1946-06-24

Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table copy of order in council P.C. 2432, passed June 20, 1946, further amending the wartime wages control order, P.C. 9384.
In connection with this amendment I wish to make the following statement:
Canada's anti-inflation programme, established in 1941, can, I think, be regarded as being something in the nature of an experiment. It can now be said that many economists did not think it would succeed and would break down because it ran contrary to the economic forces. However, for the most part it did succeed. In large measure that success was due to the unqualified acceptance of the programme by the people of Canada.
While it was a difficult enough task to put into motion the machinery needed to implement the anti-inflation programme, it is squally difficult to gear down that machinery and modify the programme. On previous occasions it has been stated in this house that the government's policy is to move out of the price control-wage stabilization field just as rapidly as it is considered expedient to do so. The current problem is one of timing the steps to be taken in decontrol.
In respect of wage stabilization, steps have already been taken to modify the wages order, ,and a further step is about to be taken. It is concerning this latest modification that I wish to speak in particular.
The important change proposed concerns section 20 of wartime wages control order 1943, P.C. 9384. That is the section which gives war labour boards the power to authorize or direct adjustments in wage rates.
The original clause (a) of subsection 1 of the section limited the board's powers to increase wage rates only to the extent necessary to rectify "a gross injustice or gross inequality". In January of this year that section was changed so as to enable boards to authorize or direct increases in any wage rates which were found to be low in comparison with wage rates generally prevailing in the locality. The amendment further empowered a war labour board to authorize an employer to increase wage rates on such other basis, and to such extent, as in the opinion of the board is reasonable in the circumstances and con-

sistent with the maintenance of existing prices of the goods and services which the employer sells.
While this amendment served its purpose during the period it has been in force, changing conditions during this transitional period have made it appear to us that the wage adjusting formula should be modified to permit war labour boards a wider discretion than they have had.
Under the present amendment, war labour boards may authorize or direct increases in wage rates if and to the extent that such boards find the proposed increases are "just and reasonable". The amendment cuts away from the over-all wage fixing formula some of the previously existing restrictive conditions. It places upon war labour boards a greater discretion-a discretion which, I am satisfied, will be fairly exercised by representatives of management and of the major branches of organized labour in Canada, who as members of those boards have had a vast amount of experience in administering this part of our anti-inflation programme.
Much has been said of Canada's contribution to the war effort. In my opinion this is not the time to review that contribution. This is the time to direct our thoughts to the present and the immediate future. The progress of Canada will depend largely on the process of reconverting the country from a wartime to a peace-time basis.
The next two or three years will be critical ones for the future economic development of Canada. If we fail to pursue sound economic policies during that time, damage will be done which will jeopardize our progress for years to come. I can tell you that the task of maintaining a reasonable degree of stability in our economic affairs at this time is much more complicated and calls for a much greater degree of judgment than was the case when we were fighting for our very existence.
Thanks to our policy of economic stabilization, which ultimately met with the active support of industry and of the great majority of organizations in the labour movement, we came through the war well. That has been true to date in this transition period. It is the responsibility of all Canadians, whether they be in the managerial group or the labour groups, to see to it that we do not have a repetition of the inflation that struck this country in the early twenties. We must not loss of sight of the fact that the forces which brought about the chaotic conditions of boom and slump after the last war are present in our economy now. An abandonment of control now would let loose forces which could

Questions
* 2749
wreck the economic life of the country at a time when an orderly transition to peace-time conditions is a primary necessity, and the country would be worse off than if stabilization controls had never been imposed.
I have been in the labour movement long enough-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Humphrey Mitchell: Wait a moment. Listen to what I have to say. I repeat that I have been in the labour movement long enough to know that the real target of labour is to raise the real standard of living.


Mr. HOMUTH:: What child did you bring
forth?


Humphrey Mitchell: It was not my hon. friend, I know.
I know that labour has, during these last six years, made greater gains in this direction than it has in any other like period in the history of the movement. The ideal should be to consolidate those gains. What I am afraid of-and I say this with all sincerity-is that any untoward advance in the present wage structure is going to do one of two things: either it will force prices up, whereupon the increased rates will count for naught, or it could force a buyers' strike to curtail production, and of course that will mean unemployment.
This government is in favour of good and fair wages; let no one think that any member of the government holds a contrary view. Good and fair wages are just that as long as they can maintain a real standard of living.
What all should strive for is production. A normal flow of goods and services will indeed form the real income of the community. It is the responsibility of management and labour, acting as a team, to work for the maximum production of goods and services, and anything which stands in the way of this is contrary to the best interests of all, particularly the wage earner.
What I have said has been for a definite purpose. I do not want anyone to think that, because the wartime wages control order has been amended, the lid is off. The revision of the order imposes upon all a very special duty, that duty being to work together through this transition period to the end that we can come out of it with an economy second to none. That should surely be a duty which all good Canadians should be glad to assume.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: May I ask, Mr. Speaker, whether the minister's statement is debatable?


Mr. SPEAKER:: The statement made by the minister is not debatable.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Then I raise a question of privilege on behalf of the ordinary members of the house. I protest against the minister making certain statements which do nothing but eulogize the government, when it is not possible for other members to debate those statements. On a question of privilege I protest against it.



PRIVATE BILL


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 197, to incorporate Cooperative Life Insurance Company- Mr. Tucker.

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

Mr. CHURCH:: (a)	What is the number of prosecutions for failure to have a radio licence; (b) the number who have taken out licences; (e) the estimated numbers who have not, in the cities of Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, Hull, Hamilton, London, Quebec, Winnipeg, Vancouver, Saint John and Halifax, for the last three years of record ?


Mr. CHEVRIER:: (a)	Fiscal Year 1943-44	Fiscal Year 1944-45	Fiscal Year 1945-46Toronto 	208	392	773Montreal ....	631	. 327	1S9Ottawa 	494	203	345Hull 	-	-	30Hamilton ....	341	370	440London 	39	80	330Quebec 	75	70	175Winnipeg ....	40	49	62Vancouver ...	70	68	39Saint John ..	2	-	12Halifax 	66	62	156(b)	Fiscal Year 1943-44	Fiscal Year 1944-45	Fiscal Year 1945-46Toronto	166,668	163,598	157,706Montreal ...	207,697	207,887	219,311Ottawa 	39,503	38,273	38,637Hull 	5,386	5,001	5,521Hamilton ...	32,584	33,787	33,618London 	21,215	19,938	19.726Quebec 	28,610	28,114	28,529Winnipeg ...	60,791	58,697	61,835Vancouver ..	71,852	72,595	75,587Saint John ..	12,980	13,318	13,192Halifax 	14,281	14,S09	14,725
Questions

(c)' No reasonably accurate estimate can be attempted at the present time, due to various factors, such as-
(1)	The difficulty of determining the number of receiving sets which are not in operation because they have become obsolete and cannot be replaced or because replacement parts are still difficult to obtain; and
(2)	The movement of population to and from wartime industrial centres and changes in domicile of families of service personnel.


RADIO BROADCASTING-EUROPEAN SERVICES
Mr. MATTHEWS (Brandon):: In the matter of international broadcasting services, what European countries are included in such services?


Mr. McCANN:: The international short wave service of the Canadian Broadhasting Corporation operates at Sackville, N.B., two 50 kw. transmitters with an elaborate antenna system permitting beaming of signals in desired directions. The European beam carries programmes in English, French,. German, Dutch and Czech; the programmes being designed for the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Netherlands and Czechoslovakia respectively. Regular broadcasts to Russia are planned to commence as soon as adequate additional accommodation can be provided for Russian language specialists.


WAR ASSETS CORPORATION-DAVID MACNEIL
Mr. GILLIS:: 1.	Is Mr. David Macneil of Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, an employee of the War Assets Corporation?
2.	If so (a) what is his position; (b) what are his duties; (c) when was he appointed?
3.	(a) What salary does Mr. Macneil receive;
(b)	what was he paid by the way of expenses from the date of his appointment until June 15, 1946?
4.	Is Mr. Macneil an ex-service man of this war? If so (a) what branch of the service did he serve with; (b) what was the date of enlistment; (c) what was the date of discharge; (d) what was the reason for discharge?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	No. However, a Mr. David Chisholm Macneil of Halifax, N.S., is employed in War Assets Corporation.
2.	(a)1 Regional personnel representative;
(b)	he is in charge of personnel work which includes recruiting, staff promotions, transfers and staff welfare, etc. in the maritime region;
(c)	April 23, 1946.
3.	(a) S3,000 per annum; (b) $196.60.
4.	Yes. (a) R.C.A.F.; (b) October 27, 1939; (c) September, 1941; (d) Medical grounds.
rMr. Chevrier.]


CANADIAN ARMY BASIC TRAINING CORPS QUARTERS, PORTAGE LA PRAIRIE
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Were any basement quarters of the 100th C.A.B.T.C. at Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, condemned at any time during the period of the recent war? If so, when?
2.	What is the date and number of any order with respect to such condemnation?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	No. Accommodation was, however, not considered suitable for sleeping quarters and other arrangements were made in April, 1943, providing new quarters for sleeping and using basement quarters for lecture rooms and storage.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


BELLEVILLE, ONT., DOCK FACILITIES
Mr. STOKES:: 1.	Did the dominion government enter into a contract for the extension of the dock area at the harbour in Belleville, Ontario?
2.	Were tenders called for this work?
3.	If so (a )when; (b) where; (c) who was the successful tenderer; (d) how many tenders were received?
4.	What is the contract price per yard for
(a) the fill used near the work; (b) for fill being brought to the work?
5.	If tenders were not called, how was the contract let?


Lionel Chevrier: In so far as the Department of Transport is concerned:
1.	No.
2,	3, 4, and 5. Answered by No. 1.


IMPORTS OF COAL
Mr. GILLIS:: How many tons of (a) bituminous; (b) anthracite coal did the Rochester and Pittsburgh Coal Company (Canada) Limited import into Canada during the period from January, 1945 to January 1, 1946?


James Joseph McCann: It is contrary to the practice of this department to furnish information which would disclose the private transactions of importeres at customs.


LABOUR CONDITIONS-TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION AND SOUTHAM NEWSPAPERS
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Has the International Typographical Union at any time since the commencement of the present dispute with certain newspaper publishers offered to amend its provision excepting its laws, not relating to hours, wages and working conditions, in such a manner as to meet clearly the requirements of Canadian law?
2.	If so, what is the nature of such amendment, and when was it offered?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	Yes.
2.	The amendment accepted, rather than "offered", by the representatives of the inter-

Questions as Orders jor Returns
national typographical union read as follows: "Provided, however, local union laws not affecting wages, hours and working conditions, and the general laws of the International typographical union, shall not be subject to arbitration except in so far as such arbitration and the results thereof are compulsory under Canadian law". This amendment was acceptable to representatives of the union at a meeting with officials of the Department of Labour held on January 30, 1946, as a proposal relating to the Winnipeg newspaper stoppage of work which had commenced on November 8, 1945.


Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	Have any Southam newspapers indicated their willingness to sign a contract with the International Typographical Union including a provision that the union's laws, not relating to hours, wages and working conditions, should be exempt from arbitration?
2.	If so, which newspapers?


Mr. MITCHELL:: 1.	My department has received no information on this point.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


WARTIME HOUSING-SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many houses have been (a) constructed; (b) are under construction, in Saskatchewan by Wartime Housing Corporation?
2.	What will be the cost to the government of each of the following types of houses (a) 4 room; (b) 5 room; (c) 6 room?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	As at June 15, 1946: (a) 424 houses; (b) 756 houses.
In addition to (b) above the construction of 250 more houses has been authorized although contracts have not yet been let for their erection.
2.	Final costs to the dominion government are not yet available as only approximately 30 per cent of the house construction scheduled for Saskatchewan has been completed. The following costs therefore are estimates only: (a) 4 room, $3,330.02; (b) 5 room, $4,272.81; (c) 6 room, $4,39722.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. FRASER:: 1.	What properties including office space did War Assets Corporation own or rent during the year 1945?
2.	What was paid in rentals, taxes, repairs and other costs on these properties for the year 1945?


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS-REGINA DIVISION-MEN LAID OFF
Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many men have been laid off by the Canadian National Railways in the Regina division since October 31, 1945?
2.	How many of these men were veterans of world war I or II?
3.	How many of these men were (a) maintenance of way employees; (b) shop employees;
(c)	running trades?


SHORTAGE OF NURSES
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	Has the government taken any action with regard to the acute shortage of nurses in Toronto and elsewhere?
2.	What percentage of enlisted nurses have left the armed services since the cessation of hostilities?
3.	How many of these have returned to private practice?


EXPORTS OF APPLES-SUBSIDIES
Mr. RAYMOND (Beauharnois-Laprairie):: 1.	What quantity of apples was exported by Canada during each of the years 1939 to 1945, inclusive ?
2.	nt what prices were they sold?
3.	What price was paid to the producers?
4.	What was the amount of subsidies paid on exported apples?


DECORATIONS AWARDED TO CHAPLAINS
Mr. MATTHEWS (Kootenay East):: 1.	Were any decorations awarded to chaplains who served in His Majesty's forces during the war?
2.	If so, to whom and when?



ADJOURNMENT ON FRIDAY UNTIL JULY 2

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: A question was asked last week whether it was the intention of the government to have the house sit on July 1, Canada's national holiday. The government have come to the decision that this year, July 1 coming on a Monday, the house should not be expected to sit on the first of July but that an opportunity be given to hon. members to participate in one or other of the numerous celebrations that are being arranged in different parts of Canada. I have asked the Clerk of the House to insert a notice on the order paper to the effect that when the house adjourns on Friday, the 28th instant, it stand adjourned until Tuesday, the 2nd of July.
Small Loans

CLOCKS IN PARLIAMENT BUILDING!
On the orders of the day:
Mr. DONALD M. FLEMING (Eglinton): I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. What is going wrong with the clocks around the halls of this building? They do not agree on the time.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: They are like the government.


Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: I wish to thank the hon. member for drawing my attention to the fact that some of the clocks are running wild. I shall do my best to have them fixed as soon as possible. We are fortunate in that only the clocks around here run wild.



SMALL LOANS ACT


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of bill No. 140, to amend the Small Loans Act, 1939.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the banking and commerce committee.
Karl Kenneth Homuth: Is there not to be a debate on second reading?


James Horace King: I put the motion for
second reading to the house and it was agreed to. Then I put the motion referring it to the banking and commerce committee, which was also agreed to.


Karl Kenneth Homuth: Is it understood that this bill is being referred to the banking and commerce committee? The minister has not said so. Mr. MACKENZIE: The speaker said so.



QUEBEC BOUNDARIES EXTENSION


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice) moved the second reading of bill No. 156, to amend the Quebec Boundaries Extension Act, 1912.
Motion agreed to and bill read the second time.
Mr. ST. LAURENT moved that the house go into committee on the bill.
Mr. COLD WELL:: Is the minister not
going to explain the bill a little more fully than he did last time?
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I assumed that the house was satisfied with the explanation I made when the bill received its first reading on May 28. At that time I stated that in 1912-


James Horace King: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the minister, but I put the motion for second reading to the house and it was carried; therefore the motion now before the house is
to refer the bill to committee of the whole.


Mr. COLDWELL:: I thought I had asked the minister a question before second reading was given. However, if the second reading has been given it is all right; we can deal with it in committee.


James Horace King: I suggest to the hon. member that the discussion can take place in committee.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: The committee will remember that when I introduced this bill on May 28 I said that it was incidental to the resolution which was under debate until last Thursday night. Had I not been remiss in my duty on Wednesday last I should have announced that we would ask the house to take up second reading of this bill when the resolution was passed. It did pass the house shortly before eleven o'clock on Thursday night, and as I had not given notice that the second reading of this bill would be moved immediately afterwards I did not feel that I should do so, and I took the first opportunity then of informing the house that it would be called at this time.
In 1912 parliament passed several acts to extend northwards the boundaries of Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba. In the bill dealing with the extension northward of the boundaries of Quebec it was provided that the population of the added territory would not be counted in the population to be divided by sixty-five to find the unit of representation on redistribution of the membership of this house. In view of the fact that the population of Quebec is not now to be the determining factor to fix that representation it was felt that the restrictions which had been inserted in the legislation of 1912 should be removed. I pointed out that when the statute of 1912 was passed its coming into force had been made contingent upon concurrent legislation of the Quebec legislature, and that in fact concurrent legislation had been passed. It was only after it had been passed and the increase in area and the terms of that increase accepted by an act of the legislature of Quebec that the federal act was proclaimed.
Hon. members will note that it is proposed that this act shall not come into force until proclaimed, and shall not be proclaimed unless and until there is concurrent legislation of the

Quebec Boundaries Extension
legislature of Quebec. As a matter of fact, before it was introduced the government of Quebec was advised of its introduction, and that the proposal would contain the section that it would not come into force except on proclamation and would not be proclaimed unless and until the legislature of Quebec had concurred in amending the provisions of legislation which had originally been made with the concurrence of the legislature of the province.
At the present time the effect is nil. At the last census the population of the area was 3,067, and in the calculation would amount to less than one one-hundredth of one per cent of the total population of Canada; therefore it does not affect the unit of representation. If it is included it raises the unit of representation from 45,566 to 45,578; but a difference of twelve in the divisor has no effect at all when used in dividing the population of the other provinces. It is really incidental to the resolution adopted by this house on Thursday evening, and if passed and concurred in by the legislature of Quebec, and proclaimed, will leave the province of Quebec in exactly the same situation as all the other provinces of Canada. It will leave the statute of 1912, which concerned Quebec, with the same conditions as those originally placed in the statute extending the boundaries of Ontario and the statute extending the boundaries of Manitoba.


Mr. MacNICOL:: Should the bill not give
a description of the new area added to Quebec? By the old description in the 1912 act, which covered the northern boundary of Quebec, the line commenced at the mouth of the east Main river, proceeded eastward and then up the main tributary northeastward to lake Nishikun, and then followed the fifty-second and a half parallel east to the source tributary of the Hamilton river. Since that time, however, Labrador has been set up, so I am under the impression that it would be necessary to mention that area lying north of the boundary of 1912 and eastward to the boundary of Labrador.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: It is not intended by this act to deal with the fact that a certain area purported to be annexed to Quebec at that time, and that since then some of it has been declared to be not within the jurisdiction of the parliament of Canada. All that is proposed is to delete two of the conditions which no longer apply. There is nothing in the statute of 1912 being dealt with in this amendment but the conditions that were inserted.


Mr. ADAMSON:: - In view of the valuable iron deposits recently discovered on the boundary of that long bit of Labrador which goes into the province of Quebec, has any consideration been given to rewriting the treaty with Labrador to include that area? A tremendous development is likely to go on there, which will be channelled down through the province of Quebec. That is really physically part of Canada, whether it is on one side or other of the height of land. I realize this bill does not deal with that, but while we are on this subject I should like to ask whether any discussions have taken place in that regard.
Mr. ST. LAURENT:	That is a matter
about which I must be rather careful in what I say. It is being dealt with by the Department of External Affairs. As the hon. member knows, just within the last few days an election has been held in Newfoundland for the purpose of constituting an assembly. The position of Canada is still as it has been stated on more than one occasion in this house. If the people of Newfoundland come to the conclusion that they would be happy to throw in their lot with Canada, their representations will be given most earnest and sympathetic consideration. But it has been said on more than one occasion in this house that this is something concerning more particularly the inhabitants of the old colony of Newfoundland, and this government would not wish to appear to be interfering in the affairs of that colony. Their delegates or representatives will be welcomed here as cordially as we can welcome them. I believe there are many Canadians who feel that it would be to the mutual advantage of Canada and Newfoundland to come closer together. Nevertheless it might not be helpful to that end to have Canada appear to be interfering with the judgment the people of Newfoundland are to express on that subject.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Now the minister has
mentioned that subject I should like to add a word in that regard, and I do this in the kindest way possible to all concerned. If Newfoundland should send delegates to Canada to discuss the question of the admission of Newfoundland into Canada, which I for one favour, I would strongly urge that no effort be made or no suggestion advanced to detach Labrador from Newfoundland. I made an exhaustive survey into the confederation question in Newfoundland, extending over a week or two during which time I indicated that I for one would favour such a step, and everywhere I was met with the question, "Would you make an effort to detach Labrador from our jurisdiction?" I found the people of Newfoundland almost immovable
Naval Service-Sea Cadets

in their determination not even to discuss the question of detaching Labrador from the jurisdiction of the island. I respectfully suggest that if this matter does come up, no suggestion be put forward by us to detach Labrador from the island of Newfoundland.
Mr. ST. LAURENT:	I am sure whoever
represents Canada at a conference of this kind will be glad to have the considered opinion of the hon. member as to the best method of serving the mutual interests of the people of the two areas.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of National Defence for Naval Services) moved the second reading of bill No. 56, to amend the Naval Service Act, 1944.
Mr. STIRLING:: Is the minister going to make a statement?


