1948-06-29

Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works) moved:: That the report of the civil service commission respecting revision of the classification of committee clerks of the House of Commons, presented to the house on Saturday, June 26, 1948, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J.COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar): Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent). It was announced over the radio this morning that Mr. Attlee had made a statement to the effect that there will be a meeting of commonwealth prime ministers this autumn. Has the Canadian government been approached in regard to the matter, and if so, can the minister indicate the purpose of the meeting?
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I should reply to the question. For some little time past the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom has been seeking to arrange a meeting in London of the prime ministers of the British commonwealth during either the summer or the autumn months. My hon. friend will have noticed a statement by Mr. Attlee that he had not found it possible to arrange for the meeting during the summer months on account of inability to get the different prime ministers together at that time, but that he does expect a meeting to be held in October.
I presume the meeting will be similar to the meeting of prime ministers held two years ago, and that it will be one in which matters of general interest to all the nations of the commonwealth will .be discussed. I am not aware, however, that any definite agenda has thus far been arranged.


Mr. GRAYDON:: I should like to ask a supplementary question. Will the Prime Minister himself represent Canada at the October meeting?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Well, that is something I wish I were in a position to answer. I might say that in the correspondence with the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom he was kind enough to express the wish that I might personally attend. I explained the position I was in with respect to attending any meeting in August, because of the convention to be held at that time. As to what it may be thought best to do thereafter may best be decided, I should think, after that meeting. I have expressed my desire to be as accommodating as it is possible for me to be in helping to .bring about the meeting at a time which would be most convenient for the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the other prime ministers.


Mr. POULIOT:: I should like to ask a supplementary question. Would the Prime Minister head the Canadian delegation to that conference?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It will not be a delegation. What is desired is a meeting of the prime ministers. Whoever is in that office at that time will, I assume, represent Canada.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, in view of what has been said about the possibility of the Prime Minister himself attending the conference of prime ministers in the fall in his capacity as prime minister, would it not be just as well to cancel the Liberal convention at Ottawa, which would serve no purpose?



COARSE GRAINS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. H. CASTLEDEN (Yorkton):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, or, in his absence, his parliamentary assistant. The minister promised a reply last week. What government action has been authorized to compensate coarse grain growers in western Canada for losses they suffered on account of early delivery of their coarse grains last fall?


Mr. G. J. McILRAITH (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Trade and Commerce) :: I do not know that there is much
Inquiries oj the Ministry

I can usefully add!. If I recall aright, the minister stated that an announcement in the matter would 'be made, and that the subject was under consideration. It will be a matter of policy.


George Hugh Castleden: Has a payment been authorized?
Mr. MoILRAITH: It is a matter of policy. When a payment is authorized I presume that it will be announced by the responsible minister.


George Hugh Castleden: I take it that a payment has not been authorized?


George James McIlraith: That does not follow from my remarks.


George Hugh Castleden: Will the parliamentary assistant answer this simple question: Has a payment been authorized? The answer is no?


George James McIlraith: The answer is that the decision is a matter of policy which will be announced at the proper time by the appropriate minister.


George Hugh Castleden: Surely I can find out whether a payment has been authorized.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.



LABOUR CONDITIONS

[Stage Direction]
seamen's STRIKE-WITHDRAWAL OF COURT ACTION
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: I should like to ask the Minister of Labour if he has been advised that the Canadian seamen's union dispute with the shipping companies has been withdrawn from the courts. If so, is action along the lines of conciliation contemplated by his department, and if necessary will he consider the appointment of a controller for the industry?


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Speaking now as an individual so far as I am concerned there will be no controller. I read in the newspapers that the case had been withdrawn. This is a free country, and you can always withdraw a case. It is simply an indication of freedom. I do not know why it was withdrawn, but it has been suggested that it was that they did not want Sullivan in the witness box. That is merely a conjecture. My hon. friend can rest assured that the services of my department are ever ready in connection with any dispute under federal jurisdiction.



FLOOD CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. D. PULTON (Kamloops):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Mines and Resources. As a result of the floods, the only Canadian highway leading into British Columbia which can be used

the only road now open-is one passing through a national park. Under the circumstances will the minister make a temporary change in the regulations to permit through trucking over the road through the national park?


Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Mines and Resources):: The arrangement suggested by the hon. member was made about ten days or two weeks ago, and will be in effect for a week at a time as long as the emergency lasts.


Mr. C. C. I. MERRITT (Vancouver-Bur-rard):: As I understand it, the relaxation of
the regulations in connection with truck traffic through a national park applies only to the movement of perishable commodities, not to general trucking which has been carried on over the southern trans-Canada highway. That road is out at Michel.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I suggest that the hon. member put his question.
'Mr. MERRITT: Will the minister extend the relaxation of the regulations so that the business of these trucking companies can be kept in being while flood conditions prevail?


James Angus MacKinnon: I took this matter up some little time ago when it was first brought to our attention. A general relaxation of all restrictions on trucking through the national park will be in effect until the emergency is over. We are having some trouble with our own roads, but they are being maintained and kept in shape. As long as they are in shape, and they are at the present time, trucks will be allowed to pass over that highway through the park until the emergency is over. The permission is granted a week at a time, as I have said.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: I should like to ask a supplementary question. Speaking to the minister's department only yesterday I was told that this relaxation applies only to the movement of perishable commodities. I would ask the minister to look into it again to make sure this is not right.


James Angus MacKinnon: I can only say that the arrangement was made through the director

Inquiries of the Ministry
of national parks, the senior official in the department. He gave me the information, and he made the arrangements. However, I shall check further.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On th-e orders of the day:
Mr. J. O. PROBE (Regina City) :: I have a question I should like to direct to the Minister of Veterans Affairs, and I have asked his parliamentary assistant to reply to it. What limitations are in effect with regard to the payment of the full 25 per cent increase in pensions to dependents of Canadian personnel killed in action and under what authority are those limitations applied?


Mr. L. A. MUTCH (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Veterans Affairs):: I have just had the hon. member's question handed to me. The limitations in effect are those which are in the act itself. The increase was a flat increase of 25 per cent to all those who are pensioned as of right. The limitation applies to dependent parents, in connection with which awards there has been discretionary power in the commission. In the case of a veteran himself, his wife or children, the increase is automatic.



FEDERATED CO-OPERATIVES OF SASKATCHEWAN- SUPPLY OF STEEL RODS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
["We agreed1 with the Minister of Public Works that we would sit long enough to enable the house to dispose of certain divorce bills after eleven o'clock.\nItem stands.\nResolutions reported, read the first and second times and concurred in."]
Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: I was going to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, but I shall direct it to his parliamentary assistant. In view of the anxiety of the Federated Cooperatives of Saskatchewan to supply their members with nails, can arrangements be made to supply steel rods for this purpose to the manufacturers with whom the federation is doing or expects to do business?


George James McIlraith: Perhaps I should say that the federation has been seeking to get an allocation of wire rods for nail cutting. The nail cutting capacity of the existing firms is not being used to capacity. As hon. members have noticed, there has been a sharp increase in the allocation of wire rods since June 1, but to take them away from existing firms and give them to the federation in order to start it in
a new business would not seem to be a way of solving the problem, and it certainly would not provide any more nails. I shall draw the remarks of the hon. member to the attention of the minister and see that they have further consideration.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Can the parliamentary assistant tell me how that fits into the free enterprise system?


George James McIlraith: I would be delighted to go into that subject, but this is neither the time nor place. I think hon. members should realize that what is being done here is to attempt to have a certain provincial organization get hold of a basic raw material which is in short supply. They want to get it in their hands away from the regular channels of trade. It is a matter of seeking to destroy the existing system rather than contributing to a solution of the problem of shortage of nails.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: A policy of protection. PRICES



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Finance if the government is giving consideration to the immediate implementation of at least some of the recommendations of the prices committee which were approved by this house last night, particularly with respect to some controls, some subsidies and some changes in taxation.


Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance):: The report is so recent that the government has not yet had time to give consideration to its recommendations.


EMBARGO ON SHIPMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. E. WRIGHT (Melfort):: I believe the matter of lifting the embargo on the export of beef is under the Minister of Agriculture. I should like to ask him if he will be prepared to make an announcement before the house closes as to just what the situation is and when we may expect some relaxation on the embargo on exports of beef to the United States.


Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, there is nothing I can add to what I said on May 7 last,
Supply

National Revenue

namely, that the recommendation which was made to the government now rests with the Department of Agriculture. It must be evident that it would1 be impossible to make any announcement in advance with regard to a question of this kind.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: What about the Saskatchewan election?


James Garfield Gardiner: I scarcely discussed it in Saskatchewan, and if my hon. friend will look at the map he will find that the only constituency in Saskatchewan in which there are a considerable number of ranches went Liberal.
Mr. 'OOLDWELL: In consequence of the minister's announcement.


James Garfield Gardiner: In other words, they show they are very well satisfied1 with the present policy.
The fact is that no one can make an announcement in advance about taking an embargo off cattle; otherwise there would not be any cattle delivered until the date announced. But in view of the fact that information is wanted, I call attention to the fact that in January 1947 the hog-barley ratio in Winnipeg was 19-5 and the hog-corn ratio in Chicago was 17*1. In May, 1948, the hog-barley ratio in Winnipeg was 19, and1 the hog-corn ratio in Chicago was 8-7. In other words, those who have now great numbers of cattle still feeding in their stalls would find that if the controls were removed immediately, the cost of grain to feed livestock would be just double what it is now.


INQUIRY AS TO REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PROCEDURE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister? Is it the government's intention to take any action this session in connection with the report on procedure which was tabled on Friday last by His Honour the Speaker?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon. friend will have to wait and see. So far as I am aware, we have covered all the reports the government intends to bring forward at this time.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.


DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE
[Stage Direction]
International short wave broadcasting station-
SOT. Maintenance and operation, $1,711,560.
Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: Mr. Chairman, are you taking votes 307, 308, 804 and 805 together?


The CHAIRMAN:: It has been suggested by the hon. member for St. Paul's that we consider votes 307, 308, 804 and 805 together. Is that agreed?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.
SOS. Capital costs, $75,606.
SOI/. Maintenance and	operation-further
amount required, $116,591.89.
80S. Capital costs-further amount required, $3,066,460.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Perhaps the minister would give us a few details of the capital cost of $3,000,000 odd in vote 805. I think I know what it- is for, probably for the purchase of the Ford hotel building in Montreal. Why does the C.B.C. want that building? I just cannot see why a building costing over three million dollars is needed in connection with this international short wave. Has this anything to do with the ordinary expenditures of CJ3.C., or what is the explanation?


Mr. McCANN:: Votes 307, 308, 804 and 805 have to do with the international shortwave service of the broadcasting system. Last night I think I explained pretty well what the functions of the international short wave were, and the work that was being done by that organization in broadcasting programs from Canada, to different parts of the world. I explained that the money that was spent prior to 1945, when the international shortwave was opened, was money which had been voted by parliament for the original construction, and arrangements were made that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation should operate the service for a reasonable fee percentage of the amount of money spent on the system.
That is as far as that particular development went, inasmuch as no provision was made at that time for offices, either engineering or administrative, or for studios for those who were to take part in broadcasting the programs. It was necessary to use the facilities of the C.BjC. in the city of Montreal, which is the headquarters for the broadcasting, and that was done. Our arrangements in that city have not been of the best, since we have had to have seven different locations in Montreal for C.B.C. and the international short wai*e. Unfortunately last January there

Supply-National Revenue
was a fire and an explosion at one of these locations, in King's Hall on St. Catherine street, involving loss of life and great destruction of property. It immediately became necessary to find other quarters to take the place of those destroyed. AVe have also run into difficulties in that our leases were expiring this year and it became necessary to look for new quarters or to renew the present leases. AVhen it came to renewing leases we found that in Montreal as in many other cities the rates had almost doubled. It was thought that it would be a matter of good policy if the facilities of both the international short wave and the C.B.C. could be brought together in one public building. With that in mind arrangements have been made, but have not been fully completed, under which the crown is buying what is known as the Ford hotel on Dorchester street for headquarters of the international shortwave system. In the building will be housed those offices which are necessary to carry on the system. There will be administrative offices and engineering offices. The interior of the building will be converted into up-to-date studios. The C.B.C. will become tenants of the building. AVhen the C.B.C. become tenants of the building owned by the crown in the name of the international short wave we shall have reached what we have had in mind for years, namely, the idea of having concentrated in one quarter the facilities of both the international short wave and the C.B.C.
As I said, the cost of the building is $2,000,000. In addition to that, to provide for expansion in years to come, if it is necessary, we have also purchased a building from the same people next to the Ford hotel on Dorchester street for the sum of $50,000. In order to take care of the leases which are held by tenants at the present time the Ford hotel people are looking after them and we are compensating them to the extent of $150,000. The cost of the Ford hotel, the cost of the building next to it, and the amount necessary to take care of the leases, bring the total up to $2,200,000. We are asking for an appropriation of $3,000,000 because it will take the remaining $800,000 to reconstruct and transform the building into offices and suitable studios.
I do not know that I can give any more information with reference to the matter, but I shall be glad to answer any questions that have to do with it.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I do not think anybody in Canada begrudges the money to our international short-wave system. It can be one
of the greatest things for good that we have ever had in Canada in connection with trade if it is properly carried on and if the broadcasts are properly done. We are a democratic country. We must let the people of the rest of the world know what a fine place Canada is in which to live. When you listen to some of the members of the C.C.F. party to my left talk about Canada you would think that it was an awful place.


George Hugh Castleden: It is getting better every day.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I find that most people look upon Canada as a good place in which to live. We should be broadcasting to the world what a fine place Canada is.^ I am all in favour of money being expended in that way.


An hon. MEMBER:: And a good government to do it.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: You will have a better government when we get into power, which will not be long from now.
Aside from this political stuff, there is one thing we should stop, and that is this farcical method of collecting radio fees. At the present time the broadcasting corporation is purchasing a building for the short-wave system. That is just nonsense because they are going to have the C.B.C. as tenants, and the people of Canada are going to pay for it. They will not get it out of the $2.50 that every radio owner is supposed to pay each year. The system does not get $2.50 from everybody. Let us cut it out. I know that the minister is anxious to cut down expenditures, but how in the world can he justify the expenditure of $571,000 to collect the licence fees? For some unknown reason-I do not know what it is

he says he wants to keep the C.B.C. free of government interference or something like that. The point is, it is not done. A person can have ten radios, and he pays a fee of $2.50. If he gets one more radio in his car he has to pay an additional $2.50.
The Minister of Agriculture probably has three or four radios in his house and one in the hotel. I have two or three around my place as well; I have one in my summer home and on my farm. All I have to pay is $2.50. What a nonsensical situation that is. I cannot understand it. I am all in favour of having a good C.B.C. AVe should have had a radio committee this year. It should be a standing committee. That committee should meet every session because there are many things that are dependent upon the C.B.C. There is the question of freedom of speech, which is coming up all the time. AVe have that question before us now.
Supply-National Revenue


Mr. CASSELMAN:: We are getting it now.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I do not take up much of the time of the house, and I do not see why my whip should call me to order in the dying days of the session. I am in support of this, but I am referring to the principle. I shall talk on it at some other time, but not this session.


Clarence Gillis: Is it the intention of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to establish a new outlet in Sydney, Nova Scotia? If so, when does the minister expect to have that station in operation?


James Joseph McCann: The establishment of a new station in Sydney is part of our contemplated program. In our next estimates we shall ask for the money to do the work in Sydney.


Mr. HANSELL:: Radio has been an interesting subject to me throughout the past number of years. I rise to make only one observation, and perhaps ask a question. No radio committee was set up this year, in spite of the fact that last year and every year that the radio committee has met it has recommended that the radio committee of parliament be an annual affair. Because that committee was not set up, we have not had an opportunity to go into the receipts and expenditures of the C.B.C. and the general radio policy as it exists in Canada from time to time.
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is a tremendous institution. While it is in the commercial field, and is reaping revenues by being in that field, it has not yet been able to stand on its own feet. I am not making any harsh criticism, because I recognize that the corporation is doing a job which requires expenditures over and above what a properly operated radio system might require. Nevertheless, with the operation of the short wave station included, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is becoming a tremendous drain upon the taxpayer. I believe that somewhere along the line we have to call a halt.
I am all in favour of making Canada known to the other nations of the world. I am all for the use of the short-wave system to encourage proper trade relations between Canada and the rest of the world. I am all for letting the rest of the world know something about our Canadian culture. Many of us wish it were of a higher order, but perhaps, in a small nation of 12,000,000 people, we cannot expect too much in too short a time. I am all for these things.
When however we begin to look into the amount of money spent on the Canadian

Broadcasting Corporation I am beginning to think that it is not entirely justified. The C.B.C. and the short-wave station, with its operations, are tied in one with the other. Personally I have not been able to satisfy myself, in reading any of the reports, as to where one ends and the other may begin. There is a general feeling abroad that the short-wave radio station, with its operations, being paid for purely by the taxpayers of Canada, since I understand the short-wave station has no commercial revenues-the minister can correct me on that point-everything the short-wave station does is done at the expense of the people of Canada. Some people who are interested in radio policy in Canada are coming to feel that the shortwave station with its operations is becoming a sort of cow which is fed by the taxpayer but perhaps in the end milked by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
If I am not right on that I would like to be put right, but it will take more than simply an answer of a minute or so to put me right on it, because I do not believe we can get the picture until we are able to go into the entire financial policy, with receipts and expenditures and all that is involved between the C.B.C. on the one hand and the international short wave on the other.
I do not rise to oppose this expenditure, but we have a tremendous capital outlay here, most of which I fancy is for the purchase of the Ford hotel in Montreal. I want to say a word on that-and it is not by way of criticism, because I really do not feel that I am competent to criticize on that particular point. However, I will take it for granted that those who are managing this thing are doing right. I must say that I never did visualize the government taking over the Ford hotel in Montreal. I know that the C.B.C. some years ago had an option to buy a piece of property which at the time they took out the option appeared to be an idle spot. After that there was a readjustment of population, and so on, in Montreal, and they let the option go by the board. This meant that some other arrangement had to be made, but I never expected that- what was going to happen would be the purchase of an old hotel. I visualized, and I recommended years ago, that Canada should have somewhere for its radio operations a sort of young radio city. I rather visualized something unique in architecture, situated perhaps in the middle of an elaborate park or other area of the kind in which art in different forms could be

Supply-National Revenue
exemplified-because after all, radio is to a large extent an art. Instead of that we are getting drab office buildings situated in the midst of a lot of other buildings. Personally I do not like the idea. However, there is nothing I can do about it except to express my thoughts on the subject.
I am surprised at the. location of this building, which now I suppose will have to do the corporation for years to come. I do not like that. Pretty soon the building, situated where it is, will be obsolete, or, if not obsolete, not much of an advertisement for radio in Canada. I rather expected that this young radio city which I visualized in a growing nation would be situated in Toronto. Why it was decided to buy the Ford hotel in Montreal I do not know.


John Oliver Probe: Why don't you consider*
Regina?


Ernest George Hansell: The hon. member for Regina City says Regina might be considered. So it might, just as well as any other point. I should think it would have to be in some city, because-


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Well, Regina is a city.


Mr. PEARKES:: There is a hotel in Victoria. Why not put it there?


Ernest George Hansell: What I mean is, whatever city is selected, it must be in a fairly large centre, a metropolis, for the reason that its operations are dependent largely on the talent that might be concentrated in a metropolitan area. That is why I suggested Toronto. I have no brief for Toronto. It might just as well be out in the glorious Rocky mountains where it would constitute a tourist attraction as well. At any rate I am disappointed that the government is buying the Ford hotel in Montreal for this purpose.
I would ask the minister to say whether I am right in saying that the Ford hotel, while being bought for the short-wave station, is simply a sort of cover. I do not think anyone will say that the short-wave service is so considerable that a hotel building must be provided. I do not think it is. The shortwave station, while serving a useful purpose, is in my opinion but a small part of our entire radio system in Canada, and I am inclined to think that this is one way of giving the C.B.C. something which it could not otherwise get. I am quite sure that if there were an appropriation of $2,000,000 or $3,000,000 for the C.B.C., even for a national home, there might at this time be some considerable opposition. I would not oppose that, because I am not one to oppose the spending of money. I think that is what money is for, to be spent. On the
other hand, when it is to be taken out of the pockets of the taxpayers, they want to know that they are to get something in return. I believe that this is just a suitable way of asking the people of Canada for two or three million dollars, on the basis of a short-wave service, so that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation may come in on the kill. I may not be right, and my language may be over expressive, but I think perhaps that is the situation.


Mr. ISNOR:: I shall deal with just one item, namely the international short-wave station. In view of the important events taking place in New Brunswick, particularly in the last twenty-four hours-


An hon. MEMBER:: You mean yesterday.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Yesterday, yes. In view of
those events I am interested in the station at Sackville.


An hon. MEMBER:: Good broadcasting was done there.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Good work was done there. During the war, and perhaps for twenty-four months afterwards, a good deal of war news of value was broadcast from that station. In his statement yesterday, the minister said that fourteen and a half hours was the average daily time that station was in use. Now that the facilities are not being used in connection with war, I would like to know what portion of the time is devoted to a function that I believe was felt to be important in the creation of that station, namely, the enlargement and development of our export trade. Has the minister a breakdown of the hours devoted to the various programs and subjects, particularly to news about the development of our export business?
While I am on my feet I should like to ask the minister if consideration has been given to the amalgamation of the C.B.C. with the national film board, or of the film board with the C.B.C., whichever way he wishes to put it. I think a merger at this time could well be considered. Whether it would be feasible in view of the coming into effect of television, and its use to a greater extent than ever before, I do not know. I notice that Hollywood is claiming certain privileges in connection with television, linking up the picture program with that of television. Has the minister given any thought to that?


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: If the minister does not intend to answer now, Mr. Chairman, may I make a brief comment? I do not wish to delay the committee; having been away for some time, I feel that I should not now make long speeches.
Supply-National Revenue

I have always been interested in the broadcasting corporation. We have not had a committee on radio this year, and I shall not deal with anything pertaining to the corporation 'but shall confine myself specifically to international broadcasting. The amount of money appropriated appears to be large, and I believe some other hon. members feel that it is large.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: The hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar answered me rather shortly yesterday, Mr. Chairman, and I do not wish to answer him in the same way. But I should like to have an answer to the two questions I asked, because I might wish to pursue them further before the hon. member enters into a general discussion.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: I prefaced my remarks, Mr. Chairman, by saying that I desired to make a few comments if the minister did not intend to answer immediately. If the minister had indicated his intention to answer immediately, I would have at once resumed my seat. I give the minister my assurance of that. I will do whatever the minister wishes me to do.


James Joseph McCann: I had thought of attempting to answer all the questions after there had been general discussion. If we were to answer them in rotation, then the hon. member for Macleod should have his answered first.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Very well; I shall continue. What I started to say was this. While the amount may appear to be large, and it is a large amount, I believe the expenditure on the international broadcasting station is warranted. Those of us who have followed the activities of this station know that it is giving to the people of the world an idea of Canadian life and culture; but I feel that it has rendered a more valuable service even than that during the last couple of years.
Our international radio station is one which is heard over a larger part of Europe than any other station in North America. For instance, I know from evidence that was given before the radio committee last year that in Czechoslovakia we have the largest group of listeners of any radio station that penetrates into eastern Europe. At this time, without indulging in propaganda of the type to which we are sometimes subjected, the fact that we are able to penetrate into countries behind what is sometimes called the iron curtain is all to the good. In doing that I think the station is rendering a useful service, not only to Canada but to the democratic cause throughout the world. To the extent that we are able to do that we are keeping in touch with people behind the iron curtain who are our friends and who feel that they are plowing somewhat

of a lonely furrow. Consequently anything we can do, through our culture programs and so on, in eastern Europe, indeed all of Europe, will be a valuable service to democracy the world over.
I am glad that several years ago, after a great deal of discussion in the radio committee, the government built the station and the corporation assumed the responsibility for its programs. I am quite sure that if we had a radio committee this year and the members of the corporation appeared before it, they would be able to tell us again the reaction throughout Europe and the rest of the world where the station is heard, and could give us an impressive list of persons who had been engaged and who, because they are refugees to a large extent, must be remunerated. It is one way of doing what I think we should try to do: we should endeavour to assist people in our country who have suffered for the common cause by enabling them to perform a useful function to Canada and to their native land. For that reason alone, if for no other, we should support the international broadcasting station.
Someone suggests that we might get some commercial revenue. I do not think that is possible with an international station. For one thing, in many countries a good example was set in not permitting commercial advertising over the radio. Those countries would resent it if a North American station advertised for sponsors in their countries. I regret exceedingly that the broadcasting corporation this year has changed its policy in that respect, by allowing prices to be mentioned under certain circumstances. I think that is a backward step; had there been a radio committee this year we should have reported adversely upon it. It is unfair to the small merchants, because it places them more and more in the hands of the big companies which can buy advertising in considerable quantities.
So far as short wave is concerned, from what I know and what I have learned from persons who have spoken to their own countries after certain things have happened there, I am convinced that this radio station is rendering a valuable service and that we should support it-if we are anxious, as I am sure hon. members are, to do all we can to encourage and to support the friends of democracy who today are under dictatorships in various parts of the world.


Mr. FLEMING:: If we had known earlier in the session that this program of expansion in connection with short-wave facilities was contemplated, we would certainly have pressed for the setting up of the committee on radio broadcasting. But we did not know about it. The matter has come to the attention of the

Supply-National Revenue
house only in recent days. The question of the purchase of the Ford hotel in Montreal was scouted in this chamber only about two weeks ago. I asked a question about it, based upon some information which had appeared in the press, and I was told that the information was not correct. Further information has appeared subsequently in driblets, and it is only now, within the last several days, that we have had a statement as to the details of the purchase.
A matter of this magnitude, involving the policy of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and of the government with respect to short-wave broadcasting, warranted the setting up of the radio committee. Certainly many of the members who had been on radio committees in previous sessions, were pressed with a multitude of other duties, and were not aware of any extensive change in policy on the part of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Under these circumstances it perhaps did not seem necessary that the committee be convened to meet again this year. Had we been told at an earlier stage of the session that expenditures of this magnitude were contemplated, that changes in policy were involved, or that an expensive building in Montreal was to be purchased, certainly it would have been the duty of the house to press the government to set up the radio committee.
I am not commenting in detail upon the terms of the purchase. Without more information I would not feel competent to express an opinion, although I am inclined to share many of the views expressed this morning by the hon. member for Macleod. But I do say that a transaction of this magnitude should not be permitted without having first a review by the radio committee.


James Joseph McCann: Why did you not have the committee?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I do not seek necessarily to bring into disrepute the policy embarked upon. But I believe it is the duty of the House of Commons to concern itself in these matters, to know about them, to inquire into them and to satisfy itself as to the necessity of expenditures and the desirability of changes of policy involved.


Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):: I should like to underline what has been said by the hon. member for Eglinton, which I think is very true. Here we face another large expenditure which comes to us without any opportunity to discuss even the principle involved. I find myself in agreement with what was said by the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar with respect to the use of the international radio. The only comment I
have to make on that is that in this strange world, where we hardly know who can be disaffected and who can not, the authorities ought to know very well who the foreigners are that they employ to broadcast to the various countries-because we have a lot of wolves in sheep's clothing these days.
What I have to say further has reference to what was said by the hon. member for Macleod. I hope the minister will tell us to what extent this will help indirectly the C.B.C. That aspect is important. Those of us who have regretted, and still regret, the building up of this great monopoly, view with increasing uneasiness the way in which it goes on acquiring more and more properties. This further aspect of it is in one's mind-and for the life of me, I cannot understand what the press is thinking about, because as soon as we get radio newspapers, and they become effective, this great and centralized system of propaganda will have been established.
Let me say quickly that I believe the C.B.C. try to be fair. I am sure they believe they are being as independent as can be. I have no doubt they often think they are leaning over backwards to be fair. But in my opinion it just is not humanly possible for any government controlled corporation to be absolutely independent of government. It just does not happen that way.


James Joseph McCann: I shall try to deal with some of the points raised by hon. members. The hon. member for Macleod and the hon. member for Eglinton have made reference to there not having been a committee on radio broadcasting this year. The blame in that regard cannot be placed upon the government. We had a motion ready and had our own representation named to it. We asked opposition members to name their representation to that committee, and they indicated to us that they did not think it was necessary or desirable to set up a radio committee this year.


Ernest George Hansell: That is absolutely mistaken.


James Joseph McCann: It is a fact.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It does not apply to this group.


James Joseph McCann: The official opposition.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Say "the official opposition", then.


James Joseph McCann: Yes, the official opposition.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Was there any suggestion that there was anything to discuss?
Supply-National Revenue


James Joseph McCann: There is always an agenda of business at yearly meetings. I was chairman of the committee on radio broadcasting on a number of occasions, and, I believe, among the first to advocate annual sittings of the committee. I still adhere to that policy, that there should be an investigation each year. But if you cannot get a party to nominate members to take their place on a committee, then you cannot go along without them.
I wish to refer to some of the matters dealt with by the hon. member for Macleod, and I would turn first to the purchasing of a place in Montreal in which to carry on business. I submit that from a business point of view this is an excellent purchase. What the hon. member for Macleod has in mind would, I have no doubt, be pretentious and artistic, and would involve an expenditure of two or three million dollars. Of course I would like to have something like that if it were possible to get sufficient by way of appropriation. I would like to have an elaborate radio centre, and I had in mind in former years that it might well be established in connection with some university. However, that has not come to pass. The fact that we were up against it to such an extent for office quarters in Montreal made us look around for a building which would take the place of the studio from which we were both burned and blown out, and of premises for which our leases had expired.
We are not buying an old hotel. We are buying a good structure, built of steel and cement. It is fireproof, and lends itself to reconstruction to the point where it will meet the needs of broadcasting for many years to come. I submit that the price we are paying is fair. I had an examination and appraisal of the building made by our own and independent officers. I know the amount of the mortgage that was on the building and by whom it was held. Their appraisal of the value of the building is exactly what we have paid for it. We are paying $2,000,000 and we were first asked $2,800,000.


Mr. MacNICOL:: You could not build it for $2,000,000.


James Joseph McCann: That is just the point I am making. That works out at about 99 cents per cubic foot, and you could not replace a building of that type in Montreal for less than $1.55 a cubic foot. In the case of a new building we would not have occupancy much before two years, whereas in this case we will have occupancy on September 15.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Do you not have to make alterations?


James Joseph McCann: I said we would have occupancy on September 15, but that is the date we will begin our operations, and we should have occupancy about the first of the new year, 1949.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I bet you will not.


James Joseph McCann: Those figures and dates have been given to me by competent people. Some suggestion has been made here that the C.B.C. are using this as a sort of underhand method in order to benefit their own case. That is not in accordance with the facts. If there has been a milch cow in this whole proposition, it is the C.B.C. They had the facilities, they had the people, they had the offices, they had everything that goes with radio broadcasting, and all these facilities have been given to the international short wave without any cost. The boot was on the other foot.
We propose that the crown in the name of the international short wave will become the owners and the C.B.C. will continue to be paid for the services they render to the international short wave. They will become tenants of the building, and along with other people who rent concessions and the like they will provide revenue which will be offset against this expenditure.
With reference to the matter brought up by the hon. member for Halifax, I may say that news is part of all the services and occupies about half the time in each language. A great deal of our time is given to programming and dealing with matters affecting trade and commerce. We are in direct connection with the Department of External Affairs and the Department of Trade and Commerce in the matter of broadcasting anything which they might want to have broadcast.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Can the minister give a breakdown of the number of hours?


James Joseph McCann: 
Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to make one comment with respect to the setting-up of the radio committee, and th*n ask some questions. First, may I make it quite clear that I accept no part of the responsibility for having said that we did not want a committee set up. But I would point out to the minister that there were a large number of committees this session, and for some reason they seemed to have more work referred to them than has been the case in past years. Unless there was an announcement of some major change in policy it was therefore natural to feel that perhaps there would be no need for the usual C.B.C. committee to be appointed. Certainly the impression we had was that the C.B.C. was carrying on under settled policy which had; been fully discussed by the past committees, and it was not until the last three weeks of the session that we found out about this purchase of a building for the international short-wave station, and also the intention to co-ordinate the various offices in Montreal. That is an entirely new departure, so far as we were aware. It is not logical to say that had
we known that anything of that sort was contemplated we would not have insisted on the radio committee being set up. It was because we did not know that until the last three weeks of the session that we did not ask that the committee be set up.
Perhaps the minister has given the information I am about to ask for. What amounts are being paid for leases in Montreal?


James Joseph McCann: Yes, I gave that.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Who will be the chief tenant of the building? I understood the minister to say that the crown will own the building and the C.B.C. and the international short wave will both occupy it. Who will administer the building? Will the C.B.C. be in charge of and administer any part of it and rent to the short-wave station, or vice versa?


James Joseph McCann: It will be administered by the C.B.C. The occupants will be those people who are connected with the short-wave system and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The engineering requirements in Montreal are considerable because they have to do with developments all over Canada. The C.B.C. engineers have built all the equipment which was necessary in the development of these high-powered stations. Considerable space will be taken up by studios which will be used jointly by artists of the international short wave and the C.B.C.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The point is that the building is definitely going to be used by both the C.B.C. and the international short wave?


James Joseph McCann: Yes. They are to be brought together and centralized in the one building.


Edmund Davie Fulton: In addition to the capital expenditure that is being made there is a considerable increase over last year in the operating cost. It works out to an increase of $259,831. Can the minister explain how operating costs have gone up, in view of his statement that C.B.C. were cramped for space? I find, for example, $90,000 for postage, printing andl stationery, which seems a tremendous amount under that one head.


James Joseph McCann: One of the reasons for the increase in operating costs is that, despite the fact that we were overcrowded, we added three new services in international broadcasting, using three more languages. You have to have people who can speak Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, Italian, French, English and all the rest, and they charge pretty good fees.
6054
Supply-National Revenue


Mr.   MJLTON@: Why do we not get any compensation from the united nations when we broadcast for them?
Mr. MoOANN: That has never been considered a commercial proposition. We regard it as Canada's contribution to the united nations to let them have the use of our facilities without charge.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Do we get credit for that fact when the program is put on the air?


James Joseph McCann: Absolutely; that is announced. Within the last few months we have received over 40,000 communications from various countries telling us how much they appreciated the service that was given.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Is it the intention of the minister to reply to the inquiry I made about the amalgamation or merging of C.B.C. with the national film board?


James Joseph McCann: I do not think the government has given consideration to amalgamating the C.B.C. with the national film board. They are two entirely different set-ups. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is the property of those who pay licence fees for receiving sets and of commercial firms who pay licences. That includes about 95 per cent of the people of Canada, because our coverage is between 95 and 97 per cent of the homes of Canada. That is in an entirely different position from the film board, which is maintained out of the taxes of all the people of 'Canada. It was an agency set up to create and distribute films. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, according to the broadcasting act of 1936, is an entirely separate corporation responsible not to the government but to parliament. They operate wholly-owned and wholly-controlled public systems of broadcasting. The national film board was set up under the National Film Board Act, and it is there to do sponsored work for different departments of government and such other work as the board, which is representative of all parts of the country and of all the services within the government, may be directed to do.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: My impression was that the same principle applied to the international short wave system, which is paid for by this country at large, as applies to the national film board. But I do not wish to pursue the matter further at this time.


Ernest George Hansell: When I spoke before I mentioned, just in a casual way, that the radio committee had not been set up this year, and that because no committee had been set up there were perhaps many things upon

which we were not sufficiently informed. The minister, when he replied, seemed to indicate by what he said, and perhaps also by the inflection of his voice, that it had been the government's desire to have this committee set up, that it had the motion all ready and its own members allocated to the committee, and that then, just as they were about to ask for its appointment, those on the opposition side expressed themselves as against setting up the committee this year. That is the impression the minister left upon the house. I consulted with the leader of this party, the hon. member for Peace River, and he says he knows nothing about that.


James Joseph McCann: The official opposition.


Ernest George Hansell: The whip of the C.C.F. also knew nothing about it. So the Conservative party may have to take the responsibility for there not being a radio committee this year. Maybe we did not need one. But that is not the point. The impression has gone out across this country: Oh yes, the government wanted a radio committee set up, but nobody else wanted it. That is not so. If the truth were known-and the official opposition can speak for themselves-perhaps the government came along in the dying hours of the session when there was no proper opportunity for a fair inquiry, and the official opposition may have said so.
I want to ask a question about the building the government have purchased for the shortwave service. It is a crown corporation. The C.B.C. are going to pay rent for the use of it. Did the government consider the advisability of asking for this appropriation for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation so that they would owm the building and it would be an asset of the C.B.C.? They could then charge rent for the operation of the short-wave system.
I believe that the national film board and the C.B.C. are big enough to require the attention of a separate minister. In saying that I have no desire to reflect on the Minister of National Revenue, who is a good minister and has done a good job, but I believe that these two branches of government, the C.B.C., which is a crown corporation-there is no disputing that, although there may be some legal technicalities about it-and the national film board; these two branches of our Canadian life-let me put it that way-have growm big enough to require the attention of a separate minister. I think that would make it a stronger department. As it is now, the Minister of National Revenue, whoever he may be at the time, is a mere figurehead, a sort of connecting link between

Supply-National Revenue
the government and these two institutions, the national film board and the C.B.C. They run themselves and perhaps run the minister, rather than the minister giving them instructions. That may be a good thing; I do not know. I should think it would be better to have our government organized in that way. Perhaps the minister will comment on my second point.
Mr. PEARKES; I have a brief question to ask which I think could properly be asked under one of these items. During the war the C.B.C. rented a private station in Prince Rupert known as CFPR, and were able to broadcast to that locality the various programs of C.B.C. These programs were carried by a communication system which was provided by the government during the war. I understand that the C.B.C. still leases CFPR in Prince Rupert, but the citizens of that locality get a very modified C.B.C. program. There is some difficulty in getting the programs broadcast although they are taken to the Prince Rupert station. I am told that it is because it has been necessary to lease the lines which were constructed during the war.
A year ago when consideration was being given to the disposal of these lines I asked whether the service would be made available to the people of northern British Columbia, so that they would not lose anything that they had gained during the war. I have a letter from the radio committee of the chamber of commerce of Prince Rupert in which they inform me that while the programs actually reach the station, they are not broadcast. I refer to programs such as the Imperial Oil hockey broadcast. These programs are not broadcast to the people of Prince Rupert although they are actually in the station. Will the minister tell me why these programs cannot be broadcast, or will he take steps to see that they are broadcast in the future?


James Joseph McCann: The answer to that question is entirely a matter of costs. To hire the transmission lines to put the programs from Prince George to Prince Rupert would cost $30,000 or $35,000 a year. That has not been worked out, although they get some of the programs because the Canadian National Railways transmit them over their lines to their own employees who are listening.


The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:: Order. The item before the committee has to do with international short-wave broadcasting, maintenance and operation. A general discussion has taken place under the general administration item. We do not want to go over that 5849-384J	'
again. We should confine our remarks to the items under discussion.


George Randolph Pearkes: I submit that this is in order because it is an international broadcast. We are right on the frontier of Canada between British Columbia and Alaska.


William Henry Golding: Has it to do with the international short-wave broadcasting station?


George Randolph Pearkes: I think so. It is heard in Alaska. Both the citizens of the United States and the people1 of Prince Rupert are interested in these hockey broadcasts; therefore the matter is distinctly international.


William Henry Golding: Are hockey games broadcast over the short-wave station?


Mr. ADAMSON:: I do not know whether these two questions were covered last night. In view of the cramped hotel space in Montreal was it necessary to have the international broadcasts concentrated in one centre rather than build part of the engineering and other facilities outside of the city?
I should like to have some idea of the pattern of the short-wave programs which are broadcast from Saekville. I have heard them in the West Indies. There are two or three services and a special beam to the West Indies and South America. There is another beam to the continent of Europe. I have not been able to find out whether a statement has been made on that to the committee. The committee would be interested in knowing, not just the countries to which we broadcast, but the flexibility of the station. How far are the broadcasts beamed, and what countries receive them? What reaction has the government received from the countries to which these broadcasts are beamed? I know that the United States station "Voice of America", which is a station similar to ours, although they have one in San Francisco and another on the Atlantic seaboard, receive favourable reports on their broadcasting. As a matter of fact they are so favourable that I understand the Sdviet union has taken steps to jam their signals as they come through the iron curtain or the dividing line between the east and west of Europe. Some statement on that should be given to the committee at this stage.


James Joseph McCann: Most of the information along that line was given last night. I may say that we can broadcast to any part of the world. The united nations have asked particularly that our service be used because they get a clearer signal throughout the world from the station at Saekville than they do from any other.
Supply-Public Works


Agar Rodney Adamson: The Saokville station can be heard anywhere in the world?


James Joseph McCann: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Has the minister reports?


James Joseph McCann: That is what is reported to us.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The minister has not
answered my first question, with regard to the situation in the city of Montreal.


James Joseph McCann: The first question had to do with the hotel situation in Montreal. There is plenty of that type of hotel service in Montreal, so that our taking over of the Ford hotel does not increase any shortage that there is in that regard.
The second question was whether it was necessary that they should be together. No, it is not altogether necessary that all the facilities be together, but it is much more convenient and much more economical than having them spread over different parts of the country.


