1948-06-22

Mr. MAX CAMPBELL (The Battlefords):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. Last Sunday as I was driving to Montreal, two policemen were stopping all traffic just outside the city limits. One stepped over to my car and handed me a ticket for some police benefit and asked me to buy it. I think this is something the public should not be asked to tolerate. I spoke to another motorist who had been stopped in the same way and he told me that when he refused to buy a ticket the police took the number of his car. I protest against that sort of action by municipal police, and I think the Minister of Justice (Mr. Usley) might notify the police commission of Montreal that Canadians do not want that sort of thing.
MR. MACDONNELL-SPECIAL EXCISE TAX - REFERENCE TO REPORT IN OTTAWA "EVENING citizen"


Mr. J. M. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege, last evening at eleven o'clock I drew the attention of the house to a statement in the Ottawa Evening Citizen that a "highly-placed informant" had told the Canadian Press that the government had decided to withdraw the special 25 per cent excise tax. I said that if that were true I considered it a gross breach of the privileges of the house, a gross budget leak and a monkey wrench thrown into Canadian business. I said that I would bring up the matter again this morning and ask for a statement. I said that if that statement were true, exemplary treatment should be given to the person or persons responsible.
I think we are getting tired of government not only by radio announcement but by newspaper announcement. I suggest to hon. members of the house in every quarter that when they read about this highly-placed informant they contrast in their minds the very lowly place of the representatives of the people as against the highly-placed informant who is a servant of the government.


Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend, as he said, was good enough to give me newspaper notice of his intention to raise this question. The statement to which he referred was called to my attention at six o'clock yesterday evening. I had been working in treasury board on the supplementary estimates during the afternoon, and had not seen the afternoon papers. I was in the house at half past ten o'clock, but I left at twenty minutes to eleven. However, I am glad to make a statement as suggested by my hon. friend.	.
I would point out to the house something of which it is well aware. It is most unusual for a minister of finance or any other minister either to confirm or to deny rumours of this kind. But in view of the widespread publicity which has been given to this rumour and the statement of my hon. friend, I have no alternative but to say that the rumour is without foundation.
I understand that my hon. friend used the words "flouting of parliament" in his statement to the house yesterday evening.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: If it were true.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Allow me to make a speech, please. He used the words, "flouting of parliament", and asked whether it was true that these taxes might be removed by order in council. I have to paraphrase his words, because I have not Hansard before me; it is not yet available. But the hon. member used some such words. He said that if it were true that these taxes might be removed by order in council, it would be flouting parliament.
I want to call the attention of the house to the fact that when the tax bill was introduced I pointed out in clear and specific terms that the taxes were of a special temporary character and that they would be removed as soon as circumstances permitted their removal. I call the attention of the house to subsection 5 of section 1 of Bill No. 172, which reads in part as follows:
The governor in council may, when he deems it advisable either in order to avoid restricting production of goods for export from Canada or otherwise, by proclamation, declare that a section, or a part thereof, in schedule I of the
Inquiries of the Ministry

Excise Tax Act enacted by this act shall cease to have effect on and after a day fixed in the proclamation . . .
I stated repeatedly during the debate on the taxes that these taxes would be removed when circumstances justified their removal. I have had several delegations call on me, and I have reiterated that point to them. All I can say now is that the time when and the extent to which these taxes will be removed is a matter of government policy which will be announced in due course and not by any rumour in the newspapers.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I wish to say that I did not overlook the section referred to by the minister. I am fully aware of that, but this highly-placed informant's statement was to the effect, as I read it, that the tax would be withdrawn in toto. That is why I raised the point. I understand and appreciate the minister's point.



INDIAN AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
Fourth report of the special joint committee on the Indian Act-Mr. Brown.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. A. CHARLTON (Brant):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Agriculture. In view of the fact that the Toronto cattle market is practically closed, with a hold-over of 6.000 head of cattle, will not the government now state their present policy with regard to the embargo on shipments of cattle to the United States?


Mr. ROBERT McCUBBIN (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, the government will announce its policy in due course, and when it does so I know it will be in the interests of the producers of this country.


Mr. ROSS (Souris):: If I may ask a supplementary question, the Minister of Agriculture on his estimates said some months ago that negotiations would be carried on with the United States with respect to the quota and lifting the embargo. May I ask what progress has been made in those negotiations?


Robert McCubbin: Good progress has been made, but we are not ready yet to make an announcement.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. PAUL MARTIN	(Minister of
National Health and Welfare): Mr. Speaker, on Friday last the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) called my attention to what he said was an error in that I had placed on record the financial statement of the national physical fitness administration for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1647. Actually the statement was for 1948, but there was a misprint in the title of the statement.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question either to the Prime Minister or to the Minister of Finance, relating to a matter of considerable public interest and concern? Will the Prime Minister or the Minister of Finance reconcile the statement of the Minister of Finance to me a week ago, that there would be no return to subsidies to keep down the cost of Living, with the reported statement of the Prime Minister that he agreed with the member for Waterloo North (Mr. Breithaupt) that there should be subsidies to keep down the cost of living.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I am very happy my hon. friend has raised that question. It gives me a chance to say that I have never made any statement to the member for Waterloo North relating to subsidies. The question of subsidies was never mentioned by me.
May I say that there have been no end of statements attributed to me in the press in the last few days which are wholly unfounded and untrue. I have read one statement to the effect that after that so-called- interview the other day in my office I had gone to council chamber and there had been a scene there with the Minister of Finance. I have my colleagues sitting around me at the present time, and I say we never had a pleasanter meeting of council than we had that day.
I read the other day in another paper that I had read the Minister of Finance a lecture, that I had told him that he must be more human, and had given him a list of items on which the excise duties must be removed, and so forth.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Hear, hear.

Inquiries of the Ministry


William Lyon Mackenzie King: My hon, friend says "hear, hear." He is echoing these anonymous statements in the press that are without any foundation whatsoever. I have never read the Minister of Finance a lecture in my life, nor has he ever read me one. We each respect the other far too much to act as school boys in a matter relating to public business, and I hope my hon. friend will not follow the example of the press in the particular I have mentioned.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Then is there to be no change in government policy with respect to the still rising cost of living?



INQUIRY AS TO NOVA SCOTIA MINES WORKING HALF-TIME

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to address a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce? Has it been brought to his attention that four small operating coal companies in Nova Scotia, employing some eight hundred men, are working half-time because of a lack of markets? Can he explain why Canadian mines should be idle while there are heavy imports of coal from the United1 States?


Right Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: There may be several reasons for the lack of markets. One of these small operators called on me a few days ago and made the same statement. I asked him if he had interviewed the coal board, and he said no. I suggested that he do so. He did so, and the board pointed out markets he could easily reach under the usual subvention policy. He went to those markets and sold coal and went back home. Perhaps if the other operators would do the same, the situation wrouId not appear so serious.



CIVIL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Justice yet in a position to answer the questions put to him on Saturday about the questionnaire being circulated in certain departments of the government?


Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Justice):: I am prepared to answer that question; in fact, I have been seeking an opportunity for the last few minutes.
With reference to the questions asked on Saturday, June 19, by the hon. member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker) and the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), the government are aware of the concern felt by members generally in the matter of the security of government employees. For that reason it is felt to be advisable that a general statement on the subject should be made.
The government is acutely aware of its responsibility in relation to security within the government service, and administrative measures have been taken to ensure the safety of the state in this respect. These measures do not interfere with traditional principles of just treatment.
In the government's view, loyalty is not susceptible to any precise series of tests. Accordingly, after careful consideration, it was decided not to set up an elaborate organization, as had been done elsewhere, to determine and adjudicate upon the loyalty of government employees. As was indicated to the House of Commons by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent) on April 14, 1947 (Hansard, page 1993), an interdepartmental panel on security, composed of officials from departments and agencies of government, was set up some time ago to advise on the coordination of the planning, organization and execution of security measures generally which affect government departments. These measures necessarily include the devising of the best methods of carrying out inquiries concerning applicants for government employment in order to determine their suitability from a security point of view. The security panel advises on measures and methods. It does not deal with individual cases.
With regard to the so-called questionnaires, there are, of course, a number of forms used by departments for ordinary administrative purposes as a necessary part of their personnel management. In addition, forms are in use in some departments for the purpose of assembling relevant information concerning persons whose duties include work of a secret character. The use of these so-called questionnaires for security purposes is merely a means of facilitating the work of those who have to make the necessary inquiries. They are employed only for persons in positions of trust and not for the great majority of government employees. In some cases the information required can be and is obtained from departmental personnel records and from the records of the civil service commission. In other cases, the information is requested
5630	COMMONS
Department of National Defence Act
of the employees themselves by means of questionnaires. The completion of such forms is not compulsory. They are designed to help those responsible to obtain quickly information which may be helpful in- assessing the suitability of individuals for confidential employment. Incidentally, departmental practice in this respect is under review and I can assure the house that any Objectionable and unnecessary features in such documents, such as questions concerning collateral relatives and any irrelevant inquiry into the private lives of individuals, will not be permitted.
The government is of the opinion that loyalty to the state of employees in positions 6f trust is an essential aspect of the efficient conduct of public administration. Moreover, there are certain duties of such a secret character that the state would not be justified in employing for their performance any person whose trustworthiness is in doubt.
Under the terms of the Civil Service Act and regulations, the civil service commission is required to satisfy itself as to the character and habits of persons appointed by it to government employment. These provisions do not apply to all employees or departments and agencies, nor do they relieve departments of their responsibility for satisfying themselves as to the suitability of individual employees from a security standpoint.
The particular attention of heads of departments and agencies of government has been drawn to their responsibility with respect to the reliability of employees under their charge from the security point of view. A procedure has been approved which will enable them to discharge this responsibility as a part of their normal administrative function.
This is the position of the government with respect to security in relation to government employees generally. There is, however, the special case of those who are members of or associated with the communist party. The government is satisfied, from all the evidence available, that it would be a risk to the security of the state to employ such persons in positions of trust. For this reason, and in the discharge of its primary responsibility for security, the government has decided that no person who is a member of the communist party or associated with it shall be employed in work of a secret character. I may add that the same rule applies to those associated with fascist organizations.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
Mr. HUGUES LAPOINTE (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of National Defence) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to bring in a measure to amend the Department of National Defence Act to release from the consolidated revenue fund certain moneys which were contributed to contingents of the Canadian Officers Training Corps established at various educational institutions throughout Canada by the members thereof by way of assigned pay and- otherwise and by other persons.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
Mr. LAPOINTE:: The purpose of this resolution is merely to introduce legislation amending the Department of National Defence Act by adding a section to it under which certain moneys subscribed to and collected by Canadian Officers Training Corps contingents during the years of war for specific purposes might be released from the consolidated revenue fund and returned to these educational institutions to be used for the purpose for which they were subscribed. During the war, in most universities where C.O.T.C. contingents existed, a voluntary assignment of pay was made by members of the contingents for definite purposes such as buildings for the use of the contingents, establishment of memorial scholarships or bursaries, or such other memorial purposes. To this amount subscribed to by the members of the contingents in some instances subscriptions were made by private individuals for the same purpose. Under the Consolidation Revenue and Audit Act these sums would now be considered public moneys, and as such could not be used for the purposes for which they were subscribed without statutory authority from parliament. This legislation merely seeks to obtain authorization for these contingents to use these funds as intended.
Mr. PEARIvES: Were any of these funds raised through canteens conducted by the officers training corps in the various universities?


Hugues Lapointe: No. None of these funds were collected through canteen funds. They were all assigned pay and public subscriptions.

Insurance Companies Act
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Lapointe thereupon moved to introduce Bill No. 394, to amend the Department of National Defence Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



INSURANCE COMPANIES


[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of Bill No. 350, to amend the Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act, 1932, and the Foreign Insurance Companies Act, 1932.
He said: Mr. Speaker, perhaps a brief word of explanation of this bill should be made.
The first purpose of the bill is to enlarge the powers of Canadian, insurance companies to permit them to invest in mortgages in excess of the usual limit of 60 per cent of the appraised value, where the excess is guaranteed by the government of the province of Ontario under the authority of The Housing Development Ac't, 1948, passed at the la^t session of the Ontario legislature.
At the present time there is authority in The Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act, 1932, for making investment in so-called "excess" mortgages, but only in cases where the excess is insured by the federal housing administrator of the United States of America. The experience under this type of mortgage has been so good that it is considered justifiable to substitute a more general provision for the existing one. The new provision will enable tire companies to participate in the Ontario scheme, or any similar national, provincial or State schemes in countries where they are carrying on business, and in so doing to take advantage of sound investment opportunities.
The second purpose of it he bill is to enlarge to a limited extent the general investment powers of Canadian insurance companies. The steady increase in the funds 'to be invested by the companies has been accompanied by increasing difficulty in finding suitable investments within the prescribed classes. This problem has been the subject of discussion between representatives of the companies and officials of the department of insurance from time to time, but more extensively during the last few months. While the principle of restricting the investments of insurance companies to specified classes is unquestionably desirable, nevertheless new types of sound investments not within the prescribed classes are continually
coming into existence, very often in limited amounts, and frequently the best of them are available for only a short time before being taken up by other investors-sometimes by British and foreign insurance companies possessing wider investment powers. This situation 'has pointed to the desirability of granting to Canadian insurance companies a small degree of freedom in their investment powers, subject always to certain general prohibitions and restrictions, and the effect of subsection 3 of section 1 of the bill is to permit relative freedom up to a limit of three per cent of a company's total assets.
When it is remembered that British insurance companies have practically one hundred per cent freedom, and that their record stands as an example to the insurance world, the proposed limit of three per cent for Canadian companies appears to be reasonable and justifiable. Another consideration pointing to a provision of this kind is that the merits of different investments within a particular class vary greatly, and while some of them may undoubtedly be first grade, it might be unsatisfactory in some cases to authorize specifically that particular class as a whole. In addition, it is becoming more difficult to prescribe satisfactory tests for certain desirable investments.
The record of Canadian insurance company management is such as to merit confidence that the additional powers here conferred will be exercised in the best interests of the policyholders. It is a minor change in the investment powers. I would not undertake to make any substantial change without a great deal more study on the part of the department of insurance to the whole question of insurance companies' investment power.
Motion agreed to. bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section l1-Guaranteed or insured real estate mortgages.
Mr.FRASER: Will this help insurance companies to make it possible for housing to be increased throughout Ontario?
Douglas Charles Abbott: Not only throughout
Ontario. The main purpose is to facilitate greater investment by insurance companies in mortgages on real estate. The section, to which I made special reference, to implement the new act passed in Ontario, enables them to invest in mortgages beyond the present 60 per cent limit if these mortgages are guaranteed by the province, the state or other governmental authority.
Insurance Companies Act


Mr. FRASER:: This will not affect in any way the security of the policyholder?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Not a bit. I think it improves the policyholder's position.


