1947-03-04

[Stage Direction]
EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G., B.A., L.Ph., PRINTER TO THE KING'S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY 1947
[Stage Direction]
House of Commons
[Stage Direction]
Befmtes
Tuesday, March 4, 1947


[Stage Direction]
Mr. L. A. MUTCH (Winnipeg South) presented the first report of the special committee on canteen funds, and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. HUGHES CLEAVER (Halton) presented the second report of the standing committee on banking and commerce.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I move:
That pursuant to the recommendations contained in the second report of the standing committee on hanking and commerce presented this day, the said committee he instructed to inquire into the administration of the patent office in regard to staff, office space and equipment and to report to the house in relation thereto.
Motion agreed to.	[DOT]


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): I wish to announce the Canadian delegation which will attend the second session of the united nations economic and social council preparatory committee of the international conference on trade and employment which will convene in Geneva on April 8.
Mr. L. D. Wilgress, Canadian ambassador to the U.S.S.R., will head the delegation, with Mr. Hector B. McKinnon, chairman of the tariff board, as alternate. The other delegates will be: Hon. Victor Dore, Canadian ambassador to Belgium; D. Sim, deputy minister of National Revenue (Customs and Excise); J. J. Deutsch, Department of Finance; H. R. Kemp, Department of Trade and Commerce; F. A. McGregor, Commissioner, Combines Investigation, Department of Justice; A. M. Shaw, Department of Agriculture; S. D.

[Stage Direction]
Pierce, Department of External Affairs. Advisers to the delegation will be: W. J. Callaghan, Commissioner of Tariff, Department of Finance; R. Cousineau, tariff board, Department of Finance; G. C. Cowper, Department of Trade and Commerce; J. p! Manion, Canadian Commercial Representative, Rome; A. L. Neal, Department of Trade and Commerce; A. E. Richards, Department of Agriculture; G. B. Urquhart, Department of Rational Revenue; A. S. Whiteley, Department of Justice. The secretary general of the delegation will be L. E. Couillard, Department of Trade and Commerce.
At the conference the representatives of nineteen countries including Canada will seek to negotiate specific tariff concessions on a multilateral basis, the removal of other barriers to trade and the elimination of discriminatory practices. They will also seek to agree on a charter establishing common principles of world trade policy and setting up the proposed international trade organization of the united nations.
The Canadian delegation is at present en route to London where it will hold preliminary discussions with commonwealth representatives on tariffs and preferences prior to the opening of the conference in Geneva.


Right Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Reconstruction and Supply):: I should like to make a short statement with respect to Arctic weather forecasting stations.
To enable Canada to provide more accurate and longer range weather forecasting to meet her domestic and international obligations, the government proposes to establish nine weather stations in the Arctic during the next three years. The most northerly of these will be located in the vicinity of Eureka sound on the northwestern side of Ellsmere island approximately 600 miles from the north pole. The main weather station will be established at Winter harbour on Melville island at approximately latitude 75 north, longitude



EDITION

[Stage Direction]
Weather Forecasting Stations
[Stage Direction]
110 west. It is planned to have Eureka sound and Winter harbour in operation this coming summer. The actual location of the other weather stations is a matter for further study. It is considered essential that these stations be operated for a minimum period of five years to enable accurate assessment of their value with a view to determining the advisability of continuing or expanding weather reporting operations in these Arctic regions.
Our Canadian climate and weather are more definitely influenced by currents of air and storms from the Arctic than from any other points of the compass. It is anticipated that the establishment of Arctic weather stations will provide our meteorologists with accurate information which will be of inestimable value to our national economy, and particularly to enterprises in many fields, such as agriculture and lumbering, to say nothing of aviation and other forms of transportation. From an economic point of view, long-range weather forecasting would result in savings far in excess of the monetary costs in establishing and maintaining these stations. Their establishment would also determine the feasibility of air routes across the Polar regions. Reports from the proposed Arctic weather stations will reduce the number of errors in the weather forecasts by providing advance information of outbreaks of cold air from the far north.
To our knowledge, the U.S.S.R., which is equally affected by polar storms and currents of air as the North American continent, maintains a large number of weather stations in the Arctic regions on the other side of the north pole. It is hoped to be able to interchange Arctic weather information with the U.S.S.R. and other neighbouring countries in the north when possible. The U.S.S.R. has already a very extensive exchange of weather information with Canada and will be greatly benefited by the additional reports which will be made available to them.
These new stations will be of great value to the United States as well as to Canada, and their operation will enable more accurate long range forecasting by the United States weather bureau. The United States has therefore undertaken to assist Canada in the establishment and operation of these northern stations, which will, of course, be under the control of the Canadian government, which will supply the officers in charge. United States technical personnel will be included in the staffs required. The Canadian government is grateful for this assistance, which will be invaluable until sufficient technically qualified Canadian-trained personnel are available. It is believed that this extension

of weather-reporting facilities, in which the two countries will cooperate, will be of service to all countries interested in improving our common knowledge of the north.


Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a statement to the house regarding certain tax relief measures which the government proposes should be extended to the gold mining industry.
The house is doubtless aware of the difficulties facing the' gold mining industry in Canada today and of the urgent representations that have been made to the government from associations representing the industry, from responsible citizens of mining districts, and from members of this house representing many constituencies in Northern Ontario and Quebec who have expressed to me personally their real concern over conditions in their constituencies.
No one who examines the record of current gold production and compares it with the level of output in our best years can fail to be impressed with the seriousness of the decline. Production has fallen from its all time high of 5,345,000 ounces in 1941 to 2,808,000 ounces in 1946. This is a decline of more than 47 per cent. Moreover, with rising labour and material costs and with the loss of the 10 per cent premium on United States funds, the immediate outlook is not bright.
It is, of course, a characteristic of the gold mining industry, which produces a product with a fixed price, that the margin of profit narrows down in the face of rising costs of labour, materials, and equipment at a time when business generally is prosperous. On the other hand, favourable conditions appear in this industry when others are in depression. It is well remembered how active the industry was during the hard years of the thirties, and how important it was to our whole economy during those years as a support to employment, to our foreign exchange position, and to our domestic purchasing power. Accordingly, I believe there will be general endorsement of the proposals I am about to make which are designed to assist in increasing production and to encourage prospecting and development in this field.
The government's proposals for the industry are threefold. In the first place, the depletion allowance for gold mines will be increased from 33J per cent to 40 per cent of profits earned on and after January 1, 1947. This will apply

Taxation-Gold Mining Industry
to mines the value of whose output is to the extent of 70 per cent or more from gold. This will be of general benefit and encouragement to the industry as a whole. By widening the margin of retainable profits, the well-established mines should be able to utilize more low-grade ore than they might otherwise feel it worth while to bring to the surface. This provision should operate naturally to lengthen the productive life of existing mines in the industry. To this extent, therefore, it can be regarded as contributing towards future employment in the industry.
The second proposal is directed particularly towards the low-grade marginal mines where the impact of adverse conditions has been most severe. As a special relief measure in this direction it is proposed that the amount allowed as depletion for gold mines, as defined above, shall not in any case be less than $4 per ounce of gold produced. This new minimum allowance of $4 per ounce will replace the present minimum of $2 per ounce, and will be effective as from the date of commencement of the existing 82 per ounce minimum, that is to say, it will apply in respect of gold produced in fiscal periods ending after June 30, 1946. This provision will have the effect, for example, of exempting completely from tax those mines whose profit margin is $4 per ounce or less. This minimum depletion allowance will likewise be of benefit to those mines whose profit margin is more than $4. As it is an alternative to the 40 per cent depletion mentioned above, it is obvious that this $4 minimum will be of benefit to every company whose profit margin per ounce is less than 810.
The third proposal relates to new gold mines which have come or come into production on or after January 1, 1946. As the house is already aware, the law allows a three-year exemption period for new mines. In this three-year period companies are at present expected to take into their books the appropriate write-off for depreciation and pre-production expenses. It is now proposed to relieve gold mines from this requirement. These deductions which the companies have been required to take regardless of the size of their profits may now be carried over and taken in the remainder of the ordinary period of write-off remaining after the three-year period. This provision, while somewhat technical in nature, will, I think, be recognized by the industry as a substantial addition to the value of the three-year exemption. It should give added stimulus to the search for and development of new prospects since it increases 83166-64J	.
significantly the tax concession to new mines.
The government has given very careful and sympathetic consideration to a number of other suggestions which have been made. There has, for instance, been some talk in the press of an outright subsidy for gold production. It is significant, however, that this was not urged by those who speak on behalf of the industry as a whole. In the government's view, at a time when subsidies on essential foodstuffs and other commodities are being withdrawn, it would be most inappropriate to embark upon a policy of subsidizing gold mining operations.
I would also like to take this opportunity of clearing up one point on which I find considerable misunderstanding in some quarters. It has been suggested that the government is obtaining more than $35 per ounce for the gold it sells abroad, because the Canadian dollar has been selling in the unofficial markets in the United States at a discount, of several per cent. There are also suggestions that the industry should be entitled to the value of its gold converted at this unofficial exchange rate in New York. Let me say first of all that the proceeds of all Canada's sales of gold abroad are paid into the exchange fund account held by the foreign exchange control board and converted into Canadian dollars at the official rate of exchange, so that the government is making no profit in the way that some have apparently thought.
It would be out of the question to convert the proceeds of the sale of gold abroad into Canadian dollars through the unofficial market in New York and other American centres, and this is obvious when the nature of this unofficial market is understood. The transactions which take place in this market are only certain transactions between nonresidents. All exporters of all products are required to account to the foreign exchange control board for the foreign exchange they receive from their exports and are not permitted to sell it in the unofficial market. This is one of the most basic elements in our system of exchange control, because it is necessary that the foreign exchange produced by the sale of our exports shall be made available for the purpose of purchasing imports for Canada and paying our other commercial and financial bills abroad. This is the use to which the foreign exchange is put when it is sold to the foreign exchange control board. If the proceeds of our gold exports or any other exports were sold in the unofficial markets abroad, they would not be available to Canada for normal purchases or payments abroad, but would instead be diverted to the

Taxation-Gold Mining Industry
export of capital from Canada by nonresidents, thus undermining one of the main purposes of foreign exchange control.
This will be clearer if I take a moment to explain in more detail the nature of this unofficial market. This market arises because certain Americans or other non-residents of Canada may wish from time to time to withdraw capital from Canada and they find that they are unable, under the Canadian foreign exchange control regulations, to withdraw it by purchasing United States funds from a Canadian bank in the normal way. As members of the house are aware, United States funds are provided under present policies for all current account transactions, that is to say, for all imports, for reasonable travel expenditures abroad, for the conversion of the income earned by Americans on their investments in Canada, and they are also provided for the repayment of debts, including outstanding bond issues which are payable solely or optionally in United States funds. In addition, there are certain other types of capital transactions which we are prepared to see take place in the form of Canadian dollars but for them we are not prepared' to provide United States funds out of our official reserves. For example, an American granted a permit to sell a security in Canada comes into possession of Canadian dollars which cannot be converted into United States funds in Canada. Similarly with an American selling real estate in Canada or reducing his capital investment in a Canadian business. Nevertheless, although Canadian dollars so acquired are not convertible into United States funds out of our official reserves, they are not blocked. The American receiving them is perfectly free to sell them to another American who wants Canadian dollars, at whatever rate they agree upon. The American purchasing the Canadian dollars can only use them for certain purposes. For example he cannot use them to pay for Canadian exports Qn account of the requirement that exports .from Canada to the United States be paid for in United States funds. The main purpose for which they can be used is to make new investments in Canada, though Canadian dollars can also be used for tourist expenditures here.
The fact that Canadian dollars acquired in the unofficial market can thus be used only for certain limited purposes naturally makes them less valuable in the hands of nonresidents than United States dollars, which can be used for any purpose. Hence a discount may arise, but this discount is no indication whatever of the true value of the Canadian dollar. This discount represents merely the price paid by one non-resident to another as

an inducement to make a capital investment in Canada which cannot be converted into United States funds through the official channels. This unofficial market is highly specialized and accounts for only a small percentage of our total international transactions.
While I realize that this is a highly technical subject, I thought I should make this explanation to remove some of the misunderstandings which appear to exist.
In closing I should like to emphasize that the new pattern of taxation of the gold mining industry which I have outlined must not be regarded as fixed policy. It represents a programme which the government considers proper under the present circumstances, and will, of course, have to be reconsidered when circumstances change and particularly if and when general economic conditions become much more favourable for gold mining.


Mr. HACKETT:: Will the Minister of Finance indicate to what extent the discount of the Canadian dollar in the United States market is attributable to the management of the Canadian dollar by the Canadian authorities?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would say not at all.


Mr. COLDWELL:: Will the Minister of Finance inform the house why it is that the government alters the basis of the budget established by this house without referring it to parliament?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is not altering the basis of the budget. This is not a statutory provision. It is a provision which is within the discretion of my colleague the Minister of National Revenue. The rates of depletion and depreciation are such as the minister may allow. My hon. friend will recall that those are not fixed by statute.


Major James William Coldwell: I did not recall that.


Douglas Charles Abbott: They are a matter which is within the determination of the administrative branch of the government. That is why I am in a position to make this announcement which is a matter of government policy and does not require an amendment to the existing statute.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Peel):: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has Canada been sounded out either officially or unofficially by

Inquiries oj the Ministry
the secretary general or any other official of the united nations organization as to the Canadian view on calling a special session of the general assembly to discuss Britain's latest proposal with respect to the handing over of the mandate of Palestine to the world organization?
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): The answer is no.


Gordon Graydon: May I thank the minister for such a prompt and brief answer.



NATIONALITY AND CITIZENSHIP


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: May I direct a question to the Secretary of State? Did Canada participate in the commonwealth conference on nationality and citizenship which has just been concluded in London? If so, who represented the Canadian government?


Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Secretary of State):: I think that question should more properly be referred to the Secretary of State for External Affairs.


Gordon Graydon: He would just say no.


Colin William George Gibson: I may say that the representative from the department of the Secretary of State was the under-secretary of state, Doctor Coleman.



IMPORTATION FROM UNITED STATES INTO MARITIMES PROVINCES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the- day:
['There is, and for many months has been, a prohibition against export of nails from Canada.']
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour, arising out of many telegrams I have received from civic bodies throughout the maritimes, stating that the fuel requirements of that area are being supplied by United States coal. Can the minister inform the house who are the importers of this additional coal, and can he assure us it is not being imported by the Dominion Steel and Coal Corporation? In the second place I should like to inquire if the government of Nova Scotia or of New Brunswick has made representations to his department or advanced any proposals with regard to a settlement of the present work stoppage.


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: The answer to the second part of my hon. friend's question is no. The other part of the question comes within the jurisdiction of the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, and no doubt he will answer it.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I must advise my hon. friend that coal control ended on December 31 last. For more than six years prior to that date the Department of Reconstruction accepted responsibility for seeing that every citizen of Canada received coal sufficient for his needs. That responsibility is now in the hands of others. The government has neither the machinery nor the power to protect any user of coal to the extent that he will receive his full supply. The only machinery left is the statutory dominion fuel board. I am told by that board that it has received requests from the province of Nova Scotia for certain help in rationing coal and in moving coal from one part of the maritime provinces, where there is a surplus, to another part where there is a deficit. I am informed that, to the extent its staff will permit, the board is helping in this way.
As far as the importation of coal is concerned, I have no knowledge of it. I do not know whether or not coal is being imported; or, if it is, I do not know who is importing it.


Clarence Gillis: The point I am interested in is whether or not the company which is carrying on a strike at the present time is being paid the subsidy the government pays on United States coal.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have explained that there is an agreement with the company, and I notice on the order paper a motion asking that the agreement be tabled. I will attempt to facilitate that motion and table the agreement at the first opportunity,


Clarence Gillis: The subsidy to which I
have reference is the S3.50 a ton paid on United States coal used for domestic purposes.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order.



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, arising out of the announcement he made a few moments ago respecting the Canadian delegation to the preparatory com-
Inquiries oj the Ministry

mission, on trade and employment. In view of the many assignments being given Mr. Dana Wilgress, whom I regard as well fitted for them, may I ask if he will soon be returning to his post as Canadian ambassador to Moscow, or is consideration being given to the appointment of someone else in his place?
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): No decision has been made with respect to that matter. When a decision is made it will be announced promptly.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. C. GREEN (Vancouver South):: Reports from the Pacific coast indicate a serious shortage of nails there. Can the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply make any statement with regard to the situation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have not heard of a shortage of nails in any part of Canada during the past two months.


Mr. FRASER:: You have not been around, then; for there is a shortage.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The fact of the matter is that there was a shortage last year, for several reasons, the principal of which was the strike in the steel industry. The limiting factor today is the amount of wire rod that can be devoted to the making of nails. The rod making capacity of Canada is being operated to the fullest extent, and the nail making capacity is being operated to the extent that rods can be made available. I might add that steel rods are being supplemented by aluminum rods, which make a satisfactory nail for some purposes. I have just received from the statistical department a forecast of production which indicates that whereas the production of nails in 1946 was 59,000 tons, production for 1947 is estimated at 72,000 tons, an increase of twenty-two per cent. I can assure my hon. friend that the industry is today operating at the rate of 72,000 tons of nails per annum, which should more than satisfy the requirements of Canada.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: How many nails were
exported?


Clarence Decatur Howe: There is, and for many months has been, a prohibition against export of nails from Canada.



INCOME TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: Will the Department of Finance give consideration to advancing the date of payment of compulsory savings to persons in need? I am being inundated with letters from people in need.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall be glad to give consideration to that matter.



INQUIRY AS TO DISCONTINUANCE OF RATIONING

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. DONALD M. FLEMING (Eglinton): I should like to ask the Minister' of Finance if the discontinuance of meat rationing is in contemplation; and, if so, when?
Douglas Charles Abbott: The question has not been considered. When a decision is made it will be announced in due course.



WAR SAVINGS CERTIFICATES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Knapman Fraser: 'Will the Minister of Finance say whether the chartered banks will be allowed to cash war savings certificates when the first of them become due, which will be within a few months? I understand that according to P.C. 306, dated January 28, only the post office will be allowed to do so.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


James Horace King: Order.



FEED GRAIN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. A. ROSS (Souris):: I want to direct a question to the appropriate minister; I am not quite sure who it may be. When will an announcement be made with respect to the price of barley and flax for the 1947 production? Many farmers are anxious to make their seed arrangements for the approaching season.


Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture):: The whole policy in connection

The Address-Mr. Adamson
with feed grain was held over for consideration until after representations were received from the farmers' organization last Friday. It is now being given consideration, and an announcement will be made in due course.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. R. PEARKES (Nanaimo):: On April 8, 1946, the Prime Minister asked me not to press at that time my request for the production of papers connected with the withdrawal of the Canadian occupational troops from Europe. In view of the statement made last evening by the Secretary of State for External Affairs will the government now table those papers so that this house may obtain full information on the subject in its relationship to other pending international agreements?
Some lion. MEMBERS: Order.


Gordon Graydon: There should be an answer.
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): The regular way to obtain the production of papers is by a notice of motion on the order paper.


George Randolph Pearkes: Mr. Speaker, it was on a motion for the production of these papers that the Prime Minister made the statement to which I have referred.


Gordon Graydon: The minister and the Prime Minister are as far apart as the poles.



MR. GILLIS-INCOMPLETE ANSWER TO ORDER FOR RETURN

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Clarence Gillis: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, in order to call the attention of the Secretary of State to the fact that sessional paper No. 142A, tabled yesterday in answer to some questions I asked, is incomplete. I suggest that now he should advise me how I might go about getting the necessary information. In my opinion questions 4 and 5 in this order were not answered at all. I believe the Department of National Revenue were in error in their answer to question No. 4, when they said it was contrary to the practice of the department to furnish information which would disclose the private transactions of the importers at customs. In my question I did not
suggest that any private transactions should be disclosed. I merely asked for the names of companies importing fuel into Canada- nothing about their private transactions.
Question 5 was whether any of the importing fuel companies in Canada were subsidiaries of operating coal companies in Canada or the United States, and the answer was, no information. If the Department of National Revenue or the wartime prices and trade board, which answered these questions, have not that information, then surely some other government department has it. I wonder if I could impose upon the good nature of the Secretary of State to the extent of asking him to suggest to me some way by which I could get this information. I should like to have it because it involves large expenditures of the taxpayers' money, and it is information to which I believe we are entitled.


Colin William George Gibson: I shall look into the matter.



GOVERNOR GENERAL'S SPEECH


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, February 7, consideration of the motion of Mr. J. W. MacNaught for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Bracken, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Coldwell.
Mr. RODNEY ADAMSON (York West):: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to see that there is at least somebody in the Department of Finance who realizes there is such a thing as a gold industry in Canada. But I want to say here and now that the plan just brought down to the house by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) will be of as little use as the plan he brought down previously.


Mr. CHEVRIER:: You have not even
looked at it.