[Stage Direction]
Items agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
327. Departmental administration, $246,607.
'Mr. MacNICOL: There is nothing in the estimates of the public works department pertaining to great lakes levels, particularly lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron. Since the high water levels of these three lakes, and particularly lake Ontario at the moment, are a matter of major importance, I felt I should raise the question at this time.
Across the front of the great city of Toronto lies what was in my day, when I used to visit it, as I did many hundreds of times, a most beautiful island. No finer public park existed in Canada than Toronto island as it was some years ago. When one recalls seeing over there thousands upon thousands of mothers, scores of thousands of children, all gathered there for the good of their health; when one remembers the thousands of picnics that were held on the island by residents of Toronto many years ago, one wonders why it is that today the island is in such a deplorable condition.
I was over there a few days ago to check up on my past observations, and I am exceedingly sorry to say that the high water level of lake Ontario is now ruining that beautiful island, so that unless some major reclamation program is initiated it will be washed away. At the moment the latest report for the month of June indicates that the water level of lake Ontario, that is to say, Toronto harbour, is at the almost unprecedented height of 248-15

feet above sea level, the highest level in the history of the lake since 1860, except in July 1947 when it averaged 248-81.
What can. be done I am not going to say. I may offer suggestions, but I am quite aware that the problem is a great one. On the island itself, comprising about 800 acres, there were many years ago beautiful lagoons on which the residents of Toronto used to pass their time in pleasure boats, and in my time many thousands of people spent the summer in cottages on the island. Unless some change takes place in the Ontario lake level, all that will be a thing of the past, and it will be a serious matter for the great city of Toronto.
Not only does this apply to Toronto island; the same is true all along the three lakes. Look at Burlington beach, where many hundreds of houses were built; today they are more or less imder water. One sees the same thing all along lake Erie up around Erieau, where I went recently to see the effect of the high water level. But the damage is not confined to the Canadian side; one can see the same thing on the United States side. I am afraid there will be a great deal of trouble.
In 1941, if I remember rightly, I brought up the question of lake levels in the House of Commons, and I predicted then what would happen as one of the results of the diversion of a very large volume of water from the Albany river watershed into the St. Lawrence river watershed. I predicted then that not only this government but the government of the United States would face thousands of legal actions for the destruction of private property, and that is what is coming to pass.
On March 10 of this year an organization known as the Lake Shore Erosion Association held a conference in Toronto. So far as I can estimate from the report, which I have in my hand, between sixty and seventy-five municipalities along the shores of lake Ontario, lake Erie and lake Huron, attended to lay before the conference the troubles which each was having from the constantly rising lake levels. Many resolutions were passed, one of which I will read, No. 7:
Resolved that this organization ask the provincial and federal governments to instruct their engineers to make a survey of erosion on the great lakes and report with a recommendation for remedy; and that in this report be included a report on the effects of the Ogoki and Albany river diversions on the level of the great lakes.
It was about the probable effect of the diversion of waters from the Albany river watershed into the St. Lawrence river watershed that I spoke in 1941 when I predicted that precisely what is happening now would take place. The delegates who framed this resolution probably had before them a pamphlet

Supply-Public Works
I wrote in 1939; for I sent copies of it to many of the municipalities along the great lakes who have written to me on the subject. The pamphlet is called "Water". I gave a copy of it to the minister this morning and I shall be glad to give copies to other members. This pamphlet is a treatise on lake levels. I have travelled over these lakes from one end to the other, as well as to their sources and to the sources of the rivers that flow into them; I know therefore what I speak about. In the pamphlet I discuss the lake levels and the flow of water into these lakes.
This report mentions the Ogoki and Albany rivers. The Albany river watershed is in northern Ontario, flowing from west to east. It is a big river, between 500 and 600 miles long. In some places it is a mile wide. Its principal tributary is the Ogoki river which is about 500 miles in length. I have been on that river from one end to the other. The Ogoki river has an average flow of 4,000 cubic feet per second throughout the year, which means that in the spring the flow goes up to anywhere from 10,000 to 20,000 cubic feet per second, while in the summer it goes down to perhaps 1,000.
Some years ago I took a trip to Chicago, and engineers of the United States government whom I visited said some things that surprised me. At that time I was fighting against the diversion of water from lake Michigan out of the St. Lawrence river watershed into the Mississippi river watershed. Chicago wanted more and more water. At that time they were taking about 12,000 cubic feet per second out of the St. Lawrence river watershed and pouring it into the Mississippi river watershed.
I had gone there to discuss the problem with them and they told me that we would not have to worry very long because they would get all the water they wanted from northern Ontario. That was something utterly new to me and I asked, quite innocently, where they would get it from in northern Ontario. They replied that they expected to divert the waters of the Ogoki river. I hurried back to Toronto and later arranged a trip to the Ogoki river with Mr. Roy Snider of the Toronto Telegram, a wizard in this line of business. We found the place on the Ogoki where the dam was to be located.
Later the question came up in the House of Commons of the Ontario government's proposal to pour more water down the Nipigon river, and I fought that like a tiger. I fought as hard as I could, and for a considerable time I was instrumental, I believe, in preventing the passage of that proposal through this house. Finally, however, this government allowed the Ontario government to do what
I argued was an act against the laws of God, in the diversion of water from one large watershed into another watershed; because in my opinion the waters of the Albany river should not find their way into the St. Lawrence river watershed. But the government finally did agree to the diversion of water from the Albany river watershed into the great lakes, the argument being that it would allow them to develop much more power. I often think of the engineers with whom I was associated at the time we were fighting the diversion of water at Chicago, and of their strong argument that the diversion of that water lowered the levels of lakes Ontario, Erie, Huron and Michigan. I agree with them; they were absolutely right. It amuses me now to hear what some of these same engineers say today. In fact it passes my comprehension how they can say that the pouring of water into the great lakes watershed does not raise the lake levels.
What has happened? At that time, and for quite a length of time before, those who were fighting the Chicago diversion put up a strong battle. They had associated with them all the states along the United States border, including Wisconsin, whose engineers were most vigorous fighters and whom I visited on several occasions at their capital, Madison. Their arguments were strong that the diversion of water at Chicago, which at that time was at the rate of 12,000 cubic feet per second, seriously lowered the levels of the great lakes, and they were right.
Some hon. members will recall the story of that battle, and how it resulted in the United States government agreeing, in order to appease Chicago, to build under the city of Chicago a tunnel perhaps twenty-five miles in length and twenty-four feet in diameter, from the sewage disposal works in the north part of Chicago. The result was that the effluent of the sewage disposal works would pour into the Des Plaines river and go on into the Illinois and down into the Mississippi. That tunnel cost perhaps S150 million. The United States did that so that Chicago would permit them to agree with Canada not to take so much water out of the great lakes watershed; and the United States supreme court issued an order that Chicago should reduce its takings to 1,500 cubic feet per second for dilution purposes. But the city itself was allowed to take for domestic purposes from lake Michigan an additional 2,000 cubic feet per second, or rather the city is now allowed to take a total for dilution and domestic purposes of 3,500 cubic feet per second instead of what they had been taking, 12.000 cubic nw second.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
From the Canadian side, from the immediate watershed of the Nipigon river, which includes Nipigon lake and a string of lakes up north over the height of land, and from the Keno-gami watershed, the Iienogami being a tributary of the Ogoki, we are now pouring into the great lakes watershed 5,200 cubic feet per second, 1,200 cubic feet per second from the Kenogami and 4,000 cubic feet from the Ogoki. Chicago, as I said a moment ago, is allowed to take out at the moment at the rate of 3,500 cubic feet per second, which makes a net increase in the water flowing into the great lakes watershed of 1,700 cubic feet per second. Some hon. members will say that does not amount to a great deal of water, but I say it does. It amounts to a vast volume of water when you realize that it goes on every second of every minute of every hour for 365 days in the year. Actually it amounts to 164 billion cubic feet of water per year. I will not listen to any engineer who says that the flowing into the great lakes watershed of even an additional 50 billion cubic feet of water per year does not mean anything. It does. All these municipalities along the great lakes are alive to that fact.
I read a moment ago resolution No. 7, in which the reference to the Albany and the Ogoki impelled me to show that from these two rivers we are pouring into the great lakes watershed an additional 1,700 cubic feet per second.
Resolution No. 8 reads as follows:
"Whereas it is the opinion of this association that the removal of sand from the beds of the great lakes system contributes to and aggravates the erosion taking place on the shores of the said great lakes and whereas the control of the beds of the lakes is within the province of Ontario.
Mention is made of the question of sand removal, because everyone knows that at east Toronto we have those magnificent Scarboro Bluffs which are being ruined by erosion. West of Toronto all the way to Hamilton, including such places as Port Credit, Long Branch and all along the northern shore of lake Ontario, the shores are being ruined by erosion. The problem of sand is mentioned there because the city of Toronto at the moment is considering (his gigantic problem in connection with the destruction of its own beautiful island. The last day I was there I had to walk on planks where we used to have all sorts of ball games and all sorts of parties. Sand is mentioned because the city of Toronto has under consideration-I do not know who is fathering it-the raising of the level of Toronto island by two feet. It is a big problem. Toronto

island consists of 800 acres. To raise that 800 acres by two feet would require about 80 million cubic feet of sand.
This association is fearful of the pumping of the sand from the lake into the area to build up Toronto island. I shall not make any comment on whether that would mean trouble or not, but I mention it because the Department of Public Works has control over all that area, and it is a problem. Certainly the island must be raised two feet to make it serviceable at all, or else some other major action must be taken.
I want to give some idea of the effect of this diversion. I do not say for one moment that the diversion is the whole cause. Someone will tell of other causes. But to me it is one of the major causes, because I have been at it a long time; I know that the pouring into the great lakes watershed of a net of 1,700 cubic feet per second is bound to have an effect. It may not happen all at once. It took a. long -time coming up, and it will be just as long going down. I believe that the present water level of lake Ontario is not going down very rapidly. As a matter of fact, with the exception of July 1947, it is higher this year than it has been in any previous year since 1860, when the records were first kept. For instance, according to the topographical report I have in my hand, in May 1948 the height of water was 0-37 feet higher than it was in April 1948. It was 0-45 feet higher than May 1947. That is about half a foot higher. It was 0-79 feet lower than the highest May-that of 1870-since 1860. In July 1947 it reached 248-83, and today it is 248-15. It was 4-27 feet higher than the lowest May since 1860, -which was in 1935. In other words, the water level of lake Ontario today is five feet higher than the lowest record. That is a gigantic volume of water. I am particularly interested in the preservation of the beautiful island at Toronto, in my judgment one of the finest parks in the world. But today it is being ruined by these high water levels.
These figures are obtainable from the hydrographic service, and they must be correct or they would not send them out. In May of this year in lake Ontario it was 1-54 feet higher than the average stage of May for the last eighty-eight years. That is a pretty high record. It is stated that the cost of raising the island two feet would be $3,000,000. AVho will pay for it? Certainly the city of Toronto should not have to pay for it. Why should Toronto have to pay for it? The city is not responsible for the pouring of water into the St. Lawrence watershed from the Albany river watershed.

Supply-Public Works
Let me repeat that for years I fought against the Chicago drainage canal diversion being allowed to take out as much water as it did, and these engineers were fighting the Chicago diversion when I argued that taking that water out lowered the lake level. If those engineers were right then, certainly they are wrong today if they say that the pouring of 5,200 cubic feet per second into the great lakes watershed does not affect the water levels of the great lakes. I know that the level of lake Superior is controlled, and I am not speaking about lake Superior. But in respect of the three lower lakes, I maintain that there is no other argument than that the pouring in of that big volume of water has had a bad effect. The fact that Chicago does take out 3,500 cubic feet per second means a net increase in the water of the lower great lakes of 1,700 cubic feet per second.
The fact that these levels are so high is clear evidence that they are affected. Other engineers say that the general tendency will be up. What is to be done about it? What can the department do? I do not know; but I would ask the minister between now and the next session to look into the question, through his engineers. Someone will say it is only half an inch or an inch. But it is always going up. It cannot be allowed to continue. What is the use of Toronto paying moneys out this year to raise the level of the island in front of the city

and no doubt the city will expect the federal government to pay for it-if in another ten years, owing to the continual ingress of water from the Albany river watershed into the great lakes watershed, you have to add another two feet to the top of it?
It is a big problem. I appreciate the minister's allowing me to bring it up at this time; I do not wish to continue any longer, because I want him to finish his estimates. I would however ask him to consider carefully what I have placed on the record, and I would ask that he be not led astray. Let no one tell the minister that the pouring in of that amount of water does not have any effect upon these levels. It has. All he has to do is to check back to the reports submitted by the Hydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario, by the city engineering department in Toronto, and by other engineering bodies, at the time of the fight against the Chicago drainage canal, and he will see that the engineers argued that the taking out of the water at Chicago did lower the lake levels. I shall be amused if they try now to say that the pouring in of additional water does not affect the lake levels. The report showed that the levels are higher today than they have been in the past eighty-eight years.
Alphonse Fournier: Had I the
experience of the hon. member, and had I visited all the rivers he speaks about, perhaps I could put aside the reports I receive from engineers and take the same stand as he does. But I have to admit my lack of knowledge in these matters, and have to rely upon the reports given to me by the engineers in my department.
If I followed well the hon. member's argument, he has said that the diversion of the natural flow of water into the great lakes has brought the levels of those lakes up to an extent that damage is caused to the shoreline and to the island at Toronto. Having explained this to the officials of my department, I received the following answer this morning:
It has been claimed that the high water on lake Ontario is caused partially through a diversion of water from the Little Long Lac watershed and the Lake Nipigon watershed. It is true that water is diverted on to the great lakes system from these two watersheds in the amount of approximately 5,2'00 cubic feet per second; i.e., 1,200 cubic feet per second in the case of the former and 4.000 cubic feet in the case of the latter. This diversion has been going on for approximately four years and it was legalized through an exchange of notes between Canada and the United States, wherein it is admitted that the use of this water for power is solely the property of the Canadian government and is not to 'be divided equally as is the case with the rest of the water in the great lakes-.
In 1941 when -these notes were exchanged it was computed that the diversion would never raise lake Ontario more than three inches, and in order to arrive at this point it would take approximately twelve years. In order to arrive at this figure it must be noted that the small diversion, which is only three per cent of the total flow, will have to assert its influence on each of the lakes in advance of lake Ontario, and it must also be noted that once it has arrived at this predetermined figure of three inches the flow through the St. Lawrence will have been increased to a point that this extra water will not raise the level of the lake any further.
These figures have been checked by the dominion, the province and the United States authorities and, while there are some discrepancies, they all arrive at the same point of a variation of an -inch only.
They were checked this morning as to accuracy with the Ontario hydro.
The water level for lake Ontario during 1947 was extremely high, the July average being 248-8. which is the highest it has been since records have been kept. The average for June this year, to date, is nine inches lower than that of last year.
I am told that this increase in the water level would depend more upon natural causes than the diversion of water. Not being an expert I have to give this answer to the hon. member. I do not ask him to agree with
Supply-Public Works

it because I know he has a lot of experience. However, I think he will- understand my position when we are discussing the level of the waters in these lakes.


Gordon Graydon: 
Alphonse Fournier: This is the second time within the last two months that I have been impressed by arguments in favour of the development of the harbour at Port Credit. Some two months ago I received a delegation in my office, and on that occasion the hon. member for Peel was present. They gave me many arguments to justify the expenditure of money to help stop erosion and develop the port. Since that time I have had the engineers of my department undertake a thorough survey to verify the facts presented by the delegation as to the expansion of industry in that area, and I can assure my hon. friend that in the recess I shall certainly give a lot of thought to this problem.


Mr. CRUIOKSHANK:: Mr. Chairman, I presume you do not want me to speak on floods on this item, so I shall confine myself to river bank erosion, hoping to have the opportunity to discuss floods some time this afternoon.
I was much interested in what previous speakers have said, and I join with them in impressing on the government that while under the act set up forty years ago the federal authorities may have no responsibility for river bank erosion, conditions have entirely changed since that time and must be met accordingly. I am not blaming the government for administering the act as is, but I say it is up to parliament to amend the act. I am confining my remarks to conditions in my own riding, but I am sure that many other ridings are similarly situated.
Year after year since 1912, although I did not actively participate at that time, we had been petitioning the federal government and the government of British Columbia about river bank erosion. If I remember correctly, although I had nothing to do with it then, the first action taken in connection with river bank erosion on the Fraser river was in 1912 or 1913. Every year since then, ever since I have been active in political life or have been a member I have been urging the government
Supply-Public Works

to accept responsibility in this matter. I have lost many acres of my own land, on which I paid good taxes, through its floating away down the Fraser river. In the last few years I have seen acre after acre and buildings on the bank of the Fraser river, particularly in Chilliwack and in Kent, float away. The only reply I can get from the department is that the federal government is responsible only for channel clearance and navigation. As I stated the other day, years ago, when the Fraser river was navigable as far as Hope, and before that as far as Yale-that was before my time -we did not have these great sandbars which caused river bank erosion, which is not taken care of by federal government engineers and certainly not by the provincial government engineers.
I should like every member of the house to see pictures taken in 1939. I am not speaking of the floods this year; I shall have plenty to say about them this afternoon. I am talking now about river bank erosion, which has cut right into the dike near the main bridge. I have pictures of the piling put up by the C.P.R. in 1894 and 1896 when they realized that the end of their bridge would go out. I would like members to see a picture taken in 1939 of one span of the C.P.R. bridge.
Another cut was made half way in the farmers' dike through erosion caused by the action of the C.P.R., in spite of the protests of the reeve of the municipality and my representations to the federal Department of Transport and the Department of Public Works. The Department of Public Works replied, up until November of last year, that they had no control over the matter, but in November last they admitted that they had responsibility for the Fraser river causing erosion. I would like to show the minister a picture of the span that went out this year, taking with it one hundred feet of the dike, through the erosion caused by the action of the C.P.R. over a number of years.
I was not in the house on June 9-and a lot of damage was done after that by erosion- but according to Hansard the Minister of Transport said that the railways estimated that already a million dollars' worth of damage had been done to their lines, not to the farms. I do not want to be critical; I do not want to indulge in recriminations, but I believe it is up to parliament, not government, to realize that a lot of changes have taken place since the act was passed. Among other things, the watershed in British Columbia has changed. I do not know so much about other parts of Canada, but I do know that in British Columbia the watershed has changed. When the watershed changes, even the greatest engineers

will admit that the flow of water, through navigable waters or through any other system, adversely affects river bank erosion.
This job is too big for any government or any party. It is up to parliament to deal with it. I should1 like to point out to the minister, through you, Mr. Chairman, who represent the government and the people of Canada, that we have many millions of dollars at stake. Both our trans-Canada railways, one publicly-owned and the other privately-owned, have a lot at stake. We have a big stake in the privately-owned railway, although we do not own it. The whole of Canada has a stake in these railways. The trans-Canada highway and the transcontinental telegraph lines are affected by these floods. The whole economy and the whole outlook have changed since the act was brought into being. Surely it should be apparent to everyone that no municipality or municipal government is in a financial position to guard against and prevent river bank erosion.
I am not an engineer, but I personally believe that the answer to erosion on the Fraser river bank is dredging. Ever since I have been a member of the house I have urged upon the minister the necessity of acquiring adequate dredging equipment. The only equipment we have now to prevent river bank erosion is one obsolete dredge which is forty years old. Its entire time is taken up in the port of Westminster and at the mouth of the Fraser valley. That is the only dredging equipment we have available.
I must admit that we 'have had certain small grants of $3,000, $5,000, and $8,000 in this connection, but it is a mere pittance. The work that it could do could be washed away in twenty minutes. It is time that the parliament of Canada looked at river bank erosion in the Fraser valley. It is a national problem and one that must be worked out. Some system of engineering should be worked out, not locally, so far as the Fraser river is concerned. A commission should be set up at once with complete authority as to diking, channeling, clearing and preventing river bank erosion on the Fraser river.
I urge the minister to take steps tonight. I hope that this session of parliament will be concluded by midnight. Before prorogation adequate funds should be voted to provide for ample dredging. A country with the wealth of Canada, and with what we have at stake, should be able to secure adequate dredging equipment to do the work. Any country that can spend $10,000,000 a day on destruction can surely find a few million dollars to prevent river bank erosion.

Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: In all fairness I should say a word in answer to the hon. member for Fraser Valley. I may tell him that the department has sent out to British Columbia, to the Fraser valley, one of its outstanding engineers, Mr. Goodispeed, who, along with Mr. Morton, is most familiar with conditions in that province.


Gordon Graydon: Judging by his name he ought to give fast service.


Alphonse Fournier: His name is Goodspeed. He is out there. He was instructed to make a complete report on the conditions, and wherever dredging is necessary to try to avoid these conditions in the future, if dredging is one of the ways to avoid them, we shall instruct the department officials to proceed immediately with these works. That is why we have an estimate of $500,000, for repairing the damages to nur own works and do some dredging. The hon. gentleman may rest assured that these instructions will be given immediately.


Mr. HERRIDGE:: I should like to bring to the attention of the minister a matter of serious concern to some 20.000 of my constituents living along the banks of the Columbia river or the Arrow lakes. It is of particularly serious concern at this time because of the damage occasioned by the recent floods, and the hope that something of a permanent nature will be done to prevent the recurrence of such damage.
A great part of the damage done in my constituency was done near the city of Trail, one of the greatest industrial communities in Canada. In addition to that, all the scattered communities and scattered farms along the shores of the Arrow lakes suffered damage to a greater or lesser extent. I am fully aware of the terms of the agreement between the dominion government and the provincial government with reference to assistance to the Fraser valley area, and that that area has been termed an area of national disaster, and that so far as rehabilitation is concerned the province has agreed to look after any difficulties in other parts of the province. That is not the aspect of the question that I wish to deal with. I wish to deal with the long-term approach to the regulation and control of these large rivers to prevent future flooding.
I am well acquainted with the Columbia river, which is the greatest river in British Columbia, because I have lived on its shores for forty-three years. My property is on its shores. In order to give the minister a fair picture-and I want to be as brief as possible 

I shall deal with a report I have here from 5849-385i
the city engineer of Trail, a report which outlines the damage and makes certain proposals. I have no exact knowledge of the damage in the upper parts of the river or in the Arrow lakes, but I stress this because it has a particular significance for the city of Trail, and I think the recommendation is an excellent one, certainly, which if acted upon, will protect a very important industrial community in Canada either in peace or war.
Prompt and aggressive measures were taken by the city of Trail and the Consolidated Mining and Smelling Company of Canada Limited to combat and control Columbia river flood and overflow of its banks into the city from the period May 31 to June 15.
Emergency building of temporary dikes and fills was continually maintained twenty-four hours a day, bringing to bear every available resource of men and equipment to protect life and property. In that respect I want to say that the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada Limited was most generous in placing at the disposal of the committee its crews, equipment and engineering staff. Approximately a mile and a half of dikes and protective work were built in this time, including hauling and dumping at least 100,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel for fills and support of temporary dikes, including hauling and constructing timber work, using 60,000 board feet of material. Installation of relief sewers including seven pumping stations, pumping sewage through steel mains on surface to river by this method. The total joint expenditure incurred to date by the city of Trail and the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada Limited is $125,000. Of this sum the city's share has been agreed on as $50,000. That figure of costs does not include the voluntary work.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: What is the hon. gentleman reading from?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Pardon me. I am not in the habit of reading in this house. I am simply reading excerpts from the engineer's report for the sake of greater accuracy and the saving of time.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I would like to know what is the report.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: "The Corporation of the City of Trail, British Columbia", a brief report on the damage and proposals to prevent a similar situation in the future. That does not include, Mr. Chairman, the volunteer work of hundreds of men who really gave their time during the period of this difficulty. As the result of the flood the city is faced with certain expenses to restore the normal operations and functions of the city's activities. They will
Supply-Public Works

require to remove auxiliary dikes and fills from city streets; they will have to repair pavements, roads and streets, sewers and water systems. They will have to pump, clean and disinfect the basements and flood areas where required, as the water recedes. There will have to be continued operation of the auxiliary sewage pumping system to ensure and maintain health and prevent epidemic and nuisance, until the water reaches normal level.
There will of course be no volunteer labour available for this restoration work, and therefore no correct estimate of the cost can be made until the water recedes, but it is obvious that the cost will be very heavy to the city of Trail.
I am speaking now on behalf of the city of Trail, and I wish to bring to the attention of the minister the following factors. The fill material now in place on the ground could be used to very great economic advantage if joint government action were taken immediately to provide protective measures for the future, to forestall and prevent a recurrence of this ruinous condition.
It is believed that in the memory of present inhabitants of the area floods run in cycles. That is to say, there was in past years a series of successive very high- water conditions; this may very well happen again, possibly next year, and the people of that district and those engaged in the industry

 very important industry too, producing as it did last year nearly 1100 million worth of industrial products-believe that this is the opportune time to start preventive action in order to obviate a recurrence of the difficulty. The suggestion is made that 100,000 cubic yards of fill material now in place could be used by the dominion government in the permanent work to prevent a recurrence of floods, particularly along the waterfront, on both banks of the river at Trail.
Therefore I urge upon the -minister, particularly having heard that he sent one of his best engineers to British Columbia, to ask that engineer to visit Trail to see what can be done to use this 100,000 yardis of material for permanent improvement with a vie-w to preventing a recurrence of the difficulties that we have had in the last year.
In addition I would suggest that the department make a survey of the Columbia river from the international boundary to its source in order to see what should be done to prevent a recurrence of flood damage at various points.
Before concluding, Mr. Chairman, I should like to express my support of the hon. member for Fraser Valley regarding the question

of the prevention of erosion. The dominion government has -for years dredged the Columbia river.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Mr. Chairman, could not the hon. member get the report from the engineer and put it on the record, thus saving time?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Pardon me; I am not reading from the report. To conclude what I was going to say, the dominion government should in various places prevent erosion with rock cribbing or mattress work. They have done dredging for many years, but in several places in the narrows, between the upper and lower lakes, a considerable loss of land is caused1 by the increasing rapidity of erosion, and this creates still greater difficulty in keeping the river open for dredging. I support the hon. member for Fraser Valley in his suggestion with respect to these large navigable rivers. Everything should be done to keep them in a navigable condition by the prevention of erosion. I urge the minister to send the particular engineer to whom he referred into Trail to see the officials of the city of Trail, to see the situation as it now exists, with a view to carrying out permanent improvements that will prevent a similar occurrence in this important community in the future.
Mr. -ROSS (St. Paul's): In the Department of Public Works there is a gentleman whom I know quite well-I believe he is the chief engineer of the department-and I do not mind saying that there is no one who is better than he. I refer to Mr. Murphy. I have known him for a good many years, and I know he will do whatever is best.
A good deal has been said this morning about water in the great lakes. We have heard about the diversion of water. Well, let us find out exactly what is happening and what the solution is. Let us find out all about this cycle about which we have heard. I might mention Presqu'Ile by way of illustration. There are times when I can drive a motor car across the island, but today I could not swim across it, it is so deep. We know that these things happen, but what do we want on the great lakes? If Toronto island is being damaged, it is for the Department of Public Works to repair the damage. But we need all the water we can possibly get in the great lakes, for two reasons, one being the development of power, and the other to facilitate navigation. If we could divert more water into the great lakes it would be far better for us in Ontario. The more water we can get, the better. If there is difficulty in connection with

Supply-Public Works
Toronto island or along the shores of lake Ontario it is up to the government of Canada to prevent these things. The water that we can get there is of great benefit to us in our province. Last year we had to go short of power because we did not have enough water in the right places. What we need is water to give us that power, and no one should complain about getting water there.
I know the little Napoleon of public works- and he does look very much like Napoleon, doesn't he?


Mr. BRYCE:: Can we get in on this whispering campaign?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: He has told us that he will do all he can for the city of Toronto, and I am sure he will keep his word. And there is a lot he can do. He had better get his engineer, Mr. Wilson, whom I know very well, to advise him, in consultation with Mr. Murphy If he did that, perhaps we would get a lot more done for Toronto and all these other places where the people are having trouble. At any rate, we need all the water we have for the benefit of the country.


Mr. LENNARD:: I associate myself with what was said by the hon. member for Davenport and the hon. member for Peel, because I represent a section of Ontario which is a part of the Niagara fruit belt, and a great many people in that area are vitally concerned about what is happening along the shores of lake Ontario between Hamilton and Niagara. Stretches of that fruit belt are being eaten into by the lake shore erosion every year. I urge the Department of Public Works to do all that is necessary to prevent this condition -in fact, I would say, not only the Department of Public Works, but both governments. Both the Ontario government and the dominion government are interested in this. If my memory serves me, it was the Ontario government that changed the course of some of these waterways, and it is only right that they should assume their proper share of the responsibility. The present Ontario government should take its full share of responsibility, and so should the dominion government.


John Oliver Probe: Going through the estimates of the Department of Public Works for 194849 and the supplementaries, I find that the minister is asking the house for some $84,000,000 for his department, which is about $7 per capita for the people of Canada. Because I am concerned with the distribution of these funds across Canada, I was especially interested in the extent to which money was to be spent in my own province. I notice that, including the supplementaries, the Department of Public Works is spending there some 8620,000 this year. That works out to about 70 cents per capita in Saskatchewan or one tenth of the amount that is being expended on the average across the dominion. I do not want the minister to run away with the idea that we have no problems that cannot usefully be the duty of the public works department of Canada to do something about. It is for that reason that I wish to speak for a few minutes about problems that should be the concern of his department, some of which I have from time to time casually discussed with the minister. I want to mention two with regard to the southern part of Saskatchewan and Regina specifically.
We have in the city of Regina, for example, a number of buildings owned by the government of Canada, one of which is particularly attractive and ornate, and is called the federal building. But the departments of the Canadian government are housed and scattered in many privately-owned buildings throughout the city. I think possibly that condition applies to governments generally. They seem to have no particular scheme whereby they concentrate public buildings, either for efficient administration or for their more facile use by the public which has business with the government. It would seem to me that in the public works department, in all major centres where it is necessary to occupy extensive floor space, some sort of over-all planning might be adopted to house government departments either in a single building, or in a group of buildings convenient to traffic but forming a unit apart from the rest of the business district of the city concerned. Unfortunately, all our chambers of commerce lobby all senior governments. When there is a likelihood of a public building making its appearance in some portion of the country, they lobby for it in their particular city. I realize that situation applies, and I sympathize with the minister and the department for sometimes being put under a form of local patriotic pressure which is not always in keeping with the best distribution of the public services. However, that has gone on for decades and undoubtedly it will continue to do so. But I believe that functional planning of the buildings that will house the ever-increasing number of public services is necessary in all cities. Certainly that statement applies in special measure to my city of Regina. Last year, for example, a number of us went to the minister with respect to the taking over of a building that housed the Department, of Commerce offices. While we were negotiating with the government to do something about acquiring the building, it was
Supply-Public Works

sold under their noses. There is the factor
*f delay in all these matters. I trust the govrnment or the minister will take cognizance of representations to plan the future development of public buildings.
I have another instance that concerns us in the southern part of Saskatchewan. It is interlocked with the fact that governments, both provincial and federal, make use of the services of urban municipalities. I refer to the matter of water supply for cities in drought areas or in dry farming areas. Regina is vitally concerned about this matter because, in our system of deep wells to supply water to the city of Regina, we have reached the ultimate. We have passed the point of being able to supply water for all the services in that city. This should concern our senior governments, because the senior governments in their buildings also use the services such as that of water. P.F.R.A. of course has been dallying-and I use that word advisedly-with the idea of drawing water from the Saskatchewan river with the object of supplying Moose Jaw, Regina and other southern centres. Unfortunately-


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member does not mean that what he is explaining about water would come under my department?


John Oliver Probe: That is right. I hope I will make myself clear in a moment. I will not take long. The point is that, under P.F.R.A., irrigation projects were envisaged that might ultimately supply water to the urban centres of Moose Jaw, Regina and other places, as well as forming an irrigation project. Those projects have proceeded at such a snail's pace that I do not think we can get much relief from the P.F.R.A. projects, say, for ten years or so. However, here is the connection with the Department of Public Works, and this is what interests the minister and us; in all unban centres the government departments make use of what facilities or what utilities are provided by municipal authorities, water being one of them. Water is a major utility in a dry district.
The Department of Public Works or other government departments spend money on the Rideau canal. I have not objected to the expenditure of money running into perhaps half a million or three-quarters of a million dollars annually on the Rideau canal, even though the strictly utilitarian reason for the expenditure is overweighted by the effect it may have on the tourist business. The Rideau canal serves a national purpose; therefore we concur in the expenditure. But in our request for water services, particularly in southern

Saskatchewan, we have hit a delayed acquiescence from government departments. Now I am trying to put across to the minister the point that water supplies are needed for the large numbers of offices used by the government of Canada, through the Department of Public Works. In view of the shortage of water in our cities, the supplying of water to those buildings-and through that means, of course, the supplying of more water to the residents of my city generally-is a proper function of the Department of Public Works or could be considered as such. I do hope that when delegations from my city come to the government asking, as they are going to do, for sympathetic consideration in respect of increased (water reservoirs to help that city the Minister of Public Works, partly because the servicing of government buildings is involved, will give sympathetic consideration to the representations .made. I think such a request is all the more valid and reasonable because his department, on a per capita basis does not spend any more than one-tenth as much in my province as it does on an average across the country.
For 'these reasons the minister should stretch a point in this instance by giving favourable consideration to my request. Indirectly it affects government buildings, but directly it affects the citizens of my district to a great extent. They cannot do it themselves, and I say the minister's department should do it.


Mr. HAZEN:: Mr. Chairman-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Two o'clock.
At two o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock. Item agreed to.
Architectural branch-
828. Branch administration, $412,001.


William Scottie Bryce: I have received an answer from the minister to most of the problems I have brought before him during the session, but there are two still outstanding. The first refers to the recommendations that have been made by the board of trade and the municipality of Riverton with regard to dredging the Icelandic river. It is some number of years since anything was done there, and these people are anxious that something should be done. I do not know whether the minister has had a report on this matter.
Yesterday I took up with one of the officers of his department the matter of the erosion that is taking place at Gimli on lake Winnipeg and I understood that a further report was to be made. The original breakwater

Supply-Public Works
there has fallen into disrepair and the erosion is quite serious. This is much too large a thing for a town like Gimli to undertake, and there should be co-operation between the provincial and federal authorities in this matter.


Alphonse Fournier: I have not yet received a report with regard to the dredging of the Icelandic river. After discussing the protection works at Gimli with the hon. member, I requested a further report from my officials to see if, with the new facts before them, they might change their minds as to the amount that should be expended. I understand that this is quite a difficult problem. because they are having trouble in connecting it with navigation. I am sympathetic toward the request, because I believe it is to protect some old folks' home.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to ask the minister to say a word with regard to the wages paid to women cleaners, particularly in Winnipeg. As the minister knows, I have drawn this matter to his attention a number of times during the past few years. I want to thank him once again for the attention that he has given to my requests and for the successful representations that he has made in times past on behalf of these women. The points that I have drawn to his attention at times have been of an administrative nature, while on other occasions I have raised the question of holidays with pay and the important question of wage rates.
Some two or three years ago the minister was successful in persuading the proper authorities to agree to allow one week's holidays with pay for these women. They now receive six days' sick leave in a year, and this is not deducted from their holidays as was the case a few years ago. In years gone by there have been acceptable increases in the wages paid to these women, but I believe it is nearly two years since they have received any increase. In the meantime the cost of living has been going up and is bearing heavily upon them. They have also been conscious of the fact that other government employees in Winnipeg and throughout the country have received increases, and they have dared to hope that, through the months when increases were being announced, there would soon be an increase for them. But, as I said a moment ago, no increase has come through, their last increase being nearly two years ago. I ask the minister to give the same serious and sympathetic consideration to this matter that he has given in the past to the other matters I have brought before him concerning this group of women.
I do not wish to speak to the exclusion of women working in public buildings in other cities. Local conditions vary as between city and city and as to the hours that these women have to put in. I know the situation in Winnipeg and the women involved, and I submit to the minister that their case is deserving. These women do not work just two or three hours in the morning. I think they work seven hours a day for five, five and a half or perhaps six days a week. In other words, they have a full-time job. I think the time has come when they should be considered as being on a par with other government employees and given an increase in wages to meet the increased cost of living.
I do not think it is out of the way to suggest that they should also be given two weeks holidays with pay. I would agree that those two weeks might apply only to those who have served for a couple of years or so, but that is a matter of detail. I know the minister shares my views in connection with this matter, and I hope he will press them upon whatever authority has to make the decision. I should be glad if the minister could comment at this time.


Mr. MacINNIS:: Before the minister rises to make a comment, I should like to say that I represent a city which is somewhat larger than Winnipeg. There are quite a number of government buildings there and, I imagine, quite a number of government services of the same class with regard to which my hon. friend has been pleading. I hope that the minister will do what the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has suggested and that he will at the same time treat Vancouver and all other large cities on a fair and equal basis.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: I represent some places that are smaller than Winnipeg and Vancouver, but to the people who live there they are certainly not less important. Lest I should not be in the house when the supplementaries are reached, and since this is an architectural item, I should like to express now my appreciation to the minister for including in item 826 in the supplementaries an initial amount for a public building at Rosetown, Saskatchewan. I know that for a number of years that well-to-do and productive community has felt that the quarters, particularly in the post office, were entirely inadequate to meet the community's needs. The minister may have seen some plans-I have mentioned this before on other occasions here-of a tiny building at which an attempt was made to conduct the important public service of the post office, and I am very glad to see this initial appropriation. I want to express to the minister the thanks, not of myself, but of the community.

Supply-Public Works
I never believe that these things should be considered from any political angle. I have never believed that the local member should take credit for work being proceeded with on a necessary public facility, and I am not taking credit for it. I have made representations on behalf of both Rosetown and another town in my constituency, Biggar, where a site was purchased some ten years ago for a public building, and I hope that that, too, will be undertaken. I am speaking on behalf of the community. I was spoken to when I was there the other day. I knew that the minister had this under consideration and that the architectural branch had been or were going to the town in order to make an investigation, but I told my friends who approached me at that time that I was quite sure that the minister would view this public building from the point of view of public interest and necessity. May I express again the gratitude which the people of that community will feel and which I myself feel for this item in the supplementary estimates.


Mr. IRVINE:: I wish to say one or two words in connection with public buildings. I think it is true to say that the major portion of the sums of money expended by the public on public buildings goes to the larger centres. For some time I have been urging upon the minister the necessity of building a post office at Quesnel and a public building at Vander-hoof. I agree with my leader that no member should take any credit to himself for public works undertaken in his riding, but unfortunately I must take credit when it is not done, and so I would ask the minister to do something about it now. Without making any extended remarks because I know he wants to get his estimates through quickly, I ask him to be good enough to give some consideration to the claim of these two communities, whose claims, which I have set out in black and white before the minister during the year, I think are very strong.


Mr. RICHARD (Ottawa East):: I wish to refer to the char staff in the city of Ottawa and to ask the minister whether he has given any more consideration to representations which have been made in the past two years to allow more of these women to do their char work in the evening instead of in the morning. At present I understand that the only place where the charwomen can work in the evening is the printing bureau. Now that the war is over, surely we could allocate a few more buildings where some of these widows, who have young children, and who cannot very well work in the morning, could work in the evening.

Prevailing rate men are now given two weeks holidays. One of these weeks is really a holiday with pay and the other week is not paid for by the government but, under an order in council passed in 1923 or 1925, represents the overtime a man would usually work. While the salaries of these men are calculated on a prevailing rate basis, the men are really paid on a yearly rate divided by fifty-two, estimated on their working so many hours a year. I think they should get the same consideration as other civil servants in the matter of holidays and certainly some sick leave. While I would not ask for three weeks' holidays and three weeks' sick leave, I think they should get three weeks' holidays and two weeks' sick leave as other civil servants get.
Another question. Does the minister believe that the prevailing rate men in the public works department are getting the prevailing rates in the trades in this district? As I understand it, adjustments were to be made to equalize these rates, but I do not think that process has been completed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural branch-
S29. Ottawa-maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., $7,548,875.
Mr. GREEN:: There is an increase of approximately $1,800,000 in this item. Would the minister explain it?


Alphonse Fournier: If hon. members will look at the whole of the estimates they will find that there are no more votes under demobilization and reconversion, and the increase is due in part to the provision of funds formerly voted under demobilization and reconversion. Secondly there is an increase in the allotment for materials and supplies because of increased cost of materials and labour, and due to the provision now being made in this allotment for alterations, partitions, improvement to lighting, et cetera, required in connection with the allocation of accommodation for all the departments in the various buildings in Ottawa. The net increase is $1,795,493.


Howard Charles Green: An increase of more than 25 per cent. What is the reason for that?


Alphonse Fournier: There are two reasons. First of all, we are making more repairs to our buildings, which were sorely neglected in the war years; secondly, there has been an increase in the price of the materials themselves.


Mr. McLURE:: With reference to many of these items, I feel myself in the position of a school boy returning home from school

Supply-Public Works
and telling his parents that he has forgotten to bring home his report. I have to ask some questions on these estimates, so that I can answer my electors when they call upon me and ask me about them. Item 330 amounts to $8,612,478 for maintenance and operation of public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa. I notice that for 25 per cent of this item, amounting to $2,109,944, there are no details. That seems to be customary in all the estimates that come before us, but this is quite a large amount.
Another matter I wish to refer to is the rental of public buildings by Ottawa departments in the city of Charlottetown. May I have a breakdown of that? How many buildings are rented? Has the department decided to erect a large building of their own in Charlottetown to take care of the different departments that are now occupying rented buildings?


Alphonse Fournier: The only building rented in Charlottetown is for the wartime prices and trade board. It is rented from a Mr. Chapel at an annual rental of $1,500. All the other offices are located in buildings belonging to the federal government.
The second question was as to whether there was an estimate for the erection of a public building in Charlottetown. A site has not been purchased. We are inquiring into the best site. Probably the hon. member for Queens will be consulted. When we have the site we shall prepare the plans for that building.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: You have agreed on a location and site?


Alphonse Fournier: The last report that I had indicated that a site for this building had not been agreed on.
Mr. MoLURE: Is that site to be purchased by the federal government, by the provincial government, or by the city of Charlottetown?


Alphonse Fournier: If it is to be a federal building it will be purchased by the federal government.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I believe the minister was ready to make a statement in reply to my representation on item 328. We are still in the same general field. Perhaps he might say something now.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. I shall explain to the hon. member the procedure with reference to revisions of salaries or wages of charwomen. A survey is made in every part of the country, and we try to meet the prices in the locality which are paid by private
industry. Then we make a recommendation to the labour department. They themselves, with the officials in the different departments, make a report and approve or disapprove our recommendation or modify it. When the hon. gentleman brought the Winnipeg case to my attention I asked for a report and found that about two weeks before that we had asked the labour department for an increase for the charwomen working all day. I believe it is six hours a day. I have not yet had a report from the labour department. When it comes in, it is submitted to treasury which passes final judgment on the matter.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Did I understand the minister to say that his department asked the labour department for an increase?


Alphonse Fournier: We recommended an increase in this case to meet the wages paid locally to that class of employees in Winnipeg.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Was consideration given to the matter of lengthening the holiday period?


Alphonse Fournier: That has not been studied lately. As the hon. member mentioned, we did give holidays and sick leave, but I have not heard that it has been reconsidered lately.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I would hope that the department would reconsider it. May I refer to one minor point, and I am not quarreling with the language used either by the hon. member for Ottawa East or by the minister. I do happen to know that these women do not particularly like the use of the word "char". It would seem to me that, since men doing comparable work are called cleaners, or sometimes men cleaners, we might meet the point and actually change the name of the women to women cleaners. It is perfectly honourable work. My own mother was a domestic servant, and I am not ashamed'-indeed I am proud- of people who do this kind of work, but they do have some feeling about it. Perhaps one way to achieve the object would be for those of us who talk about it to use the name they themselves suggest, and perhaps the change might even be made officially.


Alphonse Fournier: In the documents which come before me the two words are used interchangeably. Sometimes it is charwomen and at other times it is women cleaners, male cleaners or female cleaners. I do not think the word "charwomen" is used all through the proceedings which come before me. If that is the wish we can ask the department to have it changed to male or female cleaners or women cleaners.
Supply-Public Works


Stanley Howard Knowles: Men cleaners and women cleaners.