Mr. HACKETT:: Is the guarantee for the whole of the mortgage, or only for the excess over 60 per cent of the appraised value?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can get that information later.


John Thomas Hackett: I am satisfied.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
On section 3-Nature thereof.
Clarence Gillis: When he was making his statement the minister said that this would prevent Canadian companies investing beyond three per cent of their capital or assets, and he pointed out that the British insurance companies had one hundred per cent latitude in any field in which they might wish to invest. Will this section limit the investment of British insurance companies in Canada to the same extent that Canadian companies are limited?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No. This does not affect the investment powers of British insurance companies. British insurance companies doing business in Canada must conform to our requirements with respect to investments, and must deposit with the Receiver General of Canada sufficient approved securities to guarantee their underwritings in Canada. The purpose of section 3 is merely to give the minister, with the approval of treasury board, the right to approve such assets as may be placed in the trust account to secure these underwriting liabilities in Canada.
Of course we have no jurisdiction to affect the investment powers of British or foreign insurance companies. We can say what they have to put up to secure underwriting obligations in Canada. We do in fact do that, and they have to deposit in trust sufficient approved securities to guarantee their obligations here. In section 3 I am adding the words, ''or such other assets as the minister, with the approval of the treasury board, may permit". It has always been the practice that the treasury board should be the body to approve the type of assets, provided they come within the limits in the act. There has been some complaint that under the restrictive provisions of section 3, as it stands, they could not even put up cash to secure their obligations here.


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


[Stage Direction]
Mr. GLEASON BELZILE (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of Bill No. 351, to amend the Quebec Savings Banks Act.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 1-Loans without collateral security.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Will the parliamentary assistant make a statement?


Mr. BELZILE:: Perhaps a brief statement would be in order so as to give the committee some information on the subject.
This bill was introduced in the senate, and it pertains to the Quebec savings banks. The Quebec savings banks are institutions operating under special charters. There are two of them, both operating in that province.
In 1846 the Montreal City and District Savings Bank was founded. Its charter was granted by the Dominion of Canada in 1871. This savings bank operates only in the city and district of Montreal, where it has its head office and twenty-five branches. It has some
300,000	depositors.
The Quebec Savings Bank, or La Basque d'Economie de Quebec, was founded in 1848. It was incorporated in 1855 by an act of the Canadian legislature, and given a dominion charter by 34 Victoria, chapter 7. The Quebec Savings Bank operates only in the city and district of Quebec where it has fourteen branches.
These two banks are real savings banks; that is, they were established for the promotion of thrift and to encourage the regular saving of small amounts. The scope of their operations is limited to receiving deposits, investing them in gilt-edged securities, and granting loans guaranteed by the same kind of securities. They do not cater to the ordinary commercial risks. A clause in their charters stipulates that they must confine their operations to the accommodation of the non-business class of depositors.
There is no service charge of any kind for the granting of loans or for the opening and maintenance of accounts, and clients may issue cheques against their accounts.
For the convenience of their clients, the offices or branches of these banks are kept open to business on week-day evenings. It has been found that the great majority of the clients of

Quebec Savings Banks Act
these banks are of the working class particularly, and that they deposit small weekly or monthly amounts out of their pay cheques. It has been established that they seldom use their savings for ordinary purposes, but that, on the contrary, they will use them only in emergencies such as death, illness, or in special circumstances such as the purchase of a house, outlays for education of children, and the like.
The provisions of their charters and of the act place severe restrictions on the investments which these banks are allowed to make. Section 35, as it now stands, provides that these banks may invest moneys only in bonds, debentures, or other securities of or guaranteed by the government of Canada, or by provincial governments of Canada; in municipal bonds or debentures of school corporations in Canada, or bonds and debentures guaranteed by the United Kingdom, and so on. There is even a provision which makes it an offence and imposes a heavy penalty if the banks place money in unauthorized investments.
Section 37 provides that the banks may not lend any money upon the personal security of individuals, or to corporate bodies without collateral securities up to the amount of the loan, and these collaterals must be only certain kinds of bonds. Furthermore, the provisions of section 39 prohibit the making of a loan upon the security of real or immovable property.
The result has been that these restrictions are so great that the banks cannot actually meet the desires of their clients as to personal or mortgage loans. This bill would remedy this situation and permit the banks to make unsecured personal loans to a client, not exceeding at any time the amount of $1,000, and the aggregate amount of these loans made by the banks are not, at any time, to exceed five per cent of their deposit liabilities. It will further enable the banks to grant such loans on first mortgage on improved property, provided that such loans do not exceed sixty per cent of the value of the mortgaged property; and here again the aggregate amount of these loans shall not exceed five per cent of the deposit liabilities of the lending bank.
These powers to be conferred on these banks are not unlimited, as will be seen by the short explanation which has been given. They would be, in fact, similar to the powers of the trust companies and conform with the provisions of the civil code of the province of Quebec, section 981 o, as to the administration of funds by a trustee, tutor or curator.
It has been deemed necessary to permit the enlargement of the powers of the banks in
order to give them an opportunity to get their funds into more profitable circulation. These banks are well-managed institutions. Their losses have been few and far between, because they make only loans containing a minimum of risk.
The bill contains some minor amendments to bring the act into line with the Income Tax Act and with the Bank Act, and certain provisions relating to income and investment reports to be made to the Minister of Finance. But the main purpose of the bill is to empower these banks to render additional services to the public in general.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
On section 3-If amount reserved in excess of reasonable requirements.
John Thomas Hackett: I know the answer is that there is a similar enactment in the Bank Act, but why there should be such stringency of administration in relation to a savings bank which does no commercial business at all, and which is almost a domestic concern, is a little baffling to one who has no more information than I have. I wish the minister or his parliamentary assistant would give some other reason than that a similar provision is in the Bank Act.


Gleason Belzile: There is a provision in the Income Tax Act to the effect that if any corporation sets aside as reserve a larger proportion of its income than is deemed necessary for the operation of the corporation, the minister may value, for income taxation purposes, the excess amount so put aside. This rule has been introduced into the Bank Act, as the hon. member knows; and I understand the intention of section 3 is to get all banks and similar institutions into line with the special provision of the Income Tax Act so that the minister may at any time, when it is apparent that an amount has been set aside in excess of that which is necessary for the operation of the institution or corporation, value the excess amount so that it will come under the income tax provisions.


John Thomas Hackett: I do not wish to pursue the argument into an unduly controversial field, but every day we see the tentacles of bureaucracy pushed further into the heart of private enterprise and business denied any final discretion in the operation of its own affairs.
I thank the hon. gentleman for telling me about the income tax. It is possible that I was aware of that, but it is not necessary that the Department of Finance arrogate to itself
Customs Act

the determination of what is sufficient reserve to enable the minister to collect his taxes. The Minister of Finance or the Minister of National Revenue will collect such taxes as, in the discretion of his department, may seem proper. But here we find something totally different. We find a government official determining when a surplus should cease to be a surplus, and I submit that this government official does not know. He has not the training or the experience to determine what, in the circumstances of any particular case, should be the reserve necessary for the protection. and w'ell-being of the institution. The government official is not responsible to anybody for the sufficiency of protection for the shareholders and depositors of a bank, especially a savings bank.
The other day, as a matter of policy, at the decree of the government or one of its creatures, interest rates went up and the market price of bonds fell. Institutions such as these, and others, saw their reserves impinged upon to the extent of thousands or hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. How helpless is the institution in the face of conditions over which it has no control; yet this act will deny an institution the right to determine what safety measures should be taken against these unknown and all-pervading influences of uncertainty and chaos.
I cannot but express my profound regret that the government has found it necessary to assume a further measure of control over a purely domestic institution, well administered, concerning which there is no control and no complaint. So far as I am concerned there is no reason for the enactment of this amendment, unless it be to enable the government further to determine what shall be, in the realm of what used to be free enterprise.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 4 to 6 inclusive agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, June 3, consideration in committee of Bill No. 229, to amend the Customs Act-Mr. McCann-Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 5-Valuation of imports prejudicially or injuriously affecting Canadian producers.
Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue):: When this bill was last considered by the committee it was approved with the exception of sections 5 and 6. Section 5 seeks to amend section 43 of the Customs Act by striking out the reference to the British preferential tariff or any lower tariff. This would make the section non-discriminatory, and is in accordance with our commitments at Geneva.
Some lion, gentleman suggested that we should defer discussion of this section until after consideration of the report of the banking and commerce committee on the general agreement on tariffs and trade. That report has not yet been tabled. If that is still the feeling of the committee, the government is prepared to withdraw this section. However, I would point out-and I think this is important-that an emergency might arise in which Canadian producers or manufacturers were prejudicially or injuriously affected, and it would be desirable to have the power to impose values under this section against any country.
I would note that it relates entirely to values and not to rates. Inasmuch as the change has no material effect upon the British preferential tariff rates, the committee might give approval to the section. However, if they do not care to do so, we are ready to withdraw it.


John Thomas Hackett: I should like to express my appreciation of the careful study the minister has given these two sections; but I hope the withdrawal is not conditional upon my acceptance of the hatching of another emergency. As the minister knows, my appreciation of that pastime has been frequently announced ; and even though I should be the only one to object to it. I hope h.e will understand my position. But I am glad this matter of the British preferential is to be allowed to remain in abeyance until we have had a further opportunity of finding out exactly what the Geneva agreement means, and have been afforded an opportunity of examining it in further detail.


The CHAIRMAN:: Has the minister the consent of the committee to withdraw section 5?
Some hon. MEMBERS : Agreed.
Section 5 withdrawn.


William Ross Macdonald: Does that apply also to section 6?


James Joseph McCann: No.
On section 6-Goods exported to Canada through another country.


James Joseph McCann: When this section was last considered the senior member for Halifax, the

Customs Act
hon. member for Saint John-Albert and the hon. member for Gumbeirland expressed some concern about its effect on our Canadian ports. I should like to make it clear that in order to get the benefit of the British preferential rates it will still be necessary for goods to be shipped direct from the originating country to a sea, lake or river port of Canada. The new section simply provides that goods bona fide exported to Canada from any country, but passing in transit through another, shall, upon such terms and conditions as to shipment, documentation, warehousing, transhipment or the like as the governor in council may prescribe, be valued for duty as if they were imported from the first-mentioned country. The change by the new section gives direct statutory authority for such valuation rather than merely empowering the governor in council to make such a provision.
The terms and conditions prescribed by the governor in council under both the existing and the new section have been and would be such as are required to establish shipment from the original country destined to Canada, and preclude abuse. In other words, shipment from the original country when destined to Canada would require to be established by the documents. As a general rule, warehousing or remaining in an intermediate country for any purpose other than that of transhipment would void direct shipment from the originating country, and the new section makes no real change in the administration in this regard which has been in effect for over half a century.
The last part of section 6 makes provision for appeals to the tariff board. It consolidates authority for appeal to the tariff board from decisions by the deputy minister both in respect to tariff classifications and valuation for duty, and for further appeal to the courts from the decision of the tariff board.


Mr. ISNOR:: I thank the minister for having placed his statement on the record. I am not concerned about the latter part of the section, but I am concerned about the first part which has to do with warehousing and reshipment of goods through United States or other ports. In view of the statement made by the minister I feel quite sure that no harm will be done to Canadian ports. I trust that this legislation will work in the manner in which he says it will. If this provision has been in force for fifty years I cannot see why it is necessary to include these words at this time. That is the point I made when I spoke previously on this question. Could we not carry on with the elimination of those words and continue to
operate under the act as it originally stood? I think that would satisfy those who are interested in shipping through Canadian ports. I emphasize the point I made before, that I am not a lawyer, and I am willing to accept the minister's interpretation.


James Joseph McCann: This is putting into statutory form what was done previously by order in council.


Mr. FERGUSON:: The minister says that this has been done for fifty years.


James Joseph McCann: It was done by order in council, and this merely puts it in statutory form.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Am I to understand' that goods, we will say shipped from Europe, landed in New York, warehoused for perhaps twenty days and reshipped to Canada, would come in as though they had come direct?


James Joseph McCann: It would depend entirely on what was shown by the shipping documents.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: That is just what I am afraid of. There are free ports in various sections of the world. There is one at New York, another farther south, and I believe one is in operation on the United States west coast. Goods could be shipped to one of those ports, warehoused, repacked and shipped to a Canadian port. Would they come in as they do at present?


James Joseph McCann: I am told that they would not get the benefit unless the original documents showed that they were destined for Canada.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I understand that at the present time only a bill of lading is necessary for a shipment from London to Montreal, or preferably to Halifax. Why should you depart from that practice and allow goods to go to a United States port and then be transhipped to a Canadian port and still receive the benefit?


James Joseph McCann: I am told that that has always been permitted.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
William Ross Macdonald: That concludes the sections and I suppose it is agreeable that certain sections be renumbered?


John Thomas Hackett: That is, as a consequence of the changes?


William Ross Macdonald: Yes.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.
5636	COMMONS
Civilian War Pensions and Allowances


James Joseph McCann: Section 10 reads:
This act shall come into force on a day to be fixed by proclamation of the governor in council.
I wish to withdraw section 10.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When will it come into force?