Gordon Graydon: He did not have to look at it; it was read to the house.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The plan will be of no
use whatsoever, because the mines which are facing virtual extinction are those the basic costs of which to produce an ounce of gold are greater than $35. To offer any tax relief, or to call this a measure of tax relief for mines which at the present time are operating in the red, is only adding insult to injury.
There is one thing to be said about the minister's statement: After four or five years of constant hammering at the Department

The Address-Mr. Adamson
of Finance and its experts over in the east block, eventually they have done a little with regard to the depletion allowance. If I read the statement correctly, the depletion allowance to mines is increased from 33J per cent to 40 per cent. Nothing is said in the statement about shareholders, so presumably the shareholders still take it in the neck.
My next observations will be directed to the free exchange. The minister went to great lengths to show that free exchange was not helpful to the Canadian or United States owner. If it is not helpful, and if it is not a real differential in cost, then why is it that Canadian stocks selling on the New York stock exchange sell from anything up to ten per cent lower in American dollars than they do in Canadian dollars? If the exchange disparity is not something that is very real, why is there a disparity in the prices of stocks on the two markets?
Having said that I should like to attempt to show the house the real danger which is facing the mining industry. I believe I should begin by pointing out the difference between mining-particularly gold mining-and any other type of industry. In a normal industry if the product is not marketed at a profit one can increase the price to the consumer. If the manufacturer still cannot operate at a profit, he can go into some other line and make some other type of article. Then if he fails to make a profit he can close his plant and wait until times improve, and pay only the small cost of maintenance and insurance.
On the other hand with a gold mine one is faced with a fixed price of $35 an ounce. Expenses are constant: one cannot close a mine or shut down a mill. The company has to keep it operating, because if it is not operating the mine will fill with water and become of virtually no value. Furthermore the management cannot make or sell any other product. Therefore as gold mining costs increase the mine is constantly driven nearer to the wall, until such time as costs equal selling price, which must bring about the closing of the mine. There is no other answer.
Under normal conditions mining is a hazardous and extremely vulnerable industry. There is no way in which one can look forward to what he is going to discover with the aid of the diamond drill. Except under most exceptional circumstances reserves can never be blocked out years in advance. Mining is always a wasting asset: the deeper one gets, the higher go the costs. Even under the best circumstances mining is a difficult, dangerous, hazardous and speculative business.
On many occasions I have drawn the attention of the house to the importance of

mining, and particularly gold mining, to Canada. Under normal conditions a man employed in a mine gives work to at least five other men in other parts of Canada. In the United States the ratio is even higher, because the extent of 'fabrication of metals in that country is greater than it is in Canada.
Mines have beaten back our northern frontier. Without them northern Quebec could not have been properly and adequately colonized. Without mining, the great clay belt represented by the hon. member for Cochrane (Mr. Bradette) would not have become a potential farming area. Today in Canada eighty per cent or more of our land can be used only for mining purposes. North of the tree line, and even approaching that line, the only asset we have lies under the ground. It seems therefore that everything possible should be done by any government in Canada to see to it that that eighty per cent is developed.
I now come briefly to the question of base metals. Today we have a differential between the controlled price of base metals in Canada, and the world market for those products. I wish to place on record a table showing these comparative prices:
United
Canadian States	World
Lead	 10-63	14-00	14-0044-50
Electrolytic
zinc	 10-25	11-50	11-50-11-75
Electrolytic
copper 

 16-63	20-50-22-00	20-50-21-00
It will be noted that the world market runs similar to the United States market. The differences between the Canadian and United States prices are 3-37 cents for lead, 1-25 cents for zinc and 5-37 cents for copper. There would be the same differences between the Canadian and world prices. If the price of base metals was keeping up the cost of living in Canada to any extent there would be some excuse for continuing controls, but there are two things to be taken into consideration. First, a difference of two or three cents per pound may mean the difference between a mine operating at a profit or at a loss. The net result of these controls has been that in effect a subsidy is being paid to the fabricator.
The price per pound1 does not mean much to the consumer of the average article, because the metal content costs of most articles is quite low. The cost of the metal is only a fraction of the total consumer cost. One of the first things that must be done is to remove the ceilings and controls on base metals.
There has been considerable activity in the stock market and people will say that if the stock market is good there cannot be much

The Address-Mr. Adamson
the matter with the industry. That' is a very dangerous situation because the condition of the stock market does not necessarily denote a healthy condition in the industry. The boom in the stock market is largely due to two factors. First, there was a recent discovery of large nickel deposits in Manitoba and, second, some high grade deposits of copper ore have been discovered in the Rouyn and Noranda district. I will not mention the names of the companies, but those discoveries have been outstanding and large paper profits have been made in the stock market. All this does not-indicate that the mining industry is in a healthy condition. There is only one thing that will make a healthy mining industry, and that is production. At the present time that is anything but good.
I come now to gold. The trouble with the gold industry can be summarized as follows: First, there is the parity of exchange. Second, there is the increased cost of materials. Third, there is taxation. Fourth, there is the increased labour cost. Fifth, there is the inefficiency underground because labour is getting older and the mines are getting deeper. As a consequence in many cases the output is not as good as it was before the war. Sixth, there is a drop in the ore reserves. Seventh, development work has been virtually at a standstill during the entire war, and ore is being broken on a hand-to-mouth basis.
I come now to the crucial point in connection with the entire gold situation. Unless a gold mine can produce an ounce of gold for S35-it is really S34.80, because there is a mint charge of 20 cents-that gold mine is not producing at a profit. There is only one answer: if you cannot produce your gold for $34.80 an ounce you cannot continue your mine. There is no other option open to such a mining company. You must produce for $34.80 or you go broke and your mine closes.
Let us look at the situation which existed in Canada at the end of last year, and it is considerably worse today. I have the names of the companies here but I shall not give them because I do not think it would be fair. This is all a matter of public record through published statements. In Ontario there were 14 mines which were not producing gold for less than $35 per ounce; in Quebec there were nine and in British Columbia there were four. The aggregate daily tonnage of the Ontario mines was 7,975 tons; of the Quebec mines, 6,175 tons and the British Columbia mines, 1,570 tons. There was a total installed mill tonnage of 15,720 tons per day. In other words, there was installed in Canada 15,720 tons per day in mills in mines which were operating in the red.
I am assuming that the average grade was $5 per ton. It would be a little less than that in Quebec, probably a little more in Ontario and considerably more in British Columbia. Assuming your average value per ton to be $5, the daily loss would be $78,600. On the basis of 350 working days a year, the loss per annum comes to the staggering sum of $27,510,000 which is almost entirely attributable to the policy of putting the Canadian dollar on par with the United States dollar and thus decreasing the price by $3.50 an ounce. I ask the house, through you, Mr. Speaker, and I ask the country through the house: is that policy worth it? The answer must come from the people of this country. They must answer whether the fiscal policy of this government with regard to the gold industry is worth $27,000,000 per annum, based on conditions at the end of last year.
There are other things which are almost as serious. One is the tremendous shrinkage in the ore reserves of every Canadian gold mine. Since parity was established, twenty-five mines have cut or omitted their dividends. This constitutes a direct tax loss to the country. More dividends will be cut or omitted this year. There were only forty-seven mining companies paying dividends in 1946, and parity occurred early in July. The most recent information is that Hollinger has shown a loss of 200,000 tons in ore reserves this year, with an estimated value of nearly $3,000,000. This is the most substantial drop in ore reserves in the history of this great Canadian mine.
I come now to the other factors which are increasing the cost of mining gold. The first mine of continuous record to report was Kirkland Lake Gold Mines. Kirkland Lake estimates that parity meant a loss of $1.30 per ounce produced during the last half of 1946. This mine also said that the increase of ten cents per man-hour to labour meant an increase in costs equivalent to $1.61 per ounce of gold produced or 64 cents per ton milled. The increase in the cost of supplies in 1946 equalled $1.50 per ounce produced. By adding together these three items of increased costs it will appear that the 1947 costs will be between $4 and $4.50 per ounce produced higher than the 1946 pre-parity costs at this mine.
Kirkland Lake Gold is an old established mine and has a steady record of production. It is therefore reasonable to say that the conditions of increased costs found there will apply to the whole gold mining industry. An over-all cost per ounce of between $4 and $5 will put every straight Canadian gold mine in the red with the exception of eight mines, several of which are small high grade pro-

The Address-Mr. Adamson

ducers with a small output of gold. These are the facts. Can parliament and the government sit idly by and watch the destruction of this industry?
It may be asked, what should be done to assist the gold mining industry? The Minister of Finance and his advisers have always said that to export gold was to export capital. There are a number of mines in Canada today which are willing to market their own bullion. They are prepared to turn over to the foreign exchange control board the funds realized for this bullion, and they are prepared to turn over these funds in United States currency. Is that an export of capital? With our desperate need for United States dollars, surely if a man can get $40 or $45 per ounce in United States currency he should be allowed to do so, on the understanding that he turn over the currency to the foreign exchange control board. Surely that is not an export of capital.
I hold in my hand a short article which was published in the New York Herald Tribune last week, having to do with the marketing of gold. It reads as follows:
There was little gold to be had anywhere in the world -with the exception of London, where brokers were offering metal, presumably of Swiss origin, at from $41.75 to $42 an ounce.
Informed quarters speculated whether the unofficial pressure being exerted by Washington would also be brought to bear on licensed international dealers to hold down the wholesale price which has been increasing consistently over the last two months.
However, as long as the black markets were bidding ever higher prices for gold at retail, which has exceeded $80 an ounce in oriental markets, there was very little chance of keeping private wholesale dealings at reasonable levels.
If the present international move to stamp out excessive black market operations should be successful, there is reason to believe that wholesale prices would respond, subject, of course, to the law of supply and demand.
This is the important sentence:
The relative scarcity of gold would seem to act against any substantial decline of quotes at this time, regardless of all other factors involved.
In other words, Mr. Speaker, regardless of what the United States government may do, the price of gold is going up. It cannot be stopped.
That is the first step. The second step is to establish a free bullion market in Canada. The third step, which would be taken some time later, is to mint convenient sized bars and allow Canadian citizens and corporations to hold the gold. I mention this particularly in reference to the annual report of the Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada. The Sun Life has some $3,500 million of insurance in force at the present time. One of its
fMr. Adamson.]
greatest difficulties is with international currency. I shall not read the report of the company, but at the present time it is doing one of the great works of mercy in the world in that with its world-wide organization it is financing its policyholders, many of whom have kept their policies in force or at least have a considerable equity in them. It is providing destitute people all over the world with funds. If that company could supply its policyholders with gold, what a great asset it would be to policyholders in the orient, on the European continent, in Africa, in South America and even in England, and what a wonderful piece of good will it would be for Canada!
I come now to the matter of depletion allowance. I have said that the depletion allowance of 40 per cent at the mine is minuscule; it is nothing compared to what is needed. I have suggested 50 per cent and the senate committee agreed. The mining association and the chamber of mines have all agreed that not only do we want an increased depletion allowance to the mine but it should be given to the shareholder as well, and it should be in the neighbourhood of 50 per cent to really encourage the industry.
The mining industry is wholly opposed to a subsidy. If a mine cannot produce at a profit it is not the duty of the Canadian people to support it. All that the gold mines ask is to be allowed to get the world price for their metal. Surely that is not asking too much.
So far we have considered the industry merely from its own point of view. Let us look at it in the light of our present economic position. I say, Mr. Speaker, in all seriousness that this country is in one of the most perilous international monetary conditions of its history. I should like to refer briefly to our position vis-a-vis the United States. In 1946 our imports from the United States were $1,405,300,000 and our exports to the United States $887,900,000, leaving a net deficit of the staggering sum of $517,400,000 in 1946 as against a small deficit of only $5,400,000 in 1945. That is not all. The situation is much worse than that today. In December our imports from the United States were $145,600,000; our exports were only $83,900,000, leaving a debit to the United States in December of last year of $61,700,000, the highest of any month in our history. Let us look at the ways in which we can meet that debt. We can meet it by currency devaluation, by tariffs, by selling more goods to the United States. I suggest to hon. members that they read an excellent article by Professor Palyi in last week's Financial Post. It seems

The Address-Mr. Adamson
unlikely that we are going to do any of these things, although we may be forced into devaluation; it is unlikely that our exports to the United States will greatly increase. We need their coal and oil and we are going to need them more and more. But there is one way in which we could help to meet that deficit, and that is by increasing our gold production. Our non-monetary gold exports in 1946 fell, I believe, to the low of many years of 95-8 million dollars. The average for the period of 1935 to 1939 was $124 million; that is, the average of the four years prior to the war was 35 per cent higher than the gold exports last year. In 1941 the maximum gold production was $206,000,000, and in 1946 is was just half that, $103,000,000.
In our desperate position in relation to United States exchange, in relation to United States dollars, I suggest that the first job of any government should be to see to it that we increase our gold production to meet this astounding deficit.
Let us look at the situation in another light. Canada's reserve of United States dollars in 1945 was $1,500,000,000. In 1946 it was down to $1,200,000,000. At the beginning of 1947 it was down to between $600,000,000 and $700,000,000, and at the present rate of dissipation it will take about six months to exhaust it entirely. Are we going to wait until we entirely denude ourselves of United States funds and become pauperized, or are we going to act now?
Let me mention another thing in this connection. The very stoppage of Nova Scotia coal mining is aggravating the situation, because for every ton of coal produced there we have to import a ton from the United States, further increasing the debit balance. I wish to quote one sentence from Graham Towers' report on the Bank of Canada, page 23 of the annual statement for 1946:
Canada cannot continue indefinitely to sell on credit in overseas markets while she is incurring a substantial cash deficit in her balance of payments with the United States.
I say that Mr. Towers' "indefinitely" means about six months; in that time at the present rate we shal^ be denuded of American exchange. We may be denuded by the summer of this year. Can we look upon that with equanimity? I say not. We are in very truth facing bankruptcy if we continue in our present course.
I come now to the international monetary fund. It was hoped that the fund W'ould provide a means whereby we could stabilize our exchange. At the present time controlled exchange are for the most part entirely fictitious, the pound sterling being worth $4.04 83166-65J
and the French franc one cent or nearly one cent. That is a fictitious exchange. It has no true value as an exchange rate. The franc today is selling for probably one-fifth of a cent, and the pound sterling, according to the last quotation I saw, was around $2. Are we to expect a hard boiled Republican congress of the United States to kick billions into the international monetary fund in view of these fictitious values of the pound sterling, the franc and other currencies in terms of United States dollars? We cannot count upon their doing so.
I wish now to quote some words from Camille Gutt, managing director of the international monetary fund:
I cannot see any purpose in having a country go through deflation and depression to hold on to a currency parity which is fundamentally unsuited to its international economic position.
We saw that in the 1930's, when depreciation was used not merely as a remedy for an unbalanced international position, but also as a device to export unemployment by depreciating a currency below the rate warranted by the international economic position of the country. It was what has been very appropriately called "a beggar my neighbour" policy. If we do not want a repetition of monetary chaos, we must replace conflicting national policies with cooperation in dealing with international monetary problems. That is the primary purpose of the fund-to provide a means for consultation and cooperation.
Under the gold standard, short-term movements of capital were supposed to help countries to tide over difficult periods. Before the first world war, they were mostly of an equilibrating character. During the last twenty-five years when we had such movements, they were quite often of a disequilibrating character, what was called "hot money." Balances shifted from one centre to another for speculative or for political reasons. They could and, in some cases, did induce inflation or deflation in a country.
That statement was made recently in a symposium on the international monetary fund at Columbia university, academy of political science. The significant part in it is what he says about the gold fund flowing from one country to another owing to political unrest. That is very true, and it will always remain true so long as there exists political unrest together with controlled and managed currency throughout the world. The only way in which you will stop this flow from one country to another, in a politically upset wTorld, is by establshing and retaining confidence in a country and the availability of hard exchange. The way in which that can be done, and the only way that has ever been found by which it can be done, is by establishing convertibility or exchangeability into gold.
I want to quote one thing more with reference to the international monetary fund. This is from Professor Jacob Viner, professor
The Address-Mr. Adamson

of economics at Princeton. I quote this to show that it is not merely my ideas on this matter that I am putting forward. I have a considerable amount of expert opinion behind me. This is what Professor Viner says concerning the international monetary fund:
The means for dealing with economic problems must be adjusted to new conditions. Otherwise the economy breaks down. That does not require a change in objectives; but it does require a change in techniques. The gold standard was fundamentally a means of securing a common international monetary policy. With the more rigid structure of the present industrial economy, the gold standard can no longer perform this function.
The international monetary fund could, and should be made to operate, within the limits of its resources, as a cycle-dampening agency. If it operated in accord with what I interpret as the spirit and even the letter of its charter, strictly as an exchange stabilization fund, such would be the natural result of its financial operations. But if newspaper reports have any basis, the managers of the fund are impatient to begin credit operations.
A sinister implication with respect to the use of the monetary fund.
At this time price controls, rationing, subsidies, black markets, import and export controls, and direct governmental trade operations are almost everywhere either substituting for or distorting the traditional role of free-market prices as regulators of economic values. At this time every exchange rate in the world has a questionable and indeterminable relationship to the lasting values under free exchange market conditions of the currencies involved. At such a time there is little obvious value in stabilizing the existing more or less arbitrary exchange rates. At such a time there is no technique, except patience and trial and error, for ascertaining what levels of exchange rates would be deserving of stabilization. If the monetary fund authorities nevertheless embark upon active operations without waiting for less unsettled and less transitory conditions, the fund will inevitably operate as a reconstruction agency, or as a relief agency, instead of as an exchange stabilization agency. Once the time arrives when exchange stabilization proper, will be feasible and urgent, the fund -will have a till empty of the currencies then in demand and choked with the currencies in over supply in the foreign exchange markets of the world.
By that he means, Mr. Speaker, that if the monetary fund continues as a relief agency, which apparently is what it may do, the hard currencies, those which it is possible to transfer into gold, will be used up by the devastated soft currency countries until eventually the fund will find itself full of nothing but soft currency for which there is no use. I say "no use," Mr. Speaker, and I mean no use. The only way currency stabilization can ever be put into effect is by allowing a free exchange. I do not suggest that within a period of many years we shall be able to go back to a fixed gold standard. But we should use the gold we

have to assist our own economy. We should use it by allowing our citizens to have it and by allowing it to be used as a trading asset instead of selling it at $35 an ounce when we know it is worth a great deal more than that, and selling it to a country to whom we are going in the red to the extent of $600 or $700 million a year. We are selling it, at a price far below the world price, to the United States, who will use it as one of her great assets in the time to come. I say that we need every ounce of gold that we can possibly produce in Canada. The function of the government should be to see that the gold industry- is encouraged in every possible way. What are we doing now? The gold industry is being quietly strangled, and the statement made by the Minister of Finance today will do practically nothing to stop it.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker. I wish to make these last points. First, Canada is in an extremely vulnerable position with regard to her international exchange. Second, the controlled exchange rates now in force throughout the world are almost entirely fictitious. Third point, in view of Professor Viner's statement, it is improbable that the international monetary fund can operate as a currency stabilizer under the present rates of exchange. Fourth, bankruptcy is inevitable at the present exchange rates, which cannot be maintained. Fifth, the only way which has ever been found of bringing about a free exchange is to allow a free market for gold. Canada is in an extremely favourable condition in this regard. We are a great trading nation in our own right. We are today probably the greatest per capita trading nation in the world. The use of gold as an asset in the hands of our traders abroad would be of inestimable value.
Finally, we have an opportunity to push back our northern frontier. I do not know what gold is worth in the open market today, and nobody knows. It is selling at $80 an ounce in some places and $60 in others, and reasonable transactions are taking place. On the bullion markets of the United States it is $4-1 and $42. Nobody can say what the true value of gold is today, at least in terms of the Canadian dollar or the American dollar. I do say, though, that the value is certainly a great deal higher than the $35 Canadian which we are being paid for it. If gold is increased in value, in relation to the Canadian dollar, to anything like the rates currently in effect throughout the world, you will see not only $200 million, but $300, $400 or $500 million worth of gold produced in Canada annually. We have the possibility of entirely

The Address-Mr. Croll
altering our whole economic structure. It is the one thing which will pull us out of the doldrums of upset international trade. The world is hungry for gold. The United States is hungry for gold.


An hon. MEMBER:: The world is hungry for wheat.


Agar Rodney Adamson: They are hungry for
wheat, yes, but we do not get paid for it. I have no quarrel with that; we must do what we can to prevent mass starvation. But I do say that gold is the one thing that the nations of the world have ever put any trust in. We can use our gold for our own advantage and become a great international trading country, or we can continue with our present policies, in w'hich event I say in all seriousness that we face bankruptcy. That choice rests with this parliament.


