1946-04-17

THE EARL OF ATHLONE


Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to
inform the house that the Clerk has laid on the table to-day the reply of the Right Honourable the Earl of Athlone to the joint address of farewell presented to him by the Senate and the House of Commons, as follows:
Honourable members of the Senate,
Members of the House of Commons,
I thank you most sincerely for the; kind address of farewell which you have presented to me on the occasion of my approaching retirement as governor general of the Dominion of Canada.
It is with feelings of regret that I am concluding my official relationship as the representative of His Majesty the King in this country. It has been an honour and a great privilege to have served as governor general during the most eventful and calamitous years in the history of our time. The period of the war was fraught with innumerable difficulties many of which appeared at the time to be insurmountable. But parliament and the Canadian people, by their unselfish and untiring devotion to the cause of freedom, played a major part in the victorious struggle of the united nations against the implacable enemies of democracy.
My numerous tours of this vast country have enabled me to see almost every section of Canada.
I have been a witness of the efficiency, pel-severance and courage displayed by the men and women of Canada, whether they served in ' the armed forces or were engaged in factories or in one of the numerous societies which performed such miracles of organization and effectiveness. This ready response to the call of duty was an* evidence of the loyalty of the Canadian people to His Majesty the King and to the British commonwealth of nations, of which Canada is so important a part.
I am very much pleased to record that my relations with the members of both houses have been of the happiest.
I shall not fail, on my return to England, to convey to Their Majesties the King and Queen the loyal sentiments so admirably expressed in your address. It will be my pleasure also to convey to Queen Mary your kind remembrances. Her Majesty the Queen Mother has the warmest interest in the people of this country.
I join with you in expressing the hope that Their Royal Highnesses the Princess Elizabeth and the Princess Margaret may pay a visit to Canada in the near future.
On behalf of Princess Alice I wish to convey to you Her Royal Highness' appreciation for the very kind references you have made to her in your address. These have touched us both very deeply.
TMr. Pouliot.l
We shall never forget what Canada has contributed during the past six difficult and testing years. She earned the admiration and true gratitude of all free peoples for her magnificent and munificent contribution to the victorious prosecution of the war and to the welfare and rehabilitation of the suffering peoples of the world.
In bidding you farewell, Princess Alice and I wish to assure you of our deep and abiding affection and at the same time to express our complete confidence in the continued prosperity of Canada and the maintenance of her proud position as the senior dominion of the British commonwealth of nations.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: I should like to supplement the statement I made in reply to the question asked yesterday by the leader of the opposition with reference to- a threatened stoppage of work on ships operating on the great lakes, by reading a letter addressed by myself to Mr. Sullivan on April 11. The letter reads as follows:
I have your letter of April 9 and there is a necessity in my opinion to record the facts up to date -as we understand them.
You met with me on March 25 and in addition to your committee, you will recall that Messrs. MacNamara and Maclean were present. The statement of myself and officials is that it was agreed that a telegram would be sent to the parties urging that a meeting take place on April 8 which was the earliest date convenient to you.
It was further stated that the meeting could be held in the Department of Labour office at Toronto if the parties so desired and also that a conciliation officer would be available if the parties asked for him.
In accordance with this understanding telegrams were dispatched to both parties and copies of same are attached.
It does seem to me that there is no room in the wording of the telegrams for any misunderstanding.
I am still of the opinion that it would have been advisable to meet with the operators. However, your committee decided otherwise.
You, of course, will at once agree that I could not, under the circumstances, say to the operators that they had refused to meet you.
It is noted that your executive has decided to take a strike vote beginning April 15 and I suggest to you that inasmuch as the process of collective bargaining between yourselves and the ship operators has not yet been concluded, a strike vote at the moment seems to be unnecessary and cannot be said to be in accordance with the provisions of the wartime labour relations regulations, P.C. 1003, which requires the parties to a dispute to bargain in good faith one with the other.
You may be assured that the department will do its utmost to bring about a mutually satisfactory agreement between the operators and

Labour Conditions
the employees. However, the department is still convinced that the most satisfactory solution would be one brought about by collective bargaining rather than by the passing of legislation providing for an eight-hour day.
I further wish to inform you that the labour department has requested the Department of Justice to review the relative authority as between the dominion and provincial governments and, in addition, the department has arranged for the submission of an independent legal opinion on this question.
Yours sincerely,
(sgd) Humphrey Mitchell


Mr. BRACKEN:: Has the minister considered calling these groups together in order to try to iron out this matter?


Humphrey Mitchell: I have already done that. The operators are meeting on April 24 and I understand that a submission is to be made to the men's organization. It can be fairly stated that I have had some experience in labour negotiations, not only as chairman of boards of concilation but also as a negotiator for trade unions. I have never yet felt that anything is lost by negotiation. Sometimes when settlement of a dispute seems hopeless and a strike is inevitable the interested parties meet and in many instances an agreement is arrived at and work goes on unimpeded notwithstanding the difficult situation that existed.
May I give a word of advice to both sides? We have set up machinery for the settlement of disputes of this kind, and anybody who has a good case should never be afraid to come before an impartial tribunal. The machinery of the labour relations board-and I speak now from memory-has dealt with about 3,200 disputes. In only eight cases has there been a strike. I believe that is a fair average, and compared with other countries it gives an indication of the soundness of the legislation that this parliament has adopted for the settlement of disputes of this kind. I hope that good sense will be shown by both sides; that they will obey the law and use the machinery that most other organizations have used since the establishment of the code in this country.



REFERENCE IN DEBATE TO QUESTION OF PRICES

Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :: As a matter of privilege I should like to clarify a statement which was made the other evening and upon which there have been some reports that are creating some difficulties. Most of us find it rather difficult to get any butter in these days. Following my remarks the other evening the suggestion was made that I had said there might be a
further increase in the price of butter. Naturally that would cause persons who have butter to hold it for the higher price. I just wish to state that I had no intention of making any such suggestion either to this house or to the country, and I want to emphasize that fact. What I did was suggest that already there had been an increase in the price of butter and that there might be other products in connection with which increases might be necessary, but there was no reference to butter in the latter part of the statement.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 31 for the relief of Esther Irene Lind Booth-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 32 for the relief of Katie Hoffman Pinsky-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 33 for the relief of Dorothy Adams Acer McDougall-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 34 for the relief of Helen Douglas Stewart Rankin-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 35 for the relief of Olive Esther Rose Ewen-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No., 36 for the relief of Andrew Prem-Das-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 38 for the relief of Reginald Wesley Titcombe-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 39 for the relief of Hilda Forsey Pearce Johnston-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 40 for the relief of Ann Low Fuller Mitchell-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 41 for the relief of Marguerita St. Catherine McKeigan Guillevin-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 42 for the relief of Bessie Goldrosen Green-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 43 for the relief of Audrey Helen Jackson Maxham

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 44 for the relief of Frank Russell Yeoman-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 45 for the relief of Florence Joy McGibbon Lafleur-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 46 for the relief of Isobel Cameron McLaggan Oswald-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 47 for the relief of John Louis Charlebois-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 49 for the relief of Georgina Hylda Swaffield McKenzie-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 50 for the relief of Dorothy Ellen Cope Kimpton-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 52 for the relief of Charles Patrick Kavanagh-Mr. Maybank,
Bill No. 53 for the relief of Irene Gertrude Cariy Staley-Mr. Maybank..
Naval Service Act
Mr. CASE:: I may be out of order, Mr. Speaker, and if so you will rule accordingly; but I propose to oppose the third reading of every divorce bill presented from the senate.



NAVAL SERVICE ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of National Defence for Naval Services) moved the first reading of bill No. 56 (from the senate) to amend the Naval Service Act, 1944.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. ABBOTT:: The purpose of this
bill is to insert in the Naval Service Act a section similar to one contained in the Militia Act, by which the sea cadet corps, the naval cadets, will be authorized in the same way that the cadet corps for the army are now authorized under the Militia Act. During the war the sea cadet corps were authorized by order in council under the War Measures Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



ROYAL CANADIAN AIR FORCE ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Minister of National Defence for Air) moved the first reading of bill No. .57 (from the senate) to amend the Royal Canadian Air Force Act.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: This bill is to amend the Royal Canadian Air Force Act to make provision for the formation and establishment of Royal Air Force cadet squadrons. These squadrons were formed during the war under the provisions of the War Measures Act, and this bill is being made in order to provide for their retention.
Motion agreed to and bill read the. first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. JAENICKE:: In each of the provinces during the years of 1944 and 1945: 1. How many prosecutions were taken under section 77 of the Income War Tax Act, chapter 97 R.S.C. 1927?
2.	How many persons were convicted?
3.	What were the total fines in respect of such convictions ?
TMr Gardiner.]
4.	In respect of how many convictions do the fines remain unpaid?
5.	How many of the convicted persons have made their return and have paid their income
tax?
6.	How many actions or proceedings have recently been taken under sections 70, 71, 72, 73: and 74 of the said act?
7.	How many persons having been assessed for income tax have been relieved from payment of such tax ia.nd on what grounds were they so relieved from payment?


Mr. McCANN:: 1.	The sections referred to do not provide for prosecutions or convictions. Therefore, there have been none.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Answered by No. 1.
4.	Answered by No. 1.
5.	Answered by No. 1.
6.	Answered by No. 1.
7.	None, unless insolvent estates, bankruptcies and compositions with creditors under bankruptcy proceedings may be regarded as such and if so the information is not available.


ATOMIC ENERGY-COST OF DISCOVERY AND PRODUCTION
Mr. FRASER:: What share did Canada have in the cost of discovering and produoing atomic energy?


Mr. McILRAITH:: Although Canada had membership on the combined policy committee which was responsible for the over-all general policy relating to experiment and production of atomic energy, it is impossible to give Canada's share of the total cost because the cost to other nations is not known. Canada, however, has spent a sum of approximately 27 million dollars on research and development in the field of atomic energy.


WAR ASSETS-MOTOR VEHICLES
Mr. WEBB:: 1.	Are priorities required to purchase jeeps, station wagons, automobiles and trucks held for sale by War Assets Corporation?
2.	If so, to whom are they issued?
3.	If not, what is the proper procedure to buy one?
4.	What are the names of individuals or municipalities in the county of Leeds who have purchased vehicles or materials of any kind from War Assets Corporation?
5.	Is there a local office of War Assets Corporation in Leeds county?
6.	If so, where is it located?


George James McIlraith: 1,	2 and 3. The policy of War Assets Corporation in the disposal of vehicles is to meet, in the first instance, the priority requests of

Questions
9S1
federal government departments, provincial government departments and municipalities. The remaining vehicles are then disposed of through the normal channels of business i.e. dealers, subject to a veteran's preference.
4.	The county of Leeds has made no application to purchase equipment or material from War Assets Corporation; the municipality of the town of Brockville applied for an ambulance which was offered to them on December 17, 1945. No reply was received from the municipality. The Brockville police department applied for a motorcycle which was offered to them on January 7, 1946, and no reply has been received. The municipality of Gananoque applied for a floor polisher, fire hose, ladder trucks and steel fencing with posts. This equipment is not available.
It is not possible to give the names of individuals.
5.	No.
6.	Answered by 5.


WHEAT BOARD-1945 SALES
Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many bushels of wheat were sold by the Canadian Wheat Board in 1945 iat (.a) $1.25 and (b) $1.55 per bushel basis 'number one northern, Fort William?
2.	What number of bushels of wheat was used for such domestic purposes as flour and feed in 1945?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	Wheat sold basis No. 1 Northern, Fort William/Port Arthur or Vancouver:
Basis SI.25 per bushel	 131,775,015
Basis $1.43 per bushel	 92,917,711
Basis S1.43 to $1.54 per bushel ..	37,382,159
Basis $1.55 per bushel	 175,126,270
437,201,156
2.	Used for domestic purposes-76,920,218 bushels (subject to revision).


VETERANS LAND ACT-FARMS PURCHASED IN LEEDS COUNTY
Mr. WEBB:: 1.	How many farms have been purchased in Leeds county under the Veterans Land Act?
2.	Where are these farms located and from whom purchased?
3.	What acreage in each farm and what price was paid for each?
4.	What is the name of the inspector who recommended these purchases?
5.	How many applications are now pending awaiting inspection ?
6.	Who is the district officer in charge of the D.P.A. Veterans Land Act in Leeds county?


Mr. TUCKER:: With regard to paragraph 3 of this question, it is considered that the public disclosure of details as to prices paid for various lands being purchased by the Veterans Land Act administration would be detrimental to the administration and operation of the act, and not in the best interests of the veterans for whom the land has been purchased. Subject to that, the question is answered.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Is that not new
procedure?


Walter Adam Tucker: If the hon. member is interested in any particular parcel of land and wishes to ascertain what has been paid for it, there is no objection to giving him the information. But the public disclosure of the amount paid for each parcel of lp,nd of course will operate to the detriment of the administration of the act, because it may cause others to ask far more for their land than otherwise would be the case.


Gordon Graydon: It is not a matter of the detriment to the administration; it is the detriment to the public, is it not?


Walter Adam Tucker: It is felt that it would work to the detriment of the veterans who have to pay for the land.


Gordon Graydon: I am not sure that is so. It might mean that the veterans would get the land for less.


Walter Adam Tucker: The answer to the remainder of the question is as follows:
1,	2 and 3.
Land Description - Vendor - Acreage- Appraiser
Pts. Lots 28 and 29, Con. 1, Twp. Elizabethtown, Mrs. Muriel M. Bryan, 55, William G. LaTour.
Pt. Lots 20 and 21, Con. 2, Twp. Elizabethtown, Winifred Wright, 124, H. O. McMillan. E. Lot 19, Con. 4, Twp. Front of Lans-downe, Chas. N. Horton, 100, E. R. Donaldson.
Central Pts. Lots 32 and 33, Con. 5, Twp. Elizabethtown, W. H. Davis, 137, E. R. Donaldson.
Lots 20 and 21, Con. 2 and 3, Twp. Front of Escott, Mrs. Jessie Hagerman, 92, Wm. G. LaTour.
Lot 29, Con. 1, Twp. Kitley, and Lot 26, Con. 1, Twp. South Elmsley, John A. Dal-gleish, 168, Wm. G. LaTour.
Pt. Lot 8, Con. 2, Twp, Kitley, W. J. McCabe, 100, Wm. G. LaTour.
Questions

N. i Lot 9, Con. 3, Twp. Lansdowne, B. H. Pederson, 100, M. B. Cochran.
E. i Lot 7, W. i Lot 8, Con. 12, Twp. Lansdowne, Samuel Gluck, 150, H. O. McMillan.
Pt. Lot 10, Con. 12, Rear of Lansdowne Twp., Stewart Singleton, 80, M. B. Cochran.
Pt. Lot 8, Con. 13, Twp. Rear Leeds and Lansdowne, J. Robt. Sheridan, 45, H. O. McMillan.
W. J Lot 4, Con. 1, 60 acs. of Lot 4, Con. 2, 80 acs. of Lot 5, Con. 2, Twp. N. Crosby, A. V. Egan, 240, H. E. Henry.
Rear J Lot 13, Con. 1, Younge Twp., Mrs. Alice Clow, 98, H. O. McMillan.
Pts. Lots 19 and 20, Con. 2, Younge Twp.,
H.	R. and C. L. Knowlton, 165, ffm. G. LaTour.
Pt. Lot 6, Con. 10, Twp. Younge, P. H. Robeson, 100, ffm. G. LaTour.
Lot 9 and N.E. J Lot 10 and 2 acs of Lot 8, Con. 7, Twp. Kitley, Roy B. Gardiner, 252, E. R. Donaldson.
N.W. Pt Lot 22 and N.W. Pt. Lot 21 (74 acs.), N. Pt. 21 (10 acs.), Con. 10, and 10 acs. in Central Pt. Lot 21, Kitley Twp., ffm, Crothers, 95, E. R. Donaldson.
S.W. i Lot 13 and S. i Lot 12, Con. 6, Leeds Twp., Jacob Dormer, 150, M. B. Cochran.
Lot 21 and W. 4 Lot 22, Con. 7, Rear of Leeds and Lansdowne, T. MacMillan, 260, E. R. Donaldson and E. W. Bradley.
N.W. i Lot 18, N.W. 1 Lot 19, Pt. N.E. i Lot 20, N.W. i Lot 20, Con. 4, and Pt. S.W. i Lot 20 and Pt. S.E. i Lot 21, Con. 5, Twp. Front of Yrounge, George Davis, 207, E. R. Donaldson.
4.	Purchases recommended by the regional advisory committee rather than inspector or appraiser. Appraisers' names are given above.
5.	Six.
6.	Mr. H. L. Armstrong, regional supervisor,
Kingston.	[DOT]


RADIO BROADCASTING-SACKVILLE STATION
Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: 1.	Is the Department of Trade and Commerce utilizing the facilities of the short wave radio broadcasting station?
2.	If so, to what extent?
3.	What payments are being made to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for the service?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	The Department of Trade and Commerce, in cooperation with other government departments, does make use of the short wave radio station for broadcasting trade information,
	,
bureau of statistics reports, etc. This department does not purchase time nor sponsor any particular programme.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	No payments whatever are made by this department.