James Joseph McCann: On the day it is passed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When it is given royal assent?


James Joseph McCann: Yes.
Section 10 withdrawn.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.



WAR PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES


[Stage Direction]
Hon. MILTON F. GREGG (Minister of Veterans Affairs) moved the second reading of Bill No. 303, to amend the Civilian War Pensions and Allowances Act.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 1-Application for disability pension to be made within one year.
John Thomas Hackett: Has the bill been
printed?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: The bill has been printed. We have a copy here, but we have not sufficient copies for distribution. I understand the bill was introduced on the recommendation of the committee on veterans affairs. It was all threshed out in the committee. The bill is quite short and simply removes the time limit so that certain people may benefit under the terms of the act. It seems it was unanimously accepted in the committee, and we would ask the consent of the committee of the whole to proceed.


Mr. LENNARD:: I think if the minister gave a short statement it would clarify the situation.


Mr. GREGG:: When the house was in committee on the resolution, I made a short statement, but members of the committee on veterans affairs were in session at the time. I should like to confirm the promise given to the hon. member for Vancouver South at the committee stage, that there would be an opportunity to discuss another matter relating to the merchant marine. There will be

that opportunity under the item of the estimates which had been held over for such purposes.
This is a short amendment, Mr. Chairman. Its effect is to remove the time limit in so far as it affects applications in respect of dependents of deceased Canadian merchant seamen and salt-water fishermen. Section 7 of the act permits awards of pension in respect of death only when death was a direct result of enemy action or counter-action taken against the enemy, which includes extraordinary marine hazards occasioned by the war.
There have 'been a limited number of cases in which the dependents owing to illiteracy, ignorance of their statutory rights, lack of dependency at the time of death, or other reasons, failed to make application within the statutory time limit.
In view of the limitations contained in section 7, the removal of the time limit in respect of death would affect only a small number of cases and would permit of an award being made in certain cases of hardship. That is the effect of the amendment to section 1.
Section 2 repeals subsection 2 of the present section 62, and the effect of that is this. Section 59 of the act permits of awards to widows of Canadians who served as civilian air crew with the Royal Air Force Transport Command when death occurred during service as a direct result of enemy action or counteraction taken against the enemy, which includes extraordinary aerial or other hazards occasioned by the war, and the dependents are in necessitous circumstances.
The removal of the time limit is respect of death will permit of an award in a few deserving cases where the dependents, at the time of death or within one year after death, were not in necessitous circumstances but have subsequently fallen into necessitous circumstances.
It will be seen that both amendments are designed to carry out the original intent of the act and deal with the dependents of deceased persons.


Mr. CASE:: Does the bill clarify disability due to enemy action?


Milton Fowler Gregg: No, that is not touched
upon at all.


Mt. PEARKES:: There was a one-year
time limit. Is that limit completely removed?


Milton Fowler Gregg: No new time limit is set so far as these amendments are concerned.

Civilian War Pensions and Allowances
The old time limit of one year stands, affecting personnel who served and who may be eligible for pension.


George Randolph Pearkes: That is not dealt with in this bill?


Milton Fowler Gregg: There is no change so far as this bill is concerned.


George Randolph Pearkes: The minister referred to aw'ards to widows of the ferry command personnel. I presume that the benefits will apply to any dependents, not merely to widows.


Milton Fowler Gregg: Yes, any dependent who qualifies under the act. Subsection 2 of section 62 of the act which is being repealed reads:
62 (2) No pension shall be awarded under this part in respect of death unless application is made therefor within one year after the coming into force of this act or within one year after the death, whichever is the later.


Mr. ARCHIBALD:: I am in favour of any further benefits that may be given to seamen or their dependents who served during the war. I should like to have seen all the benefits that are given to veterans extended also to the merchant seamen. I have in mind a young man who served in the merchant marine during the war and who, after the war, went up for his ticket as a mate only to discover that he was colour blind, wdiieh meant that his career in the merchant marine was finished for good. The future is bleak for these men who were exposed to all the hazards of service on the high seas during the war, and I should like to see further benefits given to them and to their dependents. If it cannot be done this session, I hope it will be done next session.


Milton Fowler Gregg: In view of what the hon. member has just said, I indicated at the committee stage that the veterans affairs committee was this week completing its report in which I know' a number of matters are dealt with. That report will be completed, I think, today or tomorrow'. Therefore the question my hon. friend has raised should not now be opened up, but without violating the confidence of the veterans affairs committee, its chairman might be allowed to make a comment.


Mr. MUTCH:: The bill before us is the result of the seventh report of the veterans affairs committee which was tabled in the house last w'eek. This legislation embodies the recommendations which were unanimously made by that committee. At that time the committee was, and it is now, considering questions relating to the merchant seamen and the members of the R.A.F. ferry command. I understand that its report is drafted, but until it is approved and submitted to the house I submit that any discussion of the question my hon. friend has raised would be out of order. It will be in order when we come to discuss the final report of the committee, which I presume will take place on the item which has been allowed to stand over. In the meantime I can only say that this is not the final word of the committee with respect to such representations.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
On section 2-Application for disability pension to be made w'ithin one year.
Mr. CASTLEDEN:: I do not think it is a good principle at any time to be passing bills we have not seen, even though they may represent the unanimous view' of a special committee. Would it not be possible to have copies of this bill before us by three o'clock?


Leslie Alexander Mutch: This is a two paragraph bill. It was sent to the printer yesterday. I was able to get only four copies. The pressure of the work of the session has made it impossible to have these bills delivered in the morning. They will be here in the course of the day and will be distributed. The four copies which are available have been in circulation. I can assure the committee that there is nothing in the bill except the two clauses which in effect delete the time limit which my committee unanimously felt was objectionable and should be removed. It may not go far enough, in the opinion of some, but in effect it does one thing which we unanimously agreed should be done.


George Hugh Castleden: Does this bill require that the dependents shall qualify only if they are in necessitous circumstances?


Milton Fowler Gregg: That is according to the terms of the original act.


George Hugh Castleden: That still stands?


Milton Fowler Gregg: That still stands so far as this bill is concerned.


George Hugh Castleden: Who decides whether they are necessitous under the means test?


Milton Fowler Gregg: The decision is reached by the board of pension commissioners.


Mr. SKEY:: I presume that the minister's department, or the Department of Transport, the department concerned, will immediately review the cases which have been outlawed and give advice to people who have already applied.


Milton Fowler Gregg: Yes; the interpretation and execution of this act are carried out by the board of pension commissioners in the same
5638

Agricultural Prices Support Act
way as for all pensioners, and the board will immediately review the cases.


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


[Stage Direction]
Mr. ROBERT McCUBBIN (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Agriculture) moved the second reading of Bill No. 392, to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act, 1944.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Is this bill printed?


Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Speaker, we are in the same position on this bill as we were with the bill that we have just passed.


John Thomas Hackett: How many sections?


Alphonse Fournier: Only one section. I have handed a copy to the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken). The section seems so innocuous-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Read it.


Alphonse Fournier: I shall ask the leader of the opposition to read the section in a moment. It extends the life of the Agricultural Prices Support Act, which expired on March 31, 1948. We have no other way but to proceed with this special legislation to extend the life of the act. I think there is no objection to it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Have you taken the leader of the opposition into the cabinet?


Mr. JOHN BRACKEN (Leader of the Opposition):: I shall be glad to read the clause, but before I do so I think I should read a lecture to the government. This house should not be asked to pass the second reading of a bill without having seen it.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


John Bracken: Certainly at this stage of any session a bill with only one clause in it, a bill that the government has known must come before parliament, should not be proceeded with until copies are available to all hon. members.
_ The minister said that it is a short bill. That is true, but hon. members do not know the exact terms of the amendment, and until they know that, they are in no position to discuss the matter intelligently. The measure is a simple one, and I am not now raising this objection on the merits of the bill. I do it as a matter of principle of procedure. I want

to say to the government now that in .the future we shall expect to have these bills distributed before we are asked to proceed with second reading.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Your lecture is having effect; copies of the bill are being distributed now.


John Bracken: The minister has been very courteous to me in dealing with all these matters in the past. I am sure there was no discourtesy intended here; but with all respect I suggest that this house and the minister should not be put in the position of asking hon. members on this side to accept these measures without having seen them. We ought not to have to speak in this way to the government.
I want to speak briefly now on the bill itself. Its purpose is to extend the powers of what is popularly known as the Agricultural Prices Support Act, an act which is technically described as an act for the support of prices of agricultural products during the transition from war to peace.
Hon. members will recall that early in the war the government established the policy of fixing ceiling prices for agricultural products. I think it was in 1943 that we took the position, and I emphasized it time and time again, that if we were to have ceiling prices established on agricultural products to prevent prices going up at a time when they would otherwise go up, we should have a policy of establishing floor prices to prevent agricultural prices going away down in times when conditions might otherwise drive them down.
In the following year, 1944, this measure was brought in. It is in effect, as well as in name, a transitional measure, a temporary measure. That certainly was not my intention or our intention then or now. What is needed is a measure that remains in effect, not for any transitional period which the government itself may determine, but for an unfixed period as a matter of permanent policy. That is my main criticism of the bill. The bill does not provide a permanent policy.
As I have said, it is specifically set out in the title to the act that it is only for the transition period from war to peace. Mr. Speaker, the war has been over now for three years. How long is this transition period to continue? If the government is serious about having a floor price policy beyond the immediate or the near future, we should not be extending from time to time a transitional measure. It should be made a permanent policy.
With respect to the merits of this measure, the government, or members of the government, do a lot of talking about floor prices. Yet in effect, what their policy is doing is

Agricultural Prices Support Act
maintaining ceiling prices. What is the use of talking about floor prices when prices are high? They are using this and other measures not for the purpose of floor prices but for the purpose of preventing farm prices going up. They let nearly everything else go up in price, but indirectly, and in some cases directly, they are preventing farm prices from following the general trend.
This is called an Agricultural Prices Support Act. What the government is doing is keeping farm prices down, not supporting them. One does not need to go far for an illustration. The wheat board is being used for that very purpose. It was built up as a marketing institution for the benefit of producers, and it is now being used by the government, not for that purpose, but to carry a policy of government to part of the price control principle of keeping farm prices from following the normal trend under these conditions.
I have just three comments to make on the measure. The first I have referred to. It is a transitional measure and not a permanent measure. When the impression is left, as it is commonly left with the people of the country, that we have a permanent floor price policy, we are only inviting criticism, doubt and cynicism on the part of the public when we continue to deal with measures from time to time in this manner.
The second point is this. By following policies of the general character of this measure, the government has failed to lay the basis for a permanent policy to provide equitable prices for farmers in the future. They had an opportunity and they lost it. There was a time, and it is with us still, when there was a great demand for wheat, a demand which made the price much higher than it had been in the past. Instead of allowing our wheat to sell at what it was worth, the government required it to be sold at much less. Had the government allowed it to be sold at what it was worth, had they allowed the farmers to receive for it an equitable, a parity, a fair price, the balance being set aside as a reserve, that reserve would have been sufficient to supplement low prices later on for ten or twenty years.
Various figures have been suggested as to what has been lost by the wheat deal with Britain. Some put it at 8300 million in two years, and others suggest a higher amount. If we had been allowed to take the world price for this commodity, and if the farmers had been allowed to receive from that high figure a fair price for it now, the balance to be used as a measure to supplement prices when they 5849-358i
might be low later on, we could have laid a permanent basis for equitable prices for our farmers for years to come.
As it is, we have kept the price of wheat down, and because the price of wheat has been kept down, coarse grains have been down, and because coarse grains were down livestock prices were kept down indirectly. Because of such policies, we have been denied the right to sell our livestock in the United States. And that brings me to the third point.
The government is now further destroying the confidence of the public in itself and in government generally, by its action with respect to livestock. Across the line to the south the price of beef cattle is 10, 12 and 14 cents per pound higher than it is here. We are denied that market as a matter of government policy, and yet the Minister of Agriculture comes along and leaves the impression that we are going to be allowed to get into that market. He leaves the impression that the embargo is to be removed. He leaves that impression but the government takes no action; and when that impression is left what happens? The farmers hold back stock, expecting a higher price for it. I do not say that they all do, but they can do it, and it looks as if it has been done. They can hold back stock, and the price of meat goes up, and now we have the consumer facing rising meat prices because of that intimation that the embargo would be removed and that prices would go up. The consumers are facing these rising prices at home, and yet we are denied the United States market for that product.
As I said yesterday on another matter, we are getting the worst of two worlds; the embargo has not been removed and yet we have rising prices at home. I will take just a moment or two to read an extract from a western paper showing the reaction to policies of this kind. The Winnipeg Tribune of June 18 states:
Over the week end Winnipeg housewives and restaurant keepers had a hollow feeling in their stomachs as they watched the price of various cuts of beef shoot up as much as 18 cents a pound. (Naturally they were wondering why meat should suddenly jump in price at a time of year when prices usually decline.
I need not read the whole of the article. After referring to the speech of the minister, that the embargo was likely to be removed, and in view of the fact that it was not removed, the newspaper continues:
The natural reaction of livestock producer* to this sort of thing was to withhold their cattle from market. Why shouldn't they, when they
Agricultural Paces Support Act

have almost official assurance that they can make money by doing so? The scarcity of offerings on the livestock markets was thus reflected in higher prices in the butcher shops.
And now we have the report this morning that there was difficulty in the livestock yards at Toronto. Apparently housewives are not buying much meat with these rising prices, and so meat accumulates in the storehouse and cattle coming to market are not sold, because the government has not been frank with the Canadian people with respect to this matter. If the embargo is to be removed, it should be removed and everyone should know what is going to be done. If it is not to be removed, the impression should not be left that it will be removed, with all these unsatisfactory reactions following.
As I said, this is a transitional, temporary measure. There is no excuse for leaving it ini that. way. It is still being left so that the governor in council may determine how long it may exist. The government should not ask us to approve that position. We are willing to make this a permanent measure. I cannot speak for every section of the house, but I Imagine that on this matter I would be expressing their views and, I would think, the views of hon. members opposite as well. Why therefore leave it as a transitional measure? Why leave it in the hands of the governor in council to determine how long it will continue? Why not make it a permanent policy and be done with it?
Having said that, let me add that half a loaf is better than no bread. Of course this measure will be supported and passed. My criticism is that the government is not fair even to itself in bringing forward a measure of this kind if it is serious about a floor-price policy-and I do not suggest that it is not serious. Dealing with matters in this way, however, leaves it open for people to question whether it is serious or not,


