the people who at present own them. At that time the minister replied that this was a matter of government policy, and in short refused to answer. That was on Thursday. On Saturday I read in the newspapers the answers to the questions I had asked. My view is that hon. members of this house do not deserve to be treated with that kind of contempt.


Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue):: I am sorry the hon. member insinuates that I treated him or anybody else with contempt. I had no such idea; I gave him the answer as I knew it. So far as the report in the newspapers is concerned, I am not in a position either to confirm or to deny it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: It came from you, according to the newspapers.


James Joseph McCann: My dear friend, if you
believe all you see in the newspapers then you will be able to eat all you see there.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Then deny it, if you wish.


James Joseph McCann: It did not come from me.

Food-World Shortage



REPLY OF MINISTER OF RECONSTRUCTION TO QUESTION CONCERNING COAL

Mr. L. W. SKEY (Trinity):: A few days ago I addressed a question to the Minister of Reconstruction (Mr. Howe) on the subject of coal. Within the hour a statement was given to the press banning the use of soft coal in public buildings, and so on. At that time the minister did not take the opportunity to elaborate in answer to my question, though he must have been aware that this announcement would be made wijhin a few moments of the time the question was put to him here in the house. I feel that this is another case in which the house has been overlooked as a medium for public information.


Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Acting Prime Minister):: I want to call the attention of the house to the fact that the Minister of Reconstruction is not in his place. If he were here, no doubt he would be in a position to answer the statement just made.



WORLD SHORTAGE


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. 'J. L. ILSLEY (Acting Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, discussions of the world food situation have taken place over the week-end between members of the Canadian government and Mr. Herbert Morrison, M.P., Lord President of the Council, of the United * Kingdom, who came to Ottawa for this purpose following similar discussions with United States representatives in Washington at which the Canadian ambassador was present.
The Canadian government has taken note of the joint statement issued by the United Kingdom and the United States on May 17, following Mr. Morrison's discussions in Washington and has expressed general agreement with the proposals it contains for continuing consultation and collaboration to meet the world food crisis.
During the discussions in Ottawa the steps already taken by Canada and the United Kingdom to alleviate the disastrous effects of world food shortages were reviewed and broad lines of future policy were discussed.
The maximum supplies of bread grains that are at present likely to be available from May through to September, 1946 have been assessed at some ten million tons, of which Canada expects to supply 2-3 million tons. Screened requirements for the same period were expected to total 13-4 million tons leaving a deficiency of 3-4 million tons or about 25 per
cent. A further intensive review and scaling down of these requirements to the barest minimum needs are likely to reduce the gap over this five-months period to something under one million tons. Inevitably severe hardship will result and great danger of famine will continue. The Canadian government has agreed to associate itself with the United Kingdom and the United States governments in maintaining constant review of the situation, and to put forth its best efforts to secure and make available additional supplies of grain.
The Canadian ministers described the comprehensive programme of agricultural production and of conservation of food which their government is carrying out to meet this situation. In anticipation of the urgent world need for food that would arise immediately following the conclusion of the war, Canadian food production had been expanded during the war years. This high rate of expanded production has been maintained and in some cases even increased. Wheat acreage has been raised to a very high level. Rationing and restrictions on sales of certain foods to help provide more for export were continued and even extended; meat rationing was reimposed. Complete control of agricultural products, in particular grains, has been retained in order to ensure that as much food as possible may be made available to the hungry of other nations.
When, some months ago, it became apparent that the expected serious food situation in the world would be greatly aggravated by drought in large areas, and by other difficulties, the Canadian government took still further steps to meet the threat of famine. On March 17 the Prime Minister announced a nine-point programme upon which the Canadian government had decided in order to increase supplies of foodstuffs for export. This programme included:
1.	Reduction by 10 per cent below 1945 of wheat released for human consumption in Canada.
2.	Reduction by 50 per cent of wheat released for distilleries.
3.	Special income tax arrangements to encourage immediate marketing of wheat stored on farms.
4.	Measures to release increased quantities of oats and No. 4 wheat for export.
5.	Special priorities for rail transport of wheat for export.
6.	Modification of regulations affecting bulk shipment of flour and feed.
7.	A campaign to urge Canadian farmers to plan their production to obtain the maximum yield of foodstuffs over the next four years.
Food-World Shortage
[Stage Direction]
8.	A campaign for the reduction of inventories of wheat and wheat products.
9.	A campaign to encourage consumer savings, avoidance of waste, and development of home gardens.
This programme has been put into effect and is already producing encouraging results. Other special action has also been taken by the government. For example, further wheat is being diverted from producers of both potable and industrial alcohol to the extent that substitutes become available; additional efforts to reduce use of wheat for animal feeds are being made.
The United Kingdom representatives described the efforts being put forth in the United Kingdom. Consumer rationing has been continued and over a wide field rations are now below low wartime levels. The rations of home-based United Kingdom forces have been reduced. The extraction rate of flour has been raised several times and will be maintained at 90 per cent during the critical May to September period. Supplies of grain for distilling have been cut from 300,000 tons to
130,000	tons. The size of loaves has been reduced, while production of biscuits, cakes and pastry has been substantially curtailed. Beer production has been set at 90 per cent of prewar production. Cereal production is being encouraged and a number of special directions and inducements have recently been introduced to this end. Feeding of millable wheat to live stock remains prohibited and rations for livestock have been cut down. Consumers are being encouraged to conserve food and to reduce waste.
Further, the United Kingdom has recently agreed to forego another 200,000 tons of imports which will thus be released for use elsewhere. This has been done with full awareness of the dangers to the United Kingdom in the way of still further interruptions of distribution or restrictions on the austere diet obtaining in the United Kingdom for the six years since the beginning of the war.
The Canadian and United Kingdom governments agree that every effort must be put forth to remove completely the threat of world famine, a threat which will continue at least until the harvests of 1947 become available. The two governments agree that they will continue to collaborate through the combined food board or other appropriate agencies to this end. They will continue to consult on measures of major importance which may be found necessary to meet the present world food shortage.
Mr. JOHN BRACKEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I am aware that the statement which the Acting Prime Minister

has just made is not supposed to be debatable, but perhaps the house would permit me to make one or two observations.
I want to commend the government for this announcement, and for its plan for further consultation and cooperation in this crisis with the governments of the United Kingdom and the United States. I can see no harm in the minister's restatement of the government's policy with respect to increasing the supply of food under these circumstances. I might just point out in passing, however, that when the minister says the Canadian people have put in a higher acreage of wheat in recent years, that has not been done because of, but rather in spite of, government policy.


James Lorimer Ilsley: On a point of order, is this debatable?


Mr. SPEAKER:: The statement made by the Acting Prime Minister is not debatable. It has been the practice, however, to permit the leader of the opposition to ask certain questions. I have always been generous in that respect, but I cannot permit any debate.


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, you did permit the Acting Prime Minister to make a very important statement. I now ask Your Honour: Are you going to deny me the opportunity of commenting upon it? If you are, I take my seat.


James Horace King: As I have already said, it is well known practice in the house that statements made by ministers at this stage of the proceedings, are not debatable. I thought it was my duty to permit the leader of the opposition to ask certain questions, or to ask for information, but I cannot permit debate.


John Bracken: I was not proposing to debate the subject at all, I had simply intended to make some comments. The only comment I have made thus far is to deny what the minister has said, namely that as a result of government policy the acreage of wheat in this country has been increased. The only other thing I wish to say is this: The leader of the house has referred to the fact that a member of the United Kingdom government is in Canada to-day to discuss this very important matter of food for a hungry world. The minister stated that he had met certain members of the government. My question is this: Would the government be good enough to arrange that that representative from the United Kingdom government meet representatives of other parties, as well as those supporting the government? We would all like to see him and to have his story and, so far as possible, we would like to support his request. The minister has already intimated

Private Bills
that this food crisis will not be overcome by this year's harvest. My suggestion is that plans should be made now in this as well as in other countries to see that short of the limitations placed upon it by climatic conditions, next year's harvest will be the biggest this nation has ever produced.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Morrison intended to be here on Saturday and to leave to-day. I believe he was held up because of flying conditions and did not get here until yesterday noon. I am informed that his intention was to leave Ottawa at noon to-day, and I have ' every reason to think that he has left. I shall check and find out, but I know he had intended to leave at noon to-day.	'



PRINTING AND STATIONERY


[Stage Direction]
Hon. PAUL MARTIN (Secretary of State) moved for leave to introduce .Bill No. 127, to amend the Public Printing and Stationery Act.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. MARTIN:: The purpose of this bill is to amend section 3 of the Public Printing and Stationeiy Act to bring the practice with regard to the operations of the printing committee into consistency with the law of the land as it now stands.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. S3, for the relief of Roland Taillon. -Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 84, for the relief of Frederick Albert Johnson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 85, for the relief of Joseph Frangois Georges Landry.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 86, for the relief of Dorothy Ruth Bennett. Macnutt.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 87, for the relief of Anne Levy Marder.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 88, for the relief of David Ritchie McEwen.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 89, for the relief of Marie Jeanne ' Antoinette Bastien Cadieux.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 90, for the relief of Gwenyth Lorraine Madge Popkin.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 91, for the relief of Louis Jocelyn Wolfrey Black Griffin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 92, for the relief of James Delmer Thomas Kirton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 93, for the relief of Helen Sylvia Stacey Thompson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 94, for the relief of Kay Florence Smart Gardiner.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 95, for the relief of Zoita Tehanciuc Moldovan.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 96, for the relief of Ambrose Keble Fred Vernham.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 97, for the relief of Clermont Gendreau.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 98, for the relief of Beatrice Lydia Ogulnik Goldin.-Mr. Boucher.
Bill No. 99, for the relief of Harry Dyce.- Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 100, for the relief of Alastair Tren-holme Lovat Fraser.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 101, for the relief of Elsie Rachel Silverson Ward.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill No. 102, for the relief of William Joseph O'Sullivan.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	103,	for	the	relief	of	Dorothy
McClelland Hamilton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 104, for the relief of Violet Maude Griffiths Barraclough.-Mr. MacLean.
Bill	No.	105,	for	the	relief	of	Norman
Peter Gray.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	106,	for	the	relief	of	Andrew
Kovacs.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 107, for the relief of Eda Margel Sand.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 108, for the. relief of Lucille Eileen Piche Perrier.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 109, for the relief of Bertha Lipshitz Joslove.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 110, -for the relief of Ernest Leslie Maddock Jones.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. Ill, for the relief of Marie Komyati Sznyitar.-Mr. Emmerson.
Bill No. 112, for the relief of Irene Renee Levey Ritchie.-Mr. Emmerson.
Bill No. 113, for the relief of Alexander Marr Meldrum.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 114, for the relief of Ottocar Fiedler. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 115, for the relief of Kathleen Elizabeth Regan Griffiths.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 116, for the relief of Eliza Ritchie McDerment.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 117, for the relief of Ruby Eileen Baker Jones.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 118, for the relief of Ralph Samuel Currie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 119, for the relief of Simone Tardif Laverdure.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 120, for the relief of Max Schacter. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 121, for the relief of Mary Walker Tiffney.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 122, for the relief of Margaret June Purdy MacKinnon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 123, for the relief of John Rae.- Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 124, for the relief of Nellie Mug-ford Brumby.-Mr. Maybank
Questions

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

Mr. McKAY:: 1.	What charters for railway construction are at present held by the Canadian Pacific Railway in southern Saskatchewan?
2.	Have any commitments been made by the railway company for the early completion of the branch lines involved in these charters?
3.	When do the charters for the construction of each of these railway lines terminate?
4.	Have any applications been made by the Canadian Pacific Railway Company to have these charters (I) extended; (2) cancelled?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: The Canadian Pacific Railway Company advise as follows:
1.	None, other than the general branch line powers contained in section 14 of the agreement dated 21st October, 1880, which is a schedule to the company's act of incorporation, 44 Victoria (1881), chapter 1.
2.	No.
3.	Charters for the construction of railway lines in southern Saskatchewan, other than those given to the company by its original charter, have now expired.
4.	No.


FEDERAL EMPLOYEES IN DAUPHIN CONSTITUENCY
Mr. ZAPLITNY:: 1.	How many persons residing within the electoral district of Dauphin are on the regular payroll of the federal government?
2.	What are their names and addresses?
3.	What are, in each case, their, (a) duties; (b) salaries; (c) date of appointment?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think perhaps this question could be dropped, in view of the fact that the hon. gentleman and I have had a chat and he has written me a letter for certain information.
Question dropped.


BANK OF CANADA-MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC DEBT
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	What did it cost the dominion government to have the Bank of Canada manage the public debt of the dominion in the year 1945?
2.	Did the Bank of Canada render any other services in 1945 to the dominion government beside managing the public debt of the dominion?
3.	If so, what other services were rendered and what did these services cost the dominion government ?


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Nil.
2.	Yes.
3.	The Bank of Canada acts as fiscal agent of the dominion, government without charge

in accordance with the provisions of section 23 (1) of the Bank of Canada Act. These fiscal agency duties include, in addition to management of the public debt, the distribution of subsidiary coin; shipment of gold to world markets for sale; purchasing, selling and safekeeping of securities for government departments and agencies; and maintenance of government deposit accounts. The Bank of Canada also performs the normal functions of a central bank which include the tendering of advice on financial and monetary matters to the government of the country in which it is located.
Certain out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the bank for the account of the government are reimbursed by the government to the bank. These expenses are mainly express and telegraphic charges.


WORLD SUGAR POOL
Mr. LOW:: 1.	Are Canada and the United States members of a world sugar pool?
2.	Are they both subject to the same quota allowance ?
3.	Upon what basis is this quota decided?
4.	Are the per capita quantities of sugar available in various forms to the people of the United States greater than those allowed to Canadians, and if so, what is the comparison?


Mr. MAYHEW:: .
1.	Canada, United States and United Kingdom are all members of the combined food board.
2.	Yes.
3.	By agreement between representatives of the United States, United Kingdom and Canada.
4.	No. The total per capita quantities of sugar allocated are the same in both countries, but each country makes its own decisions governing internal distribution. In other words each country makes its own decisions regarding the relative quantities to be allocated to householders, to public eating places and to sugar using industries.


Mr. BARRETT:: 1.	Has consideration been given to increasing the quantity of sugar available to householders for canning purposes over the quantity allowed last year?
2.	If so, what is expected will be the increase in the ration for the above purpose?
3.	Is there a likelihood of an increased quantity of sugar to Canadian consumers during the last half of the present year?	-
4.	Has the government canvassed the possibility of purchasing sugar from Java or other sources where it is reported available, and, if so, when may these increased quanties of sugar be expected to be made available to consumers?

Questions


Mr. MAYHEW:: 1.	Consideration has been, given to this matter but there is no prospect that there will be an increase in sugar available for canning purposes.
2.	Answered by above.
3.	No.
4.	The representatives of the British, United States and Canadian governments through the medium of the combined food board are in constant touch with all available sugar markets. No amount of sugar reported to be held in Java has so far been made available for export therefrom. If and when Java sugar becomes available it will be allocated through the combined food board of which Canada is a member.


WARTIME HOUSING-VANCOUVER
Mr. MERRITT:: 1.	Of the 1,200 houses contracted to be built by Wartime Housing Limited, in the city of Vancouver in the month of July or August, 1945, how many have been completed, up to April 30, 1946?
2.	How many were occupied by tenants at that date?
3.	Who are the contractors for this project?
4.	Has the completion of any of the 1,200 houses been delayed for lack or scarcity of materials?
5.	What is the total amount of building materials subject to priorities allotted to the contractors between the date of the contract and the 30th April, 1946?
6.	What is the total amount of building materials subject to priorities used in the construction of said houses between said dates?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 
AMERICAN MILITARY HOSPITAL, CHURCHILL
Mr. MOORE:: 1.	Has the federal government taken over the American military hospital at Churchill, Manitoba ?
2.	If so, what disposition is being made of this hospital?


Mr. McILRAITH:: In so far as the Department of Transport is concerned:
1.	Yes.
2.	As it is surplus to the requirements of the Department of transport, it is in process of being reported to crown assets allocation committee for disposition.



LOANS UNDER FARM IMPROVEMENT LOANS ACT

Mr. MENARY:: What is the total amount of the loans made by the dominion government, under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, in each province?


Robert Wellington Mayhew: The dominion government does not make loans under the Farm Improvement Loans Act. Loans are made by chartered banks and the repayment thereof is guaranteed by the dominion government up to 10 per cent of aggregate amount of loans made by each bank.
Loans made by chartered banks by provinces to March 31, 1946, under the Farm Improvement Loans Act, are as follows:
British Columbia	$ 133,063 36
Alberta	
1,687,205	43Saskatchewan	
1,177,462	85Manitoba	
684,094	97Ontario	
819,768	96Quebec	
160,734	75Nova Scotia	
26,548	40New Brunswick	
29,904	20Prince Edward Island	
7,360	50Total	/	$4,726,153 42



GOVERNMENT MOTION PICTURE BUREAU

Mr. FULTON:: 1.	What is the government motion picture
bureau?	_
2.	Under what authority is it constituted?
3.	Who are (a) the director; (b) the members of the bureau?
4.	What are the duties of the bureau?
5.	What salaries are paid to (a) the director; (b) the members of the bureau?


Mr. CLAXTON:: The information asked for is as follows:
1. The government motion picture bureau no longer exists. Formerly a section of the Department of Trade and Commerce its functions are now performed by the national film board. In accordance with the terms of the Public Service Rearrangement and Transfer of Duties Act C.165, RSC. 1927, the control and
Questions

supervision of the Government motion picture bureau were vested in the national film board by orders in council P.C. 3549 of June 11, 1941 and P.C. 6047 of August 8, 1941, which were tabled on June 12, 1941 and November 3, 1941, respectively.
2, 3, 4 and 5. See Answer to No. 1.



CONSTRUCTION OF ROADS INTO MINING AREAS

Mr. MOORE:: What amount of money was made available to the provincial governments Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Alberta, by the federal government for the construction of roads into mining areas in 1942, 1943, 1944 and 1945?


Mr. GLEN:: Fiscal
year Alberta Manitoba Ontario Quebec
1942-43 $1,276 10	nil	$26,272 27 $32,632 36	1943-44	nil	nil	75,322 06	46,463 771944-45	nil	nil	466 97	11,525 201945-46	nil	nil	nil	nilLEVEL	RAILWAY	CROSSINGS-NOVA	SCOTIA


Mr. STANFIELD:: 1.	How many level railway crossings are there in the provinces of Nova Scotia?
2.	How many of these level railway crossings are protected by wig-wags or automatic gates?


Lionel Chevrier: The Board of Transport Commissioners advise as follows:
1.	Approximate number of level crossings in Nova Scotia, 971.
2.	Approximate number protected by automatic signals or gates, 80; approximate number protected by electric bell and danger sign, 25; approximate number protected by watchman, 9; approximate number of unprotected crossings, 857.



POLYMER CORPORATION LIMITED

Mr. MURPHY:: 1.	Who are the officers and directors of the Polymer Corporation Limited?
2.	What is the salary of each director and/or other official?


George James McIlraith: I would point out that the information being asked for in this question was given to the house in a return tabled on March 15, 1946.


Mr. MURPHY:: In view of the resolution sponsored last Wednesday by the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe) with regard to the operation and financing of government companies, and the fact that there are some questions affecting the Polymer corporation and I do not know when that resolution will be up again for debate, I would
ask that the questions involving Polymer be answered as soon as possible, or at least before that debate comes up again.


George James McIlraith: I would point out that this was answered on March 15 of this year.


Joseph Warner Murphy: I am thinking about the others that were not answered, and others that will come up to-morrow.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: They will be answered when it is convenient to answer them.


Mr. HOMUTH:: Who is running this
country?	'


George James McIlraith: The question is
answered.



RUSSIAN EMBASSY-SECOND SECRETARY AND CONSUL

Mr. TUSTIN:: 1.	Have any steps been taken to request the recall of one Pavlov, second secretary and consul of tlie Russian embassy at Ottawa?
2.	If so, when and with what results?
Mr. ST. LAURENT:
1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.



OFFICERS ON STRENGTH OF INTERIM ARMY

Mr. KIDD:: 1. How many officers are serving on the strength of the interim army with the rank of captain?
2.	How many of these officers have only had service in Canada and Great Britain?
3. How many officers are serving on the strength of the interim army with the rank of lieutenant?
4.	How many of these officers have only had service in Canada and Great Britain?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	445.
2.	44.
3.	372.
4.	78.
Above figures as of 30th April, 1946.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURN


Mr. BERTRAND (Terrebonne):: 1.	Have all games and sporting equipment used at Bouchard D.I.L. during the production period, been declared war surplus assets?
2.	If so, on what date were they transferred to the War Assets Corporation?
3.	Have they been disposed of?
4.	If so, what equipment was disposed of, to whom, and at what price?


George James McIlraith: Return tabled.

Questions as Orders jor Returns


SUGAR FOR APIARISTS
Mr. HANSELL:: 1.	How much sugar per colony of bees is being allowed this spring to apiarists for feeding purposes?
2.	How does this compare with the amount
allowed in 1945?	[DOT]
3.	Has there been a decline in the number of colonies of bees shipped into Canada from California, and other places compared to 1945? If so, to what extent?



HOUSING


Mr. STANFIELD:: 1.	On whose authority was the site chosen by the dominion government for the building of veterans houses at Onslow, Colchester county, Nova Scotia?
2.	How much was paid for the land?
3.	Why were the houses built in such a location?
4.	How many houses were built?
5.	What was the total cost of all the houses?



DEBTS PAYABLE IN LONDON AND NEW YORK FUNDS

Mr. FLEMING:: What amount of (a) bonds; (b) other forms of indebtedness issued or guaranteed by the dominion of Canada, are payable in (1) London; (2) New York funds, and what are the dates of maturity?


Robert Wellington Mayhew: Return tabled.



MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENTS ASSISTANCE ACT, 1938

Donald Methuen Fleming: What payments have been made, by years, to each of the provinces under authority of the Municipal Improvements Assistance Act, 1938, from its inception?


Robert Wellington Mayhew: Return tabled.



HUDSON BAY RAILWAY

Mr. THATCHER:: 1.	Will any Canadian wheat or other freight be shipped over the Hudson Bay railroad and seaway route this year?
2.	If so, how much?
3.	If not, for what reason?
4.	Have any of Canada's trade commissioners in Europe been requested to seek in-going cargoes for the Hudson Bay route?
5.	Has the government given any consideration to coal from England as a temporary import cargo for boats entering the Hudson Bay?



CANADA YEAR BOOK

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many copies of the Canada Year Book, 1945 edition, were printed?
2.	How many of these were sold to the general publi?, aside from the regular distribution to government departments?
3.	How many copies of the handbook, "Canada 1946" were printed?
4.	How many copies of the handbook, "Canada 1945" were sold to the general public, aside from regular distribution to government departments ?



VETERANS LAND ACT-HOUSING

Mr. LOCKHART:: _ 1. Under the Veterans Land Act administration, how many designs for veterans houses have been approved in the province of Ontario: (a) designate them by letter or number; (b) how many are completed and occupied; (c) indicate in what localities; (d) how many are presently under construction; (e) indicate in what localities?
2.	How many bulk sum stipulated price contracts have been let in the province of Ontario: (a) for what designs; (b) to whom let; (c) what was the contract price in each instance;
(d)	under these contracts, -are extras allowed for the use of equipment, or otherwise; (e) if so, on what basis are extras paid?
3.	How many cost plus contracts have been let in the province of Ontario for the erection of veterans houses: (a) for what designs; (b) to whom have the contracts been let; (c) in what locations- (d) under these contracts, are extras allowed for the use of equipment or otherwise;
(e)	if so, on what basis are extras paid; (f) under cost plus contracts, is a fixed fee payable to the contractor; (g) if so, what is the fixed fee allowed in each instance?
4.	Under cost plus contracts was an overall cost calculated before the contracts were let: (a) if so, what was the estimated overall cost for each design of veterans home-indicate in detail?
5.	Were administration costs included in all estimates made: (a) were administration costs included in the overall cost to the veteran; (b| what was the estimated administration cost per unit for each design approved?
6.	How many inspectors are employed under the Veterans Land Act in connection with housing in the province of Ontario: (a) what are their names and in what areas are they employed; (b) what salary is being paid, or was paid, in each instance; (c) what qualifications have been established in order to secure employment as an inspector under the Veterans Land Act?
7.	On whose advice were the sites for veterans homes chosen?
8.	Who recommended the sites chosen at -Niagara Falls, Welland and St. Catharines?



PROVING GROUNDS

Mr. LOCKHART:: 1.	(a) Since September, 1939, how many proving grounds were established in Canada; (b) where were they located?
2.	How many claims have been filed for damage to property, or otherwise, arising out of the operation of these proving grounds, stating the number of claims received from each proving ground.
3.	(a) How many claims have been paid for damages arising out of the operation of these proving grounds prior to the passing of P.C. 80/4133 on May 31, 1944; (b) from which proving ground did these claims arise?
4.	(a) How many claims have been paid since the passing of P.C. 80/4133; (b) from which proving ground did these claims arise?
5.	How many claims have been refused to date, stating the location of the proving ground from which these claims arose?
Motions for Papers

6.	How many are still under consideration, and in what location?
7.	(a) On whose recommendation was P.C. 80/4133 passed; (b) for what reason?



SERVICE IN PACIFIC WAR THEATRE-RATES OF PAY

[Stage Direction]
Mr. LENNARD;
1.	How many of all ranks of the (a) Royal Canadian Navy; (b) Canadian Army (c) Royal Canadian Air Force, served in the Pacific war theatre before V-J day?
2.	Did all of the above receive Pacific rates of pay? If not, why not?

[Stage Direction]
Mr. BLACK (Yukon);
1.	Was an agreement made between the government of Canada and the government of the United States of America whereby Canadian employees of contractors, where American or Canadian, engaged by the United _ States on projects, including the Alaska highway, in Yukon, were or are covered by the Longshoremen's and Harbour Workers' Compensation Act of the United States, and that no Canadian provincial or federal workmen's compensation laws would apply to such employees in Yukon?
2.	Was an agreement made between the government of Canada and the government of the United States of America whereby Canadian or other civilians suffering injury and incurring damages due to negligence on the part of a member or members of the army of the United States of America in Yukon, Canada, are deprived of their rights to sue the United States of America or the army of the United States of America for damages in the territorial court of Yukon territory, and, if so, what rights, if any, have been given to or conferred on such Canadians in lieu of the rights of which they have been so deprived?

Mr. RAYMOND (Beauharnois-Laprairie):: What subsidies were paid by the government during the years 1939 to 1944 inclusive?



FOOD SHIPPED TO EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

Maxime Raymond: What quantity of each food product was sent by Canada each year, from 1940 to 1945 inclusive, to the various European countries, and what amount to each country?



JAPANESE INTERNED IN CANADA

Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	How many persons of Japanese origin are now interned in Canada?
2.	How many of these are (a) Japanese nationals; (b) Canadian citizens by naturalization; (c) Canadian citizens by birth?
3.	How many have been released from internment since Y-J day?	_
4.	Do the review boards appointed under the Defence of Canada Regulations investigate Canadian internees of Japanese origin with a view to making recommendations to the Minister of Justice?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Joseph Warner Murphy: For a copy of financial statement of the Polymer Corporation, Limited (a) as of March 31, 1945; (b) as of March 31, 1946 showing (1) balance sheet; (2) operating statement for the year; (3) power plant expenses; (4) plant overhead expenses; (5) capital assets held in trust for the crown.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, I would like the opportunity of looking further into this motion. It will be n-oted that it asks not only for the financial statements of the company, but that they show the operating statement for the year and power plant expenses. I am not sure whether the financial statements give the information in that form.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: If it is a proper statement, it has to.


George James McIlraith: I do not propose at
thie moment to argue the propriety ior impropriety of the financial statements of crown companies. I Would ask that the motion stand unless the mover is satisfied to take the financial statements without the limitations he has attached to them.


Joseph Warner Murphy: I will accept what the
minister can give me now, and if that is not enough I can ask for more later.


James Horace King: Carried, on that understanding.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the motion-Mr. Cockeram:
For copy of report of the court of inquiry held by Lieutenant-General Price Montague, C.B., D.S.O., M.C., into the administration of the Canadian Army in Holland.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Mr. Speaker, I ask
that this motion stand in the absence of the minister.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: When is the minister
expected back?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: To-night or to-morrow.
Motion stands.



AUXILIARY SERVICES


[Stage Direction]
Horn. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
[Stage Direction]
Veterans Affairs
That it is expedient to present a bill to provide financial and other benefits for certain persons who were attached to and served with the naval, military or air forces of Canada, outside the western hemisphere, during World War II, as supervisors in the auxiliary services.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to present a bill to provide financial and other benefits for certain fire fighters who served outside the western hemisphere, during world "war II, as members of the Corps of (Civilian) Canadian Fire Fighters.
He said:	His Excellency the Governor
General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
INQUIRY AS TO PROCEEDING WITH MEASURE '	DURING PRESENT SESSION
On the orders of the day:
John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, I would direct a question to the acting leader of the house. It has to do with redistribution. It was indicated in the speech from the throne that we would be expected to proceed with a redistribution of the seats of the house at this session. In recent days common report has it that the government does not intend to proceed with the measure this session. I do not accept those reports, but under the circumstances the acting leader of the house should indicate whether the government does intend to proseed with that measure this session, and if so, when the bill is likely to be introduced.
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice): Mr. Speaker, the Department of Justice has been requested to draft appropriate measures in that regard and I hope that they will be ready to be placed on the order paper within the next two or three days.



DAIRY PRODUCTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. RUSSELL BOUCHER (Carleton):: I wish to ask a question of the Minister of Finance, of which I am sorry I was unable to give him notice. In view of the statement of government policy announced on Thursday last, will the dominion government exercise any jurisdiction over the price ceiling of fluid milk after June 1 next?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The statement that was made on Thursday last was carefully expressed, and I do not think I can add anything to it in reply to my hon. friend's question. I received no notice of it, and I would not like to add anything to what was said by. the Minister of Agriculture the other day. On looking at the question in Hansard, if I think anything should be added to what I said the other day, I shall have to make a statement later.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. H. FERGUSON (Simcoe North):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Acting Prime Minister how much longer is this government going to continue refusing permits to returned men to go into business for themselves and make a livelihood?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman will place his question, or one more appropriately worded, on the order paper, he will receive a full and careful answer.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: My question may not be appropriately worded, but the minister knows exactly what I mean.
[Later A
On the orders of the day:


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: I should like to ask the Acting Prime Minister when veterans who are now engaged in butcher businesses in Canada are to be permitted to slaughter their own cattle, in order that they will not have to go out of business through lack of meat.


James Horace King: I would ask the hon. gentleman to put his question on the order paper.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: The matter is urgent. These men are losing their businesses.

Sunnybrook Hospital



SUNNYBROOK HOSPITAL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. DONALD M. FLEMING (Eglinton): Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Public Works. What steps has the government taken or does it propose to take with a view to settlement of the strike at Sunnybrook military hospital called by the operative plasterers and cement finishers, A. F. of L., local 48, and when may completion of the hospital be expected?
Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for giving me advance notice of his two questions. His first question relates to a strike of plasterers and cement finishers at Sunnybrook hospital. The facts are as follows:
On Wednesday, the 8th of. May, the regional war labour board awarded to the union plasterers of Toronto an amount of $1.30 per hour, which was 5 cents per hour less than had been requested. This award represented an increase of 9 cents per hour and it was * effective from May 1, 1946. On Friday, the 17th, the plasterers in the Toronto area laid off work and held a meeting, the results of which were that they requested from the different contractors in the Toronto area, in addition to the raise already granted by the regional war labour board on the 8th instant, holidays with pay for each of the eight statutory holidays observed throughout the year.
At noon to-day, the plasterers' union, which represents 600 plasterers, notified the plastering contractors that they were on strike asking for these holidays with pay. At a meeting of the plastering contractors held at 12 o'clock to-day, the four major contractors refused the demands but five minor contractors accepted them and their men may be at work. The results of this will not be known until tomorrow.
The regional war labour board have today granted increases, effective May 1, to the following trades: bricklayers, to $1.35 per hour; lathers, same as increased rate for plasterers, $1.30 per hour; plumbers and steam-fitters, to $1.27 per hour; sheet metal workers, to $1.28 per hour.
Just before coming into the house, Mr. MacNamara, the deputy minister of labour, advised me that he had received a telephone call from the Toronto labour exchange to the effect that they expected this strike would be settled during the week.

My hon. friend's second question related to the completion of the work at Sunnybrook hospital. I would not dare to fix a date, right in the midst of the strike, when the hospital will be completed, but I am ready to give a progress report on that project, as follows:
Boiler House. Completed and in operation.
Neuro-psychiatric Building. Practically completed. Expect occupation by June 15.
Up-patients Building. Expect occupation by October 15.
Active treatment building. About 95 per cent of all the concrete in floors and roof slabs has been placed. Exterior wall work is about 65 per cent completed. Plumbing, heating and ventilating pipes and electric conduits are being installed, and some tile partition work has been done m basement and on ground floor.
Out-patient building. Concrete in all floors will be placed by May 4-
This report is dated April 30.
-leaving only the roof and penthouse slabs to be done. Exterior stonework at ground floor is about 40 per cent completed.
O. & S.A. and maintenance building. All walls, columns and concrete work on ground floor are finished, and structural steel framework is about 20 per cent erected.
Laundry. All footings and walls, necessary for erection of structural steel framework, have been finished; and forms for main floor concrete slab are ready for placing of concrete.
Emergency water and coal storage. This structure is completed.
Services. As previously reported, power water and sewer lines are all finished, and generally m use. No road work has been done since last fall.
Bed Cross lodge. This building should be completed about May 31.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I note that the report which has just been read was made some time ago. Will the minister give us a further report on progress at some early date?


Alphonse Fournier: I will ask that our architects in Toronto send me a further report.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: In this connection, Mr. Speaker, may I call your attention to the fact that I asked the Minister of Veterans Affairs much the same question on April 5, 1946, which is over six weeks ago-as reported in Hansard, page 586-and this is the first reply we have had.
Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege: the hon. member for Trinity (Mr. Skey) said that he asked a question of the Minister of Veterans Affairs on April 5. I find that the question was answered immediately, the same day.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: In reply to the Minister for Veterans Affairs, may I say that he did not answer the question, because no date for the completion of Sunnybrook hospital was given.

National Parks


James Horace King: During this period before the orders of the day are called, questions should not be turned into a debate. We should proceed with the business of the house.



RADIO BROADCASTING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Arthur Leroy Smith: I am anxious to direct two questions to the Minister of National Revenue. The first one is this: Is it true that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has purchased three large broadcasting outfits? The second is this: Has the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation taken any steps 'to take over three private stations, one of which is located in Toronto, another in Calgary, and the third, I believe, although I do not know, is located in Winnipeg?


James Joseph McCann: I am informed that orders have been given for some transmitters; I cannot say whether it is two or three. In reference to taking over some stations, it is not done just in that way. The way it is handled is thpt certain private commercial stations have the right to use a frequency and it is held upon a yearly basis; the permit is renewed from year to year; and in conformity with the Canadian Broadcasting Act the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation can notify the holders of those frequencies that they may be required for the purposes of the broadcasting corporation itself at some date. I cannot say whether or not any notification has been given to that effect.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Well, is it going to be given?


James Joseph McCann: I cannot answer that at the present time. I shall have to find out from the broadcasting corporation, who make and put into operation their own policy, what they expect to do in that regard.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Then, Mr. Speaker, you will perhaps permit a supplementary question.


James Horace King: Order. I allowed the hon. gentleman to put his questions, although I did not think they were very urgent, but I wanted to be generous. I found that the question was pretty lengthy, and this was another reason why it should be put on the order paper. Now it seems to have turned into a debate. I ask the hon. member, if he has any further question to put, to put it on the order paper.


Arthur Leroy Smith: May I submit a very simple question? It is about six words, 63260-1061
and I am not asking that it be answered, Mr. Speaker, until you rule on it. Why have these transmitters been bought?


James Horace King: I must again inform the
hon. member that I do not see any urgency in his questions on this matter. I would ask him to put the question on the order paper.



NATIONAL PARKS


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, May 14, consideration in committee of bill No. 63, respecting the boundaries of certain national parks-Mr. Glen-Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 1-Short title.
James Allison Glen: When the discussion ended on Tuesday last I had not an opportunity to explain to the member for Davenport the situation with regard to the 200 foot strip along the foreshore of Point Pelee. He wanted to know why that was not included in the description of the park. The reason is that it was already in the title of the crown and therefore does not form a part of the description of the new piece now being taken over.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Certain additions are being made to straighten out boundaries. What type of land is being taken over, and how much, if anything, is being paid for it?


James Allison Glen: Banff park is already described in the National Parks Act. The boundaries of the park were not surveyed until 1940 when, on instructions of the surveyor general, a survey was carried out and an official map prepared. This map was approved and signed on behalf of the dominion government by the then minister of mines and resources, under the authority of the governor in council, and on behalf of the province of Alberta by Mr. Tanner. A copy is filed in the land titles office of the land registration district of Calgary, being 345, folio 109. Two small parcels of land not formerly in the park are included in the boundaries of the park as set out in schedule A, one parcel containing approximately 210 acres being required as a site for the eastern gateway. That was acquired. The other parcel, comprising one-sixth of a square mile, owing to the adjustment of the boundary made on the survey of the park is added with the approval of the province. That did not cost anything. The total area added is approximately one half square mile. The total area of the park as described in the schedule is 2,585 square miles more or less.
National Parks


Mr. MacNICOL:: The minister, at page 1540 of Hansard, on May 14, made this statement:
Mr. Speaker, as this bill, if enacted, will divest the crown of certain areas of land in certain national parks, title to which is at present in the crown, the governor general has been informed in respect thereto, and has given his consent to consideration of the bill.
Can the minister tell us which parks are being divested of certain areas? The parks mentioned in the bill are Banff, Kootenay, Riding Mountain, Point Pelee, Georgian Bay and Mallorytown. Is land being added to any of the parks, and what is being divested?


James Allison Glen: All that is being divested is two small sites in the Riding Mountain park. They were outside the boundaries of the park and were used for houses for the park wardens. The administration has been carried to within the park now. These sites were unnecessary, being very small portions, and therefore we are divesting ourselves of them and turning them back to the province.


John Ritchie MacNicol: We do not get anything for it?


James Allison Glen: No.	s


Mr. BLACK (Cumberland):: Will the minister make a statement regarding the policy of the department in respect of National Highland park in Nova Scotia?-which should have been called, I believe, the Cabot park, seeing that the Cabot tourist highway trail serves that park. I understand the province of Nova Scotia and large public bodies as well as individuals in the island of Cape Breton have made representations to the government to make extensive additions to that park in the northern part of the island. The land involved is largely crown land of the province of Nova Scotia. The matter has been before the public and the department for some time and I would like to know why it is not covered by the bill.


James Allison Glen: I suggest that it might be more proper for the hon. member to ask that question on the parks estimates. We shall then, be dealing with that particular matter. This is simply a bill with respect to the boundaries of certain parks. When the estimates on parks are before the house I shall endeavour to reply to the hon. gentleman's question, which has been noted.


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: Can the minister make a general statement as to what measures are being taken to encourage the greatest possible tourist traffic this year from the United States? By the time his estimates come up it may be rather late, and if ever there was a time when it was most necessary to encourage that tourist traffic with a view
IMr. Glen.]
to securing United States dollars in Canada, it is now. I am sure the minister is in full possession of the necessary facts to enable him to make a statement on the subject.


James Allison Glen: I would not wish to enter into a discussion of the point raised by the hon. member, which of course will come up under the estimates. All I would say now is that there is an increased grant being asked of the house for the very purpose he has mentioned. I hope to deal with the matter when the estimates are under consideration. This is something that should have been done years ago, because the boundaries of the park have to be correct and surveys have been made and plans registered in order that we may know what is contained within the boundaries of the park. This bill deals only with boundaries without reference to administration. When the estimates are before the house the questions that are now asked will be properly replied to.


Mr. REID:: In taking over an area for a park is there some minimum extent of territory fixed before that area can be declared a park?


James Allison Glen: There is no limit with regard to the area. The province may obtain land and give it to the dominion, who may then if necessary form a park.


Thomas Reid: I remember on one occasion we were told by Ottawa that a certain area was too small to be considered a national park.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On Section 2-Park areas described.
Mr. STIRLING:: I find it quite impossible to form any opinion on this bill, as to its merits or otherwise, by reading the schedules without reference to the maps and plans. As I understand it, this is an adjustment in the boundaries of certain parks, entailing the giving up of land in one place and the acquisition of land in another. Is it the provincial government which is at the other end of the deal in each case, or do private owners come into the picture? If private owners do come into the picture, are they sometimes sellers of land and sometimes purchasers?


James Allison Glen: In the case of the Kootenay park, in which the hon. gentleman is interested, the provincial government is on the other side of the deal; and in the Riding Mountain park the same thing applies.


Grote Stirling: Banff?


James Allison Glen: There is no divesting from the park there; that is a case of adding to the park. We are adding two small parcels, one

National Parks
of which was bought and the other given, to be added to the crown lands within the park. In the other cases, however-that is in connection with Kootenay park and the Riding Mountain park-there is a divesting of two small portions only, which will belong to the province.


Grote Stirling: Who sold the land, in the case of the purchase by the crown for an addition to the Banff park?


James Allison Glen: I have not the name of the individual. It was a purchase under the direction of the surveyor general, after a survey made at the entrance to the gate of the park. Perhaps I might send my hon. friend a plan of Kootenay park, so that'he may see what is proposed.


Mr. WEBB:: How much land was taken, over in connection with the Mallorytown Landing park? I understand some arrangement or some adjustment was made as a result of the highway going through there. I should be interested to learn just what amount of land this boundary will take in. This park is accessible from the highway as well as from the St. Lawrence river, and I think eventually it will become very important. It is stated that the parcel of land being added amounts to 3-38 acres. I take it that is in addition to the land already within that park?


James Allison Glen: Yes. As my hon. friend knows, the new scenic highway being constructed by the provincial government between Brockville and Gananoque runs through the Mallorytown Landing park, one of-the St. Lawrence islands parks. The provincial government secured and transferred to the dominion a small area adjoining the park, in compensation for the area taken up by the right of way of the highway; and the area added amounts to 3-38 acres.


Mr. HAZEN:: What was the date of the transfer from the provincial to the dominion government?


James Allison Glen: About 1938.


Mr. ZAPLITNY:: I notice that under
schedule B something less than two sections are being added to the Riding Mountain park. Would the minister * explain for what purpose this area is being added, from whom it was purchased, and what amount was paid for it?	-


James Allison Glen: The portion mentioned by the hon. member was purchased in order to protect the entrance to the park. It is outside the south gate. Some people were wishing to build right up to the gate, and the officers
of the department of that date thought it was necessary to protect the entrance, so they arranged the purchase of the land outside the park as it then was. I have not the amount paid, but I can give the hon. gentleman that information.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: And from whom it was
purchased.


James Allison Glen: Yes, I will get that information and give it to the hon. gentleman.


John Ritchie MacNicol: There is just one other question. The minister gave some explanation when the matter was last before the committee, but I am not quite clear on it. Perhaps I should be; I know the area very well. I am referring to Flowerpot island. The bill provides to place it under the control of the Georgian Bay "Islands park. Under whose control has it been up to now?