Mr. ABBOTT:: Perhaps I had better say a brief word in explanation. The purpose of the bill is to amend the Naval Service Act by adding two sections, 2SA and 28B, in order to provide permanent authority for the formation, training and administration of the Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps. That authority exists at present by virtue of P.C. 3655 of May 26, 1941, an order in council passed under authority of the War Measures Act and continued in effect under the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act, 1945. As the powers conferred by that act in due course lapse, it is necessary to provide permanent authority under the Naval Service Act. The bill is similar to sections 59 to 62 of the Militia Act, which make provision for military cadets.
The Canadian sea cadet movement is by no means new. Since 1896, members of the Navy League of Canada have contributed, without remuneration, a large part of their spare time to the sea cadet corps. The primary object of the movement was not, I think it is fair to say, to train cadets for service during war time, but rather to help direct boys and young men along the road to better citizenship.
At the outbreak of war in 1939, the Canadian navy consisted, as hon. members are aware, of approximately 1,700 officers and men. One of the lessons we learned in the course of the growth of the navy to its war-time
[Mr. MacNicol.l
peak of over 100,000 officers and men was the value, in time of war, of the training that had been given to the sea cadet corps. True, cadets were by no means finished seamen, but they had in the course of their training absorbed many of the fundamentals of service at sea, and also the basic features of naval discipline. The value of this training was demonstrated in every theatre of operations in which the Canadian navy was engaged. At least 6,000 cadets passed from sea cadet corps to active service during the war, and among their numbers the navy is proud to count some of its most distinguished officers and men.
It was in 1941 that the naval service first took an official part in the affairs of the sea cadets. Since then the movement has been the combined effort of the navy league and the naval service. The navy league provides the corps with training quarters and at least one summer camp in each province. The general administration of the corps is attended to by local branches and committees of the league. Interested citizens act as sea cadet officers and they, with the committees, organize public support for the corps. The naval service supervises the training of the sea cadet officers and cadets, operates the summer camps, and lends the necessary training equipment. It is intended to continue this, arrangement, which has worked out most, satisfactorily.
In 1942 His Majesty the King, at the request of the government of Canada, was pleased to permit the sea cadets of Canada to use the term "Royal" as a prefix to their-name, so that the official name then became "The Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps."
During the war considerable emphasis was-naturally placed upon the value of the corps as a means of training youths for eventual active service with the navy. Now that the war is over, emphasis is again placed upon the primary peace-time object of the corps which, as I have said, is to assist in the development of good Canadian citizens. Yet always-in the background is the thought that should Canada again be faced with a national emergency, the training these youth are-receiving to-day will stand the nation in good, stead.
There are at present nearly 13,000 sea cadets, attached to approximately 100 separate corps located in all of the larger cities-of Canada, as well as in many smaller cities and towns. It is proposed to increase the-number of cadets to 15,000. The widespread national enthusiasm for the movement that is constantly being demonstrated makes it plain that that number could, without diffi-

Naval Service-Sea Cadets
culty, be greatly exceeded. However, for the time being at least, the funds and administrative facilities that are available make it impracticable to aim at a membership of more than 15,000.
Hon. members who have, as I have had, a son in the sea cadet corps, or who have become familiar by other means with the activities of the corps, will not need to be told of the fine work that is being done in building character and in keeping the boys interested in worth-while things during their leisure time. I have been informed by officials of the Navy League of Canada that there is no record of a single serious offence having been committed in Canada by a member of the sea cadet corps. I am not in a position to verify that statement, but I am quite prepared to believe that it is correct. This record may in some measure be attributable to the fact that the Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps attracts a good type of young boy, but I am quite sure that the training the boys receive and the spirit that prevails in the corps has had a great deal to do with it.
I trust the house will support the amendment to the Naval Service Act which will permit this corps to become a permanent part of our naval service.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Mr. Speaker, I am happy indeed to support this bill. I have been a member of the Navy League of Canada, Ontario division, for the last thirty years, ever since 1917, and for a number of years have been one of the honorary presidents. In that time I have been associated with a multitude of distinguished men and women across Canada who, as the minister has so kindly pointed out, have given their services freely. They have given, too, of their time and their means to build up this great organization.
I thank the minister for the encomiums he has paid the navy league for the achievements of the young men belonging to that organization. I was amused a few days ago when I received from Toronto a pamphlet in whieh appeared the definition of a sea cadet boy. Perhaps the minister has read it, but I think it would be worth while to put it on Hansard. This article was prepared by the Rev. E. M. Skillen, co-padre of "Admiral Mountbatten" Navy League Sea Cadet Corps. Happily the sea cadets name their corps for admirals or ships. I have forgotten the name of the Toronto corps. The article states:
A sea cadet is a boy. A boy was once classically defined as a "darling" at the age of two, a "nuisance" at the age of 8, at 18 "interesting," at 22 "a meal ticket," and at 25 married "and to blame for everything." The definition is
humorous but superficial, for it leaves out of account the straddling age of 12 to 16, the most important time in a boy's life.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The top limit is 19 years. It ranges from 12 to 19.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister referred to training. The Rev. Mr. Skillen makes reference to that feature, in these words:
First the boy is dressed in the finest uniform in the world, a uniform steeped in tradition and honour, and he is taught to respect the uniform and what it stands for. It teaches him the first lesson of good citizenship, faithfulness to ideals.
Those are some of the reasons why in 1917 I became interested in this movement. That was about the time the late Lord Jellicoe, the victor at Jutland, came to Canada. He and those associated with him gave the movement a tremendous impetus.
As the minister has said, the corps have grown in number to almost a hundred. I believe the exact number stands at 91, and they are found in the principal cities and towns throughout Canada. The objective in membership is 15,000. I am happy to say that during the war more than 10,000 of those trained in sea cadet corps in Canada entered the Canadian navy. This number would be almost 75 per cent of the number belonging to the corps. Then, about 14 per cent joined the army, and about three per cent the air force.
But the effect on total enlistments throughout Canada in all the services, through the work of the navy league since 1917 was much greater than can be shown in the percentages I have given. Years ago, when I had more time, I visited the corps all across Canada. One expects to find the spirit of the sea prevailing in the towns and cities along our coasts, but it has always been a revelation to me to witness the ardour and enthusiasm of the sea cadets corps at inland points. I have in mind the city of Winnipeg which at that time, if not to-day, had the largest sea cadet corps in Canada. It is a large corps. Regina also had a high class corps, as well as Calgary and Edmonton.
The training that these boys had received down through the years showed results during the war. The young men of the prairies were far removed from the sea, but they were encouraged to enlist for naval and sea work. They excelled and distinguished thmselves beyond anything that anyone would have dreamed possible on the part of boys who had never seen ships and who had never had anything to do with the sea. With the minister I rejoice in the marvellous work accomplished by the navy league down through the years.
Naval Service-Sea Cadets

I cannot speak too highly of the navy league. Every time it was mentioned in the house, particularly during the war, many hon. members have been ready to laud its achievements. I cannot close without mentioning a few of the outstanding Ontario men and women who have taken part in this work. I am sorry I have not the names of those in other parts of Canada, but perhaps other hon. members can mention them.
Those in Ontario include the patron, His Honour the Lieutenant Governor Albert Matthews. The dominion president is Mr. D. H. Gibson, C.B.E., a retired executive of the great Robert Simpson Company. He has carried into the administration of the affairs of the navy league the same careful business administration he exercised when building up that great company. The Ontario president is Mr. Gordon C. Leitch, another outstanding business man of the city of Toronto, who devotes his whole time to the administration of the Ontario division of the navy league. I believe last year he was able to raise close to $400,000 to carry on naval work, which was to the credit not only of the Ontario division but of the whole navy league. The secretary is Mr. Victor R. Ramsay. Among the honorary presidents are Lady Eaton, Lady Kemp, Mrs. A. E. Kirkpatrick, Mrs. R. C. Matthews, and among the vice presidents are Colonel A. E. Kirkpatrick, K.C., Mr. J. C. M. MacBeth, K.C., and a long list of others.
I rise with a great deal of pleasure to support this bill. Let me close by quoting the promise made by the sea cadet. This reads:
I solemnly promise to live up to the motto of the Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps for God, for King and for the empire, and further promise, as far as I am able, never to allow any one to do or say anything against my king or country.
I gladly second what the minister has said about the official figures showing that the sea cadets are never in trouble, that they are always an example to others. I have never heard of one of them being in the courts for a misdemeanor. The training is such as to make them real men in character, in deportment, in civility and in recognition of authority. Although their pledge does not call upon them to serve, they have shown that they are ready to serve.


Mr. F. E. LENNARD (Wentworth):: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to delay this bill, nor shall I repeat the many fine things that have been said about the Navy League of Canada and the sea cadet corps in Canada. Naturally I agree with everything that has been said. I commend the interest that the minister and his department have taken in this work during

the past several years. I rose simply to draw one matter to the attention of the minister. I suggest that the remuneration given to the sea cadet officers be in the form of a clothing allowance. In the past this has always been to compensate for out of pocket expenses, which may amount to a considerable sum at the end of the year.
I have in mind one chap who attended the sea cadet officers course at Cornwallis for two weeks last month. He then went to camp with the boys at Gananoque. At the end of the year he found that the amounts he received for expenses put him in a higher category and the result was he was being penalized by our own revenue department. I feel that this matter should be taken into consideration and these payments made in the form of a clothing or expense allowance.
Mr. NORMAN J. M. LOCKHART (Lincoln) : Mr. Speaker, I support what the hon. member for Wentworth (Mr. Lennard) has said. In my fair city there is one of the outstanding branches of the sea cadet corps. Many persons in that city have given of their substance as well as of their time to support this work, and they are finding considerable difficulty in getting new personnel to continue it. Every possible consideration should be given to continuing the interest which these young men have in this work. They have grown up over a period of eight or ten years and have now reached the point where they would be very useful to the organization, but, they hesitate to continue with the work because of financial considerations, although they have every other qualification. I feel sure the minister will give this aspect of the matter every consideration.


Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: Mr. Speaker, the Social Credit movement will be behind the proposals made by the minister in this bill. We urge that the minister be ambitious in preparing our people for an emergency. He should not be apologetic; he should tell the people that they are in grave danger of having to face another struggle at any time. It is wisdom to be prepared. We should emphasize the aspects of this movement which involve health, training, and 'character development, and we must be more prepared in many of these things than we were in the last generation. People get the idea that all they are doing this thing for is character development. The Social Credit movement will support the minister in an ambitious programme.


Mr. G. H. CASTLEDEN (Yorkton):: The first question I want to direct to the minister

Naval Service-Sea Cadets
is whether his remark about including those of nineteen years of age is correct, because I understand from the bill that it does not include those of nineteen years of age. The second point is with regard to rates of pay, accommodation and medical care, and so forth, being left entirely to orders in council. I believe that on previous occasions there have been complaints of discrimination between the various arms of the service with regard to the cadet corps, that the naval cadet corps was not receiving the same pay as cadets in the army and the air force. Are these provisions to be made uniform, or is there to continue to be discrimination in rates of pay?


Douglas Charles Abbott: We are not in committee, but if no hon. member desires to speak I can deal with the matters which have just been raised by the hon. member for Yorkton.


James Horace King: If no other hon. members wish to speak, the minister wTill now close the debate.


Mr. G. R. WEBB (Leeds):: As the boys' sea cadet camp known as Rotary Island is located within almost a stone's throw of where I live, I should like to say just a few words. I have had the opportunity of visiting this camp on many occasions, and my impression is that good training supervision is the secret of the success of this organization. I believe that in most cases the instructors and trainers are good, and therefore I am heartily in accord with any advancement of this enterprise. It is a great work. I have a couple of questions to ask, but possibly I can do that in committee.


Mr. ALAN COCKERAM (York South):: I just want to compliment the minister for bringing down this measure, and would like to suggest to him-I., am sure he has taken it into consideration-that the good will and the cooperation of the provincial departments of education be obtained in order that this whole movement may be successful.


Mr. G. K. FRASER (Peterborough West):: I have in my riding two of the finest sea cadet corps in the country, one sponsored by the Kiwanis, and one at the Grove school. The Grove school is, I believe, one of the oldest sea cadet corps in Canada. Three hundred of its members went into the services in this war and the previous war. But since the war is over the members of the Kiwanis club of Peterborough-of which I am a member-have told me it is difficult to keep up interest in the movement, to bring the boys together. I suggest to the minister that he do everything possible to get boats and other
equipment for the boys in connection with their training. They need it, and it is one way of keeping the corps together.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will close the debate, if I may, by thanking hon. gentlemen who have spoken for their kind words about the sea cadet corps and the Navy League of Canada-all of which, of course, I heartily endorse. I did not feel that this was a bill which would provoke controversy, and I am glad that it is receiving such general support on the part of hon. members.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1 - Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Has any arrangement been made that the ships' bells off the different corvettes, Fairmiles, and so forth, be sent to the cities and towns to which they belong? If the ship's bell of, say, the corvette Peterborough were sent to Peterborough, it would assist in the recruiting of sea cadets and1 help the morale of the boys.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am not quite sure. I
believe that where possible, and where the request has been made, ships' bells have been sent to the cities and towns for which the corvettes have been named, but I am not in a position to say whether that is the general rule. I am inclined to think it is not. I will take a note of my hon. friend's suggestion, and when the estimates of the naval service department are before the house I can perhaps reply in greater detail.
The hon. member for Yorkton asked, I think, as to the age limit. The ages, as I said, are twelve to nineteen, but up to nineteen. Boys over nineteen years of age are not eligible as cadets. In other words they can serve up to the time they enter their nineteenth year.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: How many training centres will there be in Canada, and where; and how long will the cadets train each year?


Douglas Charles Abbott: By training centres does my hon. friend mean cadet camps?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Yes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: There are fourteen in all.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Distributed throughout the country?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Distributed throughout
Canada-one at least in every province.
Naval Service-Sea Cadets


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Has my hon. friend the names of them?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes. I would be glad to put them on Hansard:
Pownal, ten miles from Charlottetown on Pownal bay.
In Nova Scotia negotiations are under way for a camp site and will be settled shortly.
Camp Brock, twenty-eight miles from Saint John, on the Saint John river.
William Ewing camp, which is near Choisy, outside Montreal.
Rotary island, Gananoque, Ontario.
Princess Alice and Queen Elizabeth, twelve miles from Midland on Minnicog and Beausoleil islands.
Kitchigami, five miles from Goderich on lake Huron.
Lake Eva, which is on Purdy island in Eva lake, near Kawene, Ontario.
Ruttan, which is near Kenora.
Shepley island, which is an island in the Saskatchewan river not far from Saskatoon.
Wabamum, which is thirty miles from Edmonton.
Chestermore, which is east of Calgary.
A camp in British Columbia on Gambier island, some fourteen miles northwest of Vancouver in Howe sound.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: What will be the period of training?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I have not that information at the moment, but, judging from the experience of my own son, the camp operates during a period of two months in the summer, and the boys go for periods varying from two to four weeks.


Grote Stirling: The minister has drawn attention to the fact that, strictly speaking, a cadet ceases to be a cadet on his nineteenth birthday. Of course after that those who show aptitude and who so desire may perhaps be granted commissions; they are extremely useful in carrying on the work of the corps, and even as instructors they are on occasion continued in the work of-the corps and give very beneficial service. The great impetus which came to the sea cadet movement at the beginning of the recent war was largely due, I think, to the interest which the minister's predecessor took in this movement. Before that, in the years between the wars and particularly as a result of the years of depression, grave difficulties were encountered by those who were endeavouring to carry on the work of the sea cadet corps. A great deal of the load fell on the shoulders of those in our communities who were sufficiently interested in the work, and sufficiently appreciative of the fact that such training was of the greatest value not only to the boy himself but to the neighbourhood, to ensure that the movement was carried on. In 1941 the sea cadet corps
TMr. Abbott.]
regulations were brought out. I understand that those regulations have been amended and a new set have been prepared but not issued. I shall be glad if the minister will explain the position with regard to the new regulations. Possibly he has been waiting until this bill should become an act, but there are quite considerable modifications, I am told, in the new set, and I should like to hear when we shall have them.
In the second part of section 1 reference
is made to the fact that the members and instructors shall be entitled to accommodation, medical care and pay and allowances, as may be prescribed. I should like to make this observation to the minister with regard to accommodation. In 1935 the government took over a school building in the town of Kelowna where there is a cadet corps which has existed now for a considerable number of years, a school building which was about to be demolished but which it was considered could be adapted to the use of an armouries. On that occasion I made a point of seeing to it that the sea cadet corps should have not only the use of the drill hall and of the miniature rifle range but also have a room and a storeroom. A sea cadet corps accumulates a very considerable quantity of government property, such as rifles, ammunition and various instruments used for training the boys, and prior to that time it had been very difficult to preserve these possessions of the government in the hands of the sea cadet corps. I then made arrangements that there should be two comparatively small rooms put at the disposal of the sea cadet corps, one for use as an office where the committee could meet, whose task it is to run the corps, and where the officer commanding and the petty officers could draw up their reports and fill up their forms, and next door to it a store roorfi which could be under lock and key, the window of which could be barred. And so the sea cadet corps was for the first time in its history with something which it could call its own in the way of premises.
There must be many other opportunities for the government to provide that minimum of accommodation which in my opinion is pretty nearly a necessity if an efficient corps is going to be ran. Prior to that time, that corps and another one in my neighbourhood went from pillar to post to get what premises were available at a cheap rate, and then they were turned out and had to find something else. I should like to hear from the minister something on that subject, and whether he will endeavour to see that in future, when

Naval Service-Sea Cadets
armoury buildings are being provided, the sea cadet corps of that neighbourhood have premises provided for them.


Douglas Charles Abbott: First, as to the new regulations, these have not yet been issued; as my hon. friend has intimated, they are being held until this bill has been passed. They will be issued shortly thereafter. It may be a month or two, allowing for revision and printing, but he can be assured that they will be issued promptly. On the question of accommodation, I agree with what he has said, that in making plans for the construction of any new naval division buildings, if and when we are able to proceed with them, proper care be taken to see that facilities are available for the sea cadet corps.
When I visited the naval division in Saskatoon two or three months ago-it is a modern type of naval division, a building which was constructed during the war-I was pleased to find that adequate and suitable provision had been made therein for the local sea cadet corps. The estimates for this year contain an appropriation of something over $800,000 for the support of sea cadet work, and the committee can be assured that this work will be continued.


Grote Stirling: Can I take it from the
minister's remarks that in those centres where there is not an armoury or a national defence building or any sort, the government will look favourably on a sufficient grant of money to enable proper premises to be rented for the purpose?


Douglas Charles Abbott: As my hon. friend knows,
the sea cadet movement is sponsored by the Navy League of Canada, and a substantial portion of the money which is used in its activities is raised by voluntary subscriptions. The government feel that it is extremely desirable that this should be continued because it enlists the support of public-spirited and representative citizens in different parts of the country and is not solely a government-directed movement. It is most desirable that this feature should be retained. I am not prepared to say that in districts where there is no naval division available, in which quarters can be furnished for a sea cadet corps, a specific grant could be made for that purpose, but I shall be happy to take my hon. friend's suggestion into consideration and bring it to the attention of the officers of the department to see whether something of the kind would be possible. After all, it is as broad as it is long. If the moneys raised locally do not have to be used for the rental of premises, they can be used for other purposes, and therefore the amounts made available through
government assistance can be used for some other purpose. However, I shall take the remarks of my hon. friend into consideration and see what can be done.


Grote Stirling: I warn the minister that I shall expect him to fight like a tiger when the new premises are being built, which are foretold of in the Okanagan valley. A new building is said to be in contemplation. By the way, it is the same minister, and I shall feel it all the more necessary to ask him to see to it that a sea cadet corps is properly provided for in the buildings which will probably be put up before many years are over in order to replace those that exist today. In my opinion it is essential, if the government is going to support this very worthy enterprise, that the necessary facilities be provided to enable them to carry on their work properly.


Frank Exton Lennard: The corps in which I am most interested is housed at the moment in armouries under the direction of M.D. 2, and we are working harmoniously with the O.C. of the battery in charge of the armouries. Further to what the minister said about the sea cadet movement being under the direction of the Navy League of Canada and more or less on their own, I believe it remains that way to a great extent. I may add that both Hamilton and Burlington are considering the raising of considerable amounts of money- by private subscription, which is as it should be-for the erection of sea cadet headquarters in both places.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: I feel it my duty to say that no one in Canada did more for the sea cadet corps than a former minister of national defence, the hon. member for Yale (Mr. Stirling). It was one of his great works. When he was minister of defence and in opposition in other days he unfailingly supported the sea cadet corps.


Mr. PEARKES:: Canada now has three
cadet corps, the sea cadets, the army cadets and the air force cadets. They all receive some, if not all, their financial assistance from the government of Canada. There are other boy organizations, such as the boy scouts, in Canada which in the past have, I believe, received government grants. It is highly desirable that there should be no duplication, in the expenditure of this money, and that there should not be undue rivalry between these various organizations-and by undue rivalry I mean attemps made by local scoutmasters or cadet leaders to get boys to transfer from one organization to another. In order that Canada's money may be spent as wisely
Naval Service-Sea Cadets

and judiciously as possible some coordination is required between the activities, training, terms of enlistment and so forth of these various cadet corps. Can the minister tell us whether any steps are being taken to coordinate the training activities of the three cadet corps? If so, is there any further coordination between the other boy movements of Canada?