Mir. E. G. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, the subject before us is the second reading of a bill to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act of 1944. It is unfortunate that this bill, which came up for first reading in April of this year, comes down to the house now alt this late date. I support the bill because it is one part of a policy to give stability to our agricultural producers; but in my opinion it is unfortunate that it is not properly integrated with other types of policies in order to provide the measure of stability that should .prevail in agriculture. In order to have a workable plan, even under this act, it is necessary to integrate that policy with a policy of stability in agriculture, namely, parity prices. In order to do that we

would have to establish a parity by which our agricultural producers would get a fair price for their products, thus giving them a decent standard of living. Having established that base parity, we would have to arrive at a formula under which, when the costs of agriculture increased in the various productive fields, we would increase the parity price so that our producers would be able to get out of their produce the money with which to buy back enough goods to preserve a proper balance with the base period. It is unfortunate that we have not used the Agricultural Prices Support Act in order to do that.
I had an order for return in the house on February 25, 1948. My question was:
1.	How much has been spent under the agriculture support act since it was passed ill 1944?
2.	For what purposes, and to wliat amount, has this act been invoked?
The answer to the first question was that only $807,618.90 has been spent, and of that amount, $75,212.23 has been spent on administration; that $109,305.18 has been spent to cover operating losses of the meat board, the dairy products board and the special products board with respect to overseas contracts for 1946-47; that $123,101.49 has been spent for price support in respect of the 1946 potato orop in the eastern provinces, and that $500,000 has been spent for price support in respect of the 1947 apple crop in Nova Scotia.
I quite agree with the expenditure of those moneys in order to try to bring some form of parity to the producers in those fields and alleviate some of the distress that was occasioned in marketing those products. But I want to bring to the attention of the government some of the submissions which have been made on behalf of agriculture in the last two years.
In 1947 the United Farmers of Canada and the Alberta Farmers' Union presented a brief to the Minister of Agriculture. (Mr. Gardiner). I may say that they speak on behalf of the agriculture groups in the country. One of the recommendations contained in that brief was that the foreword of the act we are now discussing should be changed to read, "An act for the support of the prices of agricultural products." I maintain that the act as it is now constituted does not meet the needs of agriculture. In other words it must be extended in its use in order that moneys may be used from the public treasury so that we can have parity in this country.
Yesterday we passed a resolution to ratify the international wheat agreement. That is one form of trying to get world peace-agreement so that we can have a flow of agricultural products from Canada to overseas importers or consumers. We have also passed

Agricultural Prices Support Act
the United Kingdom wheat agreement, with which I am in accord; because as a producer and as a member of the House of Commons I recognize the fact that, until we give stability to agricultural producers in this country, we cannot have any stability whatsoever in our economy at large.
Since agriculture is a basic industry, it is essential that one of the first things to do is to give to our agricultural producers the stability as a result of which they will not experience the booms and busts they have experienced in the past. I am in agreement with the recommendations of the United Farmers of Canada and the Alberta Farmers' Union with respect to their recommendations to the government that this act be extended and called: "An act for the support of the prices of agricultural products."
With regard to section 1, they recommend that it read:
This act may be cited as the Agricultural Parity Prices Act, 1944, amended 1947.
They go on further to recommend an amendment to section 3 to read as follows:
There shall be an agricultural parity prices board under the direction of the minister consisting of five members including a chairman and a vice-chairman to be appointed by the governor in council and who shall hold office during pleasure.
They recommend an amendment to section 9 of the act to read as follows:
The board shall be empowered to recommend a price change in regard to wheat to maintain a parity balance between agricultural prices and the cost of goods and services that agricultural producers must purchase or pay for. None of the consolidated revenue fund named in this act shall however 'be used for the purpose of adjusting wheat prices.
I could read all the recommendations, but since they have been tendered to the government I do not think I need do so at this time. Let me say, however, that in a further memorandum to the government in March of this year the interprovincial farmers' union council recommended to the government that a fact finding board be set up

have to guess when it will be removed, or how much of it will be removed, and we have the retail merchants asking the question: Are we going to be compelled to absorb losses amounting to thousands of dollars in order to pay for this experiment? At the same time we have the wholesale meat dealer wrestling with the question whether or not our cattle will be exported to the United States.
In all fairness, and with all sympathy for the members of the Liberal party, I hope they will go to their cabinet ministers in greater numbers and suggest that the people of Canada learn once and for all, without further nonsense, whether beef is going to be exported, so that we can finally arrive at the price the consumer will have to pay. At the same time let us know whether the excise tax is to be removed, so that we may know what we must pay for other commodities. When that is done, democracy will begin to function again and socialism will be a thing of the past.


Mr. VICTOR QUELCH (Acadia):: After what the last speaker has said, I want to make it perfectly clear that in supporting this bill I do not consider that I am supporting socialism. I look upon this as a measure which is required in order to give fair play and justice to the primary producers of this country. The secondary industries in Canada, as in all countries, have always been in a position to set their prices high enough to return the cost of production plus a fair profit. The primary producers have never been in that position. They have always had to take whatever prices the trade wished to pay them, with a complete disregard for what it might have cost to produce the goods.
The Agricultural Prices Support Act was introduced in 1944, as has been stated already, as a temporary measure to assist in the transition from war to peace. From time to time various farm organizations have urged upon the government the desirability of making this a permanent measure. Strangely enough, at one time in this session I was laying emphasis on the fact that this measure should be made permanent, and the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) interjected that as far as he was concerned there was nothing in the measure which would indicate that it was not permanent. Apparently the government does not agree with him, however, because the government has found it necessary to bring down this amendment.
One reason why it is essential to maintain a measure of this kind in this country is the fact that for the past eight years the farmers have been accepting prices lower than they

could have obtained had it not been for certain government controls. The Minister of Agriculture pointed out that they had been taking these lower prices for eight years, and that in return they had been promised that prices would be stabilized. As a result the government has been trying to stabilize prices, and it has promised that stabilized prices will be maintained in future.
Just what do we mean by stabilized prices, and does this act go far enough in establishing a basis for prices of that kind? Subsection 2 of section 9 of the act states:
In prescribing prices under paragraphs (a) and (c) of subsection one of this section, the board shall endeavour to ensure adequate and stable returns for agriculture by promoting orderly adjustment from war to peace conditions and shall endeavour to secure a fair relationship between the returns from agriculture and those from other occupations.
If that is the basis on which the government is to proceed, I do not think there will be any criticism from agriculture. In other words, under this act it is the duty of the government to see that a fair relationship is maintained between the prices of agricultural products and the prices of the products of other industries. Under this act, in reality the farmers are guaranteed a parity price; but whether or not that is the interpretation the government will place upon this section in the future remains to be seen, because as yet we have not met a serious situation requiring action on the part of the government. That is so as far as the prairie farmers are concerned, though it may not be strictly true of other parts of the country, particularly those concerned with the production of potatoes and apples. But it is very necessary that parity prices be maintained in future in order that the farmers may obtain their fair share of the national income.
The main objection I have to the amendment now .before the house is that it continues the act merely as a temporary measure, subject to action by the governor in council. Thus we may have a repetition of what has happened already this year. We may not be aware of it, but we may find one day that section 9 has been taken out of operation by proclamation. We would like to see the legislation made permanent.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
On section 1-Section 9 continued in force.
George Hugh Castleden: One o'clock.

Agricultural Prices Support Act


William Ross Macdonald: There are only three sections in the bill. Does the committee wish to consider it before one o'clock?


George Hugh Castleden: I have a number of questions to ask.


James Arthur Ross: What objection has the department or the government to making this legislation permanent rather than a transitional measure? That is the issue across the country today; it is only a transitional measure. As my leader has said, it is three years since the war ended, yet we still have these temporary transitional measures. The people have great fear of the future; and if this legislation were made permanent it would do a great deal to stabilize agriculture by giving some assistance to the producers throughout the country. I could say a great deal more at this time, but I believe the country is entitled to some explanation from the parliamentary assistant, on behalf of the government, on this most important issue.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: One o'clock.
Mr. MeCUBBIN: Do hon. gentlemen wish to go ahead and discuss this bill? I can go on with it, if that is their wish. No one is more strongly in support of stabilizing agriculture than this government, but at future sessions there will be plenty of opportunity to discuss the matter further. For the present we are going to extend its operation for a period of two years, and at the end of that time we can make the legislation permanent or otherwise as may be considered desirable.


George Hugh Castleden: Is there anything that could be put into this bill which would prevent such a debacle as occurred last year in connection with coarse grains? As the parliamentary assistant knows, last fall the prices of coarse grains were stabilized, and the farmers delivered their coarse grains at those low prices. On October 21 the government announced the withdrawal of subsidies. After the farmers had delivered large quantities of their oats and barley-barley deliveries at that time were about 39,000,000 bushels and oats almost the same-and the subsidy had been taken off, the open market handling of coarse grains permitted a manipulation and prices went up about 30 cents on oats and 40 cents on barley. The result was that the feed companies who bought up coarse grains were able to purchase at a low price and then sell them to western farmer feeders at a higher price. Naturally this had a reaction upon the cost of living all along the line.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.


George Hugh Castleden: Before the luncheon recess I was asking whether the action of the government last year in removing the subsidy did not permit the feed and grain companies in the west who bought the farmers' feed to make an extra profit and prevent the farmers who delivered their coarse grains before October 21 from getting the full price for their product.
This is a bill to guarantee to the farmers a maximum price. The action of the government prevented the farmers from getting the money for which their product was actually sold to the feeders in eastern Canada. It also had the effect of increasing the cost of living all across the board for consumers in Canada because the price of milk, butter, eggs and meat went up. Not only did the farmers, who delivered their grain prior to October 21, lose, but the consuming public also lost through an increase in the cost of living caused by the removal of the subsidy. Can this bill not be made to provide against a recurrence of such a situation, and what redress is contemplated for the farmers who lost money by this action of the government?
Mr. MeCUBBIN: Unless ceilings were reimposed it would not be necessary to do anything. As to reimbursing the farmers, the hon. member knows that some companies have already helped the farmers and I have no doubt that more of them will. This bill is for the purpose of stabilizing the price of farm products, and the wheat board is under instructions from the Minister of Trade and Commerce to set a fair price for oats and barley, No. 1 feed, f.o.b. Fort William. The price is 96 cents and a fraction for barley, and 65 cents for oats. I think that will have a stabilizing effect on the coarse grain industry in western Canada.


George Hugh Castleden: Has any decision been made by the government about reimbursing the farmers for the loss they sustained by the action of the government?
Mr. MeCUBBIN: That is a matter of government policy over which I have no control. The government's policy will be announced at the proper time.


George Hugh Castleden: It was announced over the radio that the Minister of Agriculture had stated in Saskatchewan that the government would reimburse the farmers.


The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:: Order. I do not think the hon. gentleman is in order in discussing that on this clause.
Agricultural Prices Support Act


Edward George McCullough: The
Moose Jaw Times-Herald of Saturday, June 19, carries this item:
Mr. Gardiner told his audience the farmers would not lose $210 million on coarse grains. He said he had recommended the federal government pay 6 cents a bushel on oats and 12 cents on barley. He expected the latter would be cut to 11 cents, however, as the wheat pool was paying 16 cents.


William Henry Golding: Order. The hon. member is out of order in discussing that question on this clause.


Edward George McCullough: With all deference to your ruling, Mr. Chairman, this bill is to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act, and here we have a statement by the Minister of Agriculture that certain payments will be made by the government to the farmers who lost a huge sum of money during the debacle last October. I a>m asking the parliamentary assistant whether funds will be used under this act to reimburse the farmers for that loss. I think that is a fair question, and that I am entitled to an answer. The parliamentary assistant has said that the grain companies are paying part of that loss, and I understand that the wheat pools have made certain payments. I also recall that the former member for Rosthern, Mr. Tucker, flew to Ottawa from Saskatchewan and stated that he was going to ask the government to give such assistance. I think payment could be made under this act. If not, out of what fund would it come? We should have a statement on that point from the government before the end of the session.
Mr. MoCUBBIN: I do not think payments could be made under this act in respect of coarse grains. They might be made in some other way.


Edward George McCullough: How could they be made?


Robert McCubbin: I am not in a position to answer that.


George Hugh Castleden: If such a payment is made, would it not be tantamount to taking public funds to subsidize the profits made by the grain exchange through the handling of coarse grains last fall? They are the only people who made money on it.


William Henry Golding: I must ask hon. members not to carry on this debate on the clause now before the committee, because in my opinion it is out of order.


George Hugh Castleden: The monejr would not come out of this fund?


Robert McCubbin: No.
[The Deputy Chairman.]