Mr. DAVID CROLL (Spadina):: Mr. Speaker, if there is a single topic which has been thoroughly debated throughout the length and breadth of this land, that topic is immigration. This perplexing problem will continue to agitate this nation for many days. As this house knows, many speakers-including repeaters like myself-have discussed the subject from the social, economic, moral and humanitarian aspect. While, on the practical level, there has been a nation-wide demand from every walk of life for more people, yet the doors of this country have been opened only a crack. We still say to the world at large, "If you are lucky enough to come within a few narrow categories, you may enter at some time in the future." To the others we simply say, "We have not been able to make up our minds." I do not want to derogate from the little we have done to open Canada's narrow gate. It is at least a beginning, though its greatest fault, as I see it, is that it is vague, indefinite, wholly inadequate, and will bring us only a trickle. Yet one thing we have achieved. In common with other hon. members I hailed the statement made in this house by the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen), when he announced that there would be no discrimination against any group or class of immigrants. That all will be treated alike is in itself a victory. It was undignified for the government and an insult to the foreign-born among us that certain people were preferred. Now this invidious distinction has been removed in principle, and I trust the department will not fail to do away with it in practice.
There are two fundamental bases for the opening of immigration. The first is our obligation and our desire to help the war-stricken areas of Europe. This is a limited,
short-term humanitarian plan, but it is not an immigration policy. The second is the long-term development of Canada. I bring to the attention of the house a booklet recently issued by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. MacKinnon), referred to as "educational bulletin No. 1, 1947, Canadian census occupational data for counsellors", containing some 165 pages. Rather than give my view, I give the opinion of the Montreal Gazette, as expressed this morning. They say:
Support for the general view that increased immigration is essential is now offered from an additional and surprising source; the dominion bureau of statistics in a report on census occupational data. The figures, tables, charts and conclusions of the bureau report are as coldly practical as they are irreproachably accurate mathematically.
Unmoved by sentiment, unswayed by prejudice, uninstructed in political considerations, the bureau of statistics argues from the basis of collated facts and nothing more. Its presentation begins at the beginning. It arrives by way of charts of figures at the only logical conclusion arithmetically. And it proves its opinion that "only a robust immigration policy could provide such expanding home markets as were previously available," whilst the Canadian birthrate is stationary or declining.
Further:
If Canada is to maintain its present standard of living and develop its natural resources- still largely unexplored, unexploited and unharnessed-while taking its appropriate place in the comity of nations, it must fill some part of its empty places with men and women from other lands; men and women working together for themselves and for Canada.
A generous immigration policy is not only humanitarian, it is the best tradition of enlightened self-interest.
To date, Mr. Speaker, we have done very little under both these heads; not enough either to relieve the basic need or to salve our own conscience, as continuing demands from home and abroad would indicate. We are profoundly uneasy about immigration. We know we must adopt some positive plan; yet we seem to do so reluctantly. Instead of formulating a broad, clearly defined policy, we juggle around the regulations, raising the age limit here and including another small category there, until even the immigration officials are as confused as are members of the public. It is true that a fifteen-year negative mentality is hard to change, but that is our task.
I shall deal with the immediate aspects of this problem. The question of refugees and displaced persons is a vital one, not only for the displaced persons themselves, who have been driven from their homes and have spent long years at forced labour and in concentration camps, but for the future peace and welfare of the whole world. Not until the disruptions and disorganizations of war have.-
The Address-Mr. Croll

been settled, can we hope to proceed with the rebuilding of Europe. It is important that we should have a clear idea of the issues involved. There has been and still remains much misunderstanding concerning the number of refugees and their racial and national composition; and I should like, therefore, briefly to review the facts in the case. It is estimated that about thirty million persons were displaced from their homes in Europe during the war. Of these some ten million were removed to Germany as labourers in agriculture and industry. Some of these went voluntarily because of their enthusiasm for the nazi cause, but many more were coerced, becoming virtually slave labour. In addition, several million were prisoners of war, and about a million were held in concentration camps. The remnants of these groups constitute the core of the present displaced persons' problem. To these must be added a quarter of a million or more children whose parents were killed in concentration camps or during military operations, or who wandered over the country following the moving armies, or who were placed with families in Germany, France and the low countries. Following the end of hostilities in Europe, the task of sorting out and repatriating these displaced millions fell on SHAEF and on UNRRA displaced persons' teams, which succeeded in moving the majority of them in orderly fashion back to their former homes. From V-E day to April, 1946, some six million displaced persons have been repatriated; and the task of repatriation has been continued, thanks to the admirable work of UNRRA, the intergovernmental committee on refugees, and the British and United States military governments.
There still remains, however, what we may call the irreducible minimum, those who, after almost two years of peaee, remain homeless and the responsibility of the victorious allies. These number approximately one million people, mostly in displaced persons camps in Germany, Austria and Italy. They comprise roughly 400,000 Poles, 200,000 Baltic peoples, 70,000 Yugoslavs, 150,000 Jews and 100,000 Ukrainians.	Of these, some 600,000 are
found in the United States zone, 350,000 in the British zone and 50,000 in the French zone. The rest are in smaller groups. In other words, they are mainly from central and eastern European countries and are unwilling, for either political, economic or racial reasons, to return to their homelands.
It is well to examine what manner of people are these displaced persons. As we have seen, they are of varied origins, occupations, cultures and abilities, but all have undergone common experiences. They have
("Mr. Croll.]
been uprooted from their homes and separated from their families, many of whom met death at the hands of the invaders. They spent years in internment camps or barracks, where lack of humanizing contacts with friends and loved ones, coupled with the brutality of the nazi overseers, has broken and upset their previous life pattern.
Most of the displaced persons showed little interest in politics. There was deep hatred of the oppressor. But the violent uprooting and long separation from their homeland tended to blur their political as well as their other affiliations. To add to these deprivations, they enjoy none of the rights guaranteed to prisoners of war by international convention, and even the little privileges of food parcels and gifts were denied them.
The majority of these persons were set to work in the German economy. Eastern Europeans were usually assigned to agriculture and heavy manual labour, while western Europeans were employed largely in industry. As might be expected, their output of work was usually less than half that of the German workers, owing to their resentment, inferior living conditions, and lower level of skill, coupled with a great deal of deliberate sabotage.
Yet even before the end of hostilities the displaced persons were beginning to rise out of the depths. Community life, if only on a very rudimentary level, became reestablished; and with the advent of peace and fewer deprivations, some return to a more normal behaviour pattern was possible. So long, however, as the homeless remain virtual prisoners in the same camps that housed them in the days of their slavery, and so long as four-fifths of them continue in enforced idleness, we may expect their resentment and restlessness to continue unabated.
These people have no future, in their present way of life. We must help them to become self-sustaining economically if we ever hope to rebuild them morally. At present they are homeless and hopeless. Their host countries look upon them with hostility. So many Germans have been deported from the east into the United States and the British zones that the population has increased from 34,000,000 in 1939 to 43,000,000 in August of this year. No doubt some of them can be integrated into the German life; but there is little there worth while. It is very crowded, and even they are looking to the British and to the Americans for food to be provided for them, while all the rest of the world appears in their eyes to be indifferent to their fate.
We must not forget the children. In their desire to destroy the biological basis of

The Address-Mr. Croll
adjoining countries, the nazis kidnapped hundreds of thousands of children from their homes and cast them adrift on the continent. UNRRA workers have been able to find only 10,000 of them, most of whom have now lost their native language and their desire to return home. As children will, they remember only dimly their past associations. Their lives will have to be rebuilt from the very foundation.
What is to be done with this tragic residue of men, women and children? Return to their homes is out of the question for a variety of reasons. In many instances their homes and possessions have been destroyed, through military operations. In other instances their property has been acquired, legally and otherwise, by people who refuse to restore it, even if legal title could be established. Still others, notably Poles, Ukrainians and Baltic peoples who make up the majority of the displaced persons, cannot go back because of hostility to the governments which prevail in their homelands. Often this is aggravated by fear of violence and even death, if they return.
The Jewish displaced persons, who number approximately fifteen per cent of the total, suffer most of these disabilities. They do not want to go back to the homelands, and they are not now wanted. Their homelessness poses an especially sad problem, because the war left tragic residue of anti-Semitism in Europe.
To settle this problem, the general assembly of the united nations has approved the formation of the international refugee organization which will come into existence formally, we hope, when the constitution has been approved and signed by the fifteen member states whose contribution to the operational budget is not less than seventy-five per cent of the total, which has been tentatively set at S160 million.
The international refugee organization must be prepared by June 30 of this year to take over the work of settling displaced persons previously carried out by the various bodies I have mentioned. What is Canada's position in all this? Our position has been ably presented before the general assembly of the united nations by the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin). Our view throughout the discussions was that the question of refugees can be solved only through cooperation among all the united nations to the fullest possible degree, and we have consistently supported the formation of the international refugee organization. In this connection I quote the words of the minister:
. . . with the clear understanding that we will play our full part as a member state of the international community.
We take as our major premise these four points on which general agreement has been reached:
1.	The problem of refugees is an international responsibility;
2.	Repatriation should be carried out to the fullest extent possible;
3.	No genuine refugee should be forced to return to his place of origin against his will; and
4.	No aid should be extended to war criminals, quislings or traitors.
This last point is of paramount importance. The basis of our approach is on humanitarian principles, and traitors and Quislings are certainly not entitled to look to us for mercy and assistance. In addition, if such people were false to their countries of origin, what assurance should we have that their attitude toward their land of adoption would be any less reprehensible? We have no room for political turn-coats or economic opportunists. Our sole desire is to extend the helping hand of humanity to those who deserve our aid. Our doors will be forever closed to those who backed the wrong horse and betrayed their own countries.
Most important of all, we must do our utmost to make the international refugee organization a reality and not a polite fiction which will salve our consciences and leave the great human problem unchanged. To date, as the minister has pointed out, despite our fine words, scarcely a single refugee has been actually aided by the united nations. AVords in themselves solve nothing. We must get on with the great social task before us.
We are in agreement upon one fundamental principle. The refugee problem which is an inevitable legacy of war is an international problem and it must be given an international solution. The united nations, on the basis of their available space and their economic stability, must be prepared to offer immediate haven to a million refugees. We must all do our share. Already the South American countries have announced their willingness to participate. Brazil has expressed the desire to take 120,000; Paraguay is calling for agricultural workers, including 5,000 Ukrainians, and will take professional workers up to fifteen per cent of the number of practising in that country. Venezuela will accept 10,000 families, amounting to from 30,000 to 50,000 persons. Chile has appropriated S20 million for immigration. Argentina will take 50,000 a year up to 4,000.000, and Colombia has announced that she will accept displaced persons. What I think will interest the house more is the fact that Britain has announced that she will
The Address-Mr. Croll

admit 500,000 displaced persons to relieve her manpower shortage. I should like to quote from the Montreal Gazette of today:
The admission of a half million displaced persons to relieve Britain's manpower shortage has been agreed upon by the ministry of labour and the trades union congress, it has been learned.
As a result of continuous pressure by the cabinet, faced with accumulating evidence of Britain's deteriorating economic position, union leaders are understood to have agreed under two conditions to a drastic move to break the vicious circle of shortages. The first is that the immigrants shall become subject to union rules and standards. The second is that the immigrants shall be selected individually on a basis of their skills and general suitability for Britain's most seriously undermanned industries-coal, foundries, textiles and agriculture
Britain, the Argentine and Brazil already have missions in Europe weeding out the displaced persons. They are stealing a march on us and we are going to be left holding the bag. Let us not deceive ourselves; Canada must take a stand in this matter and it must be a realistic stand. On the basis of the room available and on the basis of our strong economy, we shall probably have to take into this country a minimum of 100,000 displaced persons. If they are picked, they will strengthen rather than weaken our economy. Until the present, we have gone along with the united nations, agreeing in principle with the united nations. We now stand committed to the fullest possible participation, a participation which we accepted1 as part of our responsibility to the world. But words only have been spoken and now the time has come for us to take some action.
As I said, we shall probably be called upon to take a minimum of 100,000 displaced persons. Bather than sit back and take what they give us, let us go in now and choose and take as Britain, the Argentine and Brazil are doing. Let us send our teams into these European camps without delay. If we wait we shall be left with the leavings, and that might well give immigration into this country a set-back from which it will never recover. We are ready to take our fair share numerically of displaced persons, but we want the very best we can get. First come, first served, seems to be the order of the day according to the announcement in the press.
Whom shall we take? First of all, there are those with relatives in Canada. Under present regulations these would number at most 2,000. But our test must not be whether they come within the present narrow regulations. The test should be: Has the displaced person relatives in Canada and have the relatives asked for him? WTe must be careful not to break up family groups. Those people who
IMr. Croll.]
have relatives in Canada already have one foot in this country. They have someone here to speak for them, to welcome them and to look after them. They will assimilate quickly and will readily be absorbed into the Canadian stream.
Next come the children. On several occasions during the war the question of bringing orphaned children to Canada was broached and the response from the country at large was immediate and good. We showed what we could do in a small way with the British war guests, and I am confident that Canadians will open their homes and their hearts to the orphaned children of Europe whose lives have been shattered before they have scarcely begun. I know they will find among us foster homes where they will become workers and citizens in a society that needs them as much as they need it.
Next come the kind of people we want; that is, the workers, the same kind of people Britain wants. At the present time we can certainly use 5,000 domestics, and they are available. Mining, agriculture, textiles and other industries are all desperately in need of man-power. We are faced with the opportunity to do two great and inspiring things:	help the
homeless of Europe and help ourselves at the same time. It is a challenge which we must meet boldly.
I see the problem as being one primarily of organization. We must send our immigration teams to Europe at once with instructions to go ahead at full speed and with the fullest support from the government agencies concerned. This is not the time for administrative delays or departmental complexities. We are faced with an emergent situation which calls for the same bold planning we threw into our war effort. Present facilities patterned on our pre-war set-up are inadequate for the task. We must set up a large efficient immigrant processing department with ample powers. There will be labour department officials to designate what kind of people we want and where they can best be employed. There will be a medical group to examine refugees on the spot, including the use of X-rays. There will be an administrative group to screen and document refugees and a transportation group to move them from the camps to Canada. There will be a reception group to receive them on arrival and distribute them to their destinations, and educational groups in the provinces must seep them in Canadianism.
Let no one say that this cannot be done. Once before in our history, at the height of the great immigration boom before the first great war, new Canadians were landing on our shores at the rate of 1,000 a day and

The Address-Mr. Croll
we handled them with dispatch. In 1911, a total of 286,839 came into this country; in 1912 they totalled 331,288; in 1913, 400,870; and in 1914 almost 250,000. Who will say that Canada is not up to such an effort today? Any country that built up the great organization that we did in the war, that sent half a million men overseas and brought them back again, cannot possibly bog down on this task. There is no shortage of help. We trained thousands of men during the war to examine and move whole divisions of men half-way across the world. This personnel, trained in military operations and UNRRA work, is available today and is waiting to tackle the job. We have only to give them the word to go ahead.
There is no shortage of ships. I have here a copy of a Canadian Press dispatch, date-lined London, February 25, 1947, quoting Foreign Secretary Bevin's report to the British House of Commons on the plight of displaced persons. This is what Mr. Bevin had to say about shipping:
Foreign Secretary Bevin told the House of Commons today that there are 1,000,000 displaced persons on the continent.
He said he had suggested that all countries take a proportion and "end this miserable state of affairs," but no one wanted these people.
"I will not mention names but one great statesman in the British commonwealth came and gave me a lecture on this problem. I said to him, 'How many will you take, I will get a ship and send them tomorrow'."
"But," said Bevin, "the statesman didn't take one."
I wish to make it clear to the house that that reference is not to the Prime Minister of this country. Here are Bevin's boats that are available merely for the asking. There is no shortage of ships, and even if there were, this matter should have the highest priority. Everything depends upon the will to do it and upon organization. The nation with the best organized and most efficient immigration scheme will leave the others behind.
Then we come to the shortage of housing. A number of years ago when we first opened the debate in this house on post-war immigration this argument for going slow was advanced. We had to bring back the soldiers first and the soldiers' wives and dependents, and we all agreed that they should have first priority. So we waited and some 50,000 families of ex-service men came and were absorbed into our economy and were most welcome. We must now tackle the refugee problem. Our answer cannot be that of the Mad Hatter in "Alice in Wonderland" when he cried "No room, no room"; for, as Alice very properly replied: "Nonsense; there is plenty of room." To begin with, five to ten thousand displaced persons with relatives here
will be absorbed into the family circle; they will be taken into the homes without aggravating the present situation. Nor do the orphan children present much of a problem. Certainly room will be found. As for others, how can we honestly say to them, "We have not much room for you," when they have no room at all? The little we can share with them is infinitely better than the nothing they have at the present time.
The house must not forget that every displaced person brings with him one mouth and two hands, and he, too, can create. In the past we have used the need for reestablishing soldiers and their dependents as a reason for allowing no new immigration; but now the housing shortage is being used as an excuse for sloughing responsibility. We can never justify failure on this basis. If this is to be government policy, then I begin to believe in the impossible and the incredible, but I do not believe it is government policy.
As people who solved the tremendous organizational problems of war, who built up side by side a great double economy of industry and agriculture, who controlled our economic life in the midst of world-wide inflation and confusion, surely we are not going to be fazed by a problem like this, One thing is crystal clear. Canada cannot afford i;o act like a nation of "Richards". It does not become us. This is no time for slow halting steps. We have to open that door now.
There is one thing I wish to emphasize strongly. The settlement of displaced persons is not an immigration policy. It is a strictly limited short-term humanitarian aim arising out of our obligation and desire to help the war-stricken peoples of Europe. We are faced with the problem of resocializing our share of a million human beings who have been deprived of affection, stability and the freedom to live normal lives. Since the end of the war we have shipped our old clothes and surplus food, but that is not enough. A great work of group therapy and social rehabilitation lies ahead, and Canada, as one of the united nations, is called upon to give them an opportunity to rise above this present useless, hopeless existence and build a new life with freedom and dignity, and to take their place amongst the nations that want them.
We owe it to their relatives here. They are Canadians and they feel a responsibility to their own blood and kin overseas. If we give them the chance to help their own, the new Canadians will appreciate that far more from the government than we shall a tax reduction if the house can believe that. This thing is vital to them; they feel that they
The Address-Mr. Croll

are saving lives. As years pass, the memory of the generous humane act increases rather than fades. Offspring grow up and the family circle will never forget the generous act of the government.
Let us not worry about the inconvenience to these people; they are asking for it. They are not concerned with housing shortages. They only know the human problems involved and they seek permission to do everything they can to help.
If we do what I suggest, people will appreciate that we are seized with the urgency of the present problem, and it is an urgent one, as I have indicated. When Canada was refused permission to go before the "Big Four" powers the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) talked of the drying up of the wells of chivalry. Let us not dry up the wells of compassion. Every human instinct within us cries out for these people. Today the narrow gates of Canada are almost as hard to pass through as St. Peter's gates, and to the homeless of Europe they are the pearly gates on earth.