Alphonse Fournier: In answer to the question of w'orking in the morning or at night, may I say we did have a survey made, and I was informed by the superintendent that a very small minority requested to work at night instead of in the morning. We shall look into that matter.


Jean-Thomas Richard: Will the minister answer the question as to the prevailing rates?


Alphonse Fournier: The rates in the department are based absolutely on the prevailing rates in the district. As I said to the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, the labour department passes on these rates and they are submitted to treasury board. Generally they compare the rates we pay in our department with the rates paid outside.


Jean-Thomas Richard: What
about holidays and sick leave?


Alphonse Fournier: As to holidays, a carpenter working for a contractor generally does not get any holidays. Carpenters are paid for the time they work. In public works they do have holidays. That is one reason why they would rather work for the department than for a contractor.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Saskatchewan and Manitoba both have holidays with pay acts.


Alphonse Fournier: In the scale of wages paid, compensation for holidays and other advantages are given to our employees.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Will the minister give me an idea of what the item of $2,109,944 consists of?


Alphonse Fournier: That is the salary of the temporary staff in the department.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: How many?


Alphonse Fournier: That comprises all the prevailing rate employees that are working all across Canada in the maintenance of our works, from Halifax to Victoria.


Mr. STEPHENSON:: Has any provision been made for renovating and decorating the post office building at Port Hope, especially the customs office?


Alphonse Fournier: This would not be the item.


Charles Elwood Stephenson: Maintenance and
repairs of public buildings?


Alphonse Fournier: Unless it is a very small amount of work that has to be

done. If it is a specific amount we would have a specific item in the estimates for that work.


Charles Elwood Stephenson: I do not think anything appears in the estimates for that. Is anything being done?


Alphonse Fournier: If there is no specific estimate it means that the amount of the alterations would not be very great, and it would be taken out of the general vote.


Howard Charles Green: May I point out to the minister that a serious accommodation problem is looming up in my own city of Vancouver in connection with, the closing of the old Vancouver hotel which is being taken over by the T. Eaton Company, Limited, on July 31. For some time the unemployment insurance commission and the national selective service have had-


Alphonse Fournier: There is a special item for that.


Howard Charles Green: - their offices in the hotel. During 1947 about 675,000 people called at that office during the period of one year. They have a staff of about 350 people, and I believe they occupied 44,000 square feet of floor space. That office, of necessity, must be in the downtown area of the city, because there are so many people calling there. As I said, in 1947 there were 675,000 callers. When the office is moved at the end of July where is that staff to go? I believe there is some provision for a new building, but it will take many months to complete it and I should like to know what provision will be made for the intervening period and how long it will be before the new building is completed.


Alphonse Fournier: There are two items in the supplementary estimates, one for $1,060,000, for the Begg building which we have purchased, and to which alterations are being made. That building will be ready for occupancy at the end of this year. We have also purchased the Alvin estates building. Construction is going on, and my information is that we shall take over the building on the first of January. Pending that time, we have transferred some of the employees who were in the old Vancouver hotel to the Beattie street armouries.


Howard Charles Green: Has that been done? I understand that there is only some talk of doing it.


Alphonse Fournier: The moment we have to get out of the old Vancouver hotel we shall transfer the employees temporarily to the armouries, and we hope to have them in these two buildings at the end of the year.

Supply-Public JForfcs


Howard Charles Green: The whole staff of the unemployment insurance commission and the national selective service -will be put in the Beattie street armouries where they will stay from the end of July to the end of December when the new buildings are to be ready?


Alphonse Fournier: That is right.


Howard Charles Green: Which are these two other votes to which the minister refers?


Alphonse Fournier: I am referring to vote 828 in the supplementary estimates. The hon. member will see there provision for S800.000 for the Alvin estates building and $1,060,000 for the Begg building, alterations and extensions.


Mr. BLAIR:: Do hospitals built under the direction of the Department of National Health and Welfare come under the supervision of the Department of Public Works, and are estimates called for under this department?
Mr. FOURNIER (Hull)-: In national health there is a hospital design branch with an architect experienced in the construction of such buildings. The votes are not under public works, but we act as their agents, lending the help of our architects and technicians. We call for tenders and let the contract.


William Gourlay Blair: And tenders are called for in each case?


Alphonse Fournier: If we were building away up north for Indians I do not think that in all circumstances we would ask for tenders.


William Gourlay Blair: What difference would it make doing the work up there?


Alphonse Fournier: In certain parts of the country you cannot get people .to take contracts on a firm price basis. We cannot get people to compete on certain buildings owing to transportation, and therefore we make an arrangement to meet the situation.


William Gourlay Blair: How can you be sure that there is not someone else who would be more satisfactory?


Alphonse Fournier: We try, and if we cannot get tenders we make an arrangement with some firm.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural branch.-Prince Edward Island
[Stage Direction]
333. Charlottetown-Public building (revote $50,000), $100,000.
Mr. MeLURE: I presume this item is for the construction of a new building, even if it is in part a revote from last year.
Alphonse Fournier: That is right.
Mr. MeLURE: The estimated cost, then, would be around $100,000?


Alphonse Fournier: Oh, no. This is the initial cost, the .purchasing of the site, preparation of plans and so forth.
Mr. MeLURE: I saw in the press a report -whether it emanated from the department I do not know-to the effect that the estimated cost of the building would be in the vicinity of $1,000,000.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know
what is in the press.
Mr. MeLURE: I hope the amount is greater than is shown here.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know
what appeared in the press, but we do not give releases to the press on future works without knowing exactly what the cost will be.
Item agreed, to.
Architectural branch-Manitoba-
337. Brandon public building-improvements to heating, $12,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $50,0001, $105,000.
St. Boniface public building-addition and alterations (revote $8,000), $24,000.
St. Vital public building-addition .and alterations (revote $15,000), $24,500.
Winnipeg-postal accommodation at Canadian National Railways station (revote $25,000), $75,000.
Winnipeg-postal station "A"

improvements (revote), $7,500-.
Winnipeg

postal station "F"-addition and alterations (revote $13,000), $20,000.
Winnipeg-public	building-site	(revote),


Mr. ZAPLITNY:: Does the minister intend to have any post office -buildings built in Manitoba?


Alphonse Fournier: If the hon. member will look at the supplementaries he will get a complete picture there.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: This item covers repairs and improvements of public buildings. I assume that the building of new post offices would come under this vote.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member is looking at item 337, which does not include new buildings unless they are specifically mentioned. In the supplementaries he will find that there is provision for -a post office in his riding.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
Architectural branch-Alberta-
339. Calgary public building-improvements and repairs (revote $22,500), $37,500.
Calgary-accommodation for Department of Trade and Commerce (revote $21,000), $31,000.
Counts-buildings for customs and immigration (revote), $140,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $50,000, $105,000.	.
Edmonton

addition and- alterations to south Edmonton postal station (revote $30,000), $45,-
ooo.	. .
Edmonton-public building (revote), $100,000. $300,000.
Edmonton-public building revote), $100,000.
Peace River public building-local improvements (revote $7,200), $8,500.
Mr. LOW:: What is the $8,500 for in connection with the Peace River public building, local improvements, the revote being $7,200?


Alphonse Fournier: This is to pay the government's portion of sewer and water service for the post office, telegraph service, alterations to post office, $1,300; installation of plumbing in telegraph building, $1,300; contingencies, $525; and the first amount for the town sewer and water services, $5,375.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural branch-British Columbia-
S.'tO. Abbotsford-site for public building (revote), $10,000.
Chilliwack public building-addition (revote $40,000), $72,000'.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs -and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $50,000, $250,000.
Douglas-buildings for customs and immigration (revote), $120,000.
Duncan public building-alterations and improvements (revote $4,000), $20,000.
Kelowna public building-addition and alterations (revote $30,000), $47,000-
Ladner-site for public building (revote), $5,000.	_	_ i
Langley Prairie-site for public building (revote), $5,000.
North Vancouver-postal station (revote), $50,000.
Osoyoos-customs and immigration buildings, $40,000,
Vancouver examining warehouse-installation of elevator (revote $10,000), $48,000.
Vancouver-post office building site (revote), $250,0*00.
Vancouver public building-improvements and repairs (revote), $5,000.
Vancouver-site for building for customs (revote), $100,OOO1.
Victoria astrophysics! observatory-repairs, alterations and improvements (revote $28,000), $30,000.
Victoria-public building (revote), $200,000.
White Rock-site for public building (revote), $5,000.
William Head quarantine station-alterations, improvements and repairs (revote $4,500), $20,000.
Howard Charles Green: In this item there is a vote of $250,000 for Vancouver post office building site and a vote of $100,000 for a site for a building for customs. How much has now been voted for these two buildings, including the present vote, and where are the buildings to be located? There has been a great deal of discussion on the sites to be chosen, and I should like to know what decision has been reached.


Alphonse Fournier: The site which it is proposed to acquire is the city block bounded by Georgia, Howard, Dunsmuir and Hamilton streets. It was selected after consultation with the post office department, the Vancouver city council, the town planning commission and various business interests. Practically the whole site is occupied. The total assessed value is $213,000 and the appropriation is $250,000.


Howard Charles Green: How much is it to cost altogether?


Alphonse Fournier: The assessment is $213,000. That is the best estimate we have now. If we have to expropriate, I do not know what the exact amount will be.


Howard Charles Green: That figure includes only a portion of the site?


Alphonse Fournier: No, that is for the whole site. This is an estimate of $250,000, based on the assessment of $213,000. If we go into court and the judgment is higher, we shall have to come back.


Howard Charles Green: You have not acquired the site? You have not actually acquired any portion of the site?


Alphonse Fournier: We have filed expropriation proceedings, I understand.


Howard Charles Green: What about the customs building?


Alphonse Fournier: The site -proposed to be acquired is situated on the corners of Burrard, Pender and West Hastings streets, and consists of lots 18, 19 and 20. It has frontages of 140 feet on Burrard street, 156 feet on Pender street and 206 feet on West Hastings street. The property is owned by four separate owners, namely, the Nelson, Christie Building Company, R. F. Bovey Limited, B.C. Holdings Limited, and the Burrard Holdings Limited.


Howard Charles Green: Is this figure of $100,000 only a portion of the purchase price?


Alphonse Fournier: The item is toward the acquisition of a site. I do not

Supply-Public Works
think this would be the price. We are waiting for the valuation of our people there, to see exactly the amount involved.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister give us any idea of what the total price will be?


Alphonse Fournier: I have not the city assessment, and I have not received as yet the report of the valuators who were appointed. When we have this valuation, generally we try to make a deal with the owners, or we put on expropriation proceedings.


Howard Charles Green: You have not yet arrived at that stage?


Alphonse Fournier: This would be just an initial vote.


Howard Charles Green: You have not arrived at the stage of expropriating in this case?


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know. It has been suggested that this may be close to the assessment value, but I would not want to say because I have not that figure.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: When this item was under discussion last year I had occasion to make some quite caustic comments concerning the efficiency of the department's chief architect in British Columbia. I based those comments on what I considered to be sound information from a responsible source. Since that time I have gone farther into the matter and I find that I was incompletely and incorrectly informed. Therefore I wish most sincerely to apologize for any embarrassment I have caused this estimable public servant and gentleman.


Alphonse Fournier: I thank the hon. gentleman for what he has said.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Generally-
$H. Building for national film board (revote), $25,000.
Frank Exton Lennard: Is that amount for a building or putting up a building? Is that for a new building?


Alphonse Fournier: This is a revote. Mr. LENNARD: For what?


Alphonse Fournier: I see here that at one time, two years ago, it was to provide for the purchase of a site and the construction of a building for the national film board at Ottawa.


Frank Exton Lennard: It is for the purchase of a site?


Alphonse Fournier: That is right. Mr. LENNARD:	They are in several
buildings now, are they not?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.


Frank Exton Lennard: I would suggest that the sooner you get them all under one roof, the better.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Generally-	,	.	.
S.'/S. National capital planning service, $135,000.
Jean-Thomas Richard: Will the minister give us a few details with regard to this expenditure of $135,000? Will he give us a short statement?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. Salaries,
$76,696; topographic model of national capital area, national film board, $2,500; subscription to technical publications and purchase of technical books, $500; surveys of adjoining municipalities and strategic points within the national capital region, $10,000; transportation of staff and technical officers within the region for reconnaissance and establishing necessary contacts, $1,000; outside trips for gathering of information to be undertaken by Mr. Greber and assistants, $1,000; registry office fees covering searching of plans and deeds, $100; standing order for current printing, blue prints and photos by Department of Public Works photographic service, $1,000; standing order with national film board for photographic work, coloured reproductions, lantern slides, $2,500; standing order with mines and resources for printing, reductions, et cetera, $1,000; work of printing necessitating technical processes not available in government departments, $1,000; expenses incurred in printing, binding and publishing final report, $10,000; expenses incurred in publishing a popular condensed report, $1,500; preliminary engineering services on proposed construction (bridges, viaducts, tunnels, et cetera), $5,000; publicity, public information, films, $10,000; work to be performed in Paris by Mr. Greber, $2,000; contingencies, $9,204.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Generally-
SifG. National printing bureau (revote),
Jean-Thomas Richard: I have been one of those who have been critical of the location of the printing bureau. Is the minister at this time ready to tell us if any site has been chosen, if it has been purchased and if any progress has been made as to plans?


Alphonse Fournier: The site is on boulevard Sacre Coeur, Hull. Part of it has been purchased and we have the other part under expropriation. An engineer from Chicago, Mr. Powers, one of the outstanding
Supply-Public Works

engineers in this specialized work of constructing printing institutions, has been brought here to prepare the engineering part of the plans. Mr. Cormier, an architect from Montreal, has been retained as architect for preparation of the plans.


Mr. BOUCHER:: When is it expected that the plans will be finished?


Alphonse Fournier: Some time next year.


George Russell Boucher: And will the building be
proceededi with promptly?


Alphonse Fournier: I would not know.


Percy Ellis Wright: Where are these research projects being carried out for the utilization of farm products, and what projects are under consideration at the present time?


Alphonse Fournier: What is this? There is nothing in my estimates for that.


Percy Ellis Wright: I beg the minister's pardon.
I am looking at the wrong item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-
351. Branch administration, $296,009.
Howard Charles Green: What is the position now with regard to the removal of Ripple Rock?


George Alexander Cruickshank: It is still rippling.


George Russell Boucher: And still rocking.


Howard Charles Green: Has the department made any progress since last year? And if not, whv not?


Alphonse Fournier: I must candidly admit that I know of no progress made in this matter since the last estimates were up. I have not as yet found the man or the engineer who can convince my own engineers that he has the right method to proceed. The moment we find a man who can convince my officials,
I shall be ready to make my recommendations to the government. But, to date, really I am no more advanced than I was last year.


Howard Charles Green: Is anyone in the department doing any work on the plans?


Alphonse Fournier: Not at the present time.


Howard Charles Green: In effect, the department has given up hope?


Alphonse Fournier: No, we never lose hope.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Engineering branch-
352. Engineering, including salaries of engineers, clerks, etc., $1,164,243.
George Alexander Cruickshank: Do salaries of the minister's officials in British Columbia come under this vote?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes, the engineers.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Some few weeks ago I brought up in the house a question with respect to the erosion at the east shore of Point Pelee through the action of waves and high water. If I remember correctly I suggested at that time that a report be obtained. Have the engineers with the minister any further information with respect to the preservation of the east side of Point Pelee, the whole end of which has been, washed away?


Alphonse Fournier: My deputy minister tells me we have not received that report. However, he will look into the matter, and instruct that the report be prepared as soon as possible.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The people in that vicinity are most appreciative of anything that can be done. I have just received a long wire from Mr. Morgan Brown, president of the Learning-ton chamber of commerce, expressing appreciation of what was done previously. I feel obligated to mention this again to the minister.


Alphonse Fournier: We shall certainly get a report in the matter. I am informed that there is a lighthouse at that point, and that we shall have a report in the near future.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I understand that someone has been sent there to make an investigation, and to decide whether groins should be erected^ or wrhat should be done. Something must be done to preserve that part of Point Pelee park. If the minister were to go there he would see that the erosion goes back for about a quarter of a mile.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am one who believes that we have a most excellent staff of engineering officials in the British Columbia section of his department, including the Northwest Territories and the Yukon. They are underpaid. It is my information that the department is not able to secure a sufficient number of capable engineers, because they are attracted to private concerns. I have no desire to pick out individuals. It seems strange to me that a man entrusted with the expenditure of millions of dollars, possibly for flood control, will receive about $2,400 or $3,000 a year, while the House of Commons sees fit-and I am not singling out any individuals-to pay

Supply-Public Works
$3,600 for a man who, during six months of the year, supervises the dishwashing in the restaurant.
We are losing our best brains to the United States and other countries-and naturally so. Hon. members opposite have often spoken in the same way. It seems to me it is time that the minister looked into this matter. I am not speaking particularly about those in Ottawa; I refer to those in British Columbia. He has an excellent staff out there; but the branch is very much understaffed. And that condition has arisen because the federal government is not setting the example it should set to private industry by paying proper and decent salaries to experienced and qualified men.
It is time the minister told the civil service commission that he is going to pay qualified university graduates, and other technical staff, suitable salaries. He should start in British Columbia where he has already some highly qualified men.


Angus MacInnis: If the conditions are as stated by the hon. member for Fraser Valley they should certainly be changed. The minister ought not to let that statement go without either verifying or denying it. He should now place on record the number of engineers, their grades and1 salaries.


Alphonse Fournier: The details of engineering staff by districts in the New Westminster district is as follows:
Glass title-Name-Salary
District engineer, grade 3. Morton,
K W	 $ 5,775
Engineer, grade	6, Elliott, L. B	
4,425Engineer, grade	4A, Keyt, W.	E....	3,879Engineer, grade	3, Lambert, J.	B....	3,510
Assistant engineer, vacant-not being filled at present.
Engineer, grade 2, Saint, J. B	 3,120
Engineer, grade 3B, Webster, A		3,435
Engineer, grade 3, Faulkner, C. F. P. 3,270 Technical officer reconstruction, grade
1, Milavsky, D. S	 2,580
Technical officer reconstruction, grade
1, vacant-being filled	 2,130
Departmental	accountant, grade 2,
Barwood, E. V. H	 2,880
Stenographer,	grade 3,	Pasmore,
Miss C	 1,944
Stenographer, grade 3, Martin, Miss
B. WT	 1,944
Stenographer, grade 2, Corbett. E. C. 1,398 Clerk of w'orks, grade 1. Male, D. E...	2,124
Stenographer, grade 2, Mydske, M. L. 1,536 Stenographer, grade 2, Salter, D. M...	1,380
General construction foreman, Webster, J. G	 2,310
Caretaker (storeyard), (Canoe, B.C.),
Kirk, T. A	 384
Technician, grade 2, Cox, H. G		2,580
Draftsman, grade 2, Wright, A. C		2,190
Engineer, PWR, grade 3, vacant-being
filled	
Engineer, PWR, grade 3, Blanchard,
^ P		
Engineer, PWR, grade 3, MacLellan,
J. J	
Engineer, PWR, grade 2, Buckle, C. W.
Engineer, PWR, grade 2, vacant-being
filled	
Engineer, PWR. grade 1, vacant-being
filled	
Engineer, PWR, grade 1, vacant-being
filled	[DOT][DOT][DOT][DOT][DOT]*	
Stenographer, grade 2, Gibb, H	
Mechanic-stores, McMillan, W. T...
Assistant engineer, Paget, A	
Assistant engineer, Feeney, J	
We have vacancies; I admit we are understaffed at the present time, but we are trying to fill the vacancies as quickly as possible.


Angus MacInnis: How do those salaries correspond! or compare with salaries of engineers in private employment, other conditions being considered?


Alphonse Fournier: I am informed that the salaries paid to engineers by the Department of Public Works throughout the country are uniform. Those salaries are inferior to salaries paid in private industry.


George Alexander Cruickshank: We are understaffed in British Columbia, and the officials have a tremendous responsibility in connection with both expenditures and the control over those expenditures. I heard the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre refer to some salaries he wanted to have paid-and I have every sympathy with him. But the men about whom we are now speaking are highly skilled and they are entrusted with the expenditure of millions of dollars. I say this and other departments are derelict in their duty in not seeing that higher salaries are paid, salaries which will be more in line with those paid in civilian life.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering brandh-dredging-
354. Maritime provinces, $1,252,600.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I have mentioned in the last three sessions the matter of dredging at Rustico bay for the benefit of the fishermen. I understood from the minister that the money was voted last year, but nothing further has been done. It is eighteen years since the bay was dredged and it has filled up with silt and soil. At low tide it is impossible for the fishing boats to get up to their stages when they come into the harbour. It should be dredged up to the creek which is about three-quarters of a mile away. At the present time these men must pull in their boats at the harbour at low tide
3,030
3.240
3.240 2,880
2,730
2.130
2.130 1.518 1,764 2,880 2,880
Supply-Public Works

and then wait until the tide rises to get to their stages. I should like to know whether this work will be undertaken this summer, and I want a definite answer.


Alphonse Fournier: Two thousand square yards of dredging is to be done there, but I cannot give a definite date.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: There is still nothing definite.


Alphonse Fournier: It is on our list of dredging to be done by dredge No. 17.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: It is time it was done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-dredging-
357. British Columbia and Yukon, $569,000.
George Alexander Cruickshank: Would this item cover dredging made necessary by the present flood conditions?


Alphonse Fournier: No, there is a special item for that.


George Randolph Pearkes: It should be borne in mind that the silt is carried far out into the Pacific ocean. For years the harbours on the gulf islands and on Vancouver island have been silting up as a result of the debris and silt brought down by the Fraser river, and it is worse than ever this year. I hope the minister will arrange for adequate dredging to be done there.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-Maintenance and operation of roads and bridges
[Stage Direction]
365. Burlington channel bridge, $49,930.
Frank Exton Lennard: What portion of this amount is for maintenance and what is normally required for operation?


Alphonse Fournier: The figures are:
Staff, permanent and temporary. .	$18,730
Operation, maintenance and supplies	 31,000
Sundries	 200


Frank Exton Lennard: I wanted the cost of normal operation.


Alphonse Fournier: Last year the figure was $46,888 and this year it is $49,930.


Frank Exton Lennard: That is for everything?


Alphonse Fournier: Repainting the bridge and so forth.


Frank Exton Lennard: Does the Ontario government contribute toward the maintenance of this bridge?


Alphonse Fournier: No.


Frank Exton Lennard: Why?


Alphonse Fournier: It belongs to the federal government.


Frank Exton Lennard: It is a highway bridge.


Alphonse Fournier: This is one favour we are doing the province.
iMr. LENNARD: It is part of their highway system.


Alphonse Fournier: I understand that the bridge is over a canal, a work belonging to the federal government.


Frank Exton Lennard: I am an Ontario member and I am not protecting that province. I think they should pay something, and probably they should do the same thing in British Columbia and Saskatchewan. I understand that a new super-highway is to be built to cross the canal either by an elevated bridge or by a tunnel.


Alphonse Fournier: I have no report on that. The present bridge is sufficient for our needs, but if the Ontario government want to put in another bridge they would have to make some contribution.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I should like to support the hon. member for Wentworth who is thoroughly familiar with the situation. He is quite right in suggesting that a tunnel should be there rather than a bridge. The government must keep up the bridge for the passage of boats, but quite often when it is open cars will line up for half a mile back. As the minister knows, recently when the bridge was open a car ran off the end and one or two occupants were drowned.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-'Maintenance and operation of roads and bridges-
367. Kingston, LaSalle causeway, $128,498.
John Ritchie MacNicol: As the minister knows, this is on No. 2 highway, and is located in a historic part of the province. On the left is old Fort Henry and on the right is old Fort Fron-tenac. When the department has some money to spare the minister should consider making a memorial bridge at this point because of its historic associations. I am not finding any fault with the causeway that is there, but it really is not very presentable. Next time the minister passes there, I wish he would look at it with a view to putting up some sort of memorial entrance.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-Construction, repairs and improvements - harbours ;and rivers - Prince Edward Island-
372. Canoe Cove-breakwater, repairs, $22,000.
Charlottetown-towards wharf reconstruction and improvements, $250,000.

Supply-Public Works
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of sendees, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in t/he amount of $35,000, $90,000.
Launching pond-boat harbour (revote $50,000), $74,000.
Little Sands-wharf reconstruction, $70,000.
Montague-wharf reconstruction (revote), $26,000.
North Lake-reconstruction of breakwaters, $73,000.
Red Head-harbour improvements. $7,000.
Souris-breakwater repairs, $50,000.
Summerside-railway wharf-repairs to wharf and reconstruction of shed (revote 87,000), $90,000.
Summerside-to take over and reconstruct Holman's wharf, $35,000.
Tignish-repairs to breakwaters (revote $63,400), $90,000.
Wood Islands-wharf improvements (revote $67,000), $192,000.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: One item here covers harbours and rivers generally, and I think I should refer again to Rustico harbour where protection is needed for the lighthouse property, the fishermen's houses and their equipment, such as boats and stages. This whole harbour is now threatened whenever a heavy storm comes up. Representations have been made to the minister from time to time and at least twice efforts have been made to put up a jigsaw breastwork as a protection. When the seas are very heavy the expenditure is just a waste of money. Ten or twelve thousand dollars have been spent there within the last two years and this amount is not worth ten cents as a protection for that beach. Some piles should be driven in there and a strong wall built. That work would have to be done only once. The sand would then collect inside of it and form a breastwork itself.
If the engineers were instructed to look into this matter carefully you would not be wasting $5,000 or $10,000 annually putting in the jigsaw affairs you put in there, which provide in a storm no more protection than a tencent article. Just an ordinary storm would wash the whole thing away. It would throw it up on the bank and, if the storm continued, the whole beach and all the dwelling houses would be swept away. This is a serious enough matter for some good engineers to look into it.
I sent the minister a copy of the plan of how the work should be done. That plan originated from fishermen who had lived there all their lives. One more storm like the one we had last fall-and it was not particularly severe-and you can say good-bye to your lighthouses as well as to the dwellings there. I serve notice on the government that they will be responsible to the fishermen for the
loss of their property, because representations have been made to the government.
I notice that most of this vote is a revote, except $250,000 toward wharf reconstruction and improvements at Charlottetown. Is this amount required for building a new warehouse, or is it for an extension to the wharf?


Alphonse Fournier: The Rustico
problem has given me many a headache. Our engineers did try out some works there, I do not know with what success, but the report which the hon. member makes is not a very good one. At one time I sent down the assistant chief engineer, and his report was that these works were of an experimental nature, and that if they did not answer the purpose a change of plans would be necessary. The department is looking seriously into the situation at Rustico.
The $250,000 for Charlottetown is required toward reconstructing the east side of the railway wharf, widening the wharf, dredging in the east berth and replacing the present frostproof warehouse; total estimated cost, $634,000.


Douglas King Hazen: This morning the Minister of Public Works was furnished with valuable information about the waters of our lakes and rivers from some members who reside inland in this dominion. While I listened to them, I thought of the words of a maritime poet:
Smile, ye inland lakes and rivers;
Flush, ye mountains in the dawn;
But my roving heart is ever
WTith tire ships of grey Saint John.
Now that we have returned in these estimates to the lonely sea and sky, I should like to say a word or two on behalf of some fishermen in the constituency I have the honour to represent. I wish to direct the minister's attention to one matter, and one matter only, and/ that is the condition of the wharf at Lorneville in the county of Saint John. A year or so ago, one summer day I sat on the beach at that village talking with a fisherman who was repairing his boat, and in the course of the conversation he said to me, "You know, I feel more at home on the water than I do on the land." I had never heard a man express that point of view before; afterwards I asked one or two men in the village who go out fishing what they thought about it, and they said:	"Most of
us fish, two men in a boat. We start off in the late afternoon, drift all night, and come back in the morning. Some days when it is foggy and rough many of the boys say, we are not going out tonight, but this man always went out in his boat alone, no matter how dirty the weather". He felt more at home on the water than on the land.
Supply-Public Works

The condition of the wharf in that fishing village is deplorable. There is no wharf left. I received a letter from the minister of the main church in that village a year or so ago, asking if something could not be done about the wharf, and I have had other applications about it. I have taken this matter up with the minister and his department at different times, and) in January, 1946, I received a tetter from the acting minister, notifying me that consideration was being given' to this wharf and that the possibility of a new wharf being constructed was under study. The wharf is all gone now, and that is a great handicap to the fishermen. I again bring the condition of that wharf to the attention of the minister and trust that he will give it his further consideration.
I should like to know just what is the present position with respect to the wharf and breakwater at Chance Harbour, a small fishing village. The wharf was badlly in need of repairs, and a year or so ago some money was voted to restore the wharf and breakwater. What is the position at Chance Harbour now?
In conclusion, I want to thank the minister for the dredging done at Dipper Harbour. Dredging was badly needed there. It has been done and it has proved of great service to the fishermen in taking their boats in and out and in moving what they call their cars, which are large wooden boxes which float in the water and in which they keep their lobsters.
Mr. FOURNIER, (Hull): I cannot make any promise, but I have told my officials that I should like to have these two projects studied. I should like to see a report on the conditions at Lomeville and Chance Harbour, and if they are as described by the hon. member he may be sure that I personally will see that something is done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-Ontario-
375. Belle River-reconstruction of training wall, $34,000.
Bracebridge-redredging, the provincial government to bear a like amount (revote), $42,00'0.
Britt-wharf (revote $9,500), $13,500.
Brockville-breakwater reconstruction, $138,-OOfl.
Bronte-reconstruction of piers (revote $37,000), $212,000.
Byng Inlet-wharf (revote $9,600'). $13,500.
Cockburn Island'-reconstruction of harbour works (revote $22,500), $56,000.
Coll'ingwood-harbour reconstruction and improvements (revote $63,000), $75,000.
Fort William-dredging (revote $31,000), $85,000.

Gananoque-wharf extension, $8,600.
Hamilton-towards harbour improvements (revote), $300,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of sewices no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $75,000, $275,000.
Kenora-repairs to wharves (revote $42,000), $58,000.
Kincardine-repairs to piers, $30,000.
Kingsville-harbour repairs and improvements (revote $111,000), $140,000.
Little Current-site for wharf (revote), $25,-
[Stage Direction]
Maediarmid1-breakwater repairs, $15,000.
Meaford-revetment wall (revote), $7,000.
Midland to Parry Sound-towards dredging inside channel1 (Tevote), $200,000.
Morson-wharf replacement (revote $7,400), $10,500.
North Bay-wharf improvements, $10,000.
Ottawa-(Rideau river)'-repairs to walls and tail race (revote $41,000), $64,000.
Pelee Island-wharf improvements (revote), $28,000.
Penetanguishene-harbour improvements (revote $24,000). $87,000.
Port Arthur-dredging (revote $231,000), $340,000.
Port Arthur-breakwater (revote $210,000), $300,000.
Port Bruce-reconstruction of pier (revote $28,000), $38,000.
Port Burwell-reconstruction of pier, $110,000.
Port Colborne-breakwater repairs (revote $25,000), $34,000.
Port Dover-eheckwater repairs and extension, $8,000.
Port Elgin-breakwater repairs (revote $71,200), $78,000.
Port Hope-harbour repairs (revote $121,-OOO), $200,000.
Port Rowan-harbour repairs and improvements (revote $29,000), $33,000.
Redwood Road-wharf (revote). $4,500.
Salmon Point-breakwater extension (revote $13,000). $17,100.
Sand Point-wharf repairs, $39,000.
South Baymouth-harbour improvements (revote $45,000), $100,000.
Sturgeon Falls-wharf extension (revote), $8,400.
Tobermory-wharf and dredging (revote), $43,000
Toronto-harbour maintenance (revote). $45,000.
Wallaceburg-extension to wharf and warehouse, $31,500.
Whitby-repairs to harbour works, $230,000.
Mr. BARRETT:: I should like to inquire what is to be done at Port Dover and Port Rowan. The wharf at Port Dover is in a dangerous condition, due to lack of repairs. What is the extent of the repairs that are to be made at Port Dover for $8,000, which seems to me inadequate for the work that is absolutely necessary there? What does the government propose to do in the way of dredging at Port Dover? This is not a problem that concerns my constituency alone. I think the chairman wall bear me out that the opening of Port Dover to make it possible to have a

Supply-Public Works
ferry service across the lake would be of great interest to quite a large territory north of that port. The cities of Brantford, Paris, Galt, Kitchener, and even Guelph are particularly anxious to have this port opened. A deputation was here last winter and brought this matter to the attention of the department. The opening of the port would enable crosslake traffic to reach a densely populated section of the United States, eastern Ohio and Pennsylvania. If that harbour could be opened up by dredging so that a ferry could get in, it would be of great benefit, not only to the port itself but, as I have said, to this territory in Ontario north of Port Dover.


Alphonse Fournier: The expenditure of $8,000 on Port Dover is detailed in this way: raising the height of and extending the crib work checkwater by providing 1,200 tons of rubble stone at a cost of $7,200. Inspection and contingencies amount to $800. Dredging was carried on by local agreement with Mr. George Gamble in 1946. The removal of 6,000 cubic yards of class B material at eighty cents a cubic yard; probable expenditure in 1947-48, $3,840.


Theobald Butler Barrett: That has already been done.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member wants the large project of $500,000?


Theobald Butler Barrett: No, I was not suggesting that. Has any consideration been given to the dredging of sand out of the harbour? In years gone by, this harbour could accommodate ferry boats. I remember in my youth that a large car ferry used to come in there.


Alphonse Fournier: We are considering this matter. I note that there is a study here. An estimate has been made of the dredging, but it has not been presented. It was made up for my information. I shall look further into it.


Theobald Butler Barrett: What is proposed to be done at Port Rowan? There is a fairly large vote for that.


Alphonse Fournier: Work is under contract at that place.


Theobald Butler Barrett: Is it for dredging?


Alphonse Fournier: No. It is for rebuilding the inner seventy-one feet, spans 1 to 5 inclusive, repairing balance of wharf, repairing head lock by driving steel sheet piling, filling with stone and gravel with a concrete deck slab; and construction of a steel sheet pile wall on the west side of the dredged slip. Amount of contract, $29,692; inspection
and contingencies, $3,308. There is an estimate of $6,300 toward dredging at that place. We are making a survey.


Theobald Butler Barrett: The wharf at Port Dover is in an equally dilapidated condition. I was wondering why there was not a larger vote for that. I presume it has been studied by the engineers. It is in really a dangerous condition at the present time. I notice that the wharf at St. Williams is not included in the item. Has that work been done? I spoke to the minister on that a year ago. I understood a vote was to be put in the estimates for repairing the wharf at St. Williams. The last information I had was that no wharf had been started there.


Alphonse Fournier: If work is to be done there it will be taken out of the general vote.
Mr. MacN'ICOL: I should like to ask one question on item 375. The Pelee island wharf amounts to $28,000. I am glad to see that. In vote 844 of the supplementaries an amount of $50,000 appears for the same thing. Is that the same wharf, or are there several wharves?


Alphonse Fournier: The work under contract at Pelee island is as follows: removal of cribwork protection pier, 14 feet by 164 feet, from the east to the west side of the north wharf, and extension of, the newly placed pier a distance of 83 feet. The estimated cost is given as $28,000. That is in the main estimates. In the supplementary estimates there is an amount of $50,000 for demolition of the cribwork superstructure and reconstruction in steel and concrete of the inner portion of the north wharf, for a length of 373 feet.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I am glad to see that. It is a beautiful island. There is quite a lot of transportation between the island and the mainland. Anything that makes shipment easier is better for the island.


Mr. WEBB:: There are a couple of items in which I am particularly interested. They are the breakwater at Brockville and the wharf extension at Gananoque. Is it the intention of the department to have this work-done this year?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes, it is the intention to have the work done this year.


George Robert Webb: I come to the item "harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years", and so on. What does that item mean?
Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: It covers all repairs to existing structures, but no new projects.


George Robert Webb: It does not take in all of the wharves and so on going up the river.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest Territories-
377.	Bell Rock (Fort Smith), Northwest Territories-wharf, $200,000.
Cold Lake, Alberta-harbour improvements (revote $6,000), $23,000.
Fort Fitzgerald, Alberta-wharf repairs and extension, $95,000.
Fort Franklin, Northwest Territories-wharf repairs and extension, $22,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, $25,000.
W-askesi-u Lake, Saskatchewan-harbour improvements (revote), $65,000.
Waterways, Alberta-reconstruction of wing dams, $23,000.
Yellowknife, Northwest Territories-wharf (revote), $23,000.
Mr. MaeNICOL: The first item is "Bell Rock (Fort Smith)". Is "Fort Smith" correct? Should it not be Fort Fitzgerald?
Alphonse Fournier: It is Bell Rock. There is no mistake about that. This vote is to provide wharfage facilities at Bell Rock urgently required in connection with transshipment of freight going north. A wharf built by the Northern Transportation Company Limited in 1945 and formerly used for this purpose has been practically destroyed since that time.
Bell Rock is the northern terminus of the twenty-one mile portage to Fort Fitzgerald, and all water-borne freight for points north of Fort Smith carried by the Northern Transportation Company Limited is shipped from Bell Rock.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-British Columbia and Yukon-
378.	Bella Cool-a-wharf replacement (revote), $146,000.
Campbell River-fishing harbour (revote),
[Stage Direction]
Campbell River1-wharf repairs and extension (revote $33,000), $132,000.
Chemainus-harbour improvements, $10,000.
Columbia River-protection work, $37,000.
Ford's Cove (Hornby Island)

breakwater and float (revote), $14,000.
Fraser River-towards improvements (revote $175,000), $300,000.
Fraser River-reconstruction of North Arm jetty, $40,000.
Fraser river and Vancouver harbour-dredging (revote), $400,-000.

Harbours and rivers generally

foT maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $75,000, $425,000.
Keat's Island-pierhead replacement, $12,000.
-Nanaimo-wharf repairs and improvements (revote $8,000), $24,000.
New Westminster-wharf reconstruction and extension (revote $18,000), $125,000'.
Port Alberni-harbour improvements (revote $40,0-00), $450,000.
Port Clements-wharf repairs, $38,000.
Prince Rupert

roadway and renewal of fishermen's floats (revote $30,000), $72,000.
Ruskin-wharf .replacement, $8,000.
Sandspit-wharf renewal, $75,000.
Sechelt-wharf repairs and improvements (revote $23,000), $56,000.
Sointula-harbour improvements (revote $45,000-), $50,000.
Stewart-wharf repairs (revote $43,500), $65,000.
V-ananda-wharf replacement, $65,000.
Victoria-dredging (revote), $122,000.
Westview-replacing fishing harbourage (revote), $133,000.
White Rock-wharf repairs (revote), $44,000.
Howard Charles Green: This includes an item as follows: "Fraser river, reconstruction of North Arm jetty." Will that figure complete the repairs to the jetty, or is it only taking one more bite out of the job?


Alphonse Fournier: This amount of S40,000 is to provide for the reconstruction of the portion of the north arm jetty between the shore of lone island and the inner end of the completed rock mound.


Howard Charles Green: Will that complete the repairs to the jetty?


Alphonse Fournier: No, I do not think so.


Howard Charles Green: How much more will be required to complete these repairs?


Alphonse Fournier: There is another vote in the supplementary estimates for the Fraser river, towards improvements, the further amount required being $350,000.


Howard Charles Green: I cannot understand why the repairs are not being completed this year.


Alphonse Fournier: If the hon. member will look at the vote he will see that there is a sum of $300,000 under the heading, "Fraser river, towards improvements". These improvements are a part of the different works that are to be done there. The object is to raise the north arm jetty to an elevation above high water level by the construction of a rock mound eight feet wide at the top, seven feet wide at the centre, over a brush mattress sixty feet wide by 8,775 feet long, with three pile marker dolphins at 200-foot intervals where required from station 208 to station 295, at an estimated cost of $800,000.

Supply-Public Works


Howard Charles Green: Is the $300,000 to be applied on the north arm jetty?


Alphonse Fournier: It will be applied on three different works. There is a contract with Gilley brothers for strengthening protection work along the Lulu island bank of the Fraser river between Canada Rice mills and No. 9 highway.


Howard Charles Green: That is a long way from the jetty.


Alphonse Fournier: There is another project, namely, training walls or dikes. In the Sapperton bay area the construction of two open pile dikes, upstream dike 800 feet long, downstream 733 feet with a 200 foot wing, protected at ground level with rock mound with height one-third the depth of the water, at an estimated cost of $95,000.


Howard Charles Green: The jetty is built of rock and runs out into the water, and what I want to find out is how much it will cost to complete the jetty.


Alphonse Fournier: I am told,


Howard Charles Green: Over what period will that be done? Apparently it is not to be finished this year.


Alphonse Fournier: I am told, about three years.


Howard Charles Green: Is there to be any dredging in the north arm of the Fraser?


Alphonse Fournier: We are dredging the year around there.


Howard Charles Green: The minister will recall that representations were made here by the parties using the north arm of the Fraser river. Those representations were submitted some months ago, and I have the resolution that was passed by the Vancouver board of trade on March 4 of this year. It reads:
That suitable added dredging equipment be made available to provide:
1.	The maintenance of a deep sea channel of thirty feet in depth on the Fraser river from Port Mann on the main river to the gulf of Georgia and of sufficient width for the safe movement of 10,009-ton freighters.
2.	On the north arm Fraser a channel of not less than ten feet at low tide and 150 feet wide from New Westminster to Marpole and from Marpole to the gulf of Georgia a channel of fifteen feet at low tide and1 300 feet wide.
Has the department accepted that plan and are steps being taken to dredge these channels as requested?


Alphonse Fournier: I received a delegation some months ago and I believe I have on file a copy of the resolution to which the
hon. member refers. When the request was made I was not convinced that everything in the resolution was justified, and I had my deputy go there about a month ago. He has met these people and investigated the request. At the time these estimates had been prepared and we did not add to them; but during the year, on the report of the deputy minister, we shall certainly make a further serious study of the request for that dredging.


Howard Charles Green: None of this dredging is to be done during the coming year?


Alphonse Fournier: Some dredging is being constantly done, but not on the scale on which these people would have us do it. Two courses might be followed, having another new' dredge or giving contracts. The deputy minister was out there for the special purpose of studying the situation, in the supplementary estimates we have estimated $800,000, and this year the sum of $350,000 is to be spent, so that in three years we shall finish it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Telegraph and telephone services, operation and maintenance-
886. British Columbia and Yukon, $730,000.
William Irvine: Is there included in this vote a sum sufficient to recondition the entire telephone system in the Peace River block, and, secondly, does the vote include money to recondition the line between Clayhurst and Dawson Creek? A third question is whether the work will be done forthwith. I should like to have the answers to these questions. If the minister will answer them I will shut up; if he does not, I will make a speech.


Alphonse Fournier: The special projects referred to by the hon. member are not included in this vote.


William Irvine: But it is a general vote for the whole of the Yukon and the Northwest Territories.


Alphonse Fournier: This is administration and1 everything, but it does not embrace the specific projects mentioned.