James Allison Glen: The parks department has always had control. Flowerpot island, which it is desired to include in the Georgian Bay Islands park, is located at the head of the Bruce peninsula. The island was surrendered by the Chippewa Indians on June 5, 1856, and was acquired for park purposes from the Department of Indian Affairs on December 6, 1930. With the addition of Flowerpot island, Georgian Bay Islands park will consist of Beausoleil island, containing 2,712 acres, Flowerpot island, containing 475 acres, and 'some 28 smaller islands totalling 251 acres, giving a total area of approximately 3,438 acres.


Mr. CASTLEDEN:: Were the Indians reimbursed for the surrender of that land, and if so what amount was paid?


James Allison Glen: I have no information on that. It was surrendered a long time ago, but I have not the least doubt that it was properly surrendered and any compensation would be paid then. It was surrendered by the Chippewa Indians awray back in 1856, and was acquired for park purposes in 1930.


Mr. FRASER:: Has the navy department full control of Beausoleil Island, or what arrangements have been made in that regard?


James Allison Glen: It is under our control, and just what arrangements will be made with the navy department I do not know. I understand they have been working around there and have set up some sort of camp for sea cadets, I believe.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: They have an excellent camp there.


James Allison Glen: I believe that is-so, but I have no idea as to the extent of their activities. I can get the information if the hon. gentleman desires it.
National Parks


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I should like to have it.


James Allison Glen: The hon. member wishes to know what arrangement was made with the navy department in regard to occupancy of that island?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes; and can the minister also say whether tourists are allowed to camp on the other parts of that parcel of land in Georgian Bay?


James Allison Glen: I will have to get that information and give it to the hon. gentleman.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
. Section 3 agreed to.
On section 4

Lands withdrawn from Riding Mountain park.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Why is schedule F on page 14, and not immediately after schedule B on page 11?


James Allison Glen: Schedule F deals with the land we are withdrawing. Schedule B deals with the. lands we are adding to the different parks.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I understood we were not adding anything to Riding Mountain.


James Allison Glen: The hon. member for Dauphin was asking about that. We purchased a piece of land outside the entrance to Riding Mountain park, and that is being added to it. But we are also withdrawing two portions that were used for park wardens' houses, outside the park.


John Ritchie MacNicol: How much are we adding to it?


James Allison Glen: The area added amounts to 962-3 acres.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Did we have to buy that from somebody?


James Allison Glen: Yes, it was purchased, and I have promised to give the hon. member for Dauphin the purchase price and the names of the persons from whom it was purchased. As I explained, it was purchased in order to protect the entrance to the park. Many citizens were desirous of building warehouses and stores right at the park gate, and the officers felt they had to acquire this land in order to protect that entrance. So that land was purchased and the other portion is withdrawn, as I say, just for the two park wardens' houses.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is quite a large area, 900 acres. Is it now being farmed? If so, are there barns and houses on it, and is it all ready for cropping? If that is so, we may have to . pay quite a price for it.


James Allison Glen: I do not know the price, but it was not being farmed. It was intended to
[Mr. Glen.)
bring the approach to the park right through that area, and in that way protect all the amenities of the park.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Are the 320 acres being withdrawn from Riding Mountain park timber land? I believe last year we had a bill before us dealing with this park, and the minister said there was a timber company cutting in there. Are they cutting on the 320 acres?


James Allison Glen: No, not on this portion. This is land which can be used for agricultural purposes.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Who will own these 320 acres after they are taken out? Under whose control will that land come?


James Allison Glen: It goes to the province, so it will be under provincial control.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 5 agreed to.
On schedule A.
Arthur Leroy Smith: Does the minister say he will let us know from whom this half section was obtained, and at what price?
_ Mr. GLEN: I shall be glad to get that information.
Schedule A agreed to.
Schedules B to F inclusive agreed to.
On the title.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: When may we have the answers to our questions?


James Allison Glen: Either on the estimates, or by letter.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Can we not have those answers before the bill is passed?


James Allison Glen: I expect the bill will pass today. I can give the information by letter.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I am not the only member interested.


James Allison Glen: I can give the answers when my estimates are before the committee.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I do not intend to delay passage of the bill, but it seems to me peculiar that the deputy sitting in front of the minister is not able to state immediately what is to be paid for that land added to the Riding Mountain park. We are not offering any opposition; in fact, we, are for it, but it seems to me we should have that information at once.


James Allison Glen: It was bought many years ago.

C.N.R.-Auditors


John Ritchie MacNicol: Then it belongs to the government now.


James Allison Glen: Yes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: We did not know even that.
Mr. GLEN-, It was purchased years ago and is now being taken over by the government. In this bill we are bringing it legally within the boundaries of the park.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: When did these transactions take place? I gather some of them took place at least fifteen years ago.


James Allison Glen: I have undertaken to secure for the hon. ihember for Dauphin information respecting purchase price and the party from whom the purchases were made. The information can be given either by letter or when my estimates are before the committee. The purchase in respect of Riding Mountain park was made years ago. All we are asking in this bill is that the area be included within the park boundaries.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Has the 900 acres been under cultivation?


James Allison Glen: No.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Then we do not have to pay anything because of our dispossessing anyone now carrying on operations on the land?


James Allison Glen: No.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I believe the minister will agree that we are with him. But surely our responsibility in the examination of park boundaries and the purchases of lands for park purposes is such that we should know from whom those purchases have been made, when they were made, and how much was paid. That simple bit of information could be given to us before final disposition of the bill. There would not be much object in our getting it later.


James Allison Glen: If the committee will agree, I shall be glad to give it before third reading.


Arthur Leroy Smith: (Calgary West): That is
satisfactory.


James Allison Glen: At that time I shall answer the questions which have been asked by hon. members.


Mr. CASE:: I note that schedule D provides for the addition of some small islands in Georgian bay. Is it the department's policy to lease islands of that type for long terms- let us say, ninety-nine years?


James Allison Glen: I am informed that it is not.


Grote Stirling: We should have an understanding as to when we may have this information.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: On third reading.


Grote Stirling: On third reading there can be no such thing as question and answer.
M-r. MACKENZIE: The minister will make a statement.


Grote Stirling: Another of those statements from -a minister, with which we are becoming too much accustomed.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It is "not debatable".


The CHAIRMAN:: On third reading remarks could be made, but questions could not be asked. However any hon. member would be entitled to speak on third reading, if he wished.


Grote Stirling: The minister has brought down a bill having to do with the disposal of certain lands, the purchase of other lands, and the adjustment of boundaries of parks. It struck me as most extraordinary that we did not have more detailed information respecting the parties from whom the land was bought, to whom certain lands were sold, and all points having to do with conditions of purchase. If we now agree to the passing of the title, then the bill will have reached the stage of third reading and out of the committee, in which event we cannot -ask further questions. I suggest the bill remain in committee, that the title be not carried, so that we may have in committee stage the information required. If necessary questions could be asked, and if hon. members were satisfied, the bill could pass on quickly to third reading.


James Allison Glen: What the hon. member says is entirely correct. I would therefore ask that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again this day.
Title stands.
Progress reported.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport) moved the second reading of bill No. 10, respecting the appointment of auditors for national railways.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Audi tors
[Stage Direction]
On section 1-Appointment of auditors.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Would the minister explain this section	.


Lionel Chevrier: Prior to the passing of The Canadian National-Canadian Pacific Act the auditors of the Canadian National Railways were appointed by the directors of that railway system. However, there was provision made in section 13 of the act I have mentioned that the auditors be appointed by joint resolution of the Senate and the House of Commons. Since 1932 it has been found that the practice was. cumbersome and the appointment of auditors is now carried out by passing a bill which sets out that notwithstanding the provisions of section 13, which contains the provisions I have referred to, the appointment of auditors shall be made. It is sought by this bill to appoint George A. Touche and Company-whose offices are in Montreal and Toronto, with head office in Toronto-for the year 1946. The bill is the same as it has been in past years, certainly as it was in 1945.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: How many years has this firm audited the accounts, and for how many years have the accounts been audited by other firms?


Lionel Chevrier: The accounts of the Canadian National Railways have been audited by the firm of George A. Touche and Company since 1924, with but one exception, the year 1935, when the firm of Clarkson, Gordon and Company were appointed auditors.


John Ritchie MacNicol: What is the meaning of the reference to the Canadian National-Cama-dian Pacific Act? We do not name auditors for the Canadian. Pacific, do we?


Lionel Chevrier: No, we do not. That is the act which was passed in 1932, and one of its sections took away from the board of directors of the Canadian National Railways the power which they had to appoint auditors and gave it to parliament.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: What is the annual
remuneration?


Lionel Chevrier: A total of $51,800. Of this amount, $50,000 is for auditing the books of Canadian National Railways and $1,800 for auditing the books of Trans-Canada Air Lines.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. GLEN (Minister of Mines and Resources) moved the second reading of bill No. 16, respecting the manufacture, testing, sale, storage and importation of explosives.
He said: The Explosives Act of Canada, 1914, chapter 31, was introduced in 1911 and passed by parliament on June 12, 1914, under the Honourable Mr. Coderre, but its proclamation was-deferred until after the war of 1914-18. The act is based upon the British act of 1875, which is the general basis of the explosives acts of South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Belgium and other countries. It has not been changed in any respect since 1920, the year in which it was proclamed, save for the general revision of Canadian statutes in 1927.
Revision of the Explosives Act has been under consideration for some time and a revision has now been prepared by the Department of Justice in consultation with officers of the mines and geology branch. The amendments proposed are largely minor in nature, and are the results of, first, experience in the administration of the act, and second, administrative changes in the department.
Five important changes have been made. First, the governor in council will have authority to make regulations respecting the sale of explosives; second, provision is made for forfeiture to the crown of any unauthorized explosive in respect of which a conviction has been obtained; third, an inspector may seize and detain an explosive which he believes is not authorized; fourth, the minister will have authority to seize and destroy abandoned or deteriorated explosives which have become a public danger; fifth, servants of the crown, excepting the Department of National Defence, are to be brought within the application of the act.
During the twenty-five years of operation the act has proved its value and demonstrated the desirability of having control over explosives which may be put on the market and of regulating the conditions with regard to safety under which explosives a-re manufactured and stored. Regulations for the more effective application of the act were made. These deal with such matters as the classification of explosives and the testing and'examina-tion before being declared an authorized explosive. The effect has been beneficial, and in their administration manufacturers of explosives have given excellent cooperation, with

Explosives Act
the result that quality and uniformity of explosives have undoubtedly improved to the advantage of the user.
The quantity of explosives manufactured yearly has increased steadily. Production of commercial explosives in 1919, the year preceding the proclamation of the act, was slightly over twenty-one million pounds; the greatest production was in 1940 when it totalled over eighty-four million pounds, a four-fold increase. Despite the great increase in production the number of accidents has shown a steady decline. Entire freedom from accident can scarcely be looked for in any industry; still less so in the one which involves the risks which are ever present to those engaged in work of explosives, but much can and is being done to reduce the known hazards.
Rules for factories and magazines and regulations for the packing and transportation of explosives, otherwise than by railway, were made under authority of the act. Rules, of necessity, are of a general nature intended to apply to explosives plants of various kinds manufacturing different types of explosives, but their object is primarily intended to express what is recognized to be good practice in the manufacture, storage and handling of explosives.
By order in council P.C. 191/1365 of fourteenth June, 1932, all officers, non-commissioned officers and constables of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, while serving on that force, are appointed deputy inspectors of explosives without pay. Members of the force have rendered valuable assistance in the administration of the Explosives Act in many sections of Canada, particularly in the inaccessible areas such as the Yukon and Northwest Territories.
Soon after the outbreak of war it was deemed advisable in the public interest to control the possession, sale and use of explosives. There was no authority under the Explosives Act to regulate these; consequently recourse was had to the War Measures Act under which order in council P.C. 2903, July 4, 1940, was passed. This order in council, during the years it has been in force, has proved satisfactory and has been well received by both vendors and purchasers of explosives. It has proved a useful measure to peace officers through keeping them fully informed of all purchases of explosives, with the result that sabotage by the use of commercial explosives was practically unknown in Canada during the war years.
Experience gained in administering P.C. 2903 indicates that in the interest of public safety some measure of control-not provided
in the present Explosives Act-over the operations of retail dealers who store for sale small quantities of explosives should be continued in the post-war period. For this purpose the bill now being considered will restrict the sale of blasting explosives to the owner or operator of a licensed factory, licensed magazine or registered premises. The advantages of this provision from the viewpoint of public safety and administration will be:
1.	All vendors will be obliged-to make known
.their dealings in explosives.	,
2.	Premises, other than licensed magazines, in which explosives are stored for sale will be subject to periodic inspection to ensure that the terms of the licence or certificate- are being fully observed.
3.	Records of sale of explosives which vendors are obliged to maintain would, as in the past, assist peace officers in the enforcement of law.
Order in council P.C. 2903 requires purchasers of explosives to obtain an explosives purchase permit. This restriction is not provided for in the revision of the act and will be discontinued when the new act is passed.
The present Explosives Act does not provide adequately for the disposal of unauthorized, abandoned, and deteriorated explosives. The bill seeks to correct this omission by providing authority, when warranted, to seize, forfeit, and dispose of unauthorized explosives and explosives which have been abandoned or have become deteriorated and a danger to the public.
To summarize, the new act continues the controls of the old act over the manufacture, testing, storage, and importation of explosives, and in addition requires that all who sell explosives shall register their premises. This bill has been before the other chamber and was passed almost without alteration. It was drawn in conjunction with the Justice department in the light of the experience gained during the war, and it is thought that in its present form it will be adequate to take care of the dangers of explosives and give added powers for the protection of the public. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I move the second reading of the bill.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Mr. Speaker, if the bill will achieve all that the minister has just set out, it ought to be worth while, but I understood from what he said that an act containing much of what is in this bill has been on the statute books for some time.
I rise to support any legislation or any programme at all which will strengthen the hands of whoever is charged with the control of the sale of explosives and prevent any such disaster as occurred in Toronto a week ago Sunday night. It passes my comprehension how four young lads could go into a store-I presume

Explosives Act

on College street, Toronto, because the accident happened on College street near Clinton street-purchase powerful explosives and take them out on the street-car tracks and set them off, with the result that a young man of nineteen years of age was struck on the head with a rocket and his skull pierced, resulting in his death a few hours afterwards. I should like to read for the benefit of the members what the Toronto police said about these rockets, one of which killed this young man. I have not the date of the clipping, but it must have been about May 13 or 14 last: Police say that the rockets, which were purchased by the boys at a nearby store, were of a powerful variety.
I should like to know how any young lads could buy such a powerful rocket. What control was there over the store in which these rockets were purchased? What control was there over the sale of these rockets to the merchant? I presume the bill will cover all that, and if it does, it will be a step in the right direction. Continuing with the clipping: The boys laid them lengthwise on the streetcar tracks, and when they were fired they shot along the groove in the rail. Some of the rockets were reported to have travelled as far as Bathurst street in this manner, a distance of five blocks.
One can picture what would have happened had anyone been in the line of fire five blocks away from where the rockets were set off. I hope that the new act will prevent the recurrence of such accidents. The article continues:
Announcing steps to prevent recurrence of such fatalities, Inspector Frank Crowe said that police officials would confer with Crown Attorney J. W. McFadden, to-day to discuss a Toronto by-law which forbids the setting off of fireworks in the city.
"A by-law regarding the exploding of fireworks is still on the books," he said. "Rockets of the type used Sunday are not playthings, but are dangerous weapons in the hands of grown-ups, let alone juveniles."
I hope that the provisions of this bill will prevent the recurrence of such a disaster. I nope that it will control the sale of powerful rockets by the manufacturer to the wholesaler, and by the wholesaler .to the street merchant, and that it will prevent the street corner merchant from selling rockets to juveniles who go out and set them off on the streei in this manner.
I might mention another incident which occurred near where I live. A young lad went, into a store to buy some small ammunition for an air gun. The storekeeper refused to sell it to him on account of his age, and so the boy got an older person in the store to buy it for him. I hope this bill will prevent that kind of thing. Too many people are

being injured through these small, supposedly harmless firearms. Certainly the firing of rockets on streets should be prevented by every means. Steps should be taken to prevent their sale to juveniles and to control their sale to merchants.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, the matter just dealt with by the hon. member for Davenport (Mr. MacNicol) was one which I had intended to bring to the attention of the house. So far as I can see, the bill, aa was stated by the minister, is merely a restatement of the British Explosives Act, together with a revision of the Canadian Explosives Act, bringing it up to date and applying statutory form to the orders in council which were passed during the war.
So far as the general purport is concerned, there can be no argument. It is really a photographic copy of the original Explosives Act brought up to date in order to remedy any defects which have been revealed .in practical experience. But consideration should be given to including in this bill sky-rockets and firecrackers of the type referred to by the hon. member for Davenport. I have read over the bill and I can find in it no section which in any way would be applicable to what was mentioned by my hon. friend.
If I might be permitted, Mr. Speaker, to refer to just one section of the bill, section 2(c), which defines "explosive", it includes "fireworks, fuses, rockets, percussion caps, detonators, cartridges, ammunition of all descriptions." But in view of the use of the words and the order in which they appear I should think that fireworks, fuses, rockets, would have to do in general with fireworks, fuses and rockets similar in action to percussion caps, detonators, cartridges, railway track torpedoes, fuses and other signals. In other words, there is established in that section a type or a genus, which would make the section inapplicable under the circumstances detailed by the hon. member for Davenport, and I am sure it would be the wish of the house and of the minister that there should be the fullest possible control of explosives. This bill will not cover a control which is vitally necessary to-day; I refer to firearms, which are all too frequently used. It is intended to go part way, and I am sure it would be the wish of the house that it go as far as possible to prevent the recurrence of such an event as has been described and to remove from the hands of young men, too large a percentage of whom are launching on a career of crime, opportunities of securing firearms, which are not only required in

Explosives Act
ordinary business pursuits but are part of the stock in trade of persons engaged in nefarious practices.
I have read the bill carefully and compared it with the British act and with the orders in council to which the minister made reference. I am happy to say that it gives evidence of unusual care in preparation and draftsmanship, and the other house in which it was introduced, deserves a measure of credit for the attention it has paid to the bill. May I add that this is a challenge to the commons-to the government *-in any event in that much legislation of this kind which is introduced in the commons might well- be initiated in the other house, where they have a great deal more leisure and more opportunities of examination. The bill as it stands shows what can be done when there is proper cooperation between the two houses of parliament. There is a care and directness in draftsmanship in the bill which is too often lacking, and it indicates the desirability of using to the limit the experience and the facilities which the other house offers for considered legislation.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 2-Definitions.
John Ritchie MacNicol: I know that the minister listened to what I had to say a moment ago as to what section of the bill would control and prevent such an occurrence as that to which I have referred-the purchase and firing by juveniles of high explosive rockets.


James Allison Glen: The hon. member for Davenport was referring to an accident which recently took place; and I have also in mind the remarks of the hon. member for Lake Centre. In section 2,
(c) "explosive" means gunpowder, blasting powder, nitroglycerine, gun-cotton, dynamite, blasting gelatine, gelignite, fulminates of mercury or of other metals, coloured fires, and every other substance made, manufactured or used with a view to produce a violent effect by explosion, or pyrotechnic effect, and includes fireworks, fuses, rockets, percussion caps, detonators, cartridges, ammunition of all descriptions, railway track torpedoes, fusees and other signals, and every other adaptation or preparation of any such substance;
I would imagine that that definition of "explosive" would cover what the hon. member for Davenport has spoken of. In the report he read I think the word "rockets" was used, and that word is included in this interpretation of "explosive". Section 4 provides that regulations shall be made "respecting the sale of explosives". Subsection 1 reads that 63260-107J
"The Governor in Council may make regulations___(n) respecting the sale of explosives."
That clause was inserted for the purpose of having some record by those who sell explosives of whom they sell to. During the war provision was made that those purchasing explosives should go to a magistrate or justice of the peace or mayor of a town in order to obtain ammunition. Exception to this was taken by a good many people throughout the country, who complained of the inconvenience they had to undergo. Sometimes it involved a journey of twenty or thirty miles. It is thought that by regulations made under this clause, which was not in the former act, provision could be made whereby those who are selling explosives will keep a record of those to whom they are selling, and of the amount sold, and thus there will be some check on the sale of explosives. I do not know whether that fully answers the question of the hon. member for Davenport, but I take it that it covers to some extent the inquiry of the hon. member for Lake Centre with regard to the sale of rockets, or of ammunition as referred to by the hon. member.


John George Diefenbaker: Is it the opinion of the law officers of the crown that section 2, subparagraph (c), and the one to which the minister just had reference, would cover a case such as was referred to by the hon. member for Davenport? If he has that assurance, then the responsibility has been discharged.


James Allison Glen: This accident occurred so recently that I had no occasion to inquire of the law officers with regard to it, but this section was drafted for the very purpose, and contains the power to accomplish exactly what the hon. member for Davenport desires. It would cover any explosive which would create an accident, including such an accident as that to which the hon. member has referred.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister says that the clause as at present constituted was drafted to cover just such cases, among others, as mentioned by the hon. member. As a matter of fact the old section read exactly the same, and in the explanatory notes, paragraph
(c), as set out, "explosive" includes fireworks, fuses, rockets, percussion caps, detonators, cartridges, and ammunition of all descriptions. The old section as it stood-and I think I am correct in this-did not cover the condition of affairs referred to by the hon. member for Davenport, and if it did not, then certainly the amendments now suggested would not cover it since those amendments merely substitute, for "fog and other signals", railway track torpedoes, fusees and other signals. That is the only alteration in that section. I would suggest that if it is the -minister's wish, as
Explosives Act

apparently it is, that this measure should cover the sale and disposal of rockets and also firecrackers of a dangerous type, a submission should be made to the law officers, to ascertain whether or not, as at present constituted, the section would cover that type of thing; if not, then the committee could suggest an amendment to the section. That would not hold up the bill. An opinion could be secured very soon and I would suggest that paragraph (c) be held over until that opinion has been secured.