Douglas Charles Abbott: There is an inter-service
cadet committee in the three services. I am not able to say just how far that committee has progressed with coordinating the training in the three services. One thing that it does is to allocate corps on the basis of population, having due regard to the requests of local school boards and so forth, so that there will not be overlapping and duplication, particularly in smaller towns, as between the cadet corps of the three services. I think that is desirable. I do not believe very much headway has been made thus far in coordinating the training of the various corps. I do not know just how far that wjll be possible. My hon. friend could speak with greater authority on that than I can. I suppose the one purpose of the cadet corps, aside from its training value, lis to instil in the member of the corps a liking for and an interest in the particular service for which he is training, and so long as it balances out fairly well throughout the country on the law of averages I suppose we can leave to each service the determination of the type of training that may be given in a particular corps in the service. But I shall be glad to look into the matter a bit further. Perhaps when my general estimates are under review I can make a more complete statement in reply to the inquiry which my hon. friend has made.


Frank Exton Lennard: In my own locality some men who are in the boy scout movement are members of the sea cadet committee and, it has never been my experience that there has been any conflict between the boy scouts and the sea cadet movement. I may not be right. Some hon. member said I was wrong. But so far as my knowledge goes there is complete cooperation. We do not take boys into the sea cadets until they are fourteen years of age, and at that time they are about ready to leave the boy scouts.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That coincides with my experience. In my own city Mr. R. C. Stevenson is extremely active in the boy scout movement and the sea cadet movement.


Mr. SKEY:: Is the inter-service cadet committee considering the standardization of pay and allowances, uniform conditions of service,

commissioning and so forth for the three cadet corps, or are they all handling their own organizations and directing them by different means?


Douglas Charles Abbott: There is an inter-service cadet committee in Ottawa and one in each military district as well; but on the point just raised by the hon. member I think that is a matter which is considered not by the interservice cadet committee but by the personnel members committee. I am not in a position to give a definite answer to that at the moment.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Is the government considering any national youth training or cadht movement which goes above and beyond a particular service?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Not that I am aware of.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Has the government asked the inter-service committee to report on the feasibility of trying a national youth training movement?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I question whether that would be the function of this committee. The function of the committee is simply to correlate the activities of the cadet movement in the three services. I would think that is a matter of government policy which would hardly come within the purview of the interservice cadet committee.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: There are only 15,000 sea cadets authorized, and the same number for the air cadets. That makes 30,000 young men in Canada to be taken up by these two services to be given training, which is an immense advantage. The remainder is left to the army. It seems to me that it would be well for the government to consider a scheme which would take in the whole of the country, to give youth all the benefits of the type of training which the cadet gets in these two services.


George Randolph Pearkes: Are the sea cadets entitled to receive benefits from the Strathcona trust? I have attended various meetings of the trust committee in various provinces, but I have never seen any representative of the sea cadet service there.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I cannot answer that question at the moment. I shall have to make inquiries and give my hon. friend the information when my estimates are under discussion.
Mr. GILLIS; The officers who organize and largely promote the sea cadets are obliged to purchase their own uniforms, are they not?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I believe that is correct.

Supply-Health and Welfare


Clarence Gillis: Is any gratuity, allowance or remuneration given for the services of these officers? I had the privilege of attending two or three functions of the sea cadet corps in my own community, and I know that the officers who organized and promoted the cadet corps were hard workers. They were not men of means. Some of them were school teachers on a small salary. They have to dress well. I was given to understand that they have to purchase their uniform in addition to all the work they do, in promoting the organization. I thought it was unfair. The least the government should do would be to provide them with the uniform they have to wear, which is expensive.


Douglas Charles Abbott: We are now making provision for pay for the sea cadet officers, something which had not been provided for in the past; but no provision has been made for uniform allowance. The hon. member for Wentworth suggested that instead of paying the sea cadet officers we should give them such remuneration by way of uniform allowance, in order that it would not be taxable, and I said I would give that matter consideration. But as things stand at present there is a new provision in the regulations providing pay for sea cadet officers, and at the moment there is no provision for a uniform allowance.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I can tell my hon. friend, from my own experience in the days before the war, how generous Canada was in regard to allowances for uniforms. We had fifteen hundred air cadets in Vancouver with no uniforms at all. I was in defence at that time, and from the quartermaster's stores we obtained men's uniforms. The boys worked overtime for two nights, and we converted these men's uniforms into uniforms for the boys.


George Robert Webb: There has been a little confusion as to where the naval department stops and where the navy league steps in-in other words, as to where the line of separation should be drawn. The minister mentioned this in his introductory remarks. Equipment, supervision, training and so on I believe come under the navy league, but what about training grounds and matters of the kind? Are they for the navy league or for the governnment?


Douglas Charles Abbott: In most centres the navy
league makes the premises available. In some centres where we have a naval division, suitable quarters are made available for the sea cadets, but probably it is fair to say that in most communities the premises are provided by the navy league through subscriptions raised from public-spirited citizens
who are anxious to support the movement. As I said earlier, personally I think this is a most desirable feature to be retained, because it gets people interested in the movement. You are always a bit more interested in something to which you have made a subscription, so I think it is desirable to retain it on that basis.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It was not too hard to get money for the navy league during the war, but it is a little more difficult to get it now. Some of these premises cost quite a bit to keep up. We have one in Peterborough which cost the Kiwanis Club over $3,000 to put in shape for the boys. The cost of maintenance is heavy, and I think the government should help out to some extent.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Golding in the chair.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: It was announced last week that by agreement we would take two new departments in supply each week. As announced by the Minister of Justice Friday evening, we are to call one item in national revenue and one item in transport.



DEPARTMENT OP NATIONAL REVENUE

[Stage Direction]
Customs and excise divisions-
247. General administration, $1,040,595.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Stand.
Item stands.



DEPARTMENT OP TRANSPORT

[Stage Direction]
391. Departmental administration, $494,958.
Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Stand.
Item stands.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE Welfare branch-
228. Family allowances-administration, $1,961,250.


Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: When the committee was last considering the estimates of this department on June 17, I tabled three sets of figures showing family allowance payments month by month, statistics based on the May payments, and further statistics based on family allowance payments broken down
Supply-Health and Welfare

-by provinces. These appear at page 2587 and following of Hansard. At that time, in response to some requests, I promised to make a brief statement about family allowance administration, in view of the fact that we have almost completed a year.
Hon. members will recall that the act came into force on August 15, 1944. The department which was to administer it, the Department of National Health and Welfare, came into existence on October 13, 1944, and under the terms of the act payments were to begin as from July 1, 1945. We have made payments now for twelve months. The twelfth payment, in respect of the month of June, 1946, has just been issued; but the statistics are not yet available in respect of that month. We hope they will be available next week. Generally speaking the records are kept in such a way that we can have a complete breakdown of the payments, province by province, about a week following the issue of the last cheque from the regional offices at the capitals of the provinces.
Hon. members will recall that in order to effect payment in the month of July, 1945, it was necessary to conduct a registration of all children in respect of whom parents wanted to receive payments. That registration was begun in Prince Edward Island in February,
1945,	and was carried on throughout the rest
of Canada beginning March 22, 1945. It is now possible to say that 92 per cent of the children under sixteen years of age are registered children in respect of whom payments are made under the act. The bureau of statistics estimates that there are 3,610,000 children in Canada under sixteen years of age, and in May, 1946, payments were made to 1,420,233 families in the amount of $19,934,614 in respect of 3,330,763 children. The average allowance per family was .$14.04 per month, and the average per child was $5.98 per month.	.
In regard to the size of families. 81-5 per cent had three or fewer children. In March,
1946,	one family was paid fc)r fifteen children; thirteen families for fourteen; 106 families for thirteen; 320 families for twelve; 1,132 families for eleven and 2,871 families for ten. Therefore some 4,443 families were paid family allowances on behalf of ten or more children. Families numbering four to nine children inclusive represent approximately 18-2 per cent of the total number of families in receipt of family allowances.
The hon. member for Eglinton last Monday asked me to produce a table to give a classification of families, by numbers of children, broken down by provinces. With the unanimous consent of the house I should like to place that table on Hansard. This gives the
[Mr. Claxton.l
payments for the month of March, 1946. The breakdown I am now furnishing is prepared every three months, and consequently in about a week or ten days it will be available for June. At that time we shall be in a position to give a complete record for the whole year. The table to which I have referred is as follows:
(Table appears on following page.)
I believe that hon. members generally are familiar with the administration. It would be surprising if they were not, owing to the fact that so many people in their respective constituencies receive family allowances. I must say that hon. members have been most considerate in dealing with regional offices and with the Ottawa departmental offices. The amount of correspondence we have received has been surprisingly small, when one considers the large number of families and children involved.
Administration has been carried on in nine regional offices situated . in the capital cities of each of the provinces. At each of the regional offices is a regional director and a staff connected with family allowance administration. In addition, and in the same building there are treasury officials. We have been exceedingly fortunate in having the closest possible cooperation between the family allowances staff which registers the births and conducts the greater part of the correspondence, and the treasury staff and officials of the comptroller of the treasury, who actually issue the cheques.
As at March 1,1946 there were in the family allowances regional offices a total of 489 employees who were either temporary or permanent; and in addition there were 492 employees who were employed on a casual or hourly rate basis. Those 492 were largely engaged in doing the work of verifying the backlog of registrations of births. Hon. members will appreciate that in the first year of administration we had a peak load in the registration of births, in that we had to conduct registrations of all children under sixteen, but we had approximately fifteen or sixteen times the task in a normal year. The work of verifying births has been largely completed.
As hon. members are aware, under our system applicants for family allowances are not required to furnish birth certificates. We make verifications in our offices in this fashion: We have made arrangements with each province under which the office of vital statistics in the province is furnished by us with Recordak equipment. That equipment is used to make microphotographs of all original records of births and deaths of children under
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE Classification of Families by number of Children, based on Family Allowances paid in March, 1946.
Number op Children
i	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	154,303 29,998 20,562 127,019 202,269	3,003	1,825	1,143	694	448	246	165	67	28	7	1	1	19,719 14,266	11,788	6,696	3,994	2,397	1,177	632	297	113	47	5	4	_	8,960	5,876	3,770	2,455	1,488	875	420	182	64	12	3	_	_96,169	62,457	40,407	27,050	17,985	11,507	7,141	3,997	1,990	822	260	89	10	1134,868 25,835	62,196	29,381	14,051	7,108	3,523	- 1,698	696	292	111	16	4	2,	37,290 39,739 39,911 52,396	12,123	5,972	3,112	1,439	900	360	148	44	22	4	? 3	_	_31,004 30,979	17,257	9,260	4,683	2,602	1,310	621	314	118	37	13	1	1	_16,826	8,418	4,040	2,012	886	451	182	71	19	8	1	_	_29,312	13,570	7,700	2,215	875	436	215	88	29	3	1	_	_	-Northwest Territories and Yukon	539	309	239	139	67	31	13	6	1	-	-	-	-	-	-554,026	385,464	207,241	114,992	63,676	37,352	21,486	12,164	6,210	2,871	1,132	320	106	13	1
Supply-Health and Welfare
Supply-Health and Welfare

sixteen years. The film is sent to Ottawa, where the information is put on Hollerith cards by the dominion bureau of statistics. Those cards are used to print automatically and in alphabetical order, arranged by years for each province, a register of the births and deaths of children under sixteen years in those provinces. Similar information is secured with regard to the children in the northwest territories and the Yukon, and also in connection with immigrant children.
In this way there has been built up a set of registers which, in the first instance, are kept in the family allowances offices. When an application is received, that application is checked against the register. There is written into the register the family registration number so as to prevent any double claim in respect of the same child.
The work of verification which I have just described is more than half completed. I am happy to say that thus far it has disclosed a very small number of cases of fraud. So far we have found only two cases in which there is a suspicion of fraud, in which the circumstances are such, as to warrant prosecution. That is an extraordinary tribute to the essential honesty of the parents of the children of Canada, when one thinks that with almost a million and a half registrations we have so far found only two cases which appear to show fraudulent registration. Those will be prosecuted through the usual channels. In addition, there has been a number of cases of forgery. About seventy-five claims have been made on the banks thus far, and I believe all those have been recovered.
The work of registration has been greatly simplified in Canada because the registration is so very simple in comparison with other government forms, and also in comparison with family allowance application forms used in other countries. We have found that it has worked well. An unusual feature of this administration is that we use only two printed forms, one of which is an application form and the other a supplementary application form. All other correspondence is conducted by ordinary letter. This, we find, has worked out well. It makes the administration more human; it prevents any delay owing to a lack of proper forms in the proper language at any point in Canada.
As hon. members may imagine, the correspondence is of considerable volume, and refers chiefly to changes in address, reporting deaths of children, or making inquiries as to amounts of payments. Actual letter correspondence totals about 133,000 letters a month. In addition, the family allowance administration makes changes automatically in the amount of

payment owing to changes in the size of a family or the age of children. There are in this way some 70,000 automatic changes each month. In addition, there are 31,000 changes of address.
Altogether this represents a substantial bulk of correspondence. The procedure for payment, after the form has been received applying for family allowance and payment is authorized, is carried out with, I believe, one of the most modern sets of business machinery ever to be assembled in Canada. Payments are made through Addressograph cheque-writing equipment. The cheques are issued on fairly stiff paper, which is punch-holed for automatic computation on International Business Machines equipment. In addition, in the larger offices there are envelope stuffers and other types of mechanical equipment which have enabled the administration to keep down the cost to a figure which we regard as reasonably good, in view of the fact that we have been operating for only a year, when the job of complete registration and verification of a backlog of sixteen years has not yet been completed.
When the bill was before the house on July 31, 1944, I was asked, as reported on page 6829 of Hansard, for an estimate of the cost of administration. Based upon the experience of administering dependents' allowances and other large scale payment operations in Canada, as well as the cost of administration of the children's endowment plan in Australia and the children's allowances in New Zealand, which were the best comparable costs, we arrived at a figure of from one per cent to two per cent, or from $2,000,000 to $4,000,000. I suggested that the figure of $2,000,000 was a target to aim at and that I thought it would be quite possible we would come within the figure of $4,000,000. Actually the cost of administration this year is higher than the $2,000,000 figure, but from the experience we have had so far we estimate that in a normal year, after the backlog is taken care of, the costs will amount to the following:
Department of National Health and Welfare, $1,850,000.
Department of Public Works for rentals, furniture and services, $80,000.
Treasury, $1,944,000.
The last item includes $636,000 a year for postage paid by the treasury on family allowance cheques. The total estimated expenditures is $3,874,000, which is 1-6 per cent of the estimated amount of the family allowances payable of $240,000,000. In other words, it comes within the figure we mentioned back in 1944 and we hope that this estimate will be improved upon.

Supply-Health and Welfare
With regard to the working out of family allowances generally, I think it is fair to say that from all the experience we have had the results have more than exceeded our expectations. While there are exceptions, as there must be in any large scale operation of this kind, the majority of parents spend the money for the health and welfare of their children. It is interesting to note that since family allowances were introduced in Canada in July, 1945, a bill has been passed through the British House of Commons providing for family allowances which will come into effect on August 6, 1946. By then we shall have family allowances in operation on relatively similar bases in New Zealand, from 1926; in Australia, from 1941; in Canada, from 1945 and in the United Kingdom, from 1946. In addition, family allowances on a smaller scale have been in operation in Eire since 1945.
Hon. members may be interested in knowing what the different payments are. They are familiar with the sliding scale arrangement in Canada whereby payments run from $5 to $8 per child, with a reduction in the case of children after the fourth. The average payment in Canada is $5.98 a month. In Great Britain the allowance is five shillings a week with respect to all children after the first, which, at the rate of exchange of $4.44 to the pound, works out to $1.11 a week. The total allowances a month amount to 21-7 shillings or $4.81 in Canadian funds. If we average that for all children in England for the purposes of making a rough comparison, we find that the amount per child a month is $2.11. In England they aim to put into effect by stages the provision of school lunches and milk for children, which will gradually build up into quite a sizable sum.
In Australia payment is made with respect to children after the first at the rate of 7-5 shillings a week which, at the rate of exchange of $3.55 per pound, works out to $1.33 a week. The monthly payments amount to 32-5 shillings, or $5.78 in Canadian funds. The average for the whole population gives a figure of $2.84 per child a month. Since the Canadian plan came into force the payments in New Zealand were increased and are now made in respect of all children. The allowance is 10 shillings which, at the rate of exchange of $3.55 a pound amounts to $1.78 in Canadian funds a week or $7.31 a month. It is difficult to arrive at an average for the whole population because the payments in New Zealand are not made in respect of all children. There is quite a high income test which along with other factors reduces the number of children from 100 per cent to something less
than that figure. It will be seen that the monthly rate of payment in New Zealand compares favourably with that in Canada as they have increased' the rates in New Zealand, since our legislation was passed.
The number of cases in Canada where we have found it necessary to divert the payment from the mother, or from the father in the absence of the mother, to some other parent or trustee for the child, has been found to be much smaller than was anticipated when the family allowance plan came into effect. We have had the close cooperation of provincial and other authorities with regard to the provision that payment will be made only in connection with children who attend school. In every part of Canada there has been a substantial increase in school attendance, which is one of the fortunate by-products of family allowance payments.
We receive a large number of unsolicited letters from parents telling us of the ways in which they spend the money. If hon. members are interested I can show ihem copies of this correspondence. These letters indicate a degree of cooperation and the recognition of the fundamental purposes of the family allowance provisions that is most moving. We hear from parents in different parts of Canada as to how they are spending the money for the welfare and health of their children. Many unusual cases are reported, many of them exceedingly moving. Altogether I think it is fair to say that, from the point of view of helping to provide for the health and welfare of children, and of enabling children to have a more equal chance in life irrespective of the size of their families, the place of their residence, or the income of their parents, family allowances have proved themselves to be a substantial contribution to that end we all have before us-of giving a better life to all Canadians.


Mr. McIVOR:: I feel it my duty to say
a word at this time in support of the minister, his staff, and the way they have carried out this family allowance plan. I speak from considerable experience in saying that the money has been well spent. Children are better clothed; they have better food, and I suppose that once in a while they have better entertainment. It is a large amount of money which is spent on family allowances, but compared with the amount which was spent and wasted on war, the monetary reformers who used to be in this house- perhaps some of them are lingering around yet- .


John Horne Blackmore: Not "lingering".

Supply-Health and Welfare
iMr. MoIVOR: -would say that this money has been spent in the best possible way. Keep money in circulation and you will increase employment. . . ,	.
However, what I rose to do was to commend the minister and his staff, and you will notice that not all his experts belong to the male sex.
I have heard criticism levelled at Doctor Chisholm, and I think it has been overemphasized. When one considers that a deputy minister whose offices occupy only a small part of the Jackson building js held up before Canada as a menace; when one realizes that there are hundreds and thousands of ministers who twice a Sunday have their opportunity to tell mothers and fathers how to train their children in the way they should go, I think the statement of the deputy minister is being overestimated. I judge men as I find them, and I feel quite keen about this. I have had some experience with the deputy minister, and I have found no deputy more experienced or efficient than Doctor Chisholm. In one hour after I got a request from Fort William I interviewed the minister; I went to the deputy minister; I had the assurance that $200,000 would be made available for the care of Indians in the sanatorium at Fort William, and I was back in the hall where I started on my mission. If you do not call that efficiency I do not know what you would call efficiency. I do not agree with all Doctor Chisholm's views, but I do not think the minister would have the right to muzzle his deputy. All of us have our own ideas about things. I have mine, and my conviction is that the minister would be making a dastardly mistake if he got rid of his deputy minister.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: But you were looking
for some money.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: I pay a tribute to the
common sense of the minister in holding on to him.


Mr. FLEMING:: Among the items of
information for which I asked the minister when the committee was last in session were the expenditures on publicity and information contracted for from the date of the inauguration of the family allowance scheme to the present time. Has the minister that information for the committee?