James Arthur Ross: It is evident that the Minister of Agriculture and his parliamentary assistant should get together on this question of reimbursing the farmers. Before the luncheon recess I asked the parliamentary assistant why this legislation was not made permanent instead of transitional, but I did not get a satisfactory answer. Section 1 of the bill reads:
Section 9 of the Agricultural Prices Support Act, 1944, chapter 20 of the statutes of 1944-45, shall be deemed to have continued in force from the 31st day of March, 1948, until the coming into force of this act and shall continue in force thereafter for such further period as the governor in council may fix by proclamation.
I protest as strongly as I can against temporary legislation of this type, now that the war has been over for more than two years and we are again in a time of peace. The government should decide either to continue this measure permanently, or to repeal it. What our farmers are complaining about is that they get no permanent policy, no lead from the government, no encouragement. Take for example, the cattle situation, about which the hon. member for Brant read a telegram this morning. It is difficult for many heads of households to procure a proper meat diet for their families. Two years ago the minister of agriculture in Manitoba and the beef producers association of the prairie provinces presented a brief to the Department of Agriculture at Ottawa, asking that the producers be allowed to ship their cattle to the most natural market in the world, the United States, that they be paid the prevailing price in Canada, that the difference between that price and the price in the United States be pooled in a central fund, that records be kept of the cattle marketed, and that a distribution be subsequently made from that fund to the producers in this country. What better safeguard than that could you have for the consuming public of Canada? The government had that placed before them by the producers, by the provincial ministers of agriculture and others over two years ago. I have brought the matter up on the agricultural estimates at each succeeding session, and the government have refused to tackle the matter on that basis. A situation is being created in this country under which some of the producers may be holding their cattle off the market. On the other hand we have a buyer's strike being advocated in this country. Housewives are organizing not to purchase meat at present prices. It is a very serious situation in a country such as this, at at time so long after the termination of the war. I am sure that it will be greatly aggravated.
On May 7 the minister pointed out on the agriculture estimates that while the embargo

Agricultural Prices Support Act
had been imposed in 1942, it was done as a matter of price control and had been handled by the Department of Finance up to that time, May 7.


William Henry Golding: Order.


James Arthur Ross: On May 7 it was transferred back to the Department of Agriculture.


William Henry Golding: The hon.
member is wandering far afield from this item.


James Arthur Ross: Is beef no longer an agricultural product, Mr. Chairman?


William Henry Golding: This is a bill to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act, 1944, which is a different thing from what the hon. member is discussing.


James Arthur Ross: Would the chairman mind telling me what it covers and what I can discuss?


William Henry Golding: 
James Arthur Ross: What does it include? What are the agricultural products that can be discussed under this section? I am convinced, Mr. Chairman, that if you read the original act you will see that it provides for all agricultural products other than wheat. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected. The act states:
In this act and any regulation hereunder, unless the context otherwise requires:	(a)
"agricultural products" means any natural product of agriculture except wheat, designated by the governor in council, and includes processed meat, dairy and poultry products, if so designated.
The act goes on and describes the powers, and so on.


William Henry Golding: I would ask the hon. member to read that part of the act which deals with embargoes.


James Arthur Ross: After all, I am talking about marketing.


William Henry Golding: I would ask the hon. member to read the section which deals with embargoes or the lifting of embargoes. It does not come under this at all.


James Arthur Ross: Mr. Chairman, you are drawing a pretty tight line in your interpretation of the original act. Certainly that is my understanding of the matter.


Alphonse Fournier: On a point of order, this amendment to the act has only one object, namely, to extend the life of the act. It does not ask for the reopening of all
the sections of the Agricultural Prices Support Act, 1944. What we are asking is to rectify,
I would not say a mistake, but a wrong interpretation of the 1944 statute. We are asking that the life of the act be extended, and nothing else. I always thought that in committee the discussion should be relevant to the item under consideration. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that hon. members can discuss the pros and cons of extending the act, but I cannot see how full debate on the act itself can be permitted.


James Arthur Ross: That was the very point I was endeavouring to make. I read the section. I was pointing out as strongly as I could my objection to this type of legislation being put into effect by order in council.


Alphonse Fournier: Is the hon. member in favour of this amendment?


James Arthur Ross: Yes, but I would rather have it in statutory form.


Alphonse Fournier: If the hon. member is in favour of the amendment, and he lias his reasons for being in favour of it, I cannot see why he is discussing the whole act.


James Arthur Ross: I am not satisfied with the amendment as proposed. This amendment to the act depends for its life upon an order in council. The government may carry it on, or nullify it, as it sees fit. I do not believe in that type of legislation in peace time.


Alphonse Fournier: We are not seeking to change the act at all. The only thing we are asking parliament is, does it wish to have this act in force for a further period? That is the whole question that is before the committee. I am surprised at the discussion which has taken place, when every member who has spoken up to now has said that he was in favour of extending the life of this act.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: May I speak to the point of order? I, too, represent a rural riding, and for once I am in accord with the Minister of Public Works. I cannot see the consistency of the argument of the hon. member for Souris. This is the very thing that the farmers want. They want the act extended.


James Arthur Ross: By statute, or by order in council?


George Alexander Cruickshank: This is a bill; it is not an order in council, or else I am mistaken. I think every farm member should vote in favour of it.


James Arthur Ross: Mr. Chairman-


William Henry Golding: Will the hon. member be kind enough to deal with the clause
Agricultural Prices Support Act

as it is? After all, speeches in committee must be strictly relevant to the clause under consideration.


James Arthur Ross: My objection all
through has been not to the method embodied in this legislation, but to the manner in which it is handled. It was set forth in 1944 that it was to be only a transitional measure. When does the transitional period expire? That is the point. We are continuing to deal with this matter by order in council. I was citing one of the situations which is alarming in this country today, and how it came about. I refer to the marketing of beef cattle. I will not discuss it any further. The producers know why this situation has been brought about, and why thousands of cattle are at a standstill in the Toronto yards this morning, and the same thing may apply in all of the yards across Canada. It has come about as a result of this government's legislation. I am discussing embargoes. I presume that if I gave some of the reasons that enter into the cost of agricultural production I might be ruled out of order, but these are closely tied up with the present situation. On the orders of the day today we had a question raised on the excise taxes. That all enters into the cost of production.


William Henry Golding: What is before the committee is a clause amending section 9 of the Agricultural Products Act 1944, chapter 29 of the statutes of 1944-45. It says that that section shall be deemed to have continued in force from the thirty-first day of March, 1948, until the coming into force of this act, and shall continue in force thereafter for such further period as the governor in council may fix by proclamation. That is what is before the committee.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to say a word on the point of order. I hesitate to say something that might have the effect of prolonging the debate, but it does seem to me that you, sir, should consider what section 9 is that this bill proposes to extend. I admit that the hon. member for Souris is getting beyond the powers contained in section 9 when he talks about embargoes, but not very far beyond it.


James Arthur Ross: It is the real cause of the difficulties in meat.
Mr. KNOW'LES: Section 9 has two subsections, and subsection 1 has paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), and (j). These are listed under powers of the board. In fact, if one looks through the act he finds that the meat of it is right there in section 9. The other sections constitute the board and
[The Deputy Chairman.]
arrange for their salaries, oaths of office and so on. Section 9 gives the board power to set prices at which the board may purchase agricultural products, power to pay the difference between the set price and what the farmers are getting, power to sell or otherwise dispose of agricultural products purchased by the board, power to purchase, and so on. With the other members of this group I am wholly in support of this act. We should like to see it made permanent. I agree with the Minister of Public Works that if we are all for it, the discussion seems to be unnecessary. My only 'point of order is that though it may be unnecessary, surely it is in order. Perhaps if we can agree that it is in order, the discussion would end sooner than if we all quarrel about the point of order.


Alphonse Fournier: Perhaps I did not make myself clear. The purpose of the amendment is to extend the life of section 9. We are not seeking to amend that section, to increase or decrease the powers contained therein.


Mr. ROWE:: Why extend it?


Alphonse Fournier: Your leader saw good reasons why we should extend it; he made a speech this morning, but the hon. gentleman was not here. All we are asking is this: Is this house in favour of extending these powers? We are not asking that they be changed, and all discussion on this item, I respectfully submit, should be relevant to the amendment brought in by the minister. If we were seeking to amend section 9 to vary the powers contained therein, this discussion would be wide open, but that is not the object of the amendment.


James Arthur Ross: I take it I am not in order in discussing the cost of agricultural production, or anything of the kind, which might lead to the necessity for this act.
The DEiPUTY CHAIRMAN: The purpose of the bill is simply to continue in force section 9 of the Agricultural Prices Support Act, 1944. It is to extend the time.


James Arthur Ross: I take it from your ruling, Mr. Chairman, and from the opinions expressed by the Minister of Public Works and others on the government side, that this extension does not mean very much. I wish to ask the parliamentary assistant whether it is a fact that this act comes into being only by order in council, and whether it can be nullified at any time by order in council without reference to parliament. I should like to get the answer to that question.

Agricultural Prices Support Act


Robert McCubbin: Once the governor in council decides under the act the length of time to which it shall extend, it will extend for that period. If the time decided upon is two years, it will run for that period.


Mr. FAIR:: Mr. Chairman, did I understand the parliamentary assistant to say, just before the luncheon recess, that the government intends to keep the act in effect for a period of two years?


Robert McCubbin: It is not necessary.
Before, it was for a period of two years, but it is not necessary this time. It may or may not be two years.


Victor Quelch: It may be longer.


Robert McCubbin: It may be longer or shorter.


Robert Fair: If it is longer than the government think, and if they intend to do anything about making it permanent, it might be a good idea to move in the very near future.


John Thomas Hackett: I wish to say a few words on the purport of this bill, which is to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act of 1944.
By section 12 of the act of 1944 it was provided that section 9 of the act should come into force on a date to be fixed, and remain in force for such period as might be determined by proclamation of the governor in council published in the Canada Gazette.
I am not enthusiastic about the type of economy that is spelled out in this act, but I am speaking on another point at the moment. Following the provisions of section 12 of the act, a proclamation dated the first day of April, 1946, brought the act into force for a period of two years. A further proclamation was authorized by order in council dated March 25, 1948. The Department of Agriculture was then advised by the Department of Justice that the order in council was ultra vires and that the act could be continued only by an act of parliament. We are now asked to pass an enabling act which confers upon the governor in council the prerogative of determining how long this act shall remain in force -and when I say "this act", I refer to section 9 of the act, which is the essence and the body of the Agricultural Prices Support Act.
It means that this type of legislation is subject to the whim and caprice of the minister and those about him, with the result that there is no certainty about the legislation as it affects prices of commodities covered by the act.
It may be objected that there was no great certainty in a competitive market, but at that time everybody was subject to a rule which is 5849-359J
as old as time, the rule of supply and demand. Under this enactment it is open to the government absolutely to ruin farmers in some sections of the country, as the dairy farmers in the eastern townships have been ruined, by precluding them from getting for butter a price which they were forced to demand by reason of the cost of labour and of feed. The result is that we have a shortage of butter, which is having a deleterious effect upon the health of the community, and is bringing about, in an agricultural and dairy country like ours, the necessity of importing this commodity from far lands.
The chairman appears to be a little uneasy. Possibly he is questioning whether I am speaking to the point, but I beg his attention and submit that we are asked today to enact legislation which covers all the points that were raised by the hon. member for Souris. We are today exactly in the position we were in when the act was first introduced into the house. It is open to us to discuss every aspect, every paragraph, every condition, every possibility which may arise under the act, because today, according to the government itself, there is no such act. The attempt further to enforce it by order in council was found by the Department of Justice to be in excess of the powers conferred by the act.
This house is asked to continue the manipulation of prices by the government. The war has been over for three years. Many specifics have been resorted to, to keep prices low, and what has been the result? Scarcity, high prices driving the people from the land into the cities, inadequate housing in the cities, and a whole series of maladies resulting from lack of equilibrium and lack of order, which necessarily follow from controls exercised by people who are not familiar with t'he aspect of life which they are attempting to control.
Added to all of that is the uncertainty of the enactment. Nobody knows what may be done at a propitious moment on the eve of an election, or in the heat of an election campaign. There is nothing to prevent the passing of an order in council which will create great inducements for any locality to support the administration.


Alphonse Fournier: May I ask the hon. gentleman a question?


John Thomas Hackett: Yes.


Alphonse Fournier: I am always
looking at that first section which is being considered by the committee. Will the hon. gentleman tell me what would happen if the committee voted down section 1 of the bill?
Agricultural Prices Support Act


John Thomas Hackett: I did not hear the question.


Alphonse Fournier: I am asking the hon. gentleman to tell me what would happen if the committee turned down this section 1.


John Thomas Hackett: Nothing would happen, because according to the judgment of the Department of Justice the act died some months ago. .We would get back to the one specific which the government has failed so far to apply, that of letting people manage their own business and charge for commodities prices that the markets will yield in the ordinary course of business.


James Arthur Ross: This is just political eyewash, Mr. Chairman.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member is taking the stand that this act does not exist at the moment.


William Earl Rowe: You said it did not.


Alphonse Fournier: We all know that by order in council we prolonged the life of the act. We were advised that we needed a statute to effect this purpose. Now we are presenting the statute. The act has been in force. It has never been attacked before the courts, and unless the committee today says the act should not be continued in force, it will continue in force. We are trying to remedy the defect. That is all we are doing. If the hon. gentleman says he is opposed to this act, and that seemed to be the basis of his argument-


John Thomas Hackett: The hon. gentleman rose to ask a question, Mr. Chairman. In my experience, I have found that it is always wise to permit a gentleman, especially when he is a courteous one, to ask a question. But I point out that there is a slight distinction between a question and a speech. This act was passed for a specific time. This act was under sentence of death. That sentence has been carried out. The act is dead. It is as dead as a doornail.


James Arthur Ross: It was a transitional measure.


John Thomas Hackett: Its only claim to existence rests upon one of these emergencies which the courts have already decreed do not exist. But this act itself has gone out of existence.


George Hugh Castleden: On March 31.


John Thomas Hackett: It went out of existence on March 31 of this year; and any impositions that have been enacted since then have been illegally enforced without right, cause, or power. This is an attempt to

legislate for the past and to legislate for an indeterminate future; it is an attempt to place upon commodities which are dealt in by' the farming element of the country, a continued and dangling promise of prosperity in order to induce a little temporary' enthusiasm.


James Arthur Ross: An attempt to get
public favour.


John Thomas Hackett: We are complaining that we are burdened With taxation. This act can be made effective only by the taxes that you and I pay. The hardships and the austerities which were gladly assumed during the period of the war no longer find application in a free community. For that reason I am opposed to this act, as well as to the illegalities which it attempts to cover up.