Mr. R. R. KNIGHT (Saskatoon City):: In speaking in this debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne I wish to bring before the house a subject of great importance to my home city of Saskatoon, to the province of Saskatchewan and to the nation of Canada. I had expected that we might have an opportunity to have a full debate on this subject, but the likelihood of that is now small. The subject to which I refer is the use of the port of Churchill and the Hudson bay railroad, and I propose to make of it, if a colourless, at least a cautious and a careful analysis.
On October 15, 1945, this subject was debated in the house on a motion moved by my colleague, the hon. member for Churchill (Mr. Moore), -who had asked for the encouragement by this government of the fullest use of the harbour facilities and the railroad. The house divided on the motion and hon. members will remember that it carried by a vote of 105 to 24. It would appear that the people of this country, as represented in this House of Commons, favour the idea of giving this route an opportunity to prove itself, something which up to the present it has not had. Proof of its feasibility can be furnished only by its use at full capacity over a period, and I hope that the few remarks which I shall now make will carry in them the impact of that single idea, for I shall not attempt to foresee in prospect the possibilities of the route. That might be interpreted as wishful thinking. Nor shall I attempt to give its history, 
interesting and romantic as that may be; for that can be obtained from the record of the 1945 debates, as can the statistical record of its operation. I shall endeavour to restrain the exaggeration of enthusiasm, and try to show clearly and precisely why and how in this year of 1947 a proper test of the whole project may be made.
First, it is the wish of the people of this country that such a test be made. I have already spoken of the expression of that wish in this House of Commons by the representatives of the people. But what of the people themselves? Rightly or wrongly, many western people believe that this route has been deliberately sabotaged by some of those whose interests it contravenes. They have upon occasion expressed themselves strongly in that regard. This government should note that the farmers in the recent farm strike in the west had some opinions to express about the Hudson bay route.
I hold in my hand a booklet entitled "Farmers' Action Program of Alberta Farmers' Union and United Farmers' of Canada", and on page 6, which has to do with a discussion on freight rates, I read this;
An equitable adjustment must be made in the grossly unfair freight rate structure which discriminates in freight charges against prairie farmers exporting and importing goods an all lines of railway, including the Hudson Bay railway.
On page 15, under the heading "Hudson Bay -Churchill railway", we find a strongly worded plea for this route from this organization, with a recommendation that a committee of their number be empowered to carry out an investigation to discover if there is any valid reason why the route should not be used. There are out there -many farmers who are interested in this question, and their tempers are becoming somewhat short and somewhat worn by reason of what they consider unwarrantable delays. Here is a resolution passed by the December 1946 convention of the United Farmers of Canada, Saskatchewan section:
Therefore be it resolved that the dominion government forthwith -appoint a royal commission of inquiry to investigate all matters pertaining to the operation of the Hudson Bay railway and the port at Churchill, and that a member of the Hudson Bay Route Association be appointed on the said commission.
So my first point has been to attempt to show that there is a demand for Churchill to have its chance. I shall adorn this part of my argument- by quoting the words of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) whom

The Address-Mr. Knight
I am glad to see in his seat. They will be found recorded as quoted in Hansard of October 15, 1945, at page 1099. He said:
The policy of the government in the matter of Churchill is to facilitate the use of this port, in every way possible.
That would appear to make it unanimous.
This route is a matter of national concern. It is important that this outlet to the world should be available as a means of export and import, even if at the moment it can handle only a mere drop in the bucket of the total wheat export; for that is all that it can do. In spite of some statements to the contrary, it can by no means be considered as an important rival to any other port in Canada; for the amount of grain that it is capable of handling at present is very small in terms of the total export of wheat from this country. The investment of the nation in this railway and port must be preserved.
Much attention has been given to the military significance of the north. I see that at the moment there are 600 armed personnel, including 100 Americans, at Churchill. That is from a dispatch by the Canadian Press of February 12. During the war, emphasis was on Fort Churchill rather than on Port Churchill. I personally would rather see the development of the north on a civilian basis, and I wish to be very clear here that I am not asking for any military development of the north. I would rather see the development of those industries of peace which will one day centre upon that region; such industries as the export of white poplar, the value of which is becoming more and more recognized; the development of mining, the development of a tourist industry, the development perhaps of the oil industry, based upon the prolific white whale; perhaps the establishment even of a reindeer herd. I forget I had promised to keep my feet upon the ground. However, the point I was trying to make is that, if defence is a consideration, then Churchill becomes a place of considerable importance.
Churchill is in the Musk-Ox area; that is, the eastern Canadian arctic. It is the only railhead with continental communications, the only tide-water port with oceanic communications, and also, of course, an air base. I would point out the vulnerability of our single-track trans-continental railways, the vulnerability of the Hudson Bay railway itself. It seems to me that from the military point of view it behooves the Canadian government, and the British government also, to prove once and for all this Hudson bay route, because the fate of a force based upon
Churchill might some day depend upon such knowledge. I presume that we shall preserve at least a part of the Canadian navy we used during the war. The navy will have to manoeuvre somewhere and i suggest that it might very well manoeuvre some time in the waters of the Hudson bay itself. By so doing, it would prove once and for all what the ice and weather conditions on that route are, and this information and knowledge could afterwards be used for commercial and personal purposes.
This is a national question too, in that the proving of the route would open up possibilities of interprovincial trade. I hope there are some of my hon. friends of the maritime provinces listening to what I have to say, because the maritime provinces, rather than setting their face against the whole project, might well consider these possibilities. The prairie provinces could ship to Charlottetown great quantities of feed grain, upon which there could be based a great live stock industry and bacon industry. Nova Scotia lumber companies could export wood pulp through Hudson bay, and were the freight rates equitable and the water route proven, such projects would have a chance to develop. Far eastern and middle western Canada would be brought together as never before, and that is surely desirable from the national viewpoint.
I now come to the recent and current history of the bay route. Let us review what has taken place since the debate in this house in October, 1945. Hon. gentlemen who took part in that debate will remember talk of the setting up of a committee appointed by the governments of the three prairie provinces. I am glad to be able to inform the house that such a committee was formed in July, 1946. It consists of the minister of mines and resources of Manitoba, the minister of railways of Alberta, the minister of cooperation of Saskatchewan, together with two members of the Hudson Bay Route Association. Through this committee the efforts of the provincial governments can be coordinated with those of the federal government in making the most efficient use of the port. This committee in turn set up a continuing technical committee to assemble information and to study the whole question of the use of the port. This committee of economists from the three provinces met in October, 1946, in Winnipeg and subsequently in Regina in November, 1946, and in January, 1947. The committee did, and is doing, valuable work, investigating such matters as the possible length of the shipping season, navigation aids, operation and administration of the Hudson

The Address-Mr. Knight
Bay railway, possibilities for the shipment of certain, commodities through Churchill, among others wheat, coal and poplar wood. All this, as well as research into other matters relevant to the whole question, is being done, and I am indebted to some of the findings of this particular committee for some of the facts which I shall produce later in this talk.
As to the actual use of the railroad and port since the debate in the House of Commons in 1945, in that season there were shipped from the port approximately 3,000,000 bushels of wheat, of which 2,000,000 bushels had been in storage at Churchill all during the war and which were in perfect condition after all that time. Import of commodities was very small, only some forty tons, made up in part of curling stones, Scotch whiskey, earthenware and some china from Britain destined for prairie points. These amounts were inadequate to furnish proof of anything except that shipment by the route is physically possible, and that, all other things being equal, such shipments would bring advantages to shipper and receiver alike.
I shall only briefly review the physical setup at Churchill. That is a matter of record. The port facilities as at present would allow the unloading and loading of about forty-five ships during the effective season. When I say unloading and loading I put the emphasis on the export of grain rather than on imports, because the situation is such that too great an import would interfere with the export business. Six or seven ships can be in the harbour at the same time and three can be loaded simultaneously. The loading of a ship a day is quite possible under the best conditions, but the average would be a day and a half. The capacity of a ship is, on the average, 325,000 bushels and storage capacity of the elevator at Churchill is 2,500,000 bushels.
With regard to the railway, this Hudson Bay railway is the property of the people of Canada. Its operation is in the hands of the Canadian National railway under a general manager.
The effective practicable capacity of the Hudson Bay railway in the navigation season is about 150 cars of wheat a day. I think that is fairly conservative. It could be increased, but I wrant to give the picture exactly as it is. The distance from The Pas to Churchill is 510 miles over an excellent roadbed. I am informed that there is none better in Canada from the point of view of handling freight. This roadbed is furnished with eighty-five pound steel. An old railroader who travelled that line for years told me that it was quite possible to haul the wheat to Churchill, unload

it, and have the cars back at The Pas inside of four days; and a car of cattle could reach the port within the thirty-six hour limit after which one must, by law, feed and water live stock in transit.
So we have a good port. We have modern elevator equipment with large storage capacity. We have a working railroad. Now let us look for a moment at the things which militate against the fullest use of these facilities.
In speaking of these difficulties, I am speaking of things as they are in relation to my proposal that the port be used' to its maximum extent this present year of 1947. There is, first, the handicap of its geographical position 

and, contingent upon that, its climate-and the brevity of the shipping season. There are three seasons. First, there is the effective shipping season of the ships' masters-that is to say, the season in which they are willing to come in there with their ships-and that lasts from sixty to sixty-five days. In the second place, there is the maximum insurance season, in which marine insurance can be obtained; and of course one has to obtain that to make operations anything like practical. That date is from August 5 to October 15. The third season is the natural one, which is considerably longer than the other two and is of a duration of three months upward.
The first of these-that is to say, the effective shipping season-can and must be lengthened if the port is to be a success; and I claim that we already have in our possession scientific discoveries by the use of which it will be so lengthened.


Lionel Chevrier: If the hon. gentleman will permit an interruption, will he tell us just what those scientific developments are which could be used to increase the period of navigation at the port of Churchill?


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: If the minister does not mind, I shall develop that answer in the course of my remarks; or, if he prefers, I can give the answer now.


Lionel Chevrier: I did not mean to interrupt the hon. gentleman in his speech, and I am quite willing that he should proceed.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: The next drawback, and a direct result of the first, is the high marine insurance rate. About this we can do little or nothing except one thing, and that is to demonstrate the feasibility of the route by its use to capacity over at least one season; and I would ask hon. members to note that phrase "by its use to capacity over at least one season". Insurance is an important consideration, for it determines the maximum limits of the season ships may use, the cost of ocean

The Address-Mr. Knight
freight borne by shippers, the cost of imports laid down, at Churchill, and in general the profits or the savings of operating the route. The trend of the insurance rates over the years has been downwards, accompanied by some extension of the limits of the season. The number of ships since 1931 has not provided an adequate actuarial basis for arriving at a lower rate. Full use of the port for one season would provide that. The imperial shipping committee in its report of July 19, 1939, stated:
Except in the matter of salvage it is the view of the committee that the Hudson bay route need not be considered as more risky than the St. Lawrence.
And the report added:
... in consultation with our chairman, the joint Hull committee . . . have agreed that if some twenty cargoes in all are brought away from Churchill in 1939 and no serious loss occurs, they will be prepared to give favourable consideration to the question of recommending a further reduction in 1940 from the rates of premium chargeable in 1939."
But, as hon. members will remember, in 1940 we were engaged in a still more serious matter, and the ships en route to Churchill were diverted in another direction. It is, however, reasonable to assume that the principle of the statement which I have just read still applies, and will have weight if twenty or more ships enter the bay in 1947, which is the thing for which I am pleading in this particular address.
The fact that the route never did have a proper test to capacity has left many problems unsolved, and has prevented the accumulation of accurate data for future guidance. The equipment at the port necessary for efficient operation was not complete until 1936, and during the war years the whole plans for operating the port for the exporting of grain were shelved. Then came the operations of 1946 which I have described as being too puny a test upon which to base any reasoned judgment.
The rail freight rates at which wheat will be hauled to Churchill has a distinct bearing on this whole question. Should wheat coming down the Canadian National railway on a long-haul rate be saddled with a heavier rate when it reaches The Pas? We must have an extension of the import-export rate to The Pas-Churchill track. Is the full-time salary of a general manager all charged against the operations of the Hudson Bay railroad? If it is, should it be? Is the Canadian National railway encouraging or discouraging the use of the Hudson Bay railroad? It is because the farmers of western Canada do not know the answers to such questions that the united
farmers of Canada, Saskatchewan section, asked by resolution that a royal commission be set up to find the answers.


Lionel Chevrier: If the hnn gentleman will permit an interruption, the -answers to these questions can be obtained when the committee on railways and shipping is sitting. I do not -want to interrupt the hon. gentleman, but surely he must know that such information can be obtained from that committee.


Major James William Coldwell: The hon. member has a right to make his speech.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: There are some other points about operations at the bay which such a commission might look into, or which might be revealed by the use to full capacity which I advocate. I have picked these at random, and they are not necessarily in the order of importance. Is there anyone whose job it is to canvass traffic for this road? Are the necessary minor repairs at the port being made? Did the Americans use or remove or destroy any equipment, and on what terms? If so, has such equipment been replaced? What are the labour conditions at the port? Are the stevedores efficient? Are the living conditions in bunkhouses adequate? Is there proper and convenient sanitary accommodation at the dock itself? I would draw the minister's attention to the last phrase, "at the dock itself."


Lionel Chevrier: In reply, I would say to the hon. gentleman that the information he has requested can be obtained from the committee on railways and shipping.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I shall make up my mind, Mr. Speaker, not to ask any more questions of the minister.
Are the operators, including the key men imported from Montreal, enthusiastic about the success of Churchill? Personally, if I may say so, I do not see why the minister should be on the defensive in regard to this whole question.


Lionel Chevrier: I am not on the
defensive; I am simply indicating to the hon. gentleman where he can obtain the information.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Thank you.


Mr. HEON:: Apparently the minister is on the offensive.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Well, he is not so offensive after all. What tests have been made of the gyro compass, of radar, of loran-long-range navigation aids? Perhaps in some respects mention of those will answer the question the minister asked me some time ago. What
The Address-Mr. Knight

tests of these have been made in their application to the climatic conditions in the strait? Has the government obtained from the Americans, who made continual air surveys during the war, the facts about the freezing of the waters of the bay proper, facts which have been continually in dispute? These are some of the questions for which a royal commission might obtain the answers, but I submit that, to be correct, such answers must be based on only the actual, full capacity of the route for a full season. Accompanying this test should be a beginning of the civilian opening of the north. I think this point is important, because it would result in a permanent and interested population at Churchill from which the necessary trained and acclimatized personnel for the operation of the port and railway could be drawn.
My plea is that this year we should ship a minimum of 15,000,000 bushels of grain by the Hudson bay route. This figure is based upon careful and cautious calculation, and is chosen for several reasons. That amount of shipping would keep the facilities reasonably busy throughout the season, thus reducing the overhead which has plagued what up to the present have been only token shipments. In the second place, with that amount of exports, an amount of imports in excess of those handled in any other year, that is in excess of 2,500 tons, could still -be brought in and handled with the present wharfage and shed facilities, and without conflicting with export operations. Third, the movement of 10,000,000 bushels would cover the operating and maintenance deficits of the elevator and port, and anything over that quantity should show a profit. Such a greater movement would also wipe out the deficit on the railway. The trade services division of Saskatchewan estimates that on a movement of 16,000,000 bushels, the saving to the dominion government, in wiping out the deficit on operations of the Hudson Bay railway, would be close to $500,000.
Under section 2(a) of the Canada-United Kingdom wheat agreement of July, 1946, wheat can be picked up at Vancouver, the lakehead, Montreal or Churchill. The savings on freight from shipping through Churchill as to rail traffic would accrue to the Canadian wheat board, and such savings as might be made on the ocean freight would accrue to British shipping. The closest and most friendly cooperation between the various governments and agencies concerned will be necessary if this test is to be carried out. The technical committee set up, while invaluable in the matter of research, has no authority of itself. I hope that the interprovincial com-

mittee will press the dominion government in the matter, and that the latter will carry out its pledge to give every assistance.
I should like to underline one or two things I believe the dominion government should do. Through its Minister of Trade and Commerce and its Minister of Transport, it can render vital assistance. It can give a directive to the wheat board in regard to assembling the right quantities of wheat in the right places. It can see to it that the facilities of port and railroad are in good repair and up to date. It can ensure the safety of navigation by special precautions based on a study of navigation aids and the installation of high frequency to replace low frequency direction-finding stations. It can see to it that the radar used is the modern type, superseding the older type with which there was some difficulty in floating icefields. Then, too, only with the assistance of the wheat board can this scheme be possible; for one great problem will be the finding and the placing in strategic positions of the necessary wheat. The movement of wheat within the freight rate areas preferential to Churchill if necessary should be restricted in order to ensure that on August 1, 1947, sufficient wheat will be in that area to provide a fair test; and that amount, I suggest, is a minimum of 15,000,000 bushels.
The reluctance of the wheat board to move wheat to a location where it will be what the grain trade calls "out of position" is understandable. I would urge the fullest use of the government storage elevator at Saskatoon as a base for the supply of wheat for Churchill. Wheat stored there would be in position, no matter by what route it was shipped to the sea. This elevator has a capacity of 5,500,000 bushels, making the combined capacity of that elevator and the Churchill elevator some 8,000,000 bushels; and I understand that Mr. Mclvor has given at least a verbal assurance that the Churchill elevator will be filled in good time.
So much for what the dominion government can do. We hope, too, for the cooperation of wholesale and retail business people of the prairies, cooperatives and other marketing agencies, in arranging for imports. The other day I heard of an order for two diesel engines from Britain which are to come through the bay. We hope the people of the. maritimes will -wake up to the possibilities of trade with Churchill and realize that they can send us their woollen goods, the product* of their industries, send us their coal as ballast. If there were an elevator at Charlottetown to receive feed grain from Churchill, the whole live stock and poultry industry of the

The Address-Mr. LaCroix
maritime provinces might be revitalized. Maritime shipping would not be hurt and might be helped by trade with Churchill.
I now come to the question of the finding of the ships. Under the British wheat, agreement our wheat will be hauled out in British bottoms. So we must interest the British government itself, the shipping agencies and companies, the cooperatives and export groups on the other side of the Atlantic. I said before, we had never had anyone vitally interested in finding business for the Hudson bay route. That situation is now to be changed. Mr. Graham Spry has been appointed as commercial representative of my province in London, where he has just arrived; and I think no one better qualified for that position could have been found. He will use his broad experience of affairs and his contacts within government circles in Britain to promote the trade upon which the development of the Hudson bay route depends; and Manitoba and Alberta, no less than Saskatchewan, will look forward with confidence to the success of his efforts.


Mr. MacNICOL:: May I ask the hon. gentleman if he has any figures to support what, to my mind, is his good argument, as to the amount of cattle that could be moved from the prairies through Churchill? On former occasions they did ship large numbers of cattle to the old country through that port.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I dealt with the question of cattle.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Did you give the number? I did not hear that.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: No, I have no idea what the possible export might be, but the figure would be easily obtainable.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I appeal to the government and to all parties in this house for support for this concrete objective for 1947. Let me summarize some of the arguments in its favour.
1.	The movement of 15,000,000 bushels of wheat will provide a proper test, and is within the present capacity of the railway and port.
2.	We are wasting the money of the Canadian taxpayers by not giving the route this test.
3.	The small volume advocated will not compete seriously with the interests of any other port.
4.	Movement in the quantity recommended would eliminate deficits and mean savings for
(a)	the Canadian government; (b) the wheat board and (c) British shippers.
5.	The use of thirty to forty-five ships will provide a basis for reduction of insurance rates.
6.	A full test of the port would reveal if thpre i? seed for extension of facilities or of navigation aids at the port and will add to our knowledge of radar and long-range navigation.
7.	It is essential that the route be tested on account of the strategic importance of northern Canada.
For these and the other reasons mentioned previously I ask for what I think may be characterized as a cautious and reasonable test for the Hudson bay route in this coming summer and autumn of 1947.
Mr. WILFRID LaCROIX (Quebec-Mont-morency):	Mr. Speaker, since reference is
made in the speech from the throne to the relations between the dominion and the provinces, allow me to present my views which are shared by the majority of wage-earners in this country.
Everyone admits that we are now witnessing a tremendous struggle between, on the one hand, the wage-earners who wish to be relieved as soon as possible of the heavy burden of income tax deductions from their weekly or monthly pay-cheques and, on the other hand, certain wealthy people from Toronto and Montreal, supported by all Tory newspapers in the country, among others the Montreal Gazelle, who do not wish to pay their share of income tax to meet the consequences of a war policy which they have themselves enthusiastically endorsed and the cost of which has been exorbitant to the nation.
Those same wealthy fellows, most of whom live in Toronto and Montreal, have rallied around Drew and Duplessis, in order to ensure the failure of the dominion-provincial conference and, in the event of their death, spare their estates from difficulties with the income tax division, should the dominion authorities be entitled to investigate what they actually leave, as compared with the amount they have paid in income tax for the past seven years.