William Irvine: If this does not, is there any other vote that does?


Alphonse Fournier: There is one project in connection with Dawson Creek. We have an item of $96,500 for that in the supplementary estimates.


William Irvine: Exactly what is proposed to be done along that line? I want to know whether that $96,000 will include repairing the line?
Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: If the hon. gentleman will wait until we get to the item, I will have the information.


William Irvine: I will do that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural	branch-Construction.	repairs
and improvements of publie buildings- Ontario-
8Z.). Barrie-public building (revote $20,000), $80,000.
Chapleau-public building, $25,000.
Chatham-public building, $50,000.
Cornwall-public building, $50,000.
Delhi-public building, $25,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $300,000.
Dundas public building-addition amd alterations, $20,000.
Fergus public building-addition and alterations, $29,000.
Fort Erie-customs building-addition and alterations, $50,000.
Geraildton-public building, $24,500.
Kenora public building-addition, alterations and improvements-further amount required, $54,000.
Little Current-.public building, $50,000.
Ottawa-addition to mines and resources site on Carling avenue-further amount required, $10,000.
Ottawa-central heating plant-repairs and replacements-further amount required, $45,000.
Ottawa-departmental office building-further amount required, $350,000.
Ottawa-east block-improvements, $165,000.
Ottawa-impa-ovemierats to heating in Woods and Canadian buildings, $70,000.
Ottawa-national research building-improvements and repairs.-further amount required, $55,000.
Ottawa-parliament buildings-improvements -further amount required, $23,000.
Pembroke-publie building, $25,000.
Peterborough-public building, $50,000.
Picton-public building-addition and -alterations, $25,000.
Port Colborne publie building-addition and alterations, $26,000.
Sault Ste. Marie public building-further amount required, $150,000.
Tecumseh-public building, $31,000.
Toronto city delivery building-extension, restoration, mechanical equipment and addition to site-further amount required, $76,000.
Toronto-postal station "E", $30,000.
Waterloo public building-addition, alterations and improvements-further amount required, $8,000.
Frank Exton Lennard: With regard to Dundas public building, addition and alterations, the minister has not yet given me the information I requested. I asked for it several days ago.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. I will get it in a second. It is proposed to construct a one storey addition, twenty-one feet by forty-four feet, with basement, concrete foundations,

masonry walls and to carry out extensive alterations to the existing building including new screens and boxes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural	branch-Construction,	repairs
-and improvements of public buildings- Manitoba-
825. Brandon public building-addition and alterations, $30,000.
Dominion public	buildings-improvements
and repairs-further amount required, $100,000.
Flin Flon-public building, $100,000.
Grandview

public building, $49,000.
Pine Falls-public building, $35,000.
Winnipeg immigration building-repairs -and improvements, $25,000.
Winnipeg-postal station "A"-improvements -further amount required, $12,500.
Mr. Z.APLITNY: This is the item on which I wished to speak before. The minister is away ahead of me, because we have carried on negotiations on this for about three years. I want to know whether that means a post office. Will the minister throw some light on that?
Alphonse Fournier: It is proposed -to e-rect a one storey structure, thirty-two feet by fifty-two feet, with basement, concrete foundations, wood framing, brick facing, stone trim and felt and gravel roof. The estimated icost is as follows: site, $2,000; building, $38,000; grading a.nd sidewalks, $1,000; fittings and boxes, $2,000; supervision, $1,200; contingencies, $4,800; a total of $49,000.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I thank the minister for that, information, but my question was whether this was for the purpose of a post office.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. That is what the hon. gentleman asked for.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I just wanted to make sure this was a post office. It says here "public building".


Alphonse Fournier: Public building for postal services, I suppose.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Yes. I merely want to say this. The people of Grandview and district will be happy to see this item in the estimates. On their behalf and on behalf of the Grandview board of trade and the town council, I wish to say that they will appreciate this coming through after the many years they have had to wait. The only other question I wish to ask is whether the construction on this building will begin this summer.


Alphonse Fournier: As soon as the plans and specifications are ready we will ask for tenders.

Supply-Public Works


Mr. MOORE:: I should like to ask the minister a question with regard to the public building being constructed at Flin Flon, which I presume will be a federal building. When will that be proceeded with?


Alphonse Fournier: I will give the hon. member the same answer as I gave the hon. member for Dauphin. As soon as plans and specifications are ready, we will ask for tenders.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural branch-construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-Alberta-
827. Calgary-accommodation for Department of Trade and Commerce-further amount required, $10,000,
Chief Mountain-customs and immigration building, $75,000.	.
Dominion public	buildings

improvements
and repairs-further amount required, $100,000.
Ledue-public building, $25,000.
Macleod-Public building, $25,000.
Red Deer-public building, $50,000.
Mr. SHAW:: I should like to ask if this appropriation for a public building in Red Deer is for postal purposes?
Mr. FOURNIER. (Hull): Yes.


Frederick Davis Shaw: If so, what is contemplated that this appropriation shall cover?


Alphonse Fournier: The proposed building will be a two-storey brick faced structure forty-eight feet by seventy-four feet, with a two-storey annex at the rear forty feet by fifty feet. It will have concrete foundations, masonry walls and stone trim. It is for the use of the post office, unemployment insurance commission and soldier settlement board at Red Deer.


Frederick Davis Shaw: It is indeed gratifying for us to realize that finally concrete action is being taken to solve the postal problem in the city of Red Deer. However I must confess that I am not too happy about the information the minister gave just at the conclusion of his remarks. Experience in other quarters, notably in Calgary, has proved that where a building has been constructed to be utilized for postal services, and where other branches of government have been permitted to move in, it has always been at the expense of the postal services. While I am most grateful that action is being taken in this connection, I fear that eventually we shall continue to be confronted by a problem in connection with the post office. I urge the minister to give some consideration to the prevention of other departments from moving in and simply squeezing the postal services out. I think the minister realizes that is something which has been done.
I am advised that in Calgary we have an excellent example of what occurred where other branches of government have moved in.
I know the people of Red Deer would have me express appreciation that something is being done, but I certainly hope the minister will concentrate on the requirements of the postal service and see that they do not suffer because other branches of government move into the same building.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural branch-construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
832. Accommodation for the taxation division of the Department of National Revenue, $2,000,-
000.
Howard Charles Green: Will the minister explain this vote?


Alphonse Fournier: The explanation is that I have had repeated requests from the national revenue department, saying that all over the country they lack space for their offices, that they have increased the number of their staff, and that -they are in arrears in assessments and so forth. They have asked for a general vote, so that if we find space in Toronto, or Montreal or Vancouver, that could usefully serve the purpose of the taxation branch, we would have it, and I would not be in the position of having to say to the department, no, I have not the funds, but we may deal about it and try to purchase the -buildings. This is a request from that department.


Howard Charles Green: In other words, it is a blanket request for $2,000,000?


Alphonse Fournier: Absolutely.


Howard Charles Green: To be spent, if, as and when
quarters can be found?


Alphonse Fournier: That is the position.


Howard Charles Green: What cities does that apply
to?


Alphonse Fournier: From Halifax to Vancouver. The last case I have had, and I have had a special item, was to buy the Begg building.


Howard Charles Green: That was under a different item.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes, because we have completed that deal. But that has been going on for quite a while. I have no estimate, no appropriation-; I am only serving that other department. They know their needs better than I do as to space and number of employees. This was thought to be the only way, because I cannot specify one building
Supply-Public Works

right now in Halifax, Moncton, Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg or anywhere all over the country.


Howard Charles Green: I suggest that this is an unusual way to deal with the matter.


Alphonse Fournier: It is.


Howard Charles Green: An unusual way to appropriate funds. I do not understand how the Minister of Finance could let this get by. Here is a vote for $2,000,000 to buy buildings for the income tax division. There are no buildings to be purchased at the present time. It is just a blanket vote for $2,000,000 to acquire properties if, as and when such become available. It is not known in what centres they will be acquired. The minister said it might be anywhere from Halifax to Victoria. There should be some more definite allotment.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is a matter which would come under the jurisdiction of the Minister of National Revenue, but it would be handled by the Department of Public Works. As the minister has explained, the Department of National Revenue is short of space. This is somewhat in the nature of a token vote.


Clarence Gillis: There seems to be a tendency on the part of government officials to conclude that Canada ends at Halifax. I notice the minister referred to something extending from Victoria to Halifax. I would point out to him that there are 360 more miles of Canada east of Halifax.


Alphonse Fournier: I have good reason to know that. If I had not, the hon. member would not have got the post office at Dominion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-dredging-
SS7. British Columbia and Yukon, further amount required, $118,100.
Howard Charles Green: Is any of this for dredging in the Fraser river?


Alphonse Fournier: No. We have another estimate for $500,000.


Howard Charles Green: We have not yet come to any estimate for dredging resulting from the floods?


Alphonse Fournier: Not yet. There is the estimate for half a million dollars, and another one later on.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-'Prince Edward Island-
841. Annandale-boat basin, $12,000.

Fishing Cove (Cape Egmont)

wharf and breakwater, $47,000.
Montague-wharf reconstruction - further amount required, $8,300.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I see here a provision for the boat basin at Annandale, which is a very good thing. Did the minister receive a petition from the fishermen at Murray Harbour, north, with reference to a boat basin or boat harbour to be built there?


Alphonse Fournier: I cannot recall offhand. I can look it up after I get back to the office, and let the hon. member know.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-Ontario
[Stage Direction]
844. Belleville-harbour improvements, $7,000. Britt-wharf-further amount required, $2,600.
Christian Island-wharf extension, $16,000. Collingwood-harbour reconstruction and improvements-further amount required, $200,000. Dryden-wharf, $38,000.
Fort William-dredging-further amount required, $95,000.
Goderich-redredging and repairs to harbour works, $228,000.
Grand River conservation scheme-contribution towards cost of preliminary plans, test drilling, etc., in connection with proposed dam on the Conestoga river (revote), $8,000.
Haileybury

repairs to harbour works, $24,-
000.
Hamilton-towards harbour improvements'- further amount required, $500,000.
Honora-wharf replacement, $8,500.
Island Grove-wharf, $23,000.
KenoVa-repairs to wharves-further amount required, $16,000.
Kincardine-repairs to piers-further amount required, $18,000.
Kingsville-harbour repairs and improvements-further amount required, $45,000.
Loon Lake-wharf, $8,300.
Midland to Parry Sound'-towards dredging inside channel-further amount required, $40,000.
Montreal river-to complete wharfage facilities, $4,500.
Nighthawk river-contribution towards improvements, $10,000.
Nipigon-wharf extension and dredging, $65,500,
Owen Sound-harbour improvements, $105-,000.
Pelee Island-towards wharf reconstruction, $50,000.
Port Arthur-breakwater-further amount required, $175,000.
Port Colborne-breakwater repairs-further amount required, $60,000.
Riviere des Mille lies

dredging, $40,000. Rondeau (Erieau)-repairs to piers, $85,000. Sheguindah-dredging (revote $13;000), $20,000.
Spanish-wharf extension, $7,200.
Sturgeon	Falls-wharf	extension-further
amount required, $4,600.

Supply-Public Works
Toronto-towards harbour head wall, $500,-
000. .
Wade's Landing-wharf and dredging, $9,000.
Wheatley (Muddy creek)-towards fishing harbour, $50,000.
Mr. LENNA'RD: I notice an item for a wharf at Loon Lake. There are about thirteen Loon Lakes in Ontario. Which one is it?
Alphonse Fournier: In the constituency of Fort William.


Frank Exton Lennard: I have an article here from the St. Thomas Times-Journal, which states:
Port Stanley improvements in supplementary estimates
Word has been, received by local municipal officials through Gordon Newell pf Springfield that an amount has been placed in the supplementary estimates for 1948 for the extension of the west pier to the south and east to provide the much-needed protection for the harbour.
Mr. Newell was informed through the Department of Public Works at Ottawa that the sura had been placed in the supplementary estimates. He notified deputy reeve W. C. Wheaton.
In the regular estimates there are votes for Port Bruce, Port Burwell, Port Colborne, Port Dover, Port Elgin, Port Rowan, Kingsville, Pelee Island and Morson. I think nearly every port and sandbar on the Canadian shore of lake Erie is mentioned, or some amount is allotted to it. But for some reason or another Port Stanley has been left out of the picture. Was Mr. Gordon Newell correct in saying he had received this word from the Department of Public Works, or where was the slip-up?


Alphonse Fournier: I do not meet everyone who comes to the Department of Public Works to get a wharf, jetty or breakwater. These people may have come to the department. I have seen the file with respect to Port Stanley; it is being studied. We have not yet all the data. Further estimates will be up next year, and we hope we shall have some decision at that time.


Frank Exton Lennard: Apparently Mr. Newell did not receive word from the department.


Alphonse Fournier: I cannot recall having seen him.


Frank Exton Lennard: The article states that Mr. Newell was informed through the Department of Public Works at Ottawa that the sum had been placed in the supplementary estimates.


Alphonse Fournier: I have the story now. There is a list of projects standing in
the department, and this is one of them. Probably he was told from my office that the item is being considered.


Frank Exton Lennard: He says he was informed by the department.


Alphonse Fournier: That we would recommend it; but that does not necessarily mean that it would receive approval.


Mr. CARDIFF:: I notice here a vote of $228,000 for redredging and repairs to the harbour at Goderich. Has that anything to do with the extension work in the harbour? If so, I have not much to say.


Alphonse Fournier: It is to repair the damage done by spring floods, and to do some dredging and filling in caused by the floods.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: For some years we have been trying to have some work done in the harbour. It is a dangerous channel, because of its being so narrow. It is one of the most important harbours in western Ontario. More grain passes through that point than perhaps any other port on the lake. For that reason we feel that the department is justified in spending some money on it. We do have some large steamers come in there heavily loaded with grain and, depending upon the wind, at times they have to anchor outside the harbour for days before they can venture in.
I believe the work has been in progress for some time. I should like to know how much has been accomplished. I dare say the work is going ahead favourably, but I wonder if the minister would not take steps to have this channel widened so as to make it safe for large boats entering that port.


Alphonse Fournier: This is all we can do in the present year, but it is not final by any means. We still have Goderich on our list, and we are considering doing further work there.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I wish to support the hon. member's request in connection with Goderich harbour. The problem of lake transport has long been a study of mine, and last fall I made several trips to Goderich harbour. What the hon. member has said is correct. The channel is narrow and requires deepening, and furthermore there is an island almost in the middle of the harbour which, in my judgment, is one of the best harbours on the east coast of the great lakes. I know representations were made to the minister by the chamber of commerce, and I should like to know if anything is to be done toward the removal of that island?


Alphonse Fournier: This is part of the whole project for the improvement of Goderich harbour which will cost something over
Supply-Public Works

$1,000,000. We do not feel that we can spend more this year than is mentioned here, but this is not the end of all the works.


John Ritchie MacNicol: When ships line up beside the elevators they have to back out to get into the lake, and because of this island they can hardly get out. I imagine if you went there in November you would see possibly ten to a dozen ships in the harbour, but if the island were not there there would possibly be three or four more.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: May I have the assurance of the minister that the amount of money in this item will be spent while the dredges are working there, and if this amount is not sufficient to cover all the work needed perhaps an additional amount can be voted next year?


Alphonse Fournier: I cannot add to what I have already said about Goderich.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I should like to compliment the minister upon what is to be done at Collingwood harbour. I am glad to see that the department is going to reconstruct that harbour, because ships do have a difficult time to get in and out. I want also to thank the minister for the vote pertaining to the Grand river conservation scheme. I may say that scheme was first mentioned by myself a few years ago when I promoted a scheme in this house for a program of flood control. At that time I recommended a dam on the Conestoga river and one on the Grand river about three miles north of Fergus. The dam was not constructed on the Conestoga, and I am glad to observe that provision is being made to build that dam.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers- Manitoba-[DOT]
8J/5. Assiniboime river-repairs and improvements to diking, $17,000.
George Hugh Castleden: I think the minister has done very well by Canada generally. Votes are provided for Ontario, Quebec and the other provinces, and provision is made in this vote for diking on the Assiniboine river. The Assiniboine river flooded its banks at Kamsack this spring and serious damage resulted to residential and farm property. I realize that this circumstance was unusual, but I should like to have the minister survey the situation to see if a little diking would not prevent a recurrence of such flooding.


Alphonse Fournier: I shall certainly have my engineers look into that and let my hon. friend have a report.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Engineering branch-Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-British Columbia and Yukon-
8i7. Balmoral-Wharf, $14,000.
Billings Bay (Nelson Island)-float, $7,000.
Campbell River-wharf replacement, $132,000.
Chemainus *- harbour improvements-further amount required (revote $6,700), $8,000.
Cornox-towards wharf replacement, $100,000.
Davis Bay (Wilson Creek)-breakwater and float, $17,000.
Fraser River-towards improvements-further amount required, $350,000.
Fraser River-remedial work on Lulu and Sea islands (revote), $31,000.
Fraser River (Kirkland Island)-extension of channel protection, $13,000.
Gambier Island (Camp Georgie)-wharf, $24,000.
Harrison River-extension, to shear boom,
[Stage Direction]
Nanaimo-towards dredging, $60,000.
Nanaimo-wharf repairs and improvements- further amount required, $12,000.
Okanagan flood control project-dominion government's Share of preliminary costs, $75,000.
Port Alberni-towards dredging, $40,000.
Port Alberni-harbour improvements-further amount required, $34,000.
Prince Rupert (Fairview Bay)-towards breakwater, $75,000.
Roberts' Creek-wharf repairs and improvements- (revote $20,400), $100,000.
Squamish-towards wharf repairs and improvements, $50,000.
Tofino-harbour repairs and improvements,
[Stage Direction]
Traill-landing, $8,000.
Ucluelet West-floats, $7,500.
Victoria-dredging-further amount required, $30,000.
Howard Charles Green: This vote has to do with British Columbia and the Yukon, and I notice that there are some items covering the Fraser river.


Alphonse Fournier: I explained to the hon. gentleman that the total work would cost $800,000, to be spent in three years. This year we have a vote for $350,000.


Howard Charles Green: That item is for the north arm jetty?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: None of these items is for flood control work?


Alphonse Fournier: No. When we get to that item I will let the hon. member know.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What is the situation with regard -to dredging at -Shuswap lake? We have been having correspondence about this matter, and I should like to know whether the dredging will be finished in time to have the improvement work done?


Alphonse Fournier: I am told it is expected that the dredging will be ready by the middle of July.

Supply-Public Works


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Could the minister tell me what item would cover the construction, of wharves in. Kootenay West?


Alphonse Fournier: That would be under the general vote, and1 I have not the list before me.
water is a protection for that particular harbour, and I ask the minister, have tenders been called for, and is the work going ahead, or is the minister still trying to let the contract?


Alphonse Fournier: We have an estimate of $360,000.
<l rivers - Yukon-
8J/8. Lewes river-"toward taking over, reconstructing and maintaining dam, $40,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-Construction, repairs and improvements - hairbours an
John Ritchie MacNicol: Is the dam referred to here to be constructed upriver or downriver from Whitehorse?


Alphonse Fournier: This item is to provide for taking over the Lewes river dam from the White Pass and Yukon route without cost to the crown and reconstructing a section of the dam; also maintaining and operating costs for 1948-49. The total estimated cost of reconstructing the dam is $125,000.
Proposed action is strictly in the interest of navigation as, by the filling of a considerable storage area above the dam in the fall and winter and by releasing the water in the spring to break up the ice in the Yukon river below, navigation is advanced some three to four weeks each spring.
The Yukon river system is the main highway of that country and maximum operation is essential for transport in of supplies and for shipping. During the 1947 season, 14,000 tons of freight and 4,000 passengers were transported over this waterway.
This vote is made up as follows:
Grouting of one section of	crib..	$11,500
Grout machinery	 7,500
Seven buttresses at $1,300	each..	9,100
Maintenance and operation		 10,000
Contingencies	 1,900
Total	 $40,000


John Ritchie MacNicol: I do not believe there is a dam downriver from Whitehorse, so that it must be upriver.


Alphonse Fournier: It is above.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-Generally-
8'i9- Protection works generally-to provide for remedial works where damages are caused by, or endanger, navigation or federal government structures-further amount required, $100,000.
Clarence Gillis: Would this appropriation
cover the construction of a breakwater at Port Morien, Nova Scotia? I inquired last year how this work was progressing. The break-5849-386i


Clarence Gillis: You had that last year. When are you going to spend it? There is no use in voting the money if you do not let the contract.


Alphonse Fournier: The work is under contract to J. P. Porter Company, Limited, for $342,360. If the work is not started I will get in touch with the contractor. He should be carrying on the work right now.


Clarence Gillis: That is all I wanted to know.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Telegraph branch

Telegraph and telephone services, construction and improvements-
S58. Dawson Creek-Pouce Coupe, B.C.- telephone lines-improvements, $96,500.
William Irvine: May I have the information now that I asked for a little while ago?


Alphonse Fournier: This amount is to provide for the modernization and expansion of the existing government telephone system in the towns of Dawson Creek and Pouce Coupe, British Columbia, as well as the surrounding rural areas. The total cost of this work is estimated at $96,500.
Transmission over the various circuits of the existing system has in many cases become almost impossible, due to the continued construction of power lines paralleling the government lines. In addition, the exchange system and local lines in Dawson Creek itself are no longer adequate to serve the increased requirements of the town and will have to be almost completely re-organized.
This item is to repair and extend the line-between Dawson Creek and Pouce Coupe.


William Irvine: A general reconditioning of the line, I presume. That is part of what 1 am interested in.
Another thing I want to be sure about is telephone service for a little district called Clayhurst, which is completely isolated in the spring when the river breaks up, and again in the fall.


Alphonse Fournier: If it is not included it can be taken care of under the general estimates if it does not cost too much money.


William Irvine: It would take only a few hundred dollars.


Alphonse Fournier: We will do it if it costs only that much.
Supply-Public Works


William Irvine: I want to thank the minister.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: This is a considerable sum, $96,500, for improvements to telephone lines. This and other items would lead me to believe that the department uses a lot of poles. What species of timber is used and where is it procured?


Alphonse Fournier: We use British Columbia cedar, the best we can find.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Telegraph branch-Telegraph and telephone services, construction and improvements-
853. Ashcroft-150 Mile House, British Columbia-improvements to telephone line, $23,000.
Mr. PUiLTON: What alterations or improvements are being made under this item?
Alphonse Fournier: 
Edmund Davie Fulton: There is nothing there for the telephone exchange at Williams lake. Is that expenditure contemplated next year?


Alphonse Fournier: I will look into
that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
935. To provide for repair of flood damage to federal government structures and telegraph and telephone lines and for redredging of filled-iu channels, $550,000.
Howard Charles Green: Would the minister explain this item?


Alphonse Fournier: This item is to provide for repairing the damages caused to federal government works by the disastrous floods in British Columbia.
When this estimate was prepared the waters were still too high to make surveys in order to ascertain accurate estimates of the damages. However, from telephone reports from our

district officers it is obvious that considerable repair work and re-dredging filled-in channels will have to be undertaken as soon as the water level recedes sufficiently.
In view of the above, it is proposed to use this $550,000 wherever it is most urgently required. In the meantime, however, a rough estimate of the requirements is as follows:
(a) Telegraph and telephone lines-
1.	To repair and replace cross arms, poles and wire in the Fraser river
valley on government lines	 $ 54,000
2.	In the Skeena valley from Prince
Rupert to Prince George	 50,000
3. Contingencies	 21,000

(b) Harbours and rivers-
1. Urgent repairs to diking at Lulu island to protect the main channel of
the Fraser river	 50,000
2.	Redredging filled-in channel through Annieville Bar (main channel
approach to New Westminster)	 350.006
(c) Contingencies	 25,000
Total	 $556,006


George Alexander Cruickshank: How much of that is for re-dredging?


Alphonse Fournier: For re-dredging, $350,000.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Am I to understand that it is contemplated to spend only $350,000 for re-dredging the Fraser river?


Alphonse Fournier: No, this is to take care of the siltation after the flood waters have receded. The $350,000 is for re-dredging the filled-in channel through Annieville Bar, which is the main channel approach to New Westminster.


George Alexander Cruickshank: That is merely the mouth of the Fraser river. I should like the minister to check with his officials and tell me whether any items have been provided for dredging the upper reaches of the Fraser river from New Westminster to Hope.


Alphonse Fournier: Not in this one.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Has it been provided in any other item?


Howard Charles Green: No, it has not.


Alphonse Fournier: I shall have to get a report from my officials. As I told the hon. member, Mr. Goodspeed is out there. If he reports that we have to do some work of one kind and another we shall follow his technical advice on that. If it is found out that it is necessary his report will be considered in Ottawa.

Supply-Public Works


George Alexander Cruickshank: Am I to understand from the minister that if Mr. Goodspeed recommends that further dredging is required at the port of New Westminster or at Hope-


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know the location well enough.


George Alexander Cruickshank: The minister's
officials know the location or should know it. What I want to be clear on is the amount to be provided other than the ordinary estimates to do the dredging recommended by the engineers.


Alphonse Fournier: Perhaps I am a little tired, because I do not get the import of the hon. gentleman's remarks. We have sent out one of our best engineers to survey and report, in co-operation with an engineer appointed by the province of British Columbia, as to repair of the works and what we can do on the Fraser river following the flood. We shall do our utmost to repair the damage done there. Anything further than that I do not know.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I think I have been fair about it. I have not mentioned floods this afternoon. I am speaking of the normal dredging conditions on the Fraser river. I certainly intend to speak on floods when the special supplementary estimate is before the committee. What I am trying to ascertain from the minister is this. I have stated repeatedly, since I have been in the house, that the present dredge cannot adequately care for the dredging of the Fraser river. It is a forty-year-old dredge, and can only take care of the mouth of the Fraser river. I am not talking about flood repairs or damage. Do the estimates to which the minister has referred apply to dredging out the Fraser river above New Westminster to Chilliwack? If the minister has not that information he should get it for me before the house rises, because I think I am entitled to it. Surely his officials must know whether they have made any recommendation for adequate dredging of the Fraser river from McDonald bar to Malsqui island bar. Surely his officials must have that information. If not, the other officials must have it.


Alphonse Fournier: After the floods, we felt that we needed this amount over and above our ordinary estimates to keep the Fraser river channel in as good condition as possible. This is a supplementary vote to our ordinary vote. As to the conditions on the Fraser river, this amount will not be included in any agreement with the province. That estimate will come under another department.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Then I am to understand from the minister that this vote has nothing to do with the ordinary dredging in the Fraser river. This vote has nothing to do with the repair or replacement of dikes.


Alphonse Fournier: No.


George Alexander Cruickshank: This is an additional vote. As I understand the minister, with his usual caution, and if I might put it that way I would say extreme caution because he comes from central Canada, he is prepared to state that $550,000 is not sufficient to reopen the channel and keep it in the condition it should have been. He is prepared to recommend to the government that sufficient funds will be voted, on the advice of his officials, to see that that is done.


Alphonse Fournier: What the hon. gentleman is discussing would come under a special vote.


George Alexander Cruickshank: No. That is the point I am trying to get away from.


Alphonse Fournier: At this stage we think $350,000 will be sufficient to reopen the channel and put it in good condition. If we have not enough money to do that I shall see that we try to find some more.


Howard Charles Green: The weakness of the minister's position is this. There should be some money voted for additional work on the Fraser river. This vote is only to make good the damage that has been done.


Alphonse Fournier: That is right.


Howard Charles Green: Some hon. members, notably the hon. member for Fraser Valley, have asked that there be more extensive dredging done, particularly in the portion of the river above New Westminster. No money is being voted for that purpose today. If the minister's engineer reports back that additional dredging should be undertaken in the upper part of the river no money is voted for that purpose. This figure of $550,000 contains only $350,000 for dredging. The rest of it is for telephone and telegraph lines and other items of that' type. Only $350,000 is being voted for re-dredging the filled-in channels. What we are asking is that, in addition to the dredging of the present channel, deeper channels be dug. As the hon. member for Fraser Valley says, that means more dredges, and it means more expenditure. No money whatever is voted for that purpose. The minister says he will fill in with whatever added amount may be needed, but my submission is that that is not sufficient. There should be a vote for this new kind of dredging in the Fraser river.
Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: Perhaps I have not made myself clear. This estimate has nothing to do with any agreement on the Fraser valley flood conditions. That is under other items. My department is responsible for navigation and has to do dredging and maintenance works. That comes under my department. This amount will do the dredging necessary to keep navigation where it was before the floods, or even make it better.
' .Mr. GREEN: The hon. member for Fraser Valley was not in the house when the minister gave the details. The minister said that dredging was all to be done below New Westminster.


Alphonse Fournier: If some was recommended by my engineer we would do it.


Howard Charles Green: No. The figure of $350,000 is for work below New Westminster. What I am suggesting is that if the government is to do any new dredging, or any new type of dredging, above New Westminster there should be some money for that purpose in the supplementary estimates, but there is no such vote.


George Alexander Cruickshank: That is the point I am trying to follow through. I am not worrying about the amount that has been voted for dredging below New Westminster bridge. I am not talking about the flood conditions. That will be taken up under the vote in the name of the Minister of Finance. When we reach that I shall discuss flood conditions. So far as I can see, no item is provided for dredging the Fraser river from the New Westminster bridge eastward as far as you want to go. One may say the Mission bridge or above Hope or Rosedale. The minister talked about keeping the navigable part of the river in the condition it was before the floods. That is entirely out. I informed the minister, and am prepared to prove it by pictures, by affidavits or by anything else he wishes, that that is not good enough.
I shall mention two districts, Matsqui island and McDonald bar. You can practically wade across the famous Fraser river. I maintain that no item has been provided in either the main estimates or the supplementary estimates for the dredging of that channel. No provision has been made, so far as I can find, in the main estimates, the supplementary estimates or the further supplementary estimates, to provide equipment for that service. I am asking the minister to give me an assurance that he will make a proper recommendation to the government in this matter.
I frankly admit that neither the minister nor anyone else can state now what amount will be required; but on behalf of the people

whom I represent, the people who are most affected, I ask the minister to give me an assurance that a recommendation will be made to the government that McDonald bar, Calamity Point and the Matsqui island bar will be dredged out; and not merely for the purpose of providing navigation, because no navigation has been possible for the past fifteen years, owing to neglect on the part of the Department of Public Works, both federal and provincial. I would ask the minister to give me the assurance that further sums will be recommended. I cannot say how much will be required, and I do not think the minister can say at this moment what will be required, but I submit that he should tell this committee and assure me, as representing the people of that riding, that, by order in council if necessary, funds sufficient will be found to dredge this channel, in order to make it safe, not only for navigation but for the safety of the two trans-Canada railways, the trans-Canada highway and the whole economy of Canada. I think the minister should be in a position to give that assurance.


Alphonse Fournier: What I say to the hon. gentleman is that, relying on the knowledge of my assistant chief engineer, Mr. Goodspeed, of conditions out there, if he recommends to the department that these works are necessary in the public interest I will recommend them to the government.


Howard Charles Green: But we do not want the work to be held up for another year. I would point out to the committee that in item 832 the minister brought down-


Alphonse Fournier: We do not know whether we are going to dredge or raise the banks. We are waiting for the report of the engineers.


Howard Charles Green: In item 832 the minister brought down an estimate for $2,000,000 which was to be spent for purchasing buildings for the taxation division if, as and when such buildings can be located. He did not even know in what towns or cities they were to be. Now we are asking that there be a vote for the Fraser river for necessary work to be done there. We are asking that some money be allotted for this work at this session, so that when the engineer's report comes in some work can be done this year without having to wait until another year or eighteen months from now. This is the point I make.


Alphonse Fournier: Tell me the
amount-$350,000.


Howard Charles Green: That is not so. That $350,000 is for dredging work below New Westminster.

Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: If recommended.


Howard Charles Green: According to the minister's own statement, there is not one cent for dredging work above New Westminster, and we are asking that a sum be provided so that work can be done above New Westminster.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am not talking about flood damage or anything else of that description, but about dredging. Surely the minister can tell me this. What provision has been made to date to acquire suitable dredging equipment? You cannot acquire a dredge overnight. When we built the famous Sumas dike, which held, thanks to its erection under Dudley Barrow, who built it, we brought a dredge from the Panama canal. In the province of British Columbia, ever since 1940, the federal government has had one two-by-four dredge-I have forgotten the name; it is either the Samson or the King Edward- which is forty years old, which could only keep the port of New Westminster open. I have no objection to keeping that port open.
I see a vote for dredging in the port of Victoria. I have no objection to that, but what is the reason? It is for the great commercial interests. I can tell you that we had to rush dredges over from the Fraser river there during the war. The war is over and we can say these things now. The fact is that we had to rush dredges there in order to get into that dry dock. Those dredges were taken off the Fraser river.
I am surprised that the British Columbia members have not got up and demanded-not requested but demanded-that suitable dredging facilities be procured immediately for the great Fraser river from one end to the other.


Mr. YOUNG:: I should like to raise a point with the minister. He can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe he said the idea was to restore the channel of the Fraser river to the condition it was in before the flood.


George Alexander Cruickshank: God help us.


Rodney Young: If that is the statement, it is necessary to draw to the attention of the department the fact that, in the opinion of the majority of the people on the spot, that will not be sufficient. It has been pointed out by the hon. member for Fraser Valley that at one time the waters of the Fraser were navigable at a much higher position than they are today. That river is in a condition of geological maturity and it is silting up in all its upper reaches. As a consequence of that fact, the dangers of the flood menace, of which we have had experience recently, are due largely, or in part at any rate, to the failure to retain the
condition of the river, from the navigable point of view, as it was fifteen or twenty years ago.
If the policy of the department is merely to restore the condition of the river as it was 'before the floods, I suggest that that policy is short-sighted, and the ministry would do well to take into consideration the condition of the river as it was fifteen or twenty years ago and attempt, by dredging the upper reaches, to restore it to that position.


William Henry Golding: Shall the
item carry?


Howard Charles Green: Has the minister no answer to give?


Alphonse Fournier: I was wondering whether the hon. gentleman meant that the fact that we had not dredged certain parts of the river was the reason for the flood, because the hon. member for Vancouver North made quite a speech the other night, stating the causes, in his opinion, of the flood, and he never referred to the fact that we had not dredged the river.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Yes, he did, definitely.


Alphonse Fournier: What part of the river would have been responsible for it?


George Alexander Cruickshank: I have discussed the matter ever since 1940, and the hon. member for Vancouver South will bear me out in this. I am not an engineering authority, but I do not believe the officials of the department have complete knowledge in the matter. I gave it as my opinion however, and an opinion which I believe will be borne out by any engineering authority in Canada, that if you obstruct the flow of the great Pacific ocean and the water, from the Rocky mountains the effect will be an adverse one. The hon. member for Vancouver North spoke on my behalf in my absence, and I have pointed out to the minister that if the federal and provincial governments had done their duty in keeping the channel clear, at least one district, the Matsqui, would not be today in the position of having 10,554 acres under water.


Howard Charles Green: As I understood the hon. member for Vancouver North, he said that the dikes were being made by using material from the farm land and at the same time the river bottom was gradually filling up and getting higher until the river was rising above the surrounding land. He suggested that the river bottom should be dredged out and the silt taken from it used to build up the dikes,
Supply-Public Works

instead of using material from the farm land. We suggest that there be dredging planned and undertaken by the dominion.


Alphonse Fournier: I will follow the engineer's report. We asked for an estimate of $350,000 because the session is at its close. We have not received the report, but my officials think that, with this $350,000, they can do the work they believe our engineers and the British Columbia engineers will recommend right now. Perhaps I am wrong and perhaps they are wrong, and perhaps my hon. friends are all right. I do not know.


Howard Charles Green: How much would a new dredge cost?


Alphonse Fournier: Between $800,000 and $1,000,000.


Howard Charles Green: How long would it take to get it?


William Henry Golding: Shall the item carry?
Mr. CRUICRSiHANK: No.


Alphonse Fournier: You would not
get that dredge for two and a half years.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I have been hoping the minister would say that. Since 1940 I have asked that question. I have asked it ever since I made my first speech on May 28 in connection with the flood. I asked if any equipment had been ordered or if any had been provided. Now I am told by the minister that it will take two and a half years to get it. I would point out to you, Mr. Chairman, that I am still not talking about floods. If we get the dredge there, and we pump this material out, it must settle; it must be dredged before if is put in effect; and no engineer dares to deny that fact. To tell me that it will take two and a half years-[DOT]


William Henry Golding: This is an item-


George Alexander Cruickshank: Just a minute, Mr. Chairman, this is on dredging. I listened to one hour of nonsense on a discussion on divorce the other day; surely we can have half an hour on flood conditions which, after the member for Fraser Valley's speech on May 28, the Prime Minister admitted were a national calamity. Surely we can have one hour on this subject; and I am still not talking about flood conditions. With regard to dredging this Fraser river, to the best of my knowledge there are only two dredges available. One is owned by the dominion govern-[llr. Green ]
ment, and is used entirely at the mouth of the Fraser river; the other one is privately owned.
Now I am asking-and I repeat that I am asking-the Minister of Public Works to tell me what provision has been made. Never mind what the ultimate cost will be or who will pay for it. I want to know what provision has been made or what attempts have been made to date to secure adequate provision for dredging equipment. Just today I received a letter by air mail from a friend of mine, asking if we had as yet attempted to bring in a Dutch engineer, a man from a country in which they make real dikes. I do not know whether we need a Dutch engineer. I think the Canadian engineers are competent, but I do not 'think the equipment at their disposal is capable of doing the job.
I am asking my question again. The minister has admitted to me that it will take two and a half years to get this equipment. Surely to goodness, if it takes two and a half years to get the equipment to provide adequate dredging, the sum of $350,000 to dredge the great Fraser river from Hope to the mouth at Steveston is entirely inadequate. As the hon. member for Vancouver South said'-and I have no dispute over the amount that was voted for this particular item-


Howard Charles Green: 


George Alexander Cruickshank: -if you can vote that amount for one item without knowing the ultimate cost, you can vote far more than $350,000 for dredging, not to protect the farmers of the Fraser valley whom I represent, but to protect the great Pacific coast. If you have any trouble with Russia, God help you if you have no defences on the Pacific coast. Yesterday Mr. Churchill, who is one of the greatest statesmen of all time, said that we do not know what will be around the corner tomorrow; yet here we are twiddling around with $350,000 for dredging at a time when our two transcontinental railways are out of action. The Canadian National, which we, the people of Canada, own, is still out of action and is still unable to operate to the Pacific coast. Any arsenal that you may have at Kamloops is subject to flood, and you could not get at it if it was not subject to flood because you have no railway or road to it. Yet we are twiddling around here with $350,000 for dredging.
I would say to the minister that I should like to go home just as much as anybody else.
I have a longer distance to go than have most hon. members, and I have been here longer than most hon. members-I do not mean in

Supply-Public Works
years, but in actual attendance in this house.
I think hon. members will bear me out in that statement.
If we are to twiddle around and talk about these other matters, when I am told that a vote of $350,000 is sufficient for dredging and am then told that it will take two and a half years even to get dredges-


Howard Charles Green: And none have been ordered yet,


George Alexander Cruickshank: And none have been ordered yet-that is the point. I think every hon. member will bear me out that on May 28, the first time I spoke, I asked if any equipment had been ordered, and I find that none has been ordered yet.


Alphonse Fournier: Does my hon.
friend know that dredging is done by the government and under contract? There are two ways of proceeding with this. Actually does my hon. friend know that we have a new dredge under contract, working right now with -and I have forgotten the name. We are dredging all the time and there are dredges out there. When we cannot use our own dredge we give contracts. This amount of $350,000 is to do that.


Howard Charles Green: Does the minister not think an additional dredge is required on the Pacific coast?


Alphonse Fournier: There may be a need for it, but I am told that we can give contracts for the dredging we need; the equipment is available. We need not have the equipment. We can give it to private companies as we do on the Atlantic coast or on the Pacific coast. The way some hon. members are arguing you would think the dredging is done only by government dredges. But that is not the case.


Howard Charles Green: We do not think any such thing.


Alphonse Fournier: Hon. members have pointed out what it would cost the department to get a new dredge and the time it would take; and somebody says there is only $350,000 for that purpose; that we shall have to wait for tiwo and a half years for this dredge. This is all nonsense. The $350,000 is for dredging and not for the purchase of a dredge.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I intend to follow this through right now, because it is a matter of record. On file in my office is the record with regard to Nicomen Slough. I am proud of the fact that the minister and his officials saw fit two years ago to do some $58,000 worth of dredging in Nicomen Slough, which happens to be in my riding. As I say, I am proud of 5849-387
that fact. I will tell you why they did not do it last year. After awarding the contract, the one and only available dredge, while coming from Vancouver island was upset and sunk and could not come in to complete the job. Then, in the face of that, I am told about private dredges being available. The one and only dredge was sunk on its way from Vancouver island, and could not come in to do the job.


Alphonse Fournier: Where does the under-contract one come from?


George Alexander Cruickshank: But you could not complete the job last year because you did not have the dredge, I have the correspondence up in my office stating that. I am sorry that the minister and his officials at Ottawa do not realize that this is not a penny ante thing like Nicomen Slough; it is an immense project. According to their estimates-and I admire and approve what the government has done for us-it will cost millions of dollars. And they talk about having equipment for a $58,000 contract which they did not have last year. But I still have not talked about floods, Mr. Chairman.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am glad to support the hon. member for Fraser Valley, who has spoken on behalf of his constituents and on behalf of the region of Fraser valley for years. I give credit also to my good friend the hon. member for Vancouver South, the hon. member for Kamloops and the new member for Yale. Everyone is well disposed, and the minister is the first one to be well disposed in this regard. I do not see why the hon. member for Fraser Valley should consider the minister is opposed to his views. He is ready to accept them to the extent to which he has facilities to go on with the work that he requests should be done now. I understand that when the people of Chilliwack and other places in the Fraser valley such as Kamloops, Vancouver and Yale read the report of what has happened this afternoon, they will say, We have champions in the house. On the other hand, those who will be in the limelight will be champions of their part of the country, and quite legitimately so. I congratulate them; I would do the same, to a certain extent. However I would be fair to the minister. I have been told so often that civil servants were infallible, when it was not true; now I shall protest when it is said they are fallible, when it is untrue.
I have great respect for the headquarters of the Department of Public Works. They are men of experience. I see here the deputy minister. I know personally the chief engineer, having cone to college with him. He
Supply-Public Works

was first in his class, and is a remarkable man. I knew Mr. Cameron and Mr. Hunter. The staff in the Department of Public Works is one of the best of all government departments, because they are trained to be precise. They have studied mathematics and engineering; and in that department are some of the very few civil servants who know that two and two make four.
Those men are familiar with conditions. There is a district engineer in British Columbia. The only trouble was that perhaps the Prime Minister was too late in admitting that there was a national emergency and in subscribing to the urgent request made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce to send help at once. Why did the Prime Minister wait to see that it was a national disaster? The dominion government is going to help these people, just the same as I would save my neighbour's furniture if his house took fire. I would not be afraid of being arrested for trespass. This was a condition of national emergency, and it was the duty of the federal government to be there, just as the Minister of Trade and Commerce was there. If the Prime Minister had used that language the hon. member for Yale would not have been elected; there would have been a Liberal elected in that constituency.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Jean-François Pouliot: I do not wish hon. members to laugh, because I am serious. It was an error in tactics.