Brooke Claxton: The hon. member asked
for that information last week. I find it is not possible to give him expenditures on publicity and information by months in any way that would be understandable. We can provide him with a copy of all accounts paid, which would give the actual dates, or we could
^Mr. Blackmore.]
sort it out by the items on expenditures as I did on the other items of expenditure on publicity and information in answer to previous inquiries. I thought that was what he wanted and I have that here; I will give it to him, and if. he wants anything further I shall be very glad to see if it can be obtained.
In 1945-46 there was spent on publicity and information a total of $108,341.15:	In the
year beginning with November, 1944, expenditures were made for newspaper advertising, $80,053.34. That was advertising in connection with registration. It was ordered from November, 1944, on. It was released to the papers in Prince Edward Island just prior to February 1, 1945, and released in the rest of Canada between March 19, and April 12, 1945. There were also advertisements regarding income tax and family allowance payments which were ordered on April 5, released between April 13 and May 19, and their cost is included in the expenditure for 1945-46 of newspaper advertising of $79,771.17. Then there were in radio advertisements in the period ended March 31, 1945:	in radio
announcements released in Prince Edward Island during the week of February 1 lo'c $167.87; in similar radio annoum. . released for redistribution over the rest of Canada over thirty-nine stations during the week of March 22, $5,121.69-for the year 1945-46. There is a descriptive cartoon in connection with registration which went out with registration applications: 3,358,687 were sent out. It was ordered in January, distributed in February in Prince Edward Island, and on March 22 in the rest of Canada: it cost 83,129.01-in the expenditures for the year ended March 31, 1945. There is a book let called "Family Allowances, a Children's Charter", which was' ordered on February 25, 1945, delivered on April 10, 1945, and distributed shortly after, 250,000 in English and
75,000	in French, at a cost of $7,882.25-all in the expenditures for the year 1945A6. That is now out of print, and provision for reprinting is made in this year's estimates. There was a motion picture in connection with Prince Edward Island which was shown toward the end of February and which cost $259.82. There was a similar moving picture, a news clip, ordered on January 15,	1945, and
released March 5, 1945, which cost $1,725.95- all in the year 1945-46. There was another news clip on family allowances and income tax ordered on May 15, 1945, and released on June 7, 1945, costing $1,368.79-all in the year 1945-46. Expenditures on photography-art work-in connection with news clips and posters amounted to $871.33 in 1944-45 and $134.36 in 1945-46. There was a six-page poster which was ordered on March 19 and

Supply-Health and Welfare
distributed at the end of June, of which 1,500 sets were sent out in English and 250 in French and these were exhibited at established showing points, costing $919.10 spent in 1944-45, while $1,159.80 was spent in 1945-46. Cartoons and pictographs were distributed on March 15, 1945, and there was spent $478.19 in 1944-45 and $1,550.75 in 1945-46. There were graphic sheets for insertion with family allowance cheques distributed in October, 1945, December, 1945, and February, 1946, at a total expenditure, in 1945-46, of $5,204.67. A film strip was issued, ordered October 9, 1945 and distributed April 1, 1946, at a cost of $1,723.65. Of this eighty-nine copies were issued. There is a film script in course of preparation ordered in June, 1945, and on that $250.65 has already been spent. A publication, "A Good Winter Diet", was ordered in December, 1945, and distributed in February, 1946, at a cost of $195.45-all in 1945-16. A booklet "Les Allocations Familiales" was purchased for S31.75. The other item was relatively small.


Major James William Coldwell: What has been done to inform parents as to the best use that can be made of the family allowance? The minister has spoken of films and so on. I presume some of these have that end in view. Will he tell the committee what kind of advertising, and to what extent, these films display? If we are spending money on publicity, I suggest that the best possible kind of publicity is that which will encourage people to improve the nutrition of the family.
A second point I wish to raise is this. How is a check made to see the manner in which the money is being spent in the home? That is important. We should not try to regiment or over-inspect people, but I am often asked that question with regard to family allowances: How do you know that the money is being used for the purpose for which it was intended? I heard the minister say that a majority of mothers-and. by the way, it is a good thing that the payment is made to mothers-are spending the money on additional nutrition, clothing and so on for their families; but what check is being made in this regard and to what extent is this publicity directed toward the encouragement of people to improve nutrition?


Brooke Claxton: In answer to the first question as to the general objects of this publicity, it was quite obvious that we could not secure prompt and accurate registration without telling the people what family allowances are, where they could obtain registration forms, what they were expected to do and how they should fill out the forms, so that a large proportion of the total expenditures on publicity and information was devoted to that object. I 63260-175
think it paid off in results because, instead of having twenty or twenty-five per cent of subsequent correspondence as a result of improper registration, the total correspondence amounted to something like five per cent. Incidentally, the graphic sheet issued with the application form represented the first illustrated sheet of the kind used for that purpose. It suggested how government forms should be made out. We received only one complaint about the use of that form, which was published in a newspaper, and it undoubtedly secured effective results.
The second purpose of the publicity was to bring to people's attention the relation between income tax and family allowance. That was not a simple thing to explain or deal with, and a second series of advertisements were necessary in that regard. Their purpose continued after the month of June or July, 1945, and that was almost entirely- I believe entirely-directed to the objects mentioned by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, that is to say, bringing it home to mothers and other recipients of family allowances that the money was intended for the use of children, that it should be spent on food and certain types of clothing and other things which would contribute to the health and welfare of the children. In order to do that we had two films prepared and shown partly through the commercial theatres and partly through the non-commercial, nontheatrical circuits of the national film board, and through other agencies that usually show films. Hon. members all realize what a considerable proportion of the population is reached in that way. What is perhaps more important than anything else, we inserted in each of three family allowance envelopes a graphic sheet, so that the mother, on opening the envelope and receiving the cheque, would also receive a sheet giving in graphic form suggestions as to how payments should be used so as to inure to the welfare of the child. I think it has received a favourable response. We could think of no better way of bringing it home to the families of practically all the children of Canada-as I say, of 92 per cent of the children of Canada; and we propose to issue these staffers in one form or another about three months apart, not more often, because if they went out more often than that people would get accustomed to them and they would find their way more speedily into the wastepaper basket. On opening the cheque, they see one of these graphic sheets, it takes only a minute or less to see the whole thing, to take it in, and some part of the suggestion will remain.


Thomas Miller Bell: Some nutritional surveys are being conducted among children, are they not?


The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Golding):: Order. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle has the floor.


Thomas Miller Bell: I am sorry.


Mrs. STRUM:: First of all, I wish to compliment the minister. Since I have been a member he is the first minister to recognize officially that all the efficiency and all the devotion are not confined to the male of the species within his department.


Mr. MARTIN:: That is not correct. May I point out to the hon. member-and I do this with great reluctance because of my great friendship for the Minister of National Health and Welfare-that the Minister of National Health and Welfare is not the first minister to recognize the female of the species. The Minister of Labour did that two years ago when he brought in Mrs. Eaton.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: May I point out to the Secretary of State that I said, "since I have been a member", which dates from last June.
I wish to compliment the minister on the administration of his department, and I have only two or three suggestions to make. Here we have quite a substantial investment in the youth of our country, and I think it is the best investment, the best expenditure, the government makes in the course of the year. We are now investing $250,000,000 in the children, who will be the backbone of the nation. I consider it important and useful to establish family allowances to take care of that particular group because, when I consult the figures on infant mortality-and I think this is a startling comparison-I find that in the five years from 1940 to 1944 more than three times as many babies died in Canada, where there was no war, as Canadian soldiers died in overseas service. The figure given by the infant and maternal welfare branch for infant deaths in the first year of life was 130,095 during that five-year period, while
the casualties of the army, navy and air force numbered 40,861. So one can see the terrific loss of lives in the first year of life, and the great need to do something to save the lives of our children. If we are to invest $250,000,000 in children up to sixteen years of age, we should go back even farther than the birth of the child and extend care during the prenatal period so that children would have the best possible chance of surviving the first year of life.
I find, too, that there is a great difference in the chances of survival as between the various provinces. In British Columbia, for instance, the mortality rate is 35 per 1,000 live births; they have the best record. That figure varies up to a rate of 77 deaths per
1,000	live births in New Brunswick. Here I must ask for some latitude and the indulgence of the minister if my remarks extend somewhat far afield. At the moment I am slightly out of order, but I want to point out that this is significant, because it proves that 77 can be reduced to 35, and it shows that it is possible to save the lives of more than half those babies who now die in the first year of life. That is the most valuable aspect of this report.
There is another report, coming from the same department, which indicates that we have reduced our maternal death rate from 10-1 in 1935 to 5-6 in 1943. I think everyone will agree that one mother dying and leaving a home broken and bereaved is a tragedy, but that the more than 800 mothers who died in one year according to the most recent survey constitute a very great tragedy indeed; and our statistics prove that more than half those mothers could have been saved if they had been given proper medical attention. So I would say to the minister that while this is a valuable step we have taken, we must protect this investment by extending our operations a little farther to take in not only the first sixteen years but also the prenatal care of the mother. We must make sure also that there is the proper publicity, the proper educational agencies maintained, so that mothers will know how to care for their children and for themselves.
I want to make just one suggestion in regard to this expenditure. I wish the period covered could be extended from sixteen to eighteen years in the cases of children taking secondary education. I speak from experience, because for the last three years my child has had to live away from home. I was able to collect the family allowance only for the matter of a few months. My child is beginning university this fall and becoming very expensive, and I have no family allowance. I shall be able to look after her, but I am thinking
3770	COMMONS
Supply

Health and Welfare
of mothers of large families. With six or seven children in the family it becomes almost impossible- to board one child away from home, pay tuition fees, buy books and clothing and perhaps pay railway fare. So I wish the period could be extended to eighteen years to- .cover children who are trying to get an education. Even though[DOT][DOT] they work for a short period during the summer months, it is really only casual employment. It is not skilled work; they receive very low wages, and it does not amount to very much in the year's expenditure on behalf of education.
I was interested in the comparative figures for the various countries in regard to the amount paid in family allowances. I was interested to hear Sir Wilson Jamieson, when he addressed members of this house on his recent visit. He said that in England they would rather pay a smaller family allowance and make up the difference to the individual child through school lunches and milk served in the schools. They would rather make sure that eveiy child drank milk and had an adequate meal in (he middle of the day. In a country like England perhaps it would be much easier to do that than in a country like Canada, where we have such scattered settlements and so many rural schools. However, I think it is worth noticing that milk at school can be a valuable addition to diet, and that is one way of making sure the child gets milk.
I was encouraged by the minister's remarks in relation to the integrity of the parents in the spending of the family allowance. I believe that is a hopeful sign; and I am always glad to find a man', or in this case a woman, who restores my faith in humanity. I have been interested in the results of certain public opinion polls. I have heard them on the radio several times. They start with the basic figure of so many people who spend the family allowance on milk or fruit or food or groceries, and then go on to the incidental expenditures, which I submit are just as valuable to the welfare of the child. If a mother buys a new mattress for the child's bed, I think that is part of the expenditure for the welfare of that child. If the mother adds to the comfort of her home I believe the child also benefits. I think the family allowance establishes an important principle, which I hope we may soon extend to old age pensions. That is, we pay a flat rate, and then we recover through income tax any excess in income. I hope, too, that may be extended to apply to married women seeking employment. I hope we may recognize the rights of the individual, and then recover, in income tax, any excessive family income.

There is just one more word I wish to say in conclusion, and that is in regard to the matter of publicity. I think the department has done a very good job in the matter of contact work with women's groups. I believe the literature sent out to women's institutes, local councils of women and all these other channels of information is very good, and I hope the work will be continued.


John Horne Blackmore: Now that we have
had a testimonial meeting as to the value of social credit, perhaps it is well that I should say a word or two about the matter, and we may thank the hon. member for Fort William for giving us the text. When, we Social Crediters came here in 1935 it was most interesting to see these haughty Liberals and the scornful attitude they took toward "something for nothing", $25 a month, and so forth. Now they are learning. There are many other things they must learn, too, if the country really is to be saved from disaster. Let us suppose that we have $25 a month for every citizen in Canada. I was thinking, as the hon. member for Qu'Appelle made her eloquent appeal, just how many of the needs she suggested would be filled by the payment of a flat $25 a month to everybody. Recover it through income tax, if you wish. I can suggest a means: Just increase the family allowance. Such a provision would immediately give reassurance and confidence to the parents and prospective parents throughout the land. And, too, it should increase our birth rate-a most desirable objective.
When the hon. member for Qu'Appelle was talking about the large number of Canadian babies who have died, I could not help thinking about the alarming number of them who were never born, because the prospective parents just did not dare send for them. It is time that we in our wisdom as legislators gave consideration to matters like this. It is time people had the assurance that they would have for their children food, clothing, shelter, health and education. I know what it is to see my children's teeth decay because of my inability to do anything about it, at a time when I was getting a measly pittance in income which just was not big enough to cover the needs, just was not big enough to save my children's teeth. The result was that some of them lost all their teeth at a very early age, and had to have false teeth.
Things like that ought not to exist in this country. There are plenty of dentists in the land, and facilities for training more dentists. There are plenty of materials with which to make dental fillings. It is time we gave
Supuly-Health and Weljare

serious thought to these matters. If we had $25 a month for everybody in Canada, through increasing the; family allowance, we would have immediately a market for Canadian goods and services. The hon. member for Fort William mentioned this. I find much alarm concerning the possibility of not selling the goods iye can produce, and not finding work..
So that the committee may have no worry, lest I be out of order', I am going to mention $25 a month no more, but I am going to advocate an increase in family allowances. I believe I shall not be called out of order if I do that.
It is high time we began to give consideration to the matter of markets. One can read in the minutes or records of any of the meetings of the Canadian Manufacturers Association where they make repeated references to the need for increased purchasing power. What does that mean? Does it mean just eeny, meeny, miney, mo, or does it mean a request to those in power to do something about it?
Here is one way to do something about it. It would provide markets for our products and provide employment, and it would also relieve the pressure in connection with strikes. Just think what $25 a month would do in that way throughout this dominion-$25 a month as a family allowance, not as a dividend! Just imagine how it would tend to equalize the economic standard of well-being among the provinces, and the various areas in those provinces, thereby creating cooperation between the provinces and the dominion. We would have no more of these unhappy meetings between the dominion government and the provinces, if the provinces were assured that they were to be permitted to share in the good things the nation as a whole can produce.
Moreover, we would increase international trade. I hear many people talk about the desirability of increasing international trade. Well, increase the incomes of the people, and their purchasing power, so that they can buy our own goods, and they will be able to buy goods received in trade. That ought to be obvious.
Thus we shall see that the increase of purchasing power through the distribution of these family allowances would be a means of distributing goods both nationally and internationally.
I notice now that there is no more talk among these Liberals about "something for nothing." That is impressive, isn't it? Dear me. some of them almost fainted in their seats when the first mention was made about $25 a month, because it was something for nothing.


Mr. MUTCH:: Not the first time.


John Horne Blackmore: Yes, surely they did. I could name certain members who would not be very proud of their record in that regard. 'And we hear no more about "inflation" to-day, because of the distribution of these moneys. We hear no more about "making people lazy". In fact, the whole talk of the minister this afternoon, so interesting, and so simple, Went to show the value which would accrue from the distribution of purchasing power among the people.
I do not know whether I can say what I am about to say without being called to order; but T shall proceed to point out that the one great obstacle in the way of increasing these allowances, as I know the minister would like to increase them, is this question: Where are we to get the money? If the money is to be collected in taxes from the people of Canada, then automatically a definite limit is placed upon the extent to which family allowances, can be increased. But if the amount of family allowance is to depend upon the goods and services which can be produced in this country, and the goods and services for which we can exchange our surpluses, then the family allowances can be increased to any desired degree.
The free medical care the hon. member for Qu'Appelle asked for, and the free hospitalization and free dental care can be provided, if we can only discover the financial technique which will reflect our capacity to produce goods and services, so that our money will reflect those goods and services.
I mention this once again to the minister- because, after all, he is learning. He does not need to feel ashamed, because he must remember that the Minister of Finance learned a good deal from' the time we began to talk about controlling prices. Why, when we first talked that way we were told we would have to put the gestapo in every shop, if we were to control prices. The Minister of Finance almost went into a frenzy even at the prospect of the degree of regimentation which he thought would be necessary to control prices, as the Social Crediters advocated. But he learned.
And so will the Minister of National Health and Welfare, if he will just be open-minded. He will learn, too. He will learn there are many things he does not know yet. He will learn the possibility of having a financial system which will reflect our actual power of producing goods and services.
I suggest, in closing, that the minister should honestly and sincerely, as part of the heavy task his position entails, begin a conscientious
Supply-Health and Welfare

study of social credit, and that before very long he come in prepared to recommend to the house that it introduce social credit,


Major James William Coldwell: I understand that the ministry is setting up some organizations in the provinces across Canada to deal with welfare work, and that he has some agreements with some of those provinces. With what provinces have agreements been made? Have you had any offers of cooperation in order to prevent duplication of work in the provinces and, if so, from what provinces?


Brooke Claxton: Agreements have been made with Nova Scotia, Manitoba and British Columbia. I do not know of any special offers of cooperation by the other provinces. When l made a trip across Canada in February and March of 1945 to help with the institution of family allowances and the establishment of offices I discussed lines of cooperation with every province, but the details were not discussed at that time. Since then these three agreements have been made and I think there are working arrangements on an informal basis with every province. I do not know of any respect in which there has not been cooperation by any provinces, but these are the only three with which agreements have been made. We are still working out how the matter will be dealt with in all the provinces.


Major James William Coldwell: Have you had an offer of agreement from Saskatchewan?


Brooke Claxton: I do not recall any offer of agreement. In my discussions with them there were offers of cooperation on both sides, by me in connection with their problems and by them in connection with ours.


Major James William Coldwell: There has been no discussion of an agreement to avoid duplication?


Brooke Claxton: I do not know of any. We are doing everything possible to avoid duplication where these services can be furnished on an adequate basis.


Major James William Coldwell: Is it not true that Saskatchewan has an adequate welfare department?


Brooke Claxton: That certainly would receive consideration.


Mr. MERRITT:: Will the minister give
the projected breakdown of the publicity item for the coming year?


Brooke Claxton: The total estimate for 1946-47 is $150,000. There is being provided for pamphlets for distribution largely through family allowance regional offices as follows:
Family allowances-a children's charter, reprint. 200,000 in English and 75,000 in French, $5,000.

Four leaflets dealing with child training, child care, child feeding and wise expenditure of family money, $6,500.
Family allowances, picture booklet for external distribution and display, $560.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: What does the minister mean by "external"?


Brooke Claxton: Outside the Department of National Health and Welfare, for distribution to other agencies. I did not mean external to Canada. The next items are:
Motion pictures-
Family allowances and welfare .	.	$15,000
Child training, for use in women's
clubs, et cetera	 15,000
Film strips-
Wise expenditure of family money	1,800
Child care	 1,800
Child feeding	 1,800
Graphic or cartoon sheets for insertion in family allowance cheques, four planned for year.	.	12,000
Colotype posters in two colours,
four planned for year	 12,000
Posters in four to six colours on general theme: family allowances will help you supply your children with better food, clothing, shelter and medical care	 2,000
I hope it will not be considered that the next item was included in anticipation of the budget because actually it was made up in November, long before there was any possible indication as to what the budget would be or when it would come down. It is an item of $25,000 to cover newspaper advertising in connection with family allowances and income tax. It must not be thought that because this item was included there is to be any change. The item was included in anticipation of the need that would arise should there be a change. If there is no change in the relationship a large part of that money will not be spent.
The next items are:
Spot advertising to meet emergencies ..	$4,006
Radio:	distribution of recoridngs on
child care and training in a family allowance series to forty private stations
in a twelve weeks series	 10,000
CBC semi-weekly programme, four
months	 9,600
Special writing, radio scripts, et cetera 2,000 Indians and family allowances-
Family allowances and Indians	 10,000
News clip for commercial distribution	 2,000
Simple leaflet, family allowances and
nutrition	,	 1,000
Film strips	 2,000
Purchase of film strips projectors for
use in educational programme		200
Special writing, Cree translation, et
cetera	   200
Unallocated	   10,540
The last amount is available for use in conjunction with the regional offices to meet local needs as they may arise. For example,

Supply-Health and Welfare
a local rumour may start up with regard to family allowances which may cause misapprehension and sometimes it is desirable to have a series of local spot announcements or newspaper advertisements.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: On page 2588 of Hansard the minister gave us some statistics based on the May, 1946, family allowance payments. How many families in Canada do not participate in the receipt of family allowances?


Brooke Claxton: .Eight per cent.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: What part of the
monthly payment of about $19,000,000 is taxed back in the form of income taxes?


Brooke Claxton: That is an exceedingly difficult figure to estimate for reasons which must be obvious. The income position of people during 1946 is not yet known and will not be known for a couple of years, but the best estimate we are able to work out is that the pay-back by way of income tax for 1946 will be about $30,000,000. In other words, about 80 per cent of the family allowances will be retained by parents for the benefit of children and about 20 per cent of the total will be repaid in the form of income taxes.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: There is an item of $300,000 for professional and special services; can the minister explain that?


Brooke Claxton: That is intended to cover payments to welfare agencies and others in connection with investigational work. The amount spent under this item for the year ending March 31, 1946, was $5,995, so it will be seen that the estimate is greatly in excess of what was needed last year. However, it must be understood that the system has not been completely established.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Last year the item was $50,000 and this year it vis $300,000. Why would it be under family allowances?


Brooke Claxton: It is an expense exclusively in connection with family allowances.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: It should not be under that item alone; it should be under many other items.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Before the recess I asked the minister about the matter of the $300,000 for professional and special services. I think he said it came in the welfare branch. I notice in the welfare branch there is $5,000
for professional and special services. Would the minister give us a little more information about that? I do not think it should be down here in the family allowances branch if it is meant for welfare.


Brooke Claxton: The item of $300,000 set down here is, as I said before the recess at six o'clock, largely to pay for services in connection with investigations into family allowance payments. That surely should be under the head of family allowance administration and not under any other head.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: What professional people would be required in connection with investigations under family allowances?


Brooke Claxton: In the case of the three provinces I mentioned it would be a payment to them. In the case of other services it would be a payment for welfare agencies' work, work by various provincial organizations and others in connection with the possible misapplication of family allowance payments.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: What kind of professionals would be employed?