BUTTER PRICES
Mr. HATFIELD:: When the regulation was made increasing the price of butter 4 cents did it include butterfat and dairy butter? If not, why not?


Mr. ILSLEY:: When the price of butter
was raised April 1, the increase applied to creamery butter only. The price of dairy butter has been correspondingly increased effective April 15. This has resulted, in an increase in the price of butterfat used in the manufacture of creamery and dairy butter.


CANADIAN ARMY-PERSONNEL STATIONED NEAR COURTENAY, B.C.
Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	How many army personnel are presently stationed at the Iron River Timber Company's camp near Courtenay, British Columbia?
2.	Are these soldiers doing work for a private logging company?
3.	If so, what is (a) the name of the company; (b) the nature of the work?
4.	By whom' are the said soldiers paid?
5.	If by the company (a) what is the hourly or daily wage; (b) is there any deduction for board or other expenses?
6.	If the said soldiers are paid by the Department of National Defence, what payment, if any, is made to the department by the company for work done by the soldiers?
7.	Is there a written contract between the Department of National Defence and the company regarding the employment of said soldiers?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	Two officers and 77 other ranks.
2.	Yres-reforestation for the provincial forestry service. The men are provided for this work at the request of the British Columbia forest service and British Columbia loggers association. It is expected' the work will be completed by 15 April, 1946.
3.	(a) Comox Logging and Railway Company. .
(b) Reforestation.
4.	The soldiers are paid Army rates by the Army.
5.	Answered by No. 4 above-see also answer to question 6.
6.	The logging company pays to the receiver-general, through the Department of National Defence, 60 cents per hour plus a bonus of 20

Questions
the job until it is completed. A deduction is made for board, the amount of which is not cents per day for Army men who remain on available at present.
7.	No. Arrangements made through D.O.C., M.D. 11 to provide personnel for urgent national work in isolated camps for which civilian labour could not be found.


SUGAR CONTROLLER-ACADIA SUGAR REFINERY
Mr. ISNOR:: 1.	Was the Acadia Sugar Refinery, at Wood-side, Nova Scotia, closed by order of the sugar controller of Canada?
2.	If so, has application for reopening of plant since been made by owners?
3.	What answer was given?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	No.
2	and 3. Answered by No. 1.


REMOVAL OF RIPPLE ROCK AT SEYMOUR NARROWS
Mr. MATTHEWS (Kootenay East):: 1.	What is the total amount expended by the federal government to date, in the attempted removal of Ripple Rock at Seymour Narrows?
2.	What steps have been taken by the government to proceed with this project?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: 1.	$802,825.47.
2.	(a) Methods of improving navigation are being given consideration, Ob) Other methods of removing the rock are being studied.


SASKATOON AIRPORT-EXTENSION OF RUNWAYS
Mr. KNIGHT:: 1.	Does the contract for extension of runways at the Saskatoon airport specify an approximate date for completion?
2.	If so, what is that date?
3.	Does progress up to the present indicate that the work will be completed by that date?


George James McIlraith: In so far as the Department of Transport is concerned1-
1.	Grading of E/W runway 75 per cent completed last fall. Tenders are being called for the construction of two complete runways and are due April 29. The completion date specified is November 30, 1946.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Yes.


HOGS FOR DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What is the quota of hogs granted for
domestic consumption only in each of the following centres:	Halifax, Montreal, Toronto,
Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, Vancouver?
2.	On what basis are the above hog quotas established?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	The total quota of hogs granted for domestic consumption is as follows: Halifax, no quotas imposed; Montreal, 6,853 per week; Toronto, 7,217 per week; Winnipeg, 4,963 per week; Regina, 324 per week; Edmonton, 2,827 per week; Vancouver, 3,394 per week.
Note.-These are the numbers that may be slaughtered per week in these cities but it must be remembered an important percentage of the resultant pork is shipped to areas outside of these cities.
2.	The general policy followed by the wartime prices and trade board in establishing hog quotas for domestic consumption is to permit an operator to slaughter at the rate of 75 per cent of a basic period.
Exceptions to the general policy have been made in the case of deficiency production areas, and in the case of domestic processors who normally secured their pork by purchase from slaughterers.


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD-CARPENTERS
[Stage Direction]
Mr. LaCROIX:
What is the hourly salary paid to carpenters working for the national harbours board in (a) the Toronto harbour; (b) the' Montreal harbour; (c) the Quebec harbour?
Mr. CHEVRIER:: Furnished by the national harbours board, (a) The Toronto harbour is not under the administration of the national harbours board; (b) Carpenter, 95 cents; timberman (rough carpenter), 80 cents; (c) carpenter, SO cents; timberman (rough carpenter), 70 cents.


CANADIAN FORCES-PERSONNEL IN SERVICE OUTSIDE OF CANADA
Mr. BRUNELLE:: 1.	How many Canadian soldiers are still in service outside of Canada?
2.	How many of that number are in the army or armies of occupation and how many are not?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	36,300 all ranks (as of 31 March, 1946).
2.	Canadian army occupation force, 16,900; others, 19,400.
Note: Above figures do not include 3,000 soldiers in transit to Canada.


VEGETABLE OIL
Heber Harold Hatfield: What quantity of vegetable oil was imported into Canada during the year 1945 and from what countries ?
5)54
Questions


Lionel Chevrier: Canadian imports by countries, of vegetable oils during the calendar year 1945
Item	Unit Country	Qty.	ValueCocoanut oil, n.o.p., edible.. Cwt.	[DOT][DOT][DOT]*	$	[DOT][DOT][DOT][DOT]Cotton seed oil, n.o.p., edible Cwt. Brazil    	
580	6,916United States	
169	2,773Totals	
749	$	9,689Olive oil, n.o.p., edible .... Cwt. Spain	
752	$	50,514United States	
68	4,383Totals	
820	$ 54,897Peanut oil, n.o.p., edible ... Cwt. United States	
760	$ 13,874Soya bean oil, n.o.p., edible Cwt. United States	
34,929	$ 565,338Castor oil	
Cwt.	British India	
1,109	23,547Brazil	
89,722	1,251,660Paraguay	
1,823	29,983United States	
4,850	80,989Totals	[DOT]....	97,504	$1,386,179Chinawood oil	
Cwt. Brazil	
12	$	559United States	
3,596	156,603Totals	
3,608 S 157,162Cocoanut oil, not edible___ Cwt. United States	
980	$	26,967Cotton seed and oil for mfr. Cwt.	Argentina	
161,257	1,896,561Brazil	
78,501	915,049United States	
5,056	70,898Totals	
244,814	$2,882,508Essential oil, n.o.p	
Lb.	United Kingdom	
7,258	14,239British India	
3,360	5,580Ceylon	
5,418	4,517Jamaica	
974	4,262Trinidad	
2,337	16,326Br. W. Indies, other	
410	1,872Australia	
329	1,919Brazil	
9,043	12,332France	
1,693	18,299Haiti	
50	207Mexico	
5,106	35,328Paraguay	
50	111Spain	
2,379	4,691Switzerland	
373	19,527Porto Rico	
50	97United States	
738,817	2,260,021Totals	
777,647	$2,399,328

Questions
Item	Unit	Country	Qty.	Value	Eucalyptus oil 	Lb.	Australia 	
21,475	$	18,937United States 	
2,088	2,548Totals 	
23,563	$	21,485Flaxseed or linseed oil 	Cwt.	United States 	
1,769	$	40,281Foots of cotton seed or	olives 	Cwt.	United States 	
3.045	$	38,650Olive oil for manufacturing Cwt.	Portugal 	
608	11,688United States 	
644	13,093Totals 	
1,252	S	24,781
258,103	$1,028,313	Belgian Congo 	
38,291	234J66United States 	
32	668Totals 	
296,426	$1,263,147	Peanut oil 	Cwt.	United States 	
162	$	2,958Peppermint oil 	Lb.	
6,902	16,617United States 	
31,841	262,459Totals 	
38,743	$	279,076Perilla oil 	Cwt.	S	Resin oil 	Cwt.	United States 	
5,600	$	35,866Sesame seed oil 	Cwt.	United States 	
4	$	114Soya bean oil for manufac-	ture 	Cwt.	United States 	
595	$	7,890Vegetable oil, n.o.p., not	edible 	Cwt.	United States 	
5.448	$	84,6%Rape seed oil 	Cwt.	Argentina 	
2,455	$	33,648United States 	
4,497	71,288Totals 	
6,952	$	104,936Cashew nut shell oil 	Cwt.	United States 	
1,101	$	21,943Oiticiea oil 	
3 685	94 569United States 	
13	310Totals 	
3,698	$	94,879Sunflower seed oil 	Cwt.	Argentina 	
160,500	$1,484,913	Vegetable oils for textiles..	Cwt.	United States 	
10,168	$	202,846Lemon oil and orange oil ..	Lb.	Jamaica 	
2,400	5,234Br. W. Indies, other 	
210	884Brazil 	
10,661	14,635United States 	
63,618	200,779Totals 	
76,889	$	221,532Spearmint oil 	Lb.	United States 	
12,084	$	53,445
Questions


BUTTER AND CHEESE EXPORTS
Mr. HATFIELD:: 1. What quantity of butter was exported from Canada during the period from March 31, 1945 to March 31, 1946, and to what countries?
' 2. What quantity of cheese was exported from Canada during the period from March 31, 1945 to March 31, 1946, and to what countries?


Lionel Chevrier: 1 and 2. Exports of butter and cheese, by countries, during the fiscal year ended March 31, 1946:
	Butter	Cheese
Country	Cwt.	Cwt.United Kingdom	-	1,304,574Aden 	14	-British East Africa	-	114British South Africa....	-	2Gambia 	94	60Gold Coast	1,690	447Nigeria 	-	299Sierra Leone 	-	100Bermuda 	2,317	1,764British India	-	23Cevlon 	-	557Straits Settlements ....	-	347British Guiana 	6,043	2,656British Honduras 	1.428	516Barbados	6,485	1,120Jamaica 	2,840	1.853Trinidad 	18,930	3,290British West Indies, other 	5,539	1.251Hong Kong 	-	10Newfoundland 	6.566	7.227Colombia 	1	1Greenland 	117	15Egypt	-	2,193French West Indies	125	-St. Pierre 	1,063	167Iraq 	-	36Italy 	-	953Mexico	-	2Norway 	62	5United States 	-	1,434Totals 	53,314	1,331,016


VETERANS AFFAIRS-SASKATOON MILITARY HOSPITAL
Mr. KNIGHT:: 1.	Does the Department of Veterans Affairs operate a military hospital at the former No. 4 Service Flying Training School at Saskatoon?
2.	If so, does this hospital provide only care for convalescents?
3.	Is other medical or surgical care provided?
4.	How many beds are in use?
5.	What is the number of patients?
6.	Has any physiotherapeutic equipment been provided for this hospital from (a) war-assets equipment declared surplus; (b) any other source ?

' Mr. TUCKER:
1.	The Department of Veterans Affairs operates a veterans' hospital at said premises.
2.	No.
3.	Yes.
4.	Bed capacity at April 6, 1946: 148.
5.	At April 6, 1946 : 93.
6.	(a) yes; (b) yes.


AIR TRANSPORT BOARD
Mr. CASE:: 1.	Who are the members of the air transport board?
2.	Through which member of the board is the
postmaster general's department represented, or in what other manner is that department represented?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	Robert Alexander Cecil Henry, chairman; Alan Ferrier, member; Joseph Pierre Romeo Vachon, member.
2.	Not represented through any member nor in any other manner. The Postmaster General's department is, however, advised of any matters of direct concern to it.


STEEL PRICES-AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS
Mr. SENN:: 1.	Are agricultural implements included in the list of basic iron and steel products on which the ceiling price is raised as announced by the finance minister on Tuesday. April 2?
2.	If so, what increase is being allowed?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	No increase was allowed as of April 1st, the date on which the prices of other iron and steel products were permitted to increase.
2.	An increase of 12^ per cent in the retail price of farm implements was permitted effective April 13, 1946.


NATIONAL REGISTRATION
Mr. THATCHER:: 1.	Are Canadians still compelled by law to carry registration cards?
2.	If so, for what reason?
3.	Have any prosecutions been made since January 1, 1946, because of failure to produce a registration card, and if so, how many?
4.	How many people are still employed in the administration of national registration?
5.	What is the total monthly cost to the government of employing these people?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1. Yes; all Canadians, sixteen years or age and over, are still required by law to carry national registration certificates when residing in Canada, except
(a)	Cloistered nuns;
(b)	Members of the naval, military and air forces of Canada on active service;

Questions
(c)	Persons confined in asylums for the insane or feeble-minded, or in penitentiaries or prisons;
(d)	Inmates of institutions excepted by the chief registrar for Canada upon the recommendation of the registrar for the electoral district in which the institution is situated.
2.	The principal reasons are:
(1)	To assist the authorities in the rehabilitation of the large number of adults displaced by the exigencies of war.
(2)	To assist the authorities in clearing up unfinished cases and investigations of desertions from the armed forces, defaults and delinquencies under the national resources mobilization regulations, the defence of Canada regulations and other wartime controls.
(3)	So that the national registration records from which much information is still being supplied may be kept as up to date as possible.
3.	Very few prosecutions have been made or instituted since January 1, 1946 for failure to produce a registration certificate. The exact total of such cases is not available as the provincial and municipal law enforcement authorities do not report all cases to the dominion authorities.
4.	At March 31, 1946, there were 232 persons employed in the national registration branch, Department of Labour.
5.	The total monthly cost to the government at present is approximately $30,000.


UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION-PERMANENT SITE
Mr. LOCKHART:: 1.	Have any representations been made to the government or to any Canadian delegation to the united nations organization in connection with the choice of Navy island as a permanent site for the headquarters of the united nations organization?
2.	If so, when and by whom were such representations made?
3.	What steps were taken by the government or the Canadian delegation as aforesaid to ensure that the permanent site of the united nations headquarters would be in Canada?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Yes.
2.	A number of representations were made at different times. Some of these were verbal. Those of which there is a record include the following:
By Mr. J. E. Lawson, on July 31;
By Mr. Davis Duff and Mr. Arthur A. Schmon, October 4, 1945;
By Senator J. J. Bench, December 31;
By Mr. Chauncey J. Hamblin and Mr. John A. Williamson, December 18.
In addition Mr. E. J. Anderson, Mr. Roy H. Davis and Mr. Louis Blake Duff brought this matter to the attention of the Canadian government and the Canadian delegation in London on a number of occasions.
3.	Action on the part of the Canadian government or any Canadian delegation to the united nations could not ensure that the permanent site for the headquarters of the uhited nations would be in Canada.
However, everything that could appropriately be done was done to ensure that the united nations should be aware of possible Canadian sites when giving consideration to the location of the permanent headquarters of the united nations. Representations concerning Navy island and other Canadian cities and localities were brought to the attention of the preparatory commission of the united nations. The preparatory commission circulated a list to delegations of possible sites, which included Navy island and other sites in Canada.
The preparatory commission decided that the permanent headquarters of the united nations should be located in the eastern part of the United States of America. A committee to make recommendations on the permanent site of the united nations was set up by the preparatory commission, and this committee sent an inspection group to the United States, with its terms of reference limited to specified areas around New York and Boston. The Canadian government made representations both in London and Washington with a view to having the united nations inspection group examine sites on the international boundary of the Niagara river.
The attitude of the Canadian government, like that of other member governments of the united nations, including the United States government, was that the choice of a permanent site was a matter for collective decision in the broad interests of the united nations.


RAILWAY GRADE SEPARATION
Mr. CHURCH:: For the period of the war, by years, what sums of money have been spent by each of the provinces on railway grade separation in Canada?


Lionel Chevrier: In this question the hon. member for Broadview asks what sums of money have been spent by each of the provinces on railway grade separation in Canada during the war years. The only jurisdiction over this subject matter is that of the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada, and they do not keep separate accounts for the provinces. They have an accurate account of

Questions
the moneys spent by the dominion, and I could put that on the record. But as the question stands I have no way of answering it, and I would suggest that if the hon. member were to communicate with the provinces he would get from them information as to the moneys they have spent on grade separations.
Question dropped.