John Alpheus Charlton: If the parliamentary
assistant to the Minister of Agriculture had read the explanatory notes on the right-hand page, I am sure he would have seen, from his own words, that the act expired on March 31, 1948. It was passed in 1944. It was put into effect in 1946 for a two-year period, and that period expired on March 31, 1948.
The parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Agriculture said that this act was supposed to bring stability to the farmers. What possible stability can there be when it it left to the governor in council to say when the act shall expire? There cannot possibly be any stability in that. There is no act now. This is just an. example of what this government does and of what it has been doing for the last four or five years to farm production across this country.


Mr. HARRIS (Grey-Bruce):: What stability
will there be if we do not pass this bill?


William Earl Rowe: More than we have now.


John Alpheus Charlton: I am not opposed to this bill. I want that to be understood. I am just pointing out what happened during the past four of five years as a result of government inefficiency in handling this measure. This is just one example of that inefficiency. They let the act expire. From March 31 this year until the present there has been no Agricultural Prices Support Act. Have we any assurance from the government that they will not do the same thing in two years? No. It does not say in the bill. It simply says:
. . . until the coming into force of this act and shall continue in force thereafter for such further period as the governor in council may fix by proclamation.

Agricultural Prices Support Act
What assurance have we that the act cannot be thrown out in the next six months? What possible stability can there be for the farmers?. They have been disallowed a chance of making a little extra money, and now the government come along and say: We are not sure whether we shall let you have this act for another six months, or two years, or five years. If the government cannot make this permanent legislation, why not set the period? Are they ashamed to set it?


George Alexander Cruickshank: Will the hon. member permit a question?


John Alpheus Charlton: Certainly.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I presume the hon. member is assuming-and I am sure he is correct in so doing-that we shall be in power for the next ten or fifteen years.


John Alpheus Charlton: The governor in council will still be there, and he will still have that power, no matter what government is in power.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am glad the hon. member admits it.


Mr. MILLER:: I should like to ask a question of the parliamentary assistant. Have any payments been made under this act, on any account, since March 31 of this year?
Mr. MeCUBBIN: Yes, some payments have been made, but only payments that were started prior to March 31. No new payments have been made.


James Arthur Ross: On what were the payments made?
Mr. MeCUBBIN: On apples and potatoes.


John Alpheus Charlton: The parliamentary
assistant has not yet answered my question. Why will the government not state a time in this bill?
Mr. MeCUBBIN: Once this bill is passed, they will set the time in the proclamation.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Calvert Charlton Miller: Will the parliamentary
assistant tell us this: Suppose the bill is passed, and then the governor in council passes an order in council fixing the period for one year, is there anything to stop the governor in council from passing another order in council to amend the first one, either increasing or decreasing the period of time provided by the first order in council?


Wilfrid Garfield Case: The hon. member is speaking of a great many orders in council.
Mr. MeCUBBIN: When lawyers start discussing some of these points with me, of course
that is not in my class at all. But I can say this much. Only one proclamation will be issued, and only one order in council.


John Thomas Hackett: One at a time.
Mr. MeCUBBIN: That will set the time; it will continue until the end of that time; and there will be no order in council varying it.


John Alpheus Charlton: How can the parliamentary assistant stand in his place and make that statement when he says he cannot state government policy?
Mr. MeCUBBIN: I am stating the ruling under the old act; that is all.


William Earl Rowe: I think the parliamentary assistant is only expressing his confidence in the department he represents.
Mr. MeCUBBIN: That is worth something.


William Earl Rowe: It would appear to me, as the Minister of Public Works has pointed out, that the whole point is contained in the explanatory note, which says:
A further proclamation was authorized by order in council dated March 25, 1948, but the Department of Agriculture was then advised that the section could be continued only by act of parliament.
In reply to the hon. member for Stanstead, the hon. gentleman has said the government passed an order in council before the act died in March, though they were advised it could not be done except by an act- of parliament. He said the courts had not tested it; therefore he assumed they had not the power, and an order in council has been passed already. He asked what would happen if we did not pass this bill. Evidently he assumes that if the courts did not question it, he could still carry on.
This is the situation as I see it. Even in *wartime it was suggested that the act could be continued only by act of parliament, but now in peacetime the- government wants the right to pass more orders in council and get away from an act of parliament. I am amused at the confidence, shown by the parliamentary assistant, in the governor in council, who, he says, may extend it for one year or for two years, and that this decision will not be altered, when the proposed amendment reads-
-until the coming into force of this act and shall continue in force thereafter for such further period as the governor in- council may fix by proclamation.
Then there is the further provision:
This act shall come into force on a date to be fixed by proclamation of the governor in council.

Agricultural Prices Support Act
In other words, if this amendment is adopted the governor in council can say when it shall come into force, when it shall go out, and how long it shall be continued. I think the parliamentary assistant shows a great deal of confidence in what is going to be done by the governor in council through these orders in council, if he can give any assurance as to any period of time.
As the hon. member for Stanstead has said so clearly, no one knows better than you, Mr. Chairman, that the instability in this country today, which is causing thousands of people in Europe to starve, which has brought about a hectic situation in the poultry and egg business, which has played havoc with the bacon business, and which has brought high prices, has come about simply because -of government interference with the marketing of agricultural products. Someone may ask what stability we can expect if this amendment is adopted and we give the governor in council carte blanche to fix the prices of agricultural products perhaps just before a provincial election or a by-election or a general election, and so please that great element whose support the government is losing so rapidly at the present time.
It does seem to me this is a very important matter. Everyone who comes from a rural riding, including the parliamentary assistant, knows that this year the chickens hatched amounted to only about thirty-five per cent as compared with last year, while we actually required an increase of thirty-five per cent; and at the same time we have millions of children starving in Europe. It is not exactly a matter of the dollar sign, but as long as we continue under a profit system-and unless everyone is to share alike, as hon. gentlemen to my left would suggest, with everyone owning something and no one owning anything-I submit we have a responsibility to encourage production. The parliamentary assistant knows as well as he knows he is sitting where some day he may sit permanently-[DOT]


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


William Earl Rowe: That is if his party does not go to the country in between times-that many returned soldiers have used their resources to start poultry farms throughout this country. Even those -who are lawyers who may not be as well acquainted with the agricultural districts, as some of us, have seen many barns altered, with windows in the upper lofts, to accommodate poultry. .


An hon. MEMBER:: Oh, oh.
Mr, ROWE: My hon. friend laughs. He knows the story. Those buildings are empty now, or else the owners are borrowing money from all the banks in the country.


Mr. HARTT:: Your roosters are not working hard enough.


William Earl Rowe: Your chickens are coming home to roost. That is why poultry production this year is down by about thirty-five per cent. That is why the production of butter is down. That is why the production of bacon is down, and that is why we have failed to meet our overseas commitments. By this experimental folly we have contributed to the starvation of millions of children overseas.
I think I am as much interested in agriculture as any hon. member of this house. I am not in agreement with this policy. I disagree with the general principle, and I disagree with the irresponsible way it is brought before parliament. Never before in the history of this country have we had a government which in peacetime has put through so much legislation by order in council, and left so much to be administered by those who have no responsibility to the electors. What are we here for? Why, Mr. Chairman, this parliament is becoming a farce. During the period of the war the party to your right asked for extended privileges with respect to orders in council. They were given carte blanche. Things had to be done, and we were prepared to co-operate. But surely if legislation which, as has been so well said, interferes with that private enterprise in which the great majority of the citizens of this country believe, had to be brought in during wartime by act of parliament, what justification is there today for saying it must still be left to the whim of the government and be done by order in council? Now no one knows when it will be brought in, with the exception of the cabinet sitting quietly over in the east block; no one knows when it will be discontinued or when it will be changed.
I would not want to be so cruel as to say that when another provincial election comes round we may hear a great deal about prices, embargoes and so on; that might not be in order under this bill. >1 hardly know when I am in order, however, or when I am out of order. I presume you know, Mr. Chairman; but if a person cannot talk about agricultural prices on a bill to amend the Agricultural Prices Support Act, I do not know when he can talk about them. I do not ' think you can bring them up under railways and canals, or old age pensions, for example.
I urge the government to give us something more definite; and let it be done by act of parliament. Tell us when it is to come in and when it is to go out. Probably it is too late, but I urge the government to let this go out entirely and permit the law of

Agricultural Prices Support Act
supply and demand to govern agricultural prices. Then you will find agricultural production in this country increasing all along the line. However, that is a question of policy. We are being asked for an extension of this legislation. I submit that if we are to extend it, that should be done by an act of parliament, which is the responsible way of putting through legislation, instead of lea/ving it to the whim of the government.


Alphonse Fournier: There is no one to whom I listen with more pleasure than to the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe. Whether he speaks on this or any other subject he is always interesting. But if he had read the section we are discussing he would have learned at least one thing. The purpose of this amendment is to have the act continued from March 31 last. That is when it will come in, if the house agrees.
I do not know whether the hon. member agrees with his leader, but this morning he said that he was in favour of this legislation. If he does not agree with his leader-


William Earl Rowe: We have some freedom on this side of the house.


James Arthur Ross: He said exactly the same thing we said.


Alphonse Fournier: This act was in force until March 31 of this year but the Department of Justice told the Department of Agriculture that it could not prolong its life by an order in council, that we would have to come to parliament for authority. What we are asking today is whether the committee agrees to extend this act which has been in force up to March 31, 1948, to a date to be fixed, as it was last time, by proclamation. I think the misunderstanding among hon. members arises because of a wrong interpretation of section 12, which reads:
Section nine of this act shall come into force on a date to be fixed-
The date is fixed in this one; we know that; that is a certain fact.
-and remain in force for such period as may be determined, by proclamation of the governor in council published in the Canada Gazette.
That proclamation was issued for two years. Somebody thought that we could issue another proclamation to prolong the life of the act, but Justice told us that we could not, that we would have to come back to parliament and ask once more for that power. We are asking parliament today to legalize this act, which has been in force, and permit it to be in operation in the future until a date to be fixed by proclamation.
This is one of the simplest bills I have ever seen brought in to the house, and any discussion beyond the scope of it is beyond me. If you are for the amendment we would like to know, because in your own party I think the hon. member for Souris said that while he did not like it, he was in favour of it; the hon. member for Brant said that it was not very good, but he was in favour of it. Then we have the hon. member for Stanstead saying, "No, I abhor legislation of this sort; I am against it." He was quite outspoken about it. I thought at one time that my gentleman farmer friend in front of me agreed, but at another time he was not too sure. If he had been here this morning and heard his leader, I think he would admit that while it may not be what he wants, it meets the necessities of the moment.
The group to the left of the official opposition agree to this, and they have repeatedly said so. I do not know why they are trying to stop the passage of this amendment. They have made long speeches-


Mr. GRAYDON:: Surely a member can speak on a piece of legislation?


Alphonse Fournier: When they get beyond the scope of the amendment they are not in order.


William Earl Rowe: I am not going to prolong the discussion. I do not want to interrupt my hon. friend, especially when he was so courteous to me. I take it as a compliment when he calls me a gentleman farmer, because all the farmers in my district are gentlemen. I should like to ask him if an order in council was not passed since March 31.


Alphonse Fournier: It is admitted in the explanation of the bill that on April 6 that, was done in good faith.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Your good faith was on March 25.


Alphonse Fournier: We thought at that time it was all right, but we were told that we would have to come back to parliament. This is one instance in which this government has come back to parliament.


Gordon Graydon: Just once.


Alphonse Fournier: It seems that we all agree.


William Earl Rowe: My hon. friend says that they are coming back to parliament so that they will not have to come back to parliament. Now that he has given an explanation I am not going to prolong the discussion by making it embarrassing for the government.

Agricultural Prices Support Act


Mr. DROPE:: Mr. Chairman, it has been amazing to listen to the lecture we have heard from the Minister of Public AVorks about what we should do in connection with agriculture. This act expired three months ago while the house was in session. It is just another example of the agricultural policy of this government. They are behind all the time, and they are three months behind with this bill. It seems to me that the Department of Agriculture should be cleaned up if our basic industry is not to be left behind, and this might be a good time to start in.
Every time we ask questions about agriculture-I have asked a few in the last month or two-we are told that it is a matter of government policy which will be announced in due course. I would like to find out what the government's policy is. The Minister of Public Works is talking about our leader, but what is his leader saying about it? The country does not know, and we as members of the house do not know. If we are going to provide this nation with food and have something to export, we should have a long-range policy which cannot be terminated overnight. Why was not this bill brought in before the end of March?


Robert McCubbin: We wanted all the farmer members to be here when it was brought in. They are all here today, so we thought it would be a good time to bring it in.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Where is the Minister of Agriculture?


Robert Earle Drope: If they do not know the
answer, why do they not say so?


John Alpheus Charlton: How and by whom will the floor prices be set?


Robert McCubbin: The floor prices will be set by the government on the recommendation of the agricultural prices support board.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 2 and 3 agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. McCUBBIN moved the third reading of the bill.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Mines and Resources) moved that the house go into committee on Bill No. 363, to amend the Yukon Quartz Mining Act.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
Sections 1 to 8 inclusive, agreed to.
On section 9-Tagging of claims.
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: In my opinion subsection 1 of section 45 of the original act as now amended by section 9 of this bill is too drastic and should have some safeguarding words added to it. It now reads:
(1)	As soon as reasonably possible after the recording of the claim the holder of the claim shall affix or cause to be affixed securely to each of the posts of the said claim a metal tag plainly marked or impressed with the recorded number and letter or letters, if any, of the claim, and in default the claim may be cancelled by the mining recorder on the application of anyone who in the opinion of the mining recorder has been misled by the lack of such tags.
(2)	The mining recorder on application shall supply the numbered tags, mentioned in subsection one, free of charge.
(3)	This section applies in respect of all claims recorded after the first day of June, nineteen hundred and forty-eight.
To a certain extent that follows the provision in the gold mining law of British Columbia, except that in British Columbia, before the claim is located, these metal tags are furnished by the mining recorder to the person about to locate the property, and the metal tags are put on from the start. However, if the minister prefers to have it done after the claim is recorded I am not going to quarrel with it; but I do say that in default of the metal tags on the posts, the claim should not be cancelled without an inquiry. Therefore I move an addition to subsection 1 of section 45, which, if adopted, would make the section read as follows:
... in default, the claim may be cancelled by the mining recorder on the application of anyone who in the opinion of the mining recorder has been misled by the lack of such tags, after a notice in writing by the mining recorder of a hearing before the mining recorder has been served on such claim holder and on said person or persons applying for cancellation. Said notice to contain the name or names of the persons applying for cancellation, alleging that they have been misled and stating how misled, and after a hearing of all of said parties before the mining recorder.
I think that is only fair, and it is in line with another paragraph of the same act under which co-owners of mineral claims are called upon to do their proportionate amount of the representation work annually. They must pay their proportionate amount of the renewal, and if one fails to do that, a hearing is held before the mining recorder and the defaulting owners are given a notice of the hearing. An opportunity is afforded them to come before the mining recorder at that hearing and state their case. I think the complaint should be known to the person complained of. He should know what the complaint is, and a complete hearing should be held before the mining recorder goes so far as to cancel the claim.