Brooke Claxton: Almost entirely it would be paid in respect of services like those of welfare workers, either aranged for through the provinces or directly with welfare agencies or with the welfare workers themselves.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Taking up the last point referred to by the hon. member for St. Paul's, with all due respect I think the explanation given by the minister is anything but clear. I refer back to the explanation which the minister gave respecting a similar item on December 15, 1945, as reported in Hansard, at page 3606. He said:
The professional assistance for which the amount of $150,000 is provided is in the form of investigations, supervison, welfare workers and similar work of that kind. We are beginning to make fairly heavy expenditures in this connection, but we have not come anywhere near the sum mentioned. That is the type of assistance we mean, social workers and the like.
The item has now doubled, although, if I followed correctly the minister's explanation before the dinner recess, only a very small part of the $150,000 appropriation has been used; I have just for the moment forgotten the figure, but according to my recollection it was very small. With all respect to the minister, his explanation is very hazy and indefinite. I question if there is an hon. member present who really knows now, after hearing the minister, what this money is to be used for. If, on the one hand, it is intended to assist the provinces to provide certain forms of social service, let us know that, and how it is to be divided among the provinces. If
Supply-Health and Welfare

it is to be left in the hands of the department to be disbursed at will on social services, we are entitled to know what social services this dominion is embarking on, and we are entitled to a much clearer explanation than we have had of this item of $300,000.


Brooke Claxton: In this connection I
should like very much to anticipate more accurately the kind of developments that are likely to occur. But the hon. member should appreciate that we are working this out. When we began, back in July 1945, the administration of family allowances we had no experience in Canada to go on in connection with services of this kind, that is investigation of cases, except, in the federal sphere, the expenditures in connection with payments of dependents' allowances and payments under the dependents' board of trustees. On the basis of that experience we made in November an estimate of the cost of investigations, and if we are high, in that estimate, as we appear to be, I think hon. members should be pleased at that result. It is impossible so far to do anything more than to say that it looks now as if the estimate of $300,000 is high for this particular year. We have not been able to institute the services necessary as quickly as we had hoped, and we have not found it necessary to institute services of the kind [DOT]which we thought we would need when we began. Our experience has proved to be very different from what, was anticipated. That is shown, I think, by the figures I gave the committee this afternoon. The expenditures on account of this item, of just under $6,000. for the year ended March 31, 1946, are small in comparison with the item. We hope that the expenditures in 1946-47 will also be small in comparison. But if, owing to one circumstance or another, a large number of cases is reported to us requiring investigation we want to be prepared to make an adequate investigation of them. These cases cost about $5 each to investigate. It can be seen, by dividing the figure of $300,000 by $5, that it provides for the possible investigation of
60,000	cases or something of that magnitude. That number was worked out on the basis of the experience of the federal and provincial governments in connection with other administrations. It now looks as though the estimate may and probably will be high; but, if it proves to be the case that is something for which we should express satisfaction. However, we felt it our duty to seek from parliament an estimate sufficient to cover this expenditure if it should be necessary.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Who does the investigating?
fMr. Fleming.]


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I still do not think the explanation is a satisfactory one. We have had a certain amount of experience in connection with family allowances, . and $150,000 was put down for this work. Of that $150,000 only $6,000 has been spent. All I have to say is that if the rest of the estimates are as accurate as this is-that is, $300,000 is asked for when only $6,000 was spent before- there must be something wrong with the way in which these estimates are prepared. It seems to me that we should not vote this $300,000 until we know a little more about it.


Brooke Claxton: The estimates were
worked out on the basis of the information we had in November, 1945. Hon. members should appreciate that in an administration of this kind one is face to face with two stages of the problem. The first was to get everyone registered and get the payments out, which was quite an administrative job, and the second was to set up the machinery whereby, in so far as it was necessary and no further, we could conduct investigations into those cases where it was reported that the family allowance payments were not being applied for the purpose set out under the act. We took those jobs in order. We did not set up an investigatory staff before we started making payments; we had enough to do getting staff and space and making the arrangements necessary to make the payments. But as far back as six months before we made payments we started planning for the investigation, looking into the records and experiences of other government services and into the records of the provinces, and on the basis of that examination we arrived at this figure which, as I say, is based upon the idea that there might have to be something in the neighbourhood of 50,000 to 60,000 investigations at approximately $5 each, plus some additional sums for administration.
If we do not have that experience, if we do not have that number of cases of misapplication reported to us, then we shall save the difference in the money; but we made our estimate on the basis of past experience available here and elsewhere, and if we find in consequence of one thing or another, that Canadian mothers use their family allowance payments more properly for the benefit, the welfare and the health of their children than was anticipated, thus requiring less investigation. then I think it is a gain to the people of Canada.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The minister says it is based on their experience. Well, his experience is represented by some six thousand dollars. It seems extraordinary to me, in view of the fact that there are 1,420,000

Supply-Health and Welfare
families and we have to investigate 60,000 to see whether they are doing the right thing or not. I still think, as I said before, that if the rest of the minister's estimates are as accurate as these they are not very accurate.


Mr. BRACKEN:: Listening to the discussion of the last few minutes, I gather that the minister is asking for one item under the family allowance division, the item of professional and special services, a sum amounting to $300,000 for this fiscal year. I gather from his answers that only $6,000 was spent for this purpose in the last fiscal year and he has explained that his estimate is based on about $5 for each of these special investigations, which would represent 60,000 cases. Hon. members have questioned the necessity of so much money-$300,000-this year when so little was required last year. In that connection it would help us if the minister could say how much has been spent for this purpose in the first two months of this fiscal year. Nearly three months of the present fiscal year have passed. How much under this item has been spent in the first two months which were concluded three weeks ago?


Brooke Claxton: The arrangements necessary to provide for full service are still being worked out. Sometimes the work of investigation is done by a limited number of persons of our own staff. For example, in Prince Edward Island, where there is a total of some
12,000	families in receipt of family allowances, it has been found that in view of the conditions prevailing in the community, it is possible for the regional director of family allowances personally or through a reliable employee to conduct a very large part of the work of investigation. Whether or not it will be necessary to supplement that with a service which will have to look to this vote of $300,000 remains to be seen. So far we have found that our experience is so much better than that anticipated that the appropriate part of this sum of $300,000 applicable to Prince Edward Island would be very small indeed, if in fact amounting to anything.
In connection with Nova Scotia, an arrangement was worked out with that province under which it has agreed to make investigations in consideration of a payment of $5 each, and because conditions were unusual in Nova Scotia it was agreed that there should be a guarantee of $1,050 a month. I must say that, had we delayed making the arrangement with Nova Scotia a little longer than we did, it is at least possible that we would not have agreed to that minimum guarantee, although
that seemed necessary in order to enable that province to do the work we estimated would be necessary.
Here hon. members must realize that we are in process of working out something totally new except for our experience with dependents' allowances and the dependents' board of trustees; and there is an important point of difference, in that in respect of virtually all the families where there were dependents or beneficiaries under the dependents' board of trustees provisions, the main breadwinner of the household was the husband, who was away from home. Here we were faced with a different social problem; the circumstances of the war created different social conditions. We are now engaged in trying to work out, on the basis of our own and others' experience, a system whereby we shall be prepared to investigate, just as economically and as effectively as possible, with the least disturbance to the individual, so that as far as possible there shall be an avoidance of duplication of services provided by the provinces. We have not yet had a full year's experience, and in regard to these services there is no province in respect of which we have had experience for any considerable length of time. We have had the experience of only part of a year and on the basis of that experience we are having to work along.
The item of $300,000 is based on an estimate of possibly 60,000 cases at an average cost of $5 a case. That did not seem too much in view of the fact that there are 3,333,000 children in respect of whom family allowances are being paid, and almost a million and a half families. If it turns out that our estimate has erred on the side of excess, then, of course, the expenditures will not be made. But we are not in a position yet to say that this is the case. We feel that the public of Canada would want to see that, while there is no police investigation from door to door, yet there is adequate machinery provided for the investigation of such cases as are reported where there is an apparent misuse of funds, and we want to be in a position to provide that service where it is necessary.


Mr. REID:: When the bill was under
discussion did the minister not say that he would set up voluntary committees all over the country who would see that the money is well spent? I think I remember the minister saying that. There is a great deal of truancy in certain provinces. I was wondering whether school attendance had increased since family allowances had come into effect. When the bill was before the house the min-

Supply-Health and Welfare

ister said that attendance at school was a primary requirement for a parent to receive assistance under the act, and that the allowance would be cut off from parents who did not send their children to school. I should like to hear something in substantiation of that because $250 million is a great deal of money. I am going to check up to see whether the minister did say that voluntary committees would be set up free of charge, and that when cases were reported to the minister those committees would find out if the children were attending school and would report back to the minister and the parents would be denied their allowance. This large item is now going through, and the amount will increase.


Brooke Claxton: What the hon. member for New Westminster has in mind and what I had in mind when the bill was put through the house last year was a provision under section 6 of the act which provides that if any person is dissatisfied with the decision as to the right of allowance an appeal may be made to a tribunal to be set up under the act. It is planned that these tribunal committees will be voluntary. I think that is what the hon. member has in mind. These committees have not yet been set up. There has been only one appeal from a decision )f the administration, and it has not yet Deen found necessary to set up these tribunals, but we are in process of doing so. In fact only last week regulations regarding appeals, provided for by P.C. 2316, adopted on June 7, 1946, were filed in the house. The hon. member is quite right when he says it was provided that voluntary committees should be set up which would hear appeals and advise on the administration. We are ready to set them up and have just recently adopted the regulations necessary to do so. The delay has been occasioned by the fact that only one appeal, fewer than we anticipated, was filed, and in this respect we are much better off than we had hoped for. Therefore we felt that we should work along a little longer to see what the exact nature or functions of these appeal tribunals or committees would be, how often they would have to meet, where they would have to meet, and what kind of procedure would have to be laid down for them to follow. Therefore we deliberately delayed adopting the regulations because only one application for an appeal had been made with us, and we thought it was advisable to get the benefit of additional experience before setting up our tribunals or committees.


John Bracken: A moment ago I asked the minister a question, and in all deference to him he did not answer it. The item before us is one for professional and special services, $300,000, to be spent this year. I have not heard anybody object to approving whatever funds are necessary for this purpose; but I have heard some honest questionings as to whether $300,000 is needed. The basis for these honest questionings of members is that last year only $6,000 was spent. The minister's excuse now for asking for $300,000 for this year is that he has not had a full year's experience at this work and does not know what he may require. I suggest that it is almost a year since the department started this work, and certainly within the first three months of this fiscal year the department ought to know what it spent on this particular item. That is the information I asked for. The minister ought to be able to supply it for at least two months of this fiscal year. If the minister would give hon. members some idea of what the government has found it necessary to spend on this item up to this time, they would know what more is needed for the remainder of the year.


Brooke Claxton: The item of expenditure for the year ended march 31, 1946, was, as I gave it before, $5,995, or just under $6,000. The approximate amount of expenditure for the first two months of this year is in excess of $5,000. It was suggested by an hon. member behind me that we did not spend anything on this the year before, and that is quite true. In other words, that service is just being set up. Hon. members should appreciate that this is an expenditure which is made only as it proves necessary. We expect that it will grow with the institution of effective services across Canada; but our experience so far has indicated that it is unlikely to grow to anything in excess of $300,000. That figure was arrived at in the way I have described. It seemed to be a fair estimate. If we do not spend that amount hon. members should be satisfied with the result.


John Bracken: I do not think the minister ought to expect approval by the committee from what he has said. What the minister has said is that in the first months of this fiscal year the government has spent only $5,000 on this item. That means that for the next ten months they are asking for $295,000. With all due respect I suggest that the minister ought to go back and reconsider this item. I am sure that the committee will be glad to vote him whatever fund is necessary, but he has not given sufficient justification for asking for $300,000 for this item this year.

Supply-Health and Welfare


Mr. BRYCE:: Is any of this extra money to be used to increase pensions for the blind?


Brooke Claxton: No.


William Scottie Bryce: Does the minister contemplate increasing their pensions in the near future to take care of the increased cost of living?


Brooke Claxton: That will be dealt with in the next item, which deals with old age pensions.


William Scottie Bryce: I am in the unfortunate
position that if I wait until then I shall miss my opportunity of asking these questions, and that is why I ask them here. I have to go to a committee at nine o'clock, and I should like the privilege of asking the questions now. I think it only fair that I should be allowed to ask the question. I am doing the business of the house.


William Henry Golding: We are on item 229.


William Scottie Bryce: Perhaps the minister will let me ask it, anyway. I want to know if it is to be the policy of his department to continue paying family allowances to Indian fathers and mothers, as they have done during the last year, where the money has been spent in a proper manner for the benefit of the children. On different reserves it has been rumoured that you are going to take away that privilege and pay the allowance in kind. I think this is one of the few times we have been able to show the Indian that he can be a responsible citizen in this country; and as long as the money is spent in a fit and proper way I believe the department should continue to pay it. If it is not properly spent, of course, it is all right to take it away; but give the Indian a good chance and I think he will spend it properly.


Brooke Claxton: That is the policy of the act and of the department.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Following up the statement of the minister that $5,000 had been spent in the first two months of this year, I wonder if he would give us the number of cases investigated.


Major James William Coldwell: Might I just say that I entirely agree with the leader of the opposition. I do not think we should pass this item of $300,000. If last year we spent only $6,000 on this service and have spent only $5,000 in the first two months of this fiscal year I do not think the committee should pass an estimate so much out of line with the probable expenditure. It is asking too much of the committee. I believe the minister should 63260-176J
withdraw the estimate and bring in something which he considers more within the bounds of probability. If the committee allows this kind of thing to be done we might have the departments putting in guesses and not making the sort of estimates we expect to be made for presentation to the committee. Certainly I support the leader of the opposition very emphatically in asking that this estimate be withdrawn and placed before the committee on a basis which will more nearly approximate the expenditure.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Would the minister answer my question? How many cases?


Brooke Claxton: Approximately one
thousand.


Alan Cockeram: I had a series of questions on the order paper with regard to the administration of this act, and on May 13 they were passed as an order for return. That return was brought down later. Questions Nos. 7 and 8 were answered as follows:
7.	How many investigators are employed under the act, and what number employed in each province?
The answer was:
Varying numbers-usually one or two-of employees from each regional office staff are assigned from time to time to do field investigations. This work is intermittent and is supplementary to the usual investigations made through correspondence.
The next question was:
8.	What was the total cost of investigations for the first six months of operation of the act?
The answer was:
Since the employees referred to in (7) are members of the regular staff of regional offices and have other duties it is not possible to apportion the costs of investigation carried on by them. In the period July 1 to December 31, 1945. the province of Nova Scotia was paid $2,385 to carry out investigations in respect of family allowances.
It seems obvious that the only cost is the amount of money paid to the provinces in this connection, and I agree with my leader and with the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar that this item should not be passed. Later on, I intend to go into the manner in which this question was answered; but here is a case where, in reply to a question by a member of this house, certain figures were given showing that for a period of six months the cost of investigational work was $2,385. To-day we are asked for $300,000. It does not make sense. Later on, I hope to show that a great many of the figures submitted by the minister are incorrect.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: How many additional children do we expect to pay family allowances to
Supply-Health and Welfare

because of the return of soldiers from overseas? Could the minister give us any idea how many such children there will be?


Brooke Claxton: Under the act the children of soldiers coming back from overseas become entitled to the family allowance immediately upon their return to Canada. I have not the actual figure of the number of children born to soldiers overseas, but I would estimate it to be something of the magnitude of thirty thousand.


Mr. LOW:: I strongly urge the minister to reconsider this item for investigational services. I am' sure he would not want hon. members to get the impression that he is padding any of his estimates, but I get that impression very strongly, judging by the explanation he has given in regard to this item. I will say this, Mr. Chairman, that if the item is not withdrawn and revamped more in line with the actual possible expenditure for that service. I am going to have to move that the item be cut to, say, $30,000.
Mr; FRASER: The minister said he had an agreement with Nova Scotia. With what other provinces has he agreements?	.


Brooke Claxton: That has been given already; with Manitoba and British Columbia.
Mr. FRASIER.: This afternoon the minister said there were treasury officers in each division. Are they paid by, the. minister's department?


Brooke Claxton: No.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: They are part of this service in connection with the family allowance, are they not?


Brooke Claxton: They make payment of the cheques.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes, I know, but'that is iiot charged to the: minister's department.


Brooke Claxton: Oh, no. The treasury officers who make the payments are paid out of the estimates of the Department of Finance. I gave an estimate of the amount this afternoon.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes, I know, but what I am getting at is that while you have these officers in your divisional headquarters making payments, and while they are part of this family allowance set-up, you do not charge their cost up to your department, where the cost rightly: should be' charged.


Brooke Claxton: No.
Mr. .FRASER: Well, that should, be done.


Brooke Claxton: That is not the way it is or should be done in any department. There is an officer of the comptroller of the treasury, and a staff in every department, as the hon. member knows.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes, I know.


Brooke Claxton: When I gave the details on the expenditures under family allowance administration this afternoon I was careful to specify the part applicable to family allowance administration under this department, that under the Department of Public Works, and that under the treasury. They were given in three separable items, as the hon. member will see in Hansard for to-day.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes, but do you not think in the set-up for the. administration of family allowances the cost, of the treasury officers should be charged to the minister's. They are part of the scheme and set-up, and this department should bear the-cost. It is passing the buck to another department.	-


Brooke Claxton: No, it is not passing the buck at all. The administration of family allowances has to expend money. That money is spent, and the machinery for spending it is provided by the officers of the comptroller of the treasury in this as in all other departments.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes, but they have to increase the number, of their officers in order to look after your department.


Brooke Claxton: Yes, of course.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: What was the increase?


Brooke Claxton: That is a question the hon. member would have to ask the Department of Finance. I gave an estimate of the corst of administration in an ordinary year after we took care of the backlbg: -for health and welfare, $1,850,000; for public wQfks, $80,000; for the treasury, $1,944,000.


Major James William Coldwell: The minister mentioned Nova Scotia, British Columbia, and Manitoba. What is the nature of the agreement with these provinces? Dpes, it involve the payment of money?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: Can the minister outline the arrangement?


Brooke Claxton: Yes, indeed. The agreement provides for the. provinces making, through their appropriateuagencies, investigation of cases referred to them by the family allowance administration, in consideration of a payment of: $5 per report as an over-all,-fee.

Supply-Health and Welfare
That report is sent in to the family allowances administration. That figure was worked out after the experience of the dependents' board of trustees.


Major James William Coldwell: Is that the extent of the payment to the provinces?


Brooke Claxton: Yes, except that in the case of Nova Scotia which made representations that they could not do this service without being assured of certain revenues because they did not up to that time contemplate or plan to do this kind of service, they had a guaranteed payment of less than $1,050 a month.


Major James William Coldwell: There you have a commitment out of this fund of $1,050 a month.


Brooke Claxton: For Nova Scotia.


Alan Cockeram: And only $2,385 for the first six months.


Major James William Coldwell: How is the payment for two months to all the provinces around $5,000? Are there any other investigations?


Brooke Claxton: Yes, of course there are. But I think the hon. member is perhaps expecting too much in respect of the speed with which the accounts are rendered for investigations.


Major James William Coldwell: I can see that.


Brooke Claxton: You see, we are in a pretty narrow range of time for a very large-scale operation. Payments began in July, 1945. Then, in November, 1945, after'we had been making payments for four months, and before we had arrangements with any provinces, we arrived at this estimate of $300,000 as the figure which was proper to be set as a charge for investigation.
I shall be glad to tell hon. members how that figure was arrived at. It was arrived at on the basis of investigations of something like 50,000 to 60,000 cases a year. That is,
50,000	to 60.000 cases out of 3,333,000 children or about 1,500,000 families. Relative to families, this represents about three per cent of the families in receipt of family allowances.
I believe those who are familiar with the records of child welfare organizations, of the dependents' board of trustees and of children's allowance administration, say that about three per cent of the cases are cases requiring investigation. That does not mean that three per cent of the cases are oases requiring diversion of payments. It simply means that three per cent of the cases are those requiring investigation. It was on that basis that the figure was worked out in November, when the estimates were prepared.
Meanwhile we were endeavouring as quickly as possible to create machinery under which investigations could be handled. As the hon. member has said, at the outset this was very largely done through our own staff. One or two members in each office would investigate cases which were brought to the attention of the staff. Since then, we are appointing welfare supervisors in each office. Since then, we have made arrangements successively with, the three provinces of Nova Scotia, Manitoba and British Columbia. But we have not yet made arrangements with the provinces having the greater proportion of the population of Canada, namely Quebec and Ontario, nor have we yet the kind of alternative facilities which would be necessary to do a complete job there.
Just as soon as Manitoba and British Columbia begin rendering accounts in respect of services which they have rendered, these items of $2,235, as mentioned by the hon. member or $5,000 as mentioned by me, will start stepping up very rapidly, until we are in a position when adequate service is being rendered in all parts of Canada.
It is because I have to present these estimates on the basis of inadequate experience, during the period of rapid growth in this service, that hon. members-quite justifiably I think-have been asking the questions which they have been asking. However, I hope this explanation will indicate to them that, while we hope this figure will not be necessary, and while we believe it will not be necessary, it is still the kind of figure which, on the basis of past experience, should be set in; and that the plan is the best kind of plan that can be arrived at to do the job we have in mind.
We aim to do it just as rapidly, as sensibly and as economically as it can be done. But I would hope that hon. members would feel that if the sum of $300,000 were not spent, this was a good thing, provided that we furnish the services desired. We aim to produce these services as soon as possible. As I say, they have been moving along stage by stage, and. there has not yet been a month in which we have received accounts even from the three provinces with which we have made arrangements.