VETERANS LAND ACT-QUEENS COUNTY, P.E.I.
Mr. McLURE:: 1.	How many farms have been purchased in Queen's, county, Prince Edward Island, under the Veterans Land Act?
2.	Where are these farms located and from whom purchased?
3.	What acreage in each farm and what price was paid for each?
4.	How many veterans are now established on farms in Queen's county?
5.	Who are the officers in charge of Veterans Land Act in Queen's county, Prince Edward Island?


Walter Adam Tucker: The same observations
would apply in regard to this question as in regard to the question of the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Webb). I have spoken to the hon. member who asks this question, and he is satisfied that the third part should not be answered. Subject to that, the question is answered as follows:
1,	2, and 3.
Farms Purchased in Queen's County, Prince Edward Island, per Head Office Records, 13th April, 1946.
Location-Vendor-Acreage
At Kingston in Lot 31, Leonard Willis, 73.
At Union Road, Beecher Bryenton, 146.
At Appin Road, Samuel Condon, 130.
At Marshfield, Herbert C. Nelson, 6SJ.
At Dunstaffnage, Twp. 35, Robert E. Connelly, 105.
At Mount Stewart, Twp. 37, Stewart Mac-Eachern, 152.	,
At North River, Hugh M. Walker, 74.
At Union Road, Lot 33, George H. Newman, 98.
At Winsloe, Lot 33, Harold Prowse, 87.
At Sea View, Edwin Donald, 85.5.
At Springvale, Lot 32, Lome Coles, 53.
At Stanley Bridge, Twp. 22, A. E. Fyfe, 75.
At Westmoreland, William MacVittie, 101.
At Little York, Twp, 34, Lester Keizer, 69.
At Clinton, Lot 20, G. E. Woodside, 85.
At North Rustico, Lot 24, J. E. Bulman, 98-|
At Inkerman, Lot 29, A. W. Newson, 100.
At Nine Mile Creek, Lot 65, R. H. Lowther, 100.
At Stanhope, Lot 34, W. H. Ross, 60.
At Eldon, Lot 57, G. A. Davies, 100.

At Avondale, Lot 49, E. A. Curran, 100.
At Park Corner, Lot 21, R. C. Episcopal Corp., 71.
At Canoe Cove, Twp. 65, F. MacDougall, 50
At Mount Albion, Lot 48, S.S.B., 76;
At Summerfield, Twp. 67, Mrs. W. F. Curley, 62.
At DeSable, J. D. McFarlane, 133.
At Cherry Valley, Twp. 50, Geo. and Wm. Hayden, 153.
At Alberry Plains, Twp. 50, P. Cairns, -75.
At Nine Mile Creek, Lot 65, N. MacDonald,
102.
At Cherry Valley, Lot or Twp. 50, Trueman Jenkins, 96.
At Suffolk, Twp. 34, W. S. MacArthur, 118.
At Suffolk, F. W. Godfrey, 97.
At Vernon River, Lot 50, Owen Doherty 58.
At Brookfield, Lots 23 and 24, P. A. Horne, 94.
At Rusticoville, L. Gallan, 50.
At Mayfield, Twp. 23, Lemuel Wyand, 82.
At New London, Rutherford Cotton, 95.
At Flat River, Twp. or Lot 60, and Twp. 48, R. A. Mackenzie, 100.
At Wheatley River, Lot 24, Emile Dulong,
48.
At West Covehead, Lot 34, Mrs. B. MacMillan, 114.	-
At Loyalist Road, Russell Proude, 45.
At Tracadie Cross, Lot 36, D. B. MacDonald, 100.
At Rusticoville, L. F. Gallant, 47.
At Hunter River, Lot 22, A. B. Bagnall, 122.
No. 35 Dunstaffnage School Dist., B. McMillan, 101.
No. 35 Dunstaffnage School Dist., Wm. and Daniel O'Connell, 80.
Near Fredericton, Lot 67 and 21, H. Buchanan, 97.
Union Road, Lot 33, G. E. MacKinnon, 104.
DeSable, Lot 29, D. C. McLean, 100.
Glen Valle3r, Lot 67, H. MacPherson, 205.
Cavendish S.D. 163, Lots 22 and 23, B. Graham, 135.
Bonshaw, Lot 30, G. MacLeod, 80.
Lundale, Lot 57, N. W. MacDonald, 90.
Canoe Cove, J. A. Maclean, 100.
Bonshaw, Lot 30, Wm. Gillis, 100.
Mayfield, Lot 23, DeWitt Brown, 52.
Shamrock, Lot 67, D. D. McDonald, 100.
Cornwall, Lot 31, H. Howard, 50.
Clyde River, Lot 31, W. Boyle, 77.
Argyle Shore, Lot 30, J. G. Inman, 50.
Springton, K. MacLeod estate, 100.
Near Newton Cross, Lot 57, W. D. and Euphemia Gillis, 91.
Wheatley River, J. L. Matheson, 100.
Canoe Cove, R. McNevin, 100.

Questions
At Long River, Lot 20, D. F. Paynter, 65.
At Belfast, Lot 58, C. Panton, 100.
At Rose Valley, R. M. Gamble, 200.
At Frenehfort, Lot 35, J. C. Owen, 140.
At West Valleyfield, Lot 57, J. J. MacPher-son, 80.
At Little Sands, H. Bonnell, 55.
At Kingston, Twp. 31, Derril White, 74J.
At New London, P. Johnstone, 43.
4.	Forty-three of the above properties have been disposed of to veterans.
5.	Mr. E. W. Campbell, Regional Supervisor, Charlottetown.


ARTHRITIS AMD RHEUMATIC DISEASES
Mr. BENTLEY:: 1.	Has the Department of National Health and Welfare investigated the method of treatment for arthritis and rheumatic diseases used by Dr. I. J. K. Golden of Chicago?
2.	If so, what were the results of such investigation?


Mr. CLAXTON:: 1 and 2. No.


INCOME TAX-PRAIRIE PROVINCES
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many (a) inspectors; (b) investigators; (e) other officials, are now engaged in connection with the collection of income tax in each of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta?
2.	Is any portion of the salary and expenses of the above named officers payable in whole or in part by way of bonus on a commission basis?


Mr. McCANN:: ,
1.	Manitoba Saskatchewan Alberta
Inspectors Assessing tax	(a)	1	2	2returns Other em-	(b)	133	83	127ployees	(c),	250	220	262Total em-	ployees	384	305	391
2. No.


WAR ASSETS-CROWN PROPERTIES
Mr. LENNARD:: 1.	Has the Department of Reconstruction sold any crown properties direct to purchasers?
2.	If so, why were these not sold through War Assets Corporation?


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


CENSUS COMMISSIONERS
Mr. ZAPLITNY:: 1.	What are the names and addresses of the census commissioners appointed this year in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta?
2.	Which of these are veterans of first or second world war?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	See list below.
2.	Information not available. We can procure this.
List of Census Commissioners Census of Prairie Provinces, 1946 District-Name-Address
Manitoba
1. Brandon, Charles E. Woodcock, Pipestone, Man.
2a. Churchill South, J. W. Campbell, Minitonas, Man.
2b. Churchill North, A. G. H. Mast, Cranberry Portage, Man.
3.	Dauphin, E. A. Marcroft, Dauphin, Man.
4.	Lisgar, W. T. Pringle, Manitou, Man.
5.	MacDonald, F. M. Ferg, Glenboro, Man.
6.	Marquette, Robert Peel,, Miniota, Man.
7.	Neepawa, J. S. Dempsey, Neepawa, Man.
8.	Portage la Prairie, Robert E. Poldon, Box 667, Portage la Prairie, Man.
9.	Provencher, A. S. Beaubien, St. Jean Baptiste, Man.
10.	St. Boniface, Albert Lambert, 462 St. Jean Baptiste St., St. Boniface, Man.
14.	Selkirk, C. S. Trick, Stonewall, Man.
12.	Souris, Donald John McDonald, Boisse-vain, Man.
13.	Springfield, W. Horodyski, Beausejour, Man.
14.	Winnipeg North, Peter Taraska, 325 Mountain Ave., Winnipeg, Man.
15.	Winnipeg N. Centre, Guy H. Gislason, 412 Avenue Bldg., Winnipeg, Man.
16.	Winnipeg South, Captain Albert James Mitchell, 270 Ashland Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.
17.	Winnipeg S. Centre, Albert Forcese, 778 Broadway Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.
Saskatchewan
18.	Assiniboia, Ernest Wiggins, Estevan, Sask.
19.	Humboldt, L. C. R. Batten, Humboldt, Sask.
20.	Kindersley, Fred Watt, Cavell, Sask.
21.	Lake Centre, W. J. White, Lockwood, Sask.
22.	Mackenzie, J. F. P. Barschel, Canora, Sask.
23.	Maple Creek, James E. Tetreau, Gull Lake, Sask.
24.	Melfort, F. W. Falkner, Tisdale, Sask.
Questions

25.	Melville, R. A. Crosby, Lipton, Sask.
26.	Moose Jaw, Cecil Cull, 8 Woolworth Blk., Moose Jaw, Sask.
27.	North Battleford, Leon A. Pirot, Med-stead, Sask.
28.	Prince Albert, Robert Young, Prince Albert, Sask.
29.	Qu'Appelle, Vernon Hack, Grenfell, Sask.
30.	Regina City, Hark 'D. Macpherson, Suite 3, Capitol Theatre Block, Regina, Sask.
31.	Rosetown-Biggar, Robert S. Hay, Rose-town, Sask.
32.	Rosthern, Andrew W. Michayluk, Wakaw, Sask.
33.	Saskatoon City, John Cairns, 405 Birks Building, Saskatoon, Sask.
34.	Swift Current, Frank J. Dickson, Swift Current, Sask.
35.	The Battlefords, Walter Kingston, Cut-knife, Sask.
36.	Weyburn, D. J. Mitchell, Weyburn, Sask.
37.	Wood Mountain, C. W. Johnson, Mela-val, Sask.
38.	Yorkton, Sol Saper, Yorkton, Sask. Alberta
39.	Acadia, John McDonald, Veteran, Alta.
40.	Athabaska, Laval J. Fortier, St. Paul, Alta.
41.	Battle River, J. D. Adam, Vermilion, Alta.
42.	Bow River, Thomas B. McFarlane, P.O. Box 750, Drumheller, Alta.
43.	Calgary E., Leonard H. Barnes, 1308-4th St. N.W., Calgary, Alta.
44.	Calgary W., D. J. Young, 310 Lancaster Bldg., Calgary, Alta.
45.	Camrose, Roy W. Willis, Stettler, Alta.
46.	Edmonton E., Geo. A. Campbell, 1001883rd Ave., Edmonton, Alta.
47.	Edmonton W., Edward C. Fisher, 10242105th St., Edmonton, Alta.
48.	Jasper-Edson, Donald MacLeod, Lake Isle, Alta.
49.	Lethbridge, Chas. E. Dawson, Room 10, Stafford Block, Lethbridge, Alta.
50.	Macleod, N. Nicholson, Cowley, Alta.
51.	Medicine Hat, Percy Yeo, 14 Empress Theatre Bldg., Medicine Hat, Alta.
52.	Peace River, C. J. Schurter, Slave Lake, Alta.
53.	Red Deer, C. J. Davidson, Three Hills, Alta.
54.	Vegreville, Ryerson B. Christie, Bruder-heim, Alta'.
55.	Wetaskiwin, Stan Puffer, Lacombe, Alta.


CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS
Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	When were conscientious objectors accorded permission to volunteer as such for active service?
2.	How many enlisted as such?
3.	Are conscientious objectors who enlisted required to conform to-day to the regimentation of the Department of Labour under National Selective Service regulations?
4.	Is any class of Canadian citizens other than conscientious objectors required by the Department of Labour to submit to regimentation at this time? If so, who?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	September 16, 1943.
2.	768.
3.	No.	[DOT]
4.	No persons in civil occupations are subject to labour controls at this time other than conscientious objectors who are performing alternative sendee in view of having been postponed from service in the armed' forces. Many men called or enlisting for service in the armed forces have not yet been demobilized.


Mr. WINKLER:: 1.	How many conscientious objectors were registered at the first registration following the outbreak of war?
2.	How many are registered to-day?
3.	When was the last one registered?
4.	Are any conscientious objectors working in government camps (in national parks) at the present, under government supervision?


Humphrey Mitchell: To get the information
asked for in the first part of this question would mean going through tens of thousands of files. There were millions of people registered at that time, and it would be wellnigh impossible to get the information. The third part of the question is in the same category. We should have to go through all those files. Then, who would decide when the, last one was registered?-I do not know. I suggest that the question be dropped and resubmitted on the basis of the second and fourth parts of it.
Question dropped.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: How many (a) county and district court judges (b) supreme and appeal court judges in Canada are (1) over 90 years of age; (2) between 80 and 90; (3) between 70 and 80; (4) between 60 and 70; (5) between 50 and 60; (6) under 50?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: (a) (1) None, (2) None, (3) 19, (4) 39, (5) 53, (6) 16; (b) (1) None, (2) 6, (3) 31, (4) 49, (5) 36, (6) 14.

Questions


UNRRA-SEED POTATOES
Mr. DOUGLAS:: 1.	Has the Canadian government offered UNRRA a gift of Canadian seed potatoes?
2.	If so, what steps have been taken to see that seed potatoes from Prince Edward Island are included?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: 1.	No. The usual procedure in UNRRA procurement is for UNRRA to requisition the necessary supplies. The Canadian Export Board then procures these. So far there has been no requests from UNRRA for seed potatoes.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


POSTMASTERS-REVENUE OFFICES
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	What is the present policy with respect to the discharge or retirement, due to age, of postmasters now in charge of revenue post offices?
2.	Are postmasters now in charge of revenue post offices eligible for pension if and when discharged due to age? If not, on what basis are they retired?
3.	Are all postmasters now in charge of revenue post offices paid regular salaries? If not, how' is their remuneration computed?


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: 1.	Postmasters of offices with not more than $3,000 post office revenue are not released on account of age. Postmasters of offices with more than $3,000 post office renvue will be released on reaching 70 years of age commencing 1st January, 1948.
2.	No. They are not under the Civil Service Superannuation Act.
3.	No. This remuneration is based on the post office revenue of their offices plus other allowances for specific service for work performed.


PARCEL POST-HUNGARY
Mr. KNIGHT:: 1.	Is the rate of parcel post to Hungary higher than the rates to Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia?
2.	What is the greatest weight of food that will be accepted by the post office for transmission to Hungary by parcel post?
3.	How often may such a parcel be sent by one individual in Canada?
4.	Is Hungary on an equal basis as compared with other countries in regard to (a) weight of parcels allowed to be sent; (b) the frequency with which they may be sent?
5.	If not, what is the reason for the difference?


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: The mail from Canada to Hungary operates via the United Kingdom, and as the United Kingdom have not yet resumed their parcel post service to Hungary the Canadian post office cannot accept parcels so addressed.
63260-G1
There is, however, a letter packet service operating from Canada via the United Kingdom to Hungary, and gift food packets weighing up to 4 pounds 6 ounces may be forwarded prepaid at the letter rate of postage.
These packages may be sent by any one sender to two different addressees each week and the regulations as regards Hungary are the same for similar letter packets forwarded to other countries to which the letter packet service has been restored.
The restoration of the parcel post service to Hungary is at present before this department, and it will be placed in operation as soon as the necessary facilities are available.


UNITED NATIONS-EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION  CANADIAN TEACHERS
Mr. KNIGHT:: 1.	Hid the united nations educational, scientific and cultural organization recommend that a national committee or commission be set up in each signatory country?
2.	If so, is the government presently in communication with the Canadian teachers' federation with regard to the appointment of (a) members of such national committee; (b) delegates to the main conference?


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: 1.	Article VII, section 1, of the draft constitution . of the united nations educational, scientific and cultural organization drawn up at the conference held in London, England, last November and submitted to the participating governments for acceptance, reads as follows:
"Each member state shall make such arrangements as suit its particular conditions for the purpose of associating its principal bodies interested in educational, scientific and cultural matters with the work of the organization, preferably by the formation of a national commission broadly representative of the government and such bodies."
2.	The Canadian teachers' federation has written expressing the hope that the government will appoint a national commission and suggesting the names of persons who might be appointed to such a commission and as Canadian representatives to meetings of the organization.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS EOR RETURNS


NATIONAL HOUSING ACT


Mr. NICHOLSON:: 1.	How many houses W'ere completed during (a) 1944; (b) 1945, under the National Housing Act?
2.	How many houses now under construction under the supervision of N.H.A. when com-
1U.VIEZD EDITION
9(52

Questions as Orders for Returns
oleted will cost (a) less than $3,000; (b) from $3,000 to $3,999; (e) from $4,000 to $4,999; (d) ;rom $5,000 to $5,999; (e) from $6,000 to $6,999; (f) from $7,000 to $7,999; (g) over $8,000?
3.	(a) How many limited dividend housing corporations have been established as provided by section 9 of the Housing Act; (b) how many housing units have been completed by such limited dividend housing corporations?
4.	(a) How many rural houses have been completed as provided in part 3 of the National Housing Act? (b) how many rural houses are now under construction as provided by part 3 of the National Housing Act?
5.	(a) How much money has been spent on housing research and community planning as provided by part 5 of the National Housing Act; (b) how many persons are presently employed exclusively on housing research and community planning?