Howard Charles Green: You mean the hon. member for Vancouver Centre, not Yale.


Jean-François Pouliot: I was speaking of the hon. member for Yale. I know these hon. members, and they are all good looking. But, sir, here we are, with the Minister of Public Works being made the goat for the disaster which has occurred. It was a case of jorce majeure; it is sinister, and it is a calamity. We are doing our best. Perhaps the Premier of British Columbia was too late in asking for help from the dominion government. But we will recall that the army was there, and that men from the engineering staff were there, right on the spot, to help those -who were the victims of this national calamity.
When I think of the provisions made by the Minister of Public Works to come to the assistance of our fellow citizens who have suffered to such an extent in British Columbia, particularly in the Fraser valley, one of the richest parts of this marvellous country,
I am ready to give them credit. Although I admire the hon. member for Fraser Valley, who has been fighting this case with such elo-

quence and such vigour for such a long time, and although I admire hon. members of the Progressive Conservative party and of the C.C.F. party, and even probably the Social Credit party-I am not sure about that, because they have no representatives in that part of the country-let me say we are one in saying that something should be done at once for the relief of these people and for their security, so that in the future they will not have to fear the elements.
I am ready to place confidence in the Minister of Public Works, whose heart beats with that of the hon. member for Fraser Valley-and for that I give him credit. I am suggesting that the hon. member for Fraser Valley see the Minister of Public Works, his deputy and his chief engineer and discuss the problem quietly with them. If he does, his electors will see nothing in the press until the great help comes; then they will be even more proud of their member.


Howard Charles Green: May I suggest that the minister follow this course; that he bring in a further supplementary estimate which will provide funds from which he can at least start his work in the upper Fraser valley, and order a dredge. He has no vote ait the present time from which he can do either of those things. I do not think there is any dout* that the committee would pass such a further supplementary, and there is still time to do it. That would get around our complaint. We are complaining that no provision is being made in the estimates so that the work we want done can be proceeded with, if it should be found necessary. I implore the minister to follow that course and to bring down a further supplementary estimate.


William Henry Golding: Shall the item carry?


Howard Charles Green: No. I want an answer.


Alphonse Fournier: I hope we can come to some understanding. You are giving me advice as to what we should do. The hon. member is giving me advice as to what we in the public works department should do in this instance. Will he tell me what amount he wants? Will he tell me what it will cost? That is the fir^t question I want answered.


Howard Charles Green: The minister said a dredge would cosG-


Alphonse Fournier: I want to know from the hon. member who is going to run this item exactly what he would place in the estimate he wants introduced.

Supply-Public Works


Howard Charles Green: I would suggest that the minister bring down a further supplementary estimate for, let us say, $500,000.


Alphonse Fournier: On what would you base that?


Howard Charles Green: On exactly the same basis that the minister brought down an estimate for $2,000,000 to buy office space for the income tax division across Canada-not even knowing what it will cost or in what cities it will be. He brought in that $2,000,000 item, and the Minister of Finance got up and said it was all right to pass, although he admitted that it was an unusual procedure to follow. Today we have a national emergency about which we on the Pacific coast are greatly concerned. We are only asking the minister to bring in a similar vote for $500,000. Then the money would be there with which at least to start doing some of the work the hon. member for Fraser Valley wants done.


Alphonse Fournier: Would you just give me time to explain to you my predicament? Am I to follow your advice as to the amount of an estimate, or am I to rely upon the advice of my advisers in the department, men who are engineers and who know the district as well as anyone in the house? Mr. Goodspeed and Mr. Morton are the two engineers who are handling our part of the work. They have the confidence of the hon. member for Vancouver South and of the hon. member for Fraser Valley. They know him. Those men say to the minister, "In our opinion with the knowledge we have of conditions out there, and our technical knowledge, we believe the estimate required to do the necessary work is this estimate of $550,000". That is one side of the matter. I have been here for an hour listening to the hon. member from Vancouver South-well, the hon. member for Fraser Valley did not go quite that far; he did not mention an amount. These three hon. gentlemen ask for a million dollars instead of the $550,000. They do not give the basis of their estimate. They simply say, "Put in a new dredge". Well, that is easily said.
If the hon. member was an expert in dredging and dredges I would follow his advice. But I am satisfied I have the advice of about the best men in this country in the matter of dredging and dredges. If I do not follow their advice, I believe I will make a mistake. This afternoon I ask hon. members to think of my position, and whether I should take the advice of these officials. I ask the hon. member to think of the position I am in and 5849-387J
to decide if I am to take his advice-which I do not believe is serious-or that of my engineers.


Howard Charles Green: What do you mean by that?


Alphonse Fournier: You are advising a larger estimate, but my officers tell me that this is sufficient.	i


Howard Charles Green: Does the minister mean that I was not in earnest when I made my suggestion?


Alphonse Fournier: Oh, you are in earnest; but you do not know how to prepare an estimate for dredging. There are in the department people who know how to prepare these estimates. Do you not think I would be wiser to follow the advice of those gentlemen in a case like that than to say, after listening to the speeches I have heard, to the Minister of Finance, "It is not sufficient; we want a million or a million and a half"?


Howard Charles Green: There is one fact the minister completely overlooked. He has not yet received the report from his engineer, Mr. Goodspeed. When he does get that report he will have no money with which to carry out the additional work.


Alphonse Fournier: Wait until you see the estimates of the Minister of Finance.


Howard Charles Green: We have the estimates of the Minister of Finance before us and they have-nothing to do with dredging. All we are asking is that the minister bring in an estimate so that he will be in funds to carry out the recommendations of the report by Mr. Goodspeed.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I ask the minister to give us assurance-


Alphonse Fournier: I did.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I have no intention of criticizing the Minister of Public Works, because in some ways he has been fairly generous with me since I have been a member. He has even spent three or four thousand dollars in my riding in the last few years. I have every personal admiration for him, but I am entitled to criticize the actions of his department as they -concern my riding. I am the member who is most directly concerned with this matter. I agree with the hon. member for Vancouver South that when you can vote $2,000,000 for something unknown like playing chess with your wife's brother-in-law, surely you can vote $2,000,000 to provide something that is really required. Can the minister give me, the member most directly concerned, the assurance that if his engineers, in whom I have every confidence, as I have expressed this

Supply-Public Works

afternoon, recommend that not $550,000 but $5,000,000 is required he will recommend that an order in council ibe passed providing that sum? That is all I ask. God knows it is hard [DOT]enough to get $50 from the treasury board, but I think he should give assurance that Sufficient funds will be provided to take care of what the Prime Minister has referred to as a national calamity.


Rodney Young: I would point out to the minister that the statement made by the hon. member for Vancouver North, as reported on page 5204 of Hansard, reads as follows:
The river in the olden days was navigable as far as Yale, but in recent years what little *dredging has been done by the federal government has been done only in the lower stretch between the sea and the city of New Westminster. The upper fifty miles, where the flooding is so bad, has been almost untouched [DOT]by dredges.
The minister says it is the policy of the [DOT]department to put the river in the condition it was in before the flood, but the suggestion made by the hon. member for Vancouver North has been completely lost sight of. His suggestion was that some effort be made to estimate the cost of re-dredging the river to the depth where it was fifteen or twenty years ago. If that were to be done, then the minister could come to us with an estimate which would be of some value to the Fraser river area as a whole, as well as to the people throughout British Columbia.
The present condition of the Fraser river is of such utmost importance that it should be investigated completely. I ask the minister if he is willing to recommend to his engineers, the men in whom he has confidence, that an attempt be made to estimate the cost of dredging the fifty miles of the river above New Westminster.


Alphonse Fournier: The engineers were sent out there to do what the hon. member is asking should be done, to make a survey and to report. I am ready to recommend to the government that that report be carried out.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE 68. Departmental administration, $997,990.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, under this item may I respectfully ask the Minister of Finance to make a further statement on the 
matter about which I questioned him briefly on the orders of the day this morning. I think my question properly comes under the departmental administration item of this department.
As the minister knows, there has recently been tabled the report of the prices committee. Just where that report emanated from is a matter of interesting discussion and speculation. At any rate concurrence in he report was moved in this house by a colleague of the Minister of Finance, and although there was no recorded vote last night I believe that the Minister of Finance was in favour of the adoption of the report. Some recommendations in the report would have to be referred to other departments for consideration, but the important one certainly would come under the consideration of the Minister of Finance.
In the report there is a qualified recommendation-I admit it is qualified, but at least it goes part of the way-in favour of the reimposition of some price controls and certain subsidies. There is also a recommendation that the excise tax should be reduced or eliminated. There is a recommendation regarding unreasonable profits being taxed, and two or three other matters of a financial character. I realize that the incipient rebellions on the other side of the house, and the necessity of denying those rebellions, and so on, are becoming a little embarrassing, and no doubt the government feels that the situation has to be handled in such a way as to save face. But surely that has all been done now. Surely the presentation of that report and its adoption by this house clears the way for the Minister of Finance, and the Prime Minister with him to make the kind of changes suggested in that report.
The minister could not but note this morning that there was a general feeling of humour in the house when he said that the government had not had time to consider the report. Most of us feel that the government has been considering what was in that report for a long time, even before the members of the committee had it.
I do feel that before this session comes to an end, whether it be tonight, tomorrow night or at some future sitting, the minister should make a statement about these matters. I hope he will not be worried over the way in which we have poked at the government because of divisions in its ranks and the difficulties they have had in changing policies without losing face, but that he will tell the house and the country what the government of Canada intends to do on the basis of the

Supply-Finance
financial recommendations contained in the report of the prices committee, which as I have said has already been approved by the house.


Douglas Charles Abbott: As I said this morning, the report has been tabled only recently, and with the pressure of work in trying to bring the session to a close I was correct when I stated that the government has not yet had an opportunity to give full and careful consideration to the recommendations of the committee. I myself have not been able to do so. I know from a quick reading that the report recommended that the government should give consideration to certain important matters, and I can assure this committee that that consideration will be given, and given promptly, and the government's decision as to the policy which will be followed will be announced at the proper time. I do not intend to make any such announcement this evening.
I have only one word to add. My hon. friend in his usual genial way has referred to divisions among the government supporters, saving face, and so on. But may I say that this is not the first time that members of the opposition have made unwarranted assumptions as to the attitude of the government, and possibly this is another of those cases.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Like the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, I am surprised that the minister is not ready to tell us tonight everything he is prepared to do, but I suppose that is a way that ministers have. We have before us a large item for departmental administration, involving substantial increases. The Department of Finance has now become far more than it used to be. It used to be merely a means of raising money for the expenses of the various departments of government, but now it is far more than that. Now it goes very far into our ordinary lives in its efforts to control the economy of the country.
There has been a measure of reorganization in the department this year, I understand, a sort of splitting up of functions. Would the minister give us a brief statement on that, and lay some stress on what we call the regulatory side and the extent to which the department steps into the economy of the country. I would ask the minister to say something in particular as to the relations of this department with the Bank of Canada and other important bodies in the nation, but banks chiefly.


Douglas Charles Abbott: There has been no reorganization of the department this year. Last year there was some reorganization involving what I might call the top executive branch. Three assistant deputy ministers were appointed last
year, and there was a rearrangement of the branches, the directorates and so on. But all that was done last year, and there has been no change made this year. The estimate for this year shows an increase of $65,901 over last year.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: It was the reorganization made last year that I thought the minister might speak about.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It was actually made before I brought in my main estimate last year. The reorganization consisted of Mr. Kenneth W. Taylor being appointed, if I might say so, senior assistant deputy minister, but because of the fact that Mr. Taylor is still continuing to serve as chairman of the wartime prices and trade board he has been able to devote only a portion of his time to the duties of assistant deputy minister of finance. Of course, as the committee is aware, he is also head of the emergency import control division, which is under the direction of the Minister of Finance. One other assistant deputy minister who was appointed last year was Doctor Eaton, who for some time had been head of the taxation branch of the department. He also was given the status of a deputy minister, but is still continuing to perform the duties of head of the taxation branch. Mr. R. B. Bryce, who had been one of the senior officers of the department, was made assistant deputy minister. Mr. W. C. Ronson was made master of the mint. Since that time Mr. Bryce has been assistant deputy minister with particular responsibility for the treasury board side of the department. Mr. M. W. Sharp, who had been in the department for many years, is director of the economic policy division. Mr. Deutsch, who is known to a good many members of the committee, is: head of the commercial branch. These were-the principal-well, they were not changes, they were actually giving to these very valuable officers of the department a status which I think was well merited as a result of the work which they had been performing during the war years. There has been no fundamental; change in the organization of the department, except, as I say, to recognize the particular responsibilities of those who were in it.
There has been no substantial increase in the administrative cost. The increase is $65,006 odd. All of that is substantially to provide for various salary and statutory increases. As the committee is aware, there has been a general increase in civil service salaries throughout the last year, as there has been in other fields. The increase in the administrative item of the amount I mention reflects that increase in the administrative section.
Supply-Finance


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the minister say a word more about the various boards, or would that come more properly under a subsequent item?


Douglas Charles Abbott: So far as the wartime prices and trade board is concerned, that is under a separate item. Perhaps it might be better to deal with it there, because I shall have the officers of the board here with the relevant data.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I take just a moment longer to get clear, if I can, the significance of the minister's answers to my questions a moment ago. On all previous occasions during the past number of months when any of us *have asked whether consideration was being given to the reimposition of any price controls or subsidies, the minister, although perhaps in a roundabout and polite way, always said no. He always made it clear that he had nothing to add to the position already taken by the government. Do I understand from [DOT]what he said tonight that, in view of the recommendations of the prices committee [DOT]report that some controls and some subsidies [DOT]be restored, this matter will now be considered by the government?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The .position is this. As my hon. friend knows very well, the government has power under the National Emergency Transitional Powers Act to impose any price controls it wishes to up to March 31 next. Certain price controls are still in effect. There are certain articles which are still subject to price ceilings. There are one or two subsidies still in effect. The power is there to extend them; if that is desired. The committee-I have not the report before me-recommended that the government should consider the retention of price controls in selected cases where extreme hardship would result if they were not continued. I think it is recommended that the government should consider the continuation of subsidies under similar circumstances where hardship might result. These recommendations will be considered. As I say, there are some commodities which are still under price ceiling, and there are some subsidies which are still being paid; but whether that policy will be extended or not, I am not in a position to say this evening. I therefore can make no statement on that.


Howard Charles Green: I do suggest to the minister that there is a great need for clarification on the subject of excise taxes. I hold in my hand the last Vancouver News-Herald in the reading 
room, issued on June 23, in which the following three-column advertisement appears:
Re Excise Tax.
Pending exact date of removal of the excise tax inaugurated last November 17 or clarification by the government as to their policies, all merchandise sold by us which includes this tax as of this date will be subject to price adjustment . . .
This means . . .
Immediate delivery to you from our large stock of radio and and electric appliances at . . . The new lower prices.
The day before there was an editorial in the News-Herald dealing with the removal of the excise tax, saying what a wonderful thing it was that at last this iniquitous tax had been discarded. As we know, the tax is still there. But ithis editorial and the advertisement give a clear indication of the confusion of mind that exists at least in British Columbia, and I do think it is of great importance that the minister should clear up that situation as soon as possible.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am quile aware, as are hon. members of this house, that there is a great state of confusion and uncertainty as to what is going to happen in connection with this excise tax. But may I say with all due modesty, that that state of confusion is not due to the Minister of Finance. If I may again express a personal opinion, I think it is extremely unfortunate that rumours of this kind have been circulated. There is nothing I can do about it. I made a statement in the house the other day in reply to the request of the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario, and I have nothing to add to or to subtract from it. I said at that time that it is most unusual for the Minister of Finance either to confirm or to deny the proposed imposition or removal of the taxes. The only reason which compelled me to do so was the wide publicity which had been given to these rumours by the press, and by the request-a perfectly proper request-of the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario. Let me say as firmly as I possibly can that I have nothing to add this evening to the statement which I made the other day in reply to his request.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister will agree that the other circumstances were unusual too.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That may or may not be so, but the Minister of Finance is not responsible for these statements.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is most unusual for such rumours to come from such high and well-informed sources.

Supply-Finance


Douglas Charles Abbott: We have never ascertained who they were.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The well-informed sources were substantiated afterwards in the report of the prices committee. There are certainly well-founded reasons for supposing that these rumours came by a deliberate if not a guided leak from that committee which had the sanction and perhaps lack of punishment, anyway, from the government. But I rose to ask the minister if he would report to us on another matter. It is stated again in a Canadian Press dispatch-the Canadian Press generally is close to the government sources- and the Canadian Press dispatch is reprinted in good faith by the Montreal Gazette of Monday, June 28, as follows:
The government started the new fiscal year with a bang, piling up a surplus of $255,261,473 in the first two months of operations.
The article goes on:
At the corresponding date last year the government had a surplus of $202,195,966.
(The Canadian Press erroneously reported Friday that the government had started this year with a deficit.)
Finance Minister Abbott said in his budget speech that he hopes to conclude the present fiscal year, which ends March 31, with a surplus of $490 million.
The 1947-48 fiscal year ended with a surplus of $670 million.
The information which we have been able to obtain is to the effect that this revenue total includes $288 million in income and excess profits tax, compared with $306 million for the same two months of last year. Excise tax of $76,000,000 for these two months is much greater than last year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is $2,000,000 greater.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What follows from this is that over half the surplus estimated for this fiscal year has already been collected, and the total revenue for the year is $53,000,000 higher than the total revenue for the corresponding period of last year. I think that that state of affairs definitely indicates this year what we found last year, namely, bad or poor or inaccurate budgeting, because the minister has indicated that he expected to budget for a surplus of $450 million.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The revenues this year are $3,000,000 lower than last year.


Edmund Davie Fulton: He has a surplus already of over $255 million, and if things go on at this rate he will end up with a surplus of approximately $1 billion. Certainly on the basis of last year, that surplus seems well on the way to realization. Will the minister explain how it
occurs, and what he will do about it by way of readjustment of taxes and particularly the removal of the special excise tax, to see that he does not take from the taxpayer far more than he needs, far more than he budgeted for, and far more than is justified by the high cost of living?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not indulge in prophecy, and the estimates of this year were prepared on the most careful and honest basis possible. It will I hope be found when the year is ended that they have been fairly close to the mark. The early months of the year are those in which we get our large revenues, particularly so far as income tax is concerned. What has been overlooked in all this talk about extra excise taxes that were put on is the fact that the excise taxes put on consisted of an additional tax on automobiles, radios and certain household appliances such as curling irons and toasters.


Mr. HACKETT:: Washing machines.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No; it was not imposed on those.


John Thomas Hackett: When was it taken off?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It was never put on. It was announced at first but never imposed. The tax was imposed on miscellaneous electrical appliances and refrigerators. At the same time, a fact that has never been emphasized in this house, we removed the tax from the domestic use of electricity, which affects every household, and we took off the duties that had been levied on tea and coffee, and the revenue equivalents of these taxes were very close to the estimated yield from the taxes imposed.
There has been a good deal of talk about the imposition of taxes on the necessities of life. With all due deference to those who say that sort of thing, that talk is all bunk, because there has not been any extensive taxation on the necessities of life. If anyone will tell me that a set of curling irons, or toasters, enter appreciably into the cost of living, I will tell him he is talking nonsense. If I had thought of it in time, I would have got an estimate from the bureau of statistics as to the extent to which the added excise tax on the range of electrical appliances, automobiles and so on, on which the tax was imposed, would enter into the cost of living. I venture, however, to prophesy here that it would not be one-two-three with the increase in the price of beef.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister may venture to prophesy, but will he tell us why the surplus is $53,000,000 higher than it was at this time last year?
Supply-Finance


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is because we reduced expenditures. May I say to my able young friend that two months of the fiscal year do not make the full fiscal year, and I would ask him to possess his soul in patience until the end of this fiscal year. If he is here then, as I am sure he will be, he can at that time make an informed criticism with knowledge of the facts.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The criticism I make now is based upon last year's experience.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It amazes me to find that people are appalled at the fact that our revenues hold up, that we have an apparent surplus of revenues over expenditures, and that it is higher than it was last year. I am delighted to see it, with a debt of fourteen, fifteen, or sixteen billions. Others, however, may not be pleased at that.


Edmund Davie Fulton: We are certainly not, for the reason that we are wondering whether the minister is able to forecast his requirements accurately. On the basis of a comparison of the same two months this year with those of last year-and the minister has not told us what extraordinary factors enter into those two months-we find that our surplus is running $50,000,000 more than it did last year. On that basis, unless there are extraordinary factors which were not present last year, should we not assume that the trend will be continued in the remainder of the year? Can the minister tell us anything that will make us assume that it will not continue?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Income tax collections are down and expenditures are down.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is that the minister's only explanation, or was it an interjection?


Angus MacInnis: I wish to touch upon the matter raised by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. I do not think the people of Canada are worrying so much about the extent of the surplus, although there may be some reason for worrying about it. I have never worried about my surplus. The people, however, are worrying about the codt of living. That is the question that is worrying them and they cannot get very much satisfaction from the answer which the Minister of Finance gave the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. I would point out to the minister, if it needs pointing out to him, that this question of the cost of living is important, and the people are expecting some assurance that the report which was approved here yesterday, and the recommendations or proposals that were made, mean something, that they 
mean that something will be done about them apart from the stock-in-trade reply that they will receive consideration.
That word "consideration" has so many barnacles on it that you cannot see the word, and that kind of thing is mighty dangerous at this time. If you are going to add to the cynicism of the people of Canada towards the sincerity of the government in dealing with the question, I say that you are treading on pretty dangerous ground and some statement ought to be made. I appreciate that, as regards some of the recommendations or proposals made by the committee, the Minister of Finance cannot very well make announcements beforehand. But I would urge the minister and the government not to let this matter go by with the bare assertion that it is going to receive consideration.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I said immediate consideration.


Angus MacInnis: I did not hear the word "immediate", but I do not doubt the minister said it. Even if the consideration is immediate, unless it is given with the view of taking action, then the consideration does not amount to anything.


Mr. QUELOH:: Will the minister give a brief explanation of the regulations under which Canadian securities owned in Britain can be purchased in Britain for the purpose of obtaining Canadian currency to invest in industry in this country? Under what conditions can that be done, what type of securities must be purchased, and to what use can the money be put in this country?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I take it my hon. friend is referring to the use of the proceeds of sale of Canadian securities owned by British residents for the purpose of investment in Canada. The situation there is this. As the committee is aware, under the agreement which was entered into with the United Kingdom government, and confirmed by an act of this house, relating to the non-interest bearing loan from Canada to the United Kingdom, it was provided that when dollar securities held by residents of the United Kingdom were sold or redeemed, the proceeds of sale or redemption would be used to reduce the amount of the non-interest bearing loan. That was the general provision in the agreement. In December 1946 it was agreed between the two governments that the proceeds of such sales could be used for direct investment in Canada. That is to say, if United Kingdom residents were anxious to establish plants in Canada to manufacture some commodity here, the proceeds of sale of Canadian securities held by residents of the

Supply-Finance
United Kingdom-sale or redemption.-instead of being used to pay on the loan immediately, could be used in direct investment in Canada. In other words, the practical effect of that was that a negotiable security, if I might put it that way, could be converted into plant in Canada. The asset would still be in Canada, but it would take the form of some productive asset here. That arrangement has been in effect since December, 1946, I think, and that is the position today. There is no change from that position. There has not been a great deal of investment so far in virtue of that provision, but it is available for those who wish to make use of it.


Victor Quelch: Does that apply only to British residents, or does it apply to other people as well? That is, can people other than British residents ibuy these Canadian securities?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That applies only to British residents, because those securities are those which have been registered by British residents with the Bank of England in London, and are under the control of the British treasury. It is perfectly true, of course, that anybody can purchase those securities; but the proceeds of the sale of the securities owned iby residents of the United Kingdom must either be used to pay off the non-interest bearing loan or be re-invested ini various investments in Canada, as I have indicated.


Victor Quelch: Are the proceeds being used for the purpose of building plants in this country, or is it not a fact that in some cases they are being used for the purchase of existing plants which, of course, would be far more inflationary?


Douglas Charles Abbott: They are supposed to be used only for the actual building of plants or the extension of existing plants.


John Thomas Hackett: Will the minister state if the government exercises some control in the matter? Let us assume that the British owner of the security wished to build a plant to make a commodity which is in surplus production and which would be doomed to failure. Would the government exercise any control in a situation of that kind?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No. We do not attempt to exercise control over the nature of the enterprise that the British manufacturer or industrialist wants to establish in Canada. We believe in free enterprise, of course; and if he wants to switch from a negotiable security, such as the bonds of the Montreal Light, Heat and Power or Canadian Pacific, or something like that, to a plant in Ottawa, Toronto or
somewhere else, we are glad to have him do so, because that increases the productive facilities of Canada. The security must be sold or must be redeemed; that is what I meant when I said "switched."


John Thomas Hackett: I never heard of that agreement until about a month ago. Was the negotiation made public before then?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I cannot say.


John Thomas Hackett: It was known to the
minister, of course.


Douglas Charles Abbott: We did not put any advertisements about it in the paper, but I think it has been known since early in the spring of 1947. Obviously the persons who are entitled to avail themselves of it are residents of the United Kingdom who want to establish plants here in Canada. Canadians have no control over that.


John Thomas Hackett: It is in the nature of a concession to them, is it not? Until this agreement was entered into, of which I in my ignorance had no knowledge until the other day, the proceeds from the sale of that type of security which the minister has mentioned were applied, automatically almost, against the noninterest bearing loan. That is the fact, is it not?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is right.


John Thomas Hackett: And now they may be diverted to other uses?


Douglas Charles Abbott: They may be converted into another type of investment, yes. We still have the asset here in Canada as a security against our loan.


John Thomas Hackett: That is true; but it is not a realization upon the security which you hold, or it is not a payment on account of the obligation.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Of course, as my hon. friend knows, the value of the securities held by residents of the United Kingdom in dollar securities is substantially in excess of the noninterest bearing loan.


Victor Quelch: I think the reason this matter has come up is the fact that the Financial Post gave it a great deal of publicity about a month or two ago. I was wondering what about Canadians who had capital in England or funds in England. Could those funds not be used for the purchase of Canadian securities in order to expand industry in this country?


Douglas Charles Abbott: In the case of Canadians who have securities in England they own sterling securities. If those were to be sold, they would
Supply-Finance

realize sterling. In order to make those available for investment in Canada, the British treasury would have to provide Canadian dollars; and I doubt very much if they would be willing to do that.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I wish to ask one question of the minister. I understood him to say that these funds produced in the manner indicated were to be invested in Canada only in new buildings, not in existing enterprises.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Or in the extension of existing ones.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: That struck me as odd, because I thought the Minister of Trade and Commerce was now playing down new construction, and it seems to me he should have done that long ago. If I am correct in thinking that, why would the policy be to insist that these funds should go into new construction?


Douglas Charles Abbott: There is a good deal of expansion going on here. As I say, the amount which has been availed of is small compared with the increased investments here. There is some advantage to Canada in getting the technical know-how of these foreign manufacturers who can come here, and produce these things in our own country.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Shoving up the cost of living.


John Thomas Hackett: Will the minister state the amount of the non-interest bearing loan? Then, will he tell us the amount of Canadian investments held by residents-that is probably the better term-of the British isles?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will get that in a moment. The non-interest bearing loan is down now to $331 million, in round figures.


John Thomas Hackett: What is the value of the British held securities?


Douglas Charles Abbott: We have not the figure here now. It would involve quite an extensive calculation. It is greatly in excess of $331 million, of course.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I want to refer for a moment to the question asked by the hon. member for Kamloops. While I fully recognize the force of what the minister said about the income being large in these months, the minister said a good deal of the reason was lessened expenditures. I think we ought to know a little bit more about that, because the question naturally arises in my mind: if the expenditures are less, are they less than these estimates we are now passing?


Douglas Charles Abbott: In the period to which the hon. member refers, the short period of two months, expenditures are down substantially. Ordinary expenditures are down.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is that down from the estimates?


Edmund Davie Fulton: From last year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is down from last year. The estimates are on a yearly basis. We are comparing a surplus. Apparently my hon. friend is taking the apparent surplus for two months of last year and the apparent surplus for two months of this fiscal year. I am talking about the expenditures for the first two months of this year. I am referring only to the same two months. These are actual figures, not estimates. We are not talking about estimates. We are talking about actual figures. The ordinary expenditures from April 1, 1947, to May 31, 1947, were $222,727,446.33. For the same period of this year they were-the figures are unrevised for May, of course-$173,158,266.75.	They are down
almost $50,000,000.


Jean-François Pouliot: Before this item is carried, I should like to ask the minister a question which was put to me yesterday by a friend of mine. He wanted to know the powers of the deputy minister of finance, in addition to his powers as deputy minister. I should like to know the ramifications of his authority, and the orders in council passed to give him more power. I should also like to ask the minister who is the good looking gentleman who sits opposite the deputy minister, in front of the minister.


John Thomas Hackett: The other good looking gentleman.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is Mr. George Lowe of the Department of Finance.


Jean-François Pouliot: Is that L-O-W?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No, L-O-W-E.


Jean-François Pouliot: There are two ways of spelling that name. I wanted to be sure about it; to make no mistake. We are here in the midst of these wizards of the Department of Finance, these gifted gentlemen. I am in a happy mood tonight, and I shall not use the choicest terms in describing these gentlemen who adorn the floor of the house on periodical occasions.
I understand that the deputy minister of finance was appointed fifteen years ago by a different government. He was chosen, apparently, for his exceptional ability, and he has been confirmed in office by ministers of finance since that time.

Supply-Finance
I shall not go farther into the matter, but I would ask the minister if he would be kind enough to tell us the ramifications of the jurisdiction, power, authority, and so on, of his deputy minister.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The powers and responsibilities of the deputy minister of finance are substantially those of any other deputy minister. They are defined, of course, in the Department of Finance and Treasury Board Act, and other acts relating to the Department of Finance. But the Department of Finance and Treasury Board Act and the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act are perhaps the two most important. He is, by statute, secretary of the treasury board, of which I, as Minister of Finance, am chairman. In addition to his ordinary functions as deputy minister of finance, the deputy minister is a member of the board of directors of the Bank of Canada, and represents the minister on that board; he is a member of the board of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and a member of the Canadian farm loan board. He is a member of the board of directors of the Industrial Development bank. All of these are government organizations. I do not know that I can elaborate any further upon his duties and responsibilities which, as I say, are defined by the acts to which I have made reference.


Jean-François Pouliot: I thank the minister; but to put it in a nutshell, he is a government tycoon.


Douglas Charles Abbott: And a good one.


Jean-François Pouliot: Don't say that; don't go too far in praising him, because it may arouse my feelings.


George Hugh Castleden: Is that a promise or a threat?


Gordon Graydon: I should like to change the subject. Perhaps this is hardly an understandable subject to a minister of the crown, because it deals with such a small amount of money. But I wish to try to find out, if I can, the answer to a question which is disturbing a good many people in the rural parts of Canada. My question is in connection with the sale of livestock which goes through the ordinary channels of a livestock commission merchant operating in a stockyard at any point throughout the dominion.
In deductions from farmers' returns for their stock, a common usage or practice is followed, whereby the revenue stamps on the cheques issued to the farmers are charged up against the farmers receiving the cheques. I happen to have in my hand a copy of one of those,
because I thought I had better be fortified with something of that kind before making this assertion in the house.
I was wondering if the minister could tell us whether there is any legal justification for anyone taking off a farmer's cheque the value of the stamp which goes on it. I know this is a small amount of money, but there is a principle involved. Small as it may be, a good many farmers through the years have felt concerned about it. This one farmer I have in mind has been agitated about it recently and has brought it to my attention again. I thought it was worthwhile to .bring it before parliament because, if this is an improper practice, we should know about it and, if it is proper, an explanation ought to be made to the farmers concerned.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall bring the matter to the attention of my colleague the Minister of National Revenue. My understanding of the excise tax on a cheque is that it is payable by the drawer of the cheque. I imagine all hon. members who issue cheques have to put the stamps on, themselves. I cannot think by virtue of what law the issuer of a cheque would have the right to charge the payee the amount of the stamp tax.


Gordon Graydon: I am not singling out any particular livestock commission merchant, because I understand that it is being done by all of them. Perhaps the minister could1 take this matter up. The evidence is in his hands. I should like at some stage to be able to give an answer to the farmers who are greatly disturbed about it, because they think the last cent has been taken from them. If that is so, the condition ought to be remedied.


Douglas Charles Abbott: 
George Hugh Castleden: In support of what has been said this evening with regard to the report of the committee on prices, I think it is a sad reflection on parliament if we prorogue at this time without solving the most vital problem facing 95 per cent of the householders of this country.
The minister's answer leaves one thing certain, that if any solution is to be found for the present problem of living costs in Canada, it will be government ,by order in council. People in all walks of life are deeply interested in this matter of the cost of living. And, irrespective of whatever personal, private or selfish interest they may have, we must face the fact that inflation is a dangerous thing facing the Canadian people at this time. We cannot continue along the path of procras-
Supply-Finance

tination, without incurring the rightful and, I think the deserving wrath of the people of Canada as a whole.
In the opposition we can do little more than plead, object and protest. But I wish to assure the minister that it must be evident to him that the Canadian, people are intensely dissatisfied and that they will vent their ire against those who are responsible. I cannot blame them, because they have been patient. They know the government knows how to control the cost of living, because they know the government has done so. They know the government could do so; and if it fails to do so, the people can come to one of two conclusions, either that the government is impotent and does not intend or cannot take action because of some weakness within itself, or that it supports the continuation of the injustices revealed in the report. I can assure the government that if it fails to adt, the people will not.


Jean-François Pouliot: I agree for the most part with what has been said in that regard. It seems that it should be easy for the minister to lighten the burden of people in the lower income brackets by providing greater exemptions. That would give a chance to those receiving small salaries to make ends meet. This type of people deserve special consideration. I have not taken much of the time of this committee, but I want to emphasize the necessity of looking after people with small salaries who are finding it so difficult to get along.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Can the minister give an estimate of the decrease in the funded debt for the current fiscal year and the projected decrease in the funded debt for 1949? He budgeted! for a tremendous surplus, and apparently is getting one much larger than he expected, and the one point in budgeting for a surplus is to pay off back debts. It is important that we should know the estimated retirement of the funded debt of the country this year and what the minister hopes to pay off next year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The relevant information asked for by the hon. member for York West with respect to last year appears in the white paper which was attached to the budget speech. I do not suppose he wants me to go into details, but perhaps I could read paragraph 70 on page 37 of the white paper, which reads:
The decrease in the net debt for the year is estimated at $669,9.58,'000. This, of course, is the amount already reported as the over-all estimated surplus for the fiscal year 1947-48.

In the current fiscal year we have estimated a surplus of $489 million and, if that is realized, the net debt of the dominion will be reduced by that amount. I do not know that I am in position to give my hon. friend any more particularized information than that at this time. That is the surplus, and I have indicated that that surplus wifi be used to reduce our debt. Any surplus that will be realized1 this year will be used for that purpose.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The surplus last year in its entirety was in the neighbourhood of $1,000 million when it was all added up.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is the cash surplus.


Agar Rodney Adamson: And we reduced our funded debt by $669 million. This year apparently we budgeted for a greater cash surplus, or it would seem that way according to the first two months of the year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That may be so for the first of the year. To prophesy is always a little dangerous, but I would think our cash surplus available for debt reduction this year will be considerably less. Last year we had substantial repayments from the foreign exchange control board of advances previously made by the Minister of Finance to the board, and we shall not have items of that kind this year.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The estimated reduction of the funded debt in the two years is about $1,200 million, which I think is the main point of the austerity program and the present high taxation. If we are paying these high taxes to get out of debt, that is something, but we had a cash surplus of $1,100 million last year, and apparently it is difficult to estimate what we shall have as a cash surplus this year. I should like to have the assurance of the minister that every available dollar under these very high schedules of taxation will be used for the retirement of the funded debt. I do not think there is anything more important than the retirement of funded debt when times are good. What worries me and what I think worries great sections of the country is that we are being taxed and taxed and that the taxation is not going toward the retirement of the mortgage on the plant, the mortgage on the house, the mortgage on our lives, which is the funded debt of the country.
In these times of buoyant revenue, one thing we should endeavour to do is to reduce the funded debt, so that if, as and when revenues decrease, as we expect they will, and taxation must, of course, decrease and income may decrease-if those things happen, then

Supply-Finance
we should find ourselves partly out of the debt which was necessarily incurred during the war.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am glad to hear my hon. friend say that, because he is voicing pretty much what was said in the white paper on employment and income which was issued in
1945.	I am in complete accord with the view which he has expressed, that in times of buoyant income and prosperity, when we have a heavy debt, that is the time to reduce that debt. That is the thinking which was behind the budget presented this year. As to the assurance which he is asking for, I give it to him without any hesitation. Of course! as he knows, the government is required to make certain investments in housing in the way of loans under the National Housing Act, investments in the Canadian National Railways and the like. Except to the extent that the government is required to use a prospective surplus for this type of purpose, it will be used in the reduction of the funded debt.
I gladly give that assurance.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I am glad to hear the minister say that, because it seems to me that the one point in paying these excessive income taxes and these excessive corporation taxes is in order to pay off the debt which we incurred. I hope that when the budget is presented next year we shall not find some strange scheme of increased expenditures and that the taxes which the country is paying this year, particularly the people with low incomes, will be used to pay off the debt that is on the backs of the Canadian people. I certainly will look carefully at the next budget statement, and I know the country will hold this government to a strict accounting for that one tangible thing, a reduction of debt. I want to ask the minister certain questions about the transfer of funds. I understand that certain British concerns are coming here-


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think my hon. friend was not in his seat a moment ago, was he?


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I gave quite an explanation
of that.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I saw articles in the newspapers quite recently, showing the manner in which insurance companies doing an international business transferred funds from one country to another, and British companies transferred funds to be invested in plants here. What are the regulations regarding that?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is a matter that is within the control and discretion of the British
treasury. If a Canadian insurance company is willing to advance to a resident of the United Kingdom Canadian dollars against the security of sterling assets which that resident of the United Kingdom has in Great Britain, the transaction requires the consent of the British treasury, because the British resident is in effect undertaking at some future date to pay off the loan in Canadian dollars and is putting up as security sterling assets. If the British treasury is willing to agree to such a transaction we in Canada, broadly speaking, would welcome it.
The reason why it can be done is this. Insurance companies which have liabilities to meet in the United Kingdom in sterling are obliged to have sterling assets in order to meet them, and they may be quite ready to advance funds to a resident of the United Kingdom in Canada and take, as collateral, securities which are payable in sterling. That is the type of transaction, but it requires the consent of the British treasury, not the Canadian treasury, because Canadian dollars are not being put up by the Canadian exchange control. They are in effect being provided by the British exchange control. The Bank of England says in effect: We will allow you to assume an obligation payable in Canadian dollars and you pledge sterling securities to guarantee repayment. The consent of the British treasury is required because, if there were default, the British treasury would have to provide the Canadian dollars to meet the obligation.


Agar Rodney Adamson: A Canadian company with a surplus of sterling, which many of them have, in view of the British exchange restrictions, will advance money to a British concern to erect a plant in Canada, which is a way of transferring a loan in sterling from the United Kingdom to Canada in Canadian dollars, and the debt is owed at all times to the insurance company. It is merely a means of transferring the debt from the sterling area to the Canadian area. The Canadian government has no objection to that, and in fact would welcome it. Is that it?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The situation is exactly as I have explained it. A resident in Canada puts up Canadian dollars for a British resident. It does not matter where he gets them. He provides the resident of the United Kingdom with a credit in a Canadian bank, upon which he can draw to pay for that plant. Of course he does not do that for fun, but takes some type of security, usually an assignment or a pledge of securities or cash. If he can use the sterling in the United Kingdom, so much the better. If the British exchange control, the Bank of England, is willing to allow the British treasury
Supply-Finance

to convert sterling in the United Kingdom into Canadian dollars we are delighted. Most of these transactions take the form, as my hon. friend indicated, of a long-term obligation, A Canadian insurance company puts up Canadian dollars and takes sterling securities as security, and the loan is payable over a long term of years. They can nearly always find a person who wishes to use sterling. That is how these transactions can be arranged with the consent of the British treasury, if they are satisfied that it is advantageous to both parties, and apparently there is some indication that they are prepared to do so.


Agar Rodney Adamson: There is actually no transfer of cash in sterling, but merely the transferring of an obligation by using a credit of the Canadian concern. In other words, the Canadian concern is putting up funds for a British concern to erect a plant here.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The Canadian concern is lending Canadian dollars to the British concern and taking sterling securities in satisfaction or as security.