Gordon Graydon: The common people are with Duplessis and Drew.
Mr. LaCROIX: That is what you say. Mr. Duplessis has stated in the Quebec legislature that the levying of income tax from a dead man is unfair, since he is no more in a position to defend himself. My answer to Mr. Duplessis is that some people have defended themselves so well during their lifetime by piling up colossal fortunes through non-payment of taxes-and this to the detri-
The Address-Mr. LaCroix

ment of wage-earners who hare to make up the difference-that no one need defend them after their death.
You know as well as I do. Mr. Speaker, that everyone admits today that certain wealthy people convert their holdings into beaner securities which they afterwards place in a bank safety deposit vault in the name of some member of the family, or of any other person, while carefully keeping the key themselves, these same bond-holders putting into their own vaults only securities of little value, which their estates will use as a basis when filing their returns to the provincial government.
Now, since only the safety vault of the deceased is put under seal at the time of his death, the family takes possession of the other vault containing bearer bonds and quite frequently divides a huge fortune accumulated during the previous ten years, either on the black market, or in some other way, and on which the deceased has paid little income tax, if any, thus committing a glaring injustice to the wage-earner whose income tax is deducted at the source.
It is also admitted that some Montreal millionaires rent safety vaults in Ontario banks in the name of one member of the family, or of some other trusted person, and that some wealthy individuals from Toronto are doing the same in Montreal; all this in order to avoid the filing of too high a return on succession duties to their respective provinces, and especially so as to prevent the dominion from recovering the income tax which has not been paid for seven or eight years.
Some may object and say that this is the only way of subscribing to election funds or of bequeathing what is called "conscience money" to religious or charitable institutions without interference from the income tax division, but I regard such a practice as a robbery whose victims are the wage-earners who must pay the difference. Did not Christ say: "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's"?
I am certainly in favour of having all moneys collected as succession duties remitted to the provinces, but I believe that the onlyway to arrive at a true valuation of an estate is to leave to the federal government the right to collect such duties, because the dominion government has control over our whole banking system and may also use its facilities for international relations to deal with estates having safety deposit boxes in foreign countries. That, however, is beyond

the power of Quebec or Ontario whose control over the banks does not extend outside their respective territories.
Those monopolizers are so anxious to avoid paying the state its due, which in their case represents a fortune, that, rather than be caught, they would sooner sacrifice their bearer interests and dividends. I am sure that our large public utilities and manufacturing companies know what I mean, and so does the government on whose bonds the unclipped coupons are accumulating.
That explains why so little is collected in succession duties by the provincial government in the Montreal district where so many- enormous fortunes are concentrated. Should the task of collecting these duties be left to the dominion government it would mean a much larger revenue, and the province -would then be in a position to help more substantially our school boards and municipalities for whose welfare the province is directly responsible, not to mention the setting up of a public works programme as a means of alleviating unemployment.
The hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) himself has said, and I am sure he will confirm my assertion, that if the federal government had the right to legislate in the matter it would be in a position to recover millions of dollars legally owing to the state, thereby-reducing in like proportion taxes deducted at the source from the wage-earner's pay envelope. This would undoubtedly- allow for an important reduction in the tax rates of the wage earners under the $3,000 bracket from whom, as we all know, the largest proportion of income tax is collected by the federal government.
There are cases where a man's death offers the only opportunity- to ascertain whether or not he has paid his income tax. In the United States as well as in Great Britain the control over both income tax and succession duties rests with the central government. It is devised as a means of gradually eliminating the taxes paid by the wage-earners, who form the bulk of the population. When a man dies in those two countries the seals are affixed to any strong-box he may have in his home. This also is intended to reduce the amounts paid to the state by the small wage-earner. The province of Quebec has no income tax and, if it had, the federal government would no doubt be invited to do the collecting. I am of the opinion that in thus keeping the federal government away from this field a serious injustice is done to the wage-earner

The Address-Mr. LaCroix
As to the failure of the dominion-provincial conference, you may rest assured, Mr. Speaker, that the real responsibility rests with some Toronto and Montreal millionaires who, worried over their own interests, have brought pressure to bear upon Drew and Duplessis in order that they may do their utmost to impede the conclusion of any arrangement so long as the word "succession" appears on the agenda of the conference. That explains why Duplessis offered no alternative, but simply shut the door with a bang and returned home.
You know as well as I do, sir, that the rich capitalist or the man operating a business of his own is in a far better position than anyone else to avoid taxation, a practice which I regard as criminal since the difference must be borne by that poor sucker, the wage-earner. Only an equitable distribution of taxes levied to pay the tremendous cost of the last war will prevent the spread of communistic ideology. As you well know, communism is taking full advantage of the unfair distribution of our national wealth to prey upon the minds of our working people in the hope of finding them willing and ready to accept this new way of life.
The suppression of income tax would help the *wage-earner in the lower income brackets to improve his family budget, thereby eliminating the misery which is, in many cases, the most potent and virulent microbe of communistic disease, the contagion of which wre all want to avoid in the interests of our economic stability.
Some taxpayers make honest statements of their income. However, when a person who has paid practically no income tax leaves several thousand dollars upon his death, the greater part of which was accumulated during the past ten years or so, surely that money did not fall into his lap of its own accord.
I think it is unfair for a family to divide among themselves a fortune which was accumulated out of the income tax paid by the majority of wage-earners. You may rest assured, sir, that the supporters of Duplessis and Drew prefer making important subscriptions to the election fund to paying heavy amounts accruing from their estates. There are those who will no doubt argue that certain Liberals think otherwise, but it does not matter since it is not the first time I have held a different point of view.
Mr. Speaker, members of the Liberal party enjoy freedom of thought, which is the best means of assuring the party's evolution. However, this is the antithesis of the attitude within the Duplessis party, where each and
every member is compelled to "follow the Fuehrer". Have you ever found such men as Cardin or Power in the Duplessis party? You may seek all you like, but, "It will avail ye nothing". The wage-earners of Quebec, that is the majority of the people, should not be compelled to assume the cost of a war which they did not want and which I certainly did not want either. Why should we let Toronto and Montreal millionaires enjoy a fortune, part of which is derived from the income tax paid by the common people to cover those war expenses?
People in Quebec who own small fortunes have nothing to fear, because, as everyone knows, there are no succession duties, or practically none, on estates of less than S20.000. So, if in the future our Quebec farmers are compelled to pay income tax it will be as a result of the present attitude of Tories like Duplessis and Drew. Again, if Quebec cannot attain social security and obtain an old age pension payable at sixty-five years of age or under, the blame should be laid on Duplessis and Drew, who have compelled the wage-earners to pay these taxes alone, or almost alone. They cannot continue to do so without decreasing the purchasing power of the people and bringing about a period of unemployment more acute than that of 1931.
It seems to me that Liberalism has always been prompted by the interests of the people. It should understand, therefore, that in both the provincial and dominion fields no income tax is fair unless it is on a common basis with succession duties because, if there are honest people, there are also scoundrels and Scrooges. Moreover, no government will be able to control the situation unless it has the power of enacting laws to that effect.
I am in favour of autonomy, but not to the point of forcing wage-earners to pay taxes for those who do not. Income derived from succession duties should remain the property of the province of Quebec, but it is essential that the dominion be allowed to legislate in that field since income tax is collected by the federal government. Even though provincial legislatures have the same right as the dominion to tax income, we must realize that income tax is now a federal responsibility and that it will remain so for some time to come. Wage-earners should, therefore, be granted relief from taxation. Taxes will decrease inasmuch as the dominion government is able to recover its legitimate dues. Furthermore, Ottawa would then be in a better position to expand social security plans on behalf of farm, industrial and forest workers who are in dire
The Address-Mr. LaCroix

need of such help when old age robs them of the physical ability to earn a living for themselves and their families.
I know that some large newspaper owners hold other views on the matter and that I am coming up against vested interests; but I do not mind at all; I am used to it.
Invisible forces are at work even here, in Ottawa. Drop the succession duties item from the order paper, and you will see Messrs. Duplessis and Drew come to terms with the dominion. Their declarations about autonomy will vanish as if by magic, since they will no longer have the support of high finance which has always been the backbone of Toryism.
The same men who claimed that the government never spent enough money on war are now trying by all the means at their disposal to avoid paying for it.
I certainly do not approve all the government's policies, as my votes in the past have shown, but when the federal authorities are in the right, one should have the courage to congratulate and support them.
I urge my compatriots who are each week deprived of part of the pay which they so urgently require to provide for their families' vital needs to join forces with the Liberal party whose loyal stand behind our great working classes should encourage them to act. Let them oust Duplessis and his gang, who are using autonomy as a screen to hide the plutocratic selfishness of the few.
The Tories, even in this very house in Ottawa, are 100 per cent behind Duplessis and Drew on this succession duty business. I therefore offer this truth as a conclusion, Mr. Speaker: Tory in Ottawa, Tory in Toronto, and Tory in Quebec; they are but one and the same thing.



MAIN ESTIMATES, 1947-4S

[Stage Direction]
A message from His Excellency the Governor General transmitting estimates for the financial year ending March 31, 1948, was presented by Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance) and read by Mr. Speaker to the house.
Douglas Charles Abbott: That notwithstanding standing order 57 this house will resolve itself on Wednesday next into committee to consider of supply to be granted to His Majesty.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Douglas Charles Abbott: That His Excellency's message and the estimates be referred to the committee of supply.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
At six o'clock the house took recess.

After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. J. W. MacNaught for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Bracken, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Coldwell.
Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):: Mr. Speaker, coming from a large financial and industrial centre such as the Toronto district, I wish to say something tonight regarding the motion which is before the chair. This is one of the few opportunities afforded a private member to bring before the house and the country some constructive suggestions, not by way of criticism of the government, because, after all, the function of the opposition is to try to aid the government as far as possible, so long as it is the government of the day and has the confidence of the people.
We have one of the largest taxpaying districts in all Canada. I may say that twenty-nine per cent of the postal receipts come from that district and we pay $13,000,000 towards the post office each year. Unfortunately, however, for the first time since confederation we are without cabinet representation. Indeed, we have not had in the cabinet a representative from the Toronto district since 1935, when the Bennett administration was defeated. However, we are not suffering greatly in any way as a consequence because there are a couple of very good members on the other side representing our city and we all get along very well together.
If you look around you at home and abroad today, Mr. Speaker, you will find only a storm-tossed world. That is natural after such a vast conflict as we have gone through. It was only to be expected that after such a war there would be a grave dislocation of business and that things would be upset generally. We as a country, however, were singularly fortunate, because we were not invaded during that war, although we came close to it.
I submit, sir, that the Canadian people today are expecting some relief from the intolerable conditions that exist. I admit that the government has a very hard task before it, saddled as it is with all the expenditures which a government must face after such a terrible war. Nevertheless, there are certain features of the situation that do not appeal

The Address-Mr. Church
to the businessman. For one thing, the businessman is complaining of the overgovernment and overtaxation we have in Canada today, dominion, provincial and municipal. Each of these agencies is announcing extra burdens for the people to bear.
It is unfortunate that we have not seen in Canada some of the reforms that I for one have been advocating for some considerable time now, reforms which we should have had years ago. In 1927 I introduced into the house the question of parliamentary reform such as was instituted in England many years ago. We should have also constitutional reform, cabinet reform and law reform. All these reforms have been brought about in the old land.
In the course of the debate in 1927 the then minister of justice, an able man, said that he would see that the maritimes were given a royal commission to investigate their grievances concerning many matters that were brought to light at that time, and that was done. As to constitutional reform, I submit that the time has come when we should have something of-that sort in this country. It is long overdue. In fact, it was due at the time the wrar broke out. The time is ripe also for cabinet reform and law reform along the lines indicated in this house.
In my opinion there has been altogether too much collecting of funds from the public for various purposes. Every day the ordinary businessman receives half a dozen letters from various agencies demanding subscriptions to one undertaking or another, and with the heavy taxes that we already have to bear, federal, provincial and municipal, the people cannot stand this extra burden. I know that members of the House of Commons receive such letters because I have seen some of them opening their mail, and every morning I notice half a dozen letters from various people seeking relief or money or assistance for one reason or another.
Taxation being what it is, there should be some central government agency to take care of all these demands. There was a government agency that operated under what was known as the War Charities Act, the purpose of which was to regulate all such appeals. Something of this sort is needed because there are altogether too many demands on the public today.
We have requests coming also through radio propaganda, but the people are not told the truth about public affairs. Then you have the Gallup poll. It seems to me it is all Gallup and no poll. I believe there was a racehorse known by that name that ran at a racetrack. We on this side of the house have not the public ear, although we polled a large
vote at the last election. I suggest that the government should direct all these activities. As regards the Gallup poll, may1 ask who conducts the poll? Has anyone in this chamber a vote? I doubt very much whether the leader of the house tonight has a vote in the poll. I do not know whether he bets on racehorses. I bet on a horse Gallup once myself and it was the lamest duck you every saw. It was like the Gallup poll, which has so much to say about the government, about our hon. friends to the left and others.
I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that the Canadian people today are demanding relief from the intolerable control system which we have in Canada. We are overgoverned and overtaxed, and we find now a slowing dowTn of the process of reconversion from a war to a peace economy. The people were expecting much more satisfactory progress in reconversion than we have had, and, dear knows, they are entitled to it. The Canadian people are long-suffering, but there is a limit to their patience, and that limit has been reached. I do not say that by way of criticism of this government, because I believe the people are criticizing all governments. The fact is, however, that mistakes have been made in the process of reconversion and the people are losing confidence in all governments. They are being called upon to pay too many taxes.
The people are not acquainted with the facts. I think there is too much soothing S3rrup being served up for the comfort and happiness of the people. There is no sacrifice that Canadians are not prepared to make if it can be shown that they are in the public interest. I believe our people are willing to face the facts, if only they know what the facts really are. But they want to be told the truth. They will no longer be treated as they have been. They want to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about what is going on, not only here but throughout the country, in connection with all these matters for which they are being taxed. They want to know how our public business is being conducted, and they want to know the official truth. They want to have something besides propaganda.	.
After all is said and done, who is paying for the great war and for the reconstruction days after it? The public back in the constituencies are. Some of them have already contributed blood and treasure which is uncountable. It is the ordinary man back home in the country who pays, and he is looking for a better deal from everybody.
The Address-Mr. Church

There are some truths in connection with public affairs which I should like to mention. As I have always said, I have always believed in the maxim that if you tell the people the truth and trust them, they will trust you. Never be afraid to tell the public that you have made a mistake, because the public back in the constituencies do not expect their leaders to be gods. I would commend that truth to some of the younger members who have come into the house and have done very well.
As I was saying the other night at a commencement in a large collegiate institute, some of the graduates will sooner or later be treading the thorny path of public life; they should pay strict attention to what their constituents say, and nothing that anybody says should prevent them from doing what they themselves think is right. After all is said and done, the greatest crime in history was committed by one who thought he was doing what was right, and had public support for it, namely, Pontius Pilate. It is not cleverness which is lacking in this house and in the constituencies, or in our leaders in all countries; it is an independence of character which is lacking in them. As the late Edmund Burke said when he laid down the duties and functions of a member of parliament to his constituents away back at the time of the American revolutionary war: to be a good member of parliament is not an easy task. He laid down the general principle that a member of parliament owes a duty not only to the constituency which he represents but to the country at large.
C-oming to the reconversion question, I have been very much dissatisfied with the way in which large and small business has been hamstrung. I admit that the control system is a very hard thing to get rid of, because once a controller, always a controller. He thinks he is indispensable. He thinks the country cannot get on without him, and he is over the whole civil service. Price control, unless unified with wage control, is no control at all and means inflation. Since the war closed, the board has been seeking to control almost every walk of life and almost every commodity over parliament's head and without any responsible action by a minister of the crown attempting to check or regulate it. The ministers never even see the speeches. These officials just issue them over the heads of the ministers. In answer to a question I asked of one minister as to whether he had any control over them, or did he see the proposed: measure, he said, no; he had just received general instructions about it. In that way these controllers have the advantage of the dead hand of the treasury because the treasury is more

or less inactive in that connection; and, when it exists, it is only an academic non-existence.
Since the war closed, the board has hamstrung almost every private business. If you go into a small retail store or go into a larger departmental store you will find that they are continually being asked by their customers, where and when are we going to get rid) of this system? It is a tragedy that nobody can conduct his business in the manner which he should be able to do, from the commercial aspect, because of the large number of information reports which he has to make from time to time, which is something which is giving a headache to nearly all those operating large and small businesses and to departmental managers in the big stores. I hope something will be done to eliminate this as soon as possible, because the board's actions threaten our system and Canada's prosperity in reconversion. Many of these officials who have charge of this control system have never been trained in trade or commerce. They almost have the dead hand of the treasury on all kinds of business.
Do not forget this: there is a great deal of material decay in Canada. Canada is going to face some hard times in the days to come. We have squandered our natural resources at a rapid pace. We have given our best asbestos away in the raw state to the United States, and other metals. Asbestos finds work there for 36,000 hands. The result is that a large number of young people who will graduate this spring from the universities of Canada have already decided to depart and go to the United States to find work at better pay and less taxes. I have opposed this in and out of the house from time to time. As I said away back on the first day we met here in this chamber in a similar debate, there is an insistent demand all over the country that the government should make some declaration of policy regarding control bodies and bureaucratic expenditures which are being made over the head of parliament. At the present time there is virtually no control. All kinds of bodies are spending a great deal of money over the head of parliament. Every principle for which the British nation struggled in the old land since the seventeenth century has been surrendered to the political caucuses. Parliament itself, which came into being to ensure that taxes shall be voted only by those who have to pay them has become the institution through which those who do not pay them impose them on others.
I wish to emphasize to the house that the powers of legislation, even older than the right of taxpayers to determine the national

The Address-Mr. Church
expenditures, have been surrendered and, if we are to continue this sort of thing, the power of parliament will be gone forever. Whole spheres of activity involving the livelihood of every man, woman and child in this country-have been removed trom the jurisdiction of the law and of parliament and reserved for the determination of tribunals, irresponsible, irremovable, governed by no control and subject to no appeal. I do object, now that the war is over, to the way that business is being conducted over the head of parliament. We are told that parliament is supreme. If parliament is supreme, why has it not now control over these outside bodies and their expenditures and in the result we shall only hold a postmortem as the money is spent.
Coming to my own province, the province of Ontario, I wish to say a word or two about it. I have always been in favour of the principle of confederation and the old Cornish battle cry of "each for all and all for each." I believe that what is good for one province is good for them all. Ontario and the province from which you come, Mr. Speaker, are the two industrial provinces and were contributing before the war about seventy-six per cent or seventy-eight per cent of the cash taxes of Canada. I might go on to say that I never believed in the Sirois report. I thought it was very unfair in many ways to the province from which I come. We in Ontario have a large number of members of parliament, but they do not seem to stand up for their province in the same way as do members from British Columbia, the maritimes and the prairies for their respective provinces. I hope there will be an improvement. I have spoken about the matter myself, and I hope we may have further assistance in seeing that our own great province gets a better and fairer deal. In my opinion, and I am sorry to have to say this, Ontario seems to be the forgotten province of confederation.
I now come to the question of income tax. Up to 1917 this belonged exclusively to the municipalities since confederation; it was collected in the municipalities where it was earned, and was used to relieve the burden on real estate. In 1917 the income tax was taken away from them by Ottawa. I opposed that at the time. We came here to meet the government about it, but they imposed the tax anyway. Then the province came along and imposed a provincial tax of one mill on the dollar. At that time Ottawa said that the tax would be imposed by the federal government for one year only, or until the war was over; they are now collecting the whole thing. What have the municipalities
left to relieve the burden on real estate? I do hope some better and fairer way of taxation handling this question will be found.
In regard to housing, I am sorry to say that this is an acute problem in our city. I have visited some of the homes of our soldiers, and I have found disgraceful conditions. In 1935, the federal administration, on my resolution in the house, appointed a committee on the matter of housing and reconstruction, which prepared a report as to what should be done. The government opposite, which came in after, in 1937, has done a good deal to help solve this difficulty, but much remains yet to be done. I supported an amendment to our report which would permit the banks to lend money on these houses at a low rate of interest. Over $90,000,000 has been spent in the Toronto district alone in connection with these houses, which have gone up to the north, south, east and west of our city. To serve them, existing light, power and transportation systems by our civic car system had to be extended, and a great deal of good work has been done in that connection. I hope that further efforts will be made, and that non-essential construction will not get the materials, but that priorities will be given for housing. I trust we may see a year of real progress in meeting the housing situation.
As I visit some of the institutions of this country, I find many returned soldiers in them. Only a short time ago I noticed lengthy articles in the Ontario newspapers about a poor soldier with no charge against him, being detained in the gaol at Orangeville because the magistrate had no other place to put him. He had been in the hospital there for six weeks; when he was put out, the counties of Duffevin and Grey quarreled as to who should pay for him. I have seen this sort of thing in the past, and I should think things would be different under our charter for soldiers. These men bore the burden and heat of the day; many of them are too poor to provide adequate accommodation for themselves and their families and now, after the services they rendered, we find them in this condition. The Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie) has hundreds of employees at 55 York street, Toronto. I believe his department should carry on a survey all over Canada so that, if the provinces and municipalities will not do what is necessary, something may be done to take these men away from such gaol institutions as I have mentioned and to find them a decent home with federal aid.
Recently the Canadian institute of mining and metallurgy met in Ottawa, and in attendance were delegates from all over Canada. The universities have turned out magnificent
The Address-Mr. Church

engineers to develop the mines and natural resources of this country. His Excellency the Governor General addressed that meeting and showed himself a statesman. He made a wonderful speech, in which he made several helpful, constructive suggestions in regard to the development of our natural resources, following his visit to the northwest territories. This afternoon I was glad to hear the government, through the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott), announce some concessions to the gold mining industry. I hope that this will be only a beginning, that these concessions will be extended to base metals and other types of mining, because, if ever there was a country where Providence had done so much and never man so little, it is Canada. I do hope that during May and June of this year the graduates of our universities will not have to go to the United States to look for jobs. This morning I met a young man whom I did not recognize at first; he is looking younger all the time. I knew him well at the university of Toronto, first as a student. I refer to the great Doctor Best, of Varsity, co-discoverer of insulin with Sir Frederick Banting. I remember when he and Sir Frederick Banting were associated in Toronto. At that time Doctor Banting had an office in London. He received an offer and was thinking of going to the United States. If he had done so, what would have happened to that great discovery they made? Doctor Best is one of the world's greatest scientists and a wonderful man who has brought health to thousands. He has the element of greatness, humility and usefulness like all great men.
When I speak of medicine I must say that the strides science has made have been phenomenal. Our expectation of life has been increased. Medicine is said to be the brightest gem in the crown of science; her achievements have been so impressive, so far-reaching as not merely to silence all criticism but also to arouse a noble enthusiasm and enlist in the cause of humanity a legion of recruits, missionaries of her gospel. If medicine has not mastered at least it has diminished pain and robbed it of its terrors. Plagues and pestilences have been stayed; a multitude of diseases- diphtheria, rabies, smallpox, typhus, yellow fever, Maltese fever, to name only a few- have been almost exterminated. Great scourge-ridden tracts of the earth's surface have been rendered habitable; food values have been understood; vaccines and anti-toxins have been discovered; antiseptic surgery has been so established as to open up new fields of remedial agency; ailments of the mind as well as of the body have been controlled and

relieved. This is an achievement to which no previous age in history can produce a parallel. Within a century the expectation of life in all civilized countries has been amazingly increased; in our own country by sixteen years; in Denmark by seventeen years, in parts of America by fifteen years. These are the facts. What is happening to science now, with the discovery of the atomic bomb? There were days when the church turned its back on the scientists and imprisoned them. Today, however, religion and science are marching hand in hand because today people are turning to religion more than ever before, largely because man does not know what to do with this new atomic invention he has discovered and science has come closer to religion at last.
In conclusion, I should like to add a few words on the subject of foreign affairs I dealt with last night. I believe we cannot get on without the imperial preference, which proved such a wonderful thing between the two wars. The Ottawa agreements increased the trade between Canada and Britain by forty-one per cent and between Britain and Canada by forty-three per cent, and we have had multilateral trade. Formerly it was known as most favoured nation treaties. We made these treaties with some thirty-two different countries between the two wars, but they brought us very little in the way of exports. What countries can afford an export market for Canadian goods? Upon exports we live. Markets are available with respect to many things, but the only great agricultural market left in the world for Canada is Great Britain. We acquired a preference in that market for wheat at six cents a bushel, which Sir Wilfrid Laurier once said he would give almost anything to obtain. It is equally true that the preference on apples, pears and so on meant the sale of a million barrels of these fruits from Nova Scotia in one year. What we lack is markets for our exports; and if anyone thinks we are going to find in the United States a market for either our agricultural products on any substantial scale, or for manufactured goods, I am afraid he will be disappointed. The only things they will be willing to take from us are the raw materials from which to manufacture finished products, as they have done previously.
I am much disturbed at the present state of the world. I do not like the terms of the loans made by the United States. In my opinion they are much more like the ruthless and vindictive demands of a victor made upon a vanquished foe than arrangements between allies. It must be apparent by this time that, had it not been for Britain alone, and with