James Allison Glen: There has never been any question of the department's power under the act to deal with rockets and firecrackers. No one has ever questioned the jurisdiction of the act and I would imagine it would cover exactly what the hon. member has in mind. However, as he says, I am anxious, as I am sure the . committee is, to make the act as ironclad as possible, and therefore I have no objection to allowing paragraph (c) to stand until such time as I have an opportunity of discussing the point with the officers.


Douglas King Hazen: What are "fusees" in line 16? When I first read this I thought it was intended for the word "fuses", but evidently it has a meaning of its own.


James Allison Glen: I am informed that fusees are the flares used on the railways for stopping trains.


Douglas King Hazen: The hon. member for Lake Centre referred to the words "fireworks, fuses and rockets". He suggested that they might be all of the same genus and that the word "fuses" might be limited to fuses used in connection with fireworks. Does the word "fuses" in paragraph (c) include surplus mine fuses? There are land mines and there are fuzes that have to be attached to them. Is the word "fuses" in this paragraph limited to such fuzes as are used with fireworks,. or does it include fuses such as land mine fuses, or fuses used to detonate shells?


James Allison Glen: I am informed that fuses are military explosives which are under the control of the department of defence, not the type considered in the definition of fuses here, or in the interpretation of the word "fuses".


Douglas King Hazen: Do I understand that the word is intended to include military fuses?


James Allison Glen: No. Those are under the department of defence.


Douglas King Hazen: Under what section?


James Allison Glen: Those are under the control of the department of defence, not under this act. Ordinary fuses that might be used on the

railway would come under this act, but those that my hon. friend speaks of are under the control of the department of defence.


Douglas King Hazen: But they may not be under the control of the defence department. They might be under the control of the Department of Munitions and Supply. Section 3 states:
This act shall apply to the possession, storing, sale or offering for sale, making, manufacture or importation of explosives by or on behalf of His Majesty in right of Canada or any province except explosives under the direction or control of the Minister of National Defence.
There ma3' be explosives that belong to the dominion government but are not under the direction or control of the Minister of National Defence. For example, explosives may be under the control of the Department of Munitions and Supply. In that case, does the word "fuses" in line 14 of 2 (c) apply, or is that word limited to fireworks?


James Allison Glen: I am informed that fuzes, from the military point of view, are not spelt in the same way. These fuses would cover in the last sentence what calls for "every other adaptation or preparation of any such substance". Does that meet the hon. member's point?


Douglas King Hazen: I must confess that I am a little puzzled about the matter. It might be given a little more consideration. The minister said he was going to refer this section back to the law officers and perhaps he might consider this point.


James Allison Glen: I must say that I thought, when I read over this provision, "railway track torpedoes, fusees and other signals, and every other adaptation or preparation of any such substance", it would be wide enough to cover all that the hon. gentleman has in mind. However, we are allowing this to stand over and I will consider what he says.


Douglas King Hazen: The minister says it does not include fuzes under the control of the Department of National Defence.


James Allison Glen: It does not apply to explosives of any kind under the charge of the Department of National Defence.


Douglas King Hazen: Then does it include explosives under the control of the Department of Munitions and Supply?


James Allison Glen: Certainly I would say it would apply to those, unquestionably.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I should like to pursue a little farther the case I mentioned a few moments ago. I understood the hon. member for Lake Centre to say he had thoroughly

Explosives Act
read this bill. I have read it casually, but not thoroughly. He also said he had carefully read the British act, and could not find in it any clause that would cover the case I brought up. What I want to suggest to the minister is that in the preparation of the regulations, they should prevent the sort ot thing that took place in Toronto a week or ten days ago, when four young lads were able to purchase very powerful explosives in the form of rockets. I believe the regulations should prevent the sale of such rockets by any wholesaler for resale to comer stores, hardware stores or anyone else, where boys or juveniles might purchase them. To the extent humanly possible will the regulations under this act prevent the producer of such high explosives from selling them to, let us say, a wholesaler, and will they prevent the wholesaler from selling them to the small corner stores which in turn will sell them to juveniles? In this case a young man, nineteen or twenty years old, with all his life before him, was killed. He was minding his own business when from down the street, some distance away, a rocket came and punctured his skull, so that he died a day or two later. If that racket had been fired by an adult I presume it would be a case of manslaughter. I do not know whether these boys should be punished, particularly, but I believe there should be some control over the sale of such powerful explosives to young lads. Will this act prevent that sort of thing?


James Allison Glen: The hon. gentleman is referring -to a newspaper report concerning an accident which apparently involved a rocket. That is covered by the interpretation clause, which includes rockets. Then the hon. member asks if there is power under the act to prevent the sale of such explosives. When we come to section 4 he will find that regulations can be made under paragraph (n) with respect to the sale of explosives, and in the making of these regulations account will be taken of what the hon. gentleman has said, in order that the sale of explosives may be as closely guarded as possible. No one, of course, can provide entirely against the possibility of accident, but there is power in the act to make rules and regulations respecting the sale of explosives. That is one of the new features of this bill as compared with previous legislation.


Grote Stirling: Would the minister explain exactly the position we shall be in after the passage of the bill with respect to Canadian Arsenals Limited? I do not think it can be said that Canadian Arsenals Limited will be under the direction and control of the Minister of National Defence. It will be a
crown company which will produce almost all, if not all, the explosives required by the services, and I am quite doubtful whether under this act the inspectors charged with enforcing the act will have the opportunity or will be required to inspect the operations of Canadian Arsenals Limited.


James Allison Glen: We are not dealing with that now, but still from the general point of view section 6 provides that the minister may issue licences for factories and magazines. Crown companies will have to have their licences, the same as any other institutions. Then power is given under sections 17 and following with regard to the powers of the inspectors to enter into any factory, magazine or premises where explosives may be manufactured or stored. So .. that I think the point raised by the hon. gentleman has been pretty well covered in these three sections, and perhaps we might deal with them when we reach them.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Does the minister know whether the rocket which was involved in the accident in Toronto was of Canadian or Chinese manufacture? The reason I am asking is that in a store on Sparks street they have fireworks which have been manufactured in China, and I wondered if the rockets in question had been of Chinese or Canadian manufacture. Another reason I asked is that one of the'largest manufacturers of fireworks on this continent, if not the largest, generally sell fireworks or rockets for large displays direct to fairs or municipalities, and they generally send out to look after those displays men who understand these fireworks and can look after them properly. I do not think our Canadian firms would sell, to the general public rockets which would cause such damage.


James Allison Glen: The information we have with regard to the rockets involved in this accident is that they were made in Canada.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I suppose the minister does not know what size they were, whether they were half-pound, one pound or two-pound. There is another type of fireworks which is equally dangerous; what they call mortars. These fire shells weighing a pound or two, and if they are not handled by an expert the person firing them is likely to have his head blown off, because they fire instantly.


Percy Chapman Black: As I understand the act, the minister has complete control over all explosives used in connection with mining operations. This is an important matter in Nova Scotia, since explosives are used in coal and other mining. Recently in one of the coal mines there was a complaint
Explosives Act

that the explosives were defective, and that owing to delayed explosions the workmen were subjected to additional hazards, to such an extent that they refused to continue to work in this mine until an investigation had been made. As I follow the discussion to-day, the minister has full responsibility for-the quality and handling of such explosives. Could he tell the committee the result of that investigation; whether these explosives were defective and, if not, whether reassurance was given the men working in this mine in Nova Scotia that they could return to their work in safety? We realize that coal miners and other miners are subject to great hazards in the carrying out of their work, and they ought not to be subjected to hazards arising through defective explosives or defective machinery.


James Allison Glen: I understand the hon. member to say that an accident took place in one of the Nova Scotia mines.


Percy Chapman Black: Owing to what was described as delayed explosives, thereby creating a hazard for coal miners which prompted them to refuse to continue operations until a thorough investigation had been made. Has the minister a report respecting such investigations, and will the men be given some reassurance?


James Allison Glen: I am informed that the accident was never brought to the attention of the department. It will be noted that section 2 (h) describes "magazine" as:
. . . any building, storehouse, structure or place in which any explosive is kept or stored, but does not include
(i) a place at or in and for the use of a mine or quarry in a province in which provision is made by the law of such province for the efficient inspection of mines and quarries and explosives used in connection therewith.
The use of the explosives will be subject to inspection by provincial departments. In this instance I suggest it was the use of the explosives which caused the accident, a matter which would be within the jurisdiction of the province. We provide only the places in which it can be used, subject always, of course, to the jurisdiction of the provinces in that connection.


Percy Chapman Black: I understand the minister's department assumes no responsibility for defective explosives in the hands of coal miners. The explosion to which I referred in Nova Scotia resulted in the shutting down of a mine for I do not know how many days at a time when the production of coal is required to as great an extent as has ever obtained in the history of our country
[Mr. P. C. Black.1


James Allison Glen: When we reach it I shall direct the hon. member's attention particularly to section 26 in the bill which provides:
Nothing in this act shall relieve any person of the obligation to comply with the requirements of any licence law, or other law or bylaw of any province or municipality, lawfully enacted, with regard to the storage, handling, sale or other dealing with explosives, nor of any liability or penalty imposed by such law or by-law for any violation thereof.


Percy Chapman Black: That may be all right, but I want to know if the minister and his department are responsible for defective explosives in the hands of coal miners. If the explosives were not defective, then all I ask is some reassurance of that fact. But if they were, I want to know if the minister's department is responsible for their use in this instance.


James Allison Glen: The manufacture of explosives, under this measure, is a procedure for which the department would be responsible. The use of the explosives in a province, or in the mines of a province, would be subject to its jurisdiction, and to its laws in that connection. This department, is responsible for the making or manufacture, but not for the use.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Do I gather from what the minister has said that the use of explosives is entirely within the jurisdiction of provincial governments? I have in mind the use of dynamite, which is mentioned in section 2 (c) of the bill? I have in mind particularly the careless way in which dynamite is handed out by certain quarry operators to people who are using explosives for different purposes. Is there anything in the bill to restrict the handling of explosives, and dynamite in particular? I know it is handed out carelessly by some irresponsible rock-quarry operators.
I brought this matter to the attention of the government during the winter. Are there any general restrictions in the bill? I am not a lawyer, and perhaps I am not qualified to interpret the bill fully, but does it contain any restrictive provisions which would bring pressure to bear upon the provinces, in the event of the use of explosives being under their jurisdiction? This is a matter which will have to be watched carefully, especially in rock quarries.


James Allison Glen: Section 4 (1) (c) states that regulations can be made for regulating the sale, importation, packing and handling of explosives, and the transportation of explosives. But there should be concurrent legislation in the provinces dealing with the utilization of explosives, especially in mines, or in respect of anyone wishing to use them for

Explosives Act
logging or blasting purposes. They would have to have a licence under this measure, when it becomes law.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: What happens if a province does not pass legislation?


James Allison Glen: I do not think there will be any doubt as to their passing it. All the provinces will have legislation concurrent with ours, because they are seized of the duty of protecting operations of this kind.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: At the present time if one wants to obtain fifteen or twenty sticks of dynamite, complete with fuses and caps, he must have a permit. Is that under dominion or provincial jurisdiction? If it is under the dominion, does the minister intend to keep it up? I hope he does. I bought dynamite only a month ago, but before doing so I had to get permission from the police, and to tell them what I wanted it for.


James Allison Glen: Does the hon. member suggest that there should be a permit?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: There is one at the present time. When I wanted to buy the dynamite before I had to go to the Department of Munitions and Supply. Now I need only go to the local chief of police?


James Allison Glen: Yes.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: And is that under dominion or provincial jurisdiction?


James Allison Glen: Dominion.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Does the government intend to continue this procedure?


James Allison Glen: We have the right to do it.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Do you not think you should?


James Allison Glen: You suggest that we should exercise that right?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I suggest to keep it on.


James Allison Glen: As I mentioned before, exception was taken, especially by farmers who would be going to a country store and who *would "have to get a permit signed by the magistrate or justice of the peace or mayor of the town. They complained bitterly about that inconvenience. We have the power to do it by regulation, and it is a matter that will receive most serious consideration when the regulations are being set up.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Before the war there used to be twenty, thirty or perhaps forty stores in my district which sold dynamite, caps and fuses at any time to those who wanted them. At the present time there are only about two
places, the quarry at Marmora and the board of works in Peterborough. Stores do not carry dynamite because they must keep it away from the store building and that costs money.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: The minister has laid his finger upon the exact situation. The federal government has the power to restrict this thing, but from what he said I gathered that he was not inclined to take any steps in that direction. There may have been some complaints from farmers who wanted to blow up some stumps or something, but I would point out that in certain sections of this country there are men who are dangerous and who should be dealt with by the federal authorities. The damage that might be created by these men more than outweighs any inconvenience that might be caused to some farmers. I join with the hon. member for Peterborough West who states that this is most important. There are men of a type who are hardly safe to have in our communities and they should not be allowed to get explosives, particularly dynamite, with ease. Improper use might be made of it. There are sections of the country where the subversive element is certainly not growing any weaker. I think some hon. members have seen the development of certain activities and I plead with the minister to keep a close watch over this situation. If there is federal jurisdiction, I urge him to use it and not consider just the complaints of a farmer or two, even though they are bitter. With all due respect for what the minister says, I submit that this is flirting with something that might prove very damaging.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Flirting with dynamite.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: It is flirting with dynamite, as the hon. member says. I urge the minister to retain the restrictions and not allow this to become the free and easy matter that it was before the war.


James Allison Glen: I was discussing that very point this morning and, as the hon. member has said, I am aware of the dangers that might be incurred. I assure him that I will give the matter the consideration it deserves.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: While the minister is giving this matter consideration, I should like to raise something else for his consideration and the consideration of the hon. gentlemen who have just spoken. Do they suppose for one minute that there are not in the city of Toronto and in the government of Ontario men who are just as desirous of seeing public safety cared for as anyone in Ottawa?
Mr. . FRASER: Perhaps more so at the present time.
Explosives Act


John Horne Blackmore: Do they imagine that the city of Toronto is not as able to pass bylaws governing the sale of these dangerous explosives as is Ottawa? Do they imagine that the city of Toronto officials are not capable of doing this? There is a tendency, altogether too strong, to centralize power. That is not good. When the hon. member for Davenport read the account of this 'serious accident in Toronto it was well that he read also the statement that the city officials had taken action. Those officials do not need Ottawa to pass laws. They are just as much interested in the welfare of humanity as ever we can be. The fathers of confederation placed power in their hands and responsibilities on their shoulders for doing that very thing. I just wish to raise that for the consideration of the hon. member.
I consider the minister very wise to have been circumspect in connection with this matter and for having wondered whether or not it was necessary for Ottawa to do all the governing in Canada with respect to explosives. Let us not forget that the farther you get your government away from the people, the more you destroy democracy. The hon. member pointed out that matters were free and easy before the war. Did he hear of any serious accidents like that one in Toronto?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes, I have heard of them.


John Horne Blackmore: I am just wondering if we shall not hear of serious accidents after this legislation has been made as iron-clad as it is possible to make it. That accident was not caused by the fact that there was no iron-clad act in Ottawa; it was simply due to the human elements that enter into all relations. It has been my experience that where an accident of that sort takes place the local authorities are quite capable of adopting measures to deal with all such occurrences and to make provision against their recurrence.
Let us be careful about centralization. It is an easy matter to centralize power but it is very difficult to decentralize it and get it back into the hands of the people. All through the thousand years or more of our history we have been struggling to keep our power decentralized. Let us not in a period of hysteria brought on by a terrible war and rumours of communism and other dire threats forget the poise, balance and judgment which we inherited from our fathers who have gone before us.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I am not going to talk for a thousand years or anything of that kind; I simply want to point out that the provinces

have not the right to deal with this problem. Even if they had, anyone living on the border between two provinces could simply go into the other province. A man in Ontario could cross over into Quebec, purchase dynamite, and bring it back into Ontario. There is nothing to stop that. The dominion government have the right, and they are using that right, to regulate this matter. I am simply asking that there be some system of permits. If the dominion government is not going to do it, the provinces should. Perhaps the hon. member has tried to spank me, but I do not stay spanked very long.


John Horne Blackmore: If I were going to spank the hon. member I would spank him so that he would stay spanked. I was not criticizing particularly what the hon. member had to say; I was merely pointing out the danger of the tendency to centralization that is evident in the world to-day. There is not only centralization of power in Ottawa; it is going on to centralization in Geneva or Timbuktu where the people cannot possibly get at it.
This is an important point. I am not pronouncing whether the province has authority to deal with explosives or not, but obviously from what the hon. member for Davenport read, the city of Toronto considered that it had power to deal with the matter.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: That was fireworks.


John Horne Blackmore: They are a form of explosives.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: They have not been dealt with.


John Horne Blackmore: Then let them be dealt with. I am sure that they will be dealt with in Toronto and in other cities of Ontario and in other parts of Canada. But this parliament need not undertake to do everything for all the governments in Canada, for there are intelligent men in other government bodies.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: We acknowledge that.


John Bracken: I was not in the chamber when the minister made his statement on the bill. I understand that it comes from the other house and that, therefore, there will not be a disposition to take as much time on it here as we otherwise would. Did the minister explain to the house the work which was put in on this bill in the other place? Did it receive mature consideration there? If the minister has already covered that point, perhaps he would restate it.


James Allison Glen: The bill was introduced in the other chamber, with a short explanation on

Explosives Act
the first reading and a discussion on the second reading, and then almost a whole afternoon was spent in considering the different sections of the bill. The result of this study is the bill now before us.


John Bracken: Where was the bill prepared? Is it a government measure?


James Allison Glen: Yes; it was prepared by the Department of Justice.


Douglas King Hazen: How many inspectors are employed under the act at the present time, and what does it cost in the course of a year to administer the act? I have the estimates for 1947 but I cannot find any item covering inspectors.


James Allison Glen: It is under Mines and
Geology.	,
Mr. HAZEI^: Yes, I see now that there is an item of $29,500. How many inspectors and sub-inspectors are working under the act at the present time?


James Allison Glen: We have a chief inspector, two inspectors and one chemist in the permanent establishment; and the clerical permanent staff includes one grade IV clerk, one grade II clerk, one stenographer grade II and one typist grade II. The temporary establishment includes three inspectors and a clerical staff consisting of two grade III clerks, three grade II clerks, three grade II stenographers, four grade II typists and one grade I-A typist. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police also serves voluntarily in connection with this work extensively throughout the dominion.


Douglas King Hazen: I see by the details that there is one chief inspector, and two inspectors of explosives.


James Allison Glen: We have a chief inspector, two inspectors and one chemist in the permanent establishment.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 3-Explosives to which act applies.
Grote Stirling: May we take up on this section the question I raised as to whether it is quite clear that the crown company, Canadian Arsenals Limited, will by this measure be under the inspection, indeed the jurisdiction, of the Minister of Mines and Resources?


James Allison Glen: The bill when it comes into force will apply to all crown companies not under the control of the Department of National Defence, which will be subject to inspection under this measure.


Grote Stirling: So that the situation will be entirely altered in the future. In the past, before the war, the dominion arsenal was under the control of the Minister of National Defence, and inspection took place within it only by his authority. Canadian Arsenals Limited, which will be very much larger in scope than the dominion arsenal, will by this measure be under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Mines and Resources, so far as the inspection of the arsenal is concerned?


James Allison Glen: Section 3 says:
This act shall apply to the possession, storing, sale or offering for sale, making, manufacture or importation of explosives by or on behalf of His Majesty in right of Canada or any province except explosives under the direction or control of the Minister of National Defence.
The exception there is "explosives under the direction of the Minister of National Defence." I presume, therefore, that inspection of the arsenal would be under the direction of the Minister of National Defence if it is under his control.


Douglas King Hazen: This section applies to the possession, storing, sale or offering for sale, making, manufacture or importation of explosives. But there is another factor, and that is the disposal of explosives. Why should this measure not apply also to the disposal of explosives? There are at the present time, I believe, a good many surplus explosives in this country. Should not control over them be in the minister's hands just as much as control over the possession, storing, sale or offering for sale, making or manufacturing of explosives?
I do not want at the present time to go into details of the case I have in mind, but the disposal of explosives should be very carefully handled in order to prevent injury to civilians. Although I have not had an opportunity of giving this bill any particular study, it seems to me that the disposal of surplus explosives might very well be included in the measure. Is there any reason why the disposal of surplus explosives should not come under this bill? Why should not that be inserted in section 3?


James Allison Glen: I would take it that "possession, storing, sale or offering for sale" would cover the point the hon. gentleman raises, because that is the only way in which explosives can be disposed of except by destruction. If it were deteriorating and a danger to the community, there is power taken later in the bill to deal with such conditions. That, it seems to me, would cover the point raised by the hon. member-"sale or offering for sale".
Explosives Act


Douglas King Hazen: I am not referring to explosives which are sold or offered for sale; I refer to explosives which are being disposed of as surplus by the government. There are in this country to-day explosives which will be disposed of as surplus; there are explosives which have been disposed of as surplus, and in some instances, through negligence on somebody's'part, they have caused injury to Canadian citizens for which the government does not want to assume responsibility. As I say, I am not as familiar as the minister is with this bill, but it might be well if the "disposal" of these surplus munitions and explosives were included in this bill, in the interests of the citizens of this country.


James Allison Glen: Of course the hon. member will realize that under this bill there is power taken to make regulations which will cover anything dealing with the disposal of surplus such as the hon. member speaks of. What he is referring to is equipment and surplus munitions, and explosives which are unused and not likely to be used and therefore might be declared surplus. These go to the War Assets Corporation, which as a corporation would be subject to the provisions of this bill in the same way as anybody else would be. However, we might come to this later when we are dealing with the appropriate section.