Major James William Coldwell: There are three provinces with which the department has made arrangements, but there are six provinces where there are no arrangements. In those six provinces someone must be looking after cases of this sort for investigation. Who is doing it now? Surely the department knows what it is costing to do that in these six provinces. Who is doing it? There is no question of rendering accounts, as in Manitoba,

Supply-Health and Welfare
British Columbia and Nova Scotia, because the department itself is doing the work. What has been the experience in these provinces with, as the minister says, the largest population?


Brooke Claxton: There is no item for these expenditures in the other provinces because, in so far as these services are necessary, and have been proved necessary, they are being done by people on the staff of the administration as part of their ordinary employment. But, as I say, that is not involving a number of people sufficient to give the kind >f service we would like to see given.


John Bracken: I am rising for a third *,ime on this item-and I hope it will be the ast time. I do so for the purpose of making i suggestion which I hope will be accepted, and which I believe will expedite the passage of the minister's estimates.
From all the information we have, in the first two months of this fiscal year he has required for this purpose 82,500 a month. He is asking, for the remaining ten months of this year, $29,000 a month. Hon. members over here question the necessity of an estimate of this size. The minister himself questions it. My suggestion-and I make it in all deference-is that the minister should say, "We will go back and review this matter. We will look at it in the light of present facts, to date, and come forward with a revised estimate." If that were done I am sure the committee would pass it. But let me say this to the minister, that if hon. members get the idea that that is the way in which his estimates are put together, they will not have confidence in the way in which these tables have been set up. That is all I have to say about the matter at the moment.


Brooke Claxton: 
Major James William Coldwell: When the minister is
dealing again with this item I would like him to tell us what is being done in the other six provinces. It seems to me that, if arrangements were worked out with the orovinces which have a department of public welfare or a department of that description, it would eliminate the. necessity of setting up some other organization. In discussing this matter to-night the minister has said that we are in the process of doing this, that or the other and it seems to me that when the minister comes back again he should be able to tell us that -negotiations have been undertaken with the other provinces where they have the necessary facilities and that such and such an arrangement has been worked out. It strikes me that the arrangement made with Nova Scotia is an intelligent and satisfactory sort of arrangement if they have a department that can do the work. The same thing obtains with regard to British Columbia and Manitoba. We all know that Alberta has an efficient department, as have Ontario and Saskatchewan, and it seems to me that it would be wise to endeavour to work out a plan whereby the departments already set up in the various provinces would undertake this work and prevent duplication all across Canada.


Mr. HACKETT:: Has the minister any
information concerning expenditures and investigations in the provinces with which no agreements have.been made? I wish also to ask him,if in his opinion members of parliament and lawyers have the right to represent people who. have.;been unable to get any satisfaction from; the "department,1 want the minister to understand that while I have written to

Supply-Health and Welfare
him I realize that he has not had time to examine the matter and reply. I make no complaint about that. I wrote to him about a case where the parties had been writing to the Quebec office of the department for something over six months and had been unable to get any satisfaction whatever. I took the matter in hand and I did not get any satisfaction. I then wrote a rather earnest letter and I was informed, in courteous terms, by the head of the department in Quebec that under some order in council or regulation the records were considered to be private and could not be discussed with members of parliament. No mention was made of lawyers, but I inferred that they w^ere included. I should like to know if there is any such regulation and whether or not the minister considers the answer I received a proper answer to give to a member of parliament who endeavours to come to the rescue of constituents who have not received for some months the bonus to which they are entitled?


Brooke Claxton: Under regulation 19 it
is provided that no person shall disclose or communicate or allow to be disclosed or communicated any information or evidence obtained under the provisions of the act and these regulations unless the same is necessary for the administration thereof or is required by law. To the best of my knowledge that provision is strictly enforced, but it does not prevent members from taking up cases to make sure that the parties concerned are receiving consideration from the regional office, from the department or from the minister.
If the hon. member has received any communication along the lines he suggests I can only reply that probably the occasion for that refusal to disclose information would arise because there was something in the case which required that answer to be given. Ordinarily members' letters are replied to courteously by either the department at Ottawa, the regional office of myself. The matter is looked into and, when possible, action is taken at once. An effort is made to answer correspondence on the day it is received, or on the following day, and I think in only a small minority of cases is there any delay. If there is, it is on account of the fact that there must be some further investigation and the correspondent is told about that.
While the secrecy provision is there and while it is observed, it certainly does not prevent hon. members from making representations to see that cases are adequately considered. Those representations are carefully considered;


John Thomas Hackett: I am not complaining of any lack of courtesy; I simply want to know how far this matter of secrecy goes. I understand that these records are private, but 1 should like to know if when a lawyer receives a mandate from a client, when a member of parliament writes in at the instance of a constituent, the minister would interpret the opening of the record to such lawyer or member as a violation of the secrecy under which the work is carried on. I think we should be clear on that because, if he does, it will undoubtedly give rise to some consideration of the wisdom of revising the rules and regulations.


Brooke Claxton: In answer to the hon. member for Stanstead I must say that I have never had drawn to my personal attention any case in which a refusal to give information on the grounds of the secrecy required under the act was protested against. If the hon. member has such a case I would be only too glad to see that it is brought to my personal attention and I will look it up. I know that on a number of occasions regional directors have refused to give information, on grounds of secrecy; and I think that where it has been done it has usually been recognized that that is the right course to follow. I have never heard of any case in which there was a protest against that action being taken. In the ordinary course where, a member writes in, the usual kind of letter is, "Mrs. So-and-so filed her application for family allowance on such-and-such a date. The regional officer says it has not a record of the filing on that date. Would you please look into the case and see if it is not possible to give effect to the filing from sueh-and-suoh a date?" There is a well-recognized procedure in that event. If there is at the office a record which can be traced which shows the date of filing, then that is the effective date. If that cannot be shown, and there is some evidence by way of affidavit or otherwise which is reliable, then the filing of the application is dated back to that date.


John Thomas Hackett: I am quite positive that the minister will deal with this specific case, which I mentioned only for purposes of illustration, and I want to put that aside. What I want to know is, does the rule of secrecy preclude a member of parliament or a lawyer from acting on behalf of the person who is complaining?


Brooke Claxton: No.


John Thomas Hackett: Thank you.
Supply-Health and Welfare


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: On a point of order, the minister said that this item would stand. I have never seen any further debate once the responsible minister suggests to the committee of the house that the item stand; it means that the item is to be considered or reconsidered; it means that the item comes back to this committee for consideration and reconsideration. Therefore I think the item automatically stands over once the responsible minister suggests to the committee that it shall stand.


William Henry Golding: I think the point raised by the Minister of Veterans Affairs is quite correct.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Call the next item.


William Henry Golding: The suggestion was made that the item should stand; the minister consented; the item will again come up for consideration; and I would suggest that this item be now allowed to stand.
Item stands.
Welfare branch-
229. Administration, $47,410.
Payments of dominion's share of pensions, $34,538,200.


John Horne Blackmore: Under item 229 I notice that old age pensions are to be considered. I desire to make a few remarks regarding old age pensions. On several occasions in this parliament I have advocated that $50 a month be paid to people who have reached the age of sixty-five years, and I wish to make that request once more to the minister, that he give consideration immediately to the possibility of offering $50 a month to people who have reached sixty-five years of age.
My feeling is that the way in which we are treating our aged people is a reflection on the whole of the people of Canada. It is high time that something be done about it more than just talk. The social credit movement has committed itself to $50 a month for people who have reached the age of sixty-five. This is by no means the ultimate goal at which social credit aims. It is the limited objective, the next trench which we at present aim to take and consolidate. Let no one suppose for a moment that social credit is in favour of stopping at the relatively meagre pension of $50 a month at sixty-five, because we simply have no right at all to offer our elderly people anything less than they can live on comfortably. Certainly no ordinary person could live comfortably in any ordinary Canadian community on $50 a month, let alone the thirty measly dollars we are giving them.
[Mr. Hackett.J
When this subject was last under discussion I believe the hon. member for Vancouver East made a motion that something like this amount of money should be paid, and I wish to give him full credit for having made that motion. I supported him on that occasion. The minister at that time made a remark which I believe should be given some consideration. He said, as reported in Hansard, April 10, 1946, at page 753:
Further, there is no system of old age pensions in the world which provides for a pension of anything like $50 a month.
I am quite sure that the minister had overlooked what is going on in the state of Washington. I think it would be well for the minister to consider some of the facts which I am going to read to him, from "The Pensioner", published in New Westminster. In the issue of April, 1946, the minister will find the quotations which I give on the first page of that periodical. It says, among other things, these significant things:
There is now ... no relative responsibility whatsoever.
That is in the state of Washington.
The department is not permitted even to enquire into how much the sons and daughters are earning!
That indicates quite clearly that there is not a means test.
Senior citizens can do what they wish to with any estate they may have!
What a glaring difference there is there between what they do and what we do. Again:
The minimum grant under the law is now $50 for those without resources and income-and that is a floor under grants. Pensioners may, and do, receive higher grants where there is need. Senior citizens found eligible receive their grant retroactively to the day they apply, and it is paid as a legal right of the pensioners.
That sounds something like a paradise for elderly people when we consider what we do here in Canada. Again:
As a result of the W.P.U.'s work, senior citizens-
Notice they call them "senior citizens" there, not old age people.
-can to-day have $200 in cash each, $500 worth of insurance, can own their car, have a vegetable garden, a cow and chickens, and still be eligible. No longer is it a disgrace to be a pensoner; instead it is recognized that senior citizens are the pioneer fathers and mothers of our state, entitled, because of their years of work, to seniority.
That is exactly the stand I take, and I believe that if a confidential roll were called of members of this house, ninety-five per cent of them, regardless of party, would support

Supply-Health and Welfare
that idea. I should like to know what it is which causes it to be impossible for ninety-five per cent of the membership of this House of Commons to be able to get what they want with respect to old age pensions. There is something radically wrong. I believe every member of the house just thrills in sympathy with the statements which are here made.
. . . the pensioners to-day have, in addition to their grants, free choice of doctor and dentist, plus free medicine, free appliances-glasses, dentures, artificial limbs, hearing aids, et cetera, and are entitled to nursing care in their own home.
No member of this house would deny elderly people all these advantages. Yet think of the way we treat them in our country. It positively makes me ashamed to hold my head up when I think of the way this country deals with its elderly people. Again:
. . . the state contributes $100 to each funeral -and relatives can contribute as much additional as they wish without lessening the state's contribution!
I am sure that the minister would be desirous of knowing about that/so that he will not make again such a sweeping statement as he made on April 10. Some hon. members will wonder whether or not this article in "The Pensioner" is authentic. I wrote to the capital of Washington to find out whether or not this was authentic. We received a number of pamphlets, laws, regulations and the like, which it would take too long a time to review, but the gist of them substantiated the report which is given in this periodical. Here is the letter written on April 30, 1946, from the state of Washington's executive department, in which appear the following statements in certain paragraphs:
You will note that to be eligible a person shall have lived in the state of Washington for a period of five out of the last ten years immediately preceding the date of application-
Contrast that with the situation here.

shall have reached the age of 65, and shall be in need of financial assistance. Persons may own the home in which they live, may retain up to but not exceeding $200 in cash resources, and may-have insurance of $500 in value. There is no citizenship requirement in the Washington pld age assistance law, neither is there a relative responsibility clause.
Which of course, as hon. members recognize at once, means that a child or someone else who happens to be related to the pensioner and who is in easy financial circumstances cannot be called upon to help to support the father or mother.
In the next paragraph I read:
We are proud of the provisions which have been made for elderly citizens of the state of Washington. It is felt that the way in which
the grant is determined as well as the amount which is being paid to individuals is preserving both the morale and the well-being of our elderly citizens.
How fine those words sound.
We are glad that you wrote regarding our programme and hope that you will feel free to make further inquiry.
Cordially yours,
Reatha M. Chance, (Secretary to the governor)
That, of course, makes it certain that the report is authentic and that actually there is a part of the North American continent where people have learned something about how to treat their elderly folk. I have no desire to prolong the discussion but I thought this matter ought to be brought to the attention of the committee.
There are two or three other matters which should be considered in regard to old age pensions. This afternoon, in the discussion of family allowances, it was contended that it was to the advantage of producers to have purchasing power distributed among the people. Hon. members can contemplate for a moment the difference it means to producers to have $20 or $25 a month going out to elderly people instead of having $50 paid to them. If they were paid the latter sum, how much more coal, milk, cream, butter, cheese, eggs and everything else our elderly people would be able to buy. They could get all these things if they had the money with which to buy them, and if that were the case, what an excellent market there would be right in our own country. This would be the situation if purchasing power were put into the hands of the people. This is an aspect of the question that must be considered.
There is something else that hurts my feelings terribly every time I think about it, and that is whenever I contemplate the tax structure we have in this country. It is next to impossible for an ordinary person,, after he begins to earn to lay anything by, because every cent which he does not absolutely need in order to meet his current expenditures is literally robbed from him by a financial system that taxes the very lifeblood out of the people. The result is that our people cannot save. We allow them to go on in that way until they are probably forty-five years old and there is no longer a demand for their services. They cannot get jobs and, even if they do get some employment, they are unable to save anything, so that they continue in that state until they are about fifty-five years old. When we no longer need them we take them out of employment, throw them into the corner and expect them to starve until they get to be seventy years old, when they can
Supply-Health and Welfare

take the meagre pittance which we turn over to them. How can intelligent mem and women in an age like this and in a country like Canada contemplate such outrageous mistreatment of elderly people? There is just no logic or sense whatever in the set-up. Beeause of the taxation structure which exists to-day we must make some sort of provision for our elderly people. There is a fluctuation of employment, which also seriously affects people as they go along. Even if they did manage to save a little, they would presently find themselves out of work and have to spend those savings. How will they live; how will they support themselves when they are too old to find employment?
I will say no more at the present time because I am afraid I shall become rather more animated than I should be on this occasion. I have said enough, but there is one more observation I wish to make before I sit down. I wish to call the attention of the minister and of the committee to this important point. The minister absolutely must get to the stage where he does not have to depend upon the amount of money which he can wring out of the people's pockets in order to obtain the financial requirements for the things he wants to do. I commented on this aspect of the matter this afternoon with respect to the family allowance. There is not a member in this house who would not increase the family allowance to-day by 50 per cent or even 100 per cent. I doubt whether there is a single member who would object to that if the money could be obtained. But it is not a question of money; the question is whether we can produce the goods. Certainly a monetary system should reflect the actualities or realities in connection with the production of goods and services. It is utterly impossible, however, to do this with money that is wrung out of the people by taxation. Obviously, then, something must be done; and for the minister and his colleagues, in this desperately serious time in Canada, to sit by and do nothing about the financial system is virtually a betrayal of the trust which they have assumed in consequence of getting themselves elected at the last election. This condition must not go on. They have assumed a responsibility and must discharge it, and the discharging of that responsibility involves a reform of the financial system which will make that system one that reflects the facts in relation to the productive capacity of the country. Until that is done, it is idle to talk about doing any of the many things that ought, to. be done, including giving tq our elderly .
r.\lr. BIackmorc.3	...	;	;	-
people a fair deal after the lives they have lived in making this country a fit place for us to live in.


Mr. NICHOLSON:: I wish to endorse the remarks of the hon. member for Lethbridge in regard to the importance of granting additional amounts to old age pensioners. While he was speaking this afternoon in connection with the 125 a month, I made a rapid calculation and I found that $25 a month for our
11,566,000	people would come to about $3,469,000,000. While ten years ago people laughed at the idea of paying $25 a month, the record during the past four or five years has demonstrated clearly that we could increase the national income according to the plan advocated by my hon. friends. I want it clearly understood that I am not supporting their economic views. I disapprove their antiSemitic and other queer ideas, but I think the argument that my hon. friend advances-


Mr. JOHNSTON:: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, the hon. member has no right to imply that this group is anti-Semitic. Let him speak for himself.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I was thinking of some of the members of the Social Credit group.


Charles Edward Johnston: Or even some of them. If the hon. gentleman has doubts about that, those members can speak for themselves.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: If we may return to the item before us, I think the minister has a responsibility to the old age pensioners of Canada to give some indication of how soon their pensions may be increased. I have before me the proposals of the government of Canada, prepared prior to the dominion-provincial conference, on health and welfare and a labour reference booklet. In these two booklets I think it is clear that the government recognizes that $20 a month pension for citizens of 70 years of age or over is not adequate. On page 36 I find that aged persons are finding it increasingly difficult under normal conditions to retain their places in the labour market, and this condition is not likely to be reversed in the next twenty-five years. Under the heading, "deficiencies of the present scheme", it states:
The means test is generally recognized as undesirable after a certain age. It has been noted , that about forty per cent of all persons of seventy years of age and over make application, satisfy the means-test requirements and receive pensions. There is little doubt that a very considerable number in addition are not able entirely to support themselves, but are dependent -upon their family, and refrain from applying for pensions because of the embarrassment occasioned by the means test.

Supply-Health and Welfare
The minimum age of seventy, though convenient as a dividing line with respect to the payment of any kind of universal old age pension, is nevertheless too high in a number of cases of actual need. A strong case can be made for reducing the age limit to sixty-five in order to provide assistance at least for those in the age group 65-69, who are actually in need.
In the other booklet which I mentioned, the legislation which has been passed in the United States, in Great Britain, in New Zealand and Australia is reviewed, to mention but a few of the countries. In these countries old age pensions are available at sixty or sixty-five years of age, and there does not seem to be any good reason why Canada should be so backward. Having demonstrated during the war years that we could surpass records which were established in many other countries, there is no reason why we might not set a different pattern in the treatment of old age pensioners. The words that we have been hearing so often during the past two or three weeks regarding the matter of consulting the provinces and the powers of the British North America Act have been a convenient excuse for failure to deal with, the problem of old age pensions.
I have been reading a booklet prepared by the Department of Labour giving the history of old age pensions in Canada. According to that booklet, I find that in 1906 this question was first brought to the attention of parliament. A motion was introduced suggesting:
That in the opinion of this house the subject of improving the condition of the aged, deserving poor, and of providing for those of them who are helpless and infirm, is worthy of and should receive the early and careful attention of the government and of parliament.
After some debate the motion was withdrawn.
' Then, in 1908 a special committee was selected. On February 10 the first meeting was held and a chairman was selected. On July 11 it was reported that the committee had managed to have only three sittings. Apparently they were very busy in those days with other matters that were much, more important than old age pension legislation. Then, in 1912 a resolution was adopted by the House of ' Commons which indicated that some progress was being made. However, it was , not until the early twenties, when there was a lot of labour unrest and when there were labour representatives in parliament, that the old people received special consideration by parliament. I find that an interesting report ; was prepared of the proceedings of the committee on an old age pension system for Canada in 1924. Some.of the witnesses called ' gave the story of old age ' pensions in the states of Montana and Nevada land in ;Great Britain. Mr. Tom Moore, president of the
Trades and Labour Congress, gave some interesting evidence to the committee. On June 17 the chairman of the committee moved that the report of the committee be adopted. In speaking to his motion he made it clear that nothing very much was to be expected. He said, as reported at page 4425 of Hansard of June 17, 1925:
Hon. gentlemen will observe that the recommendation involves no expenditure and no responsibility further than the continuance of the idea of establishing in Canada an old age pension system, which the committee think is very desirable, and would like to see it proceeded with.
The hon. member for Cariboo, who was then the hon. member for Calgary East, was as impatient as he is now with this type of stalling tactic, and he moved an amendment as follows:
That this report be referred back to the committee with instructions to consider and report on a purely federal scheme.
Those who did not want to do anything argued that the federal parliament had no authority in this field; that it was clearly a matter for provincial jurisdiction. The hon. member for Cariboo at that time said:
It is surely clear that it would take the same amount of money whether the provinces came in or not, and the taxpayers of Canada are not so foolish as to imagine they pay any less if they pay part of it through the municipalities, part of it through the provincial government and part of it through the federal government.
Those remarks were made in reply to the argument advanced that we could not stand the cost of providing old age pensions. Then, in reply to those who said we could not afford it, he said:
I believe we can afford it; but if it he so that we cannot afford it, let us frankly say so and not continue making a pretence that we are on the way to obtaining old age pension legislation by referring the whole question to a conference.
There was an interesting division at that time, and I find that only seventeen stood up and supported the motion moved by the hon. member for Cariboo. There were 138 against the motion. It is interesting to note that of those who supported him two now sit with the Progressive Conservatives, the hon. member for Broadview and the hon. member for Yukon. The Prime Minister voted against it as did most of the Conservative and Liberal members. But after a while there was an election in Canada; the voters of the country felt that if the people wanted to have old age pensions there was no reason why they could not have them, and the government which took office in the next session was prepared to proceed with and introduce old age pensions.
Supply-Health and Welfare

I might say further that before old age pensions were finally passed the members of the senate considered the matter in 1926. There was quite a heated discussion in the other place. Many were much opposed to the idea of pensions. Speaking in the debate, Senator Ross said, as reported at page 156 of senate Hansard:
Mark you, after this bill had been passed and provided a pension of $210 a year, if I know anything about it, the aged people in this coun-trj- would not be satisfied with $240, and it would not be very long until the pension would have to be worked up to one dollar a day, or perhaps doubled to $480 a year.
That was twenty years ago. The old age pensioners in Canada are very patient; they are still not receiving the $480 anticipated by the senator who was so much concerned about it. One other senator used almost violent language. He said, as reported at page 180 of the senate Hansard:
Therefore I ask myself the question:	in
heaven's name, why has the present government displayed such hectic haste in bringing this legislation before parliament in order to fasten upon this country an initial expense of $25 million . . .
That was a large sum of money in those days, and we could not spend such an amount so recklessly. In the session of 1926 I find that some heated discussion took place on the question. Mr. Meighen was then in the house, and as reported at page 2474 of Hansard of 1926, he said:
It is the result of a compact, made at the opening of the house, to get the votes of labour members, and it is not going to get any old age pensions. It was intended to secure votes and it has served that purpose already. I do not know of any much more effective step which might be taken in order not to provide for old age pensions.
He was complaining of the fact chiefly that the late Mr. Woodsworth and Mr. Heaps were supporting the government headed by the present Prime Minister, because that government was prepared to introduce old age pensions. The government which Mr. Meighen would have led was unwilling to travel in that direction. This matter was up in the house the other day, and the Prime Minister correctly stated the fact that there was no compact. The labour members wanted at least two things; they wanted more adequate old age pensions and they wanted some form of unemployment insurance. The record would seem to indicate that Mr. Meighen was unwilling to introduce social legislation of either type, whereas the present Prime Minister was prepared to bring in legislation to deal with old age pensions.