Frank Exton Lennard: I want to bring to the minister's attention one point which is causing confusion and, I think, should be cleared up. The minister is probably conversant with it. A few weeks ago the eight per cent sales tax was removed from processed foods, and the public naturally felt that they would get immediate relief in the form of a lower price for these foods. But apparently that has not taken place because, when the eight per cent sales tax was on the processed product, the ingredients were not taxed, but now the reverse is the case. Fruit pectin, spices and other ingredients all now pay the eight per cent sales tax, and the result is that no reduction had been made in the price of processed foods. There is only one way to relieve the consumer of processed foods, and that is to remove the sales tax immediately from that industry.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will look into the situation to which my hon. friend refers. I think he may be mistaken in some details. I know that question arose in connection with canned soups, and we straightened it out. Primarily the matter comes under the administration of the excise division of national revenue, but I will take a note of what my hon. friend has said and see what should be done.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I do not think the soup situation has been straightened out yet, because I have a letter from a large soup company in my constituency, the purport of which letter is that the department send an auditor to investigate the plant of the soup company,

of whose bona fides I can assure the minister, and that any substantial reduction to the ultimate consumer of soups is almost prohibited by the sales tax on the ingredients. I was amazed at the number of items that go into a can, tin plate and all the other things which add to the cost.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not my tax officials with me tonight; but if the sales tax on these things, through some quirk in the law, is having the effect my hon. friends describe, we shall see that the matter is straightened out. I shall look into it at once.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If I might support the point raised by the last two speakers, I have a complaint in regard to the price of beef in tins for babies. Today an Ottawa housewife called my attention to the fact that on June 1 she was able to purchase these tins in an Ottawa store, the name of which she gave me, at the rate of two for twenty-nine cents. At the same store she is now paying twenty-one cents a tin. The same question arises. I am confused myself by the details to which the hon. member for Wentworth and the hon. member for York West referred.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That does not sound like saleg tax.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It may be something else, or it may be that, but the net result is this sort of experience to the housewife who is trying to balance a budget, and it certainly calls for more action than 'just passing a report.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
932. To authorize and to provide for payment of a portion of the costs incurred on or after May 15, 1948, by the government of British Columbia, by the municipal authorities in the Fraser valley and by the departments and agencies of the government of Canada in repairing, strengthening, constructing and reconstructing dikes in the Fraser valley and removing water and debris from the flooded lands in that valley in accordance with an agreement which the government of Canada is hereby authorized to enter into with the government of British Columbia for the purpose of establishing a division of such costs on the basis of the government of Canada bearing seventy-five per cent thereof (treasury board is hereby authorized to direct that there be credited to other appropriations of the government of Canada to which any of such costs have been originally charged any amount that would otherwise have been payable by either of the said governments in accordance with such agreement); and to authorize and provide for payment of seventy-five per cent of the total' costs incurred by a board to be known as the "Fraser Valley Diking Board" (such board to be constituted pursuant to an agreement w-hieh the government of Canada is hereby authorized to enter into writh the gov-

Supply-Finance
eminent of British Columbia and, when so constituted, to be a body corporate and to have, subject to the joint direction of the government of Canada and the government of British Columbia, the powers, duties and responsibilities provided in such agreement) in carrying on the work of repairing, strengthening, constructing and reconstructing dikes in the Fraser valley and removing water and debris from the flooded lands in that valley, $4,506,000.
933. To authorize and to provide for payment of an emergency unconditional grant to the government of British Columbia to assist that government in meeting costs incurred in providing emergency relief to the residents of the Fraser valley and in rehabilitating the areas damaged by the floods which were declared by order in council dated June 10, 1948 (P.C. 2644) to have created a national disaster, $5,000,000.
Douglas Charles Abbott: These are the two votes which relate to the proposed appropriation to assist in the relief and rehabilitation of the devastation caused by the floods in the Fraser valley and the restoration of the dikes. My colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, who is the minister from British Columbia, has been in constant touch with the Premier of British Columbia in connection with this matter. Although the commission, composed of General Hoffmeister and the Hon. Mr. Hamber, nominally reported to me, may I say that the Minister of Fisheries assumed the major share of the responsibility in connection with working out these arrangements. Therefore I am going to ask him if he will give to the committee an explanation of the steps which were taken and of the votes which are before the house.


Hon. R. W. MAYHEW (Minister of Fisheries) :: Mr. Chairman, I think it would be wise on this occasion to give the events as they occurred. Some people seem to think we moved rather slowly. If we go over just as hurriedly as possible the events, the committee will be able to follow it more closely. On May 24 and 25 flood damages became serious. The water level at Mission rose to 18-82 feet. On May 26 the banks of Agassiz broke and flooded about a thousand acres of land. The water level at Mission rose to 21-6 feet. On May 27 Dewdney dike breaks. On May 28 Canadian Pacific railway main line washed out. First army troops called out. Messrs. Cruickshank. Fulton and Matthews draw-attention of House of Commons to gravity of situation. Mr. Claxton outlines steps being taken by Department of National Defence.
On May 29 last rail connection with east severed. Mr. E. R. Gillie, Red Cross chairman, is named as supreme commander of all flood disaster relief and aid. Three armed services set up a province-wide communications system with headquarters at Red Cross House, where all requests for aid will be cleared. Right Hon. C. D. Howe, visiting British Columbia, is
reported to have stated that British Columbia floods had reached the proportions of a national disaster and that the federal government was prepared to give all assistance possible.
On May 30 Fraser river reaches highest point since 1894 at Hell's Gate, 107 feet.
On May 31 Premier Johnson proclaims a state of emergency with Colonel Snow, area commander of the Canadian army, being authorized to co-ordinate all flood control and relief activities. Flood relief fund started with $1,000,000 as objective. Prime Minister Mackenzie King states in the House of Commons that the responsibility for financial assistance to those suffering from floods and similar disasters of nature lies with provincial governments and local communities as well as with non-governmental organizations such as the Red Cross. Mr. King pointed out that any federal government financial assistance would only be made in the light of representations by the provincial governments concerned.
On June 1 Sumas prairie dike breaks at. Connor. Mission gauge rises to 24-45 feet. Prime Minister Mackenzie King informs the House of Commons that his statement of the previous day referred only to the question of direct financial assistance. He pointed out that from the beginning of the floods the dominion government had been rendering assistance on a considerable scale in other ways, such as army, et cetera. Mr. Claxton advises the house further measures being taken by the Royal Canadian Navy, Canadian Army and Royal Canadian Air Force.
On June 3 Prime Minister King announces that the federal government is prepared to assist the province financially, not only in meeting the expenditures required for immediate relief but also in meeting the costs of rehabilitation and restoration. Mr. King also announces the formation of the Fraser river relief and rehabilitation commission to have general supervision over the entire situation. Mr. Claxton advises the house that army personnel actively participating in disaster work total 1,482.
On June 4 the Prime Minister announced that Major General B. M. Hoffmeister will be dominion government's representative on Fraser valley relief and rehabilitation commission. Finance Minister Abbott advises-the house that prices board has been authorized to pay a subsidy of up to six cents a pound on butter flown into the flood areas -from Calgary and Edmonton.
On June 6 Mr. St. Laurent, while visiting British Columbia, is reported to have stated that the relief for British Columbia flood victims would not be delayed by waiting to
Supply-Finance

determine the extent of the flood damage. He said that the people were entitled to know that everything reasonable would be done and would be done expeditiously. Record June temperatures continue to melt snow and hasten run-off.
On June 9 Prime Minister Mackenzie King announces the basis on which the dominion government will share the costs of relief and rehabilitation in the Fraser valley. Mr. Claxton advises the house that in addition to naval and air force personnel engaged in the flood area there are also 1,226 active and 1,359 reserve army personnel, with another 500 members active force on the way from the prairie command.
On June 10 flood level at Mission reaches a new high of 24-62 feet.
On June 11 evacuation of Sumas prairie region nears completion.
On June 14 Mr. Sinclair requests details on government's program for rehabilitation.
On June 17 Premier Johnson announces that homes and farms in Fraser valley flood regions will be restored. Work to be carried out by four departments of the provincial government.
On June 18 first transcontinental train in eighteen days arrives in Vancouver from the east.
On June 25 Prime Minister Mackenzie King advises the House of Commons that the dominion government's financial contribution in respect of the Fraser valley disaster would consist of a grant to the province of $5,000,000 for relief and rehabilitation, and the sharing, to the extent of 75 per cent, in the cost of repairing, strengthening and reconstructing the dikes and removing water and debris from flooded land. The Prime Minister also announced the formation of the Fraser valley diking board to carry out this work. That brings us up to June 25, and I have here a statement that came in today with regard to the condition.
The information that we have received here today indicates that the flood waters are now dropping about six inches in each twenty-four hour period, and that by tomorrow morning the level of the water at the gauge at Mission will be down to the 18-foot mark, which has been taken as terminating the emergency period. As a consequence, the attorney general of the province last night, after consulting Mr. Dixon, who is the provincial government engineer on dikes, and Mr. Good-speed, the dominion government engineer, who went to that area about the 19th of the month, who are now to be responsible for the operation on dikes, and the flood control comfMr. Mayhew.]
mittee, signed a declaration stating that the emergency is now ended and that the services of the active militia are no longer required in aid of the civilian power.
Following the declaration, the national defence authorities have arranged for the responsibility of the military authorities to be handed over entirely to the existing civilian authorities, or those which have been set up for the purpose of relief and rehabilitation on the one hand by the province, and for the work on dikes by the dominion and the provincial government jointly.
The military forces are to be withdrawn from the area this week, commencing tomorrow, and it is expected that the movement will be completed as soon as the transportation companies can provide the necessary facilities.
With the ending of the emergency, the flood control committee originally set up by the province held its final meeting, but will remain available for consultation. The active direction of the continuing work on relief and rehabilitation will be carried out by the provincial authorities, who have taken over the work by agreement, as explained in the announcements in the past ten days.
This work is under the immediate direction of Mr. W. L. Macken and Colonel D'Arcy Baldwin. These men are appointed by the provincial government to work on repairs and reconstruction of dikes, and the removing of water from the flooded lands is now being carried on under the immediate direction of Mr. Bruce Dixon and Mr. Goodspeed, pending the establishment of (the proposed Fraser valley diking board. Work is at present going forward on the agreement under which the board will be established. The personnel has been agreed upon and, I understand, will be announced later this evening. This review makes it evident that the emergency is now over and that the arrangements which have been worked out between the provincial government and this government have taken effect quickly and smoothly. It is a matter for gratification that the province and the dominion have been able to reach agreement so quickly in this urgent matter.
I cannot let this opportunity pass, however, without drawing to the attention of the committee the vital role which the defence forces of this country have played in dealing with this emergency. All three services provided help quickly and effectively. At one time as many as 3,000 members of the active and reserve army forces were engaged in evacuation, relief, protection of dikes and flood control. From all sides and all sources, there has

Supply-Finance
been a general appreciation of the excellent work which the services have done in this emergency.
That brings us up to the present time. So far as the work is going, apparently the emergency is pretty well over. This does not mean that the work is by any means over. It is really just beginning. The Prime Minister, on June 26, gave a statement to the house on the genera! agreement. At the same time the Premier of British Columbia made a statement in Victoria. I have received this wire from Premier Johnson, dated June 25:
Apart from press statement issued on dominion provincial arrangements on Fraser valley flood separate statement was given out today stating that the province was assuming full responsibility for flood damage elsewhere in t'he province outside of the Fraser valley area and that Honourable E. T. Kenney was making a tour of these areas with a view to reporting his recommendations to the government so that action can be taken in connection therewith.
Byron I. Johnson, Premier of British Columbia.
I hope, Mr. Chairman, that you will allow the release to the press, which has now appeared in the newspapers, to go on the record. It is lengthy, but it has already been reported and I should like to have it on Hansard, because it is complementary to the statement made by the Prime Minister in this house, and the two together form the agreement. With the permission of the committee, I would ask that it be put on the record without being read.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


Robert Wellington Mayhew: I will hand it to Hansard.
Canadian Pacific Telegraphs Victoria, B.C'.. June 25 Hon. R. W. Mayhew Minister of Fisheries, Ottawa.
Following is text of press statement issued by me today:
"Premier Byron Johnson today confirmed the conclusion of his negotiations with the federal authorities for tlieir participation in sharing responsibilities in connection with the Fraser valley flood, which was proclaimed a national disaster. The arrangement, Premier Johnson stated, is as follows:
1.	The dominion government will make an outright grant of $5,000,000 to the provincial government to cover the dominion's share of temporary emergency relief as well as the financial liability for measures of rehabilitation which the government of Canada agreed to accept as announced by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons on June 9.
2.	The provincial government will assume full responsibility for immediate relief and assisting in the general rehabilitation of homes, farm buildings and damage sustained by provincial and municipal property.
3.	The dominion government will set up a Fraser valley diking authority for the purpose of repairing the dikes, removing water from inundated areas, removing debris and for the purpose of completely reconstructing the entire diking system so that wherever it is humanly possible a recurrence of the disastrous floods may be avoided. The cost of this work will be shared on the basis of 75 per cent by the dominion government and 25 per cent by the provincial government.
4.	Cost of protecting the dikes and combating the flood will be shared on the following basis: 75 per cent by the dominion government and 25 per cent by the provincial government.
The fund being raised by the B.C. flood relief fund committee is rapidly approaching the $2,000,000 mark. This fund is under the complete control of the committee which has organized it. It is understood that they have asked rlie Canadian Red Cross Society to administer the proceeds of public subscriptions for them for the purpose of providing personal belongings lost in the flood, the replacement or repair of essential household furnishings, food and other necessities which may be urgently needed.
In connection with the diking work the federal government will appoint a top-ranking administrator to head the diking authority. Working with this authority will be Mr. Bruce Dixon, provincial diking commissioner who has been appointed by the provincial government as its representative. F. G. Goodspeed, chief engineer of the dominion public works department, will be the federal representative.
"Mr. Dixon," the premier stated, "has a thorough knowledge of the Fraser valley diking system and has carried out excellent work in connection with the combating of the flood during the present crisis. His knowledge in this respect should be of inestimable value to the Fraser valley diking authority."
The rehabilitation work will be undertaken by a provincial commission comprising two members, namely, Mr. W. L. Macken and Colonel D'Arcy Baldwin, both of whom hare done outstanding work during the past five weeks in connection with fighting tile flood in the Chilliwack area.
"The government, in appointing Mr. Macken and Colonel Baldwin to the provincial commission on Fraser valley rehabilitation, did so because of tehir administrative and organizing ability," the premier stated.
"Mr. Macken and Colonel Baldwin will supervise the work of the entire valley and will have authority to expend such sums as are required to assist owners of property in their efforts to rehabilitate their homes and farm buildings," the premier stated.
"It is the government's desire that every assistance shall be given, but it is expected that every initiative willl be shown by the owners in recovering and restoring their damaged property," the premier continued.
The municipal authorities have been asked b.v Honourable R. C. MacDonald, minister of municipal affairs, to render the fullest co-operation and assistance to the commission in this work.
In commenting upon the final arrangements that have been made between the dominion and the province, Premier Johnson stated that he was most gratified with the wholehearted co-operation and sympathetic consideration he had received from the federal authorities in arriving at the arrangements already outlined.
Supply-Finance

He pointed out that the major task was that of reconstructing the dikes on a basis that would give the utmost sense of security to the people as far as human effort can go.
"No one can tell just what a river will do when it is on the rampage, but I can assure the citizens of British Columbia that, having discussed this work with the federal authorities, it^ is their clear understanding, even as it is mine, that the reconstruction work will be of such a character that the people's confidence in the protection of their property will be maintained and a sense of security established beyond that which they have enjoyed before," the premier asserted.
"I would also like to take this opportunity of expressing tile very deep gratitude of the government for the splendid volunteer service rendered by our provincial representative, the Honourable Erie W. Hamber, C.M.G., who worked so harmoniously and untiringly with Major General B. M. Hoffmeister, C.B., C.B.E., D.S.O., E.D., the dominion representative on the Fraser river relief and rehabilitation commission, which was established jointly by the dominion and provincial authorities in the early stages of the flood so that they could guide the two governments in taking such measures as were deemed necessary to meet the changing conditions of the time and to set up the necessary organization to undertake the work which was bound to follow the recession of the water. The work of Major General Hoffmeister and the Honourable Eric Hamber has come to a close and I think that I would be failing in my duty if I did not express on behalf of the government and people of British Columbia our warmest thanks for their endeavours," the premier stated.
Premier Johnson likewise expressed his sincere appreciation to Prime Minister Mackenzie King and the federal government for the splendid spirit of co-operation amd sympathetic understanding that has actuated the federal authorities in all their negotiations with the province in reaching a basis upon which to share financial responsibility in the costly undertakings imposed by the Fraser river calamity.
"In particular, I would like to mention the names of the Hon. R. W. Mayhew, the Right Hon. C. D. Howe, the Hon. Douglas Abbott and the Hon. Brooke Claxton. ail of whom were ever willing to he of assistance and to relieve us of our great anxieties. My thanks go out alike to all those federal members who have been of assistance in this regard."
"Further I think the time has come, now that the waters are gradually receding, to express my heartfelt thanks to all of those persons who worked along the dikes and in organizing evacuation, emergency shelter, etc. Very many names and organizations come to my mind but it would be unfair to those who worked silently and courageously without thought of public recognition if I singled out any particular one. It was a great experience for me to witness the wonderful spirit of the people, the courage in the face of calamity and their indomitable will to overcome the frightful disaster which wreaked so much damage and caused so much *distress," the premier continued.
"I wish also to express the thanks of tihe citizens and the government for the very splen-

did work carried out by the Canadian Red Cross Society, the B.C. flood relief committee and the personnel of the three armed services," the premier concluded.
Byron Johnson.
A good deal of work had to be done, and these estimates are before the committee. No one can say they are accurate. In connection with them, a certain amount of common sense had to be exercised, and certainly no one was trying merely to get by with the least amount of money possible. The Canadian people demonstrated clearly, in their donations to the relief fund, which is now some $2,000,000, that they want a fairly reasonable agreement between the two governments. However I wish to make it clear that some of our own people had seen this area and realized that there had been a national disaster.
The Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) visited the area himself and with him was the deputy minister of public works, Mr. Murphy. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) also visited the Fraser valley area, and so did the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Gregg), and latterly the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent). All these gentlemen visited the area, and others who did so were the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank), the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair), the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) and myself. We made four separate trips over that area.
On one occasion I flew in a small plane, and we were able to fly at tree-top level so that we got a good view of the situation. I had never thought I would be guilty of so many stunts in the air as I performed on that occasion, but I did get a good view of what was happening and I can assure the committee that we were all agreed that it was a national disaster of the first order.
Perhaps another statement I should make here is with reference to a telegram which was received by the Minister of Finance from General Hoffmeister. It is the final telegram in this series.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What is the date?


Robert Wellington Mayhew: It is dated the 25th of June and reads:
The statement made in the House of Commons today concerning the Fraser valley flood is very satisfactory and agrees in detail with the understanding here. It is the view of the commission that the statement finalizes the work of the commission particularly in view of the provincial government having already assumed full responsibility for rehabilitation of public and private property. In view of the foregoing it is therefore respectfully recommended that the

Supply-Finance
commission be dissolved forthwith; however if desirable to be available in an advisory capacity. There will not be any expenses submitted in connection with the administration of or in .any other respect of the commission. The utmost co-operation has been extended by the provincial government representatives of the dominion government BjC. area headquarters (army), the R.C.A.F. and members of the flood control .organizations all of which is gratefully acknowledged. E. W. Hamber concurs with all of the foregoing.
I think that concludes those statements. The first item in the supplementary estimates is 932, for 84,500,000. That item is the amount which we believe can be spent this year before March 31; that is the fiscal year of this government. It does not indicate that this is the total cost or our total participation in the diking to be done in that area.
The other item is 933, for 85,000,000. I will deal with it in only a few words. We had two choices. We had the choice of setting up several committees, all doing some part of the work within the area and working jointly with a similar number from the province. In the opinion of the committee and in the opinion of the subcommittee of the cabinet that was dealing with this matter, it would be much better if we could arrive at a lump sum and leave the entire obligation and opportunity of doing this job to the provincial government. It was difficult to set up a committee without losing time in the doing of it and without involving a great deal of expense. So far as the dominion government were concerned, we would have had to send people out from Ottawa. We would have had to send out representatives from the treasu^ board, the Department of National Health and Welfare, the Department of Public Works and nearly every department of the government would have had to be represented in this. By doing it in this way, we were able to get action much quicker than would otherwies have been possible; and I am sure that it is a much tidier job all the way through than it would have been if we had tried to be in on every piece of work that was to be done. I think that probably explains the matter about as fully as I can at the present time.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I listened with a great deal of interest to the British Columbia minister's explanation of the flood situation, past and present, in that province, 99 per cent of the effects of which flood happen to be in my riding. I appreciate his explanation. I only want to say to the government that possibly if some of the statements he has made tonight had been made two or three weeks ago, you would not have the unfortunate feeling you have in all parts of Canada, particularly
in British Columbia, and especially in the Fraser Valley riding which I have the honour to represent. In the dates the minister quoted, he did not mention that of May 28, about four o'clock in the afternoon when the member for Fraser Valley in this house said the flood situation was no longer a Fraser valley matter. I am sorry he did not mention that. I think he, as the minister from British Columbia, might have done so. About four o'clock on May 28, last, I said it was no longer a Fraser valley matter, but was a national matter. At that time I said that within twenty-four hours the trans-Canada railways would be out of action. I erred in that. Within ten hours they were out of action.
The Canadian National Railways, which the people of Canada, the taxpayers, own, is still out of action and will be out of action for some time to come. I am sorry the minister neglected to mention that fact. This flood situation has become such a national affair that even Pravda mentions it. We have heard a great deal of blame placed on the communists. I am surprised that even these floods were not blamed on them. I cannot read this in Russian, but I shall read a translation of what Pravda said. The minister, in his statement, apparently overlooked this. This is a news item from Pravda:
Canadian newspaper report that as a result of hot weather which caused intensive melting of snow in the mountains of British Columbia (Canada) over a period of two weeks, large floods have resulted. The rivers overflowed their shores and flooded many communities.
An hon. MEMBER; Are you reading in Russian?


George Alexander Cruickshank: If I could read it
in Russian, possibly the same people from Ontario could not even understand it in that language, when it concerned all Canada. To continue:
Fifty thousand acres of farm land were covered and over 9,000 population lost their homes. The railway lines between British Columbia and the rest of Canada were washed away, as well as the nail connections with the United States. The flood is continuing.
And the note I have says;
Date not known exactly, but two weeks after flood had reached a high point.
The reason I am mentioning this to you and through you, Mr. Chairman, to the committee, is that I said on May 28 that this was not a Fraser valley matter but was a national matter, as was recognized ten days later by the Prime Minister of the Dominion of Canada when he stated that it was a national matter.
Supply-Finance

What would have happened if we had had an international incident during the interval? According to t'he press of yesterday, that great leader-a Conservative, if you like, but the greatest leader the British empire ever knew-Winston Churchill, said that nobody knew what might happen in the next two weeks. I want .to ask the minister and through him, the government, what would have happened if that incident had happened during the past two or three weeks when the Pacific coast, the direct route to Russia, was cut off from the rest of Canada? I hope I am not a warmonger, but I believe in facing realities; and I resent the fact that the minister from British Columbia overlooked what the member for Fraser Valley said on May 28, but quoted everybody else.
I want to go home like everyone. I do not believe in recriminations. What 'has happened, has happened. I firmly believe that this government has every intention of doing the right thing for the people of the Fraser valley and the people of British Columbia in all the flooded districts. I will tell you t'he reason why I believe they have that intention. It is that I believe the people of Canada as a whole would demand that any government do the right thing for their fellow citizens, who are victims of circumstances beyond their control.
The only thing is that I wish this cabinet, this government or the members of parliament had the time to observe some of the pictures I have. I should like to show the minister who introduced this estimate the house that I lived in, and I am not appealing for sympathy personally. I did not own the house. Though the farm land happens to be flooded, my house and barn are above high water. I should like to show the minister a picture of the house in which I spent the happiest years of my life. I spent the first three years of my married life in a house now flooded to the eaves. Yet the minister tells me that this token payment is representative of what the people of Canada want to do. The deputy minister tells me the record of assistance to the distressed countries of Europe; and I have no condemnation of that; I believe the people of my riding and I believe the people in my province agree with that. Speaking from memory, I believe we gave $124 million to the distressed people of Europe. In one vote alone we gave $5,000,000. Yet I am told that this is the best we can do to rehabilitate some 2,500 farms that are flooded out right up to the eaves, when many of the buildings have floated away, as well as every bit of the people's furniture.

This represents the lifelong savings of people, many of whom are sixty-five or seventy years of age. These people are flooded out, ruined. But, in the great generosity of the people of Canada we can find for them $5,000,000, less, of course, what we have advanced to the army, as has been brought out by the hon. member for Vancouver South! Why, in one vote alone -and I do not begrudge it at all-in one vote alone for the distressed peoples in Europe we can vote $5,000,000. But does anyone tell me that the people of Canada in their generosity can vote only $5,000,000 to rehabilitate some
2.500	homes, homes which are completely ruined, completely lost, homes where there will be no crops for one, two or three years, homes where the life savings will be gone? That the generosity of the people of Canada goes only to the extent of $5,000,000 does not make any sense to me; and I do not think it makes any sense to the people of Canada either.
In a country which boasted of the magnificent work accomplished, the work done through the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, a country which could find $10,000,000 a day to save ourselves in Europe, a country which can boast of that fact-perhaps I should not say "boast", but is certainly proud of it -can we find only $5,000,000 to rehabilitate
2.500	homes, many of which are under ten feet of water today, their entire life savings gone, not a particle of crop for one, two or three years, not a bit of feed for their cattle for at least a year or two? Do you tell me we can find only $5,000,000 today, and that out of that there must be deducted amounts paid to the army? I want to pay my compliments-


Robert Wellington Mayhew: That is not a correct statement. We want at least to be accurate. We are not deducting the expenses of the army when they were in there doing relief work. The pay and allowances of the men in the armed forces are paid out of the army vote. They are not charged up to this fund. Any extra expenses will be, but not those charges.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I have not time to check it, so I shall take the correction of the minister from British Columbia. Unfortunately, however, he is not yet in charge of the government. The Prime Minister said in the house-and I leave it to my hon. member to check it in Hansard; I have not the exact page, but I believe it was June 25-"except pay and allowances".


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is page 5833.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am glad pay and allowances are not included, because I wish to tell the minister, through you, Mr. Chairman,

Supply-Finance
that I had the privilege of escorting the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and it was not on one of these conducted tours. I conducted him personally around where the houses were floating and where only small portions of telegraph poles were showing. There were enough brass hats around there to sink a ship, and if we had to pay them, God help us. I know what I am talking about. I did not take any conducted tour around there. I went around in a small boat, in row boats and "ducks". I know what I am talking about, irrespective of what anyone may say.
Maybe I am bitter; I know I am bitter. I saw there people I have known all my lifetime. My father sold them their farms forty years ago. They were the people who pioneered, and who by their hard work brought up their families-families who enlisted-did it voluntarily, and fought for their country. Many of them did not come back. They built that country. And now to see these pioneers lose their all, with not one word being mentioned by this government to date, except the responsibility they have to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, is not easy to take. The Canadian Pacific Railway Company did not assume its fair responsibilities. Not one acre of that land would be under water today if the president of the Canadian Pacific and his fellow directors had done the decent and the honest thing as Canadian citizens, and had not deliberately lied as they did in the letter referred to by the Minister of Transport.
Of course I am bitter. I would like the minister and some of his colleagues to look at some of these pictures. They would see barns floating down the river, out to the Pacific, I suppose, on their way to my good friend's own riding.


Robert Wellington Mayhew: I was there.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Oh, the minister may have been there; but I lived there all my life. I did not just tour over it. I went through it in a row boat, in a small boat, and I know what I am talking about. I do not want any corrections from him in that matter.
I know the government will do the right thing, at least I believe it will. I honestly believe it will, because I believe that the present Prime Minister and his successor, whoever he may be, are good men. They will be good Canadian citizens and want to do the right thing for their fellow Canadians, irrespective of party. I believe that no matter what party he belongs to, the leader of that party wrants to do the right thing for his fellow citizens.
But I do believe this, that no man has any justification for standing up in front of me and telling me that we can find $10,000,000 a day for destruction in wartime, and then
try to justify an estimate of only $5,000,000 for the rehabilitation of this area. I do not 'believe that is the wish of the Canadian people.
I do not believe it is the desire of the Canadian people or of the Canadian government. I do not believe it is their intention.
Unfortunately, however, there are statements by people who have not the human touch, who have not had first-hand information-
I will not go so far as to say they have not wanted to know-and who have not firsthand knowledge. They cannot tell me that this is a proper amount. I am appealing to the government and, through the government to parliament here in Ottawa, to say to the government that that is not sufficient for the rehabilitation of 2,500 of their fellow citizens, pioneers of this country who did not inherit silver spoons, who did not make their profits in wartime companies. All they have today- the homes they built, and everything they owned-was gained by the sweat of their brows and by their hard work. Surely they are entitled to every consideration.
I believe the people of Canada would endorse any move the government would make to rectify this situation.


Howard Charles Green: I do trust that the government will pay heed to the remarks just made by the hon. member for Fraser Valley. As he has said, the Fraser valley has been his home throughout the whole of his lifetime. He knows the conditions there better than anyone in Ottawa, and he is thoroughly qualified to place the facts before the house. I, for one, would not think of questioning his statement. So I do hope that the government will pay heed to his representations.
One thing that worries me greatly about the proposed settlement is that it is a settlement for cash, before anyone knows the extent of the damage. The Prime Minister announced the other day that the dominion government would pay $5,000,000, and that that constituted the full settlement of its liability for rehabilitation and emergency relief.
As the hon. member for Fraser Valley has said, a good deal of the land is still under water. It is impossible to determine at this time what the total damage will be. I suggest, that the dominion should not make a final settlement now, but that there should be some provision for further assistance, if it is found that the cost of rehabilitation and of emergency relief exceeds $10,000,000. I presume the idea was that the dominion would pay half and the province half, I hope that the dominion will not insist on this $5,000,000
Supply-Finance

being a final settlement if it is found that the damage exceeds twice that figure.
There is a further payment to be made in connection with the repairing of dikes. We should have some assurance from the government that when they are built again they wrill be modern dikes, no matter what the cost. I do not know whether this estimate of $4,500,000 will provide for three-quarters of the cost of modem dikes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is only what we think it may be possible to spend up to the end of the fiscal year.


Howard Charles Green: We should have the assurance that it will be three-quarters of the cost of modern dikes, no matter what that cost may be.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is the agreement; that is the intention.


Howard Charles Green: Is it a term of the agreement that these dikes will be of the modern type mentioned by the hon. member for Fraser Valley, wide enough at the top to allow for a line of trucks in either direction? Can either of the ministers tell me whether or not that is the agreement?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The dike authority which is to be set up will have to advise the respective governments as to what type of dike would be best. Broadly speaking, it should be a modem type, adequate to perform the functions which it is supposed to perform, and if possible to make sure that there will be no recurrence of the disaster which occurred this year. It would be throwing money away if that were not done.


Howard Charles Green: I am glad that is so.


Jean-François Pouliot: Can the hon. member tell me the assessed value of the farms that have been flooded?


Howard Charles Green: I am afraid I cannot do that. The hon. member for Fraser Valley has set the number at 2,500. I doubt if he would know the assessed value of those farms, because many municipalities are involved. The actual damage caused by the flood cannot be determined as yet, because the flood is still there. Much of the land is still under water, and that is why I cannot understand the dominion making a final settlement at this time. I think it was premature to set a final figure.
I should like to express a word of appreciation for the way in which the people of the other provinces came to the help of the sufferers in the Fraser valley area. Our province is a long way from eastern Canada; we face the Pacific rather than the Atlantic, and I 
suppose we sometimes feel that we have been forgotten and are not getting a fair deal. It is easy for us to develop antagonism toward the other parts of Canada. I cannot remember anything in my lifetime that has done more to drive away that feeling than the manner in which the cities and towns and villages in other parts of Canada voluntarily offered help to their fellow citizens in the Fraser valley.
Right from the start, almost before the government in Ottawa realized that this was a national emergency-I am not blaming anyone at the moment-funds were being donated in Montreal and Toronto to help the sufferers, under a lead given by the mayors of those two cities. Similar help has been received from other centres and organizations in eastern Canada and we are all most grateful. It makes us all just that much more proud to be Canadians. I am sure I speak for all the members from British Columbia when I express that word of appreciation to our fellow Canadians in the other eight provinces.
One other fine feature was the spirit shown by these people who had to get out of their homes, leave their furniture behind and, in some cases, lose their stock. They accepted all these hardships with remarkable spirit; very much the spirit that the hon. member for Fraser Valley has shown here, very much the spirit that he showed during the first world war when he had such a wonderful record. The people of his valley have certainly shown themselves to be a grand lot.
I was proud, too, of the help given by my city of Vancouver, by the city of New Westminster and 'by the adjoining areas. Businessmen, workers in factories and school boys all went out night after night to work on the dikes. They received no pay; it was entirely a voluntary effort and they did a grand1 job. Many United States citizens voluntarily crossed the line from' the neighbouring state of Washington to lend a hand, which was a very fine action. These kindly, helpful acts were the bright spots in this terrible catastrophe, the worst in the history of the province.


Jean-François Pouliot: This session should prorogue in glory after the fine speech of my fine friend.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I should like to support everything said by the hon. member for Vancouver South and the tributes he has paid. I also support his remarks as to the undesirability of the dominion making a final settlement of $5,000,000 for relief and rehabilitation. It is estimated that the damage in the Fraser valley alone will amount to $30,000,000, and that does not take into account the damage in

Supply-Finance
other portions of the province. That being the case, I think it is premature for the federal government to say this represents a final settlement with respect to their contribution toward compensation for damages. I consider it desirable that they make a cash contribution now, .but I think they should leave the door open for the payment of an increased sum when the amount of actual damage is finally assessed.
I find it difficult to understand why the premier of the province accepted1 that small payment. We should approach this whole matter in a spirit of co-operation. The hon. member for Vancouver South has mentioned how much we appreciate the co-operation of citizens all over Canada, but I would point out that, according to the figures tabled during this session, it is shown that, under the financial agreement between the dominion and the province of British Columbia, the dominion takes in tax revenue from that province $144,000,000 and returns just over $20,000,000. This means that the tax resources of the provinces are extremely limited.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That ridiculous argument always irritates me beyond question. Dominion taxes -would have been no lower in British Columbia if we were not paying British Columbia $20,000,000.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What the minister has said has not disproved my argument, because those tax fields are now occupied exclusively by the federal government. This means that the tax resources of the province are that much more limited, that there is that much less in the way of free sources of revenue from which to meet the tremendous burden imposed by the flood disaster. As I say, it is estimated that the damage is $30,000,000, of which the province will evidently have to find $25,000,000, while the dominion finds only $5,000,000. I do not think one is extreme when he says that is ungenerous treatment. I am surprised that the premier of the province would have concluded this agreement and accepted this figure of $5,000,000 as a final payment.
There are one or two other matters which I think should be mentioned. While it is a source of satisfaction to find that money is being provided for the repairing of the dikes in the Fraser valley, it is a source of concern to find that as yet no effort is made to prevent floods at the source. I shall not go into that because we discussed it previously, but if we are to prevent floods in the future it is not enough merely to provide dikes in the Fraser river valley down in the broad flat lands, but care must be taken to prevent a rapid runoff at the head waters.
Finally I think we are entitled to expect to find some item for compensation of the provincial government for the expenses which it incurs in carrying out this program of rehabilitation and the assessment and repairing of damaged lands. The Minister of Fisheries has made it quite clear that the dominion government has handed over the responsibility for the administration to the province, and I think that is proper, because they are close to the spot; they know the needs and they can administer relief more efficiently. But obviously it will be an expensive thing to administer. The province will have to send their own officials and probably will have to employ more experts and so on. While it is proper to leave the detailed administration to the province, the expenses incurred in that administration should be taken into consideration in fixing the amount which the federal government will grant to the province over and above the $5,000,000 as straight compensation, which, as I have said, I do not consider adequate. While some if not most of the things I have said may have been critical, I, like other members, appreciate to the full the generous gestures made by private citizens, the work of the armed forces, and so on, but I do think the rest of the citizens of Canada and the federal government should have all the facts placed before them, so they they may be able to judge whether or not some further compensation should be paid to the province, and whether or not the door should be held open, instead of being closed on this question of the provision of a further cash payment when the amount of damages is finally assessed.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I wish to add one word. Perhaps an Ontario man should not step into this, but one or two things can be suggested. First, this is a national emergency. That has been shown by the action of the government. Second, for the moment an agreement has been arrived at, in which the province of British Columbia, in the view of some British Columbia members seems to have made an improvident agreement. But when we talk about things being final, I do not think that in a democracy things are ever final, because public opinion can always assert itself and the public will want the right thing done in the end, once the damages are assessed. The damages may be more, or they may be less. But this is a step forward. The door is not banged and barred and bolted, and I suggest that we might take what has been done as so much gained.
Supply-Finance


Rodney Young: I have listened with great respect to the remarks of the hon. member for Fraser Valley, who has made himself the voice of his countrymen in that area. While it is pardonable for the hon. member for Fraser Valley to be emotional, since he is deeply affected personally and since he is one of the people, I feel that we, the remaining members of the house and I myself as one coming from the province which is affected, should be strictly practical about what is to be done with the sum allotted by the government. I think we should make certain that what is done with it will result in something of permanent value to the people of the Fraser valley.
It is extremely difficult to assess in dollars and cents what the final results of the flood will be, but it is not difficult to assess the steps that can now be taken with regard to fhe diking and harnessing of the Fraser river. As I said in an earlier debate, the condition of the Fraser river is and has been changing for some fifty years. That river has reached geological maturity. Its course, if left unregulated, will change and will result in damage to the lands now cultivated on its banks. There is only one possible solution. That solution lies in the report of engineers who are capable of assessing the conditions in that area and of deciding what type of dikes shall be built and how much money should be spent. After that, while we cannot talk in terms of a Canadian T.V.A., nevertheless it will probably be found that if money is wisely spent in that area power from the Fraser can be harnessed, lands irrigated, and secondary industries will flourish at the mouth of the Fraser, and the people of the Fraser river valley will be properly protected. But that will require the employment of sums far in excess of the 810,000,000 proposed. I would ask the minister to take into consideration plans for the future, rather than to regard this as a temporary emergency.
Our geologists and our departments are aware that the flood of 1894 was as great as the flood which has just taken place. There are a great many years between 1894 and 1948; but, since none of us can say what nature will do in any particular year, the flood of this year could be repeated ten years later. It is obvious that it is entirely up to man, with the modern machinery and modern methods at his disposal, to harness these things and to make this valley safe and to turn the present disadvantages into advantages for industry.
I,	too, went over the flooded area in an aeroplane. My riding had the honour of

entertaining six cabinet ministers at one time who flew over that area, and it was an aweinspiring sight to see that valley from the air in its flooded condition. But knowledge of the actual situation cannot be gained in that way. The people who live in that area and the people of the province feel that they have been let down, because there has been no planning on the part of government which would have rendered the flood at least less damaging. If there had been large planning much might have been saved that was lost. I think there is a lesson to be found in the Fraser river valley flood if the government and the departments care to learn it, and that is that we must be practical, we must plan, and not just say:	We are going to spend $10,000,000,
and that relieves us of further responsibility. The government must not wash its hands of the situation once that $10,000,000 has been spent. I urge that the government and the minister make a definite statement that they accept responsibility with regard to the unassessed damages of this flood.


Mr. REID:: I was one of the members representing one of the other districts that suffered during the disaster. Perhaps the committee will bear with me while I occupy a few minutes of its time. May I, first of all, join with the hon. member for Vancouver South in his remarks where he gave credit to the wonderful help and assistance rendered by all persons in all walks of life. It is amazing how the Canadian people rise to the occasion when called upon to do so. When the call went forth to men and women for help to man the canteens there was a ready response from one end of the country to the other. I want to take a minute to add my word of praise for the wronderfuI help and assistance given. Then, of course, there is the great fund of money which is being collected from all over. Other countries as well have contributed.
However I want to pass from that and say a word or two regarding the flood itself. Many statements have been made regarding what it will cost. I am one of those who believe that no one can estimate or tell just what the actual damage will be until the water is actually off the land. It is natural that the hon. member for Fraser Valley should be wondering whether the $5,000,000 allotted is sufficient to take care of rehabilitation. My own view is that it is not. On the other hand, I have a statement made by the government, and I do not think they will deny it, that they are willing to pay 75 per. cent of the cost of diking, and that they have also agreed with the province to pay for complete rehabilitation. While it is easy for some of us, including myself, to rise in our places and advocate this

Supply

Finance
or that, yet one cannot overlook the fact that the provincial government whose responsibility it is, and who have assumed the job of rehabilitation-I do not think there is any argument on that-did meet all the reeves of the affected areas, seven in number, including a number of councillors. They met at a place called Murrayville in the constituency of New Westminster. Assurance was given by the provincial minister of municipalities, the Hon. R. C. MacDonald, who is in charge. The following appeared in the British Columbian Weekly of June 21:
Mr. MacDonald told the gathering that the provincial government was prepared for the complete rehabilitation of the flood victims and he was in complete charge. He felt that administration of the assistance could be handled more efflciently through the local flood committees which have been established in each area.
In many oases the farmers themselves will be able to do much of the repair work on their homes and barns and for this the provincial government will pay them.
There you have a meeting of all concerned right on the ground. The hon. member for Fraser Valley may have information that I have not, but the reeves of my own district have not complained about the agreement already entered into by the provincial and dominion governments. They met on the job with the provincial minister there, who has given the assurance that full rehabilitation will be .taken care of under the guidance and jurisdiction of the provincial authorities.
With regard to the $4,500,000 for dikes, I doubt whether the provincial grant added to the $4,500,000 for dikes will mean that they will be able to spend more than that until March of next year.
May I say this to the committee. I believe that some good will ultimately come out of the flooded areas, because for the first time the attention of the dominion government has been drawn to the conditions on the Fraser river, and to the lands through which the Fraser river flows. It is true that we have been complaining about the lack of dikes, but diking out there is not a simple matter. I am going to draw to the attention of the committee just one little problem that will arise in regard to diking. Diking on the river is just one aspect of the diking of the Fraser valley. In my riding I have groups of farmers who have diked against the sea, and who are being charged up to $7.50 an acre, and will be for the next fifty years. They come to me and say, "If the dominion and the provincial governments are to build dikes to protect the lands from the waters of the Fraser they had better dike ours against the ravages of the sea." I mention that to show the committee 5849-388
just one of the many problems that will arise. I ask the hon. member for Vancouver South how he would settle that.


Howard Charles Green: You had better settle it yourself.


Thomas Reid: I have to give them an answer. I shall be inclined to support them in their view of making representations. That is just an example of what is apt to happen when we start to rehabilitate
I have every sympathy for the groups flooded out .and the residents who will have to be rehabilitated. It will be a stupendous task. It is a task that will require the services of men .with sympathy and a little firmness in deciding the cases that will come before them.
In my own district 4,000 acres were under water. It is true that a greater .part of the constituency of New Westminster is protected by diking. The dikes helped. Like the dikes in the Fraser Valley riding, these dikes were all built by the farmers themselves. They are apt to say, Now, we want some further protection from the government because if they are going to do 140 miles of diking on the Fraser river, build modern dikes so that you can drive two trucks across it, we had better have the same kind of protection for our land. I thought it my duty to mention that >to the committee.
The hon. member for Fraser Valley knows the conditions there perhaps better than anyone else. I do not know whether he has the double trouble of diking from the sea, but I know I have it in my own riding. I thought I should rise at this time, first of all to express my appreciation of the great help that has been given by thousands of volunteer workers. It is true there was a little dispute here and there between the military personnel and the civil population. That was only to be expected, because the civil population thought that many of the army men should take off their army boots and go down in gum-boots and overalls, wade through the water, and start packing sandbags. Apart from that, things were handled remarkably well.
What the dikes will cost, no one can say. What rehabilitation and relief will cost no one can estimate at the present time. Someone has said $30,000,000. My own belief is that, until the water has all subsided and conditions improve, it will be impossible to tell exactly what damage has been done. Some will be greatly damaged; many will be wiped out; others may well be slightly benefited, because much of the land received a coating of silt. Provided that the land does
Supply-Finance

not receive too heavy a coat of silt, it may do the land considerable good in places. I think the hon. member for Fraser Valley would agree with that statement. Those who had strawberries or raspberries and find them buried under the silt will find that they are gone, and they will not have another crop until they replant and wait for two or three years.
But these are all matters which will be gone into by the local committees. I am pleased indeed to note that the provincial government has set these committees in motion, has called all the reeves and councillors together and discussed with them right on the ground where the damage can be seen. They are in the best position to know exactly what should be done. Our position should be to pay them enough money and to leave it to the provincial and municipal authorities to carry out their task. I say that without fear of successful contradiction.