Douglas King Hazen: I thought it would come under section 3, although I may be wrong; as I say, I do not profess to be familiar with this bill. The minister said that he would further consider section 2, paragraph (c). I wonder if it might not be advisable to give some consideration to the point I have raised concerning section 3, as to the disposal of surplus explosives. The question is this: should the word "disposal" be included in that section?


John Ritchie MacNicol: Would the minister be disposed, if to do so would not infringe upon provincial authority, to have someone in his department inquire into the matter which I brought up, namely as to how that merchant obtained possession for sale of high explosive rockets to children?


James Allison Glen: Power is taken under this bill to cause inquiry to be made into any accident of the nature spoken of.


Douglas King Hazen: Does the minister think this measure should not apply' to the disposal of surplus munitions and surplus explosives? I think I am entitled to an answer to that question.


James Allison Glen: The reason this section was put into the bill was in the light of the case of King versus LeBlanc, of which the hon.

member may have a more intimate knowledge than I, a case decided by Chief Justice Hazen in the Supreme Court of New Brunswick. The defendant was charged with negligence in the operation of explosives, and on appeal before the chief justice it was held that he was not within the purview of the provisions of the Explosives Act as it then stood. To correct that omission we have placed this section in the bill,' making all parties, even the crown and its employees, liable for any act of negligence under this measure. That is the whole reason why it was put in the bill. The sale, disposal and deterioration of * surpluses are covered in subsequent sections.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 4-Regulations.
William Ross Macdonald: Section carried.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Before this section 4 is carried I have a question to ask. I wish to compliment you, Mr. Chairman, on the able way you are putting the sections through; it shows great ability. I used to do the same thing myself when, in the old days, I was sitting where you are now. I did not allow anything to hang before the committee any longer than I could avoid. But now that I am in the opposition I have another duty to perform. As regards subsection 1, paragraph (d), "for holding inquiries into any accident caused by explosives," I would ask if the department would feel disposed to make an inquiry into the sale of rockets in Toronto, some ten days or two weeks ago, as the case may be, through which, a week ago last Sunday, a young man was killed on or near College and Clinton streets, Toronto, through the explosion of a rocket.


James Allison Glen: My officer informs me that the matter at the moment is in the hands of the municipal police, but he will take such steps *"as the hon. gentleman suggests, in conjunction with the municipal police, for the holding of an inquiry such as the hon. member suggests, to find out exactly what took place.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is quite satisfactory. The matter would, I think, come under paragraph (h), enabling regulations to be made "for the safety of the public."


Douglas King Hazen: May I ask the minister if he held any inquiry into an accidental explosion at Lomeville, New Brunswick, in January of this year?


James Allison Glen: No; no inquiry was made.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.	[DOT]
Sections 5 and 6 agreed to.
On section 7-Certificate to store.

Explosives Act
John Ritchie MacNicol: Under this section would the department or someone authorized by the department be enabled to inquire whether such a store as must have sold these high explosive rockets was a fit place to store them?


James Allison Glen: Under this section a certificate will only be issued to any person permitting the storing for sale of explosives on such premises and in such quantity as the minister may determine.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That would apply to a retail store, would it not?


James Allison Glen: These would be what we call registered premises, and the certificate would have to be issued by the minister, who would have to be satisfied as to the suitability of the premises and also as to the quantity which might be allowed to.be stored in that store.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 8 to 18 inclusive agreed to.
On section 19-Minister may direct inquiry.
John Ritchie MacNicol: In the event of an accident such as that which caused the recent lamentable death of a young man in Toronto, this section could be put into operation?


James Allison Glen: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 20 to 28 inclusive agreed to.
On section 29-Repeal.
Douglas King Hazen: Will the minister tell me the sections of the bill that have to do with the disposal of explosives? He said that as we went through the bill we would come to those sections.


James Allison Glen: The hon. member will find that the regulations under section 4 are extensive. I cannot imagine anything that has not been included in them. I have gone over them carefully with the officers, and they assure me that the regulations provide all the power necessary for governing the sale of explosives, the taking of them, the procedure to be followed, the construction and management of premises, the safety of the public, and so forth. The sale and disposal of explosives would be covered by the regulations. The bill provides for forfeiture, where officers have the power of inspection and can enter premises. Under section 18 the officers can go into premises and take samples of explosives, open and examine them and may require the owners to give evidence with respect to
such samples, and later, on conviction, the explosives can be forfeited by the crown and destroyed or sold in the discretion of the crown. The hon. gentleman is worried about the word "disposal" and the word "sale".


Douglas King Hazen: Not so much "sale" as "disposal".


James Allison Glen: I think the word "sale1' will cover exactly what he has in mind. Sale will include disposal, and the word "disposal" will not add to the strength of it.


Douglas King Hazen: If a department of government decides to dispose of surplus explosives, I do not think that by any stretch of the imagination that can be called a sale. It should come under this measure.


James Allison Glen: By giving it away or destroying it?


Douglas King Hazen: Not by giving it away but by destroying it-disposing of it in the sense of destroying it so that it will not cause injury to anyone.


James Allison Glen: Under section 27, where a conviction is obtained, the explosives are forfeit to the crown and may be destroyed or otherwise disposed of, as may be thought fit. I think it covers handling from first to last; the officers assure me that the matter has been fully considered and they are quite satisfied.


Douglas King Hazen: Section 27 does not cover the case I have in mind. I do not want to labour the matter but I submit that it is not covered in the bill.


Mr. IRVINE:: What would happen to surplus bombs in the hands of War Assets Corporation?


James Allison Glen: They are subject to the jurisdiction of this measure if there is any danger to the public in storage or handling.


Mr. MacINNIS:: This matter was discussed briefly in the house either on a question or in some other way during the last session, or perhaps during this session. Certain explosives were disposed of by the Royal Canadian Air Force by being dumped into the ocean, but they were not dumped far enough out, so that when the tide went out some youngsters went out and picked up some of the explosives. Some of the children were injured.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 1 agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
National Parks
[Stage Direction]
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
On section 2-Definitions.
James Allison Glen: The hon. member for Lake Centre asked: Is it the opinion of the law officers of the crown that section 2 (c) and section 4 would cover a case such as that referred to by the hon. member for Davenport? During the recess this point was discussed with the officers of the justice department, as well as the deputy minister, who expressed the opinion that the bill as drafted would include and cover the kind of explosive used in the instance referred to by the hon. member for Davenport. The technical officers of the department were also consulted, and they are satisfied that this provision fully covers the case mentioned by the hon. gentleman. The hon. member for Lake Centre stated that if the Department of Justice approved it,-he was satisfied.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed. NATIONAL PARKS

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration in committee of bill No. 63, respecting the boundaries of certain national parks-Mr. Glen- vlr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
William Ross Macdonald: When this bill was before the committee of the whole previously all the sections were carried, and the committee was considering the title.
On the title.


James Allison Glen: The hon. member for Dauphin, the hon. member for Calgary West and I think the hon. member for Mackenzie asked questions with regard to the purchase of additional land for the Banff national park. The small parcels of land being added comprise (a) approximately 210 acres at the eastern gateway. This was transferred to the dominion by the province by P.C. 714-333 dated September 12, 1933. The original order in council was registered in the south Alberta land titles office at Calgary. Duplicate certificates of title Nos. 47X181 and 47X182 were received covering the parcels of land in question. These were dated October 31, 1933. I might say that one duplicate certificate of title covered those parts of the north half of section 13 and the northeast quarter of section 14, township 25, range 11, west of the 5th meridian,

.lying southeast of the then park boundary. The other covered the portion of the Banff-Calgary road lying within the above area.
(b) The second area in question comprises one-sixth of a square mile in the Spray river valley. A plan of this area and an explanation of the necessity for a change in the boundary at this point was prepared by Mr. Cautley, the department's representative, who in cooperation with the provincial representative decided upon the final park boundaries as revised in 1930. The province has formally approved of the plan of survey which included the area in the park. This means that the land was transferred to the dominion by the province at no cost.
The other question asked by the hon. member for Dauphin dealt with the portions of land added to the Riding Mountain national park in Manitoba. There were four different parcels of land added to the park immediately to the south of the present town-site of Wasagaming. Two of these areas were expropriated, namely, the northeast quarter of section 24, township 19, range 19, west of the principal meridian, the owner of which was Walter E. Dean. The other was the northwest quarter of section 19, township 19, range 18, west of the principal meridian, the owner of which was R. J. Pollen. The purchase price of the northeast quarter of section 24 was 82,400 plus 8232.77 interest on this amount, making a total cost of 82,632.77 for that quarter section. For the northwest quarter of section 19 the purchase price was fixed at 82,200.
The following areas were transferred to the dominion by the province: the south half and south half of the north half of section 29, township 19, range 18, west of the principal meridian, comprising 480 acres, and the southeast quarter of section 30, township 19, range 18, west of the principal meridian. These were transferred by the province to the dominion without cost. These make up the total of the 960 acres which have been added to the park; and, in addition, the province transferred the official road allowances lying between the above-mentioned sections.
I think that completes the answers to the questions asked by hon. members.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I understand that there was an interest charge of $232.77 in the case of one of the purchases. Would the minister tell us how this interest came to accumulate?


James Allison Glen: The land was expropriated; the price was fixed by the-court and interest of $232.77 was allowed. That is the information I have. That makes up the 960 acres,

Narcotic Drug Act
and there are three acres more, which probably would be the road allowances which were given over by the provinces.
Then the hon. member for Peterborough West asked a question with regard to Beau-soleil island. The Navy League of Canada, dominion council, have a licence of occupation of 3-25 acres. The period runs for twenty-one years from April 1, 1942. They pay SI a year, and the licence is renewable at the end of that period.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I am not clear about this $232, which I understand is for interest. Just how did that accumulate? It is interest on what, for what period of time?


James Allison Glen: I have not complete information. All I have is that the expropriation award fixed the purchase price at $2,400 plus interest of $232.77 on that amount, making the total cost of that northwest quarter $2,632.77. That was in 1934, when the award was made.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: What rvas the date of the expropriation of the land.


James Allison Glen: For the northeast quarter of section 24 it was May 8, 1934, and for the northwest quarter of section 19 it was March 29.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: And the date of payment was also 1934?


James Allison Glen: Yes, I presume it was.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I note that there is $232 in interest. How did it accumulate?


James Allison Glen: I have no information, other than that we might have been in possession under expropriation proceedings, and that may be interest on the purchase money to the date when it was paid.


George Robert Webb: I note that the explanatory note to schedule E reads:
Mallorytown landing park One of St. Lawrence islands parks
. . . The provincial government secured and transferred to the dominion a small area adjoining the park in compensation for the area taken up by the right of way for the highway.
I take it that this roadway went through part of the old park, and that in lieu of that the provincial government bought land by way of compensation. I should like to have that confirmed, and also the date of the transaction.


James Allison Glen: It was made in 1938. Mallorytown landing park was transferred to the dominion by the Mallory estate, with the proviso that the area was to be used for
national park purposes only. It comprises a small area facing on the St. Lawrence river directly south of the town of Mallorytown. The new four-lane highway passed through there and took up a considerable portion of the area. To compensate for this the provincial government acquired an additional area on the river front and transferred it to the dominion government as an addition to this park. It is this small area secured from the province that we now wish added to the park.


George Robert Webb: It did not cost the federal government anything?


James Allison Glen: No.


[Stage Direction]
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed. OPIUM AND NARCOTIC DRUG ACT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Health and Welfare) moved the second reading of bill No. 29, to amend the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, 1929.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 1-" Department."
Grote Stirling: Would the minister be
good enough to make a general statement respecting this bill?


Brooke Claxton: Mr. Chairman, this bill comes from the senate. When it was in the other place it was referred to the standing committee on health and welfare, -where it received consideration.
Sections 1, 2 and 7 of the bill make a simple change in the name of the department, to conform to the creation of the Department of Health and Welfare, which took place as of October 13, 1944.
Section 3 replaces the word "distributes" by the word "administers", and I believe the explanatory note covers the point sufficiently.
Sections 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 carry into the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act of 1929 provisions which were made effective by P.C. 4769 of June 10, 1943, P.C. 6227 of August 8, 1944, and P.C. 7096 of November 27, 1945. The effect of these is to make the control of narcotics more effective in Canada and also to carry into our peace-time legislation provisions found necessary and desirable during the war. We explain these by saying that during the war the supply situation in connection with
Narcotic Drug Act

narcotics presented many difficulties and, in order to conserve our supplies, which were short, and to secure more effective control, it became desirable to make changes in the laws by orders in council under the War Measures Act.
The changes which were made were to make the supply of drugs as defined in the act subject to prescription, and the other controls exercised under section 5 of the act effective without the same exceptions there had been been under section 8. Under section 8 of the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, 1929, there was an exception under which it was possible for retail druggists to distribute small quantities of drugs, including morphine and opium, without prescription. During the war that exception was eliminated. The only relaxation to that exception since the war is that the only quantities of drugs which can be distributed without prescription are drugs containing small quantities of codeine.
That exception has been earned into effect in the bill. Consequently the bill substantially carries into effect the war-time provisions so as to effect a more stringent regulation in the supply of drugs such as morphine and opium. The changes are largely technical. They were made after consultation with the Dominion Council of Health and the advisory committee of the Canadian Medical association, both of which recommended them to the department. The only suggestion that we went too far came from one provincial medical association. We answered them, and since then we have received no word that anyone thought we were not doing 'the right thing.


Mr. HACKETT:: I must confess that I have not had an opportunity of examining the bill very carefully, but there is one type of offence which is becoming too numerous, cases in which possession alone-without any proof of criminal intent-constitutes the offence. Are there any such in this bill?


Brooke Claxton: This bill does not make any change whatever in the situation regarding possible crimes, except for the amendment proposed to section 4 where the word "distributes" is to be replaced by the word "administers" in the case of administration or distribution of drugs to minors.


Thomas Reid: Has any consideration been given to limiting the quantity of drugs which may be held by a druggist? During the past three, four and five years it seems to have been quite an easy thing for those who wanted drugs to break into a drug store or the office of a chemist and obtain them. Where do these druggists get the drugs? One could not avoid noting the many burglaries 
that have taken place during the past few years since opium and other drugs have been harder to obtain. It seems to have been easy for many of these people to break in the back door of some chemist's store and get away with a quantity of these drugs.


Brooke Claxton: The wholesalers who may have drugs are licensed under the act, and at the present time there are 123 wholesalers licensed in Canada. A careful audit is made of the drugs they hold and they take precautions themselves in order to preserve their licensed position. The type of offence described by the hon. member for New Westminster decreased in number in 1945 as compared with 1944. I can assure the hon. member and the committee that the utmost care is taken to see that drugs are not made available in greater quantities than are likely to be required by the wholesalers. Another factor in ensuring close control is the very short supply position with regard to these drugs.


Thomas Reid: Are there any restrictions as to the quantity of drugs that a druggist can obtain? We know that a strict watch is kept on what he does with them, but I should like to know if there is any restriction on the quantity that he can obtain from the wholesaler.


Brooke Claxton: The quantity which the
wholesaler is allowed to have in his possession which is based upon the past experience as to the quantity he needs to meet his requirements. The department is exercising strict control to prevent any large accumulation of drugs.


Mr. BLAIR:: How much marihuana is
produced in Canada and what quantity can be carried by a druggist?


Brooke Claxton: None is manufactured
and none can be carried by a druggist. Some, but not very much, is used. The quantity of all drugs used by addicts, if that is what the hon. member has in mind, has gone down considerably, and the number of addicts has also gone down considerably. We do not produce any drugs in Canada, except possibly a small quantity synthetically.


William Gourlay Blair: Section 6 of the bill refers to section 15 of the act.


Brooke Claxton: Section 6 of the bill does not refer to heroin.


William Gourlay Blair: It is marihuana, not heroin. The explanatory note reads:
Involves the addition of paragraph (g) of section 4, relative to the cultivation or production of the opium popper or cannabis (marihuana)

Narcotic Drug Act
to the subsections in relation to which the burden of proof of possession of a licence is placed upon the accused.


Brooke Claxton: I would prefer to deal with that when we come to section 6.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 2 and 3 agreed to.
On section 4-Preparations excepted.
William Gourlay Blair: What is the object in making the restriction apply to one-eighth of a grain of codeine? That does not amount to very much; it does not do very much good, nor does it do very much harm.


Brooke Claxton: The effect of this is that a druggist or physician can supply a drug as defined in the act only under a prescription, except that-and this is the only exception:
4. (a) any retail druggist may have in possession or may sell or distribute preparations containing one-eighth grain or less of codeine per tablet or other solid form-
And so on. This permits a druggist to sell tablets containing one-eighth of a grain or less of codeine without a prescription.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to. '
Section 5 agreed to.
On section 6-Onus of proof on charge of importing, exporting, manufacturing, selling, etc., without licence.
John Thomas Hackett: This is one of the offences of the type to which I made reference when I asked the minister if the ordinary rules of criminal procedure were being modified by the bill. I notice that section 6 introduces a change by imposing on the accused the obligation of proving that he has a licence. Is there some good reason for departing from the ordinary rules that obtain in criminal courts? There are some cases, as I have indicated to the minister, the number of which is increasing too rapidly, in which mere possession is taken as proof of guilt. In those cases the accused must disinculpate himself or be found guilty. The ordinary rule is reversed. Is there any reason for its reversal in this case?


Brooke Claxton: In my explanation I should have mentioned this as being a change in the law relative to the proof of offences. We can see no reason why anyone should have opium poppy, cannabis sativa or marihuana in his possession legally unless he can show that he has a licence for it. We believe that the mere possession of these articles indicates that the person has them illegally unless he can show that he has them legally. This undoubtedly does, as the hon. member for
Stanstead suggests, shift the burden of proof, but it is believed that in matters relating to the drug traffic these drugs are in the same position as morphine and opium, which have already bejm dealt with in this way, and for the best protection of the public and for the suppression of the traffic in these drugs, we believe the law should be changed by including these two drugs with the others.


William Gourlay Blair: Will the minister read paragraph (g) of section 4 of the act?


Brooke Claxton: Section 4, paragraph (g) reads:
Every person who
(g) cultivates, gathers or produces any opium poppy (papaver somniferum) or cannabis sativa, except under the authority of a licence from the minister first had and obtained shall be guilty of an offence-
-and shall be liable to the punishment provided for by this section.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I have said so often in times gone by that I believe the rules of proof should not be altered, but in connection with narcotics I am absolutely in favour of what the minister suggests, and that is the only exception I make. I say that after a long experience and knowing what this sort of thing does. So far as I am concerned I shall support the minister and the government in every way I can, even throwing aside all our rules, to try to kill this traffic. I do not know how many members of this house know people who are addicted to the use of drugs. We hear of this institution and that institution which have made cures. Frankly I do not know of one who ever became an addict and has been cured. I make this exception to my broad rule, because I consider that this is in defence of weak people. You can study addiction to drugs all you like. But what happens is just this, and let us not blame doctors and hospitals, for I have taken it myself four times a day during a period of several months. It is escapism. That is the only reason why anyone takes it. Once you have got into the picture you are through. We know that when it was easier to get cocaine you put a little on your fingernail and snuffed it through your nose. There are many kinds of drugs but they are all taken for the same reason, and I will go with this government or any other government and break all the rules on account of the wrecks that I have personally seen-and, Mr. Chairman, they do not come back. So that I am heartily with the minister, breaking all my broad rules in the administration of justice for this one thing and this one thing only. People who are addicted to narcotics are entitled to our pity;, there is no other word to use for
Narcotic Drug Act

them. To avoid their becoming addicts I go all the way with the minister in this or any other measure he cares to introduce into the house for this purpose.


William Gourlay Blair: Heroin is the most dangerous of all the drugs and I notice that the minister is still permitting its use.


Brooke Claxton: We have retained it
because of the advice of leading maternity hospitals and obstetricians as to its use in connection with childbirth. That is the only reason why it has been kept in use in Canada. The supply of these drugs to Canada has had to come from outside, and it might be necessary to maintain some drugs which are less desirable than others in order to ensure that the volume necessary for legitimate use is maintained.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 7-Judge to grant writ of assistance.
Arthur Leroy Smith: What does this mean? What is a writ of assistance?


Brooke Claxton: The only change made by this clause is in section 22 of the act to substitute for the words "Pensions and National Health" the words "National Health and Welfare." It simply changes the names of the departments in' accordance with the creation of the new department.


Arthur Leroy Smith: What does it mean by that? You have your narcotics squad. Such an officer has a general authority which permits him to do something, and you are merely making a change in the nomenclature of the department; is that all?


Brooke Claxton: That is so.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 8 agreed to.
William Ross Macdonald: Section 9, "schedule amended", agreed to.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Now, "gently, brother; gently, pray."


William Ross Macdonald: I hope that no hon. member thinks the Chairman is trying to rush the bill through.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, no.


William Ross Macdonald: As I read the section I asked if it was carried. If there are any questions, then I expect hon. members to speak. I assure all hon. gentlemen that I shall not endeavour to rush this bill or any other bill through this committee.


Arthur Leroy Smith: May I assure you, Mr. Chairman, that I did not think you were trying to rush the bill through, but may I also assure you that you were going a lot faster than I was able to keep up with you. That is my only difficulty.


William Ross Macdonald: Section 9-Schedule
amended.


John Thomas Hackett: Will the minister say what paragraph 7 of the schedule is?


Brooke Claxton: If desired, I will read it all!


John Thomas Hackett: Will the minister read paragraph 7 of the schedule?


Brooke Claxton: It would not improve the information of the committee or increase my reputation for being almost a doctor practising without a licence. The only change, I understand, which is made in the schedule is that paragraph 9 of the schedule, as it was, which reads-
Any plant of any description whatsoever, whether dried or otherwise, which contains morphine, or any part of any such plant, excepting the seed of the poppy plant.
-has been omitted from the schedule to the act, also, from part II of the schedule, apomor-phine, codeine, and its salts; and dihydro-codeinone and paracodeine have been included in the schedule; and the schedule is no longer divided into parts I and II.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Would the minister mind looking at the tenth line from the bottom of the page, and then will he read it to the committee and explain what it means?