I was interested in reading the senate Hansard following the 1926 election. The first time the Old Age Pensions Act came before the senate it was defeated by an overwhelming majority. After the election, however, when the Act came up the second time, the vote was 61 in favour and 14 against. I was interested in reading the comments of one who stubbornly opposed the introduction of old age pensions on both occasions. Sir Allen Ayles-worth. His remarks appear at page 167 of senate Hansard for March 24, 1927:
I voted against the measure last year simply because, as a matter of principle, I personally am unalterably opposed to the whole idea of pensions being paid by the state. We have pensions to the right of us and pensions to the left of us; pensions very plentiful, it seems to me...
I find that the gentleman who uttered these words on that occasion is still a member of the other place. The Parliamentary Guide gives his age as ninety-two, and he does not seem to object to the compensation he receives from the taxpayers of Canada as he performs his duties in that chamber. So I think the people of this country who cleared our land, built our railroads and developed our industries, when they reach the evening of life are entitled to much more generous compensation than we have provided up to the present.
In dealing with the estimates of the Department of Justice the other evening, I found that one of the statutory items, passed without comment, provides pensions for some ninety-seven judges who have retired. I understand that later this session we are to have legislation increasing salaries of judges. I am not complaining about the judges being adequately paid, but we do pay retired judges pensions at the rate of $3,608 a year, or over $300 a month; and if it requires over $300 a month for a retired judge to get along on, after he has had a reasonably good income as a lawyer and on the bench, I do not see how our old people can be expected to balance their budgets in the cities and country communities of Canada on the very small amounts we give them.
Then a return was brought down at the request of the hon. member for York South, giving the amounts being paid to all officers retired on pension from the Royal Canadian Navy, the army and the air force since September, 1939. Again I want to make it clear that I am all for providing adequate pensions for all those who served their country in time of war. But the thirty-seven officers in the highest pension brackets receive over $400 a month, while a great many others receive somewhat less. As you look over the return you find some who receive over $6,000

Supply-Health and Welfare
and others who receive over $7,000, while a great many receive between $4,000 and $5,000. Having established the fact that we can and do pay pensions such as I have mentioned to retired judges and retired service personnel, I think the time has now arrived when we should do something better and different for the hundreds of thousands of old age pensioners in the Dominion of Canada.
The booklet I mentioned earlier estimates the amount it would cost to provide pensions for everyone over seventy years of age. This afternoon some constructive suggestions were offered to the effect that there should not be any objection to paying pensions to millionaires or those in the higher income brackets when they reach the age of seventy, because it would be an easy matter to arrange the income tax schedules in order to recover such pensions, just as is done in connection with the family allowance. So that if pensions were paid to all such people in 1948, according to the estimates it would cost only around $200,000,000. Then, if we were to carry out the dominion's plan to provide pensions on a means test basis for those between sixty-five and sixty-nine years of age it would cost another $34,000,000. That would be only $234,000,000, which is a very small amount considering what Canada did during the war years and what we must do during the years of peace if we are to avoid another depression and maintain full employment.
My deskmate the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, and my colleague the hon. member for Vancouver East have discussed this question frequently and fully. I do not propose to quote from any of their speeches, but I should like to remind the committee of some of the comments made by the former member for Vancouver-Burrard, now a member of the senate, who spoke on this question on July 24, 1943. I believe some of the things he said should be underlined. At page 5413 of Hansard, for that year he said:
But we have neglected to recognize the old age pensioner as a class that is worthy of just as much attention as we have extended to others.
This year the matter came up by way of a question to the minister to ascertain whether or not the cost of living bonus could not be extended to the old age pensioner, and I must, confess that I was deeply concerned with the reply that the minister gave, because I believe that in all the social reforms that are facing us to-dav, success in dealing with them is largely a matter of attitude. The attitude of the minister to the old age pensioner seemed to be a repudiation of well established Liberal policy
Later, he quoted from the Minister of Finance, who replied to one of the appeals to do something for the old age pensioners by saying:
But why grind at the dominion government all the time, with its terrific burdens, and with its deficit of two or three billion? Why drive us, or make it almost impossible for us to carry on at all?
The former member for Vancouver-Burrard quite correctly pointed out that paying a few million dollars extra to enable the old age pensioners to have enough to eat and decent housing should not be a burden on a country the size of Canada; and then at page 5417 he went on:
Now the minister tells us that it would be a terrible thing if we brought the old age pension up to $30 a month, because probably we would get an increasing cycle of rising prices that would spiral into an inflationary St. Vitus dance. Whoever heard of inflation coming from the expenditures of old age pensioners? Yet that is what we were told here the other night. They are fighting this war in Australia from positions more dangerous than our own, and they are putting everything they have into it just as we are. Does anyone suggest that their old age pensions scheme has injured their war effort or caused them to suffer from inflation? But Canadians are so far behind Australians that it should be an inspiration to us to move onward. The population of Canada is 11,566.000. The population of Australia is 7,000,000, so that we have 64 per cent more population than they have. The number of old age pensioners in Canada, taking the figure for 1942, is 185,000; in Australia it is 275,000. They have invalid pensioners numbering 60,000; we have none in Canada. Pensioners in Canada total 185,000. and in Australia, 336,000, so that they have 150,000 more, old age pension beneficiaries, though we have 60 per cent more population. The total amount paid in pensions in Australia is $93,580,000; in Canada for this year it will be roughly $30,000,000 from the federal government, which bears three-quarters of the cost, which would bring our total up to $40,500,000. If we were paying in proportion to our population the same amount as Australia is paying, we would pay out $146,000,000 a year. Yet we tremble about inflation and about our financial position in the war when we think of going not nearly as far as Australia has gone. Our age limit for both men and women is seventy; in Australia it is sixty-five for men and sixty for women. The average pension paid throughout the dominion ranges from 61 cents a day in British Columbia down to about 38 cents a day in Prince Edward Island. Does any man in this house believe that an old age pensioner can get along in the cities of Canada on $20 a month?
The member who then represented the constituency for Vancouver-Burrard is not here to support the plea he made for more generous old age * pensions. But I am sure there are many hon. members on the government side of the house who share the views expressed so well that hot night in July a couple of years ago. I know the minister has given a good deal of thought to this
Supply-Health and Welfare

problem. I urge that before the item passes the minister hold out some hope to the old age pensioners in this country, to indicate to them that this is not now a financial problem. Rather, the government should ask itself, "Can we supply these people with decent housing? Can we see that they have enough money to buy flour, bread, milk and other supplies?"
The government's policy of removing price ceilings and permitting prices to follow their natural course has already placed a serious burden on old age pensioners on fixed incomes. There are nearly 200,000 people who are hoping that in this year the government will carry out the programme that was announced when the premiers were brought to Ottawa. In 1926, when the fate of a government was at stake, there was no hesitation in introducing old age pensions, although at the time there was some question as to the constitutional right of the federal government to proceed without the consent of the provinces. It took nearly ten years to get full cooperation from all the provinces. But I am sure that if to-day the federal government would indicate that it is prepared to go ahead with the plan outlined to the provinces, either with or without their cooperation, there would be very little criticism.


Mr. HERRIDGE:: I rise briefly to support those hon. members who have spoken for improvements in old age pensions. It is quite unnecessary to repeat the arguments used by previous speakers.
The hon. member for Lethbridge mentioned the pension legislation in the state of Washington. I was keenly interested in what he said, because my constituency borders that state. I know it is a most progressive one, and is composed of a fine type of people. A habit has grown up between the people of that state and those in my constituency of visiting back and forth.
I was in the state of Washington at the time they were considering changing their old age pension legislation. At that time they were in very much the same position as we are in Canada to-day, because for ten years their government was stalled on the question of old age pensions. I was there on one occasion going through the forests of Washington state and meeting large numbers of the country people who were discussing this question. These were people from both the country r.nd the cities. There was a strong demand for an improvement in their old age pension legislation, a demand which was crystallized in the plan which was read to the house this evening by the hon. member for Lethbridge.

Some two or three years ago I returned to the state of Washington and met a number of the same people. While there, I took occasion to ask them what they thought of their old age pension plan, and the answer I received from the farmers and the working people was that while at the time of its passage, there were many who considered that it involved tremendous expense, they were unanimous in their statement that it was one of the finest things the Washington state legislature had ever done. Hon. members may be interested to know that the total budget for that state last year was $350 million, out of which $110 million was spent on old age pensions and social welfare. That is some indication of the progressive nature of the state of Washington.
I wish to emphasize that this advanced type of legislation was not brought in under a socialist government, but rather under a capitalist system. The natural resources of that state are very much like ours in the west. While I am not suggesting that this government had a mandate from the people of Canada at the last election to establish a socialist system, I do say that as a result of the government programme and policies announced to the people it has a mandate to establish, and to do so very quickly, an improvement in the old age pension system.
There is no group of people in Canada to-day who have been more deeply disappointed at the failure of the dominion-provincial conference than those people who would benefit by an improved old age pension system. I believe hon. members in all parties see the necessity for this move in the near future. I hope hon. members will study what has been done in other countries, without endangering economic systems. I am sure that when we do establish an improved old age pension system along the lines of that in the state of Washington hon. members, regardless of their party, will say-as they have in that state-that it would be one of the finest things the parliament of Canada has ever done for its people in this generation.


Mr. ZAPLITNY:: I do not wish to hold up the committee unduly, but I believe this is a question upon which we might well spend more time. We have spent much longer time in discussing estimates which are not as important as this one.
Hon. members who have preceded me have made a strong case for old age pensioners. I should like to bolster that case with figures, showing dollars and cents, because we are now dealing with expenditures. I feel sure that in a little while the Minister of Health

Supply-Health and Welfare
and Welfare will rise in his place and, by means of statistics and dollars and cents, atempt to prove that this cannot be done. So that I am going to present by budget first.
I have worked out the budget which I believe the average old age pensioner would work out for himself, on the basis of a full pension of $25 per month, the amount payable in Manitoba. If we take the month of June as a basis, having thirty days, and divide that into that amount of money we find that we have a figure of 83$ cents a day. The old age pensioner knows he has to provide three essentials of life out of that sum, namely food, clothing and shelter, leaving aside all those other things which he might and should have.
If we divide that amount of money equally for food, clothing and shelter, we find it works out to 28 cents a day for each. Then, if one has a habit of eating three meals a day, this would work out to 28 cents for the three meals, or 9$ cents per meal. I should imagine that would be nine cents for the meal and one-third of a cent to tip the waiter.
This is on a basis of $25 a month, the maximum amount payable in most provinces. But, as the hon. member for Mackenzie pointed out a while ago, the average pension payable is not the maximum. He quoted figures from another source which showed that in British Columbia, where I believe the highest average amount is paid, it was 61 cents a day. If this is divided up in the same way as I have divided up the budget it would work out to only 6$ cents a meal, or a little less than the previous figure.
I have made this computation to show what would be the effect if we were to have a 60-60 plan, that is $60 a month at the age of sixty years. That would not be anything revolutionary because it would still be below the amount necessary to live on at the present time with the way prices are. Taking a $60 pension for a thirty-day month, you would have $2 a day with which the old age pensioner would have to provide food, clothing and shelter. Divide that into three equal parts and you have 66$ cents a day for food. Divide that into three meals a day and you have only 22 cents a meal with two-thirds of a cent left to tip the waiter. Anyone who would argue that 22 cents is too much for a meal for an old age pensioner would certainly run up against stiff opposition. With the way prices are to-day, $50 a month, the amount some one has suggested, is not sufficient. If prices continue to rise I doubt if we shall be able to rise in our places next year and say that $60 is enough. Prices seem to be going up in all directions in spite of the
protestations of the Minister of Finance and others. It seems to me that this is one class of people which should not be pegged down to a certain amount which was considered sufficient some years ago, although I doubt if it was even then. I have no hesitation in endorsing everything that has been said by other hon. members.
I understand that pensions for the blind come under the same item. I have often wondered why these pensions are not payable until forty years of age and this has never been satisfactorily explained to me. I understand that there is some suggestion in the proposals of the dominion government to the provinces that the age limit be lowered to twenty-one years. That is a step in the right direction, but I see no reason why we should stop at twenty-one years. Family allowances are paid up to the age of sixteen years, and in the case of a blind person I submit that the pension should start at seventeen years, so that it would take over where the family allowances left off. This class of person has been waiting too long for the relief they require.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: I felt that I could not let this item go by without saying something about the needs of old age pensioners because I think we are in honour bound to keep talking about this until something is done, regardless of what party we represent in this house. I was interested in the budget presented by the hon. member for Dauphin, but I think he is too generous. I think he allowed the old age pensioner far too much to spend because I did not notice that he allowed for rent.
Take a $30 a month pension, which is what is paid in British Columbia. Saskatchewan pays $28 and medical benefits. I am sure much less than that is paid in many other places. If an old age pensioner had to pay $15 a month rent, he would have only $15 left. If he were in Ottawa he would not get a room for that. The cheapest room that I have seen in Ottawa was priced at $10 a week for two people, and I would not stay in it any longer than I could help. As I say, the old age pensioner is left with $15 a month to buy his clothing and food. We will allow him $60 a year for clothing, and out of this he would have to buy his shoes, his overcoat, his suit, his underwear, and tobacco and anything else he might need. That would take $5 a month which would leave him $10 a month with which to buy food for thirty days.


An hon. MEMBER:: What about heat?


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: He is supposed to have heat in that $15 a month room he is living in. To buy 90 meals in a thirty-day month would
Supply-Health and Welfare

give him 11 cents a meal. I suggest to hon. members who think that $30 a month is enough that they go and rent a room and try to live for a month on the remainder. Until a person has done that he does not know what these old people are up against. The economist whom this party pretends to follow-I have in my hand the book by Sir William Beveridge called "Full Employment in a Free Society"-states that capitalist governments must be responsible for the total outlay of money in their country, and must make up the difference between what the individual may spend and the maximum expenditure required to give full employment. That is not a socialist concept. I agree with my hon. friend over here who says that this government was not elected to bring in socialism. This government pledged itself to bring in comfort and decency and until it has established a decent old age pension it will have been guilty of defaulting on the promises made just a year ago.
I hope that this government will see fit to allow old age pensioners more than eleven cents a meal, more than 115 a month _for rent and more than $60 a year for clothing. I am sure that many of them have much less than that, because in many, places less than $30 a month is being paid.


Brooke Claxton: Several hon. members have spoken about the old age pension proposals and, while the item is related to old age pension payments and the cost of administration, I think hon. members will bear with me if I reply to some of the remarks that have been made. The hon. member for Lethbridge referred to a statement which I made when this matter came up on a private members motion on April 10, 1946, when I said:
There is no country in the world, of all those that have old age pension legislation, where there is a non-contributory system that is not on a means test. Either you have a contributory system of insurance and no means test, the people receiving the pension as of right, or else you have a non-contributory system on a means test.
The hon. member was quite right in saying that I said that. He then went on to say that apparently I had overlooked the position that obtained in the state of Washington where, according to what he hadi read, they have a generous old age pension. I would point out that from what he himself quoted that pension is paid to those "in need of financial assistance" and also to those "without resources or income". That would indicate that there is a means test there, and therefore my statement is still true. We have done our best to examine.the systems in force in

other countries and have found no case in whioh there is a non-means test pension payable without contribution. If there is one, I would be glad to find out about it.
The hon. member for Lethbridge said also that people cannot save under the present system, referring to people generally, not just old age pensioners. I would call his attention to the fact that on December 31, 1939, the personal savings of individuals in Canada amounted to $3,117 million, while at December 31, 1945, these had increased to $10,993 million.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: How much of that is in the hands of individuals at the present date?


Brooke Claxton: Every cent of it.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I wonder if that is
correct or whether a number of individuals have cashed in their savings?


Brooke Claxton: That is. the net increase in bank savings and similar deposits, in the holdings of government bonds and other individual savings.


Major James William Coldwell: Is that not because
people denied themselves many things that they needed?


Brooke Claxton: Yes, that is true, but at the time those savings were being made the consumption of consumer goods went up about 15 per cent. Of course the cost of living indices must be taken' into account, but I think the increase in that connection was much less in this country than it was anywhere else. There was a substantial amount of saving during the war, and the saving I have referred to is in the hands of individuals. That is leaving out of account reductions in mortgages, reduction in farm implement loans, the paying down of indebtedness of all kinds. There has been a satisfactory change in the position of the Canadian people as individuals.
The hon. member for Mackenzie referred to the fact that it took from 1927 to 1936 to bring into force old age pensions on the basis on which we have it now, as amended from time to time. That is quite right. The first province to come in came in in 1927, the year in which the dominion enacted this legislation, and the last province to come in came in in 1936. It took nine years, and it indicates that that is a very difficult mode of procedure to follow in bringing about a substantial change in social legislation. My belief is that measures which can be financed out of the consolidated revenue fund and which provide for a payment as of right to all the. people from one end of Canada to the other can be introduced by federal legislation; but when the provision is contributory or on a means-test

Supply-Health and Welfare____
basis, I do not now see bow it can be done by federal legislation, but should be done by agreement with the provinces. It was with this end in view that the dominion put forward the proposals to the provinces last August, with the result which all hon. members know: we had a series of discussions and an adjournment of the conference.
The proposal then put forward with regard to old age pensions has already been referred to; it was for old age pensions for everyone at the age of seventy years, without proof of need, of $30 a month; for old age assistance between the ages of sixty-five and sixty-nine, up to $30 a month, to which the federal government would contribute 50 per cent of the costs of the pensions. It was intimated that these * measures would in part be financed out of a social security tax which would be introduced. That was part of a comprehensive system of social security and financial arrangements which were put before the provinces.
The hon. member for Kootenay West said that no one could be more disappointed at the failure to arrive at an agreement between the dominion and the provinces than the people who might have benefited from these provisions. I believe that to be true, and I would include among those wbo were exceedingly regretful at the failure to arrive at an agreement, those who worked for several years steadfastly to arrive at that agreement.
An hon. member referred to the "convenient excuse" of the constitutional position. I do not regard the constitution of Canada ever as a convenient excuse. I put it to hon. members that if you have an old age pension plan which is payable on a means-test basis or on a contributory basis, either one or the other, it is difficult to see how it could be introduced without a constitutional amendment or except by cooperation with the provinces, and that is the plan that we put forward.
I have briefly referred to the remarks of hon. gentlemen. I share with them the desire which many bon. members have to see to it that by one means or another our old people have more adequate provision made for them during their older years. I myself believe, as I think most hon. members do, that the best way in which to make that provision is to do it on a contributory basis under which those people who are able to do so will contribute year by year, through one means and another, so that -when they arrive at the time when most of them will need assistance they will get it as a right, having built up an amount out of which the government will make the payments by means of contributions of themselves and others. Personally, so far as I have
examined all the systems in force in different countries, I do not see that it matters very much whether the contributions in a national scheme are directly earmarked for each person on a strict superannuation fund basis or whether the contribution is made by a social security tax such as they have in New Zealand or Australia. The actual machinery is perhaps less important than that contributions should be made.
The situation as we have it to-day, however, is much as it was before the dominion government's proposals were made; that is, the old age pension is as provided for in the act of 1927 as amended from time to time. The attitude of the federal government with regard to this and other matters growing out of the dominion-provincial conference will, as the Prime Minister announced, be indicated at the time the budget is brought dowm, and I have nothing further to add at this time.