The Address-Mr. Church
her holding out as she did, all would have been ended, and there would have been a complete collapse of civilization.
As I look around me today I am pleased to note that a great soldier has been made secretary of state for the United States. I refer to General Marshall, who has succeeded the other great head of that department, Secretary Byrnes, who had to retire because of illness. General Marshall did not have what is known as the tradition of American politics as horse trading, but the fact remains that they have given him this office. General Marshall brings to his task the qualities of a first-class soldier, and he has taken office at a crucial time in the history of the world. He has won for himself the high regard of those Britishers who were associated with him in the war. I believe the new secretary of state is a man of great culture and high intellectual attainments.
It is my belief, however, that sooner or later his country will become isolationist, because it has never had a foreign policy. They have fought four wars without having had a foreign policy. Two of them were fought in our generation against Germany; one against Spain and one against the Philippines. Then they took part in the first great war. Yet they have come down to the time of the last great war without having had a foreign policy.
Another important subject will be taken up next week in Moscow. I refer to the subject of the bases. The principle of the joint Anglo-American use of bases is now in full operation. But the precedent of long-term leases of bases from Newfoundland to British Guiana, under the fifty-destroyers agreement of 1940 contains the seeds of future conflict. That agreement, which confers 99-year leases on the United States, does not provide for the British use of these bases and apparently contains no release clause in any form. If bases are to be held jointly such arrangements should be made on terms of strict reciprocity. In- the present case, the use of land and the cost of bases in allied territory should be charged to lend-lease account and an agreement should at the same time be made to terminate the 99-year lease and cancel it and to transfer the costs of the destroyers to lend-lease account.
An agreement should be made along these lines, and I hope it will be made in Moscow next week. The true cost of those destroyers should be charged to lend-lease account; in fact, that should have been done long ago. Those ships had very little value in the war, because at that time the battle of the Atlantic was being fought, and the British navy was bearing the brunt of it.
I would say as the great Kipling said in "The English Flag":
"And what should they know of England who only England know?-[DOT]
Never was isle so little, never was sea so Ioup-
But over the sand and palm trees an English flag was flown."
Wordsworth said on the death of Milton:
"Milton! thou should'st be living at this hour:
England hath need of thee!"
So I can say: Kipling, thou should'st be living at this hour; Britain hath need of thee.
One of the outstanding events in recent days has been the visit of Their Majesties and the two princesses to South Africa. They landed at that beautiful city of Capetown, from H.M.S. Vanguard, and have seen that magnificent country, with its flowers and historic beauty. Drake on his tour of the world called it a great harbour. Their Majesties and the princesses have gone through that country, just as they went through Canada shortly before the war broke out in 1939, at which time they won the admiration and affection of all our people. In no part of Canada did they get a warmer reception than in the province of Quebec. They are beloved by all the people of this country.
It was Field Marshal Smuts who prepared the speech from the throne. The king is the King of Canada; he is also the King of South Africa. They are now trying to build up a republic in South Africa. During the war Field Marshal Smuts rendered a service of great value. His life's work has been devoted, however, to the establishing of a republic in that great country.
A few days ago I referred to what I considered were three very important matters. First is India. Then comes the abandonment of the Suez canal, which was called by Mr. Churchill the jugular vein of the British empire. Equal in importance is the issue in Palestine. These are the most important matters at the present time. Then, one must consider the preservation of Greece. I do hope that we will arrive at some solution of these problems in the days ahead, because the British empire has been one of the greatest agencies for good that the world has ever known.
As we look around us we see a tendency toward the dissolution of the empire. Many people do not believe in empire; I gave their names last night, and some of them would have it liquidated. I fear a great mistake has been made by Great Britain in respect of India, and I hope some solution will be found before it is too late; because, after all is said and done, Great Britain has given India peace, security and justice for over 100 years,
The Address-Mr. Church

and freedom to 400 millions of India with security and none were armed. If she stepped out tomorrow, somebody else would step in. I fear that soviet Russia would come in and draw an iron curtain across that country. It is my view that a tragic mistake has been made by the government, and it is my hope that before many months have passed something will be done about it to repeal such a foolish proposal to withdraw British control of India, a blessing for over 100 years. The same of the Suez and the Nile. It should be held by Britain for security reasons.
I have mentioned bases in the Atlantic, the Arctic and the Pacific. At the present time the United States is saying that the Pacific is her territory, just as Mussolini talked about mare nostrum, meaning the Mediterranean. The truth is that Great Britain, before the war had control of the Pacific entirely. She was mistress of the seas. The mother country gave the world peace for 100 years between Waterloo in 1815 and the outbreak of the first world war in Belgium in 1914. She gave the world peace and security, just as she has given India peace, justice and security for the past 100 years.
May I say in conclusion that I should like to read briefly from Green's "Short history of the British People." I am sorry this book is no longer found in our schools. It was Woodrow Wilson's favourite history. In this extract the author is referring to Great Britain's losing the American colonies, but Britain survived that disaster, and he says:
What startled men most at the time was the discovery that England was not ruined by the loss of her colonies or by the completeness of her defeat. She rose from it indeed stronger and greater than ever. The next ten years saw a display of industrial activity such as the world had never witnessed before. During the twenty years which followed she wrestled almost single-handed against the energy of the French revolution, as well as against the colossal force of Napoleonic tyranny, and came out of the one struggle unconquered and out of the other a conqueror. Never had England stood higher among the nations of the old world than after Waterloo; but she was already conscious that her real greatness lay not in the old world but in the new. From the moment of the Declaration of Independence it mattered little whether England counted for less or more with the nations around her. She was no longer a mere European power, no longer a mere rival of Germany or Russia or France. She was from that hour a mother of nations. In America she had begotten a great people . . . Her work was to be colonization. Her settlers were to dispute Africa with the Kaffir and the Hottentot, to wrest New Zealand from the Maori, to sow on the shores of Australia the seeds of great nations. And to these nations she was to give not only her blood and her speech, but the freedom which she had won. It is the thought of 
this which flings its grandeur round the pettiest details of our story in the past. The history of France has little result beyond France itself. German or Italian history has no direct issue outside the bounds of Germany or Italy. Rut England is only a small part of the outcome of English history. Its greater issues lie not within the narrow limits of the mother island, but in the destinies of nations yet to be. The struggles of her patriots, the wisdom of her statesmen, the steady love of liberty and law in her people at large were shaping in the past of our little island the future of mankind.
(Translation.):
Mr. GEORGES H. HEON (Argenteuil): Mr. Speaker, I should hate myself for speaking after my hon. friend from Broadview in any other language but French. Knowing as I do that he and his constituents have always favoured bilingualism in this country, I wish to pay him a tribute that will help him secure re-election and shall therefore preface my remarks with a few words in French.
It is a matter of deep regret to me, Mr. Speaker, that the adjournment of the debate on the address in reply deprived me of an earlier opportunity to congratulate my two French-speaking colleagues recently elected in Pontiac and Richelieu-Vercheres. Their maiden speeches in this house have been rather remarkable although they probably realized that parliamentary oratory has little in common with the hustings, for enthusiasm is not as easily stirred up here as it is in an electoral campaign. Nor could my hon. friends fail to, realize that French-speaking members are to be found on both sides of the house and that, while the latter are not uniformly smitten with the liberalism practiced by the present government since 1940, and while they have not applied for membership cards in Union des Electeurs, they will none the less work with the liberalism practised by the present in any concerted effort in the service of their country, Canada.
(Text):
Mr. Speaker, at this date and therefore quite belatedly I want to extend my congratulations to the hon. member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Miller) and the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Timmins) upon having been elected to the house. Winning a by-election when one's political party is in opposition is a considerable achievement, no matter how you look at it and whether you sit to the right or left of the Speaker. In the case of these two hon. gentlemen I am informed that this is a richly deserved reward for their excellent record of public service in the realm of municipal government, which is indeed the government nearest to the

The Address-Mr. Heon
people. They are most welcome to this green chamber where I hope much distinction awaits them.
The mover (Mr. MacNaught) and the seconder (Mr. Cournoyer) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne have been rightfully congratulated upon their speeches. They performed a brilliant feat in managing to say so much so eloquently about a message which contained so little of any definite meaning to so few. The very vagueness of the terms of the speech vaguely indicated a vague situation which it was vaguely proposed vaguely to remedy. Even with the legislation already placed before this house, one can only surmise the trend and purport of the legislation which will be brought down later. It might not be amiss to utter some words of warning as to the pitfalls which lie clearly ahead for all Canadian statesmen. In the field of international relations the situation is not reassuring, notwithstanding the bland pronouncements of well-meaning and honest- statesmen whose good faith is being thoroughly exploited by others whose bad faith is becoming apparent even to the man on the street.
It must not come to pass that one may outwardly prepare to sit at the peace table and secretly prepare to sit at a council of war. The old diplomatic game of playing for time, bluffing, ace in the hole, must give way to blunt speaking, fair dealing and cards on the table. A distinguished Canadian clergyman who was chief padre of one of our Canadian divisions in Europe was repatriated last summer. He was able to travel fairly extensively in conquered Europe, and he told me recently that in some of the conquered territories the population were praying secretly and hoping for another war which would rid them of their recent conquerors whose rule was more cruel, more autocratic, than that of their former ones. Did we enter the late war to legalize wholesale displacements, wholesale looting and wholesale disfranchisement? It is high time that the world was informed that, so far as Canada is concerned, it will not be a party to a treaty which will encourage sanctions or foster the geopolitics and dictatorships which we were asked to help destroy in the gestapo and wermacht. Shall the "Big Four" turn out to be the Big Stick? What then becomes of the solemn pledges of the Atlantic charter to all the small nations of all the world? What, then, will be the lot of the common man, the small man all over the world, who has been asked, and is still being asked to bear in times of precarious peace and reconstruction the same preponderant share of the burden and sacrifice he bore during the war?
If the words of democracy and freedom are not to be further indecently uttered and invoked some definite and concrete reassurance must be given by the great powers before treaties are signed, and in the texts of the treaties themselves, that the small nations, the small men, wherever they may be, have nothing to fear, and that their moral, political, economic freedom, security and welfare will be fully and permanently assured and safeguarded.
In fewer words the "Big Four" may have titles to ensure and direct the true destiny of our civilized world, but since when have they the right to dominate it? Our Canadian government took a definite step in the right direction when it lately made known Canada's views to the special agents sitting in London. These views were in conformity with those of the right-thinking Canadians of all political parties.
The speech from the throne made passing reference to interprovincial relations. This is a subject loaded with dynamite and of great concern to all of Canada. If it is not finally, fairly and justly solved, for the nine, not the six provinces, it may lead-and I wish to emphasize this-to internecine strife, distrust and discontent.
Great emphasis has been laid by previous speakers and eminent members in the house on the fact that six provinces have already accepted federal proposals. It has been underlined, not without some ironical touch, that some difficulties were being experienced with Ontario and Quebec and that Premiers Drew and Duplessis were somewhat adamant and unreasonable in their demands. Much less has been said about the obstinacy of Nova Scotia, where apparently a Liberal administration holds sway. Most speeches made in this house have given the impression that if Messrs. Drew and Duplessis were in the Liberal ranks they would be more amenable to an agreement and that there lies a sinister political behind their stand. I for one cannot see the matter in that light. Ontario and Quebec have a greater population and pay more taxes than the other provinces put together.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: Where do you sell your products?


James Horace King: Order.


Georges-Henri Héon: As one back-bencher to another, I may tell the hon. member that I cannot hear him.
Logically they have, therefore, a greater interest in the proposed agreements and

The Address-Mr. Heon

Premier Drew of Ontario and Premier Duplessis of Quebec have a correspondingly greater share of responsibility.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Why do they not show it?


Mr. CASSELMAN:: They do.


Georges-Henri Héon: We shall come to that later.


James Horace King: Order.


Georges-Henri Héon: Will the hon. member listen to this, please? Public men, real he-men, who speak for seven-twelfths of the population of Canada are certainly entitled to as much respect and consideration as those who speak on behalf of half a million. In the case of the Hon. Mr. Duplessis-and I am not asking the house to share my opinion-he is most ably directing the destinies of the province of Quebec. He finds himself as premier of a province-and I ask hon. gentleman opposite and all hon. gentlemen in the house to remember this-wherein dwells the bulk of the French-Canadian population of Canada, and there are certain and most important items to be remembered. Quebec is Quebec. The premier of any party who is elected in the province of Quebec must, does and should always remember this: he is the elected premier of a province where there are certain particular and most important traditional, cultural and racial factors which have to be taken into account. If hon. gentlemen could have read, as have. I and all the French-Canadian members on both sides of the house, the editorials in French-Canadian newspapers, resolutions passed by national societies, youth societies, municipal councils, and school boards, approving the premier of Quebec, possibly all of us here would not be so hasty-


George Alexander Cruickshank: What do Jehovah's Witnesses say?


Georges-Henri Héon: I want to tell my hon. friend this. I am prepared to discuss that subject at any moment, but he is too broadminded to bring that matter into the house at this time. Later on, if he wishes to, I shall be glad to discuss it.


Mr. SINCLAIR (Vancouver North):: Page the hon. member for Lake Centre.
(Translation):


Georges-Henri Héon: Has any other hon. member said that he was willing to discuss the matter of Jehovah's Witnesses?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Yes.


Georges-Henri Héon: Who said that?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No one said that.

(Text):


Georges-Henri Héon: Be that as it may, both Premier Drew and Premier Duplessis are duly elected prime ministers of their respective provinces; and there is certainly nothing to show, in the light of recent provincial by-elections, that the confidence placed in them by their fellow citizens has lessened in the least degree.
We have been told that the legislatures of Ontario and Quebec will fully examine and discuss federal proposals at their present session. Surely, Mr. Speaker, we in this house have sufficient respect for the provincial legislatures not to deny them, as the freely elected spokesmen of their provinces, the right to speak for their constituents on so important a problem.
Personally, and I speak for myself alone, I shall await with a great deal of interest- and not electoral but Canadian interest; that is what I have in mind-the outcome of the discussions in the provincial legislatures. Cojning from Quebec, and proud to come from Quebec, I cannot fail to be influenced by what my own provincial legislature will decide.
May I add just one more word, Mr. Speaker? There are rumours circulating in this house that the country may be heading toward another general election. The Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), in his speech of February 3 last, was not overreassuring. Further, the newspaper Le Droit of Ottawa, dated Wednesday, February 5, 1947, in revealing to its readers the smallest details of what went on in the Liberal caucus of that same morning, published-and my hon. friend cannot deny that-


George Alexander Cruickshank: I can say that you do not know, what you are talking about.


Georges-Henri Héon: Have you read it?


George Alexander Cruickshank: Were you in the caucus?


Georges-Henri Héon: Have you read it?


George Alexander Cruickshank: You are repeating rumours, that is all, like the rest of your speech.


Georges-Henri Héon: Listen to me and you can contradict me later.


George Alexander Cruickshank: You are talking nonsense.


Georges-Henri Héon: Apparently something tickles the hon. member. Before hon. members interrupt, I want them to listen to what I shall say next; then they can criticize me if they wish to. If my hon. friend does not like my citation I cannot avoid it. It was a

The Address-Mr. Heon
French newspaper, but to help my hon. friend I will translate what it said. This was Le Droit of Ottawa, Wednesday, February 5, 1947, and this is the headline: "Flag-" my hon. friend, coming from British Columbia! will understand that-"Flag Without Union Jack. The Country is Heading Towards, a General Election." Then it went on, at page 11-my hon. friend has the reference-"That, is why the Prime Minister is thinking of having recourse to his tactics of a sudden election to obtain a more stable majority in parliament."


George Alexander Cruickshank: Sudden or delayed, you will never come back.


An hon. MEMBER:: That is a bed-time story.


Georges-Henri Héon: I understand that my hon. friend wants to go to sleep now.


Mr. SMITH (Calgary West):: Take it and like it.


Georges-Henri Héon: This article-and my hon. friends on the right will like this-is possibly unfair to the Prime Minister, and possibly it is untrue in its conclusions on what was, after all, a more or less harmonious party caucus. But the C.B.C. and affiliated stations and most newspapers carried this interpretation across Canada. The impression has been given, rightly or wrongly-personally I think it is wrong-that a general election is in the offing if-there is always a big "if"-a substantial majority is not accorded the administration; if the amendment of the leader of the opposition is carried, or if the tempers of the cabinet members become so frayed and irritated in the face of opposition criticism that they may decide upon a general election. I wish to make my position perfectly clear, and that will please members to the right of the Speaker, though I am not out to please them. I want to say this. The present administration went before the country on June 11, 1945, seeking a mandate to build a new social order, to protect social and economic gains, and, as they said, to finish the job together. This being so, Canadians in great numbers approved by their "X's", and my hon. friend will recognize an "X".


George Alexander Cruickshank: The Gallup poll
shows we are leading.


Georges-Henri Héon: Canadians approved the proposed legislative trends set forth by the outgoing Liberal administration; and the final result, although not giving the administration a clear majority, since more Canadians voted for the various other political parties than for 83166-66i
the administration, gave the present administration a mandate. Clearly the duty of the present administration is to accomplish this mandate, unless it is prepared to state officially that it cannot fulfil its numerous and most generous promises. Eighteen months have elapsed since the present administration came into power. It is a crude fact, an admitted fact, that the administration has not yet accomplished all that it promised. Would a general election solve the problem?


George Alexander Cruickshank: The electorate will give us a bigger majority.


Georges-Henri Héon: My hon. friend is thinking in terms of votes and I am thinking in terms of Canada, That is the difference. I say this in all seriousness and I want to make my stand perfectly clear. A general election at this time would only add to the confusion already existing in industrial, agricultural and labour circles. The administration's job is not to render the economy of the country less stable; it is to render it more stable. It is its job, as it is the job of all of us, to render Canada's economy more stable. A general election at this time, Mr. Speaker, in my very humble opinion would amount to a catastrophe. Personally, and mind you I am speaking only for myself, I have taken great pains to consult all classes of the electorate in my own constituency, both Liberal and anti-Liberal, before making this statement. I shall not cast in this house any vote which will favour an early election. I hope that is clear enough. The general sentiment among my constituents seems to be: "Let the administration fulfil their promises; if they do not, we shall throw them out in good time." May I add this: The political temper of the average Canadian at this time is not one that should be fooled with, and woe to the political party which does so. Our countrymen want us to do things and accomplish results. Is there any hon. member, who, having been elected on June 11, 1945, is prepared to go back to the country tomorrow? Is there any political party which is prepared to go back before the country and say, "I am sorry; you gave us a mandate to do certain things, but we have not had the courage to do them. If you re-elect us, we will try"? The whole thing is silly. It applies to all Canadians of all parties.
My Liberal friends-and I have very many of them-last year sent me as a Christmas present, if hon. members to the right can imagine it, a copy of a pamphlet entitled "Programme for Canada". I quite frankly
The Address-Mr. Heon

say, Mr. Speaker-and you have been through the classical colleges of the province of Quebec:
(Translation):


Georges-Henri Héon: Timeo liberates et dona
jerentes. Which means "I fear the liberals even when they bring me gifts".


Mr. PIERRE GAUTHIER (Portneuf):: You mean "Timeo Danaos". You do not remember your Latin.


Georges-Henri Héon: I have possibly forgotten it, but I am lost like my hon. friend.
(Text):
This is what I received as a Christmas gift, "Programme for Canada".


An hon. MEMBER:: Put it on the table.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I can think of something better to do with it.