CIVILIAN CORPS OF CANADIAN FIRE FIGHTERS- INCOME TAX

Mr. WEBB:: 1.	How many Canadians served overseas in the civilian corps of Canadian fire fighters?
2.	Is the pay and allowances received by these men while serving overseas subject to income tax?
3.	If so, what steps, if any, have been taken to exempt such pay and allowances from income tax?


James Joseph McCann: Return tabled.



SUPPLY OF FOODSTUFFS TO INDIA

['Then the hon. member\'s diagnosis is quite different from that of the majority of our citizens. We achieved so much under private enteiprise as to be the envy of the world. Was it government control that brought this country from the days of the pioneers to its present position? My conception is that we had better move along under the same policy under which we have operated from the beginning. It is my conception that the function of government is not to operate industry, but so to legislate that a favourable opportunity will be accorded free enterprise to invest its capital, thus giving employment and contributing to the financial needs of the nation.\nSome hon. members bring up the hackneyed question of "no profits" operation. Those who imagine that the sole and only motive in our free enterprise is profit are singularly ignorant of human nature. No undertaking can thrive under persistent losses. No undertaking can thrive unless from time to time there is some profit in it. I fail to see why we cannot continue to depend on the same spirit of enterprise which, as I said before, has brought this country from the days of our pioneering forefathers up to the position which we hold to-day, when we have reached the peak of our industrial production.\nWhy is it that government cannot manage industry as economically as private enterprise\' can? One reason is that under government management you cannot get the coordination and simplification and saving of time and effort that characterize private management. These are ideals that do not enter into government operation. The matter of losing a little time or a little effort does not enter so much into the minds of the government as it does into the minds of the businessman who is carrying on an enter-\n\nprise of his own. There are exceptions, of course, but the conditions where you have these exceptions are not such as to satisfy the business executive. This lack of coordination, lack of simplification and saving of time and effort is not applicable alone to public ownership in Canada. It applies also in the United States. Nor is it peculiar to our generation. It is a condition that is natural to government service, but it is unnatural in private business. You will always find under government control what businessmen characterize as red tape, seniority or some such thing, which you do not find under private enterprise. I contend, therefore, that it is not wise for the people of Canada to turn over to the government to do the things which they themselves can accomplish.\nWise leaders in governments to-day are telling businessmen things that they should know. They are telling them that they have a national duty beyond the bounds of their own enterprise and that if they will step into it and do their public duty it will not be necessary for the government to take over so many projects for which it is not fitted. I am strongly convinced that individual enterprise and freedom of contract is the policy that should be followed in this country if we are to maintain and develop Canada. This is not the day of revolution either in industry or in any other effort. It is the day of evolution. Let is try to improve the policies and methods we have followed from the beginning. I do not see that we the Canadian people are suffering at all from the rheumatic pains of old age. I believe that we are suffering from the growing pains of fast and successful development. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I cannot support this resolution. I think it is a move in the wrong direction.']
Mr. THATCHER:: What specific steps have been taken by the
overnment to supply foodstuffs to India, since
anuary 1, 1946?



[Stage Direction]
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH:
1.	What is the estimated present population of the Mackenize district of the Northwest Territories?
2.	What federal representation has the territory been granted?
3.	What were the populations of each of the provinces upon the entry to confederation?
Mr. MARTIN:: I tabled that this afternoon.


BRITISH COLUMBIA AERODROME SITES
Mr. PEARKES:: 1.	How many aerodrome sites have been developed in the Vancouver-New Westminster southwest mainland area of British Columbia?
2.	Are there any other sites which could be developed ?
3.	If so, is Boundary bay one of the above?
4.	Is it being retained?


CREAMERY BUTTER
Mr. LACOMBE:: 1.	What was production of creamery butter in
Canada during March, 1946?	,
2.	How mucli less was production of creamery butter in March, 1946, compared to March, 1945; quantity; percentage?
[Mr. Nicholson.l
3.	What is the estimate of production of creamery butter from May 1, 1946 to April 30, 1947?
4.	What caused the present shortage of creamery butter in Canada since January?
5.	Was the present shortage of creamery butter caused by a heavy decline in production of butter in the prairie provinces?
6.	Are returns to farmers from cheese making higher than from butter making?
7.	Could butter production be rapidly increased if less cheese was produced for export to United Kingdom?


POSTAL SERVICE-URBAN DELIVERIES
Mr. HAMEL:: 1.	What is, by provinces, the total expenditure of the post office department?
2.	What Canadian cities, towns or municipalities have home delivery of mail by postmen?
3.	In what year was such service inaugurated for each of the above?
4.	At what time, what was the population, number of householders and revenue for each post office?


Ernest Bertrand: I would ask the hon. member to withdraw the first paragraph, because the records of expenditures are not kept by provinces and it is impossible to give them in that way. The other three questions will be accepted as an order for return, which will be filed in due course.


James Horace King: Paragraph 1 dropped;
paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, order for return.


IMPORTS OF OIL INTO PRAIRIE PROVINCES
Mr. HARKNESS:: 1.	What were the sources of supply of oil imported into the prairie provinces in 1946?
2.	What was the amount from each source?
3.	What was the delivery point for the oil from each source?
4.	What were the companies to which this oil was delivered and the amount to each?
5.	What was the subsidy per barrel in each ease?
6.	What was the cost per barrel at source?
7.	What was the freight rate in each case?
8.	What was the gravity of the oil at source in each case?


WAR ASSETS
Mr. WHITE (Hastings-Peterborough):: 1.	How many trucks, station wagons, and passenger cars have been delivered to (a) army; (b) navy; (c) air force, since (1) V-E day; (2) V-J day?
2.	How many of these vehicles have been declared surplus?


COST OF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES
Mr. HANSELL:: 1. What was the total cost involved in Canada's part in the (a) Dumbarton Oaks conference; (b) Bretton Woods conference; (c) SaD Francisco conference?

Mineral Resources


WAR CASUALTIES
Thomas Langton Church: What is the estimated number of casualties in killed, wounded and missing in the Great War from 1939 to the end of 1945?


WARTIME HOUSING-SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: 1.	How many houses have been erected in (a) Regina; (b) Saskatoon; (c) Moose Jaw, by government authority under Wartime Housing and/or other government agencies or plans?
2.	What is the total contract price for each type?
3.	Have any been sold? If so, what is the price for each type which has been sold?
4.	If rented, what is the rental asked for the various types?


RED DEER, ALTA., CUSTOMS OFFICE
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	What volume of business was done through the customs office at Red Deer, Alberta, during each of the years 1935 to 1945?
2.	How- many employees were there in this office during each of the said years?
3.	What was the total amount paid to such employees in each of the above-mentioned years?


PRAIRIE FARM ASSISTANCE-SASKATCHEWAN- SUPERVISORS AND INSPECTORS
Mr. McCUAIG:: .
1.	What are the names of the P.F.R.A. supervisors and inspectors working in the province of Saskatchewan in 1945?
2.	How long was each employed in 1945?
3.	What amount of salary did each receive in that period?
4.	What amount of travelling expenses was paid to each in the same period?


MOTION FOR PAPERS
Mr. CAMPBELL:: For a copy of the report made by the three trustees appointed by Sir John Colborne, Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada, in 1830, on behalf of the Six Nations Indians to investigate and report on the claims under the Brant leases.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should say a word about this motion. It asks for a report made over a hundred years ago. I believe it is a rule that where information is available either in the library of parliament, a public library or in other public institutions members of parliament, like everyone else, are expected to go to those sources for information. In other words it is not to be expected that the public service will be used as a means of obtaining information on questions concerning which they may wish to obtain such information, where the information is public and obtainable from recognized sources.
63260-61J
Hon. members will see in a moment that if one were writing a book, and wished to have the research work done by the public service, this would be the way to have, it done. I suggest the document requested will be as available to others, as to the government and should be obtained from recognized sources.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Will the Prime Minister assure me that the information is in the library?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I cannot assure the hon. member of that but I will assure him that if he cannot find it in some generally recognized source the government is not likely to be more successful.
Motion dropped.


MINERAL RESOURCES
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South) moved:: Whereas private enterprise in the development of the mineral resources of Canada has not operated in the best interests of all of the people of Canada either in time of peace or in time of war;
Therefore be it resolved that, in the opinion of this house, the government should consider the advisability of bringing the developed and undeveloped mineral resources of Canada under government control land operation.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I have been waiting to discuss this resolution for the past five years. I am sorry that this afternoon, on the eve of a house adjournment, and perhaps at a time when a great deal of government business remains to be done, I have to initiate a discussion which I believe deals. with a matter of urgent importance to the people of Canada.
The resolution suggests that I should be free to discuss all mineral resources in Canada. I can assure hon. members that a discussion as broad as that would require some considerable time. Therefore in the time at my disposal this afternoon I shall confine my remarks chiefly to the coal mining industry of Nova Scotia. I assume that hon. members from other parts of Canada who represent constituencies in which coal mining operations are carried on will take advantage of this opportunity to place the position of the industry on record in the house.
I believe I am safe in saying that the remarks I shall make with reference to the industry in Nova Scotia will be applicable to the whole of industry across the country. The coal mining industry is a very sick one at the present time. It has been indicated in the house on many occasions that employment.
m
Mineral Resources


Paul Joseph James Martin: A good minister.


Clarence Gillis: -made some pertinent remarks in the legislature within the last couple of weeks. I notice that the Secretary of State (Mr. Martin) has said that he is a good minister. I hope, then, that my hon. friend will support what the Minister of Industry and Publicity in the Nova Scotia government had to say respecting the mining industry of that province.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I will support every good cause.


Clarence Gillis: Federal action is necessary for the rehabilitation of this industry. If subsidizing the coal industry of this country was any solution under the system of free enterprise the Nova Scotia mining industry should be a very prosperous industry to-day because it has been heavily subsidized. However, the fact of the matter is that that industry is in a worse position to-day than at any time in its history. The minister of industry acting for the Nova Scotia government, tabled a report in the legislature for the year ending November 30, 1945. At that time he said that too much emphasis could not be placed upon the deplorable position of the coal industry of that province. He stated further that the total production for the last fiscal year was only 5,170,400 short tons, a decrease of 637,710 tons from the production of 1944. This was the lowest figure since 1902. The production per man fell to 1-58 tons.
IMr. Gillis.]
These figures take on an even more alarming aspect when considered against the background of the 1944 report. In the 1044 report the minister referred to the lamentable decrease in the total production from the previous year. The production per man shift in 1944 was 1-66 short tons, the lowest rate since 1900 and the lowest rate for which statistics are available.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is 1944?


Clarence Gillis: 1944. He was comparing the 1945 report with the 1944. The total production and man-shift production in 1945 dropped below the 1944 figure. Despite the fact, as the Minister of Reconstruction well knows, that the federal government came to the rescue of private enterprise in the operation of this industry, and has been practically carrying the financial load of the continued operation, the industry continues to go down. This suggests to my mind tljat the time has come when the federal government, in the interests of the taxpayers of Canada, should accept some responsibility in the operation of this industry. In his report the minister went on to outline some of the disabilities under which the industry operates. He stated that all signs pointed to the fact that the loss in production was attributable not so much to the physical conditions in the industry as to human relations. He said a great change must take place in the attitude of all concerned if the industry was to retain its former place in the provincial economy.
That is the opinion of the minister of industry in the Nova Scotia government. The question is one which should concern not only the people of Nova Scotia but hon. members of this house, particularly the Nova Scotia members. It would be difficult to exaggerate the gravity of the situation as revealed in the formal language and hard statistics of the official report.
I do not raise this question in spirit of fault-finding or recrimination. I do it more to focus the attention of the government on the problem in order that they may t^ke some constructive action to see that this industry is not blotted out. It is the responsibility of the governments, provincial and federal, who are the custodians of the natural resources of the country and who have been providing funds, for the last five years at least, in order that this industry may continue to function.
As I said at the beginning, if private enterprise and the system of subsidizing industry were any solution, the problem would not be as acute as it is to-day. They have had a fair trial in the mining industry and in my opinion

Mineral Resources
that industry has failed completely to meet the needs of this country, both in times of war and in times of peace. To-day the government is underwriting the losses of this industry and is acting as their sales agents. In my opinion it is the duty and responsibility of the government to take over the industry, reorganize it and operate it as a government enterprise. The government is paying the bills anyway.
As hon. members know-and this is particularly within the knowledge of the Minister of Reconstruction-there is a royal commission now probing the whole mining industry across the country. This commission will cost the taxpayers of Canada a considerable amount of money, but in my opinion it will be money well spent. I know some of the personnel of that commission, and I am reasonably sure that when its report is made we shall have for the first time a realistic picture of the coal mining industiy across Canada.
Regardless of what this commission may find, or what its recommendations to the minister may be, I am convinced that there is no solution for the problems facing the coal industry unless the federal government take it over and operate it in the interests of the people of Canada. I believe the mining industry of Nova Scotia is in much the same position to-day as was the mining industry of Great Britain up to the time the British government took it over and operated it. The workers in the industry in Nova Scotia have lost confidence in those who operate the industry. In Great Britain there were many independent operators, whereas in Nova Scotia it is a straight monopoly. This makes it all the more necessary for the federal government to step in and reexamine the whole setup on the basis of the commission's findings.
The government should consider the advisability of nationalizing the coal industry of Canada, particularly that of Nova Scotia. This government should follow the mechanics employed by the British government. The matter was studied in that country for a long time and discussed on many occasions in the British House of Commons. The men who laid down the mechanics of taking over the industry in Great Britain had long experience, and we should do well to study what was done over there. I believ6 the time is not far distant when the government will have to take this step.
A national board should be set up consisting of men with the necessary experience and qualifications. It should function under a separate minister who would be responsible to parliament for tjie operation of the industry. In addition there should be two regional
boards in Nova Scotia, one on the mainland! and one on the island of Cape Breton. While the national board would consist of experts-working under the direction of the minister,, in order to get the active cooperation of the workers the regional boards should consist of equal representation of management and the workers, so that they could work out the-basic problems that exist underground and enable the national board to get a complete-picture of the operation.
In addition to the two boards which would! manage the industry under the minister's direction there should be set up, -as was done in Great Britain, an industrial coal consumers' council. This council is responsible for processing and marketing, and for making contacts with the industry and acting as sales agent in the marketing of coal; it also fixes prices in conjunction with the national board.
In addition there is what is known as a domestic coal consum'ers' council, which acts as sales agent in the domestic field in the processing and marketing of coal, all under the direction of the national board.
In my opinion, if these simple steps were taken in this country under the direction of a minister like the Minister of Reconstruction, who in matters of this kind is very realistic, who is an engineer and likes to get things done, much could be done. I should like to see him in charge of that kind of set-up, and I am certain that the steps that I have mentioned will have to be taken if the province of Nova Scotia is to survive. Either that or an emigration policy from Nova Scotia to other parts of Canada will be necessary.
One of the government's officials, the Hon. Michael Dwyer, who is maritime director of selective service, addressing a commercial club in Halifax not so long ago, stated that on the average for many years fifteen hundred young people had left the province of Nova Scotia every year to go to the United States or other parts of Canada to seek employment. The war has brought us no relief from that situation. Indeed, the employment situation in Nova Scotia to-day is fifty per cent worse than it was in 1939. On the island of Cape Breton alone there are over 4,500 registered unemployed, of whom 1,500 are ex-service men who never did a day's work in their lives, who went from the street into the army apd through the war and are now back on the street. Many other service personnel in that part of the country are not registered, because so long as they are receiving their out-of-work benefits they do not go through that channel. The consequence is that a serious unemployment situation is developing in Nova Scotia which will have to be dealt