Angus MacInnis: Mr. 'Chairman, I think it is established' that what happened dn the Fraser valley is a national disaster, and that the hon. member for Fraser Valley, in whose district it took place, should feel strongly about it is not to be wondered at. In fact, it would be strange if he did not. But the position in which I find myself is this. In the agreement that has been made there has been not only the dominion government but the provincial government, and I understand that the provincial premier was here. I do not know whether he met or asked to see other members of parliament. Certainly he did not ask to see me. If he is satisfied with the arrangement made with the government it would be presumptuous of me to say that the agreement was not a good' one.
But what I am glad to find out tonight is that this amount is not a hard and fast one beyond which the government will not go. If I correctly understood the remarks of those who spoke before me, this is at least the amount that can be properly spent this year in rehabilitation.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No. That relates to the diking work; that is the $4,500,000.


Angus MacInnis: The other, the rehabilitation, as has been so well pointed out by other hon. members who have spoken, cannot in my opinion be ascertained until the water has receded and the proper investigations have been made and the damage estimated. That will be the proper time to set the figure. As has been pointed out, some people will be put out of production for perhaps a couple of years. Others may not be affected very much.
Perhaps the people in other parts of Canada do not appreciate how important the IVaser

valley is to British Columbia. It is important if for no other reason than the fact that it supplies nearly all the fluid milk for a population of over 300,000 in greater Vancouver.
As I said before, I am in a difficult position because I cannot start to criticize the British Columbia government for not safeguarding the interests of the people of the district, since I do not know all the facts.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Mr. Chairman, I have a few more words to say, and I admit frankly that possibly I am, not unnecessarily, but excessively bitter. I represent at least ninety-five per cent of the people in the flooded area. During the time the flood was at its height, on one occasion I got in contact with my home by telephone, and my sister informed me that there was an urgent long distance call for me in Vancouver. When the second call came I took it, and the object of the call was for me to attend a by-election meeting in Vancouver. This was at seven o'clock at night. The one reason my telephone has not been taken out is that I have not lost the support of the hon. member for Mackenzie for the language I used.
Five minutes before, I heard a call for
1,000	volunteers for a certain area which I will not name, and then I am asked to leave when I am doing my duty, where the dike is threatened, in order to attend a political by-election. I was not there. If my language could have been heard there it would have flooded any dike.
I was the first one who said-I made the statement before I left Ottawa to return to the district-that no one could estimate the damage. I cannot on my own farm, nor can any member in the Fraser valley, estimate the damage to farm property that is anywhere from four feet to fifteen feet under water. Every newspaper in British Columbia, every radio station called me, and newspapers since I came back to Ottawa got in contact with me asking for my opinion on the damage. Government officials have asked me the same thing, and I replied that no one could estimate the extent of the damage caused by the flood.
As to the question of full rehabilitation, I wish to quote from a certain editorial and then I am through. I believe this editorial will substantiate what other members have said. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that this government is sincere in its desire to help, and so is parliament. I know the people of Canada are sincere in wishing to give all the assistance they can. I do not believe that the government, the department or the people of

Supply-Finance
Canada at this stage can estimate the extent of what is required to take care of the damage.
I am firmly of the opinion, howeyer, that what is needed is something considerable. If I suggested a blank cheque I would be going too far, perhaps, but almost a blank cheque such as we had in wartime is necessary. This parliament and the people of Canada should in my opinion give this government the necessary means to re-establish their fellow citizens in the Fraser valley or in any other part of Canada to meet a national disaster such as this.
I should like to quote a front-page editorial from the largest weekly newspaper in the affected district, the Chilliwack Progress. This editorial will give hon. members of this committee a good idea of the situation. I quote: They're Moving Back
Henry Jensen is tall, blonde, well built and Danish. He likes to wear a red baseball cap. He happens to be .a progressive farmer and an aggressive, independent and energetic citizen.
He was forced from his Arnold road farm by the flood waters from the Cannor breakthrough. Friday, Henry Jensen and his friends got his cattle together; piled his possessions on a truck and set off down the Liekman road to home.
The Jensens were luckier than a good many people. He lost 'his crops but the flood didn't reach the main floor of his home. He's not discouraged and neither is his Vancouver bred wife.
For the last two weeks, he's been hearing government warnings, regulations, vague promises and announcements of plans to help him and others like him. He was anxious, like hundreds of others, to get back. He was one of the few who could go back. He couldn't afford to wait while governments bridged the time gap between when they said they were going to do something and when they actually do it.
Everyone knows machinery fop relief and rehabilitation can't be set .up overnight, but there has been an unnecessary amount of backing and filling by departments concerned; a reluctance to assume immediate responsibility and to back up announced plans with action.
The Shortage of hay, even for temporary feeding of livestock, is for instance, critical. Immediate supplies are needed. People are still vague about who they are to see about health regulations; others are wandering around trying to find someone who is responsible for assessing damages to homes and barns. People have been moving back for .a week now'. It is later than the government thinks. The Jensens, the Toopa have returned.
In none of the government's actions, however, is there evidence of insincerity-
I want the minister to note this.
-or a backing down on its promises. The problem is one of putting words into action.
To make political capital of the flood and its aftermath, as was done in '94, is abhorrent. It is nonsense to say the government is responsible for the flood. They must, however, with all of us, help clean up the aftermath and take steps 6849-388J
to see that every possible means is employed to prevent a repetition of breaks in the diking system. They must see-with us-that a fair and equitable system of assessment of damages and payment of claims is worked out.
It is a big job and we should get on with it.
Is there anything unreasonable in that frontpage editorial appearing in the largest weekly newspaper in the affected district? The only thing I wish to say in that connection was brought out during my absence at the request of the Canadian Legion of the Fraser valley, and that is the excessive cost of hay. Today hay is $36 a ton.
Chilliwack and the Fraser valley ask for consideration by the government and by parliament, not on party lines but as aid to our fellow Canadians.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Superannuation and retirement benefits-
71. 'Superannuation and Retirement Acts, administration, $220,091.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I wish I knew some new argument or approach to make to the minister in connection with this matter. All sorts of arguments and approaches have been made; and from the letters that have 'been written and the resolutions that have been forwarded to the minister and the government one would think something would have touched off his heart before this to assist superannuated civil servants. I will not take time to go further into it now, principally because I think I might make more headway with the minister if I did' not do so. But I hope that he is giving consideration to the continuing plea of superannuated civil servants, particularly those in the lower income brackets-and there are far too many of them-for some sort of cost of living bonus or other supplement.
.Mr. ABBOTT: My hon. friend's views on that subject are well known. We have discussed this before. There is nothing that I could add to what I have said on previous occasions with respect to such things as cost of living bonus to superannuated civil servants. That payment is a form of contractual payment, the same as payments made under the pension funds of the railways and other private concerns or pensions which are provided by employers throughout the country. I have never felt, I do not feel at the present time, at any rate, that it would be appropriate.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Surely the government should be a model employer.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That may or may not be the case; 'but in any event, the government has not felt that it would be justified in granting such a bonus. I have had occasion
Supply-Finance

to say that before; and, as my hon. friend has indicated, he realizes that this is not the place to discuss that matter this evening.


Stanley Howard Knowles: IHe does not like it at all.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Public debt charges-
(S) Cost of loan flotations, $525,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: I do not understand about this item for the cost of loan flotations, and how the charges are made up. They are marked "statutory" and therefore I take it that they are routine. Will the minister explain this item, because the cost of loan flotations is usually something incurred when the loan is made.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is a statutory item under the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act. I do not think anything was spent for loans under the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act. This item provides for flotation expenses of new bond issues, including advertising, engraving and travelling expenses, less commissions and remuneration to dealers, et cetera, which are amortized over the life of the loan.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: That is what I wondered about. Is this the amortized figure?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes; that is correct.
Public debt charges-
(S) Interest on public debt-funded debt (including treasury bills)-
Payable in Canada, $415,013,481.33; payable in London, $327,680; payable in New York, $5,587,800; total, $420,928,370.33; other liabilities, $25,534,888; $440,463,258.33.


Agar Rodney Adamson: I wish to ask the minister one question on this statutory item of $5,587 -800, payable in New York. Does that represent part of the new loan recently incurred, or does that represent old loans?


Douglas Charles Abbott: It does not represent any of the interest on the new loan. It represents interest on the approximately $140 million of United States-pay government securities which are at present outstanding.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Are those direct obligations of the federal government?


Douglas Charles Abbott: They are direct obligations of the federal government. That does not include any obligations of the Canadian National Railways.
General-
80.	Tariff board, including the dominion trade and industry commission-payments may be made notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act or regulations, $94,740.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the minister say a word about this item? What is the respective cost of this?


Douglas Charles Abbott: For dominion trade and industry commission, there is provision for $1,000. That is for travelling and other expenses incidental to the operation of the commission. No major investigations were held during 194748. A number of informal conferences were held respecting complaints of unfair trade practices, and personal visits to Montreal and Toronto were carried out in that regard. Most of the work was conducted by correspondence, and the resulting adjustments were found quite satisfactory.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
81.	To provide for the expenses of the comptroller of the treasury's office, $9,986,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: There is a large increase here. Will the minister explain that?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The apparent large increase in this item results from the consolidation with it of certain activities formerly provided for under demobilization and reconversion. The only valid comparison of amounts between years, however, is that which takes into account the combined amounts voted in 1947-48 within normal and demobilization and reconversion estimates. From such a comparison, we find that the consolidation has been attended by a decrease in over-all provision for the comptroller's office of $1,149,353, as is apparent from the detail printed on page 124 of the main estimates.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
82.	Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, 1943, and Municipal Improvements Assistance Act, 1938, administration, $63,331.
Percy Ellis Wright: I should like to ask the minister in which provinces the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act is still applicable and the number of applications for adjustments that have been made during the past year in each one of those provinces.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It applies to the three
prairie provinces. I am afraid I have not available here at the moment the number of adjustments made in the last year, but I think I can say from general knowledge that it was comparatively small. However I will be glad to get that information for my hon. friend, and see that it is furnished to him.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Finance
General-
83.	Foreign exchange control board-administration, $26,800,000.
Agar Rodney Adamson: I wish to move an amendment to item 83. I move:
That item 83 be reduced to one dollar.
I do this with a full realization that it hits at the major problem and one of the major planks of the government's policy of economic control. I feel that at the present time the foreign exchange control board and the artificial restrictions imposed on our trade with the United States are among the major contributory causes to the inflationary pressure which is being built up on the Canadian price structure. To illustrate my contention, I should like to quote from the current issue of the Canadian Statistical Review, just published for the month of May by the dominion bureau of statistics. Discussing the importance or the lessening of our unfavourable balance of trade with the United States, they say this:
Our unfavourable balance of trade with the United States for this period has fallen from $295 million in 1947 to about $156 million in the current year. But this improved trade position has meant that fewer imported goods have been available for the domestic market, while more of our own production has been going abroad. Although our imports from all countries are up by $27 million or by about three per cent, when allowance is made for the rise in prices, the actual volume has probably fallen.
Then it goes on:
With incomes earned in Canada continuing to rise-total labour income for the first quarter of the year was up $194 million over the same period a year ago-the demand for all types of consumer goods has remained high and this has almost inevitably resulted in a further upward pressure on price levels. The one important limiting factor has been the substantial surplus of the Canadian government.
I mentioned that before. Then it goes on to say:
As long as individuals, business firms, governments and foreign buyers try to spend funds in excess of current income the pressure toward higher price levels will continue.
There is one other sentence I should like to read, and I am endeavouring not to remove these extracts from their context. This last sentence is as follows:
As consumer goods accumulate and individuals' most urgent needs are filled, they become more willing to increase their rate of saving. Similarly as new plants are built business requirements for capital become less acute and this decline in the demands for new equipment also helps remove the upward pressure on prices.
I contend that the imposition of exchange restrictions is having the direct effect of pushing up prices, and that, by so restricting our trade with the United States, it is not only causing a certain amount of ill feeling but, further than that, preventing that necessary flow of free trade between our two countries.
I feel that at the present time we are losing a tremendous volume of United States funds which would come to Canada for capital investment, come to Canada for the sake of building new plants.
I realize that great strides have been made in the construction of new plants. I feel that we may feel satisfied, in our own Canadian way; ibut we, on this North American continent, are lagging behind the increased productivity and increased industrial expansion of the country to the south of us. I consider that that is definitely, at least partly, caused by the restrictions on our exchange of currency.
We are in a singularly fortunate position.
I believe that our economy, our natural resources, and the development of our potential natural wealth makes our economy free enough and strong enough to withstand the impact of a free exchange. I believe that we have undeveloped in Canada the greatest natural potential, particularly in things of which the United States is short, including base metals, as well as other products. At the present time I am speaking of non-farm products. I believe our economy can complement the United States economy, and that there are literally billions of dollars waiting for investment in Canada from the United States.
I say, further, that the impact of this money upon the development and investment market in Canada would have a tendency to keep our two exchanges in a state of comparative equilibrium. I do not think there is a danger of the Canadian dollar selling at a great discount. I believe that the advantage to the economy of Canada in having a truly international dollar, exchangeable into United States dollars, and exchangeable freely without let or hindrance, anywhere in the world, would be such an advantage to the Canadian economy that it must be seriously considered at the present time.
I realize that the Foreign Exchange Control Act ends on March 31, 1949. I believe that we are in a potentially strong enough position to free our dollar from controls now. I feel that the goods which we have and which the world must have, to exist, would guarantee that the Canadian dollar would become one of the most sought after currencies of the whole world. Furthermore, the freedom of capital to come into and leave Canada without restriction, let or hindrance would, in my opinion, bring in such an influx of develop-
Supply-Finance

ment capital that it would greatly solve our present adverse 'balance of trade with the United States.
For these reasons I have offered my amendment.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am not going to attempt tonight to argue the merits of foreign exchange control. It was only a few days ago that we discussed an amendment to the act. The hon. member has repeated his views, which are well known, and therefore I suggest that the vote be called.
Amendment negatived.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
85. To provide, subject to -the approval of the treasury board, for salaries, reclassifications and increases, $10,000,000.
Frank Exton Lennard: What I have to say deals with the stenographers of members of the House of Commons. From July, 1946, to May, 1948, the cost of living increased by 28 per cent. The stenographers on the House of Commons staff are employed between sessions in other departments of government. Up to a year ago they were given the grade II maximum, and received $143 a month. I understand that a year ago, on instructions of the Department of Finance, they received the grade II minimum, or $120 a month with reductions, which gave them a cheque of $103.
This is a drastic reduction, and these girls find it hard to make ends meet. I might say that, through this reduction, they are being trimmed of about $45 a month. There is the $23 reduction from the higher to the lower grade, and $22 as an allowance for the 28 per cent increase in living costs.
We cannot expect to have expert stenographers on the House of Commons stenographic staff if that is the way in which they are to be treated. It is no encouragement for them.
I must say that the permanent civil service is receiving increases and has permanent employment. Apparently this is the only group being discriminated against. By reducing them from the grade n maximum to the minimum, the government is saving only a small amount each year. It is no encouragement to treat these employees in this way.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have been listening to the hon. member's remarks, and I am sure His Honour the Speaker will take note of what has been said.


Frank Exton Lennard: It is not his responsibility.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is under Mr. Speaker's estimates.

-Mr. LENNARD: It is after they leave here; it is not the salaries they -receive here, it is the salaries they receive between sessions that I am concerned wri-th.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: We have h-ere $5,500,000 and another $5,000,000
in the supplemenbaries.


Douglas Charles Abbott: It is $10,000,000 here. This is an annual vote to provide basket cur blanket authority for salaries, reclassifications and increases that have to be made during the
year.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: In all departments?


Douglas Charles Abbott: In all departments as and when- treasury board approves -the reclassifications or increases for which specific provision has not been miade in the departmental estimates. This vote varies each year, depending upon the probable extent of the reclassifications. As the committee knows, examination is being made -throughout the civil- service, and reclassification has been going on rather more this year than would normally be the case.


George Randolph Pearkes: Does it provide for additional .personnel, or is it only for salary increases for personnel already employed?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I-f additional personnel are authorized and approved by the civil service commission the salaries of those personnel, if not provided for in a departmental estimate, would be charged -to this vote.


George Randolph Pearkes: How many additional personnel a-re being provided for?


Douglas Charles Abbott: There is no specific -provision-for any number. As I say, this is a basket item pu-t in each year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Demobilization and	-reconversion-W artime
prices and trade board-*
87. Administration, $3,990,040.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to have a few more words with the minister about the wartime prices ian-d tra-de board and this question- of the re-imposition of price controls and subsidies. I hope -that we are now able to discuss this matter in a little more reasonable atmosphere than was the case for a number of months prior to last night. Until last night any request from this corner of the house for a reimposition of -price controls and subsidies was met with a negative reply. The minister has told -us on occasion that it could be done only by the restoration of wage controls. He has told ,us on other occasions that some controls were being maintained in so far as that

Supply-Finance
was permitted by the parliamentary statute, but it was clear that the general approach of the government was negative.
However, we now have the adoption of the prices committee report, which, although it did not go down the line for over-all price controls, suggested that some controls and subsidies should be put back on. Earlier this evening I felt that the minister indicated a slight change of attitude, in that he stated that the recommendations of the committee as approved by the house would be given immediate consideration. I should like the minister to recall a question which was asked him last Thursday by my colleague, the hon. member for Churchill, and which had to do with the minister's promise earlier this year that if prices of meat and butter got out of hand controls would be reimposed. That promise took the form of a statement which the minister made on March 4 of this year, as reported on pages 1864 and 1865 of Hansard in reply to a question by the hon. member for Lethbridge. On that occasion the hon. member asked this same question. I think I Should give the committee the text of the minister's answer on that date. This is the Minister of Finance speaking:
Perhaps I had better answer that question. The situation with respect to ceilings on meat, including beef, is this. The government announced late in January, I think, that it intended to reimpose ceilings on meat and on butter; and it was pointed out at that time that the imposition of retail ceilings on meat involved quite a technical operation in working out what those ceilings should be with respect to, I am told, nearly 200 items. That work has been proceeded with _ and it is now completed; but in the meantime tire retail prices of meats are somewhat below the prices which were prevailing at the time the announcement was made, and therefore there has been no necessity to impose the formal ceilings. As I say, the technical work has been done, and in the event of its being necessary to do so, ceilings can be reimposed promptly.
As long ago as March 4 the minister indicated that the technical work, even though it was complicated and involved nearly 200 meat items, had been completed and that the government was in a position, through the medium of the wartime prices and trade board, to put ceilings back on if the same became necessary. I should like to ask the minister what work has been done in the meantime by the wartime prices and trade board to get ready to put ceilings back on as might now be desirable in view of the approval that this house gave to the report of the prices committee. It seems to me that the argument which the government has used in the past Should not now be used because of the action taken last night by this house and
because of the at least slight change in attitude shown by the minister earlier this evening when he said that immediate consideration would be given to this report.
I know something of the splendid work the wartime prices and trade board did in the years when the government gave it half a chance, and it would seem to me that that board would now have some machinery ready and some of the technical work done, so that it would be possible for the government to act upon the report of the prices committee.
I am not now asking the minister for a restatement of the promise he made at eight o'clock; I am asking him to state what plans have been worked out and what work has been done by the wartime prices and trade board to get ready to carry out an anticipated change in government policy.


Douglas Charles Abbott: If it were decided to reimpose ceilings, on meat for instance-I am not prepared to say that would be a desirable thing- it would be necessary for the prices board to do a considerable amount of technical work; it would be necessary to call in the trade and make quite an extensive study. Retail ceilings on meat is a complicated matter. Meat prices have already moved through the ceilings to which I referred last January. This sort of thing works both ways and the producers may have some interest in the matter.
To answer my hon. friend's question directly, it would be necessary for the prices board to do a considerable amount of work in order to be ready to reimpose ceilings on meat. So far that work has not been done.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I point out that on March 4, when the minister was asked a question by the hon. member for Lethbridge, the reply was that the technical work on these 200 items had been done but the prices were below the ceiling-


Douglas Charles Abbott: Below the proposed ceiling.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And now he tells us that the prices have moved through the ceiling.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is right.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The housewives of Canada know that, and that is given as an excuse for not going ahead with this matter. It seems to me that this is not good enough, the finding of one excuse after another while the people of Canada suffer from this serious problem. I hope that when *we meet tomorrow morning the minister will be able to tell us that he has asked the wartime prices and trade board to do the job which it can do in connection with this matter.
Private Bills


Jean-François Pouliot: Some years ago-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Eleven o'clock.


Douglas Charles Abbott: If the committee desires I am willing to go on and complete my estimates, but I am entirely in the hands of the committee.


William Ross Macdonald: Is it the desire of the committee to sit for a short time after eleven o'clock?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister ought to take time to think this thing over.


Douglas Charles Abbott: There will be no different answer to my hon. friend in the morning.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Eleven o'clock.


Howard Charles Green: We agreed1 with the Minister of Public Works that we would sit long enough to enable the house to dispose of certain divorce bills after eleven o'clock.
Item stands.
Resolutions reported, read the first and second times and concurred in.


PRIVATE BILLS
[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 12, for the relief of Florence Joyce West Shannon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 13, for the relief of Alice Cecilia Anne Magniac Bailey.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 14, for the relief of Valerie Jean Lewis Samson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 15, for the relief of William Neville Buckingham.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 16, for the relief of Marguerite Elsie Dunan Currie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 17, for the relief of Ellen Catherine Holder.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 18, for the relief of Doris Amy Peate Taylor.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 19, for the relief of Kenneth Elliott Mitchell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 20, for the relief of Margaret Craig Carmichael Nicholson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 21, for the relief of Hilda Emily Brown.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 22, for the relief of Joan Ruth Grimble Campbell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 23, for the relief of Raymond Masse.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 24, for the relief of Barbara Mary Day Duffy.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 25, for the relief of Joseph Dunn. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 26, for the relief of Rena Victoria Rabin Wolfe.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 27, for the relief of Frederick Smith. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 28, for the relief of William Thomas Wright.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 29, for the relief of Marie Antoinette Aubut dit Cimon Charron.- Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 30, for the relief of James Arnold Wells.-Mr. May-bank.
Bill No. 31, for the relief of Magdelena Kleiziute Testart.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 32, for the relief of Hazel Shirley Elizabeth Hart Layton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 33, for the relief of Irene Morgan Neilson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 34, for the relief of Elerick Montgomery Barton.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	36,	for	the	relief of Adelaide
Margaret Munn Bain.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 37, for the relief of Gwendolyn Beulah Russell Denenfeld.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 38, for the relief of Miriam Salomon Starr.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 39, for the relief of Laura Krause Suffrin,-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 40, for the relief of Jean Fullarton Craig Walker.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	41,	for	the	relief of William
Hesketh.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 42, for the relief of Janet Alice Smith Bennett.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 43, for the relief of Gwendoline Elizabeth Hunt Edmund.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 44, for the relief of Reta Mabel Welch Gilbert.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 45, for the relief of Leah Shrimer Sohanker.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 46, for the relief of Doris Mary Stratton St-uart,-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 51, for the relief of Hellmut Hans Karl Pokorny.-.Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 52, for the relief of Bella Wine Rapps.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 53, for the relief of Winifred Anthony Leith.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 54, for the relief of Eugene Alden Anderson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 55, for the relief of Shirley Leighton Pawson Milligan.-Mr. Boucher.
Bill No. 56, for the relief of Mary Josephine Ruth Girard Rosenberg.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 57, for the relief of Leah MarceUe Pettitt Reeve.-Mr. Croll.
Bill No. 58, for the relief of Mane Yvette Francoise Bayard Savard.^Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 61, for the relief of Simone Body Whitelaw.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 62, for the relief of Ernest Alfred
Coker.-Mr. Maybank.

Private Bills
Bill No. 63, for the relief of Clarence William Henry Hodgson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 64, for the relief of Vera May Paulson Ward.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 65, for the relief of Ruth Ethel Attwood McVicar.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 66, for the relief of Henry George Halsey.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 67, for the relief of George Crosby-Wilson Gray.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 68, for the relief of Joseph David Ernest Paul Maysenhoelder.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 69, for the relief of Myrtle Macdonald Heale Daniluk.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 70, for the relief of Robert Grincill Barnet Jones.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 71, for the relief of Gertrude Katherine Margolis Bird.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 72, for the relief of Cecilia Maud Wood Marshall.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 73, for the relief of Beatrice Doris Haggerty Goodier.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 74, for the relief of Joyce Knowles Ledoux-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 75, for the relief of Robert Ernest Beadie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 76, for the relief of Grace Davie Park Parr.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 77, for the relief of Jeanne Crete Benoit.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 78, for the relief of Sarah Cummings Menzie Carlin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 79, for the relief of Annie Golden-berg Schulman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 80, for the relief of Clarice Jean Field Campbell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 81, for the relief of Georgina Claire Williscroft Bovard.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 82, for the relief of Saul Jack Costin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 83, for the relief of Mary Shore Bernstein.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 84, for the relief of Saul Ettinger.- Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 85, for the relief of Lloyd Arthur Davies.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 86, for the relief of Alfred Keeley. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 87, for the relief of Marie Albina Ethel Dubois Howick.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 88, for the relief of Ignaty (Ignas) Sokolovsky.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 89, for the relief of Laura Grace Hanley Huggenberger.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 90, for the relief of Eva Wolfovitch Zloty, otherwise known as Eva Wolfovitch Gold.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 91, for the relief of Sheila Lightstone
Marcus.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 92, for the relief of Lea Alvina Mary Boulay Orr.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 93, for the relief of Armand La-pierre.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 94, for the relief of Georgette Ruth Cote Geller.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 95, for the relief of Mary Elizabeth Ellwood Blackburn.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 96, for the relief of Annie Elisabeth Horseman Charters.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 97, for the relief of Sarah Ann Older Verrier.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 98, for the relief of Anna Martha Kokojachuk Waugh.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 99, for the relief of Elsie Mark Farley.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 100, for the relief of Lela May Begley Hall.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 101, for the relief of Marguerite Isaacs Kutz.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 102, for the relief of Delilah May Jacobs Button.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 103, for the relief of Ruth Shkurnik Gilbert.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 104, for the relief of Goldie Tessler Wise.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 105, for the relief of Martha Norman McCaims.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 106, for the relief of Marion Rita Kendall O'Donahoe.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 107, for the relief of Gertrude Mae McLean Cole.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 108, for the relief of Freda Gertrude Parkes McMillan.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 109, for the relief of Alma Petrides Prysky.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 110, for the relief of Jean MacDonald Di Falco.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. Ill, for the relief of Betty Yossem Edelstein.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 112, for the relief of Leonard Carlton Matthews.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 113, for the relief of St. Kilda McKay McLean Anderson-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 116, for the relief of Nellie Polistuck Levac.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 117, for the relief of Eleen Rose Gray Lawson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 118, for the relief of Frieda Kimelfild Solomon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 119, for the relief of Gordon Merrill Fuller-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 120, for the relief of Phyllis Joyce Bradfield Ainsworth.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 121, for the relief of Michael Charles Parr.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 122, for the relief of Edna Birch Drimer.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 123, for the relief of Elinore Oakes Forgues.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 124, for the relief of Mary Gwoz-decka Carter.-Mr. Maybank.
Private Bills
[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 125, for the relief of Ralph Woodall. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 127, for the relief of Joseph Onfroy Pilon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 128, for the relief of Thelma May Heggie May.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 126, for the relief of Molly Renetta Fry Bist-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 130, for the relief of Patricia Potter Parker.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 131, for the relief of Helen May Smith Saunders.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 132, for the relief of Jean Duncan Girard.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 133, for the relief of Evelyn Sylvia Jones Bowen.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 134, for the relief of Joseph Eugene Ernest Bourbonnais.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 139, for the relief of Mildred Frances Batten Gzowski.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 140, for the relief of Irene Nellie Kon Ballantyne.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 141, for the relief of Theophile Gobeille.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 142, for the relief of Violet Mary Cowper Preston.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 143, for the relief of Virginia Grace Borland Langton.-Mr. Boucher.
Bill No. 144, for the relief of Ethelwyn Lillian Flynn Budd.-Mr. Croll.
Bill No. 145, for the relief of Alfred Winston Savage.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 146, for the relief of Elizabeth Frances Mary Liddle	McClelland.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 152, for the relief of Rose Landes Clopoff.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 153, for the relief of Micheline Desautels Dooney.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 154, for the relief of William Roydon Saltor.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 155, for the relief of Marie Eva Thibodeau Buelow.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 156, for the relief of Margaret Sleno Staines.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 157, for the relief of Jean Hume Munro Auburn.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 158, for the relief of Gilles Henault.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 159, for the relief of Edward Gordon Jakeman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 160, for the relief of Kathleen McKeown Stevenson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 161, for the relief of Alice Mary Gallant Currie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 162, for the relief of Muriel Frances Marks Buchanan.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 163, for the relief of Leona Selma Cutway Hall.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 164, for the relief of Avery Patricia
Gill Reinhold.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 165, for the relief of Poppy Catherine Hayakawa Smith.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 166, for the relief of Dolores Margaret Paul Warner-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 167, for the relief of Norma Burn-stein Levee.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 168, for the relief of Eileen Sophie McNamara Sepchuk.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 169, for the relief of Mary Rowan Young Conway.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 170, for the relief of Ethel Margaret Tweddell Cartmel.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 175, for the relief of Winifred Audrey Meyer Holton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 176, for the relief of Chester Adam Hart.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 177, for the relief of Marie Marguerite Cecile Gagnon Lescadres.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 178, for the relief of Samuel Reinhardt Lewis.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 179, for the relief of Ersilia Pace Imonti.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 180, for the relief of Helen Rose Noel Steele.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 181, for the relief of Edith Saltzman Rashkovan.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 182, for the relief of Ida Malfara Romanelli.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 185, for the relief of Francis Clyde Peachey.-Mr. Boucher.
Bill No. 186, for the relief of Harriet Dodd McLachlan Cummings.-Mr. Maybank.
Bll No. 187, for the relief of Phyllis Smith Curtis.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 188, for the relief of Jacqueline Louise Waddington Skinner.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 189, for the relief of George Malouf.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 190, for the relief of Son-ja Anna Margaret van der Walde Brown.-Mr. May-bank.
Bill No. 191, for the relief of Richard Edward Welsh.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 192, for the relief of Violet Maude Mitchell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 193, for the relief of Elsie Williams Lodge.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 194, for the relief of Joseph Albert Aldee Leveillee-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 215, for the relief of Ella Margaret McLaughlin Baisley.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 216, for the relief of Mavis Aurelia Leney Ogilvie Walker.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 217, for the relief of Joanna Wright Farrell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 218, for the relief of Margaret Patricia Jones Gavey.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 219, for the relief of Selma Rattner Frid'handler.-Mr. Maybank.

Private Bills
Bill No. 222, for the relief of Lucien Menard.-Mr. Maybank.	.
Bill No. 223, for the relief of Sheila Trench Thomson Ellis.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 224, for the relief of Alexandre Hebert.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 225, for the relief of Anne Green-blatt Pliss.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 226, for the relief of Sonnie Levitt Shereck.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 227, for the relief of James Young. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 230, for the relief of Hazel Violet Camp Mace.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 231, for the relief of Adah Elizabeth Jeffries Heinz.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 232, for the relief of Mabel Findlay Turner Rollo.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 233, for the relief of Anna Dagmar Dahl.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	234,	for	the	relief	of	Florence
Evelyn White Marshall.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 235, for the relief of Kathryn Mae Richardson Rowe.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	236.	for	the	relief	of	Margaret
Dawson Jamieson Turnbull McKay.- Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	237,	for	the	relief	of	Margaret
Elizabeth Dunn Vezina.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	238,	for	the	relief	of	Elizabeth
Craig Blair.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 239, for the relief of Charles Henry Kennell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 240, for the relief of Muriel Frances Pratt Fiddes.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 241, for the relief of Leah Zeiger Rudenko.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 242, for the relief of Ruth Harris. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 243, for the relief of Eva Booth Morrison McCormick.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 244, for the relief of Naomi Evelyn Masterangelo Rosenstein.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 245, for the relief of Jean Lauder Rutledge.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 246, for the relief of Henry George Chartier.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 247, for the relief of Francis Russell Stone.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 249, for the relief of Mathilda Welter Jackson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 250. for the relief of Joseph Thomson Mowat.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 251, for the relief of Mary Hrychuk Fleury.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 252, for the relief of Anna Kathleen Burnie Beebe.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 253, for the relief of Jenny Muriel Pressley Scott.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 254, for the relief of Mary Pappas Gigantes, otherwise known as Marie Papadatos 5849-389J
Gigantes.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 255, for the relief of Gilbert Brinton Campbell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 256, for the relief of Helen McGregor Hanley.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 257, for the relief of Yudit Mary de Bartok Richardson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 258, for the relief of Abraham Schechter.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 259, for the relief of Caroline Alice Woods Mayhew.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 260, for the relief of Giana Stephen Cantlie Lyman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 261, for the relief of James Gustov Reed.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 262, for the relief of Elizabeth Ruth Maitland Harley.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 263, for the relief of Daisy Elizabeth May Fishlock Wallace.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 264, for the relief of Gertrude Agnes Dorothy Cunningham McLarnon.-Mr. May-bank.
Bill No. 265, for the relief of Jeanette Ore Paige.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 266. for the relief of Reva James Nathanson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 267, for the relief of Gerald Roderick Bartlett.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 268, for the relief of Dorothy Jardine Palmer Petrie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 269, for the relief of Nellie Maisie Wingham Carphin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 270, for the relief of Beatrice Gertrude Corbin Simand.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 271, for the relief of Margaret McCallum Cameron Baird Brine.-Mr. May-bank.
Bill No. 272, for the relief of Leila May Willett Ascah.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 273, for the relief of Joseph Ulric Stanislas Caron.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 274, for the relief of Edith Elizabeth Walker.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 275, for the relief of Yvonne Jeanne Leslie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 276, for the relief of Bertha (Brana) Handes Ramer.-Mr. Croll.
Bill No. 277, for the relief of Ellen Gertrude Hinks Fairhurst.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 278, for the relief of Shirley Marder Berman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 279, for the relief of Vera Maud Thayer Gunn.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 283, for the relief of Joseph Chiarella.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 284, for the relief of Merle Allene Dalton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 285, for the relief of George Nestor Cloutier.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 286, for the relief of Rufina Olga
Soltysik Leshchynski.-Mr. Maybank.
Private Bills
[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 287, for the relief of Rhea Lillian Appel Ostroff.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 288, for the relief of Alice Elizabeth Tucker Shaw.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 289, for the relief of Libby Raikles Lerner.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 290, for the relief of Beatrice Catherine McCabe Sowerby.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 291, for the relief of John Morrell. -Mr. Cardiff.
Bill No. 292, for the relief of Lily White Borgan - Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 293, for the relief of James Donald Bacon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 294, for the relief of Laurel Gwendolyn Wilband Walsh.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 295, for the relief of Lillian Eileen Rendle Nadler.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 296, for the relief of Claire Alice Tucker Vincent.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 297, for the relief of Audrey Beryl Fryer.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 302, for the relief of Marguerite Pichette Sanzone.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 303, for the relief of Frederick Edward Sharman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 304, for the relief of Joseph Leopold Joffre Viau.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 305, for the relief of Olga Timofy Ewaschuk.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 306, for the relief of Leie Snideman Tuchsneider, otherwise known as Lilly Schneidman Schneider.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 307, for the relief of William Francis Dunphy.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 308, for the relief of Alice Hoare Dubeau.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 309, for the relief of Jennie Leibo-vitdh Margolese.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 310, for the relief of Hugh Cyril Harvey.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 311, for the relief of Barbara Yuile. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 312, for the relief of Violet Mae Ruth Johnson Menaker.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 314, for the relief of John Clayton Sturgeon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 315, for the relief of Alice Deborah Townsend Hawker.-Mr. Croll.
Bill No. 316, for the relief of Rae Bellam Baron.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 317, for the relief of David Ewing Jackson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 318, for the relief of Olive Turnidge Burns Turner.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 319, for the relief of Dorothy June Wilson Weedmark.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 320, for the relief of Kate Henny
Wacker Prengel.-Mr. Maybank.

Bill No. 321, for the relief of Jeannette Racine Garneau.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 322, for the relief of Gladys Gwendolyn Goode Buttress.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 323, for the relief of Gladys Victoria Lewis White.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 324, for the relief of Madge Reynard Lambton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 325, for the relief of Cornelia Bar-endrecht Nickel.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 336, for the relief of Paul Charbonneau.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 352, for the relief of Samuel Lankszner.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 353, for the relief of Audrey Maude Victoria Giles Findlay.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 354, for the relief of George Elias Heydenreich.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 355, for the relief of Guiseppina Cannuli Catalfamo.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 356, for the relief of Ann Laurie Willett Allan.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 357, for the relief of Leon Schechter.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 358, for the relief of Beatrice Evelyn Tutill Bobinsky.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 359, for the relief of Una Mary Phillips Slavin..-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 360, for the relief of Margaret Laidley Lawrie Burke.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 361, for the relief of Albert Kenworthy.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 366, for the relief of Esther Leibof Kaufman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 367, for the relief of Harold Clarence Simkin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 368, for the relief of Winnifred Emily Ford Salmon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 369, for the relief of Arthur Herbert John Louth.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 370, for the relief of Frank Potts. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 371, for the relief of Kenneth Wright Williamson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 372, for the relief of Ida Goldman Adelstein.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 373, for the relief of George Cohen. -Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 374, for the relief of Katharine Lillian Cornish Mullin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 375, for the relief of Orville Lester Bennett-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 376, for the relief of May Holmes Martin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 377, for the relief of Georgette Mathias.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 378, for the relief of Gladys Odella Sweet Elliott.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 379, for the relief of Robert Charles Delafosse.-Mr. Maybank.

Supply
Bill No. 380, for the relief of Adelaide Jar-dine McDonald.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 381, for the relief of Edith McLaeh-lan Ward.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 382, for the relief of Eva Lamothe Paquin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 383, for the relief of Elizabeth Iris Lobar Kinnon.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 384, for the relief of Jeanne Obo-dofsky Newton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 385, for the relief of Philip Sidilkofsky.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 386, for the relief of Rhoda Marjorie Beaeom Sadler.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 387, for the relief of Becky Hersco-vitch Moscovitch.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 388, for the relief of Veronica Conrick Pelley.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 389, for the relief of William Bryan Hazel.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 390, for the relief of Victorien Tremblay.-Mr. Maybank.

Alphonse Fournier: Tomorrow we shall continue with the estimates of 'the Minister of Finance and any others remaining.


Howard Charles Green: What other estimates remain to be passed?


Alphonse Fournier: In the main estimates there are Legislation and the Prime Minister's office. There are also some supple-mentaries. I think there are also two items still standing in Veterans Affairs.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE International short wave broadcasting station-
307.	Maintenance and operation, $1,711,500.
308.	Capital costs, $75,000.
General-International short wave broadcasting station-	,
804. Maintenance and	operation-further
amount required, $116,501.89.	_
805.	Capital costs-further amount required, $3,066,400.
Loans and Investments-Canadian Broadcasting Corporation -
930. Loans to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation repayable with interest at a rate to be fixed by the governor in council on such terms and conditions as the governor in council may determine and to be applied in payment of expenditures on the construction, extension or improvement of capital works of the broadcasting facilities of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in Canada. Such loans, with interest, shall be a charge on the revenues of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation next after the charge imposed under the provisions of section 17 of the Canadian Broadcasting Act, 1936, $1,259,099.