Georges-Henri Héon: The foreword to this pamphlet is signed by the national Liberal committee. I want to say that I am serious about this. It has been circulated, according to the figures quoted, among 10,000,000 Canadians. The foreword, signed by the national Liberal committee, says this, and I am trying to point out that the duty of this house and of every member is not to look forward to a general election; the duty of every member is to try to go forward and do things irrespective of any party. This was sent across Canada, and this is what was signed by the national Liberal committee. No doubt the Progressive Conservative literature was just as good or as bad. But this w'as circulated and the Canadian voters approved it. So it is a duty to see that what is promised to the Canadian people should be accomplished. This is the foreword:
About one hundred days ago-
I would like to see "one hundred years", but the word is "days".
-the people of Canada voted to continue the Liberal administration. Thirty days ago the last aggressor accepted the allies' terms of unconditional surrender. The twentieth parliament elected in war time now meets in peace. The Liberal party's programme for peace as presented to the electors in the national election campaign is reproduced in these pages.
Page 3 of the pamphlet says that these advertisements had an aggregate circulation of twenty million. Any hon. member who wants to look at this after I am through, but not before, may have it. Page 4 says:
Liberal policies will create post war opportunities for all.
Page 5 says:
Liberal policies make jobs.

And it adds:
These are just some of many steps in your Liberal government's working plan to ensure full employment after the war . . . Make sure the team which made this plan for full employment shall see it through-and win the peace.
Page 4 says, and any hon. member who doubts my words may consult this, as follows:
Reduction in taxation. The Liberal government will gradually reduce taxation when the European war is over.
That word "gradually" is a most elastic word. To continue:
Taxes will come down to free spending power and to give Canadians every opportunity for prosperity, employment and freedom. What you have done in war-you can do in peace. You can do your part by supporting the Liberal candidate in your constituency.


James Horace King: I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but he has exhausted his time.


An hon. MEMBER:: He is helping us.


James Horace King: He may go on with the consent of the house.


Georges-Henri Héon: I want to thank hon. gentlemen. They have always been gentlemen and there is no reason why they should not be tonight. Page 5 says, "Liberal policies make jobs." Page 7 says:
Just plain sense! The Canadian people have made a magnificent contribution to the common victory in Europe. The Liberal administration can say with honesty and justice:	"This^ is the
government which has directed Canada's war effort at home and abroad. This is the government w'hich during the war worked out a programme of full employment and social reform . . ." These things aTe a matter of record and of common knowledge. On the basis of its record the choice of Prime Minister King's party to form the next government of Canada is a matter of just plain sense.
And it did. The same pamphlet continues with the heading, "Let the Liberal government finish its work", and I ask hon. members to listen to this, under the heading of "New low cost homes":
50,000 homes immediately. 100,000 each year for ten years. Instalments as low as $9.58 per month under the new national housing plan.
Then item No. 11:
Controls coming off. No controls for the sake of control. As promised, the Liberals have been relaxing supply controls since V-E day; materials for houses, furnishings, electrical appliances, radios, cars, etc., released every day; gas ration soon to be abandoned.


An hon. MEMBER:: Now let us hear your programme.


Georges-Henri Héon: You want to hear mine?

102S
The Address-Mr. Moore
(Translation):


James Horace King: Order. Additional time has been given to the hon. member so that he might finish his speech. Is he about to conclude?


Georges-Henri Héon: I am about to conclude.
(Text):
I want to conclude with these words. This is no time for party politics. This government has been elected, and it is its job to carry out its programme. If it is unable to do so, it should say so officially. Personally I am in favour of following the constitutional principle that an elected administration should serve out its term. Then let the electors judge, because Canadian electors have a reputation for judging their public men carefully. They have made mistakes since 1935, but one day or another they shall correct those mistakes.


Mr. RONALD MOORE (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, the postponement of the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne has obviously had the effect of reducing interest in a great many of the subjects which would have been discussed had the debate continued until the votes on the amendments were taken. However, I understand that when the estimates of the various departments are brought down ample opportunity will be provided to deal with most of the subjects which would have been discussed had the debate continued.
On glancing over the speech from the throne, I see very little on which discussion could be carried on. It seems to me that the speech from the throne is more concerned with concealing than with revealing the legislation the government intends to deal with this session. It was stated that the problem of reconversion, started some time before the end of the war, has now been completed, and Canadian industry stands ready to supply the needs of a country at peace with the world. Before the war, other countries marvelled at the efficiency of Canada's industrial machine. If our industrial machine had a great productive efficiency before the war, those years of war greatly increased that efficiency.
Many of our scientists, engineers and economists have told us that a great many of our economic problems during the depression years were due to the fact that technological , developments had caused industry to displace men with machines. Unfortunately there has not been a study of this situation as far as Canada is concerned, but in the United States a definite study of technological development has been made. According to Mr. Nathan
Robertson, an American authority who writes articles for the Neic Republic, in the thirty-year period from 1909 to 1939 there was an increase in the productive efficiency of industry ranging from three to three and a half per cent a year. Mr. Robertson goes on to say that this productive efficiency was brought about by revolutionary new methods introduced to American industry. Some of those revolutionary new methods were such things as the machine production of cigars, the development of production lines in mass-production industries, and the introduction of the continuous strip mill in the steel industry. In this same period of time the production of rayon was quadrupled; the manufacture of industrial chemicals was trebled, and the production of automobiles increased by 180 per cent. In the refining of petroleum the increase was 290 per cent, while in the manufacture of tires and automobile tubes the increase was 325 per cent.
According to the same authority, who is quoted in the New Republic of October 1 last, in the twenty-year period from 1919 to 1939 the production per man-hour increased by 107 per cent, which meant that in the period between the two wars the production of industry' was more than doubled. But wThat was the position with respect to labour during this period of time? It is true that the wages of labour increased, but only by 28 per cenL By 1939 unit labour costs were reduced by 44 per cent. I have not yet been able to find figures giving the technological picture of development during the last great war, from 1939 to 1945, but I think it is safe to say that the development of industry during the second world war was just as great as during world war I. It is necessary only to mention a few of the things the production of which was greatly stepped up during the war years. I remember the Department of Reconstruction and Supply stated that shells were produced during the second world war for a fraction of what they cost per shell during the first world war. In the United States ships went down the ways almost as rapidly as automobiles came off the assembly lines.
All these technological developments should be a boon to mankind, but in the past that has not been the case; actually they have been a detriment. One of the chief reasons for that is, I think, that the ownership of those means of production is in private hands. It seems to me that in the near future some step will have to be taken to make production of such machines which should be socially owned available to all the people of this country.
The Address-Mr. Moore

In the past a great many royal commissions have been set up to investigate various problems. We have had the Rowell-Sirois report respecting dominion-provincial relations. We have had the coal commission report, and several other commissions have investigated railway problems. The general procedure seems to have been to appoint a commission to take evidence, and then to shelve the report, doing nothing about the situation.
I believe this government at the present time should set up another royal commission, the purpose of which would be to investigate the amount of technological development that has taken place in Canada since the turn of the century, with particular reference to the development between 1920 and 1945. If that information were readily available it would afford labour an opportunity of getting a settlement for some of its present problems.
I hold in my hand an article which I clipped from the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix. This contains a report given by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. MacKinnon) and deals specifically with Canada's foreign trade. The article states:
During 1946 the minister announced the dominion's exports rose to a total value of $2,312 million, or more 'than two and one-half times as great as the five-year pre-war average from 1935 to 1939.
"It is encouraging to note that despite the elimination of these war goods from our export trade," Mr. MacKinnon said, "the volume of peace-time commodities has been maintained at a high enough level to ensure full employment in Canada's great but vulnerable export industries."
I am sure every hon. member is pleased to know the minister was able to make a statement of that kind respecting our foreign trade, particularly with respect to the aspect of full employment. That, again, is something which should receive due consideration from the house, because there is great danger that in the future our government and private enterprise will not be able to afford full employment to the people of Canada.
I note the minister has said that the providing of full employment to our people is largely dependent upon our export trade. Here are some figures which deal with that export trade. At this point I should like to compare our best peacetime year after the economic depression of 1929 with the year 1946. In 1938, which was the best year following the depression, we had in Canada 870,173 unemployed employable persons, while in 1946 we had approximately 158,000, a comparatively small figure when compared with that of 1938.
But here are our present exports, for the first nine months of 1946, as compared with our exports for the twelve months of 1938. I believe the figures I am about to place on record reveal the fact that, unless we are able t>
maintain our trade as it is today,, we shall nave difficulty in the future in providing full employment. These figures for Canadian exports are as follows:
Newsprint	
Wood pulp	
Planks and boards .... Automobiles and trucks
Farm implements	
Bacon and ham	
Fertilizer	
9 months ,12 months 1946	1938

82.800.000	33.500,000
79.300.000	43,40-0,000
45.800.000	22,900.000
22.900.000	8,200,000
54.600.000	32,300,000
24.300.000	7,900,000
I believe the minister is right when he says that these exports must be maintained if we are to provide full employment in this country. But I believe other hon. members who belong to different groups in the house are right when they say that these exports will not be maintained. And they will not be maintained because the countries to which exports are made are going to rebuild. As soon as the devastated areas in Europe and Asia have been rehabilitated, we shall encounter difficulties in the marketing of our commodities.
I suggest that if we are not to face a serious unemployment problem in the future the government must now take steps to overcome conditions which may develop. The first action to be taken should be that of investigating the possibilities of establishing in our better industries the forty-hour week. That could be done, if the findings of the royal commission, the setting up of which I have just suggested, were put into effect. We could pick out our best industries where the profits are highest, and have those industries establish the forty-hour week, with no reduction in take-home pay. Then the government could go forward and maintain investment in Canadian industry from the public treasury. By that, I mean it could institute public works, reforestation programmes, highway construction programmes in cooperation with the provincial governments-anything to maintain a condition of full employment throughout the country.
It is interesting to note that in 1938, our best peacetime year, we had in circulation in Canada S352 million, or a per capita income of $404. Those figures have increased steadily until at the present time, they have reached an all-time high. The money in circulation today stands at $1,079 million, or a per capita income of $708. If that condition is to be maintained-and it must be maintained if

The Address-Mr. Moore
prosperity is to exist in Canada-the government will have to take action. What private enterprise cannot do, the government will have to take upon its shoulders, and will have to accomplish.
I should like to deal somewhat more fully with the possibility of our present unemployment problem becoming a serious one. I know there are many people who would not like me to say that Canada has an unemployment problem. When one compares our present unemployment with that of our best peacetime year I do not think it would be fair to say that the problem is serious at the present time. Nevertheless we have today the beginning of an unemployment problem which, unless something is done about it, could become serious.
I hold in my hand a clipping from the Financial Post for March 1, 1947, giving the employment picture in Canada for February. This summary is broken down according to areas, and it gives the following information:
Unplaced Unfilled Men applicants vacancies per job
Mari times	. 26,000	3,000	8-7Quebec 	. 50,000	28,000	1-8Ontario 	. 54,000	28,000	2Prairies	. 38,000	9,000	4-2British Columbia ..	. 28,000	3,000	9-1
It might be worth while noting that at the present time Windsor has the worst unemployment situation of any city in the Dominion of Canada. The average for the whole dominion is two men for every available job, but in Windsor the ratio is twenty for every available job.
There is one other item I should now like to deal with; that is freight rates. For many years the western provinces have felt that they were paying the shot so far as freight rates are concerned. Investigations held in the past have more or less substantiated that contention. As far back as 1922, investigations have shown that railway revenue was much higher in the west than in the east. One of these investigations was held from 1922 to 1925 and it revealed the fact that the Canadian Pacific net earnings in the west amounted to $105 million, while the eastern divisions earned only $56 million. Evidence from the same report showed that western freight rates on the average were fifteen per cent higher than they were on eastern lines.
This situation came to a head shortly after the first world war, and two equalization boards sat to deal with freight rates. The first one sat from 1920 to 1922, and the second, from 1925 to 1927. The railroads left no ground uncovered to justify higher western rates. They attempted to justify their western rates by saying that the rate per ton-mile was much lower than the eastern rate. The recent request of the railroads for an increase of thirty per cent in freight rates has met with a storm of protest from most sections of the country, particularly the western provinces. I know of no single item which will retard western development to a greater degree than the proposed increase in freight rates. If the present investigation into the case put forward by the railroads for increased freight rates results in higher freight rates it will lead to an ever-increasing demand by the western provinces, particularly Manitoba and Saskatchewan, for the fullest possible use of the Hudson Bay railway and shipping route.
Speaking in the house this afternoon, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) surprised me to some extent when he made the announcement that new measures of relief were to be granted the gold mining companies. I have gold miners in my constituency, but I noticed that, when the miners who dig the ore were seeking wage increases and union recognition in the different parts of Canada, not much concern was shown by the government for their general welfare. However, the government appears to be greatly concerned with the production of gold and the welfare of the gold mining companies. Personally I cannot see why this should be. Gold is not an essential commodity. The world could get along very well without it. When the war first broke out, we actually curtailed the production of gold in this country in order to put men at more useful work. Using it as a base for our currency is an old-fashioned idea. We got rid of that during the war also. We used currency and credit and there was nothing to support that currency and credit but the printing presses and the effrontery of the issuers.
The generous allowances outlined by the minister this afternoon, such as increasing the depletion allowance from 33) per cent to 40 per cent for the whole industry and the many other concessions that were granted in that statement will cost the taxpayers of this country a great deal of money. This contrasts greatly with the government's attitude to the request of 13,000 coal miners in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick when they appealed to the federal government to subsidize their wage increase of $1.40 per day. That would cost the federal government and the taxpayers approximately five and one-half million dollars. It would help establish fair standards of living for the mine workers; but, in return, coal would be now produced in Nova Scotia. Thousands of dollars would be accruing to the government for personal income tax.
The Address-Mr. Blair

Thousands of dollars would be saved by the miners' contribution to the unemployment insurance fund and more thousands would be saved because it would prevent the closing of other industries in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick through lack of fuel. I would strongty urge the government to show the same consideration to the mine workers of Nova Scotia that the Minister of Finance has shown to the operators of gold mining in Canada.


Mr. W. G. BLAIR (Lanark):: Mr. Speaker, I regret to note that there is no mention of health in the speech from the throne. There is mention of a measure to be introduced in connection with social security, but that is the only reference to any new legislation from the Department of Health and Welfare. It is my intention at this time to review health conditions in Canada and to bring before this parliament the urgent necessity for action which cannot be further delayed.
In order to lay a sound foundation for a nation, the people of that nation must be fit mentally and physically. It is the duty of the government to give leadership, direction and financial support in order to reach that goal. For the past six years all our energies have been devoted to war for the defence of liberty, but it is now high time to take stock of the health standards of our people. We received our first intimation of the necessity for a health stocktaking when it was discovered that approximately forty per cent of our young men were unfit at the time of enlistment in the last war. The high percentage of unfitness in this group would indicate that the general health situation is even worse in other age groups.
This is an alarming state of affairs and is sufficient reason for the Canadian parliament making an inquiry into the cause of this situation. Many of these conditions could be corrected and it is the duty of the government to act, instead of complacently taking the attitude that there is no cause for alarm or that nature will heal the difficulty. I cannot find any reason for congratulation or satisfaction in the government's programme. It is to be noted that, while there are house committees on agriculture, veterans affairs, railways, fisheries and so on in this parliament, there is no house committee on health except a joint committee which met only four or five times last 3rear. Surely the health of a nation, the relief of suffering and the urgent need for medical research should be of as much importance, or even of more importance, than the matters brought up for discussion and debate in the other house committees I have mentioned.

I point out the necessity for action for the following reasons:
First, cancer, tuberculosis, and mental illness have reached an appalling total and the first two show an extremely high death rate.
Second, the death rate in preventable disease is high. .
Third, hospital facilities are inadequate for the treatment of all disease and especially so for the treatment of mental diseases, tuberculosis, and for the care of incurables. Hospital facilities are especially lacking in rural areas.
Fourth, there is a shortage of trained nurses to staff new hospitals and existing hospitals and for service in public health.
Fifth, the high cost of sickness.
' Sixth, the necessity for organized services in child and maternal health.
Seventh, the need for early diagnostic measures.
Eighth, the crying need for research into the causes of such disease as cancer, arthritis, poliomyelitis and rheumatic fever.
Let us first consider the situation regarding cancer. Every year, cancer kills approximately 14,000 Canadians. It is second only to heart disease as a cause of death. We do not know the cause, but we know that in many cases this disease can be checked or even cured if an early diagnosis is made. Apart from the death rate of this disease the course is usually long and the cause of much suffering.
I am pleased to note that the National Cancer Institute of Canada has been formed. When a meeting of those interested in this dread disease was held in Ottawa a short time ago the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin) said that the resources of the King George V cancer fund were at the disposal of this newly formed organization for cancer research. The King George V cancer fund was raised in 1935 by the citizens of Canada. It amounted to 8500,000. It was raised by public subscription and not by government grant. From 1937 to 1940, $14,000 was paid out each year to the cancer research committee of the Canadian Medical Association. In 1940, one-half of the grant was paid to the association. In 1942, the grant to the association was reduced to $7,000. In view of the fact that 14,000 people of Canada died last year from this disease, it would appear to me that the government is pursuing a niggardly policy in dealing with research on this national problem.
The provincial government of Ontario gave a grant of $500,000 to the Ontario cancer research foundation which has raised over $1,000,000 for research and treatment.

The Address-Mr. Blair
Canadian citizens are demanding action. The support for any campaign for cancer research must come from the people and be directed by the government. The problem will have to be met in the same way and with the same energy as research workers discovered the secrets of radar and atomic energy.
Let us next consider tuberculosis. In 1944, 5,724 of our population died of this disease, the majority in early life. It rates as the seventh cause of death in all age groups in Canada, and the first cause of death in the age group from fifteen to forty-five. Not only has it a high mortality rate, but it is easily transmitted from an infected to a healthy person.
Several of the provinces are carrying out an excellent plan for the elimination of this disease. In addition to observing precautions for our own citizens, it is necessary that all potential immigrants to Canada pass a strict medical examination with chest X-rays before they are allowed to enter this country. It is agreed among workers in this field that the scourge of tuberculosis can be defeated if proper methods are taken.
Arthritis is a disease of long duration; and, while it is prevalent throughout Canada, certain districts seem to have a higher incidence than others. It is commonly called Canada's No. 1 crippler. The number of cases in Canada has been estimated at as high as 400,000, of whom possibly 100,000 are crippled. Arthritis has the ability to cripple without killing; therefore it leads all other diseases in causing chronic sufferers. It accounts for a greater number of work-days lost than any other chronic illness. In Canada we have few hospitals equipped for the treatment of this disease. In addition very little research is being carried out. Not only does arthritis cripple and destroy, but, like cancer, it causes excruciating pain and suffering.
When we are considering arthritis, there is a somewhat similar disease known as rheumatic fever which causes a high percentage of casualties, especially in the young. Even in the event of a cure of this disease the heart is frequently left damaged, resulting in invalidism and early death. If all the cases of heart disease which are given as the cause of death were fully investigated, many could be traced to rheumatic fever in early life. Like arthritis, this disease demands research.
Mental illness is apparently increasing with the growth in our population. The number of cases in mental hospitals has increased by sixty per cent in the last fifteen years. New methods of treatment have proven successful but there is a marked shortage of accommoda-83166-67
tion in mental hospitals. It is deplorable that there are waiting lists for admittance to many mental institutions.
Venereal disease can be eliminated, but more money must be spent on its treatment and more propaganda must be carried out. The fight against venereal disease must be carried into the open and the problem approached by treatment, moral propaganda and education. Money spent on venereal disease now will save money which is at present being spent in mental institutions and hospitals for patients who are chronically ill in many cases. Further to help eliminate this disease, I would urge that pre-marital blood tests be carried out, and also blood tests of all immigrants coming into this country.
In pointing out eight urgent needs for action on health matters, I grouped together child and maternal welfare. While it is a fact that maternal mortality has dropped from 4-2 per thousand live births in 1939 to 2-7 in 1944, the rate is still too high, and many of these mothers could have been saved if given adequate treatment. The rate of 2-7 per thousand live births means that 776 maternal deaths occurred in 1944. The drop in the mortality rate may be attributed to these circumstances: one, the advent of new treatment by penicillin and the sulpha drugs; two, the increased tendency to hospitalization of cases and, three, educational programmes. It is hoped that the difficulty in obtaining hospitalization will not mean a further rise in mortality rates. Much difficulty is experienced in obtaining hospital accommodation in crowded urban hospitals. I cannot therefore agree with the statement in a recent periodical from the Department of National Health and Welfare, speaking of maternal mortality, that the risk is negligible. The rates per thousand live births per province are of interest as of 1944. They are as follows:	Prince Edward Island 5-2: Nova
Scotia 2T; New Brunswick 3-2; Quebec 3-1; Ontario, 2-5; Manitoba 3-1; Saskatchewan 2-3; Alberta 1-6; British Columbia 2-6.
I come next to the consideration of preventable disease. One thousand children die each year from whooping cough, diphtheria and scarlet fever. The use of diphtheria toxoid is 100 per cent effective for immunization against this disease, and eighty per cent of those treated by immunization against scarlet fever do not contract the disease. Like Theumatic fever, scarlet fever often leaves complications in its wake. I present the following statistics of diseases in the past three years: diphtheria, 8,801 cases, 868 deaths; whooping cough 44,656 cases, 1,206 deaths, scarlet fever 51,566 cases, 293 deaths; poliomyelitis 1,432 cases, 89 deaths.