with very soon. The basis of it all is the coal-mining industry, and there can be no relief under your system of free enterprise, because to rehabilitate that industry will require a large amount of capital expenditure. As lion, members who sat on the reconstruction committee with myself in 1942, 1943 and 1944, will remember, the heads of the Dominion Steel and Coal company, when questioned as to their plans for the future, the making of new openings and further mechanization of the mines already developed, stated frankly that it would cost a lot of money and that they were not going to spend the money to make those developments; but if the federal government would make the capital available, yes, they would go to work. If the federal government would do that, I am sure that there are some profits to be made in that industry. If a proper valuation of the industry were made it would be found that perhaps fifty per cent of the stock is watered. Let the minister take that industry over and squeeze the water out of the stock, fix wage rates and the selling price of coal on the basis of the costs involved, and then I am sure the coal can be marketed economically and that new openings can be made for employment in Nova Scotia. This step must be taken if the industry is to survive.
Every government in Canada is responsible for the situation in the coal mining industry to-day because they have been the custodian of that resource in every part of Canada. All our minerals were placed in the ground by the Lord, and they belong to the people. No one has any right to exploit mineral resources for private gain. Those who have operated those resources for private gain in the past have taken out the coal that was easiest to get out of the ground and got as much out of it as they could in the way of profits. Shack communities were built around the mines where the miners had to live under deplorable conditions, in every section of the mining industry all across Canada. Go to Minto, New Brunswick, and see how the miners live and work in that area. The conditions there are not peculiar to New Brunswick; the same is true of Nova Scotia. Towns which a few years ago were prosperous communities are now nothing but ghost towns. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were invested in the building of churches and schools and halls in these communities, and to-day they are falling down. Those who were operating the mines extracted as much profit as they could out of the industry, faulty mining practices were carried on, the resources were destroyed, and now these communities, in which hundreds of thousands of dollars were
I Mr. Gillis.J
invested by the people who lived here, are falling down, while those who drew most of the money out of the industry live up in Westmount, Montreal, in beautiful mansions. They never saw that industry and know nothing about it. They were merely interested in getting what they could out of it. In the meantime the workers were left to slave underground and live under the conditions I have described, conditions which no one here would tolerate. The smokeless smoke-stacks in these ghost towns in Nova Scotia and other parts of Canada are a grim monument to those who have been sent here for the last twenty-five years to make our laws. They are an indictment against us.
In my opinion the time has come for the federal government, recognizing the fact that the provincial governments have fallen down on the job of managing that particular industry, to step in and take it over and put it on its feet. If the mechanics as set up in Britain to-day for the nationalization of the coal industry were adopted here, under a realistic minister who wants to get things done, I am sure that the industry in Nova Scotia could be put back on its feet and occupy its proper place in the economy of the province.
There is another thought that I would leave with the house. We must consider the coal resources of this country as a potential supply of fuel oil requirements in the future. I read an article just a few days ago, written by a Toronto university professor, who pointed out that the fuel oil supplies on this North American continent were running out and that with the terrific developments in air transport we would have to turn to the coal resources of this country to meet the requirements of air transportation in the future. That is a long story and a technical one and I shall not go into it this afternoon. I just leave the thought with the members of the government who will be examining the report of the royal commission when it is brought down.
There has been criticism that the commission has taken too long in making its inquiry and report. Personally I am not concerned as to the length of time it takes. I want it to take all the time that is necessary to do a real job. When the commission brings down its report it will be the duty of the members of this house, particularly those from coal-mining areas, to study it closely and to press the federal government for action as soon as possible to preserve and develop our coal resources.
The minister of industry in Nova Scotia pointed out that the major disability from

Mineral Resources
which the industry was suffering was labour relations. I know something about that, and there is a lot in what he says. This labour relations question goes back forty years, when there was terrific opposition to unions in Nova Scotia. Miners were thrown out one hundred per cent from the company houses and lived for nine or ten months in the basements of churches, in tents, all over the country, simply because they wanted to form a union. They were gaoled by the hundreds. The federal government sent in the army, the navy and cavalry, and barbed-wired the province-


An hon. MEMBER:: What about the air force?


Clarence Gillis: They were not organized at that time. This was done at the request of the mining magnates of Canada. That is why there is this bit of resentment; they remember th^se things. The sons of the men who went through this experience feel that the attitude of the bosses of steel and coal has changed very little. Under a government owned set-up I believe this picture would change. Knowing the miners of Nova Scotia as I do, I believe they would feel that they were working for themselves.


Humphrey Mitchell: I can tell my hon. friend that it has not changed the situation in Great Britain.


Clarence Gillis: It has not? The minister has not followed the British Hansard.


Humphrey Mitchell: Oh, yes. I have been
reading about it.


Clarence Gillis: Besides, I Would not expect
the situation in this country to change in four or five months. It is a job which would take a little time. But if I were still in those coal mines and I found a federal government which had the courage to face up to this problem, I would say that I was working now for myself, and that I had equal responsibility with the government of this country in that they were honestly trying to rehabilitate the industry, get down to brass tacks, increase production, and do everything they could to put the industry on its feet.
Make no mistake about it: the miners at our end of the country know this problem better, perhaps, than anyone else. In their brief to the royal commission which sat in Sydney when it began its work, the miners of Nova Scotia strongly emphasized the necessity of nationalization of that industry. They have no illusions. They have had boards and commissions for thirty years, but nothing came out of it. It was the same old story: pour more money into the coffers of Dominion Steel and
Coal, another deficit for them to show at the end of the year as a plea that "we can't pay wages, we can't fix our houses, we can't do anything but sit tight, put pressure on the federal government and squeeze more money out of them." Not a sales agent in the field, but send a wire to Ottawa for new markets and get a delegation of citizens to go there to plead for them. The government has pap-fed them so long now that they sit back and consider themselves your baby, and you continue to hand them the milk-bottle. The industry to-day is completely inefficient and mismanaged, simply because the federal government has given them the money necessary to increase their depreciation at the end of the year, to put money in the reserve fund and to juggle profits from one subsidiary to the other.
I should like to see as quickly as possible ' the federal government take that industry over, set up the boards I have mentioned, ask the cooperation of the miners of Nova Scotia in putting the industry back on its feet, get a proper valuation of it, squeeze the water out of the stock, and zone the markets of this country that are fairly economical in so far as their industry is concerned. In my opinion if these things were done the labour relations would improve. I believe you can make money in this industry. It is one of our greatest natural resources; it has to be maintained'; but I cannot see why the taxpayers of this country should spend millions of dollars a year in subsidizing an industry where the head of the company draws an annual salary of $100,000, another fellow draws a salary of $75,000 a year, and so all the way down the line; and they spend four or five months every year down in Florida fanning themselves with a panama "under the bamboo tree." That kind of person is not necessary. The taxpayers of Canada should not pay such salaries to people who have badly mismanaged one of our greatest resources.
I am going to conclude by urging the federal government to take the necessary steps to give back to the people of Canada a resource which belongs to them, which was deeded over to private interests without asking the people anything about it, which has been badly mismanaged under the system of free enterprise, which has gone down to nothing, which as far as the federal government is concerned has been on relief for the last twenty-five years. It is time the federal government took it over and earnestly considered restoring it to the people, putting it back on its feet, making what money can be made from it and passing the returns back to the people of the industry and the people of Canada in the way of social services.

Mineral Resources


John Bracken: May I ask the hon. member a question, purely as a matter of information, and quite aside from the merit of the argument he has been making with respect to taking over these mines?


Clarence Gillis: Certainly.


John Bracken: The hon. member gave the figure of the production per man per day of coal as being 1-66 tons last year and T58 at present. Can he tell us what the average production per man is in Great Britain, and also in some of the better mines of the United States-^just as a matter of information.


Clarence Gillis: Yes. They are away above that.


John Bracken: Has the hon. member the figures?


Clarence Gillis: I have not the actual figures here, but speaking from memory, the United States production is away up, about three times as much.


Humphrey Mitchell: It is about seven tons a day. I can give the approximate figure. I am speaking from memory, but I do not think I am far out. It is down now to almost a ton per man per day in Great Britain. It is just over seven tons in. the United States, and I think it is a fraction over three tons in western Canada. Of course there is a reason for this disparity, a reason it is quite easy to give. Mining in the United States is somewhat different. You get there the strip operations and open pits.


John Bracken: What was the most production per man in the more favourable days in Nova Scotia?


Clarence Gillis: It was up around three or
four tons. Of course as far as Great Britain is concerned the explanation is that their mines are worked out. They are old seams; they are submarine; they are difficult, and the further you go into them the longer your hauls, so your production per man per day necessarily drops.


John Bracken: And the same applies here?


Clarence Gillis: The same applies in Nova Scotia. New openings are necessary in Nova Scotia. Conditions in the United States, of course, are not comparable at all. It is a straight mechanized electrified proposition. In many instances they just run a steam shovel in the side of a mountain and shovel out the coal. .


Mr. COLDWELL:: Or they strip the seam.


Clarence Gillis: Or they strip the seam. The grand average is taken for the industry. Conditions here are less favourable. Nevertheless this is one of our great natural resources and we have to take it as it is. This is the way we shall have to do it. The economy of the province is based on coal. Either you have got to rehabilitate it and put it on its feet, or you must start to move the people of Nova Scotia out of that province. I am reasonably sure that with a proper capital investment and a few new openings in Nova Scotia the industry can be rehabilitated. But you are not going to get that capital investment from the present operators.


Mr. J. A. BRADETTE (Cochrane):: I certainly appreciate the opportunity which has been given to the House of Commons to speak on mining in general. I was surprised to some extent by what I heard from the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis), although I must praise him for bringing forward so forcibly the situation of the section of the mining industry in which his province and indeed the whole of Canada is vitally interested, namely coal mining. But I know he will realize that I am not digressing if I discuss mining in general, including gold mining, in which my own section is more particularly interested.
Before I go further, however, may I say that I believe I sense in the remarks of the mover of this resolution something a little milder than might have been heard two or three years ago. I read some of the propaganda which was made by the Socialist party in Great Britain during the general election last fall. Speaking of the question of nationalization of coal mines in Great Britain, the supporters of that party were not backward in telling the British electors that if they were put into power the coal problem would be settled immediately. It was pleasing indeed to me this afternoon when the hon. member for Cape Breton South realized and recognized that it might take some time, even some years, to settle the problems of the coal mining industry in Canada. This surely applies to Great Britain also. At one time the British electors were led to believe that the moment the party got into power the question would be solved immediately.


Major James William Coldwell: No.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I want to complete my thought. It is always easier to theorize and criticize when you have not the responsibility of government. I say that without any bitterness of spirit or any idea of criticism. Our friends of the C.C.F. have that experience in Saskatchewan to-day. In the distant future

Mineral Resources
they may have it in Canada. They may have the responsibility of government. They may theorize at the present time on problems that seem easy of solution, but they may find them awfully hard to solve when they have the responsibility of office.
I read British periodicals and papers of Conservative and Socialist inclinations. Even* to-day the British consumers and the British people generally are far from satisfied with the coal situation. The government, through Mr. Attlee, the Prime Minister, and some of his ministers, have told the people, and rightly so, to be patient. They have asked them to endure the same sacrifices that they experienced during the war. In that they are right again. I make this statement deliberately. We all realize that it is much easier to make promises than to fulfil them the moment a party gets into power. I do not say that as an alibi for the shortcomings of my own party. They have been in power for a long time, and the}' realize the heavy responsibilities that fall not only upon the shoulders of the government and the representatives of the party in the house but also upon the shoulders of parliament.
I want to compliment the hon. member for Cape Breton South on presenting so eloquently and warmly the case for the coal miners and the coal mining industry in general. However, to him the solution is lamentably simple, and that applies to his party generally. Of course we are used to that in the House of Commons.
During the debate on the speech from the throne an amendment was proposed by the historical-it is not historical now; it is too new a party for that-Progressive Conservative party. The amendment suggested that it was possible to solve all the problems, of Canada by following some of the policies of the Progressive Conservative party. Then there was a subamendment brought forward and ably presented by the C.C.F. party. Their formula was the simplest one possible: all you had to do was to socialize all industries and all activities in Canada. If that were done you would have a new earthly paradise as far as this country was concerned. All problems would be solved. Later on the able leader of the Social Credit party introduced a subamendment. They are sincere also in their proposals. I studied their policies. I even studied their basic dividends, which none of my relatives in Alberta ever received, although the party promised that it would be the solution of all problems. To their way of thinking the, amendment they offered would solve all the problems of this country. It would be done by one simple amendment, 63260-62
one simple gesture. It does not work that way, Mr. Speaker. In my opinion that is one of the weaknesses of democracy.
I was speaking to some fine young men and women the day before yesterday in my office, -the youth movement. I said to them: "As Canadians are you ready to make the sacrifices that the Russian people are called upon to make at the present time for their government and for their country?" In Canada we apparently do not appreciate the benefits of democracy. Generally speaking we are ready and willing to take all the benefits, but very few of us are ready and willing to accept the necessary sacrifices to make it a going concern.
If we have a socialist government next year, or ten years from now, that government will soon find out the solution does not lie in a simple socialist formula.
What is the import of the resolution? It reads as follows:
Whereas private enterprise in the development of the mineral resources of Canada has not operated in the best interests of all of the people of Canada either in time of peace or in time of war;
Therefore be it resolved that, in the opinion of this house, the government should consider the advisability of bringing the developed and undeveloped mineral resources of Canada under government control and operation.
This is a far-reaching resolution. If it were approved by parliament it would mean that all Canadians would be led and governed by the government. If you socialize the mineral resources of the country you must of necessity, in my opinion, include all the industries. If my hon. friends are sincere, if they want to go the whole show, as they may some day, they would put a resolution on the order paper calling for the socialization of land. One step leads to the other. You cannot socialize mining, you cannot single out one industry without socializing the whole, the manufacturing industries and so forth. The next step would be socialized farming.
To my way of thinking there is no simple remedy, no one formula to solve the problem. Democracy, as we understand it and practise it in this country and as it is practised in some parts of Europe, learns by its shortcomings and by its errors, and by constructive criticism and by speeches such as we had this afternoon. Through these processes it finds the solution to some of the big problems that have to be faced at the present time. Those problems will never be solved by appealing to demagoguery and promising a new heaven on earth.
One thing I deplore in intelligent and capable people is that for purely political reasons they find it advisable to decry Canada, to

Mineral Resources

speak of other countries, such as Sweden, which we all respect, to speak of countries such as Norway, Australia, New Zealand and so forth, telling us that they are away ahead of us and much better countries in which to live. So far as I am concerned I am satisfied to live in Canada. I think it is the best country under the sun. You will never have a human system which is absolutely perfect. We shall never solve our problems by appeals to passion and promising pie in the sky. During the last federal election in my section of the country we had two fine C.C.F. candidates, one in Temis-kaming and the other in Cochrane. One of them was a high-school teacher, a well-qualified, highly-respected citizen. The other was a prosperous pharmacist from Kirkland Lake. Every time I listened to their speeches on the radio I found that they never had a word of praise for their own country. I said to the people of my constituency: "Where is the Canadianism of these two men? Surely there must be something good in Canada. At some time, either in the not distant past or in the near future, there will be something that Canadians should be proud of." But never, never at any time, did they find it possible to utter a word of praise for what Canada had been doing. It was always a country some thousands of miles away from Canada which they praised. They never gave a bit of credit to their own country. I am not speaking politically when I say that, because they did not give any credit to the Liberal party; but at least they could have given some credit to the Canadian people who live here, who want to make it a bigger and better country. These were the only objections I had to <their campaign. I have no advice- to give to any party, but I do not believe in pessimism. I believe in optimism. I believe in a reformed progressive capitalistic system.
I come from a section of the country where we have been fighting the elements, fighting with nature, where you run by yourself with very little help from any government. We want the country to do as much as it possibly can. It will be no solution to the coal mining problem of Canada for the government to take it over overnight. To my mind the solution would be the finest cooperation possible between the federal and provincial governments, the unions and the owners of these mines. They are all Canadians and they want to build up this country.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South used the old cliche that somebody gets $100,000 a year. He knows quite well that nobody
[Mr. Bradette.J
gets $100,000 a year without the Minister of Finance taking seventy-five per cent of it. Then he used the old cliche of their going down to Florida and fanning their faces with a panama hat. I know he wants to be fair. I had to send some of my poor relatives to Florida and I had to go into debt on account jof it, but they went down for their health. People do not always go there for pleasure. I deplore any such luxuries and extravagances 'also, but I do not believe it is fair to group together all the people who happen to be owners and say they are all doing these things, while the fact is that most of them are trying their best to make this a bigger and better Canada. I do not think it is fair to try to make others believe these people are not playing the game with the workers of their particular section of the country. I am making these statements sincerely; I know we are going' through strenuous times, but I repeat that these problems will never be solved by any such simple formula.
I could tell the house of perhaps three or four mine owners in my own section of Canada who have been practically a disgrace to the country, and who have done harm to its economy and to the capitalistic system; but they form an infinitesimal minority. Where you get one of these men acting in that way you have hundreds or thousands of others who play the game with everyone. I well remember travelling with a member of the C.C.F. party when the war expenditures committee went to Sault Ste. Marie. I am sure he was quite sincere when te told me, "I realize that to-day no man could become president of a corporation like that purely by accident." Surely it is not fair to this parliament to try to make people believe that because a person happens to be a mine owner or a mine president he is dissipating in California or Florida, or something like that. I resent such statements. They will not help this country generally. I know our hearts go out to those who suffer. I have every sympathy with the miners mentioned by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, just as I have sympathy for my own people if they do not receive justice. I have spent weeks and months at a time with my own men in the lumber camps, to see that they received the consideration they deserved.