John Thomas Hackett: Why does he not begin at paragraph 7? My difficulty begins a little earlier; the hon. member for Calgary West is more erudite than I.


Brooke Claxton: The word to which the hon. member for Calgary West refers is ace-tyldihydrocodeinone. Acedicone is the shorter name for it. The next one, which goes on for almost a line, is acetyldemethylodihydrothe-baine, -which I understand is a derivative of the first; it has the same short name.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Brooke Claxton: The short name for both is acedicone. It might be a great help to all of us if our professional people would translate these words, but apparently they are accustomed to their jargon, and I suppose it is a good thing.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I thought it was a law of England prohibiting marriage between first cousins.

Narcotic Drug Act


John Bracken: I do not think we should pass any sections the words of which the minister cannot pronounce.


Brooke Claxton: Oh, he has done his best.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On the title.
Donald Methuen Fleming: I wonder if there is not
an oversight in the bill. Under section 3 we have dealt with an amendment of section 4 of the act, but actually the amendment which the committee has approved is an amendment of section 4, subsection 1, paragraph (e) of the act of 1929. Now it happens that section 4, paragraph (f) also contains this same word "distributes"; the language is almost the same as that of paragraph (e). I wonder if it was by intent that section 4, paragraph (f) is not to be amended in like manner as section 4, paragraph (e). Section 4, paragraph (e) reads:
Every person who
(e)	unlawfully sells, gives away or distributes any drug to any minor . . .
Paragraph (f) reads:
(f)	manufactures, sells, gives away or distributes any drug . . .
And so on. We have the word "distributes" in (f) as well as in (e). We have amended it in (e) only to substitute the word "administers" for "distributes". Would the minister indicate why we are not contemplating a similar amendment of section 4, subsection 1, paragraph (f).


Brooke Claxton: The two clauses are designedly different. In the present act, section 4, subsection 1, paragraph (e) reads:
Every person who
(e) unlawfully sells, gives away or distributes any drug to any minor;
In the case of Rex versus Marino and Yipp, 56 Canadian Criminal Cases, page 139, the supreme court, speaking through Chief Justice Anglin, held that in order to constitute a "distribution" within the meaning of paragraph (f) it was necessary for more than one act to take place. There could not be a distribution within the meaning of the act unless there had been more than one delivery of a drug to the person who received it. When we considered the act in the light of war-time experience and in the light of that decision we considered it desirable to change the provision with regard to selling, giving away or distributing any drug to any minor so to make the offence one of "administering" drugs to any minor, because it was almost inconceivable that there should be a repeated delivery of drugs to a minor. We thought
the one administration of a drug to a minor was sufficient to constitute an offence, and a very serious offence too. This, therefore, led us to propose in this bill the substitution of the word "administers" for the word "distributes" in paragraph (e), but to leave the provision in paragraph (f) as it was.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I follow the minister's explanation as to the change in section 4, subsection 1 (e); I think it is quite in line with the decision he refers to in Rex versus Marino and Yipp. I understand that decision was based on section 4, subsection 1 (e) not on section 4 subsection 1 (f). I am not quite clear yet, if I may say so, as to the reason why we are not making a corresponding change in section 4, subsection 1 (f). The language is the same in the two clauses. In paragraph (e) it is "sells, gives away or distributes"; in paragraph (f) it is "manufactures, sells, gives away or distributes" any drug.


John Thomas Hackett: To a minor.


Brooke Claxton: The offence which was involved in the case of Rex versus Marino and Yipp was an offence charged under paragraph (f) of subsection 1 of section 4, and the language of (f) is quite suitable for an offence charged in connection with the distribution of drugs to someone other than a minor. Section 4, subsection 1 (f) reads:
Every person who manufactures, sells, gives away, delivers or distributes or makes any offer in respect of any drug or any substance . . .
And so on. That seems to be quite suitable language with respect to an offence in connection with delivery and so on to an adult, but in order to strengthen the law governing delivery of any drug to a minor we propose to substitute the word "administers" for the word "distributes" in (e).


Donald Methuen Fleming: Does not the minister consider it proper to insert the word "administers" in section 4, 1 (f) ? Then we should have it both ways, covering the manufacture, sale, giving away, administration or distribution, and we should strengthen the section greatly. Would it not be wise to insert the word "administers" after the words "gives away"?


Brooke Claxton: The officer of the department charged with the administration of the act says that there has never been a case in which the necessity for such a change has arisen, and we, I understand, have had cases in which we found it difficult, if not impossible,-to prove an offence under section 4, (1) (e) with regard to a minor because of lack of the language I suggest should be adopted. We have not had any such case under 4, (1) (ff).

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons


William Gourlay Blair: When the minister refers to drugs he means narcotics?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. The Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, 1929, as amended in 1932, defines "drugs" as follows, in Section 2 (d):
"Drug" means and includes any substance, mentioned in the schedule to this act whether or not the same be produced in whole or in part by a synthetic process, and whether it be alone or in conjunction with any other substance mentioned in the schedule to this act, or which may be added to such schedule under the authority of this act.
Then we have the schedule which is revised under this bill and which is tied in to the act, and it defines drugs as narcotics, opium, coca leaf, and so on.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Minister of National Defence for Air) moved the second reading of bill No. 57, to amend the Royal Canadian Air Force Act.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 1-Short title.
Grote Stirling: Will the minister give a general statement?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: The purpose of the bill is to make provision under the Royal Canadian Air Force Act for the continuation of the Royal Canadian Air Force cadet squadrons which were first formed during the war in 1940 by order in council under the War Measures Act. It now becomes necessary, if they are to be continued, to make provision for them under the act.
In this connection the committee will be interested to know that in the short space of six years during which they have been operating the air cadets have built up an excellent reputation for themselves. The air cadet squadrons are operated under the control and jurisdiction of the air cadet league, and a great deal of credit is owing to the members of the air cadet league, the provincial committees, and the members in the various municipalities throughout Canada who have sponsored the air cadet squadrons. They have raised funds provincially and locally to provide for these squadrons, and the success of the air cadet movement is due largely to the tremendous amount of work done by members of the air cadet league in sponsoring and supporting the various air cadet squadrons.
During the war we had 400 squadrons in operation in Canada. At present there are 289 squadrons active with an enrolment of something over 23,000 air cadets. It is now proposed to provide for them so that we shall continue to have the air cadets as part of the cadet system of the country, very much as the army cadets have been provided for heretofore under the terms of the Militia Act.


Grote Stirling: Do I understand from the minister that the air cadet corps operates directly under the Royal Canadian Air Force and that, while the air cadet league is a useful help and auxiliary to it, it is not necessary for the league to exist in order that the cause should succeed?


Colin William George Gibson: No; it is almost the opposite. The air cadet league is responsible for these cadet squadrons, but the bill before the committee permits the Royal Canadian Air Force to make provision for training and a certain amount of financial assistance is required to operate these squadrons. The air cadet league itself also raises money from the public to provide for some of the expenses of maintaining these squadrons. No squadrons can become air cadet squadrons unless they have been approved by the Minister of National Defence for Air. Also a syllabus of training is drawn up by the Department of National Defence for Air. There is the closest liaison between the air department and the air cadet league, and, when any matters arise that need adjustment they are settled by consultation between the department and the league.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Mr. Chairman, as one who has had something to do with the air cadet movement in Canada I should like to say that I am heartily in support of this bill which carries into the peace a movement which was efficient, which gave young men good training and which imbued them with the ideals of the service. In my opinion there are many who should be thanked for their splendid services in building up this great corps. There are the directors of the air cadet league and the provincial committees, with particular reference to the provinces of Ontario and British Columbia, and I am sure the government will be glad to know that the government of Ontario have made provision for the continuation of this splendid service through the appointment of Air Commodore O'Brien, an ex-R.C.A.F. auxiliary officer, who gave service overseas in this war and who now continues to serve the air force through his connection with the Ontario government. In addition, there are many schools, many schoolteachers, many air cadet officers and the sponsors, whom
fMr. Claxton.]

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons
the minister has already mentioned in connection with the local committees. Then there are so many others of the general public who gave generously of their finances, their time and their personal efforts to this corps. I would not like to overlook at this time the many men in the permanent establishment of the R.C.A.F., and those who served with it in war time, who have been unsparing in their time and trouble. I have in mind one particular case; that is, the men in the training branch of the Royal Canadian Air Force, who have done a splendid job in preparing a completely new syllabus of instruction for the air cadets.
Last year at this time I had the honour of inspecting three air cadet squadrons in the city of Toronto. That took place during the election, from which I was glad to take a little time, and I was indeed impressed with the efficiency and discipline of these young men. At this time I should like to say I feel that the grants of money which will be given by the country to these air cadet squadrons will be repaid tenfold in citizenship in the years to come. I hope there will never be any argument or quibbling in this house over, these grants, particularly at a time like this when we all see the danger of juvenile delinquency which was exemplified in an unfortunate case only the other day, when four young men were condemned to prison for the shooting of a man in the city of Toronto. I feel that any money we can put into such things as the air cadet movement will be for the good of the country and to our own advantage in time to come.


Mr. KNIGHT:: If I understood the minister aright, there is to be a diminution in the number of squadrons from 400 to something like 289. Would the minister give us the reason for this reduction? My experience in an institution with which I had something to do was that when the chance of becoming airmen disappeared, a good deal of enthusiasm for the air cadet corps also disappeared. When the war was practically won and the air force gave notice that no more of these boys would be accepted into the regular force, we noticed a tremendous lessening of enthusiasm. I was wondering to what extent that lack of enthusiasm exists in the squadrons remaining, and to what extent air cadet training may be in a sense compulsory in certain of the schools or institutions which still carry it on.


Colin William George Gibson: During the war it was considered advisable to start air cadet squadrons in many centres throughout Canada. Experience has shown, however, that while many squadrons have done well, others have not flourished, and to keep up
the standard that the air force wishes to maintain throughout the country it is considered better to have fewer and better squadrons rather than to try to have a large number of squadrons, many of which would be inefficient. At the same time, as hon. members know, the air force has been cut down from a peak of over 200,000 to something over 16,000. Too many air cadets would mean that only a very 'small percentage could be absorbed into the permanent and auxiliary air force. We look forward to having many boys who have trained in the air cadet squadrons come into the permanent and auxiliary forces and I am glad to say that, of the. new recruits who have enlisted recently, I am informed that approximately one-third received their early training in the air cadet squadrons. So that we prefer to have a smaller number of squadrons, and have them all good. As hon. members will see in the bill, the age limit is from fifteen to eighteen, which provides for boys taking a fairly advanced course which has been laid out for them. When they have finished that course they will then be in line to go into either the regular air force or one of the auxiliary squadrons.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Does the service contemplate assisting the air cadets with actual air instruction at summer camps, or anything of that kind?


Colin William George Gibson: I do not want to make any definite commitment on that yet, because the matter is still receiving consideration by the air force and the air cadet league. It is hoped, however, that a certain number of the top-notch cadets, as a sort of prize, will be permitted to obtain some instruction in actual flying. But while cadets at summer camps are given familiarization flights-that is, they are taken up in the air-that does not mean they are all taught to handle a plane. It is hoped, however, that a few of them will be able to secure that instruction.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Do the minister's remarks
include gliding instruction as well?
Mr, GIBSON (Hamilton West): It is a little too early to say what steps will be taken in regard to gliding. I know that subject has been receiving careful consideration by the air cadet league, and quite a long report has been put in by the subcommittee which has been looking into the matter.


Mr. McIVOR:: I believe the minister is to be commended for putting these air cadets on a solid footing. I well remember that after the last war anything pertaining to military

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons
training was tabooed by schoolboards, students in universities and so on, as teaching war. I do not know how a group of boys could be better trained than in an air cadet squadron. We have one at the head of the lakes, and we are extremely proud of it. If you keep a boy busy with good things the police will not even know that he exists. Putting this force on a permanent basis, is, I think, a good thing; and while they are not liable to service in an emergency that does not mean they are barred. As I look at it, that just means they are not compelled to serve. I heartily commend the minister for having taken this step.


Mr. McKAY:: Would the minister care to indicate whether any preference is given at the present time to air cadets who would like to enlist in the Royal Canadian Air Force? According to a recent newspaper item, I believe there is some little difficulty in getting men for groundcrews. I do not know how accurate that statement is, but the minister might indicate whether or not the boys who graduate from the courses in our high schools along air cadet lines receive preference over other boys who had no such training.


Colin William George Gibson: I can say that the training they received has made them more valuable than those who have not had the training. As I said, approximately a third of those who have already enlisted are boys who have had senior air cadet training in air cadet squadrons.


Mr. STEPHENSON:: In the smaller towns of around 6,000 population, such as the one from which I come, air cadet corps were sponsored during the war. Also in those towns are found sea cadet and army cadet corps. They were operating at sixes, there not being enough to make one good corps in any one of them.
To-day the situation is the same. We have the air cadet corps and the army cadet corps, and it is now being decided whether the air cadet corps will carry on. Does the minister offer any solution of that problem, or will they be formed only in the larger centres?


Colin William George Gibson: The plan of the air cadets league is to allocate squadrons, having a certain quota for each province. I am glad that the question in connection with the multiplicity of squadrons has been mentioned. That is a condition which grew up out of the war. We have a joint interdepartmental committee on cadets, including army, navy and air. I am anxious to have that committee work out many details which will arise, such as the pay which should be

given to the various units, the regulations concerning uniforms, instructors and the like, so that the support which the government provides for the various cadet corps will be as uniform as possible throughout the three services. When that committee meets questions such as those respecting three squadrons in one small community could foe ironed out, with a view to having only one squadron instead of three allocated to that community.


Eric Bowness McKay: Does the minister not believe some inducement should be held out to the boys who are taking air cadet training? That is one of the reasons I asked whether they received preference over other boys who might wish to join the regular Royal Canadian Air Force. I believe this is an important point.
I was air cadet liaison officer for some time in the air force. The boys asked time and again whether or not they would get preference, but I could not hold out any hope. If some inducement were given them they would go after the training much more wholeheartedly.


Colin William George Gibson: Toward the end of the war the air force stopped recruiting, and it was most discouraging for air cadets who had joined the cadet squadrons, hoping thereby to get into the air force, to find that all entry into that force was closed off because of a cessation of recruiting.
That condition, of course, does not exist to-day. Any air cadet who is fit and efficient -certainly at the present time, while recruiting is going on-can count upon his being accepted. I am sure he would be accepted, so long as he is physically and mentally fit for enlistment.


Mr. LENNARD:: I assure the minister I am in favour of his bill, but there is one point I should like to draw to his attention. I feel that air cadet training officers are being penalized. I know of one air cadet training officer who during 1945 attended a two weeks' course in the month of March, and then in the summer attended twelve days at camp with the boys. On both occasions he received pay and allowances but, as hon. members know, those payments do not compensate one for out-of-pocket expenses. Any cadet training officer has his hand continually in his pocket for this, that and the other thing. However, this officer, after having attended the course and camp, and having received pay and allowances, found, when he - went to pay his income tax, that the pay and allow- ' ances received placed him in a higher category', with the result that he had to pay a penalty of $50. This was all the thanks he

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons
got for having performed that very fine work in the cadet corps. Surely this is a matter which should be considered carefully.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: The work accomplished for the youth of our country by the army, naval and air cadet corps is vital. In one of the towns of my constituency we have a naval cadet corps. The boys in that corps are definitely being kept off the streets. The reduction in our juvenile delinquency is marked, owing to the activity of the navy league in that community. But they are trying to carry on in an old Y.M.C.A. building.
In the past, governments have been prone to neglect the erection of armouries for army personnel in communities. In our community the volunteers meet once a week, and the officers meet three times in their mess, possibly enjos'ing a drink. But the building in which they meet looks like a gaol. It is an eyesore, and quite unfit for the purpose to which it is being put. It contains no swimming pool, no gymnasium, or anything of the kind.
I suggest that the Minister of National Defence for Air, in conjunction with the minister for the army and naval services, consider seriously aiding communities in the erection of armouries, or buildings adequate to house these military units. There should be gymnasiums and swimming pools where both boys and girls in the community could assemble on different nights. Let them develop their bodies and they will develop their minds. Never has a greater development of youth been more necessary in Canada, after the trials and tribulations of the war, after watching the suffering of the older people and watching the struggles through which they have gone.
I suggest that the minister and his colleague should get into communication with the various communities. I can assure him that the town in my community would be willing to contribute any reasonable amount, in conjunction with the government, for the erection of such a building, where youth could assemble and keep off the streets.
The improvement brought about by the activities of the navy league in our community is striking. I saw the boys who had been carrying out their training. Last week, when a presentation of the bell from the corvette Collingwood was made, I saw the boys who have been carrying out this training. Their discipline was perfect, every movement the movement of veterans. But those chaps had learned those drills in a room only twenty feet by thirty-five feet.
There is no accommodation in the town for the young girls. If the minister were to train a cadet corps in our community, I am wondering where they would assemble. They are barred from the collegiate and the schools. The playgrounds are quite inadequate and not fit for the children to play on.
It behooves the government to go into the matter carefully with all communities across the country so as to arrive at something which will benefit our boys and girls, and give them what they need.


Eric Bowness McKay: I do not know to what minister I should direct the suggestion I have in mind in'connection with Boy Scout work and its association with the air cadets. As I pointed out a moment ago, we find that Boy Scouts make the most apt air cadets of all. They have had good training in citizenship and physical culture, and I think some cognizance should be taken by the government of the activities of this organization. I understand that at the present time it receives an appropriation of $5,000 for the whole dominion.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Is my hon. friend referring to the National Physical Fitness Act?


Eric Bowness McKay: That is right.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: The total grant is $250,000 by the dominion government, on a fifty-fifty basis with the provinces. Up to the present time seven out of nine provinces are taking part.	[DOT]


Eric Bowness McKay: Is that the appropriation for Boy Scout work?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: For youth organizations of all kinds throughout Canada.


Eric Bowness McKay: Is that one of the organizations you have referred to? I understood the appropriation was S5,000 and I do not think it is enough.


James Lorimer Ilsley: The grant to the Boy Scouts is $9,000.
. Mr. WEBB: I am fully in accord with the principles of this bill, but I should like to clear up the matter which was brought up by the hon. member for Durham. We have the army cadets, the navy cadets and the air cadets, and in smaller communities there is a possibility of friction, of one-organization taking members from the other. Whose responsibility is it to settle a matter of this kind when there are not enough boys to carry on the three services?


Colin William George Gibson: It would come under the air cadet league itself, and also the navy league. What happens in a great many centres is that some organization such as the Lions club, the Rotary club or some other

Air Force * Act-Cadet Squadrons
club sponsors a squadron. If they should be sucessful in raising a good squadron of approximately fifty boys it would be continued. If there were two or three cadet units in a community, all of which were under strength and competing with each other, I think the authorities would get together and decide which would be continued. Neither the navy league nor the air cadet league nor the army want to have inefficient squadrons that are under strength and not pulling their own weight.


Frank Exton Lennard: As I understand it, a branch of the sea cadets cannot be set up in a small community until it has the sanction of the navy league headquarters in Ottawa.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I am in support of the bill, but for different reasons from those of most people. I am heartily in favour of it because of the discipline upon our youth which measures such as this impose. Many people blame the delinquency of our youth upon conditions of home life, and many other excuses are made. I have an idea that there are some bad boys, and this was exemplified in Toronto the other day when four boys ranging from fifteen to twenty-one years of age went out and murdered an old chap who had built himself a little business. They were found guilty of manslaughter and two of them were sentenced to gaol for fifteen yearn, the other two receiving a sentence of twenty years each. The excuse for this was bad home conditions and no opportunity for employment. Everybody knows that since the war started six years ago there has been a shortage of man-power and there is no reason why anyone should not find employment. An old fellow by the name of Tobias is dead and his murderers are jitter-bugging in Toronto gaol and laughing at the administration of justice because the sob-sisters have finally accomplished their purposes.


Mr.   SICEY@: Is the number of corps and the number of personnel that can be enlisted limited?


Colin William George Gibson: We have had discussions with, the air cadet league and they have come to the conclusion that they should endeavour to maintain approximately 200 squadrons w'ith a personnel of 15,000 all told. This would mean the squadrons would range from fifty up.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: May I ask the Minister of Veterans Affairs if I am correct in understanding that we are spending $9,000 on the Boy Scouts this year?


James Lorimer Ilsley: It was the Minister of Finance who said that. The grant for the Boy Scouts for many years has been $9,000, and it is $9,000 this year.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: When I was advocating the erection of a building to accommodate the youth of our country I had in mind the burden that might be imposed upon our taxpayers. I am now told that we grant $9,000 to the Boy Scouts organization to build up our youth. I find that this government is spending $25,000 to distribute a French and English dictionary to the members of parliament of this country. I think the government had better stop that and do a little more for the Boy Scouts.
(Translation):


Mr. LESAGE:: Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to contradict my hon. friend, but I claim that the federal government's responsibility is much more involved in the field of education of our people for the purpose of ensuring a better comprehension of the rights of the minority, by some, and the rights of the majority, by others, than in a field which is the exclusive responsibility of the provincial governments. (Text):
If my hon. friend does not understand me it proves that we need to spend $25,000 for dictionaries, and perhaps that is not enough.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Mr. Chairman


William Ross Macdonald: Order. The committee is considering bill No. 57, to amend the Royal Canadian Air Force Act. I would remind hon. members of the committee that when the house is in committee, according to standing order 58, subsection 2, all discussion must be strictly relevant to the matter under discussion.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: No person could learn English or French from the dictionary to which I referred. It is a political dictionary.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Has the minister been able to secure from War Assets Corporation or from his department any equipment for the air cadets that would help to keep them interested in their work?