The Address-Mr. Blair

be of more value. I would suggest that consideration be given to a hearing aid of the antique type such as the ancient earhorn which would be in keeping, sir, with the uniform which you and other officials of this house wear, reminiscent of a few centuries ago. This aura of dignity and antiquity would thereby be enhanced when we hoisted the earhorns in this corner of the house.
It has been a custom for new members to describe briefly their constituencies. While I doubt if that privilege is accorded to older members, nevertheless I should like to impose upon the generosity of the house to describe my constituency from one particular angle, namely, the racial background. The honour of being the first agricultural settlement in Manitoba does not go to the constituency of Lisgar. The first agricultural settlers in that province were the Selkirk settlers of 1812; but that settlement was not an agricultural success by reason of the fact that, first of all, the settlers were not trained agriculturists; in addition, there were many other hazards which I need not mention at the moment.
The settlement did not prosper as an agricultural settlement until comparatively recently. In fact, it did not grow to any extent until in the sixties when, by reason of the railroads which had moved westward through Chicago, transportation was diverted from the water routes which had been in use earlier, to the railroads of the United States. To reach them, the trails leading south of the international boundary and 'beyond were used. Along that trail a new settlement grew up.
Early in the seventies small settlements and people from Ontario chiefly, grew up along the Assiniboine and Boyne rivers in Manitoba; so that it was not until 1874 when the first settlements in Lisgar constituency took place. Those settlers were mostly from Ontario and they followed the wooded slopes of that area, the reason being that the Ontario settler had been trained to work in the woods and understood clearing land and converting it to the use of grains.
In 1873, however, the government of the day entered into a treaty with a certain sect of people in the kingdom of Russia. These people were known as Mennonites and were of the Dutch race. For centuries they had migrated, as many sects had done in Europe, and eventually found themselves in Russia as the guests of Queen Catherine, who wished them to be an example to the Russian peasants in the way of agriculture.
Those settlements had been in Russia for approximately a century when delegates came to Canada to try to arrange for a settlement

in Manitoba. An order in council was passed permitting them to come, under certain conditions. They were granted freedom of religion and exemption from military service; and strangely, the order in council was kept secret. I say "strangely", but possibly it was not so strange, because the order in council permitted them to teach in their own schools in the way they saw fit.
However, in 1875 the Mennonites arrived and settled on the plains of Manitoba. They formed an area approximately forty miles long by twenty miles "wide; and suddenly that portion of Manitoba bloomed like a garden. Never before had such an area in Canada been seen growing in wheat. It was a wonderful sight to those who saw it, and the news spread to eastern Canada.
In the following four years, and prior to 1880, practically all the arable portion of southern Manitoba was homesteaded, principally by settlers from Ontario. The point I should like to make is that at that time there was no experimental farm system, at least none engaged in experiments in dry farming. The Mennonites who came from Russia had learned how to carry on that type of farming and were quite experienced in it when they arrived in Manitoba; therefore their colony was a success from the beginning. When the Mennonites came to treat for settlement in Manitoba, did they ask about housing? No, they did not; they were quite capable of pioneering. They ploughed up the sods and stacked them one on top of the other, packed them firmly together, packed them around window and door frames, from the bush brought saplings which they tied together at the peak, and then thatched the roof. Sod houses last for only a few years, but for a short time they are warm and dry. In due course the sod houses were replaced by log houses, which lasted for many years; in fact, many are still standing. Last year I believe the last thatched roof in that district disappeared; they last for a long time.
That leads me to refer to the Ukrainian colony in Manitoba. Any Manitoban over thirty years of age recalls the Ukrainian immigration into that province. They were dumped in large numbers almost anywhere in Manitoba, and settled) in the outlying districts. We recall those picturesque little huts built by twining saplings together and then plastering them with clay. Of course they had thatched roofs. Many of those houses lasted for twenty years; they were dry and serviceable.
This brings me to another migration which not only affected my constituency in Mani-

The Address-Mr. Winkler
toba but extended practically all through western Canada. In 1924 certain Mennonites who were refugees from the Russian revolution, who had fled to Germany without their belongings, found themselves stranded in that country without any means of livelihood or employment. They sought the aid of Canada. The department of immigration was not equipped to take care of such a large group in one move; there were approximately ten thousand of them, and, ultimately the matter was handed over to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. I should like to pay tribute to that corporation for the magnificent way in which it handled this movement. It brought these people to Canada without the payment of any money down. Last year the final dollar of the S2,000,000 they borrowed for their expenses was repaid.
This movement was perhaps concentrated more in Lisgar constituency than any other in Manitoba. I was personally acquainted with a great many of these people, and I must say that from every point of view they have shown themselves to be citizens of Canada equal to any Canadians, no matter how many generations their ancestors may have been in this country. I should like to say also that immigrants who have come from Europe have been doing most of the pioneering in this country for many years. These people are willing to do outdoor work and to exchange the sweat of years for the privileges of freedom. There is no doubt about the fact that Canadians generally, through education or for some other reason, are inclined to be diverted from outdoor life, and we must rely upon people who are willing to use their muscle and brawn to take the place of Canadians in certain occupations.
This brings me to another point, and I should like to say a word about Canadian industry today. What is the state of Canadian industry? My answer to that question would be that the war has given Canada a pattern for her industry, but primary industry definitely lags for want of workers. The need for workers in agriculture was never greater. On many farms old people, unable either to dispose of their property or to get suitable farm help, are attempting to carry on. As for domestic servants, I should say the need was never greater than it is today. In the pulp and paper industry the advance has been definitely delayed, I am told, by the lack of suitable axemen, men willing to go out and work hard during the time they are needed in that industry. At the same time the emigration of trained young men and women to the United States proceeds apace.
During this debate the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) referred to the immigration regulations laid down on May 29 of last year, and also the order in council of January 30 of this year. I wish to say at once that I have every faith in the government and its advisers, and believe that a permanent policy on immigration will be developed. But one can readily see that in a changing world a matter of this sort cannot be worked out overnight. We have to feel our way, and I have no doubt that is being done. However,
I doubt if the present situation can be met by a long-term immigration policy. As I have endeavoured to point out briefly, we have an emergent situation in primary industry, and I believe the answer lies in the displaced persons camps of Germany and Austria rather than in the more settled portions of France, Belgium and Holland. Ultimately I may be shown to be wrong, but I doubt if immigration from the more settled districts will ever suffice to meet the requirements of Canada in this regard. Certainly I doubt if the workers required for primary industry will come from those stations. I believe we should declare that we have an emergency, and then go after the type of people we need.
As to screening, I know it takes time to develop a team, let us say, which can effectively screen immigrants, and certainly we know that immigrants must be screened at this time. But we are told that they have been fairly effectively screened already by UNRRA, as far as these displaced persons camps are concerned. From personal observation during the short time I was over there about a year ago, I would say that I saw a great many people who, in my opinion, would be ideal candidates for immigration to this country, and who indicated a keen desire to come here. Just three weeks ago the steamer Volendam left Holland for South America, carrying 2,000 Mennonites from Holland. These were displaced persons from Russia. They, together with the people in the displaced persons camps in Germany, are guilty of only one crime:	they fled before
the Russian advance, and would rather die than return to the country from which they came.
It has been said in the house that there are at least 800,000 displaced persons. That figure may be somewhat high; but we know that of that number there are about 8,000, or one per cent, of the Mennonite faith. I would, therefore, urge the government to treat this as an emergency situation and, by using every facility available, try to bring to this country as
The Address-Mr. Winkler

rapidly as possible those people who give every indication of being the type of citizens we want for our primary industries.
Before resuming my seat, I should like to make brief reference to a subject which has been mentioned in the house this evening, namely the application of the railroads for a thirty per cent increase in freight rates. I have been asked why the prairie provinces are so much opposed to the request by the railroads for this increase. My answer is that those provinces feel they are being discriminated against.
Someone may ask:	Why do they feel that
there is this discrimination? It amounts to this, that a thirty per cent general increase in freight rates is not actually what the railroads want. We know that water rates compete with the freight rates structure, and that the railways must meet those rates. Therefore a general increase can be genera! only with the exception of those places where water rates apply. In a nutshell that is why the prairie provinces are so much opposed to the proposed increase. As I said, water rates do not affect the prairie provinces in any degree. We have no waterways and, therefore, water rates cannot apply. But certainly if an increase is allowed it will be made to apply, regardless of those whom it may not affect.
For instance, inland waterways are waterways just as surely as are those along the sea-coasts. Steel shipped from Hamilton to Vancouver is accorded the waterways rate, and if a railway carries that steel by rail it must meet the water rate. I would ask on what basis the railways association fixes its rates. It is generally known that in the past it has fixed the rates, and any changes which have become statutory or otherwise have been negotiated at a later time.
Once again I shall refer to my constituency to give an example of what I have in mind. Out there we have the Pembina Mountain Clays Company Limited. This was a strategic wartime industry; in fact, it was on that basis that it got its start. It is engaged in the mining of clay, the greater proportion of which is talc. It may be known that talc is a material which is highly heat-resistant. It is found in my constituency, because some 70,000,000 years ago, when most of that area was under water, volcanic ash was deposited on the water, settled in the form of silt and later became rock. It is this material which .is mined today and which, after purification, is shipped to Sarnia, at which point the

Imperial Oil Company, the chief customer, uses it in connection with the purification of oil.
There is only one other industry like it on the North American continent, and it is situated near Jackson, Mississippi. In other words, that is the only competing company. The freight rate from Jackson, Mississippi, to Sarnia was, and for many years has been, $9.46 a ton, on the United States railways. When the Canadian industry started operations during the war the Canadian freight rates association fixed the rate from Morden, Manitoba, to Sarnia at $16.60 a ton, or almost double that charged by the United States railways for a similar distance. Three years later, in 1944, after this situation had been aired in the House of Commons by an hon. member whose name I shall not mention, when speaking on the budget debate, without being asked to do so the freight rates association reduced the rate to $12 a ton.
The company still felt, however, that they were being discriminated against and made further representations, with the result that on October 1 of last year the rate was reduced to $9 a ton. It will be readily seen that, at a time when transportation costs were increasing, in this particular instance the rate was going down, and that, indeed, it came down from $16.60 in 1941 to $9 in 1946. If the basis used by the railways is similar on most occasions, one is led to suspect that the basis on which they arrange these rates is that of charging what the traffic will bear. We claim, therefore, that their basis is open to question.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that I have said all I wish to say at this time.
(Translation):
Mr. GEORGES H. HEON (Argenteuil): Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. Am I to understand that the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska (Mr. Cloutier) will not speak tonight? He is a graduate of the best college in the province of Quebec, Victoriaville College, whose former students include the hon. Postmaster General (Mr. Bertrand), the hon. member for Beauce (Mr. Dionne), the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska (Mr. Dubois) and the hon. member for Pontiac (Mr. Caouette).


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


James Horace King: I see no privilege in that. I would therefore ask the hon. member to state his question of privilege as briefly as possible.


Georges-Henri Héon: I merely wished to inquire if we should have the pleasure of hearing

The Address-Mr. Ross (Souris)
tonight from the hon. member for Drummond-Arthabaska. I also wished to extol the merits of Vietoriaville College.


An hon. MEMBER:: We shall hear from him later.
(Text):


James Arthur Ross: Mr. Speaker, like the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat, I have received many requests and resolutions from my constituents in Manitoba asking me to protest against any increase in freight rates. Some of these people may not realize that this is a matter which is not before parliament, that the matter is before the railway board, but still they protest. The people appearing before that board are fortified with a mass of able legal talent, but should the matter ever become an issue in this House of Commons I can assure all these people that I will advance the strongest arguments I am capable of in opposition to any increase in freight rates at this time. That would add to our cost of production and cost of marketing, a matter which would affect the people of western Canada to a greater degree than those in any other part of this dominion.
I should like to endorse the remarks of the hon. member for Lanark (Mr. Blair) with respect to medical research, and more especially that dealing with cancer. Some 14,000 people died in Canada last year as a result of cancer and this death rate was exceeded only by the deaths from heart ailments. One in every eight deaths is a heavy rate. The King George fund of some 3500,000 was raised by the school children of this country. The medical people have been doing good work with this fund at their disposal. I understand that Ontario is to contribute 61,000,000 this year for this work. There is a tremendous field open in cancer research to try to find a cure for this terrible scourge. The dominion should assist financially in this matter because it is most important and worth undertaking.
Mention was made also of tuberculosis, from which 5,000 people died in Canada last year. Tuberculosis is the seventh cause of deaths in Canada and is the greatest killer of Canada's younger age group. Here again I should like to associate myself with the hon. member for Lanark, who said that all immigrants coming into this country should receive a thorough medical examination, including chest X-ray and blood tests. We had a glaring example of this when some 2,900 immigrants entered this country from Europe. Just the other day I noticed a report in the paper concerning a Department of
Veterans Affairs hospital in my province, and it was stated that in one of the wings of that hospital there were ninety-eight of those Polish immigrants suffering from tuberculosis. This disease is very contagious and we cannot be too careful about seeing that these people have a thorough medical examination.
Mention was made of tuberculosis and Bang's disease in dairy cattle. When children drink milk from these cattle they may suffer from tuberculosis. I think all milk fed to little children should be pasteurized. Because of these diseases, many states in the great nation to the south will not permit the importation of cattle from Canada unless they are from purebred accredited herds. We have not had an efficient animal health inspection service and an improvement in this regard should be fostered by the Department of Agriculture.
As was pointed out, there is a great lack of hospital facilities in Canada and a great shortage of trained nurses for home and institutional nursing. Greater asistance is needed in this connection and there should be more dominion-provincial cooperation. The dominion government should provide more financial assistance for certain types of medical research and for hospitalization throughout this land.
What I really wish to speak about at this time is a matter that concerns veterans, and I refer particularly to veterans housing. It must be realized that it is only on this debate, on the budget, or possibly on the departmental estimates, that we are likely to be able to discuss these matters. I understand that no committee is to be set up to deal with veterans affairs generally. The committee last year did a good job and brought forth many fine acts, but there is still a great deal of criticism of the administration.
I receive many complaints from young veterans who want to settle on the land. Some of them were taking special agricultural courses last summer. Then a change was made in the regulations and some of these chaps quit their courses. Some of them have relatives who will supply land upon which they could settle and they want to take advantage of the new legislation in order to get a loan with which to buy farm equipment and machinery. They are finding this difficult to obtain because the local officials are turning them down. I hope the departmental officials will be able to straighten this matter out before these men are ready to start their spring operations.
Then there are other chaps who have bought their own land and who are not asking for any

The Address-Mr. Ross (Souris)
financial assistance. These men cannot obtain priorities for the purchase of tractors and farm machinery, despite the fact that they are ready to pay for these things themselves. I realize that equipment is scarce, but I think the board could give further consideration to the men in this category. They are deserving of more assistance.
Veterans housing constitutes a pretty thorny problem all across Canada. I am referring particularly to the small holdings. There is one project in Manitoba known as the Charles-wood, and I have had occasion to visit this many times during 1946. I have some personal friends living in houses on this project. The construction of some ninety homes was commenced, I think in 1945, and a good deal of dissatisfaction has been expressed by a number of these settlers since they have occupied their houses. I brought this matter before the committee on veterans affairs which sat last session when I returned from a trip out west during the month of June.


Mr. MACKENZIE:: Are those Veterans Land Act houses?


James Arthur Ross: Yes, small holdings. When I was out there later in the season I had a contractor who is a personal friend of mine in Winnipeg accompany me. He made a thorough survey of one of these homes which the government had built and for which they are asking $7,300. After measuring the housing unit and listing everything which went into its construction, he assured me that with better material and better workmanship-I must confess that it is not very good workmanship or good materials that are used in most of these housing units-he could have built a like unit in 1939 for $3,145. The difference between $3,145 and $7,300 is $4,155, or approximately 130 per cent inflation since 1939.
These units were built on a cost-plus basis under government supervision. I have inspected these units and discussed the situation with their inhabitants and I think they offer a fair value of socialism. They were built for the government under government supervision on a cost-plus basis, and I am sure that is the way in which any socialist government would operate.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Since when did you start writing the doctrines of socialism?


James Arthur Ross: I am not writing it, but I have studied the doctrine of several of these European countries for the past few years.


Mr. JACKMAN:: He who hath eyes to see.


James Arthur Ross: Remember, according to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ilsley) who was Minister of Finance during the war years, in a statement which he made on February 28 last, lumber produced in Canada selling at a ceiling of $26 per 1,000 feet in Canada is exported at the prevailing price of $70 per 1,000 feet. We had an interesting set of figures on the construction of these houses at this time. I understand that an order in council was passed in May, 1946, making provision for $1,000,000 to be used by the Department of Veterans Affairs, for the adjustment of the cost of these houses, or whatever adjustments may be necessary, but that as of February 27 last nothing of a satisfactory nature has been accomplished in respect of a settlement with many of the occupants of the houses in the Charleswood area, and that information is up to within the last few days.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) also visited there during the election campaign.


James Arthur Ross: Did he?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Yes.


James Arthur Ross: I will confess that I was there myself during the election campaign and was there for many months before any candidate was nominated or anything said about an election, and I have been there several times since. I have gone right through the whole trend of events.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Minister of Agriculture promised to come back to Ottawa and have something done about the matter.


James Arthur Ross: Did he?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: Where were you?


Stanley Howard Knowles: In Winnipeg.


James Arthur Ross: According to the Canadian building authorities claim-and it has never been repudiated by anybody-no person can afford to purchase or agree to purchase a house valued at over twice his or her annual income. I think that is generally recognized across the country. The average veteran in Canada today does not receive an annual income of over $1,500. I believe that can be admitted. Therefore one of these five-room housing units at $7,300 is altogether too costly to be charged to the average veteran during these times. I believe it is recognized that things are pretty much at a peak now. If we are to have a recession and this is the peak of the average income of the veterans they will have great difficulty in fulfilling their obligation.

The Address-Mr. Ross (Souris)
I have quite a sheaf of correspondence on this Charleswood housing project, apart from what I have discovered at first hand myself.
I do not intend to go into it all, but it does point out something about the values of the construction of these houses and the difficulties they are now having. They do raise one pertinent point, namely, that several officials are putting the pressure on these people to have them sign these agreements at these amounts of S7.300. If they do not do so they will be asked to vacate on May 1, and that is less than two months from today. The people are now living in the houses on a rental basis of $30 a month. They are told by these officials that if there is any difficulty about having them sign these agreements or vacate, the rent will probably be raised considerably per month to the present occupants of the house.
I know, from my own personal inspection of these places, that some of them are most unsatisfactory in the matter of construction. When I was there, some of the houses had a great deal of water in the cellar. The basements had heaved and the centre was cracked wide open, throwing the foundations out of line. Some of the buildings were really in bad shape at that time. In fairness to the department, I must say that a great deal of repair work has been done to houses in that unit, but many of the people are still unsatisfied. They think there should be a 100 per. cent repair job done on all these houses before they are asked to sign an agreement to purchase the property. They are rightly entitled to that. They go farther, and a number of them ask for an independent royal commission. They claim that if such an independent commission were set up it should hold sittings in the larger centres throughout Canada. They mention, in particular, Winnipeg, because if the sittings were held there these people could get their own counsel and appear before such a body in Winnipeg. The same thing would apply to all centres across Canada w'here difficulties arise.
As a member of the committee on veterans affairs, I have heard of cases of a like nature in almost every province. To bear that out, I remember last summer I asked the minister a question, and probably some of these matters are still under investigation. In their complaints, many of these people point out that at this time the septic tanks have frozen up and the water has backed up into the basement. One can understand that this would cause an embarrassing situation to the people occupying these houses. They say that there is a great deal of danger from disease in the spring when warmer weather sets in.
As I have said, the cement floors in the basements have cracked and heaved from the frost and the water. There is a lot of water in that area at times, and the places are in an unsatisfactory condition. The carpentry work in many cases was very poor. Some of these chaps told me about their-own relatives working on the job, chaps who had never done any carpentry work in their lives before. They had come in from the farms and were paid carpenter's wages, working on the construction on a cost-plus basis. Not knowing anything about the job, they did not hustle very much. They were greenhorns on the job.
I remember last summer that a resolution came before the veterans affairs committee, and I believe it was agreed to because a question was asked the minister respecting the resolution on August 5. The committee recommended that if the outside cost of the veteran's house had gone over $6,000 the government should subsidize the excess up to at least 23i per cent, and the minister said that the matter was still under consideration and would probably be dealt with at the next session. By that, he meant this session of parliament.
On motion of Mr. Ross (Souris) the debate was adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Wednesday, March 5, 1947