Mr. PROBE:: Was the hon. member subsidized by the government when he was doing that?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Subsidized for what?


John Oliver Probe: When you were doing this work about which you are speaking?

Mineral Resources


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Oh, no, I did that on my own, as the member for my riding and as a citizen of this country. I thought it was my duty to stay with the men, to go with them to the camps to see what the living conditions were, in order that anything that was wrong might be rectified. But if I had gone before these men and said, "Yes, you should keep on striking because the general manager of the Spruce Falls mill is getting $40,000 a year," for instance, would that have helped the situation? Would that have helped these men? Not at all. We went to these higher authorities and told them both the wages and the working conditions were unsatisfactory, and in most cases we won our points.
I am speaking sincerely on this subject, because I believe my constituency is one of the greatest gold mining centres in Canada, if not on the north American continent. I will not mention the names of the men who are at the head of these gold mines, but the hon. member for Cape Breton South was there last winter; no doubt he met some of them and spoke with them, and he must have been struck with their humanitarianism. The homes of most of these general superintendents are open day and night to any of the men; not their offices but their homes. They have made mistakes at times, because, after all, they are human, but they have tried to rectify those mistakes.


Clarence Gillis: I was not talking about superintendents, because, after all, they are workers too. I am talking about the fellow who lives in Westmount, in Montreal, and who does not see the mine.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Well, you go and speak to these men in Westmount. They will tell you they are workers too. Everyone is working in his own way. We cannot all have the same occupation. We are working as members of parliament, sitting here this afternoon discussing the problems of the moment. We call ourselves workers. Men who work in the bush or on the drive would say we were having a wonderful time, not doing anything. You cannot apply the same standard to every walk of life, to all the activities of human beings. I do not make that statement with any feeling, because I repeat that I appreciate the fact that the hon. member has brought the situation of the coal mining industry of Canada to the attention of this country. In our section we are far away from the coal mines, and naturally we have to pay high prices for the coal we use in our industries.
Let me give the house another example of what public ownership has done in my part of the country. Twenty-five or thirty years ago some fine old prospectors-and God bless them; they are doing wonderful work for this country-found a great lignite field in northern Ontario. Immediately they came to our section they raised money among themselves; they went back again to stake the land and so on. Then, and I do not say this in a critical way because I believe it was done with the very best intentions, Hon. Charles McCrea, an outstanding man who was in Mr. Ferguson's cabinet, expropriated that lignite field without any compensation at all to those of us who had put money into it. Very high, hopes were entertained that the government was going to see that the lignite field would be worked and exploited for the benefit of the people. That was over twenty-five years ago, but I do not believe we have seen more than three or four tons of that lignite coal. In connection with that field there has been more political gerrymandering than I have ever seen anywhere else. All governments have to take some blame for that situation, because they all went in and made an awful mess of it. I maintain that if private interests had been allowed to invest capital and take a chance there, as we do in our own mining section, the needs of northern Ontario to-day would be largely supplied from that lignite field. I am sure the Ontario members who are listening to me will agree with that statement.
Talk about public ownership of mines! We all remember the old, historic town of Cobalt, where silver mining boomed for many years. When it was at its peak the Ontario government, again with the best of intentions, expropriated one of these mines which was to be run by the government. What happened? Prior to being expropriated that mine was showing a fine surplus each year. After being operated by the Ontario government, for a year and a half it had such large deficits they had to close up the mine and get out of the mining business.
I give these examples in order that the "house may realize the exact situation. I repeat that I think there is only one solution of the problems of the coal mining industry, which is so vital to our economy; and that solution is not an easy one. We realize that with all the coal we have in the east and the west most of our industries in southern Ontario have to use coal brought from Pennsylvania; and that applies even more forcibly to northern Ontario. It is true that coal has no nationality, and we have to do this because of transportation costs and also,
Mineral Resources

in many instances, because of the quality of the coal we must buy. So that if we are ever to solve the coal problem, of which my hon. friend spoke so eloquently, we must find some method by which it will be possible to get that fine Nova Scotia coal to both southern and northern Ontario. If that could be done we would be your best customers and would readily buy all that coal we could use in order to help the miners of Nova Scotia and strengthen the whole national economy of this country.
I have mentioned mining in general. I offer no excuse if for a few moments I speak of the gold mining of my own section, with which I am more familiar. Many people think gold mining is such a bonanza that one can put in a dollar and after a year or two be worth a million dollars. I know my hon. friends from Nipissing and Temiskaming, and others who have invested money in gold mining operations, have always come out losers. I know I have been a loser all the way through.


An hon. MEMBER:: You should be a promoter.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I must say to the hon. member that with all the regulations we have from Toronto, even promoters do not always come out on the right side. We have at Queens Park some fine, well trained watchdogs. It is true that sometimes, through Ducket-shop practices, some people may be fleeced, but that was never done with official sanction, whether we had a Progressive, a Conservative or a Liberal government in office. Ehey have always tried to play fair with everybody. The gold mining industry means a great deal to our national economy, but it is highly speculative. I wish I could put on record how many people are making money in it, and how many people are always showing deficits. As hon. members all know, personal initiative means a very great deal in connection with gold mining, silver mining, nickel mining, or any metal mining development. No doubt many hon. members listening to me this afternoon have met prospectors, * both old and young. How keen these men are; how they love their jobs. Could you visualize putting these men into government service as civil servants? Could you visualize a young prospector, who has his heart in the north country, being told, "Now, we are going to put you under a civil service organization. You are going to be allowed to go to this territory only so many days or so many weeks. Then you must come back and report." You could never have any real prospecting under such conditions.


Clarence Gillis: But the government is sending them out now.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Oh, no, not now. They are sending expert men to make a map geology analysis of the whole country, to show prospectors, promoters and others who may be interested the possibility of undertaking new ventures. Surely my hon. friends do not want to create the impression that this government has a special department of prospectors, who prospect for and promote the mines they find? It does not work out in that way. Again I say that the minute you make a businessman a civil servant for the rest of his life, just at that moment you lose most of his qualifications and ability for personal initiative.


Clarence Gillis: You release him from bondage. You take him out of the hands of the companies.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: The word "bondage"
may have different significance in different places. It sounds as though the hon. member wishes to create the impression that we in the north country are in the relationship of masters and slaves.


Clarence Gillis: The hon. member mentioned prospectors. I said that the government all through this war and even at .the present time have sent prospectors out all over the country, grub-staking them and financing them. Then, when they found something they had to come back and turn it over to one of the mining companies. Why not turn it over to the government?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: It was done under war conditions.


Clarence Gillis: They are still doing it.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Not on a large scale. To prove what I say, I shall place before the house some of the features about mining, particularly in my own section of the country. Prospecting for new minerals at the present time in Canada has all but ceased and, if the mining industry is to continue on any worthwhile basis, this unfortunate situation must be corrected immediately. Emphasizing the necessity for quick action is the fact that under war-time demands for maximum metal production, coupled with a labour shortage, development work at producing mines has been necessarily and drastically curtailed, and ore reserves are being dissipated at an accelerated pace.
We have all heard of Mr. LaBine, who went away up into the north country, into the far north, which most of the Canadian people knew nothing about. Most people thought it was too far away; they really did

Mineral Resources
not realize how far it was-up in the Great Bear lake district. But what a great thing it was for the world when there were found pitchblende, the ore from which radium is derived, and uranium.
Would that have been done under the civil service? Would it have been done by men who were paid by the government at so much an hour or so much a day? Great sacrifices were made by the men who went there. At the present time we have hundreds of young men in my section of the country-men from Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, men from every centre of population in Canada. Those men are preparing themselves, equipping themselves, to go into the wilderness, in among the flies and in the rain and bad weather, where they will have none of the comforts of life.
Why do they do it? They do it because they believe in private enterprise. They do it because they believe that to a certain extent we should work out our own salvation. Can we visualize their working for any government, provincial, municipal or federal, and working under those conditions? Can we visualize their asking for two or three months leave to do prospecting work of that kind? This applies to all walks of life.
I for one, of French descent, can never visualize the British people being absolutely tied down under the yoke of socialism or Marxism. The British empire, as we know it, would never have developed or would never have been built under a principle of socialism, because socialism simply means this, that the individual loses his identity. That would, generally speaking, be absolutely repugnant to the British people. Without trying to prophesy, I am certain that never in Great Britain, even under a so-called socialistic government will they have absolute state socialism. That is my belief, so far as that country is concerned.
This brings up some strange things. I wish the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) were in his seat at the moment. He made certain references the other day to the royal family which, perhaps, I shall have another occasion to mention.
Some people are inclined to the view that the mining industry generally is making large profits. I well remember the days when Viscount Bennett was prime minister of this country. At that time, ignoring the advice of an able minister from my northern section of the country, a gentleman who was then minister of labour, Hon. Wesley Gordon, a bullion tax was put on gold. It was thought that this would be good policy, and that it would be a popular move. But the first thing he knew, not only did he have the mining
interests coming to Ottawa with their protests, but in addition ne had the prospectors. He had the investors, the retailers, the wholesalers, the manufacturers-all of them were coming here and telling him it was a mistake. After a few months the government was honest enough to withdraw [DOT] that bullion tax-Yes, it looked good on paper, because people-are always thinking in terms of profits of gold', mining or nickel mining; but it did not work out in practice.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South has shown, and rightly so, that the coal mining industry at the present time is not in a; position to produce all it should, or to permitworking conditions which should be permitted.-That bullion tax was taken away because it would destroy the initiative of those connected with mining operations.
I have no doubt that everyone is interested in gold mining in this country. I can well remember the hon. member who formerly represented the constituency of Grey-Bruce, Miss Agnes Macphafl, being invited to speak at the commencement exercises which took place in the vocational school at Timmins. In her opening remarks she said, "You are a strange people up here in the north country. You sweat and work day and night all your lives to extract these things from the earth; then you ship it down to our section of the country and we bury it in the ground." Then George Drew-not the premier of Ontario, but another George Drew, who was mayor of Timmins- said this to Miss Macphail: "Well, what you say is possibly true. But I understand you come from a section of the country where you produce large quantities of tobacco. Up here we buy that .tobacco at fair prices-sometimes at high prices-and turn it into ashes and smoke." This shows that in a national economy there is a necessity for all manner of activities which may be found within the boundaries of a country.
Regardless of what some of my Social Credit friends may say, there is a sound reason for gold mining in Canada. If that industry were denied to the country, we wTould realize what a tremendous influence it has had. For instance, in my own section alone there are tens of thousands of people who are interested and employed in gold mining. More than that, we have always a ready market for our product. Surely we should be the last to destroy a community which has that gold production. Indeed, the whole world seems to have been satisfied with the find which was made in South Africa only a few days ago.
So that it shows there is no special privilege given to this industry. There was a member in the house at one time who represented one
Mineral Resources

of the Winnipeg seats-I believe it was Mr. Heaps, who is now in the government employ- who discussed the bullion tax, and referred to gold mining as a sheltered industry. I rose in my place immediately and said that there was certainly no shelter so far as gold mining is concerned. They have never wanted anything from any government. All they want is to live their ojrn lives and to be dealt with fairly by government in matters of taxation.
One cannot visualize the government's going into mining. Let us picture the government spending the public's money and then, after a year or two of functioning, finding out that the venture was not what had been expected, with the result that the property would be left as it was in the first instance, possibly after losing a million dollars. Let us remember that in Flin Flon private capital and private enterprise spent about $30 million before it was in a position to produce.
What can the government do? Will it spend $30 million on a venture? Let us suppose that it does venture, and does spend $30 million on something which proves to be a fizzle, on a property where the ore bed did not measure up to expectations, and where the country has to spend large sums of money for nothing. These are the things we must remember when we think of mining.
Let- me say this, too, that governments have very few qualities of human beings, but very many of their faults-and that applies to all governments. For instance, let us consider nazism. Would any citizen of any country of his own initiative, through the activities of a single man, allow youth to be destroyed by the millions and tens of millions? That is what is done by governments. Can you visualize, for instance, what would have happened in England if there had been nationalization of industry at the time of the invention of the steam engine and the internal combustion engine? Can you visualize the government investing $5,000,000,000 to replace equipment that would be discarded almost overnight? It has never been done and it will never be done.
I repeat that I believe implicitly in the closest possible cooperation. Of necessity we must revolutionize our capitalistic system, but in doing that the workers will have to make some sacrifices, management will have to make sacrifices, and every citizen of this country will have to make sacrifices in order to make it a going concern.
You will never hear a whisper of a strike from the workers or farmers in Russia. I am not here to discuss communism or the internal IMr. Bradette.]
policies of that wonderful country, but no one can make me believe that in Russia they enjoy the same liberties that are enjoyed in Canada or in other sections of the world. The Russian government has instilled into the minds of its people the necessity of sacrifice by everyone for the good of the whole, and they are doing it. We will never deprive the workers of their right to strike when it is necessary to strike. More than that, we will never deprive any section of our population of full access to our governmental machinery. But even in times like the present, every section of the population must be prepared to make some sacrifice in order that we may arrive at a solution of the problems of peace.
I should like to give a few figures in connection with metal production in Ontario in 1941. Of the mineral production 76-4 per cent was derived from mineral areas discovered prior to 1910. We have to be careful with our mining industry. We do not want to destroy it. Some of the older mining fields have been worked out. The hon. member for Cape Breton South has referred to places in which there are ramshackle buildings, but those are in districts in which the mines have been worked out. Some hon. members may remember the old town of Cobalt, although many are too young to have seen it in its best days. In the past few-years that district ihas been deteriorating because the mining is playing out. Of the mineral production 13-2 per cent was derived from mineral areas discovered between 1910 and 1920; 4-3 per cent was derived from mineral areas discovered between 1920 and 1930, and only 6-1 per cent was derived from mineral areas discovered since 1930. I am putting these figures on Hansard because I am afraid that a resolution of this kind may scare away some of the capital which is necessary for the development of our own section of the country.
I can remember when Mr. Howard Ferguson was minister of mines and forests for Ontario. He went over to the United States and was able to interest $16,000,000 worth of capital in the development of the natural resources of the province. Those men were willing to risk their money. Many risks have been taken in connection with mining. Mining is not wholly on a dividend basis. Hon. members will' probably be surprised to know that the Ontario records show that 2,800 claims were recorded during the period of 1907-41 inclusive for each company which paid one or more dividends. There was a total of 317 companies which reached production, but only 113 reached the taxpaying stage in any amount. Only 1-8

per cent of some 4,426 organizations formed for precious metal mining were sufficiently successful to make any return whatsoever to their shareholders. It will be noted in this connection that not all of this 1-8 per cent could be considered to have been economically successful.
Before concluding i should like to make a few remarks about private and public enterprise. I come from a section of the country in which we have had to stand on our own feet as far as development is concerned. We could never have developed our forests and our mines if we had had to wait for the government of the day, whoever they might have been, to carry on this development. I have always been in favour of the Ontario hydro, but I should like to make a statement which may astonish some hon. members. I have farmed and resided in northern Ontario, in the Cochrane district, for nearly forty years, and still we have not the benefit of the Ontario hydro. During that period the provincial treasury has paid 810,000,000 to subsidize rural lines in southern Ontario. I have no quarrel with that because I am perfectly satisfied that the farmers of southern Ontario should enjoy the full benefit of the Ontario hydro, but we in the north country have helped to pay for the hydro lines in southern Ontario and we receive no benefits. I can remember going to Toronto and appearing before the hydro commission to inquire what they were going to do about providing hydro for our part of the country and I was always given the answer that the field was too speculative.
The fine industrial town of Kapuskasing was built by private enterprise. The Porcupine and Kirkland Lake districts, the Rouyn-Noranda district, and the Sudbury district, were all developed by private capital and private enterprise. These private enterprises have paid taxes into the provincial treasury, which taxes have helped to support the Ontario hydro. I am not criticizing that; besides, this is not the time to go too deeply into that matter. However, I want hon. members to know that the Ontario hydro has paid no taxes whereas the private corporations have.
Private enterprise took its money into the wilderness and gambled with it. Private enterprise has had to pay all the taxes I have mentioned. Only two years ago the Ontario hydro expropriated the Northern Power Company at Timmins and immediately the town of Timmins found itself short $35,000 in municipal taxes. I want hon. members to realize that it is not all so golden and rosy as some
people would have us believe. If we had had to wait for the Ontario hydro to develop northern Ontario, we would be waiting yet.
There must be cooperation between private enterprise and governmental activities, but I do not believe, nor do I think the majority of Canadian people believe, that the solution of the problems of this country will be arrived at by socializing our mining and other industries, and eventually our land. If you socialize one section of the national activities, you must socialize others. I should like to quote. H. D. Ainley, of the C.C.F. who said:
The C.C.F. has considered socialization of land. . . There are many advantages to the farmer from some form of socialism . . . We can learn much from Russia in this respect . . . Social security cannot be obtained as long as we leave control of our production in the hands of private individuals.
That is going pretty far. I believe if that language were repeated to the western farmers they would not fall in with such a system.