Mr. MacKINNON:: The hon. member has discussed this matter with me and with the officials of the department, and I have drafted an amendment to this section which I purpose asking my colleague the minister of external affairs to move. It follows exactly along the lines of the representation the hon. member has made. It has been submitted to Justice and they have passed it. I will read it, and if it is satisfactory to the hon. member I will ask my colleague to move it:
45. (1) As soon as reasonably possible after the recording of the claim the holder of the claim shall affix or cause to be affixed securely to each of the posts of the said claim a metal tag plainly marked or impressed with the recorded number and letter or letters, if any, of the claim and in the event of default, the mining recorder may after a hearing, cancel the entry for the claim upon the application of any person who, in the opinion of the mining recorder, has been misled by the lack of such tags; notice of the hearing together with a copy of the application, shall be served on the recorded owner of the claim in the manner directed by the mining recorder at least ten days before the date fixed for the hearing.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I so move.


John Thomas Hackett: May I make a suggestion which I hope the minister will consider. It refers to the delay. It seems to me that ten days is a very short delay. Thirty days would be a more equitable time, considering the vast distances of that remote land, and it would probably in the end save time because, if the person were to go before the board and say he was not able to proceed because of the very shortness of the notice, he would probably get an adjournment. I therefore suggest that the minister make it thirty days instead of ten.


James Angus MacKinnon: One effect the suggestion might have would be to delay matters, but I really have no objection to extending it from ten to thirty days.
Yukon Quartz Mining Act

Mr. ST. LAURENT: The word "thirty" can be substituted for the word "ten".


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section as amended agreed to.
Sections 10 to 12 inclusive agreed to.
On section 13-When dominion land surveyor may include fraction within the claim. Proviso.
George Black: I have an amendment to this section, a copy of which I will send to the minister. Section 13 relates to the original Clauses of the act numbered 81, 82, and 82A. I am moving an amendment to be en tered as 82B.
82B. No entry granted' for a mineral claim shall be subject to cancellation in the discretion of the minister unless such cancellation is first recommended by the commissioner.
The preceding sections and subsections of section 13 refer to surveys. This Yukon Quartz Mining Act was enacted in 1924 in the second session that I attended in this House of Commons. Prior to that time, the mining law of Yukon in regard to quartz and lode mining was by order in council passed at Ottawa, regardless altogether of the circumstances pertaining to Yukon, methods of mining, and what was advisable or not advisable.
I drafted the act and submitted it to the miners of Yukon. As far as possible it met their requirements. I submitted it to the then minister of the interior, as he was called, the late Hon. Charles Stewart. He submitted it to his legal advisers and together we agreed on the act. Mr. Stewart piloted it through the house, and it has stood from 1924 down to this time with some more or less minor amendments down through the years.
In the act there was one section which the department was very anxious to have in. I did not approve it, but rather than hold mp the legislation or jeopardize it, I refrained from making any long fight against it. I was assured by the minister and his staff that the wide provisions of that section would newer be abused, and all through the years they have never been abused. No attempt was made to violate the provisions of that section until March of this year when there occurred what I regard as a violent abuse of the section. I will read the section to the committee:
The recorded owner of a mineral claim shall have a survey thereof made at his own expense by a duly qualified dominion land surveyor under instructions from the surveyor general within one year from the date upon which notification by the minister to do so may be sent to him.
2. Such notification shall not be given until the expiration of at least one year from the date upon which the claim was recorded.

3. If the survey is not made, and if the returns of such survey are not received and approved by the surveyor general within one year from the date of notification, the entry granted for the mineral claim shall be subject to immediate cancellation in the discretion of the minister.
There is too much discretion there to foe given to any minister. The section should not be brought into play unless there is absolute need of it, and in my opinion, knowing the situation in Yukon as I do, I do not think there is need of it today. Under the provisions of that section, this is the order that went out to the claim owners. Notices were prepared in Ottawa and sent to the various mining recorders of the territory:
Upon instructions from the Minister of Mines and Resources and pursuant to section 78 of the Quartz Mining Act, you are hereby notified that you must within one year from the date upon which notification is sent to you, at your own expense, have a survey made of all mineral claims owned by you which were recorded prior to March 31, 1947.
A storm of protest against that came in to the department. Then along came another letter from the mining recorder, also prepared in Ottawa and sent out to have the name put in and be sent out by the mining recorder. This is the way this demand No. 2 reads:
The increasing interest displayed in mineral resources of Yukon Territory has emphasized the necessity of having surveys made to determine the boundaries of older quartz mining claims. Many complaints have been received recently as a result of those entering the field being unable to accurately locate claims from stakes on the ground or from descriptions in the record book.
The minister has therefore authorized the enforcement of section 78, Yukon Quartz Mining Act, and I have been instructed by the minister to notify you in his behalf, and you are hereby so notified, that you shall have a survey made at your own expense by a duly qualified dominion land surveyor under instructions from the surveyor general within one year from the date of this notice, of all claims standing in your name and recorded for over one year.
Then the attention of the claimant is called to the penalty, which is that the claim shall be subject to immediate cancellation at the discretion of the minister. Then along comes another letter. The two I have read were by no means well received. No. 3 reads as fellows:
The correspondence which has been received as a result of the notices sent to claim holders under section 78 of the Yukon Quartz Mining Act has been reported to the department and I have been instructed to furnish further information to all those to whom these notices have been sent, supplementing the information already given,
The necessity of a survey of mineral claims has been a fundamental requirement of the Quartz Mining Act from the beginning.

Yukon Quartz Mining Act
That is absolutely incorrect and not so.
The two-post staking system which is in effect in Yukon territory contemplates that there will be an early survey so that the boundary of each claim may be defined.
That is not a correct interpretation at all. It was never the intention that there would be an early survey. The two-post system is in effect and has been used in British Columbia for the last fifty years; and quartz mining in British Columbia is greater in magnitude than anything that has been undertaken in Yukon to date, although it is coming on. The two-post system has been satisfactory to the miners all down through the years and there has never been a demand for a change. The letter continues:
This requirement was not enforced during the time when it was imposible to obtain the services of a surveyor. The net result of this leniency-
Listen to that-"leniency".
-has been that those who wish to proceed with the development of the mineral resources of the territory are unable to ascertain the limits of the properties that can be secured either by purchase or staking.
I doubt that. If there are people of that sort who are delayed and prevented, they should come out from under cover, say who they are, say who is delaying them, and have those people who are delaying them disciplined and made subject to the provisions of this act. Do not hit the whole mining population over the head with that section. The letter continues:
Now that the services of dominion land surveyors are available it has been considered appropriate to require claim holders to have their claims surveyed. There is no intention of taking arbitrary action.
Oh, none at all.
If it is impossible to have a survey made, either because the surveyor cannot get around to it, or for good and sufficient reason the claim owner while developing the property is unable to pay the expense of the survey, then the circumstances will be considered by the minister on the representations of the claim holder.
And so on. That, I think, was the third demand.


James Angus MacKinnon: I would appreciate it if the hon. member for Yukon would finish the reading of the document. He stopped in the middle of it. It is important in connection with the statement.


George Black: Then following
those notices came a demand to the claim owners for a deposit from them of $200 per claim. A man owning ten claims had to put up $2,000. That demand was not welcomed either. Now the department has come down to $100. That is the last demand.
Further than that, there are three mining districts in Yukon; the Dawson district, the Whitehorse district and the Mayo district. I am informed by the minister's officials that no surveys are to be required in the Dawson or Whitehorse districts, but that it will all be confined to the Mayo district. That is where the big silver mines are. That is where certain people, I think, want to get more property instead of going out in a manly way and going after it. Those operators of silver-lead mines in Yukon are in the way of making millions of dollars of profit on Canadian investment, and I am glad they are. They have silver-lead ore so rich that it is hard to realize it. It is so valuable that it does not need to be milled, but only to be sorted and sent out to the smelters in its native state. To say that the people wishing to acquire claims to more property cannot find the boundaries of claims already located and that have become the property of various owners, is not correct. There is a map of all the surveyed claims in that silver mining area and there is a blueprint in the mining recorder's office at Mayo and Dawson, showing the location not only of the surveyed claims but of all the recorded claims.
If people are anxious to acquire a property from claim owners, those claim owners will go out and show them where the boundaries are and what they have to acquire. I have received-as I am sure the minister and his staff have also-literally hundreds of protests. I have one protest here containing signatures of over 164 claim owners against that attempt on the part of the minister's officials to drive those claim owners into having their claims surveyed. The minister will pardon me if I quote from a letter written to me by him, dated May 25. He says:
It may interest you to know that in the Northwest Territories the department employs mining inspectors to see that the assessment work which is claimed by affidavit is actually performed on the claims. So far, this has not been the policy undler the Yukon Quartz Mining Act. You are aware, of course, that the British Columbia mining administration, which has two-post staking, employes mining inspectors.
I can understand that the minister is not up to date on the policy of his department, because he has only come to it. But he saya that it has not been the policy under the Yukon Quartz Mining Act. When this quartz mining act was passed in 1924, mining inspectors were at once appointed; they did their work, inspected the claims and saw that the mining was done properly and with safety to the miners in the mine. But for some unaccountable reason the government and the department have dropped the position of
Yukon Quartz Mining Act

mining inspector altogether and we have no mining inspectors in Yukon. That is not the fault of the miners; it is the fault of the government itself. When the minister says it is not the policy, it is true it is not the policy, but it is provided by the act. British Columbia has the two-post staking system and its mining inspectors. We should have our mining inspectors, and we want the staking in Yukon to be the twonpost staking. I set out the situation fully in a letter I wrote the minister; and with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I should' like to read that letter and have it on record, because to the miners of Yukon this is a most important matter. On May 20 I wrote the then acting minister, whose appointment I am glad to say has been confirmed, saying:
The Yukon Quartz Mining Act was enacted by the parliament of Canada in 1924.
In the 24 years the act has been in operation mineral claims have been located, owned, sold and mined with entire satisfaction to both companies and individuals owning them, and until March of this year, no minister of mines, nor any of his staff has abused the power given the minister by section 78 of the act by notifying the recorded owners of unsurveyed' mineral claims in Yukon that a survey of the claims must be made at their expense by a fully qualified dominion land surveyor under instructions from the surveyor general within one year from the date upon which such notification by the minister to do so may be sent to him, and if the survey is not made, and if the returns of such survey are not received and approved by the surveyor general within one year from the date of notification, the entry granted for the mineral claim shall be subject to immediate cancellation in the discretion of the minister.
I need not read the whole letter, but in it I set out the various notices I have already read to the committee. Then I said to the minister, as I now say to the committee:
The department of mines states there are in Yukon approximately 1,057 recorded unsurveyed mineral claims, and it is assigning a surveyor to make surveys of mineral claims in Yukon, that such surveying in Yukon can he done during three or four months of the year, depending on locality. It follows that it will take a number of years to have those claims surveyed.
At the time this letter was written the amount demanded of the claim owners was $200 a claim, and I was acting on that figure. As I have already said, it has been reduced to $100 a claim.
Two hundred dollars per claim is exacted from the owners of the 1,657 unsurveyed claims. That will be $331,460-
Now, at S100 a claim, it will be half that amount, but these words will apply to that figure just as they applied to the earlier figure. -which sum or any part of it, if expended in prospecting and development work would do far more to develop mining than if tied up for unnecessary surveys.

As to the two-post system, the predecessors of the mining companies operating there now produced in a few years from those few mines values in silver-lead of over $25,000,000. The amendment I have moved provides that no entry granted for a mineral claim shall be subject to cancellation in the discretion of the minister unless such cancellation is on the recommendation of the commissioner. With all respect to the minister, he must remember that he is not a miner. He is here in Ottawa, three or four thousand miles from the mines to which this law is to apply. He has a perfectly good commissioner who, before being appointed to that position, was a lawyer practising first in Winnipeg and later in the mining camp of Yellowknife. He is in sympathy with the miners; he knows what they need, and he would never recommend the cancellation of a mining claim unless there was great misbehaviour on the part of the owner.
I ask the minister: Why penalize the owners of all claims, in even one of the three mining districts, if there are people holding unsurveyed mineral claims and who, as a result, are hampering progress and preventing other claims from being acquired? Let those who are complaining come into the open and say who is holding them up. Then the minister and his officials can quickly attend to those people and make them get out of the way. But do not make this apply to all the law-abiding miners in the whole Mayo district.
Therefore I considered it necessary and advisable to offer the amendment, and I only hope the minister will see his way clear to permit it to go through.