Mr. GREEN:: Does the minister think there would be any merit in attempting to make an agreement with the provinces on the question of old age pensions alone? There are different factors in connection with the pension which will have to be agreed upon anyway between the governments, and surely it would be worth, while to attempt an agreement on the whole question.
I think no one can dispute that the present condition of many, many old age pensioners js deplorable. Surely we cannot sit back now and wait-perhaps a matter of years-for something to happen, particularly when each year means so much to these senior citizens of Canada.
There are two factors with which the minister has not dealt this evening. One of them is the manner in which the additional pension is to be paid once the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act lapses. At the present time the statutory provision for the old age pension is only $20 a month. The minister will correct me if I am wrong in that statement. A further $5 is paid by order in council originally passed under the War Measures Act, and the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act picks up the orders in Council passed under the War Measures Act, so I assume that that is the way in which this extra $5 is now paid. It seems to me that this parliament must make provision for the w'hole old age pension on a statutory basis, and when that is being done the amount should be increased to at least the sum of $30; the minister should explain to us how he intends to get around the difficulty.
Supply-Health and Welfare

The other question I should like him to deal with is the possibility of amending the regulations. They are extremely harsh in many respects, as I pointed out to him at the session last fall. He will find that discussion at page 3610 of Hansard for the last session. In his reply to my questions at that time he intimated that he was already negotiating with the provinces for an amendment to the regulations. He said:
I am very glad to tell the hon. member, however, that we have already inaugurated discussions with the provinces alongside the work of the dominion-provincial conference, and in their welfare officers-
I think there is a word left out there.

have accepted our suggestion that early in the new year we should meet together to discuss administrative problems relative to old age pensions.
It would be interesting to know whether that meeting has been held, and, if so, what progress was made in changing the regulations. I do not intend to go over in detail the regulations that should be changed, but, as the minister knows, in the proposals of the government of Canada, set out for the dominion-provincial conference of last year, there is to be found the dominion's idea of what these regulations should be. At page 38 it is suggested that the residence qualification should be residence in Canada for a total period of twenty years since the age of 18. No matter at what time the applicant had been out of the country, the only requisite would be a total residence in Canada of twenty years since the age of 18. Then the dominion apparently believes that the maximum payment of pension should be reduced only by any income that the recipient actually gets. In other words, there would be none of this business of estimating five per cent of the assessed value of his home and counting that as income, whereas he was not actually getting any income from the home. The proposal reads:
In computing the income of the recipient for purposes of this means-test, moneys received from other sources not for the recipient's own use to be excluded.
I would point out that in the proposed amendments to the War Veterans Allowance Act, now being considered by the special committee on veterans affairs, provision is made for the war veterans allowance recipient to have a home of a value of $4,000 without suffering any reduction in his war veterans allowance. There is also provision, under that act as it stands at present, for the recipient to have $1,000 in victory bonds without suffering a reduction in his war veterans allowance.

The dominion also proposed last fall that provinces should not crack down on an old age pensioner coming from another province.
It would not make any difference in which province he had been, he would be entitled to full pension; whereas at the present time, under certain conditions, the pension is reduced. The dominion further advocated wiping out the provision whereby the estate of the pensioner can be taken by the government after his death.
These are only a few of the suggested changes in the regulations. Is it not possible to have these changes made in the near future without waiting for a resumption of the dominion-provincial conference? It seems to me that the necessity for these changes is so obvious that there cannot be any argument . about it; there should be some way of bringing about changes in the regulations.


Brooke Claxton: The hon. gentleman
expressed the hope that we would not sit back and wait. I would point out that this government has not sat back and waited. It took the initiative with the introduction of old age pensions in 1927. It took the initiative with the amendment in 1937 and with the introduction of pensions for the blind. It took the initiative in 1943, when, by order in council, as the hon. member said, the maximum amount payable was increased to $25, and it took the initiative in August, 1945, when it put before the provinces the proposals to which I have already referred. The question of old age pensions is one in which, while there may be comparative agreement among the members of the house, there is considerable disagreement in different parts of the country, and that was brought out during the course of the discussions at the dominion-provincial conference, when the attitude of all the provinces was by no means identical. The complexity of dealing with a matter of this kind became apparent in the wide disparity of views which were expressed.
The hon. member referred to my indicating that I hoped early in the new year, following discussions we have had with provincial representatives, to call a meeting to discuss possible amendments to the old age pension regulations. We had that in mind in consequence of the discussions which took place in November and December, and it was my thought that we would have that conference early in the new year. But in view of the adjournment from time to time of the dominion-provincial conference, it seemed advisable not to have it until we knew clearly what the outcome might be. However, I should say that the interprovincial board on old age pensions has

Supply-Health and Welfare
recently been reconstituted. I have sent a letter to the members of the board, which consists of the provincial ministers responsible for old age pensions administration, and the deputy ministers, suggesting to them that it might be convenient to meet on September 16.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Will this session be over by then?


Brooke Claxton: At least we shall be available. Then we shall go into among others, some of the matters raised by the member for Vancouver South. It should be remembered that the dominion's proposals were put forward as part of a comprehensive scheme, but that does not mean that if we cannot get that scheme we are necessarily tied to these proposals in detail.


Howard Charles Green: But they show what the dominion government thought would be proper changes.


Brooke Claxton: As part of a comprehensive scheme they showed what we thought would be desirable. If we cannot get that scheme it may be necessary to work out something else, but we propose to have this conference. I have asked the representatives of the provinces to indicate the matters that should go on the agenda, and then we shall examine the regulations and take into account all the representations that have been made in this committee and in the house.


Howard Charles Green: One point the minister did not deal with is the increase in payment.


Brooke Claxton: I am sorry. It is proposed that during the session, despite its possible length, legislation will be introduced to carry that into effect.


Howard Charles Green: By what amount will the pension be increased?


Brooke Claxton: That will be made known when the legislation is brought down.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I was not in the house when the hon. member for Vancouver South began his remarks, but I entered in time to get the minister's reply. He mentioned that this government had taken the initiative in 1927 to institute pensions and again in 1943 to increase the amount of the pension. I believe the records of this house show that in 1927 it was not so much a matter of this government taking the initiative as the initiative being forced on the government. That is quite clear.


An hon. MEMBER:: They deny that.


Angus MacInnis: They deny almost anything and I do not blame them. We all deny things that are not to our credit. But these are the facts. I would refer my hon. friends to my right to the speech made by a former leader of the party and a former prime minister of this country who said that there was not the least doubt in the world that the person who was responsible for old age pensions in Canada was the former leader of this group, the late Mr. J. S. Woodsworth. But the point I should like to impress upon the minister and upon the committee is that a pension at the present rate of $30 a month is wholly inadequate. It must not be forgotten that that amount is all that these people have to live on.


Howard Charles Green: They pay only $25.


Angus MacInnis: what it means to the hundreds of people who have written me during the last two or three years. I "have a pile of letters several inches thick from elderly men and women. These letters have come from people all over Canada who have given their lives to the building up of this country, and yet we cannot give them more than $30 a month. Most of those people who are administering this money may spend more than that on cigarettes, cigars and various kinds of drinks. I suggest to the minister that if he wants to get the reputation of being progressive-and he has acquired that in some way or another; I do not know how-he will have to do something better than that for our old people.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister has not said anything about pensions for the blind. I know that pensions are given to them, but is the department doing anything, to prevent blindness and to help the blind? The minister's department should take every means possible to prevent people from becoming blind. I have not heard of anything that the department is doing in that connection. I believe this matter came up in the social security committee in a brief presented by the Canadian National Institute for the Blind. The earning power of a single blind person should be increased to $660 and a married person to $1,200, and at the same time they should be permitted to retain their pension, because these blind people require people to assist them to and' from work.
During the last few years the Canadian National Institute for the Blind has helped a large number of people to obtain jobs. They have shown them how to work. The blind people are doing a splendid piece of work. The Canadian National Institute for the Blind has helped the department of the Minister of Veterans Affairs to place men in jobs, and these men are doing jobs that are worth while. We have them in factories in Peterborough and they are doing jobs which are very difficult. They are doing the job as well as, if not better than, people with eyesight. Therefore I wish to impress upon the minister that everything possible should be done by his department for these blind people. They deserve it. I should like the minister to make a statement in regard to what the department is doing and intends to do in that regard.
The suggestion of the hon. member for Dauphin that the pension should start where the family allowance leaves off at seventeen years of age is a worthy one. The department should take it up, because these people need pensions at all times.


Brooke Claxton: I am grateful to the hon. member for Peterborough West for his remarks. We have the interests of the blind Very much at heart, and have created a hew division of blindness control to inaugurate just the kind of work which he mentions. This came up in connection with the discussion on these estimates on June 14, 1946, reported at page 2525 of Hansard; also on June 7, reported) at page 2303. Hon. members will not expect me to go over the same ground again. I should like the hon. member and the committee to know that it is very much in mind and that we are conducting a survey of all cases of blindness that can be made available to us in order to ascertain the causes of blindness, with a view to seeing what percentage can be prevented or cured. The proposals we placed before the provinces included an offer to pay 50 per cent of the cost of work in the direction of preventing or curing blindness. Further, the proposals included increasing the amount that might be paid to $30 a month, and reducing the age to twenty-one years.
The other proposals which have been put forward by the Canadian National Institute for the Blind and other organizations have been receiving continuous consideration. I think there are only two which have not been put forward either in the dominion proposals to the conference or actually carried out by the dominion government. Those two refer to a special grant for guiding, and to relating the pension to the cost of living index. So far we have not considered it possible to adopt those, but I can assure the hon. member that they, like all others relative to this subject, are receiving careful consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare branch-
230. National physical fitness-administration, $50,000.
Donald Methuen Fleming: This item and item 231 have to do with the matter of national physical fitness, and arise out of the National Physical Fitness Act passed in 1943. At the outset I should like to observe that if there are any items above all others which should be considered only after the committee has been furnished with full information, it is items of this kind. Here the administration started out with $250,000 on hand, of which $25,000 was to be for administration expenses and $225,000 for distribution among the provinces. Six of the provinces have entered into agreements coming under the scheme, while three, New Brunswick, Ontario and Quebec, have refused to participate. It is now June 24, and we have not before us, in any form whatever, the report of the national council

on physical fitness for the past fiscal year. Section 13 of the National Physical Fitness Act, which is chapter 29 of the statutes of 1943, provides:
The minister shall, as soon as possible

I emphasize those words, "as soon as possible".
-but not later than three months after the termination of each fiscal year, submit an annual report to parliament covering the administration of this act for such fiscal year, and such report shall contain a statement of all moneys paid into or credited to the fund and all disbursements therefrom and shall include the regulations made under this act.
The fiscal year adhered to by the council is the government fiscal year ending March 31. Under the section I have just read, one week from yesterday is the last day within which the minister must file the report of the national council on physical fitness, even without giving any attention to the words "as soon as possible". I think the committee is entitled to an explanation of the fact that this report has not yet been furnished to hon. members.
I go on from that to offer this observation. In approaching items of this kind, having regard to its duty to scrutinize these proposed expenditures, I believe the committee needs to be certain that the activities of this national physical fitness council are really such as will contribute to the end of increasing physical fitness throughout the country. The committee will want to be very sure that what is being proposed or embarked upon here is not just a duplication of work already being carried on by the provinces. I know in the province of Ontario no occasion has been found for participation in this scheme, because it represents duplication. Just enlarging on that thought, at page 67 of the report of the Department of National Health and Welfare for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1945, I find this paragraph:
In connection with the training of instructors and leaders under the National Physical Fitness Act, the national council passed the following resolution:
"As many excellent leaders in physical fitness and recreation are serving at present in His Majesty's services, the council recommends that the responsible provincial departments use this source of potential leaders."
I do not think we need any national council on physical fitness to tell the responsible departments of the provincial governments that in the armed forces we have a source of instructors in physical fitness. I think the provincial departments are well aware of that fact, so that it is quite unnecessary, and I suggest perhaps just a little bit cheeky, for this national council to be passing resolutions of this kind undertaking to instruct the pro-
Supply-Health and Welfare
vincial governments concerned as to how they may carry out their duties to those who have served in the armed forces. I think the provincial governments are well aware of their duties in that regard.
Lacking the report, I question whether the committee is in a position to give these two items the intelligent study which should be given. Since we are without the report, may I ask the minister if he will answer questions on the following points? In the first place, will he give the committee the expenditures for the past year? In the second place, what programme is contemplated for the present fiscal year, and what distribution among the six participating provinces is contemplated? Next, can he furnish the committee with a financial statement for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1946? Next, what is the salary of the national director; and next, has the council undertaken to acquire any real property pursuant to the power contained in section 6 (2) of the act?


Brooke Claxton: I wonder if there are any other questions I might take up at the same time. If not, I shall be veiy glad indeed to answer the questions put by the hon. member for Eglinton. In the first place, the statute requires that the report be filed as soon as possible after the end of the fiscal year, and not later than three months after the end of the fiscal year. I think hon. members will agree that this period is shorter than that provided in most statutes requiring the filing of annual reports. In this case we have had the report available in draft form for just a few days. It would have been filed in typewritten form already but for the fact that there has been delay in having it translated. I think hon. members are aware of the fact that just now it is difficult to have government papers translated and printed as promptly as we would like. However, the report will be filed in accordance with the statute before the end of this month, though it will not be possible to have it printed in that period.
The hon. member asked for the expenditures last year, and I can give him those. They were as follows:
Salaries	
Cost of living bonus and unemployment insurance	
Publicity and information	
Telephones, telegrams, postage ...!!
Sundries	
Professional and special services. ..
Material and supplies	
Freight, cartage and express Transportation and travel

Supply-Health and Welfare


Donald Methuen Fleming: Would the minister mind breaking down the item for publicity and information, and relating that to the proposed appropriation of $18,930?


Brooke Claxton: I have just been handed the table of expenditures I gave the hon. member, and I find I shall have to reconcile it with the information to be procured.
With regard to the programme covering the present fiscal year, the national council of physical fitness has had two meetings during the year. It laid down for the national director a programme which involved the preparation of a draft syllabus for a suggestion to universities in connection with the training of instructors in physical fitness. That has been distributed to the universities and it has met with a good deal of interest. It is available for them to be used, should they desire to do so.
Resolutions were adopted by the council suggesting further educational and promotional activities in connection with camps, the holding of games, organized activities in universities and schools and in connection with community activities. This act came into effect in 1943. Six provinces have cooperated actively in it.


Solon Earl Low: Which provinces?


Brooke Claxton: All except Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick. Six provinces have cooperated actively and have all signed renewals of their agreements.
I think it should be remembered that all provinces are not in the same position as Ontario and Quebec in respect of looking after their own needs; and it has been found by those provinces which participate that they secure a contribution which enables them to assist in their own work. They have also found the services of the council and the national director useful in connection with the development of their own programmes.
The hon. member asked for the distribution between the provinces. During this fiscal year the distribution was as follows: Nova Scotia, $6,747.50; Manitoba, $2,692.44; Saskatchewan, $17,044.65 and Alberta $23,070.53. Payments to British Columbia and Prince Edward Island do not come within this fiscal period, although they obtain their payments in accordance with the arrangement.


Howard Charles Green: How much did they get?


Brooke Claxton: British Columbia could get up to $16,015, and Prince Edward Island could get up to $1,861. Then, I was asked what salary the national director gets.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Perhaps I might interrupt at this point. I understand the basis of allotment among the provinces is a per capita basis. The second province mentioned by the minister, if I followed correctly, was Manitoba, with an allotment of something over $2,000.


Brooke Claxton: Yes, $2,692.44.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That is for Manitoba?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That does not seem to compare, on a per capita basis, with the allotment read out by the minister for the other provinces.	.


Brooke Claxton: But the province draws down from the fund only on a fifty-fifty basis with the amount it spends. If a province spends a dollar on purposes set out in the regulations, it can then draw down a dollar from the fund. They do not necessarily draw the maximum. These are the actual expenditures. The amount of salary of the national director is $5,000.
I believe that covers the questions which have been asked.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The last question was about real estate.


Brooke Claxton: There is none at all.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Perhaps my colleague would forgive my interrupting at this point, because I believe I am the author of this national fitness programme. I regret very much that three of the provinces of Canada have not joined in the great national scheme.
Those of us particularly who come from British Columbia are keenly aware of the wonderful results effected by the Pro-Rec scheme, which was commenced under the provincial government of that province, and is now supplemented and buttressed by the provisions of the national physical fitness programme. The idea behind it was to follow what was done in Norway, Sweden, Czechoslovakia and other countries of Europe before the last great war, and to train our young men in physical fitness and give them all the benefits of the courses which were suggested and prepared. I believe that great work has already been accomplished under this legislation, and I hope that in future it will continue.


Howard Charles Green: It is for both men and women, is it not?


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: Yes, indeed. I am sure the hon. member for Vancouver South has seen the classes in the open spaces around Vancouver, the parks. He has seen the men,

Supply-Health and Welfare
women and school boys from universities and colleges take training in physical fitness. This builds up the morale of our people, and this physical fitness is always identified with intellectual and social morale.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: The agreements of three of the provinces expired this year, two in January and one in April. These are British Columbia, Alberta and Prince Edward Island. Have all those provinces renewed their agreements?


Brooke Claxton: Yes they have.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare branch-
232. Assistance to schools of social work,
Donald Methuen Fleming: This is a new ite n. Would the minister explain it?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Would he explain it particularly from this point of view: Are those schools of social work of the recognized type connected with universities?


Brooke Claxton: Yes. This vote is introduced for the first time. Whether or not it will be reintroduced will depend upon the will of the house. It is not necessarily designed to be a repeat vote. When family allowances were introduced and we discussed the situation with the provinces, and the various welfare agencies in those provinces, we found there was a great shortage of qualified workers to undertake the work of investigation. That is one explanation why we did not spend as much of the vote of $150,000 last year as we thought we would. It was represented to us that in order to assist in the accelerating of the training of an additional group of workers we should make grants available to schools and provide fellowships in the same way as had been done during the war in connection with the training of nurses for service in the armed forces. That need for nurses has ceased, but this was designed to meet a peace-time need of the same nature. The plan was worked out in connection with the representatives of the organized schools of social workers, of which there are seven in Canada. These are the Maritime school of social work at Halifax, Nova Scotia; the school of social work of Laval university; of the university of Montreal; at McGill university; of the university of Toronto; of the university of Manitoba and of the university of British Columbia. Plans have been worked out through consultation with their representatives which are understood to be satisfactory to them under
which this money will be available, partly
for grants to the schools and partly for fellowships. I should like to make it plain to the committee that this is being done on a one-year basis. It is not necessarily desired to repeat this, and we wish to warn the recipients that it may not be repeated in a subsequent year. We aim to accelerate the training of an additional group of workers just as soon as possible.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Do I understand that the seven schools of social work attached to the universities enumerated by the minister represent the complete group which will be benefited by this vote?


Brooke Claxton: That is right.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the basis of distribution been worked out?


Brooke Claxton: An amount of $50,000 is
to be used to establish 100 scholarships of $500 each.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Are they open to every one of the seven?


Brooke Claxton: On an agreed basis, also an amount of $45,000 is provided to assist the schools and $5,000 for administration.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister says, "on an agreed basis," but I should like him to indicate what the basis of distribution is among these seven schools mentioned.


Brooke Claxton: I will give the details, the first amount being for administration, that is assistance to the school, and the second amount to cover scholarships. The details are:
Administration Scholarships
Maritime school of
social work	$3,400	$3,600Laval 	5,200	5,800Montreal 	6,700	7.500McGill 	7.800	8,700Toronto 	9,600	10,800Manitoba 	4,600	5,000British Columbia ..	7,700	8,600


Donald Methuen Fleming: That is acceptable to all seven schools?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Mr. KNIGHT:: Could the minister give us the number of trained social workers who graduated from the universities this year?


Brooke Claxton: I am sure that that figure is not available yet, even to those working in the field. When this was first discussed about a year ago we were informed that there was an immediate shortage of some 800 in Canada.


Mr. STEPHENSON:: I notice all through these estimates there are amounts provided for travelling expenses. I brought up the same
Supply-Health and Welfare

matter when we were considering the estimates of the Department of Agriculture. In that case I figured the travelling expenses totalled $1,360,000. I notice the total for this department is something like $300,000, with increases of $5,000, $10,000, $22,000, $30,000 and $65,000 in different branches. Can the minister give us an idea how these travelling expenses are accounted for?


Brooke Claxton: There are no travelling expenses under this item.


William Henry Golding: We are dealing with item 232, assistance to schools of social work.


Charles Elwood Stephenson: I ask that my question stand.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Miscellaneous grants-
SSJi. Canadian National committee for mental hygiene, $10,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: I spoke in support of item 220 covering the mental health division and at that time I mentioned the name of Mr. Morris Wilson. I should have said the late Mr. Morris Wilson, former president of the Royal Bank of Canada. During his lifetime he was one of the outstanding supporters of mental hygiene work and I understand he was president of the Montreal section. At the same time I should have mentioned other Montreal men like Mr. J. W. McConnell, Mr. Ross H. McMaster, Mr. Paul S. Sise and a few others. I merely want to say that I support this vote as strongly as I can because I am somewhat familiar with the work carried on by the committee for mental hygiene.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
235. Health league of Canada, $10,000.
Item stands.
Progress reported.
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Tuesday, June 25, 1946.