Major James William Coldwell: What is the hon. gentleman reading?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: I am quoting Mr. H. D. Ainley.


Major James William Coldwell: Never heard of him.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Mr. H. D. Ainley on agricultural policy.


Major James William Coldwell: He is a private member of the organization. We do not smother people's views if they want to express them.


Mr. POULIOT:: Yesterday evening it was not the same thing.


Major James William Coldwell: I did not smother his views; I repudiated them.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: Here is another statement by the C.C.F.:
We cannot definitely state how much land a man will be allowed to hold. We propose that land .socialization shall be voluntary.


Major James William Coldwell: Who said that?


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: That is from the C.C.F. Saskatchewan farmer-labour group hand book, 1933. Then the following statement was made at the annual convention of the British Columbia C.C.F. on April 17, 1943:
Collective agriculture by the institution of methods of collective farming, such as have featured Soviet Russia's system, and by the creation of a provincial government monopoly in the purchase, processing and wholesaling of farm products, both those grown here and those imported.
These are definite words. I am just quoting them to the house to make hon. members realize that, once you get started you cannot
Mineral Resources

stop half-way. Natural resources belong primarily to the provinces. If the resolution were adopted by the government there would immediately be conflict with the provinces. The provincial premiers, the premier of Ontario, the premier of Quebec and the premier of Saskatchewan, who are always ready to fight for provincial rights, would be among the first to protest against such nationalization. I know the ability and energy and honesty of purpose of the premier of Saskatchewan because I have listened to him for years in this house. No one can doubt his sincerity of purpose but even he has not honesty of purpose of the premier of Saskatchewan. He has picked out a few industries but has not extended the field of socialization to mining. He has not even yet expropriated land for collective farming. I know enough of the -western farmers to know that the moment any government sought to introduce collective farming there would be a terrific revolt because every farmer wants to own his own farm. No one can tell me that the western farmers are ready for socialization of farming.


Major James William Coldwell: They do not have to be socialized because in this country a few people do not own all the land. The land is already socialized through individual ownership.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: That is only a relative statement. The hon. member, who is so capable, knows that I may have a mortgage on my home or a farmer may have a mortgage on his farm, and while the law might compel me to pay the mortgage, no government has the right to interfere with the property.


Major James William Coldwell: Nobody wants to.


Joseph-Arthur Bradette: The same principle
applies to farms owned by the farmers of the west. They may have obligations on their land; but the land is theirs; their home is theirs, and even the King of England has no right to enter without permission. But under socialization it would be entirely, different. Let us be fair. You cannot call it fish at one time and flesh at another; it must be the same at all times. Our problems are great and difficult, but I believe in the intelligence of our people. I believe that in this parliament and in our provincial legislatures it will be possible to find a solution of all our problems.
In conclusion, I just wish to say how grateful I am personally-and this applies to my section of the country

for the spirit in which the premiers of the provinces met with the dominion last year to discuss dominion-provincial relations. No part of this country is

greater than the whole. Every member of this parliament is primarily a municipalist; that is, we believe in our own little town or big town, as the case may be, in our rural sections. Secondly, we are provincialists. But over and above all that, we stand for this wonderful country which is Canada, and I hope that when the premiers meet the dominion again the same spirit will animate them which prevailed' -in the last two conferences. That will be one of the best signs that we are going to develop into a still greater and better Canada.


Mr. J. R. MacNICOL (Davenport):: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to follow the argument of the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) because he dealt with coal mining. The resolution however, distinctly refers to the mineral resources of Canada, and that is the subject with which I wish to deal.
In my time I have had a lot to do with minerals of one kind and another, and I am familiar with all the difficulties experienced by prospectors, geologists and engineers in the discovery and opening up of our mineral resources. If what they have done could be written up it would be a romantic saga of their achievements.
The mining industry has been one of the great industries of Canada. I do not say that it is the greatest but it is one of our very great industries. It is one industry that has done a major job in opening up this country. If I may turn to the resolution for a moment it says:
Whereas private enterprise in the development of the mineral resources of Canada has not operated in the best interests of all of the people of Canada either in time of peace or in time of war . . .
That is a very broad statement which could not possibly be proved in any way. I am opposed to the resolution because I am in favour of private enterprise and private initiative. I have seen in my lifetime the marvellous achievements of private enterprise and private initiative, and my opinion based on that experience is that it would be impossible to have much initiative or enterprise in the mining industry if it were taken over by the government. The achievements of the mining industry are the result of private enterprise and private initiative. I think of the men I have met in the far north, the prospectors, and what they went through, how they had to endure the black flies, or bulldogs as they called them, and huge mosquitoes, grandfather and grandmother mosquitoes as they called them, when there

Mineral Resources
was no such thing as Stayaway and other such liquids for protecting the human race against these pests; and when I think of all they went through and of what they achieved my hat goes off to them on every occasion. They never would have done it had it not 'been for private enterprise and private initiative. No man living would have endured what they endured if they were working for the government and had no chance of obtaining something for themselves through their own enterprise and initiative.
The resolution goes on to say:
Therefore be it resolved that, in the opinion of this house, the government should consider the advisability of bringing the developed and undeveloped mineral resources of Canada under government control and operation.
Your honour, that is such a stupendous order that, in my opinion, it is absolutely impossible for any government to undertake it. Think of the capital invested in the mining industry, at present between one and a quarter and one and one-half billion dollars, and employing anywhere from 115,000 to 150,000 people. To think of the government undertaking to control that amount of capital and make it pay and that number of employees just in one single industry-it is out of the question; it just could not be done. The whole industry would go to pieces under any such basis of operation.
There are three classes of minerals. There are, first, the precious metals, gold, silver, perhaps copper, nickel, aluminum, platinum and radium, if it is a mineral, and so on. Then there are the base metals, such as iron, lead and other minerals of that order. Then there are the industrial minerals, if they may be so called, such as gypsum, mica, feldspar, and in particular, dolomite, because from it we get a real mineral, magnesium metal. Each one of these classes is a wide study in itself; each one has a long history behind it and many ramifications. To me it is inconceivable that any government with the material it has at hand could direct or control, much less operate, production in these various lines of minerals. It takes all the ingenuity, skill, ability and experience of private enterprise to bring about production of' the various kinds of minerals.
The last speaker said, quite rightly, that the mineral problem is largely under the jurisdiction of the provincial governments. Just how this government could step into Ontario, which produces 49'4 per cent of all the mineral production of Canada, or into any of the provinces which supply the remainder of the production, and undertake this class of production, I do not know. I do not know how they could operate under this resolution. This is provincial business, and we have difficulty enough in getting along now with the provinces, without any further interference in such a wide and large business as mining with all its ramifications of employment and laws in connection therewith. I do not believe it could be done. Therefore the resolution, in my opinion, could not be put into effect.
Take just one of the minerals which I have mentioned-nickel. In that industry anywhere from $170 million to $200 million is invested. There are employed in that industry approximately 15,000 men and women. How any government could undertake to operate the nickel industry I do not know. In the first place the government would have to obtain the capital necessary to take it over. In the second place it would be wholly out of the question for a government to operate the nickel industry with 15,000 people; a government would require not less than 30,000, probably 45,000. I believe the ratio as between . government and private industry operation is as three to one. This, of course, would provide some additional employment, but it would also certainty add to the cost of production and make it impossible to compete in the world's markets. I suppose it could be contended that this is not wholly true of the nickel industry, because Canada contains not less than ninety per cent of the world's nickel resources. But, as the hon. member for Cochrane (Mr. Bradette) pointed out, if we socialized the mineral industry the process would not stop there. We would have to socialize every industry. Just fancy the government operating every industry in Canada! It is utterly out of the question.
I am perhaps more familiar with the iron and steel industry. At the moment Canada does not produce a great deal of iron ore, but we are rapidly getting along, and we are going to produce more. In recent months I have been to some big iron mines and before long they will be producing a great deal of iron; other large new mines are about to be opened up. The iron and steel industry has invested in it something like $235 million and it employs approximately 35,000 employees. When you start socializing a nation's industries you get into astronomical figures. At the moment these industries are handled and operated by tried and trained men, men who could not possibly work under government direction. I would no more work under government direction in industry than I would fly up in the air. Once I was required to lose my initiative, my right to initiate private enterprise, I would get out of the business immediately. Therein lies the difference between private enterprise and government operation.
97S
Mineral Resources

If I might speak personally, I know one man, engaged in processing raw iron into the finished product, who wore himself out and had to go to hospital for four months to recover, from sitting up all hours of the night, and even thinking in bed after he got there, trying to figure out methods of production of a particular form of lathe, a machine which did more than any other individual instrument in Canadian industry toward winning the war. It is inconceivable that any government employee would sit up all night long, week in and week out, trying to determine how to achieve this or that. It would not be done; it is not done outside of private industry. But it takes both private industry and private initiative to achieve what this country has achieved. I have a thorough knowledge of that in connection with the iron industry. I was in it; I myself worked all hours of the night, week out and week in, to discover and process plans for the production of the lines of material I was in. No one could conceive of employees of the government doing that. You would not expect them to do it. They are not employed to do it. They are employed to carry out the directions of the departments, and do it well, and no country in the world is served better by its public employees than Canada is. I have the highest regard and respect for them. But I would never expect them to go through what I went through when I was in industry, or what a multitude of others whom I know went through.
I remember when, a few years ago, gold was increased in value. The hon. member for Cochrane, whose riding I know well, has spoken of gold. I have spent considerable time at the Lake Shore mines, at Wright Hargreaves, Macassa, in the Lake Shore area, at the Hollinger, Dome and other mines in the Timmins area. This country owes a vast amount of respect for what the mining industry of northern Ontario has accomplished. At that time the price of gold was, I believe, $20.67 per fine ounce. The world was in the throes of the depression. Through the efforts of our own government here, the then prime minister, Mr. Bennett, and the then president of the United States, as well as others, a conference was organized in London at which the price of gold was raised to what it is now, namely $35 plus exchange, or $38.50 Canadian per fine ounce. What was the result? It broke the back of the depression. That is what started the world on its way again, and that is one* thing we owe the mining industry. The amount of purchases made by this industry is almost inconceivable. 
Think of the thousand and one items of manufactured material which have gone, for example, into northern Ontario, as one great mining area, or into the Flin Flon area, or into the Yellowknife area, where there are great gold fields. Materials purchased by these gold mines, initiated and operated by private enterprise, have kept thousands of factories in operation in eastern Canada. To my mind, anything which interferes in any way with the initiating of new mines of any description would be bad for this country. Yet this resolution calls for taking over not only the present mines, but potential ones. That is a large order and would be detrimental to this country. I do not believe that capital would come into this country and open up new mines under such a programme. Any restrictions on the mining industry that would interfere with the investment of capital will not get my support. We need more capital to open up more and more mines. Any restrictions on that would be detrimental to this country.
I have no option but to oppose any resolution such as this. The hon. member for Cape Breton South is an earnest man. I have sat on many committees with him and I have always found that he used his own best judgment. He was always sincere and earnest in what he proposed in the committees. All I can say with regard to this resolution is that perhaps he has not had the wide business experience that is required to discuss a matter of industrial advance. I believe that he is wrong in so far as the terms of this resolution are concerned. If he had mentioned ways and means of expanding the mining industry, as I believe it can be expanded in Canada, for there is no country in the world that has such incomparable mineral resources, then I could have supported him.
The mining industry can be expanded. Some hon. member mentioned sending out more and more geologists. That is one way in which it could be done. More geologists should be sent out. Another hon. member said that in the last few years the government has been sending young men into the mining areas during the holidays. I supported that because it gives them an opportunity to learn how to prospect. When they return to the universities-the great majority of them are university students-the experience they have gained in the field will help them in their studies, and when they finish their studies, they will be much more capable of achieving success in the prospecting they undertake.
In addition to increasing the number of prospectors, I would increase the number of

Mineral Resources
geologists and mining engineers. That is one way in which we can advance this country. If we develop our mines we develop our country. I am sure that the hon. member for Cape Breton South is just as anxious as I am to increase the mining industry in Canada. He knows as well as I do that in that way we can expand industry all over Canada, because in some way or another, in the last analysis, much of our industry is associated with the mining industry.
Some time ago I advocated a plan whereby the federal government could assist the provincial governments in the development of roads in the mining areas. I was happy to learn that my suggestion was carried out in connection with mining areas in northern Ontario. I do not say that the government should finance it, but they should do something to assist the local provincial governments in the development of mining roads. It will be remembered that as a result of a recommendation in this house the roadway from Hawk Junction in northern Ontario was extended to the Helen Mountain iron mine where they are turning out about 750,000 tons of siderite ore a year, which, when smelted, produces about 250,000 tons of No. 1 pig iron. In that way the government can help. I would support the government taking other means to make it easier for investors to get into the mining areas, and for the mining companies to expand those areas and then get the raw product out to the market. That is one way in which we can assist in the opening of our mining areas. I take a strong stand on this, because industry in this part of Canada is frequently engaged in making large machines for the mines. That is true all over Canada. I remember when I last visited Yellowknife. I saw on the docks large amounts of iron and steel equipment made in Dundas by the Bertram company. It was shipped to the Yellowknife for use in some of the mines in that area. That is the way the country expands. We open up new areas. Orders come here which mean jobs for men in the factories in the eastern part of Canada. From your own city, -sir, a large amount of mining machinery is shipped to northern Ontario, to Flin Flon, to the Yellowknife, to the Yukon and to British Columbia, which is also a great mining country.
I believe one or two other hon. members wish to speak on this resolution and I think they should have an opportunity. I am opposed to this resolution because I am for private enterprise and private initiative. I
am for government assistance in every legitimate way to open up the country and provide jobs.
Mr. SOLON E. LOW (Peace River): I think I should take just a few minutes to place before the house the views of my group regarding this resolution. If the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) had brought in a resolution regarding the coal situation in Canada and had confined it to that subject I am satisfied that coal would have received much better consideration here this afternoon than will possibly be the case when it is attempted to discuss this resolution as it is placed on the order paper. I am happy that the hon. member brought it forward, however, and I am pleased at the indications of widespread concern over the coal situation. However, I shall not be able, in the few minutes that I shall speak, to deal with coal in any comprehensive way. I must confine myself largely to the principle of the resolution itself.
Before I enter into that part of the discussion, I should like to refer briefly to one or two matters which were brought up in the course of the remarks of the hon. member for Cochrane (Mr. Bradette). I should like to point out to him that if his memory is so bad that he has in his mind only the one principle of the national dividend which has been advocated by the social credit organization, I would suggest that he improve himself by a little more reading and studying, because nobody in this organization has ever said that the implementing of a system of national dividends would solve all our problems. That principle is only one of a whole series that makes up the complete philosophy of social credit.
We believe in a system of economic and political democracy. Our philosophy is comprehensive and complete, a philosophy of life. We are in no way merely monetary reformers. We in no way advocate a single, simple solution of our complex problems in this land. We know they are complex, and we know no single thing will solve all these problems. But we do say, and with very good reason and evidence to support our assertion, that if the principles advocated by the social credit (Organization were applied we would set this old country on the road to peaceful prosperity. The rest of it would have to be worked out as we go along.
I was surprised that the hon. member took so much time to sideswipe the various political organizations represented in this house,-of course with the exception of the Liberal organization, when he should have devoted
Mineral Resources

his time to a discussion of the resolution itself. Some of the arguments he presented in support of the mining of gold bear little weight. One would almost think he was pleading the cause of the gold people. As far as I am concerned I do not care whether another pound of gold is ever mined in this or any other country. I am satisfied that the thousands of people now engaged in the gold mining industry in Canada could find work just as lucrative, just as pleasant, and just as congenial in some other field that would yield a much better return to the whole world. I never saw anyone who could eat gold. I never saw anyone who could clothe himself in gold. I never saw anyone who was very happy when he was involved in the intricacies of gold. I have yet to see anyone successfully demonstrate that gold is of vast importance in our national economy as the hon. member suggests. I am going to leave my remarks with respect to the hon. member's address at that.
I wish to point out briefly, Mr. Speaker, that I look upon this resolution as one more step toward the centralization of power in the hands of the federal government. I am opposed to this principle on the ground that true democracy simply cannot exist under centralization of authority. The best guarantee of good administration, good government and the orderly development of our resources is to decentralize as far as possible. If this resolution had been brought forward in one of the provincial legislatures; if rather than federal government ownership, it had provided for further decentralization so that the municipalities of that province might have more or less say in the control and development of the resources, then I would have given it sympathetic support. Let me point out that the western provinces, particularly Alberta and Saskatchewan, were not granted control of their resources in 1905, when they became provinces. Their resources were left in the hands, and under the administration, of the federal government under a system of completely centralized control and ownership. I would point out also that it was a very real government ownership. Nobody owned, and nobody controlled, except the federal government. During the twenty-five year period from 1905 to 1930 the dominion government demonstrated what happens when centralization takes place and when a central government attempts to own, control and develop the resources. It left to Alberta and Saskatchewan a legacy of complicated problems and disabilities which it will take many decades to clear away.