[Stage Direction]
327.	Departmental administration, $246,697. Architectural branch-
328.	Branch administration, $412,091.
329.	Ottawa-maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., $7,548,875.
339.	Maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., $8,612,478.
Nova Scotia-
331.	Annapolis Royal public building-repairs and improvements, $12,990.
Bridgewater public building-Alterations and improvements (revote $12,500), $49,000.
Halifax customs building-improvements and elevator (revote), $35,009.
Halifax federal building-improvements and repairs (revote), $45,099.
Halifax-postal station at Armdale (revote, $30,099), $43,099.
Halifax-postal station at north end (revote $4,000), $49,909.
Halifax-office building (revote), $25,090. Sydney public building-alterations, improvements and repairs, $20,090.
New Brunswick-
332.	Andover-customs and immigration buildings, $40,000.
Edmundston public building-alterations (revote $15,099), $21,000.
Fredericton-public building-site and preliminary work towards construction of building (revote $60,099), $73,599.
Saint John post office-addition, alterations and improvements (revote $18,090), $50,000.
Sussex public building-addition and fittings (revote), $32,090.
West Saint John-terminal building for customs and immigration (revote $50,009), $259,090. Prince Edward Island-
333.	Charlottetown-public building (revote $50,099), $109,009.
Maritime provinces generally-
334. Dominion public	buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $109,099, $235,090.
Quebec-
335. Armstrong-customs	and immigration building (revote $25,000), $80,000.
Buckingham public building-alterations and improvements (revote), $15,090.
Coaticook public building-addition, alterations and improvements (revote), $23,090.
Dominion public buildings-addition, alterations and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $109,090, $600,000.
Drummondville-public building site (revote), $25,090.
Joliette public building-addition (revote), $25,000.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
Laeolle (Blackpool)-building for customs (revote $100,000), $200,000.
Lac Megantic public building-addition, alterations and improvements (revote $7,000), $12,000.
Levis public building-addition, alterations and improvements (revote $18,000) , $60,0-00.
Magog public building-alterations and improvements (revote), $10,000.
Montreal

building for British and foreign mail (revote), $300,00-0.
Montreal-Hochelaga postal station-addition and improvements (revote), $25,000.
Montreal-office building (revote), $300,000. Montreal-postal station "B" (revote $175,000), $4-00,000.
Montreal-postal terminal-addition (revote), $250,000.
Montreal-postal terminal-parcel storage system (revote $25,000), $7-5,000.
Montreal-St. Henri postal station-site (revote), $25,000.
Noranda-public building (revote $57,0-00), $70,00-0.
Quebec-marine stores building-elevator (revote), $16,000.
Quebec-old post office building-improvements (revote $4,0-00), $7,0-00.
Bock Island customs and immigration building -addition to site (revote $44,000), $60,00-0.
St. Hyacinthe public building-addition and improvements (revote $7,000-), $11,000.
Sherbrooke-public building (revote $75,000),
[Stage Direction]
Three Kivers public building-addition (revote), $60,000.
Val d'Or-site for public building, $12,000. Ontario-
336.	Belleville-public building (revote), $52,000.
Bracebridge public building-alterations and improvements (revote), $15,000.
Brantford public building-elevator, $15,000. Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $100,000, $600,000. Hamilton-office building (revote), $100-,000. Kenora public building-addition, alterations and improvements (revote $20,000); $41,000'.
Kingston public building-alterations and improvements, $50,000.
Ottawa

addition to physical metallurgy laboratory, $50,000.
Ottawa-addition to mines and resources site on Carling avenue, $3-5,000.
Ottawa-building for department of Veterans Affairs (revote), $100,000.
Ottawa-Central Experimental Farm-accommodation for staff, $10,0-00.
Ottawa-Central heating plant-Tepairs and replacements, $76,000.
Ottawa-Connaught building-alterations and repairs, $28,000.
Ottawa-departmental office building (revote),
[Stage Direction]
Ottawa-Dominion Observatory - alterations and repairs, $30,000.
Ottawa-fuel research laboratory-alterations and improvements, $50,0-00.
Ottawa-National Research building-improvements and repairs (revote $35,000), $112,000.
Ottawa-new Supreme Court building-renovation, completion and furnishing (revote), $3-00,000.
Ottawa parliament buildings and grounds

improvements, $55,000.
Ottawa-Rideau Hall-repairs -and alterations, $20,00-0.
Ottawa-Royal Canadian Mint-renewal of elevator and alterations to building (revote $5,000), $13,000.
Ottawa-testing laboratory for Department of Public Works (revote), $50,000.
Ottawa-west block-improvements, $18,000.
Pelee Island-building for Department of National Revenue, $6,500.
336.	Port Arthur public building-improvements (revote $6,00-0), $31,000.
Port Arthur public building purchase of sate (revote), $50,000.
Sault Ste. Marie-public building, $250,000.
Sudbury-public building site (revote), $165,00-0.
Toronto-city delivery building-extension, restoration, mechanical equipment and addition to site, $900,000.
Toronto-postal station on St. Clair avenue (revote $7-5,000), $126,-0-00.
Waterloo public building-addition, alterations and improvements (revote $18,000), $43,000.
Welland public building-addition, fittings and improvements (revote $50,000-), $75,000.
Manitoba-
337.	Brandon public building-improvements to heating, $12,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $50,000. $150,000.
St. Boniface public building-addition and alterations (revote $8,000), $24,000.
St. Vital public building-addition and alterations (revote $15,000), $24,500.
Winnipeg-postal accommodation at Canadian National Railway station (revote $25,000), $75,0-00.
Winnipeg-Postal station "A"-improvements (revote), $7,5-00.
Winnipeg-Postal station "F"-addition and alterations (revote $13,000), $20,000.
Winnipeg-public building site (revote), $300,000.
Saskatchewan-	[DOT]
338.	Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in amount of $50,000, $150,000.
Nipawfin public building-addition and alterations (revote $15,000), $30,000-.
North Porta]-site for -building for customs and immigration (revote), $40,000.
Prince Albert public building-addition and alterations (revote $65,000), $120,-000.
Regina-accommodation for Department of Trade and Commerce (revote $25,000-), $39,000. Alberta-
339.	Calgary public building-improvements and repairs (revote $22,500), $37,500.
Calgary-accommodation for Department of Trade and Commerce (revote $2-1,000), $31,000.
Coutts-buildings for customs and immigration (revote) $140,000.
Dominion public buildings

improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $50,000, $105,000.
Edmonton-addition and alterations to South Edmonton postal station (revote $30,000), $45,000.

Supply-Public TForfcs
Edmonton-postal terminal (revote $112,060), $366,060.
Edmonton-public building (revote), $106,000. Peace River public buildings-local improvements (revote $7,266), $8,506.
British Columbia-*
340.	Abbotsford-site for public building (revote), $16,066.	_
Chilliwack public building-addition (revote $40,006), $72,060.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $56,606', $250,000.
Douglas-buildings for customs and immigration (revote), $120,000.	.
Duncan public building-alterations and improvements (revote $4,000), $20,600.
Kelowna public building-addition and alterations (revote $30,000), $47,006.	_
Ladner-site for public building (revote), $5,000.
Langley Prairie-site for public building (revote), $5,000.
North Vancouver-postal station (revote), $50,060.
Osoyoos-customs and immigration buildings, $40,000.	_
Vancouver examining warehouse-installation of elevator (revote $16,600), $48,060.
Vancouver-post office building site (revote), $260,600.
Vancouver public building-improvements and ' repairs (revote), $5,066.
Vancouver-site for building for customs (revote), $100,000'.
Victoria Astrophysical Observatory

repairs, alterations and improvements (revote $23,006), $30,000.
Victoria-public building (revote), $266,000. White Rock-site for public building (revote), $5,060.
William Head Quarantine Station-alterations, improvements and repairs (revote $4,560), $20,660.
Generally-
341.	Dominion immigration buildings-repairs, improvements, etc., $45,000.
342.	Dominion quarantine stations-maintenance and repairs, $50,000.
343.	Experimental farms and science laboratories-replacements, repairs and improvements to buildings, $256,060.
344.	Building for National Film Board (revote), $25,060.
345.	National capital planning service, $135,006.
346.	National Printing Bureau (revote), $200,000.
347.	Public buildings generally-repairs, alterations, fittings and improvements and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $200,660, $506,066.
348. Veterans' hospitals-repairs, improvements and alterations, $175,660.
349.	Canada House, London, England-improvements and repairs, $46,000.
350.	London, England1-clerk's table for the new British House of Commons (revote), $7,500.
Engineering branch-
351.	Branch administration, $296,009.
352.	Engineering, including salaries of engineers, clerks, etc., $1,164,243.
Dredging-
353.	General superintendence, $14,144.
354.	Maritime provinces, $1,252,606.
355.	Ontario and Quebec, $1,415,000.
356.	Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest territories, $358,560.
357.	British Columbia and Yukon, $569,066. Maintenance and operation of graving docks,
locks and dams, etc.-
358.	Champlain graving dock, $447,085.
359.	Esquimalt graving dock, $124,276.
360.	Esquimalt old dry dock, $9,000.
361.	Lome graving dock, $273,122.
362.	Selkirk-repair slip, $12,300.
363.	Locks and dams, $346,262.
364.	Snagboats, $92,966.
Maintenance and operation of roads and bridges-
365.	Burlington channel bridge, $49,930.
366.	Contribution to the provincial government of Nova Scotia for replacement of bridge at Grand Etang, Nova Scotia, $32,006.
367.	Kingston, LaSalle causeway, $128,498.
368.	New Westminster bridge, $45,895.
369.	Towards international bridge over St. Croix River between St. Stephen, New Brunswick and Calais, Maine, the State of Maine to pay a like amount, $10,000.
370.	Generally, $91,112.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
Nova Scotia-
371.	Anderson's cove-breakwater repairs, $34,000.
Baddeck-wharf reconstruction, $50,000 Ballantyne's Cove-breakwater repairs (revote) , $30,000.
371. Bay St. Lawrence-towards harbour repairs and improvements (revote), $160,066.
Breen's Pond-breakwater replacement (revote), $118,560.
Cape John-breakwater (revote $77,060), $90,000.
Capstick-breakwater reconstruction, $60,000. Chester Ironbound-breakwater extension, $26,000.
Cheticamp Beach-quay wall, $15,060. Cheticamp Point-breakwater, $15,000.
Cow Bay (Port Morien)-breakwater reconstruction and dredging (revote $150,500), $360,060.
Creignish - breakwater-wharf reconstruction (revote $24,400), $28,500.
Digby-repairs to piers, $85,000.
Dingwall-dredging, $110,060.
Drum Head-wharf replacement (revote $130,000), $163,000.
Eastern Passage-dredging (revote $1,006), $65,000.
Fall's Point (Woods Harbour)-wharf extension, $118,000.
Feltzen South-breakwater-wharf replacement (revote $97,006), $123,000.
Ferry Landings at Tiverton, East Ferry, Freeport and Westport (revote), $306,066.
Graff Beach-beach protection, $6,006.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new work to be undertaken, $755,000.
Ingonish Ferry-wharf repairs and improvements (revote), $35,500.
Inverness-maintenance of harbour entrance (revote $24,000), $30,000.
Liverpool-wharf, $35,000.
Liverpool-redredging (revote), $70,000. Livingstone Cove-wharf reconstruction, $60,000.
Lunenburg (Battery Point)-Towards breakwater reconstruction, $23,000.
McCreadyville-replacing harbour facilities (revote $25,000), $99,000.
McDonald's Cove-breakwater (revote $38,000), $48,000.
Mauger's Beach-replacing protection of Halifax harbour (revote .$25,000), $65,000.
Meteghan-breakwater replacement (revote), $60,000.
Mill Cove-breakwater extension, $67,000. Neil's Harbour-breakwater repairs, $135,000. Newellton-wharf repairs (revote), $21,000. New Glasgow-wharf repairs (revote $70,500), $80,000.
New Harbour^-breakwater reconstruction (revote $46,000), $55,000.
North Sydney.-breakwater repairs, $34,000. North West Cove-(Seatari Island)-breakwater reconstruction, $70,000.
North West Cove (Tancook)-breakwater extension, $25,000.
Parker's Cove-harbour repairs and improvements (revote), $124,000.
Petite Riviere-breakwater repairs, $27,000. Pietou-towards restoration of harbour facilities (revote $10,000), $136,000.
Pietou Island-breakwater-wharf replacement (revote), $111,000.
Port Felix-wharf replacement, $20,000.
Port Hawkesbury-wharf repairs (revote $144,000), $149,000.
Port Maitland-breakwater reconstruction (revote), $95,500.
Pugwash-wharf repairs (revote $136,100), $139,500.
Sandford-breakwater extension (revote $118,000), $123,000.
Seal Harbour-dredging (revote), $78,000. Seaside (Harbour View)-breakwater replacement, $25,000.
Shad Bay-wharf replacement, $11,000.
Short Beach-breakwater repairs (revote),
[Stage Direction]
Three Fathom Harbour-causeway (revote),
[Stage Direction]
Trout Cove (Centreville)-breakwater reconstruction (revote), $54,000.
371.	Westport-wharf repairs, $36,000.
Prince Edward Island-
372.	Canoe Cove-breakwater repairs, $22,000. Charlottetown-towards wharf reconstruction
and improvements, $250,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $35,000, $90,000.
Launching Pond-boat harbour (revote $50,000), $74,000,
Little Sands-wharf reconstruction, $70,000. Montague-wharf reconstruction (revote), $26,000.
North Lake-reconstruction of breakwaters, $73,000.
Red Head-harbour improvements, $7,000. Souris-breakwater repairs, $50,000. Summerside-railway wharf-repairs to wharf and reconstruction of shed (revote $7,000), $90,000.
Summerside-to take over and reconstruct Holman's wharf, $35,000.
Tignish-repairs to breakwaters (revote $63,400), $90,000.
Wood Islands-wharf improvements (revote $67,000), $192,000.
New Brunswick-
373.	Baie Ste. Anne-wharf (revote), $96,000 Bathurst-wharf repairs, $60,000.
Bay du Vin River-wharf extension (revote $2,000), $3,000.
Caissie's Cape-breakwater reconstruction and dredging (revote), $94,000.
Campbellton-dredging, $100,000.
Caraquet (Young Wharf)-dredging (revote), $23,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $65,000, $160,000.
Leonardville-wharf reconstruction (revote), $90,000.
Little Cape-breakwater replacement (revote), $150,000.
Petit Rocher-breakwater repairs, $160,000. Point Sapin-breakwater repairs (revote), $10,000.
Richibucto Cape-repairs and improvements to harbour works (revote $1,200), $5,500.
St. Olivier-wharf reconstruction (revote), $26,000.
Seal Cove-repairs to breakwaters (revote $19,000), $23,000.
Shippigan-Savoy Landing-towards wharfage facilities, subject to an agreement to be entered into with the provincial government as to division of costs (revote $100,000), $120,000. Stonehaven-breakwater repairs, $36,000. Welchpool-wharf replacement (revote $150,000), $203,000.
Quebec-
374.	Baie de la Trinite-dredging, $142,000. Baie Comeau-towards wharf improvements
(revote $150,000), $500,000.
Barachois de Malbaie (Bridgeville)-Jetty reconstruction (revote $130,000), $150,000.
Beauharnois-wharf reconstruction (revote).
[Stage Direction]
Cap Chat-towards wharf extension (revote $100,000), $400,000.
Chandler-towards wharf extension, subject to contribution by the Gaspesia Sulphite Company (revote $80,000), $350,000.
Entry Island, Magdalen Islands-wharf (revote $22,500), $37,000.
Fame Point (Point & la Renommee)-slipway (revote), $3,300.
Gascons Ouest (L'Anse h la Barbe)-reconstruction of jetties-(revote $55,000), $62,000. Grand Entree-breakwater and slip, $52,900 Grande Riviere-wharf reconstruction (revote), $145,000.
Grande Riviere-dredging entrance channel $135,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for mainten ance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $125,000, $425,000.
Isle aux Coudres-improvements to wharves (revote $164,400), $214,000.

Supply-Public Works
Isle aux Grues-wharf replacement (revote $80,000), $103,000.
Kamouraska-wharf reconstruction (revote $15,000), $18,000.
L'Anse 4 Brillant-harbour improvements, $16,000.
L'Anse St. Jean-wharf repairs (revote $138,-OOO), $162,500.
Les Eboulements-breakwater, $18,100.
Les Escoumains-wharf repairs, $21,800.
L'Islet

wharf repairs, $28,400.
Lotbiniere-harbour improvements, $14,500.
Marsouins-wharf extension (revote), $60,000.
Matane-towards wharf reconstruction, $100,000.
Mont Louis1-shed on wharf, $12,000.
Montmagny-wharf reconstruction, $78,500.
Papineauville (Pentecost Bay)-improvements, $42,400.
Paspebiac-wharf extension and improvements (revote $130,000), $186,500.
Petite Riviere Est-harbour improvements (revote $38,000), $50,000.
Pointe Basse, Magdalen Islands-breakwater-wharf replacement (revote), $68,000.
Quebec-completion of the reconstruction of the intercepting sewer-to implement the agreement entered into in 1939 (revote), $215,000.
Rimouski-wharf reconstruction and extension (revote $200,000), $405,000.
Riviere au Tonnerre-dredging, $58,000.
Riviere du Loup-wharf reconstruction (revote $125,000), $400,000.
Riviere Penteeote-redredging, $110,000.
Riviere St. Paul-wharf (revote $79,300), $140,000.
Riviere Whalen (Cap des Rosiers)-fishing harbour (revote $100,000), $300,000.
Ruisseau Chapados-harbour improvements, $55,000.
Ruisseau LeBlanc-breakwater reconstruction (revote), $147,000.
Ste. Anne des Monts-towards wharf reconstruction and extension (revote $318,100). $500,000.
St. Charles-wharf reconstruction (revote $24,800), $41,000
St. Ignace de Loyola-reconstruction of pier, $55,000.
St. Juste du Lac-wharf improvements (revote), $5,000.
St. Omer-wharf repairs (revote), $45,000.
St. Simeon-wharf reconstruction (revote), $95,000.
Sorel-harbour repairs, $26,200.
Trois Pistoles-wharf extension and dredging (revote $76,000), $100,000.
VeTcheres-retaining wall, $30,000.
Ontario-
375.	Belle River-reconstruction of training wall, $34,000.
Bracebridge-redredging, the provincial government to bear a like amount (revote), $42,000.
Britt-wharf (revote $9,500), $13,500.
Brockville-breakwater reconstruction, $138.000.
Bronte-reconstruction of piers (revote $37,-OOO), $212,000.
Byng Inlet-wharf (revote $9,600), $13,500.
Cockburn Island-reconstruction of harbour works (revote $22,500), $56,000.
Collingwood-harbour reconstruction and improvements (revote $63,000), $75,000.
Fort William-dredging	(revote $31,000),
[Stage Direction]
Gananoque-wharf extension, $8,600.
Hamilton-towards harbour improvements (revote), $300,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $75,000, $275,000.
Kenora-repairs to wharves (revote $42,000), $58,000.
Kincardine-repairs to piers, $30,000.
Kingsville-harbour repairs and improvements (revote $111,000), $140,000.
Little Current-site for wharf (revote), $25,000.
Macdiarmid-breakwater repairs, $15,000.
Meaford-revetment wall (revote), $7,000.
Midland to Parry Sound-towards dredging inside channel (revote), $200,000.
Morson-wharf replacement (revote $7,400), $10,500.
North Bay-wharf improvements, $10,000.
Ottawa (Rideau river)-repairs to walls and tailrace (revote $41,000), $64,000.
Pelee Island-wharf improvements (revote), $28,000.
Penetanguishene-harbour improvements (revote $24,000), $87,000.
Port Arthur-dredging (revote $231,000), $340,000.
Port Arthur-breakwater (revote $210,000), $300,000.
Port Bruce-reconstruction of pier (revote $28,000), $38,000.
Port Burwell-reconstruction of pier, $110,000.
Port Colborne-breakwater repairs (revote $25,000), $34,000.
Port Dover-cheekwater repairs and extension, $8,000.
Port Elgin-breakwater repairs (revote $71,200), $78,000.
Port Hope-harbour repairs (revote $121,000), $200,000.
Port Rowan-harbour repairs and improvements (revote $29,000), $33,000.
Redwood Road-wharf (revote), $4,500.
Salmon Point-breakwater extension (revote $13,000), $17,100.
Sand Point-wharf repairs, $39,000.
South Baymouth-harbour improvements (revote $45,000), $100,000.
Sturgeon Falls-wharf extension (revote), $8,400.
Tobermory-wharf and dredging (revote), $45,000.
Toronto-harbour maintenance (revote), $45,-
[Stage Direction]
Wallaceburg-extension to wharf and warehouse, $31,500.
Whitby-repairs to harbour works, $230,000. Manitoba-
376.	Assiniboine river-dyking and cut off (revote $40,000), $61,000.
Gimli-wharf reconstruction (revote), $35,000.
Harbours and rivers generally

for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, $50,000.
Hnausa-wharf reconstruction (revote $100,000), $115,000.
Matlock-breakwater reconstruction (revote $6,000), $44,000.
Mill Creek-reconstruction of dam (revote). $1,500.
St.	Andrews-river	breakwater (revote
[Stage Direction]
St. Andrews lock and dam-improvements to bridge (revote), $35,000.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
The Pas-wharf reconstruction, $55,060.
Victoria Beach-wharf repairs (revote), $60,000.
Winnipegosis-wharf reconstruction (revote $4,060), $6,000.
Winnipegosisi-wharf and haulout slip, $24,000.
Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest Territories-
377.	Bell Rock (Fort Smith) Northwest Territories-wharf, $200,000.
Cold Lake, Alberta-harbour improvements (revote $6,'000), $23,000.
Fort Fitzgerald, Alberta-wharf repairs and extension, $95,000.
Fort Franklin, Northwest Territories-wharf repairs and extension, $22,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, $25,000.
Waskesiu Lake, Saskatchewan'-harbour improvements (revote), $65,000.
Waterways, Alberta-reconstruction of wing dams,, $23,000.
Yellowknife, Northwest Territories-wharf revote), $23,000.
British Columbia and Yukon-
378.	Bella Coola-wharf replacement (revote), $146,000.
Campbell River-fishing harbour (revote),
[Stage Direction]
Campbell river1-wharf repairs and extension (revote $33,000), $132,000.
Chemainus-harbour improvements, $10,000.
Columbia river-protection work, $37,000.
Ford's Cove (Hornby Island)-breakwater and float (revote), $14,000.
Fraser river-towards improvements (revote $175,000), $300,000.
Fraser River1-reconstruction of north arm jetty, $40,000.
Fraser river and Vancouver harbour-dredging (revote), $400,000.
Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $75,000, $426,000.
Heat's island-pierhead replacement, $12i,000.
Nanaimo-wharf repairs and improvements (revote $8,000), $24,000.
New Westminster-wharf reconstruction and extension (revote $18,000), $125,000.
Port Alberni-harbour improvements (revote $40,000), $450,000.
Port Clements-wharf repairs, $38,000.
Prince Rupert-roadway and renewal of fishermen's floats (revote $30,000), $72,000.
Rusfcin-wharf replacement, $8,000.
Sandspit-wharf renewal, $75,000.
Sechelt-wharf repairs and improvements (revote $23,000), $56,000.
Sointula-harbour improvements (revote $45,000), $50,000.
Stewart-wharf repairs (revote $43,500), $65,000.
Vananda-wharf replacement, $65,000.
Victoria-dredging (revote), $122,000.
Westview-replacing fishing harbourage (revote), $133,000.
White Rock-wharf repairs (revote), $44,000.
Generally-
379.	Protection works generally-to provide for remedial works where damages are caused by, or endanger, navigation or federal government structures, $260,000.
Telegraph branch-
380.	Branch administration, $46,376.
381.	Telephone service at Ottawa, $4d 5,000.
382.	Telephone service other than at Ottawa, $10,400.
Telegraph and telephone services, operation and maintenance-
383.	Lower St. Lawrence and maritime provinces, $135,000.
384.	Alberta and Saskatchewan, $149,554.
385.	Division superintendent's office

Van-couver, $42,100.
386.	British 'Columbia and Yukon, $730,000.
387.	Telegraph and telephone services generally, $5,000.
Telegraph and telephone services, construction and improvements-
388.	Cable for Bay of Fundy district (revote), $28,000.
389.	For the purchase of the portion of the Pacific communication system taken over by the dominion government (revote), $75,000.
390.	Purchase and installation of submarine cable to connect Shippigan and Miscou Islands with the mainland (revote), $11,000.
391.	Extension of telephone lines in Matapedia -Matane county, P.Q., $4,500.
General-
392.	National Gallery of Canada, $148,668.
393.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for, not more than $5,000 to be expended upon any one work, $200,000.
394.	To supplement on approval of treasury board except where less than $500 is required, any of the appropriations of the Department of Public Works, $200,000.
395.	To provide for balances required to complete any projects undertaken in previous fiscal years and for which no specific provision is made in the fiscal year 1048-49, $25,000.
816.	Departmental administration - further amount required, $10,440.
Architectural branch-
817.	Ottawa-maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc.- further amount required. $1,300,000.
818.	Maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc.-further amount required, $1,730,000.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-Nova Scotia-
819.	Annapolis Royal public building-repairs and improvements-further amount required, $6,000.	_	_ _
Dartmouth public building-addition and alterations, $20,000.
Dominion-public building, $25,000.
Glace Bay public building-'improvements and repairs (revote $3,600), $6,000.

Supply-Public Works
Halifax-accommodation for customs, $100,006.
Halifax-Eastern air command buildings- alterations, improvements and repairs, $110,000.
Halifax customs building-improvements and elevator

further amount required, $11,000,
Halifax postal station at north endi-further amount required, $16,000.
Hantsport public building-addition and alterations, ,$14,000.
Kentville public building-addition and alterations, $10,000.
Kingston-public building, $25,000.
Truro public building-'improvements and repairs (revote $6,100), $13,000.
New Brunswick-
820.	Moncton public building-addition and alterations, $50,000.
North Head public building-addition and alterations, $25,000.
Sackville public building-addition and alterations, $15,000.
820.	Saint John post office-addition, alterations and improvements-further amount required, $75,000.
St. Leonard-customs and immigration buildings, $50,000.
St. Stephen-site for public building, $20,000.
West Saint John-terminal building for customs and immigration-further amount required, $500,000'.
Prince Edward Island-
821.	Summerside-public building, $50,000. Maritime provinces generally-
822. Dominion public	buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $300,000.
Quebec-
823.	Armstrong-customs and1 immigration building-further amount required. $25,000.
Blaie Comeau-public building, $90,000.
Chandler-public building, $25,000.
Cowansville-public building, $50,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $300,000.
Donnaconna-public building, $35,000.
Drummondville-public building, $121,000.
Granby public building-addition, alterations and improvements, $15,000.
Joliette public building-addition-further amount required, $25,000.
Lacolle (Blackpool)-building for customs- further amount required, $210,000.
Maniwaki public building-addition	and
alterations, $25,000.
Magog public building-alterations and improvements-further amount required, $18,000.
Masson-public building, $35,000.
Matane public building-addition, alterations and improvements, $50,000.
Mont Joli-public building, $50,000.
Montmagny-public building, $50,000.
Montreal1-Hoehelaga postal station-addition and improvements1-further amount required, $45,000.
Montreal-Longueuil postal station-addition and alterations, $50,000.
Montreal-Notre Dame de Grace postal station-addition and1 alterations, $56,000.
Montreal-old examining warehouse-addition, alterations and improvements (revote), $25,000.
Montreal postal terminal-parcel storage system-further amount required, $20,000.
Montreal-purchase of, and alterations to, building for Department of National Revenue, $360,000.
Quebec-old post office building-elevators (revote $73,000), $75,000.
Rimouski-public building, $60,000.
St. Felicien-site for public building, $5,000.
St. Georges de Beauce-addition to public building site, $15,000'.
St. Henri de Levis-public building, $25,000.
Ste. Therese de Blainville public building- addition and alterations, $25,000.
Sherbrooke-public building-further amount required, $150,000.
Thetford Mines and public building-addition, alterations and repairs (revote $30,000), $100,000.
Val d'Or-public building, $100,000.
Ontario-
821. Barrie-public building-(revote $20,-OOO), $80,000.
Chapleau-public building, $25,000.
Chatham

public building, $50,000.
Cornwall-public building. $50,000.
Delhi-public building, $25,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $300,000.
Dundas public building-ad-idtion and alterations, $20,000.
Fergus public building-addition and alterations, $20,000.
Fort Erie-customs building-addition and alterations, $50,000.
Gerald'ton-public building, $24,500.
Kenora public building-addition, alterations and improvements-further amount required, $54,000.
Little Current-public building, $50,000.
Ottawa-addition to mines and resources site on Carling avenue-further amount required, $10,000.
Ottawa-central heating plant-repairs and replacements-further amount required, $45,000.
824.	Ottawa-departmental office building- further amount required, $350,000.
Ottawa-East Block

improvements, $165,000-.
Ottawa-improvements to heating in Woods and Canadian buildings, $70,000.
Ottawa-National	Research Building-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $55,000.
Ottawa - Parliament Buildings - improvements-'further amount required, $23,000.
Pembroke-public building, $25,000.
Peterborough-public building, $50,000.
Pieton-public building-addition and alterations, $25,000.
Port Colborne public building-addition and alterations, $26,000.
S-ault Ste. Marie public building

further amount required, $150,000.
Teeumseh-public building, $31,000.
Toronto city delivery building-extension, restoration, mechanical equipment and addition to site-further amount required, $76,000.
Toronto-postal station "E", $30,000.
Waterloo public building-addition, alterations and improvements-further amount required, $8,000.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
Manitoba-
825.	Brandon public building-addition and alterations, $36,000.
Dominion public	buildings-improvements
and repairs-further amount required, $100,000.
Flin Flon-public building, $100,006.
Grandview-public building, $49,000.
Pine Falls-public building, $35,000.
Winnipeg immigration building-repairs and improvements, $25,000.
Winnipeg postal station "A"-improvements -further amount required, $12,500. Saskatchewan-
826. Dominion public	buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $100,000.
Ituna-public building, $25,000.
Nipawin public building-addition and alterations-further amount required, $15,000.
North Portal-site for building for customs and immigration-further amount required, $25,000.	.
Regina public building-improvements and repairs, $30,000.
Rosetown-public building, $25,000.
St. Walburg-public building, $20,000. Alberta-
827. Calgary-accommodation for Department of Trade and Commerce-further amount required, $10,000'.
Chief Mountain-customs and immigration building, $75,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $100,000.
Leduc-public building, $25,900.
Macleod

public building, $25,000.
Red Deer-public building, $50,000.
British Columbia-
828.	Chilliwack public building-addition and alterations

further amount required, $30,000.
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $150,000.
Duncan public building-alterations and improvements-further amount required, $6,000.
H-aney

public building, $47,000.
Kingsgate

customs and immigration building,
[Stage Direction]
Ladner-site for public building-further amount required, $5,000.
Langley Prairie-public building, $75,000.
Ocean Falls-public building, $40,000.
Smithers-public building, $25,000.
Vancouver immigration building-alterations and improvements, $35,000.
Vancouver-Alvin estates building-purchase, alterations and extension, $800,000.
Vaneouver-Begg building-purchase, alterations and extension, $1,060,000.
Vancouver-site for building for customs- further amount required, $130,000.
Victoria astropbysieal observatory-repairs, alterations and improvements-further amount required, $5,000.
Whiterock-public building, $20,000.
Generally-
829.	National printing bureau - further amount required, $400,000.
830.	Dominion immigration buildings-repairs, improvements, etc.-further	amount
required, $80,000.
831.	Experimental farms and science laboratories-replacements, repairs and improvements to buildings-further amount required, $100,000.
832.	Accommodation for the taxation division of the Department of National Revenue, $2,000,000.
833.	Public buildings generally-repairs, alterations, fittings and improvements-further amount required, $500,000.
Engineering Branch-
834.	Branch administration-further amount required, $2,500.
835.	Engineering, including salaries of engineers, clerks, etc.-further amount required, $80,000.
Dredging-
836.	Ontario and Quebec-further amount required, $330,000.
837.	British Columbia and Yukon-further amount required, $118,100.
838.	Locks and dams-further amount required, $30,000.
Maintenance and Operation of Graving Docks, Locks and Dams, etc.-
839.	Snagboats-further amount required, $5,240.
Nova Scotia-
840.	Ballan-tyne's Cove-breakwater repairs- further amount required, $16,000.
Battery Point-breakwater extension, $20,000. Canso-wharf reconstruction (revote $14,000), $20,500.
Dover-wharf extension, $27,000.
East Ferry-breakwater replacement, $60,000. Grand Etang-pier extension, $16,000.
Little Anse-breakwater replacement (revote $148,000), $210,000.
North West Cove (Tancook)-breakwater extension-further amount required, $10,000.
Pictou-towards restoration of harbour facilities-further amount required, $106,000.
Pugwash-towards wharf repairs and dredging-further amount required, $50,000.
Seal Harbour-dredging-further amount required, $65,000.
Wadden Cove-breakwater replacement, $13,500.
West Dublin-towards dredging, $20,000. Yarmouth Bur-towards breakwater reconstruction, $100,000.
Prince Edward Island
[Stage Direction]
841.	Annandale-boat basin, $12,000.
Fishing Cove (Cape Egmont)-wharf and
breakwater, $47,000.
Montague - wh arf	reconstruction - further
amount required, $8,300.
New Brunswick-
842.	Baracho-is- wharf improvements and dredging, $25,000.
Blue Cove-'towards breakwater repairs, $40,000.
Botsford-towards breakwater extension, $50,000.
Buc-touche-towards dredging, $75,000.
Burnt C-huroh-towards wharf repairs, $25,000.
Caraquet-towards harbour improvements,
[Stage Direction]
Chockfish-wharf, $13,000.
Cocagne Bar (Cormie-rville)

towards breakwater-wharf, $25,000.	_
Escuminac-breakwater repairs, $30,000. Escuminac-boat haul-up, $20,000.
Little Shippigan-wharf extension, $70,000.

Supply-Public Works
Mace's Bay-towards breakwater, $100,000.
M-alloch's beach - breakwater extension, $65,000.	.
Neguac Church-towards wharf extension, $50,000.
St. Andrews

towards wharf improvements,
[Stage Direction]
Seal cove-towards breakwater, $100,000.
Shippigan-Savoy Landing-towards wharfage facilities, subject to an agreement to be entered into with the provincial government as to division of costs-further amount required, $85,000.
Traeadie-wharf, $21,000.
Quebec-
843.	Bagotville-wharf reconstruction (revote), $60,000.
Bale de la Trinite-dredging-further amount required, $28,000.
Baie des Sables-towards wharf extension, $50,000.
Barachois de Malabaie (Bridgeville)-jetty reconstruction - further amount required, $40,000.
Blanc Sablon-towards wharf, $125,000.
Cap Sante

wharf reconstruction, $30,000.
Cloridorme-towards wharf, $50,000.
Cross Point-jetty extension, $21,500.
Grande Riviere-dredging entrance channel- further amount required, $60,000.
Grande Vallee-towards deepwater wharf, $50,000.
Lake Checobi-wharf, $6,500.
Lac Tremblant-wharf, $30,000.
La Tabatiere-wharf extension, $43,000.
Levis-reconstruction of wharf, $200,000.
Montmorency-wharf enlargement, $12,000.
Natashquan-wharf reconstruction and improvements, $173,000.
Notre-Dame du Portage-towards wharf reconstruction. $50,000.
Pointe Basse, M.I.-breakwater-wharf replacement-further amount required, $45,000.
Port Daniel-towards fishing harbour, $50,000.
Quebec, inner Louise basin-wharf repairs, $30,000.
Richelieu River-dredging, $207,000.
Riviere au Tonnerre - dredging - further amount required, $30,000.
Riviere Colombier (Anse Noire)-wharf enlargement, $30,000.
Riviere Quelle (Pointe aux Orignaux)-towards wharf reconstruction, $100,000.
Riviere Pentecote - redredging - further amount required, $20,000.
Riviere St. Paul-shed, $19,000.
Ste. Anne des Monts-towards wharf reconstruction and extension-further amount required, $600,000.
St. Francois du Lac-wharf repairs, $32,000.
St. Jean, I.O.-towards wharf reconstruction, $25,000.
St. Joseph d'Alma-wharf reconstruction, $18,400.
St. Michel de Bellechasse-wharf repairs, $52,000.
Sorel-harbour improvements, $355,000. Ontario-
844.	Belleville - harbour improvements, $7,000.
Britt - wharf - further amount required, $2,600.
Christian Island-wharf extension, $16,000.
Collingwood-harbour reconstruction and improvements-further amount required, $200,000.
Dryden-wharf, $38,000.
Fort William-dredging-further amount required, $95,000.
Goderich

redredging and repairs to harbour works, $228,000.
Grand River Conservation Scheme-contribution towards costs of preliminary plans, test drilling, etc., in connection with proposed dam on the Conestoga river (revote), $8,000.
Haileybury-repairs to harbour works, $24,000.
Hamilton-towards harbour improvements- further amount required, $500,000.
Honora-wharf replacement, $8,500.
Island Grove-wharf, $23,000.
Kenora-repairs to wharves-further amount required, $16,000.
Kincardine-repairs to piers-further amount required, $18,000.
Kingsville-harbour repairs and improvements

further amount required, $45,000.
Loon Lake-wharf, $8,300.
Midland to Parry Sound-towards dredging inside channel-further amount required, $40,000.	. .
Montreal River-to complete wharfage facilities, $4,500.	.
Nighthawk River-contribution towards improvements, $10,000.
Nipigon-wharf extension and dredging, $65,500.
Owen Sound - harbour improvements, $105,000.
Pelee Island-towards wharf reconstruction, $50,000.
Port Arthur-breakwater-further amount required, $175,000.
Port Colborne-breakwater repairs-further amount required, $60,000.
Riviere des Mille lies-dredging, $40,000.
Rondeau (Eriaaiu)-repairs to piers, $85,000.
Sheguindah - dredging (revote $i3,000),
[Stage Direction]
Spanish-wharf extension, $7,200.
Sturgeon Falls-wiharf extension-further amount required, $4,600.
Toronto - towards harbour head wall, $500,000.
Wade's Landing-wharf and dredging, $9,000.
Wheatley (Muddy Creek)-towards fishing harbour, $50,000.
Manitoba-
845.	Assin-iboine river-repairs and improvements to diking, $17,000.
Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northw-est Territories-
846.	Alberta Beach, Alberta-wharf repairs, $24,000.
Bell Rock (Fort Smith) N.W.T.-wharf- further amount required, $33,000.
Fort Fitzgerald, Alberta-wharf repairs and extension-further amount required, $58,000.
British Columbia and Yukon-
847.	Balmoral-wharf, $14,000.
Billings Bay (Nelson Island)-float, $7,000.
Campbell River-wharf replacement, $132,000.
Chemainus-harbour improvement-further amount required (revote $6,700), $8,000.
Comox-towards wharf replacement, $100,000.
Davis Bay (Wilson Creek)-breakwater and float, $17,000.
Fraser River-towards improvements-further amount required, $350,000.
Supply-Public Works
[Stage Direction]
Fraser River-Remedial work on Lulu and Sea islands (revote), $31,000.
Fraser River (Kirkland Island)-extension of channel protection, $13,000.
Gambier Island (Camp Georgia)-wharf, $24,000.
Harrison River-extension to shear boom,
[Stage Direction]
Nanaimo-toward dredging, $60,000.
Nanaimo-wharf repairs and improvements -further amount required, $12,000.
Okanagan Flood Control Project-dominion government's share of preliminary costs, $75,000.
Port Alberni-towards dredging, $40,000.
Port Alberni

harbour improvements-further amount required, $34,000.
Prince Rupert (F-airview Bay)-towards breakwater, $75,000.
Robert's Creek-wharf repairs and improvements- (revote $20,400), $100,000.
Squamish-towards wharf repairs and improvements, $50,000.
Tofino-harbour repairs and improvements,
[Stage Direction]
Trail-landing, $8,000.
Ucluelet West-floats, $7,500.
Victoria - dredging - further amount required, $30,000.
Yukon-
848.	Lewes river-towards taking over, reconstructing and maintaining dam, $40,000.
Generally-
849.	Protection works generally-to provide for remedial works where damages are caused by, or endanger navigation or federal government structures-further amount required, $100,000.
Telegraph and telephone services, operation and maintenance-
850.	Lower St. Lawrence and maritime provinces-further amount required, $50,000.
851.	Telegraph and telephone services generally-further amount required, $2,000.
Telegraph and telephone services, construction and improvements-
852.	Alert Bay-Kelsey Bay, B.C.-improvements to telephone line, $5,000.
853.	Ashcroft-150 Mile House, B.C.-improvements to telephone line, $23,000.
854.	Chatham 

 Escuminae, N.B. - improvements to telephone line, $20,000.
855.	Boularderie island-to purchase and deliver telegraph poles subject to agreement with local telephone companies to take over and undertake future maintenance of line, $8,000.
856.	Quesnel, B.C.

purchase of Quesnel telephone system, $8,000.
857.	Extension of telephone lines in Mata-pedia-Matane county, P.Q.-further amount required, $9,520.
858.	Dawson Creek-Pouce Coupe, B.C.- telephone lines-improvements, $96,500.
859.	Port Alberni-Bamfield. B.C.-addition to telegraph and telephone facilities, $45,000.
860.	Port Renfrew-Shawinigan Lake, B.C.- telephone line, $45,700.
861. Quesnel-Baker Creek, B.C.-telephone line, $9,000.
862.	Smithers, B.C.-purchase of telephone exchange, $2,500.
863.	St. Cyprien-Ste. Justine, P.Q.-telephone line-repairs and improvements, $3,200.
864.	National Gallery of Canada-further amount required, $32,500.
865.	To provide for balances to complete any projects undertaken in previous fiscal years and for which no specific provision is made in the fiscal year 1948-49-further amount required, $25,000.
935. To provide for repair of flood damage to federal government structures and telegraph and telephone lines and for redredging of filled-in channels, $550,000.

[Stage Direction]
68.	Departmental administration, $997,990.
69.	Blank -inspection (inspector general of banks' office), $27,408.
70.	Royal Canadian Mint, including the Dominion of Canada assay office, $794,431. Superannuation and retirement benefits-
71.	Superannuation and retirement acts, administration, $220,091.
72.	Government's contribution- to the superannuation fund, $3,730,000.
Public debt charges-servicing of public debt-
73.	Commission for payment of interest on public debt, services of fiscal agents, London, registrar's fees, etc., $439,500.
Miscellaneous grants and contributions-
74.	Canadian General Council of Boy Scouts, $15,000.
. 75. Canadian Council of the Girl Guides Association, $6,000.
76.	Royal Astronomical Society of Canada,
[Stage Direction]
77.	Royal Canadian Academy of Arts, $2,025.
78.	Canadian Writers Foundation, $4,000.
79.	Canadian Olympic Association, $17,500. General
[Stage Direction]
80.	Tariff board, including the dominion trade and industry commission

payments may be made notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act or regulations, $94,740.
81.	To provide for the expenses of the Comptroller of the Treasury's office, $9,986,009.
82.	Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, 1943, and Municipal Improvements Assistance Act, 1938, administration, $63,331.
83.	Foreign exchange control board-administration, $268,000.
84.	To grant authority for the payment hereafter, notwithstanding the provisions of the Civil Service Act or any other act or law, and subject to the approval of the governor in council in each case, of a secretarial allowance to each permanent civil servant appointed to perform the duties of principal private secretary to a minister of the crown (or other member of the government, or to the leader of the opposition) , in an amount sufficient to provide, with his permanent salary, annual compensation at a rate equal to the rate approved by the governor in council for such principal private secretaries who are not permanent civil servants, $1.
85.	To provide, subject to the approval of the treasury board, for salaries, reclassifications and increases, $10,000,000.

Supply-Finance
86.	Unforeseen expenses, expenditures thereof to be subject to approval of the treasury board and a detailed statement to be laid before parliament within fifteen days of next session, $80,000.
932. To authorize and to provide for payment of a portion of the costs incurred on or after May 15, 1948, by the government of British Columbia, by the municipal authorities in the Eraser valley and by the departments and agencies of the government of Canada in repairing, strengthening, constructing and reconstructing dikes in the Eraser valley and removing water and debris from the flooded lands in that valley in accordance with an agreement which the government of Canada is hereby authorized to enter into with the government of British Columbia for the purpose of establishing a division of such costs on the basis of the government of Canada bearing seventy-five per _ cent thereof (treasury board is hereby authorized to direct that there be credited to other appropriations of the government of Canada to which any of such costs have been originally charged any amount that would otherwise have been payable by either of the said governments in accordance with such agreement); and to authorize and to provide for payment of seventy-five per cent of the total costs incurred by a board to be known as the "Fraser valley diking board" (such board to be constituted pursuant to an agreement which the government of Canada is hereby authorized to enter into with the government of British Columbia and, when so constituted, to be a body corporate and to have, subject to the joint direction of the government of Canada and the government of British Columbia, the powers, duties and responsibilities provided in such agreement) in carrying on the work of repairing, strengthening, constructing and reconstructing dikes in the Fraser valley and removing water and debris from the flooded lands in that valley, $4,500,006.
933. To authorize and to provide for payment of an emergency unconditional grant to the government of British Columbia to assist that government in meeting costs incurred in providing emergency relief to the residents of the Fraser valley and in rehabilitating the areas damaged by the floods which were declared by order in council dated June 10, 1948 (P.C. 2644) to have created a national disaster, $5,000,000.	.
[Stage Direction]

Wednesday, June 30, 1948