Colin William George Gibson: The Royal Canadian Air Force supplies the air cadet squadrons with a great deal of, if not with all the equipment that they use in their instructional work, as wrell as the arms with which they are trained.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I am thinking of the aeroplane instruments, engines and one thing and another like that which they should have so that they can see what they will have to work with later on.


Colin William George Gibson: These are not provided from War Assets but direct from the air force. Equipment required by the air

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons
cadets is supplied, if available, by the air force, which turns it over rather than declaring it surplus to War Assets.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: What provision is being made to assist in air force training in the schools? There is a lot of equipment available that would be acceptable to the schools. What is the government's policy as to assisting in that work?


Colin William George Gibson: The provision of equipment to technical schools is an entirely different matter. This bill is dealing only with the formation of air cadet corps, and it does not cover the supplying of equipment to educational institutions.
Mr. LOCKHART; Some of the schools have in mind that their educational courses will lead to air cadet work, hoping that the boys will eventually become air-minded. They will at least have the fundamentals, and it is expected that many of the boys will want to go into the air cadets. I have heard that thought expressed several times.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: The minister has said that at present the government envisage a maximum of 15,000 air cadets. Will they be evenly distributed across the country? The province of Quebec had some most efficient corps in the war, ably trained, and there were also some in the maritimes, Ontario, the prairie provinces and British Columbia. I believe there are now more than 12,000 air cadets in Ontario alone, so that Ontario and British Columbia would absorb the whole quota which the minister mentioned.


Colin William George Gibson: The air cadet squadrons will be distributed on the same basis as now through all the provinces. Prince Edward Island may have more squadrons. I think they have one-now, and that number will probably be increased. That is a matter which is being worked out with the air cadet league, but no definite decision has been reached.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: The departments of education of the various provinces have to know how many corps they can put into the various schools. Every provincial department of education requires to know how many air cadets it can have and how many schools it can put them into, if the minister intends to have squadrons in the public schools.


Colin William George Gibson: A great many squadrons will carry on as they have in the past. Some squadrons which have not been functioning up to the proper degree of efficiency may be disbanded. We had 400 squadrons at the peak during the war. A great many of them have folded up for one
reason or another. We have only 289 at the present time. Many of these squadrons had both senior and junior cadets. When you eliminate the juniors it does not leave enough seniors in some squadrons to make it worth while to carry on the squadrons with the few seniors available.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Is it necessary that these be designated as air force squadrons or air force cadets? I was interested in the suggestion made by several members that these various squadrons should be grouped together. There is no particular need, as far as I can see, to give specialized training to boys of that age either in air force, army or navy work. One solution of the problem suggested in the town I come from was that the only way a cadet force could be carried on was to put the three divisions together. We could have a cadet corps in connection with high school work and we need not give them particularly specialized training. In the event of war these boys would have had some military training and they could then join special branches. But for the purpose of that discipline which has been mentioned by hon. gentlemen to my right and for the purpose of promoting citizenship, or merely for the negative purpose of keeping the boys off the street, a combined corps is just as good, and it has not some of the objections which a military organization has in the minds of a good many people.


John Horne Blackmore: I wish to commend the minister for the idea of having a cadet corps, but I believe that this plan is not nearly comprehensive enough. I do not really see why it should be necessary to cut down the number of squadrons in order to improve their quality. I gathered from what the minister said that he would rather have a few squadrons and have them exceptionally good. I am not able to see why we should not have a large number of squadrons and have them all good. I believe the motivation must be at fault.
. The idea which seems to be in the minds of those who are organizing this cadet movement is that the boys shall be prepared to go into the permanent force. I do not believe that is the basis upon which we should proceed. There should be the ideal of being prepared. I do not wish to say any harsh thing, but it looks to me almost as though the minister's was a policy of defeatism. All we need to do is to get the hints that are dropped of the colossal and systematic preparations which are being made in a certain country to realize that if we should ever become involved with a nation like that one, no small air force will be in any way adequate to the

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons
situation. I believe that we should start right now to teach our boys and girls and our people throughout the country that we are living in the most dangerous time that has ever existed in the history of this nation or this race. All our boys and girls throughout our schools everywhere ought to be taught definitely that we have never yet acknowledged publicly in this country what are the causes of war. No one in this government since I have been here has ever breathed a word concerning the real causes of war, and no member of the opposition since I have been here has ever said a word concerning the real causes of war. The result is that people are being deluded into thinking that all we need to remove war is a sufficiently powerful united nations organization.	-
So long as the causes of war are not publicly acknowledged and so long as nothing is done to remove those causes of war, we are in danger of an outbreak of war any week from now on, and the people ought to know that. Every person in public life with responsibility ought to tell them that. If the boys and girls were told that in the schools and were given to understand that it is their duty to prepare for war if it comes, it seems to me that we would have a motivation which would encourage a very large percentage of our boys to enter training for the services. It ought to be made perfectly clear to them that the next war will be a war of instants, a war of minutes. There will not be any possibility of holding the foe back of any Maginot line or any other line or behind any ocean while we commence three or four years of preparation to make up for what we have lost. If we are not thoroughly prepared when the enemy strikes the next time, the first battle will be the last. Our boys ought to be taught that: they are the ones who are going to suffer; why should they not be told the truth? They ought to know also that the next war will be a global war; it will be global war from the very first move. Canada will be in the front line; Canada will be a theatre of actual conflict. That is the most certain conclusion that the ablest thinkers in military matters are able to arrive at to-day.
Why not tell the boys and girls about this? Why not say to them, "Boys, you cannot afford to be unprepared when the time of decision comes." Everyone in this country ought to be ready for immediate action until such time as the causes of war, the great, fundamental, economic, inevitable causes of war are discovered and provision is made for removing them.
So I think that for the minister to speak as modestly as he is doing, about an air force
[Mr. BlackmoreJ
of only 16,000, is for him to undershoot the mark a great deal. -I am convinced that the minister feels that way himself, and I would not be surprised if he had wondered whether the' house would accept favourably his offering even at this rate. Perhaps he is happily surprised to find that we are all with him. But what we are looking for is bold, aggressive, determined, adequate leadership to make this country ready to perform its part in whatever conflict may arise. That, I would say, is the main motivation which should be used for the boys, not the idea that when they are finished with the cadet training they should be able to go into the permanent force. That is not what they are going into it for, not by 'any manner of means. I believe that every school from coast to coast in this country should be making provision for the training of boys for the services into which they may have to go any day.
There is another basis of motivation about which I should like to have heard something but, as far as I know, the minister did not mention it. I wonder whether provision has been made for summer camps in the various provinces, so that cadet groups can go to those camps and spend a month or six weeks there.


Colin William George Gibson: Yes; it is planned that they will go to summer camps for two weeks.


John Horne Blackmore: That is a proper motivation, and the provision of proficiency cups and shields will give another incentive for the boys to go in and do their best. So that we ought to have no difficulty at all, I would suppose, in getting all the boys we can use, and we certainly ought not to have any difficulty in using all the boys that come forward. All the boys in the country should be welcomed and encouraged to be trained.
I was thinking, just before I commenced to speak, along these lines: if we are to have only 16,000 air cadets, or 16,000 in the permanent air force, is that somewhere near all we shall have in the naval force, and is that somewhere near all we are to have in the army? If that is so, obviously our permanent force is going to be far too small. I am not a specialist in this subject, but these are considerations which are passing through my mind. I wonder whether the minister is entirely wise in saying that he is thinking about cutting down the number of cadet groups, in order to raise the efficiency.


Colin William George Gibson: There is no figure in the legislation. That is the basis we are working on with the air cadet league. They are prepared to sponsor that number of

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons
cadets at the present time, but there is no limitation on the number of air cadets that may be taken on by agreement between the league and the department. But of course the air cadet league itself must sponsor the various squadrons, and the Minister of National Defence for Air must authorize the squadrons before they are formed. The suggestion that all cadets that are taken in are expected to go into the permanent force is, of course, not sound, in view of the fact that the cadets will only be in the air cadet corps for approximately three years each. That would be, with 15,000, five thousand coming out each year, and obviously the regular force could not absorb that number if they all wanted to enlist. But it is hoped that a large number will go into the auxiliary squadrons.


John Horne Blackmore: That is why I think that the more general approach as regards the air cadets in order to qualify for the air force is fallacious, that the boys should never be enrolled in the cadet corps with the idea that they are to qualify for the permanent air force.


Colin William George Gibson: I did not say they were enrolled for that purpose; I said it would give them perference for the air force if they wished to enlist.


John Horne Blackmore: I wonder if I have gathered this right. The impression I have is that the department is remaining more or less passive and in the background and is waiting for the air cadet league to take the initiative. That is, the air cadet league decides that it wants to have another cadet group; it asks the department for permission to have one, and the department gives its consent. Is that the general procedure?


Colin William George Gibson: No; they are far more closely integrated than that, because, after all, the major expenditures on this whole air cadet movement are defrayed by the Department of National Defence for Air. Consequently the control is in the department, for it has to supply a considerable portion of the funds, a great part of the arms and equipment, and, to some extent, the clothing. So that there is close cooperation between the two. But certainly the matter of finance must always be considered in connection with authorizing unlimited numbers of squadrons.


John Horne Blackmore: There is no question that the matter of finance must be considered. I grant that; we are not doubting that for a minute. But if we were to plunge into war in six weeks' time we would forget finance immediately. That must impress on every hon.
member the fact that in the last analysis finance has to be the servant and not the master. What I would like the minister to make quite clear is, just what is the relation between the department and the air cadet league? Does the department organize the air cadet league? Does it motivate it? Does it initiate its action? How does the air cadet league come to take its part?


Colin William George Gibson: I thought I had pointed that out at the opening of my remarks to-night. The air cadet league is an organization with a charter established for the purpose of forming and operating air cadet squadrons.


John Horne Blackmore: Who formed it? And who keeps it going?


Colin William George Gibson: It is a chartered organization. It has a national charter to form and operate air cadet squadrons.


John Horne Blackmore: Is it a civilian
organization?


Colin William George Gibson: It is a
civilian organization, yes.


John Horne Blackmore: Well, that is just the point I cannot get the logic out of. Is the air cadet movement in Canada to depend entirely on the air cadet league? I do not see who originates the air cadet league and what keeps it going and what connection there is between the department and the league.


Colin William George Gibson: The air cadet league forms these squadrons. There are also civilian organizations in the various centres with civilian boards in centres such as Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton, Winnipeg and other places, and these civilian organizations get behind the groups of boys who are formed into squadrons. They assist the squadrons, and in addition to the local sponsors there are provincial air cadet organizations that operate under the air cadet league. The league executive is at the top. They have provincial organizations and local organizations, and the local organizations have arranged for sponsors for various squadrons in these localities. These are all provided by civilian effort and they raise funds from civilian sources to assist the squadrons for which they are responsible. The Royal Canadian Air Force also assists in providing pay for instructors as well as grants and capitation fees to the boys according to the numbers in the squadrons. Various other grants are also given for clothing, bands and so forth, and funds are provided

Air Force Act-Cadet Squadrons

for summer camps. In addition, the officers attached to the squadrons are paid by the Royal Canadian Air Force. But the organization that sponsors these squadrons is entirely civilian.


George Russell Boucher: The same question is likely to arise in the discussion of the army and navy cadets. It seems to me that it is a privilege for any boy to be able to join any of these cadet corps. Many of the boys will want to join, and I believe that the opinion of the country has changed considerably in comparison with the pre-war antagonism to cadet training. To-day people realize that such training can do a great deal of good for the youth of Canada, whether it be in promoting physical fitness, in distilling discipline, or in making these boys potential members of the armed forces. This being the case, many of us in the house would like to have from the government an enunciation of policy generally so far as youth training is concerned whether in connection with air cadets or army cadets or sea cadets. I do not think it should be left entirely to a voluntary organization to solicit the minister's permission to form a squadron here or a unit there. The smaller schools in the urban and rural areas, as well as those in the big cities, should have the privilege of establishing cadet classes. In some towns there are cadets in connection with all three forces, but no doubt there are many towns that are without cadet training for any of the forces. .
I can remember when I was going to school we had an army cadet class and I was proud to belong to it, but it developed just before the war that public opinion was to a great extent opposed to cadet training in schools. I believe, however, that public opinion has changed vastly, and the government can give some leadership by announcing its policy as to whether it feels that, in the interests of peace and for the sake of the health and welfare of our youth, as well as for the benefit of the whole country at large, these cadet classes should be encouraged throughout the country generally and not be left merely to promotion by voluntary organizations. I would ask the minister to give us some insight into the government's position in this matter with regard to cadet training in his department as well as in the other two departments of national defence. Can he not go farther than he has indicated to-night in assisting this important movement?


Colin William George Gibson: I would not wish to say that the Royal Canadian Air Force or any of the defence departments are responsible for youth training in a general way

or from the point of view of what might be considered part of the health and welfare of the nation. We are defence departments, and it is the responsibility of these departments to provide some preliminary training to the youth of the country in defence matters so that they will be qualified to join the defence forces when they become of age to enlist. Better results have been secured, not in having every boy put into the defence force, but by having units with a waiting list of boys who are keen to get in. Far better results are obtained in that way than by having a unit into which every boy automatically enters, where he parades on the day of inspection and perhaps not again throughout the entire season. In that case morale is low and so Is efficiency. Consequently, we find it preferable to keep the numbers limited to boys who are keen to stay in. That has produced and is producing the best results.


George Russell Boucher: Is the minister interested only in getting boys to join the force in so far as they may be potential members of a permanent force? Is there not a broader outlook than that?


Colin William George Gibson: As I have pointed out, we could not take them all into the permanent force if we wanted to. We are responsible for giving preliminary defence training to those boys who come into these cadet squadrons, and they are available to go into some of the forces, permanent or auxiliary; or if they are called upon later, they will have had valuable preliminary training.


George Russell Boucher: Why not have a sufficient number so that you can pick what you require.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: If I may interrupt for a moment, we had thought tha,t this bill was disposed of some time ago, seeing that every hon. gentleman in the house was in favour of it, and we were anxious to get into supply. If, however, there is a disposition to debate the bill for any length of time we shall have to move the committee out of the present stage.


Mr. BENTLEY:: I wanted to say a word or two on this subject because I think the bill is a good one. The boys that join these corps can learn a good deal apart from academic training. It is a voluntary organization, and I think the minister's idea is a good one, of making it something that boys who are keen to join will want to get into, instead of having everyone automatically in it. I believe in the idea of affording these boys scope for personal ambition.
I would not have risen to speak had we not listened to what, in my opinion, was a most unfortunate speech. I am sorry that the hon.

Price Ceiling-Farm Products
member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) is not in his seat at the moment. He said that since he has been a member of this house-^-and he has been here longer than I have-he has never heard anyone give a clear explanation of the fundamental causes of war. The implication there was that he knows what the fundamental causes are. Well, he should have told us instead of leaving it in the air. I do not want to see these boys trained for some war that may be inevitable as a result of fundamental causes, but the hon. gentleman said that we were pinning our hopes on the united nations organization. Frankly, I am;
I am also with the minister in what he is doing, though I hope he will never have to make use of it, but I hope and trust that the efforts of the united nations organization will be successful.
This is something which is very close to me. Then the hon. member left that up in the air and tried to sow a little seed of doubt as to whether we can be successful in the united nations organization. Goodness knows, I am not blind to the pitfalls with which we are faced. I know the possibilities of failure, but I am looking to the possibilities of success, and I think we should direct our efforts along that line and not sow any of these other seeds. That was another unfortunate statement the hon. member made. Then he mentioned a nation we might be called upon to fight, and said the name of that nation could be in anyone's mind. Well, when he said that I had two nations in mind, because I have heard him on different occasions. I am not going to quote the pages of Hansard-, I do not know them, and he will correct me if I am wrong, but I heard him mention Russia as a possible enemy.


John Horne Blackmore: Do not give wrong impressions, now.


Thomas John Bentley: I am just asking the hon. member to straighten out the impression he left with me.


John Horne Blackmore: Do not twist things up.


Thomas John Bentley: That was one of the nations I had in mind when I heard the hon. gentleman speak. The only other nation with which we might wage war would be the nation to the south. Unquestionably those are the only nations which might or might not go to war with us. I hope neither one does; I hope we are going to have peace all round, but those things should not be left up in the air, and I did not believe this debate was the proper time to sow these particular seeds of doubt, or to leave these bits of conjecture up in the air as to the causes of war and the 63260-108J
nations we might have to fight, which implied the failure of the united nations organization. War is one of the most explosive things we know.
The hon. member for Lethbridge said he hoped that the minister was going to have some measure of control over the air cadet corps; yet this afternoon 'he was the first to claim that ordinary dynamite and other explosive instruments should be left entirely in the hands of


William Ross Macdonald: Order. The hon. member must not refer to a previous debate during the present session.


Thomas John Bentley: I am sorry; I should have known that.	-


John Horne Blackmore: If the hon. gentleman will permit me, I did not say one word about control on the part of the government.


Thomas John Bentley: We shall leave that matter for Hansard to settle to-morrow. I shall not prolong the debate on this point, but I did not want the hon. member's observations to pass unnoticed and unchallenged.
Progress reported.



PRICE CEILING POLICIES WITH RESPECT TO FARM PRODUCTS

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Wednesday, May IS, consideration of the motion of Mr. Mackenzie that the house go into committee of supply, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Bracken, and the amendment to the amendment of Mrs. Strum.
Mr. R. H. WINTERS (Queens-Lunenburg):: In this house, Mr. Speaker, we hear a great variety of subjects discussed, and when a subject is up for debate there is no telling what it will lead to, as we have seen to-night. But there is no doubt in the mind of anyone in this house that the cause of the farmer is well and ably championed. To-night we are speaking on an amendment and a subamendment, both of which deal with farmers' problems. Both the amendment and the subamendment focus attention on farm products as the salient feature of this country's economy. Probably this is truer of the Progressive Conservative amendment than of the C.C.F. subamendment, but both overlook the fact that there are in this country food producers other than farmers. Both the amendment and the subamendment point out that the farmer suffers disproportionately. Without even an analysis of statistics it is very difficult to see how that could be the case, in view of the attention the problems of the farmer are given in this chamber.
Price Ceiling-Farm Products

While we in the maritimes are sympathetic toward the western farmer, because we feel that any benefit accruing to him will automatically be extended to us, I wish to point out that we have problems of our own which are not associated with those of the western farmer. We want to make it clear that we fully appreciate his importance in our over-all economy. I am pleased to see the problems of our farmers being given such full consideration, because I know of no class of people more deserving of support. However, at times it is necessary to apply our thinking on a broader basis. The amendment moved by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) appears at page 1244 of Hansard, and states:
t That this house is of the opinion that the government's price ceiling policies with respect to farm products are discouraging production of needed food and imposing on the food producers of Canada an unfair share of the burden of maintaining the government's price stabilization policies.
The C.C.F. subamendment, which I think might well be read at this time to give a good picture of what we are discussing, will be found at page 1651 of Hansard, and reads:
This house is of the opinion that the government's policies permitting recent unjustifiable increases in the prices of farm machinery and of steel have resulted in imposing on food producers and workers in Canada an unfair share of the burden of maintaining the government's price stabilization policies.
Both the amendment and the subamendment set out to prove that the government's price policies are working contrary to the best interests of the farmer and discouraging needed food production. Based on what has been said previously in this debate and on my own observations, I would seriously doubt that the farmer has been suffering too disproportionately. It is true that the prices of his products have been fixed, but that is the case with prices of other commodities used by many classes of people throughout the country. The hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) pointed out in an interesting talk some of the difficulties facing the maritime provinces, in particular Nova Scotia and still more in particular his own constituency. I feel that his speech ' did Nova Scotia some good, because it served to bring before this house the particular problems with which we are faced, Being at the extremity of the country, as I have said before in this house, we have problems of transportation, freight rates and so on that are not encountered in some other parts of Canada. I feel, however, that the hon. member for Cape Breton South was inconsistent when he continued to advocate that wages be increased but that price ceilings otherwise be maintained. Both the hon. member for Cape

Breton South and the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mrs. Strum) deplored the fact that the leader of the opposition restricted the discussion to agriculture. I entirely agree in that respect. I feel that it is a great mistake to select any group in the national economy and attempt to give them preferred treatment.


William Irvine: WThy select the manufacturers?


Robert Henry Winters: Did I?


William Irvine: Your government did.