What are some of these problems? In a short discussion of these matters I cannot confine my remarks merely to the mineral resources, but what I have to say in general about the resources of the province of Alberta will, of course, hold true for the mineral resources. The first problem created, which has complicated the lives of the people in Saskatchewan and Alberta, was the haphazard land settlement policy of the federal government, which owned and controlled those lands in those two western provinces. They allowed, yes, encouraged, the building of widespread communities, some of them hundreds of miles apart in the hinterland, in the wild, undeveloped areas of the provinces. There was no orderly settlement, no orderly policy of settlement and there could not be with the government three thousand miles away, having no intimate association or knowledge of conditions existing in those areas and, I might add, not very much interest. They allowed the settlement of marginal and sub-marginal land. Not only did they allow it; they encouraged the settlement of land in the Palliser triangle which they knew perfectly well was not fit for settlement. I say they knew this perfectly well. The Palliser report was in the hands of the federal government for a good many years prior to the time the settlement of that area was entered upon. But they.brought in settlers just the same; they colonized the land largely through the homestead method.
I might just point out that the settlement of those marginal and sub-marginal lands has cost the people of Alberta fully $25,000,000 in rehabilitation alone. They have written off their books more than $16,000,000 of taxes, seed grain advances,and relief advances. To rehabilitate those areas fully after this haphazard settlement will require many more millions. That settlement in Saskatchewan and Alberta was so poorly planned under federal government ownership, administration and development that in Alberta, for example, we have had to build 96,000 miles of roads to link up the scattered communities of the province, which in itself is no mean item when it comes to maintenance. So that I say I have yet to be convinced that government ownership and development is the policy we should follow.
The second problem is the alienation from the crown-the people-of not less than 50 per cent of the total mineral resources of Alberta. The people found they did not own even 50 per cent of the mineral resources, after those resources were returned to them in 1930. They had been given away as gifts to the Hudson's Bay company, to the Canadian

Mineral Resources
Pacific Railway company, to the C. and E. Corporation and others; and when it came to trying to obtain a fair share of the returns from the development of these resources the people of Alberta could not do so simply because under centralized federal government control and development those resources had been alienated from the crown and therefore from the people of the province.


John Oliver Probe: Is the hon. member arguing at this stage that this is an example of government ownership and control? It seems to me that would be a most flagrant case of government maladministration.


Mr. LOW:: I am pointing it out as a fair sample of what we can expect if we centralize the development and control of resources in the hands of the federal government.


John Oliver Probe: Of the Liberal organization.


Solon Earl Low: No doubt the C.C.F. would be entirely different.


James Horace King: Order. The hon. member who has the floor may not be interrupted without his permission.


Mr. ZAPLITNY:: I am asking permission of the hon. gentleman, if he will allow me to ask a question. Would he say, then, that he would be in favour of government ownership under the control of the provincial government, but not under the federal government?


Solon Earl Low: Near the close of my few remarks I shall explain the .policy I advocate, if the hon. member will allow me. I shall not forget it. Let me go on for just one moment.
The third problem that was created in that period of federal government ownership, control and development, in the twenty-five years between 1905 and 1930, which has had far-reaching results, was the depletion of the timber resources, and particularly those of Alberta. This has come about through timber slashing. Those resources were wasted; there was no reforestation; there was no attempt whatsoever to preserve watersheds. Streams became dry and, as a result, atmosphere and rainfall conditions changed.
A careful study of the situation over the years has shown that the federal government in its own areas has been a notoriously bad fire-fighter. As a matter of fact, in some areas it has done nothing whatsoever to assist. Last, year I happened to visit in the United States just across the boundary line from Waterton lakes national park. I got iirto the area known as Glacier national park in that country. While there, I met dozens of young men who were acting as wardens and who looked for fires every day. The United States
government was spending considerable money, but it was also making money because those young men were watching and preserving the timber resources of the country. At the same time, just across the border line in Alberta fires were raging in our own Waterton national park, an area which is supposed to be watched over and preserved by the federal government. Nothing was being done in Canada; the watersheds were being destroyed. It is high time something was done to prevent that sort of waste.
Another problem has been our coal problem. The hon. member for Cape Breton South made a strong plea on behalf of that industry, particularly as it applies to Nova Scotia and the Cape Breton area. In the few remarks I shall make about coal let me say at the outset that in Alberta we have a big coal problem. Coal is our greatest mining operation and, next to agriculture, our greatest resource. In Alberta for many years we have attempted to develop the Ontario market for our coal.
During the war we have seen another example of what happens under centralized federal controls, and the house should know about it. The government appointed a fuel administrator. Under his dictatorial powers he set aside certain areas in Albert which were supposed to be supplementary stripmining areas. He built tipples and spurs of railway track. He brought in huge implements and machinery, and commenced a process of strip-mining. Mind you, those strip mines produced the worst coal we have in Alberta. With only a small amount of overburden, it is only natural that that coal would be our poorest quality. The average depth of our mines would run from 200 to 400 feet, and at those depths the coal is of better quality. But, would you believe it, the coal for which permission was granted for shipment to Ontario, to keep up the market for Alberta coal, was derived from those strip mines! No wonder some of the people in northern Ontario said, "What in the world do you mean by sending us such stuff as that?"


John Oliver Probe: To make the Pennsylvania coal more popular.


Solon Earl Low: Perhaps that is it. But that is just one example of the quality of the control that is exercised by a centralized federal government, which is located so far away from the actual scene of operations. We realize that the coal problem is an extremely big one, and that it is complicated. There is no simple formula for its solution, and it is well to remember that. Perhaps ih Nova Scotia, as in Alberta, our greatest single problem in con-
Mineral Resources

nection with coal is that of marketing. Markets have to be found as near the mining operations as possible. I am convinced that the solution for Alberta in the future is so to develop that resource that the product can be used in the province. I am convinced that Alberta sits on the site of the greatest chemical industry in the world, and we shall not solve our coal problem until we begin to develop that industry in its diversified forms, with all its derivatives. We must develop those products which come from coal and which can be used right there among the people, or shipped to nearby areas of population. Our solution is certainly not found in shipping all our coal to Ontario-certainly not in the light of the arrangements the federal government now has with the United States.
One other point I should like to mention is this. It seems to me that the coal operators in Alberta, as well as those in Nova Scotia, have been losing a good bet in that they have failed to process their coals, and properly to clean and grade them before sending them to the markets in those areas where they are required. I am satisfied that if the Alberta producers would pay more attention to that phase of their activity, and see to it that the coal is properly processed, cleaned and graded, they would find a better market in Ontario for their product. I throw out that suggestion, because I believe it is true.
I am ready to assert that, in the past, natural resources have not been developed and administered in the best interests of all the people of Canada. I am ready to admit that there is much room for improvement, but I am convinced that improvement will never be brought about by centralizing administration and development in the hands of the federal government. I have good reasons for my conviction.
In addition to those already stated, I might place on record this further one, if any further is required to prove my contestations. When the war situation began to intensify the federal government asked Alberta for permission to come in and take over the Abasand oil properties in the Athabaska tar sands field, and there to carry on some developments for the purpoe of helping to supply the requirements for fuel oils and derivatives in the war effort. Everyone, especially those of us who come from the west, is quite familiar with the fiasco that followed, when Alberta did allow the federal government to come in, set up their pilot or experimental plant, for the attempt to develop and devise new ways of extracting oil from those sands. The attempt was a complete wash-out. They

have shown no beneficial results whatsoever, so far as we in Alberta have been able to ascertain. That is why the provincial government joined with private enterprise in setting up a pilot plant in the Athabaska tar sands area for the purpose of making further investigations respecting the best methods of extracting the oil and bitumen from those sands. That ought to be sufficient evidence to show that centralization of controls in the federal government brings only disappointment and maladministration of things so far from the seat of government.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The Alberta government
has discovered a process, has it not?


Solon Earl Low: Yes, it has. I further assert that there is one province in Canada in which great progress has been made in the last ten years in connection with administering and developing resources in the interests of the people. But that has not been done under government ownership. Rather, it has been done under a carefully and wisely and regulated system of private enterprise with government assistance. They have obtained results.
I do not want especially to sing the praises of Alberta, but for over ten years I was familiar with what took place there, and for that reason it is the best example I can give. In the first place we did take hold of things, and saw to it that proper conservation measures were introduced. Those conservation measures came belatedly, because many of our resources had already been wasted. As a result of the policy introduced into that province of a government regulated system of private enterprise there was gained for the people of the province a fair share of the returns from the resources of the province.
At the same time ample allowance was made to provide a sufficient reward to those people who came into the province under their own steam, and who took their own risks. They took big risks in the province, as can be shown by the record. They were permitted, we think, to obtain a just reward for their efforts and risks. The people have had a fair share of the returns from the development of these resources except in those cases where the resources had already been alienated from the crown by the action of the federal government prior to the time Alberta received her resources in 1930.
In the third place, orderly development has taken place instead of the haphazard development that occurred in those cases where the administration was located at a point thousands of miles away from the scene of the

Mineral Resources
actual work. Exploration has been intensified in the gas, oil, gold and most other fields. People who wish to risk their capital are not afraid to come into the province of Alberta because they know they will get a fair deal under the system of government regulated private enterprise.
Alberta has not solved all her problems by any means. She has not solved the problem of coal, but I am satisfied that the future holds some hope of a solution, provided that we go forward in faith and work carefully in an effort to find this solution. I do not believe that government ownership can possibly take the place of private ownership and development. I believe in a system of private enterprise. I believe that a private risk should bring with it a fair reward for the risk taken and the effort put forth. Basically that is the policy of the group which I represent.
Social credit simply means laying down basic and fundamental conditions and providing a financial and political reorganization within so that we may have a nation of good and free consumers or customers. Business cannot keep going unless business has customers. It is our policy to see that we have a nation of customers who are good and constant customers. Under such conditions there will be an optimum market for all wanted goods and services, coal or whatever the people may want, and there will be minimized the opportunities for exploitation of the people. Therefore, taking all these things into consideration, I cannot support the resolution as it stands. I must oppose it.


Mr. M. E. McGARRY (Inverness-Rich-mond):: Mr. Speaker, as a good neighbour gesture I must congratulate the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) upon the splendid presentation he has made this afternoon of the case he puts forward. I agree thoroughly with the hon. member when he said that things are not well with the mining industry of Canada, particularly the coal mining industry. I agree that that industry requires all the sympathetic support and stimulus that can be accorded to it. The hon. member for Cape Breton South has made a fairly good diagnosis of the ills of this industry, but unhappily his prescriptions are not such as I think will relieve the industry.
I think it was Longfellow who in his good-natured way of offering solace to a disappointed wooer said to talk not of wasted affection because affection never was wasted. We cannot apply that saying to all efforts that are made. When an hon. gentleman rises in his place in this house and puts forth a splendid effort, such as has been put forth by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, if that effort is made on behalf of nationalizing the mineral industry of our province then it can be said that that effort is entirely wasted so far as convincing this house or the Canadian people is concerned.
The ideas advanced by the hon. member look all right in theop'. If they could be translated into the reality of actual successful performance then the prescription would be splendid and the industry would have a chance to be relieved of its troubles. Unfortunately the theories which he advances have been put into effect, not only in connection with the mining industry but also in other phases of government activity and found wanting.
The Canadian National Railways is a government-owned transportation system. For years before the war this transportation system came back to the government with annual deficits ranging from $26,000,000 to $35,000,000.


John Oliver Probe: Would the hon. member suggest that that was because it was a government-owned institution or because of the obligations that the government assumed when they took the system over from the Grand Trunk?


Moses Elijah McGarry: In any event it is and has been operated by the government. It was only when this system had the stimulation of abnormal transportation demands that it was able to come back with a decent surplus. Over the war years I believe it declared a dividend of about $25,000,000, which is the equivalent of the annual deficit during times of peace.
If I am permitted I should like to deal with a matter of regional interest. I refer to the operation of a coal mine in my own constituency. That mine has been operated by the government since 1933; ever since it was taken over by the government there has been a persistent decline in total production and man-day production, and the only increase that we have seen is in the deficits from year to year. The 1945 production in that government-operated mine was less than it had been in 1933. The man-day production fell to 1-22 tons which is nearly the lowest in the whole dominion, while the deficit rose to $293,000. These are a couple of examples of what can be done unsuccessfully under government control.
I fail to understand the great urge for government control. I fail to understand the urge to nationalize our industries in the face of the failures which have obtained under government management, particularly when we see what can be done under private enter-

Mineral Resources
prise, as, for instance, in our war effort when private enterprise effected an industrial development which was the envy of all the nations.


John Oliver Probe: We subsidized private enterprise ' in the war.


Moses Elijah McGarry: I do not catch the hon. gentleman's remark.


John Oliver Probe: During the war we subsidized private enterprise and when a particular operation required special emphasis it was put under public ownership.


Moses Elijah McGarry: Would the hon. member say that everything that was done in the way of industrial production during the war was done under government control?


John Oliver Probe: Or subsidy.


Moses Elijah McGarry: Then the hon. member's diagnosis is quite different from that of the majority of our citizens. We achieved so much under private enteiprise as to be the envy of the world. Was it government control that brought this country from the days of the pioneers to its present position? My conception is that we had better move along under the same policy under which we have operated from the beginning. It is my conception that the function of government is not to operate industry, but so to legislate that a favourable opportunity will be accorded free enterprise to invest its capital, thus giving employment and contributing to the financial needs of the nation.
Some hon. members bring up the hackneyed question of "no profits" operation. Those who imagine that the sole and only motive in our free enterprise is profit are singularly ignorant of human nature. No undertaking can thrive under persistent losses. No undertaking can thrive unless from time to time there is some profit in it. I fail to see why we cannot continue to depend on the same spirit of enterprise which, as I said before, has brought this country from the days of our pioneering forefathers up to the position which we hold to-day, when we have reached the peak of our industrial production.
Why is it that government cannot manage industry as economically as private enterprise' can? One reason is that under government management you cannot get the coordination and simplification and saving of time and effort that characterize private management. These are ideals that do not enter into government operation. The matter of losing a little time or a little effort does not enter so much into the minds of the government as it does into the minds of the businessman who is carrying on an enter-

prise of his own. There are exceptions, of course, but the conditions where you have these exceptions are not such as to satisfy the business executive. This lack of coordination, lack of simplification and saving of time and effort is not applicable alone to public ownership in Canada. It applies also in the United States. Nor is it peculiar to our generation. It is a condition that is natural to government service, but it is unnatural in private business. You will always find under government control what businessmen characterize as red tape, seniority or some such thing, which you do not find under private enterprise. I contend, therefore, that it is not wise for the people of Canada to turn over to the government to do the things which they themselves can accomplish.
Wise leaders in governments to-day are telling businessmen things that they should know. They are telling them that they have a national duty beyond the bounds of their own enterprise and that if they will step into it and do their public duty it will not be necessary for the government to take over so many projects for which it is not fitted. I am strongly convinced that individual enterprise and freedom of contract is the policy that should be followed in this country if we are to maintain and develop Canada. This is not the day of revolution either in industry or in any other effort. It is the day of evolution. Let is try to improve the policies and methods we have followed from the beginning. I do not see that we the Canadian people are suffering at all from the rheumatic pains of old age. I believe that we are suffering from the growing pains of fast and successful development. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I cannot support this resolution. I think it is a move in the wrong direction.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order, until Monday, April 29.
Monday, April 29, 1946.