James Lorimer Ilsley: It did not,


Robert Henry Winters: The constituency I represent is not generally considered to be a farming one. It is widely and justly known as a fishing centre. But there is much more farming carried out there than most people would imagine. There are many fine apple orchards, for example, as there are in Nova Scotia generally. I do not feel I need spend time on the apple orchards, or attempt to advertise a product which is already well known. Last year, however, the apple crop was a failure. The production of this farm product was down. I have heard some strong arguments advanced in the house blaming the government for discouraging production, but I think the arguments would need to be much more convincing to persuade the farmers that government policies were responsible for the apple, failure last year.
The same may be said of the potato crop in Nova Scotia last year. By the same token farmers generally all across Canada do not blame government policy when circumstances in the hands of nature result in decreased crops. This year in Nova Scotia we are hopeful that our apple crop will be better. Indications are now that it will be. We feel, too, that our farm production generally will be better. But if it is not we know it will not be for lack of trying on the part of the farmers. They are showing no tendency whatsoever to hold back because of the government's policy. In support of that statement I would read an extract from the Halifax Herald, dated Thursday, May 16, under the heading "Acreage is increased":
Ten per cent increase in Nova Scotia potato acreage is in prospect this year according to reports from government farm correspondents. Latest estimates fix the intended 1946 seeding at 24,600 acres, 2,200 acres higher than last year. Four per cent increase in seeding of oats and spring wheat are expected.
Granting that there may be some restiveness under price .control, I do not see that it is in the best interests of the country to focus attention on any one group and make the people in that group feel that they are suffer-

Price Ceiling-Farm Products
ing disproportionately. It is well to consider what would happen to the rest of the country if preferred treatment were given to any one group. For instance, if prices of farm products were allowed to increase, they would reflect themselves into the over-all economy of the country, and would increase the burden on all classes of people, including farmers, fishermen, merchants, tradesmen and so on. They would all be obliged to pay more for bread, cereals, cheese, butter and all farm products.
With particular reference to the C.C.F. subamendment which claims that there is discrimination against the worker, that, too, is not accepted as such in my constituency. I hold in my hand a clipping from one of our local papers which states:
Wage price control policy is helpful
The war-instituted policy of wage and price control, as now practised in Canada, has benefited and will continue to benefit the Canadian worker by protecting his living standards and avoiding an inflationary rise in prices, which *would cancel the advantage gained by an increase in his real wages during the war years and since.
That is found in a paper which has never been inclined to lean over backwards-to use the expression of the hon. member for Cape Breton South-in support of the government.
In my constituency there is a high percentage of people engaged in seafaring. This is a hazardous occupation, and the loss of life is accordingly high. Years in which there are no drownings at sea are very few indeed, as hon. members well know. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, last year was the first in this generation in which there were no losses at sea among crews of schooners in our deep-sea fleet. As a result of the cumulative high loss of life there are many widows. I wish those who advocate the immediate removal of price ceilings would tell the house how those widows, on their small incomes, are going to adjust their method of living to compensate for increased prices. They have no means whatsoever of gearing their incomes to an inflationary spiral. The same thing applies, of course, to people on fixed incomes and pensions all across the board. They have no opportunity to keep pace with increasing prices.
It is idle to say that prices would not increase if ceilings were removed. The very fact that there is such a great pressure against these ceilings is a clear indication of what we could expect if they were removed. If we were sure that the ceilings would not be lifted there would not be such great stress to have them lifted. That the two things go hand in hand goes without saying. There is no doubt in my mind that prices would skyrocket at once if ceilings were lifted, and we would find ourselves in the midst of a violent period of inflation. For example, in the United States where controls have not been maintained as rigidly as in Canada, they are experiencing this condition right now, and are envious of this country's well-controlled economy.
Referring once again to the amendment offered by the leader of the opposition, we find it states that the government's policies are discouraging the production of food. The C.C.F. subamendment states that the government policy has imposed on food producers and workers an unfair share of the burden of maintaining the government price stabilization policy.
I say emphatically that both the amendment and subamendment are wrong. Speakers in support of these amendments have attempted to show that because of the government policies farmers are deliberately not producing up to their full potential capacity. I say again that this applies more particularly to the amendment offered by the Progressive Conservative party than to the C.C.F. subamendment. The hon. member for Victoria (Mr. Mayhew) and the hon. member for Halton (Mr. Cleaver), speaking on behalf of the government, have shown clearly that what the amendments say about farm production is not the case at all.
But if one were to suppose, for the purpose of argument, that the government's policies do discourage production of farm products- which they do not-the amendments would still be wrong. Both amendments refer to food products, not farm products aloner- The word "food" is not used in a restrictive sense. I presume it is intended to include all food products. The C.C.F. subamendment does not state directly that food production is discouraged, but it does imply that by stating that the government's policies impose unfair hardships on food producers.
There is the greatest tendency on the part of farmers, and those speaking on behalf of farmers in the house, to consider food to be limited to farm products only. The definition of "food" must surely embrace fish, which is an important food, as all must agree. The inclusion of the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Bridges) in the Canadian delegation to the meetings of the food and agricultural organization in Washington is official recognition by the government of the fact that fish is included in the long-term food programme. Surely that is becoming more important all the time.
We can no longer make the mistake of talking about food and excluding fish. There
Price Ceiling-Farm Products

are many in the house who are not fully familiar with the extent of the fishing activities on the west and east coasts. However, I am sure the house realizes the important part fishing is playing in Canada's economy; While we are anxious to see that the farmer gets the best possible deal, I am sure we can assume that the farmer is just as anxious that the fisherman is given due recognition for the part he is playing. To say, then, that the government's policy is discouraging the production of needed food is hardly correct when one interprets the word "food" in the proper way and reads such statements as have been contained in th'e press recently, and I quote:
Nova Scotia's fish catch increased by 6,034,000 pounds in March over the corresponding month last year. Value of the landed catch to the fishermen was $376,000 more than in 1945. Altogether 26,957,000 pounds of fish were caught with a total landed value of $1,672,000. Lobsters, which gained in quantity by 52,900 pounds, and in value by $134,900, were a big factor in the general increase. Catches of cod, halibut, scallops and pollock all were larger than last year.
I would remind the house that fishermen everywhere do not take kindly to statements alleging that the government's policy is discouraging the production of food when they are doing their utmost to produce in unprecedented quantities and are delivering the goods. They are producing all the year round under the most trying and hazardous conditions. Rather than criticizing the government's policies, these people are grateful to the government for what it has done to assist them to earn a good living wage after so many lean years. As hon. members know, assistance has come in the form of subsidies on ships, veterans benefits, floor prices, trade agreements and so on.
I wonder how serious people are who say they want controls removed entirely and at once. It is reported that in a recent speech at Sherbrooke the non. member for Stanstead (Mr. Hackett) advocated that price controls be removed immediately and completely. I understand from,remarks made in this house that many of those on the opposition benches feel the same way, but I think we should have a clear statement from them as to how far they want to go, on what commodities they want ceilings removed and when they want them removed. Many people criticize, but I think most of them realize what would happen if ceilings were removed. A good example of how the public reacts to this problem and registers complaints while at the same time playing safe is a statement made recently by a well-known Canadian newspaper, the Toronto Daily Star. The heading is, "Wartime restrictions should go." The article is quite emphatic in that, but it ends up by saying:

Except for whatever price controls may be necessary, war-time restrictions should go [DOT]
I think in private most opposition members who complain about price controls feel just that way. They have some local complaints, but at the same time they are reluctant to see controls go completely. The recent strenuous objections from the opposition to the increase in the price of farm machinery and the removal of the subsidy on milk serve to illustrate this point. In my opinion it is doing harm to the country to make the people restive under controls which are known to be in their best interests. Focusing the problem before the public and leading manufacturers and merchants to believe that controls will be removed in the near future serves to retard the availability of consumer goods, since there is every reason to believe that, in the light of the publicity resulting from amendments such as these, goods are being held off the market.
Every reaction that I have received from my constituency has been favourable to the government's policy of adjusting controls and removing them where possible on a gradual basis in order to return to a normal peacetime economy without violent inflation. As the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) said in a previous speech on this subject, as reported on page 472 of Hansard, this policy is adopted in the confidence that price control and the maintenance of ceiling prices have the full support of Canadian people, and the government does not intend to flout their opinion. If these circumstances are appreciated on all sides and actions are governed accordingly, we shall be assured of a quicker return to normalcy, with fewer irregularities.


Eric Bowness McKay: Mr. Speaker, at the outset I wish to state that I am unequivocally in accord with the principle of price stabilization. During the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne last session I stated, and I reiterate it again, that a more satisfactory approach to price control in so far as agricultural products are concerned would be to establish basic parity prices for all farm products. These prices should bear direct relationship to the cost of production; they would not be floor prices nor yet would they be ceiling prices; they would be prices that would vary with the changed costs of production as related to the cost of the goods which the farmer buys and uses. Obviously the government is not following such a policy.
By this policy of permitting the ceiling on prices of farm machinery to be raised," the cost of producing foodstuffs has been increased

Price Ceiling-Farm Products
for the farmer. The increase allowed in the price of gasoline is another example of the same thing. At the same time the floor has been lowered under the selling price of wheat. It is apparent that such actions on the part of the government is placing an unfair share of the burden of maintaining the price stabilization policy upon the shoulders of the people who obtain their livelihood by tilling the soil.
I can see absolutely no justification for the increase in the price of farm implements. There are many serious objections that could be taken to the raising by 12^ per cent of the ceiling on the selling price of farm machinery manufactured here in the Dominion of Canada. First, farmers to-day are in grave need of machinery replacements for their worn-out equipment. This, added to the increase in price, adds most substantially to the burden the farmer is forced to bear. He must purchase large quantities of new implements to replace his old machinery and must pay higher prices.
Second, higher machinery prices will increase the cost of production. In the face of a lowered floor price of SI a bushel for wheat at Fort William, I cannot see any justification for raising the ceiling on the goods the farmer has to buy.
Third, I question the reliability of the figures which apparently were submitted to the government by the farm machinery companies and which were quoted by the Minister of Finance to indicate increased costs for the implement manufacturers. I question that data unless it was procured directly from the records of the companies concerned and by investigators of the government. Machinery prices have been unjustifiably high for years, according to the report of the special committee on farm implements which sat in 1937.
According to evidence which was submitted to that committee of parliament, and which appears on page 13 of the report of proceedings:
It appears that a small cream separator (under 500 lbs. capacity) can be manufactured in Sweden by a company allied with the De Laval Company, doing business in Canada, and after payment of freight (ocean and rail), duty, excise tax, can be laid down at Peterborough, Ontario, for $17.65. These particular cream separators are sold at Winnipeg for an average price of $44.58. When it is remembered that the freight from Peterborough to Winnipeg is only $1.30, this committee is of the opinion that the above facts speak for themselves, and that the retail price to the Canadian farmer is completely out of line with manufacturing and distribution costs.
I particularly wish to emphasize that last statement:
The retail price to the Canadian farmer is completely out of line with manufacturing and distribution costs.
May I now refer to repeated statements which have emanated from industrial and financial leaders, and may I add that these men are not of the C.C.F. Certainly none with whom I have conversed are sympathetic with our policies in this corner of the house. As a matter of fact, they largely support the Progressive Conservative point of view, which appears to be to take off the lid so that prices on every commodity may go sky-high.
These leaders of industry and finance, directors, in other words, of big business, maintain that increased labour costs are * largely responsible for the high prices of manufactured goods. Certainly labour costs have risen to some extent, but no more than the increased costs of living would justify. Labour, despite these increases, is still not receiving its fair share of the national income. The labouring man, and that includes the fishermen who have just been referred to by the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Winters), who comprises such a large part of this' country's population has always been in the lower income brackets. Too often industrialists have had too much regard for profits and have failed to respect the old biblical counsel: the labourer is worthy of his hire. The small share that labour received from the price realized from farm machinery is revealed on page 435 of the proceedings of the special committee, 1937, on farm implement prices. I think this house and the country should carefully examine that report. On page 435 of the proceedings of the special committee on farm implement prices it is stated that in 1913-quite a long time ago- the selling price of an eight-foot binder sold in the city of Regina was $165. The price itself would indicate that that was a long time ago. Labour costs amounted to 810.21-
I repeat, only $10.21-not a very large sum as everyone must admit. In 1932 the same binder sold in Regina for $276 and the labour cost amounted to only $13.40, still a very small percentage of the selling price, actually just 4-8 per cent.
In every case, the selling commission, freight from the factory to Regina, factory overhead, and materia! costs, each exceeded the cost of labour. Later figures are not available from a reliable source in Canada. But in the United States, where labour in most industries is on a higher wage level than in this country, the report of the federal trade commission, issued from Washington, D.C., last year, stated that the cost of labour in the manufacture of farm implements in the United States has not altered materially in relation to other costs of manufacturing. The report reveals that a
Price Ceiling-Farm Products

combine retailing in Minneapolis for $638 had as labour costs $46.43, or just 7-3 per cent of the selling price. Had labour costs increased 50 per cent, labour would still be obtaining only slightly over ten per cent of the selling price of that particular type of farm machinery. But labour costs have not increased 50 per cent. The minister quoted figures to show that labour costs here in the dominion in the implement industry had increased only 28^ per cent; I think I am correct in that figure.


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is correct.


Eric Bowness McKay: Referring again to the 1937 special committee on farm implement prices, page 435 of the proceedings, reveals that the highest selling price for an eight-foot binder was in 1921, when labour costs were $20.66. That binder sold for $329 in Regina. Had labour increased 28% per cent at that time, labour costs wrnuld still be only $5.88 more, or a total of $26.54, representing just 8 per cent of the selling price, not 80 per cent.
Therefore I submit that labour costs in Canada, in the implement industry in particular, cannot be the reason for the demand for an increase in the price ceiling on farm machinery. Certainly they are not a legitimate reason for a 12% per cent increase, and until there is placed before this house evidence that can be relied upon to justify a rise in the price of farm machinery, I am unalterably opposed to breaking the price ceiling, the effect of which can only be a demand by other industries for similar treatment. Under the pressure of such a demand the whole structure of price stabilization will be shaken to its foundations and inflation will be upon us with all its attendant evils.


Mr. D. F. BROWN (Essex West):: Mr. Speaker, I think it is the privilege, duty and obligation of every member of this house to do everything we humanly can to protect those people who most need protection, the common people of this country who are very much in need of our attention and services. If we get into an inflationary period it is the common people who will suffer the most. For that reason I think it is the duty of controllers, cabinet ministers and the like, and the duty of everyone of us who sits in this house and every citizen of this dominion to do everything possible to prevent any inflationary period from getting started.
As I see it, the constituents of good government are not only the qualities of intelligence, stability, order, vitality and compassion, but ordinary common honesty and sincerity. Instead of going around the country making wild and reckless statements, we should con-

sider what we are talking about. We should reflect that the people of Canada are aware of what is being said and that they expect us to do our duty. In the constituency I represent there are many people, the backbone of our country, who work in the factories, the offices and the shops; there are many widows and orphans, many old age pensioners, returned soldiers, retired public servants and business men on fixed incomes. These are the people who will suffer from inflationary methods, and who, indeed, are suffering from the mere talk of such inflation.
The loyal opposition-I say, the "loyal" opposition-goes about the country and preaches the removal of price controls; that is, they do so outside the house. The United States has gone somewhat upon that line; I do not say that controls have been entirely released, but they have been relaxed to a great extent. Recently the Windsor Daily Star-


John Ritchie MacNicol: A very fine paper.


Donald Ferguson Brown: "A very fine paper." I thank the hon. gentleman, and I might say that it is quoted in this house more than any other newspaper in Canada. The Windsor Daily Star took upon itself to make a survey of conditions as they exist in Windsor and in Detroit, which is on the opposite side of the river. Here are some comparative prices as found by them: soft drinks, Windsor, 7 cents; Detroit, 10 to 15 cents; hamburgers and hot-dogs, Windsor, 10 cents; Detroit, 21 cents; shortening, Windsor, 19 cents; Detroit, 27 cents. The average good meal costs 75 cents in Windsor and $1.75 in Detroit; for a downtown movie one pays 48 cents in Windsor, 85 cents in Detroit. Let me remind hon. members that if we have inflation, the industrialists, high-salaried people, and professional people will be able to charge correspondingly; it is the smaller people, the workers in the factories, who will suffer. I come from an industrial town, not from a farming area, so that I come in contact with these working people; they are my friends, some of them are my relatives, and I believe it is the duty of everyone of us to do everything in our power to protect from inflationary policies the factory workers, the widows and orphans dependent on small pensions, the retired business men with a little money laid by, for these are the people who need protection. After the last war there was no such control as we have to-day, and prices sky-rocketed. To give the house some idea, let me quote a few7 typical figures:

			March
1919	1920	1946cents	cents	centsButter, per pound ..	58	74-8	44-7Eggs, per dozen....	54	88	43Sugar, per pound . . .	11-9	25	8-6Bread, per pound . ..	7-8	9-7	6-7Milk, per quart ....	13-7	15-6	10-5This is why I am	opposed	to the	amendment submitted by the loyal opposition. Now, as to the un-loyal opposition-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Donald Ferguson Brown: Is there some question about that?


An hon. MEMBER:: Certainly there is.


Donald Ferguson Brown: Very well, I will pass that by and classify the C.C.F. with the Conservatives. If they want to be associated I will call them also the loyal opposition, or we can have the C.C.F. branch of the loyal opposition.


Mrs. STRUM:: On a point of order, the speaker is classifying two kinds of opposition or two kinds of "loyal" opposition. Am I correct in assuming we have an official opposition and then we have other hon. members in opposition?


Donald Ferguson Brown: Bless your little heart, I would not do anything-


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: Well, see that you don't then.


Donald Ferguson Brown: Far be it from me to contradict a woman. I am married too.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: Well, you are not at home now.


Donald Ferguson Brown: I did not hear that. However, I have been called un-Christian by the hon. member who has interrupted me. She did so on Monday, April 15. As quoted in the Windsor Daily Star, "Mrs. Strum says that the King government is un-Christian". It may be so. But I do not think the people of Canada are particularly concerned about what any hon. member, including myself, is saying; what they want is action. Instead of going around the country, as some hon. members are doing, making inflammatory speeches, I think we should get down to business. Men and women earnestly desire more humane conditions of living, better jobs, comfort for their griefs, healing for their wounds, life in a decent society, proper dwellings, education for their children, sane and clean government.
Now, as to this amendment brought in by the official opposition-63260-109
Price Ceiling-Farm, Products


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: That is better.


John Ritchie MacNicol: You have it right this time.
' Mr. BROWN: Thank you.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Next time it will be the government.


Donald Ferguson Brown: That is wishful thinking. The people of Canada are not particularly interested in gibes across the floor. Our job is to do the best we can where we are.
The subamendment would lead one to believe that the worker has not been fairly treated by this government-this Liberal government. However, strange as it may seem,
I come from an industrial area and I was elected. I think the people of Canada are quite well aware of the benefits that have accrued to them from this government-this Liberal government.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: So-called.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: By a former Liberal.


Donald Ferguson Brown: Will the hon. gentleman rise in his place and say what he has to say, or is he ashamed of it? After all, it was Sir Wilfrid Laurier who formed the dominion Department of Labour in 1900, and no one will say he was not a Liberal.


John Ritchie MacNicol: He was a great Canadian.


Donald Ferguson Brown: The Postmaster General of the day administered the department, and the gentleman who is now the head of the government, Mr. Mackenzie King, was deputy minister.


Angus MacInnis: It started out very badly.


Donald Ferguson Brown: It started very well, and I will depend on the judgment of the people of Canada rather than that of any political party.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: Take Prince Albert, for instance.


Donald Ferguson Brown: In 1908 the interests of labour were given fuller recognition by the appointment of a Minister of Labour holding no other portfolio, and the present Prime Minister became minister. To-day we have as minister one who has devoted his life to the labour movement. I refer to the hon. member for Welland (Mr. Mitchell). We also have an efficient department under the supervision of Mr. Arthur MacNamara, who has rendered a noble service to the dominion in the more recent strikes we have had. Between 1896 and 1911 labour legislation enacted by the dominion parliament included the Conciliation Act, establishing the department and providing for conciliation work by

Price Ceiling-Farm Products

the officers of the department in case of industrial disputes; the Railway Labour Disputes Act, designed to promote the settlement of disputes between railway companies and their employees; the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act, providing further machinery for the prevention and settlement of labour . disputes, particularly those in mines and public utilities; the Alien Labour Act, to protect Canadian workmen from the competition of alien workmen brought to Canada under contract; and the Lord's Day Act, ensuring rest on Sunday to the great majority of workers.
The statute prohibiting the manufacture and sale of matches made from white phosphorus, enacted in 1914, was drawn up and passed by the House of Commons first in 1911 but was not finally disposed of before the general election of 1911. The fair wages resolution of the House of Commons in 1900 is the basis of the government's policy by which contractors for dominion government works and supplies are required to pay the rates of wages prevailing in the district in which the work is done. In 1908, the Government Annuities Act was passed. The provision made for the sale of annuities by the government was designed for the advantage of persons of small and moderate incomes who wished to ensure for their old age a certain income.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: What has that to do with the amendment?


Donald Ferguson Brown: I am talking about the amendment as submitted by the C.C.P. as follows:
This house is of the opinion that the government's policies of permitting recent unjustifiable increases in the prices of farm machinery and of steel have resulted in imposing on food producers and workers of Canada an unfair share of the burden of maintaining the government's price stabilization policies.
That is the amendment, and I am telling the house what the Liberal government has done for the workers of the country.


Mr. BURTON:: You have not told us whether you are in favour of an increase in the price of machinery.


Donald Ferguson Brown: The hon. member will have an opportunity of making a speech if he wants to, but it will not be to-night, I assure him. Since the government came into office in December, 1922, legislative and other action has been taken to promote the welfare of the workers. The trainmen formerly employed on the Grand Trunk railway lines who had been deprived of their pension and seniority rights were restored to their former status in 1922 through the efforts of the government. That was in 1922, and the people of Canada know what benefits have accrued to them.
'Mr. Brown.]


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: What about 1946 and this amendment?


Donald Ferguson Brown: We will get to that. Do not be impatient. The Winnipeg postal employees who were required after the strike of 1919 to accept the minimum rates of wages for new men were by a statute of 1929, granted the rates payable for work done. The amendment of 1919 to the Immigration Act, whereby the minister was empowered to deport any persons who were deemed to be advocating violence or sedition except those who were British subjects by reason of birth in Canada or naturalization in Canada, was repealed in 1928 and the section made to apply to those who are not Canadian citizens. By an order in council of August, 1929, issued under the authority of the Immigration Act, employers were prohibited from importing labour under contract. In 1922, an act was passed restricting Chinese immigration.
The 1924 amendment to the Militia Act provided that the militia could be called out by local authorities only with the approval of the provincial attorney general. The use of militia in labour disputes was thus made dependent on the approval of the attorney general of the province concerned. Labour was given representation on the board of directors of the Canadian National Railways-


James Horace King: Order. It is eleven o'clock.


Donald Ferguson Brown: In that event, Mr. Speaker, I would move the adjournment of the debate, and if offence has been taken by my hon. friends-I say "friends" advisedly-I hereby apologize.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.
At eleven o clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Tuesday, May 21, 1946.