James Angus MacKinnon: I did not attempt to interrupt the hon. member while he was commenting on section 78 of the act, which is not being amended at all by this bill. This matter, with respect to which the hon. member for Yukon read certain instructions that were sent out by the department, has been the subject of conversations between my officials and myself and others interested, including the hon. member for Yukon. Following those discussions, new instructions were issued, which I believe meet with the approval of the hon. member. That is why I was anxious to have him read the full statement, to show that the clauses to which he objected have already been amended by the department.
I could go into the various points raised, but I do not think it is necessary. There was a real demand from people interested in mining development for the surveying of various claims in the Yukon territory. It is the intention of the department only to survey those claims alongside present developments, in order to

Yukon Quartz Mining Act
enable the men doing development work, as well as those in close proximity to those properties, to know exactly the extent of the claims.
We are following the two-post staking in the Yukon; that has always been followed there and in British Columbia. Each claim holder is required to do S100 worth of work on his development each year in order to hold the claim. The department is providing a surveyor to survey any claims that require to be ' surveyed, and we are doing that work for S100. That will be accepted as a discharge in full of the necessary work on the claim for that year.
I am sorry I cannot accept the amendment to section 13 by adding, as the hon. member suggests, a provision that no entry granted for a mineral claim shall be subject to cancellation in the discretion of the minister unless such cancellation is first recommended by the commissioner. There is no doubt in the world that, before the minister ever acts, he gets advice from the commissioner, and on that advice he takes action. I think it would be a retrograde step for the minister here at Ottawa to attempt to throw off any of his own responsibility in a matter of this kind. I believe the minister must accept and assume the final responsibility; and the information upon which he acts is the information and the recommendation coming from the commissioner. Under those circumstances I do not see how' I can accept this amendment.


John Thomas Hackett: WTould the minister advise the committee if there is anything in the regulations making it imperative that the minister should have a report from the commissioner before acting? I agree with the minister that responsibility rests with the minister. He should exercise it and assume all the praise or penalties that might arise from the decision at which he arrives. If I am correctly informed, mining is not only an important industry in the Yukon territory, it is possibly, the only one.
In the last few months something has come about that has caused a great deal of anxiety among the hardy breed of men called miners or prospectors. It would seem unfortunate if anything should occur w'hich would tend to diminish their enthusiasm or energy in the pursuit of their difficult and burdensome calling. The minister has not said that new' conditions have not come into existence. I did not understand from the hon. member for Yukon exactly what had aroused the fears, if not the suspicions of his constituents, but apparently about March last a number of threats of cancellation or cancellations took place.
Would there be any particular difficulty in inserting in the regulations a provision whereby an action taken by the minister should be preceded by a report from the commissioner?
I am not suggesting that the minister be bound by that report because, as he has well said, the responsibility is his, and I for one am content that it should remain where it belongs in its entirety, upon the shoulders of the minister. But, after all, the minister is far away from the Yukon. The Yukon is now more accessible in some ways than it has ever been before, and it is possible that practices which formerly did not obtain in that country may be germinating there and causing hardship to the prospectors and miners. It seems to me that if that provision were in the regulations the minister would get a report which W'ould be based upon the facts, and among those facts would be the views of the prospector or owner of the claim. Therefore no hurried decision would be taken, and I think the situation would be met.
Apparently there is something new', because for twenty-four years this act has been administered, as I understand, to the entire satisfaction of the population of the Yukon. But today that population is disturbed and upset. There must be some reason for that. I am sure that the minister wishes the important work of prospecting to go on and that those who follow that calling should have all the protection that good administration will provide. Therefore I ask him if he does not consider it feasible to put into the regulations that provision which would lead these people to believe that they will continue to receive the equitable administration which they have known in the past.


James Angus MacKinnon: Not to the same extent as the hon. member for Yukon, but to a quite considerable extent I am familiar with the situation in Yukon. In recent years the easiest access from the Yukon to the outside world has been through my own city of Edmonton. On visits to Yukon I have had an opportunity to familiarize myself to a certain extent with conditions there. I may say there are no regulations in Yukon under this act; there are regulations in the Northwest Territories.
I do not know that the miners or claim holders of the Yukon have become aroused. I heard nothing about it until this legislation was placed before me. The whole aim of the department in bringing forward these amendments is to make mining development in the Yukon easier and quicker. There have been
565S
Yukon Quartz Mining Act

requests for the surveying of claims, particularly in districts where there has been development.
Under the orders and instructions that have been set out, no person holding a claim some distance from development need have any worry about being compelled to do any surveying. It would be a physical impossibility, even if the department wished it, to survey any but the claims in the Keno-Mayo district alone within the next year or two. Holders of claims in Yukon have been informed as follows:
Those who are unable to comply or who wish to establish a case for special consideration by reason of their bona tides as actual developers of the property they hold under entry should disclose the circumstances which in their opinion would justify the minister in not cancelling thieir claims.
Everything is being done to aid the mining development of Yukon. As I have said, that is the whole interest of the government in introducing this legislation.


Frank Exton Lennard: I rise to support the hon. member for Yukon and the argument put forward by the hon. member for Stanstead. I have here an editorial published in the June, 1948, issue of the Westem Miner of Vancouver, which deals with the arguments that have been put forward this afternoon. I wonder if the minister and the committee would permit me to place this on the record. I can read it, but I ask for that permission in order to save time.


James Angus MacKinnon: I have read the article in the Western Miner. If the hon. member for Wentworth is anxious to put it on the record, I have no objection, but the editorial is based upon false premises. It is based upon what the hon. member for Yukon read at the start before he had had the department's correction. As I say, I have no objections, but I want to state that, having read the editorial, I knowr it is based on false premises.


Frank Exton Lennard: The minister having
stated his stand and apparently having no objection to this editorial being put on the record, in fairness to those interested I ask for unanimous consent to put it on the record.
Mr. ST. LAURENT: I do not like to object; but some time ago the hon. member for Lethbridge wished to put something on the record and I suggested that it would be a bad precedent. It seemed to be then agreed that our record should be a true picture of what goes on in the house. Though it does take a little time to read something of sufficient importance to be on the record I think it is preferable to take that time and do it in that way. There are other places where the written

record gives a very poor picture of what actually takes place in the deliberations, and I think it would be unfortunate if our house slipped along such a path. The hon. member might give us the pleasure of hearing him read such portions as he thinks should be on the record.


Frank Exton Lennard: It will be a pleasure to do so, as requested by the minister. This editorial appeared in the Western Miner, published at Vancouver, and is dated June 1948. It reads:
The Department of Mines and Resources would be well advised to reconsider its present attitude regarding compulsory surveying of mineral claims in Yukon teirritory. A bureaucratic interpretation of section 78 of the Yukon Quartz Mining Act now provides that owners of mineral claims in Yukon must, within one year, have their claims surveyed by a dominion land surveyor and have the survey approved by the surveyor general. Failing this, entries granted for such Claims will be subject to immediate cancellation in the discretion of the Minister of Mines. Seeking to defend its position, the government states that: "The necessity of a survey of mineral claims1 has been a fundamental requirement of the Yukon Quartz Mining Act from the beginning. The two-post staking system which is in effect in the Yukon territory contemplates that there will be an early survey so that the boundary of each claim may be defined. This requirement \vas not enforced during the time when it was impossible to obtain the services of a surveyor. The net result of this leniency has been that those who wish to proceed with the development of the mineral resources of the territory are unable to ascertain the limits of the properties that can be secured either by purchase or staking"-and (2) "Now that the services of dominion land surveyors are available, it has been considered appropriate to require claim holders to have their claims surveyed. There is no intention of taking arbitrary action. If it is impossible to have a survey made, either because the surveyor cannot get around to it, or for good and sufficient reason the claim owner, while developing his property, is unable to pay the expense of the survey, then the circumstances will be considered by the minister on the representations of the claim holder." All of which is a fine-sounding hit of official gobbledygook and nothing more.
It is interesting to note that George Black, M.P., long associated with Yukon mining, states definitely that when the Quartz Mining Act was drafted and when it was submitted to parliament in 1924 there was absolutely no contemplation, under the two-post staking system, of an early survey. Certainly the member for Yrukon, who drafted the original legislation, is more competent to pass on the intent of parliament than tlhe civil servants who are now trying to impose their own interpretation. Aside from that point, altogether, it is difficult to understand why the department should try to hang this question of surveys on such a tenuous thread as the two-post staking method. And to advance the argument that surveys are necessary because those who wish to proceed with the development of the mineral resources of the territory are unable to

Yukon Quartz Mining Act
ascertain limits of properties, is nothing short of crass stupidity. To date surveys have not been found necessary in other parts of Canada when mining claims change hands, .and if the four-post staking method provides the answer, why not have any claims in question restaked using four posts? Surely it is not the desire of the department to impose on prospectors a penalty of $200 per claim held in Yukon territory to overcome a deficiency in staking regulations which have been in force for almost a quarter of a century. In actual fact, of course, once the government's base linos have been run, any company engineer could readily "ascertain the limits" of the claims in question, and if they warrant development such a survey would be made as a matter of course.
To state that the government was "lenient" in not enforcing the survey regulations during the time when it was impossible to obtain the services of a surveyor is patently bureaucratic balderdash and is repeated here only as a further example of official circumlocution. The same applies to item (2) in the government statement. Just what do they mean when they say there is no intention to take arbitrary action? If the question of whether or not a prospector holds title to a claim rests with the idiosyncracies of the surveyor who may or may not "get around to it", or with the personal whim of the minister and his subordinates, depending on whether or not the department happens again to feel in a "lenient" mood, there will be little or no new mining development in Yukon territory.
As everyone associated with mining knows, the future of the industry in this country rests on the discovery and development of new deposits. It is the prospector who stakes the original claims and does the preliminary development. His position is one of paramount importance and every possible assistance and encouragement must be rendered him if we are to offset the rapid depletion of known ore bodies. These are fundamentals which one would expect even the Ottawa desk miners to recognize. Instead of suggesting that the department bear the cost of any claim surveys deemed essential to the further development of mineral resources, however, (and the amount involved would be inconsequential) the best that has been forthcoming to date is that the prospectors. by way of encouragement no doubt, Should hand over $200 per claim or face the probability of cancellation. Apart from the fact that most prospectors don't have that kind of money, if they did have $200 per claim to spend one would think that the greatest possible benefit to all concerned would come from spending it on additional development. Nobody in his right mind wants to have a mineral claim surveyed at a cost of $200 until he is reasonably assured that he stands a chance of getting his money back some day. And particularly in these times when it is all too difficult to interest venture capital in mine development (thanks in great part to Ottawa's long-haired idealists), prospectors are having a tough time just getting by, without any additional burdens. If the department really wants to help the Yukon prospectors in their efforts to find and develop new mines, the compulsory survey regulations should be deleted from the quartz mining act immediately. Otherwise the Yukon prospectors say they will quit the territory, and they mean it.
I apologize to my fellow members for being for once a bit long-winded, but I tried, to avoid it.


George Hugh Castleden: Does the -act apply only to claims staked after the coming into force of the act? What protection is there for those who have already staked their claims?


James Angus MacKinnon: There will be no interference with them.


George Hugh Castleden: This applies only from now on?


James Angus MacKinnon: To all claims.


George Black: This afternoon, as always, the minister has been reasonable, but his attitude is quite different from that of his staff when this crusade was begun. With them it was a "must", a command, on pain of cancellation. It is true that the editorial read by the hon. member for Wentworth was written before those "musts" and commands and threats had been toned down by the minister. He knew better, but evidently his staff did not. This whole heartache which has been caused to the miners of Yukon is based on this statement:
There are those who wish to proceed with the development of the mineral resources of Yukon territory and are unable to ascertain the limits of the properties that can be secured either by purchase or staking.
If there are people in that predicament, let us know who they are, and who is holding them up, and then discipline those who are holding them up. I asked this question of the minister:
Who are those who wish to proceed with the development of the mineral resources of Yukon territory anid are unable to ascertain the limits of the properties that can be secured either by purchase or staking, referred to in the notices senit to the owners of unsurveyed mineral claims in Yukon by the mining recorders of Yukon on instructions of the Minister of Mines and Resources ?
This is the naive answer, if I may use that word, which the minister gave me:
Companies and individuals who have already made substantial investments in mining in the Yukon and are interested in its development in the future.
That was a lot of information. Who could it possibly have been, but individuals or companies? We knew that before the question was asked. Since it was not an answer, I repeated the question on June 2. To that question the minister said this:
Mr. Speaker, may I answer this question orally?
He proceeded to read it as follows:
It is not customary, nor, except under most unusual circumstances, is it appropriate, to
Yukon Quartz Mining Act

make public reference by name to persons who communicate with departmental officials on matters of private concern. To violate this procedure might result in the disclosure of the personal and business interests of individuals or companies in a way that would be unnecessarily detrimental without serving any valid public purpose. In the present instance it is felt that the publication of the names of the persons and companies involved would not result in any public benefit, but would be an unwarranted disclosure of documents which it would not be appropriate, nor in accord with official policy, to publish.
The question of substance involved in this matter has been fully answered in earlier replies to questions asked by the hon. member for Yukon.
Far from it. I had the assurance to make this remark:
Perhaps I might speak, on a question of privilege. The minister says that to answer the question would not be in the public interest. It would be more appropriate to say that it would not be in the interests of some private institutions, and the minister knows it.
I am not going to press it, but this whole heartache of the miners had been caused by that, because some miners owning mining claims or mineral claims have failed to have them surveyed. Whoever are blocking these claims should be disciplined. They should be known, and the people they are blocking should be known. Let the minister and his staff do that and cure it. Do not penalize all the claim owners in the Mayo and Keno districts. The government has dropped the demand for surveys in the Dawson mining district. They have dropped them in the Whitehorse district. The claim owners in the Mayo district must still have claims surveyed or pay $100 for the claim because somebody is holding somebody else up. Why not get at the bottom of it? Why not make a disclosure and deal with these people who are doing wrong, not the innocent ones?


James Angus MacKinnon: The hon. member for Yukon sees something in the woodpile that is not there.


George Black: There is a nigger in the woodpile, and I am trying to smoke him out.


James Angus MacKinnon: My officials tell me that sufficient applications have been received in the department for surveys to keep our surveyors busy for the next year.


George Black: Reference has been made to the leniency of the government in not enforcing that section and having surveys made. For years and years after the act was passed there were plenty of dominion land surveyors in Yukon, and such a thing as demanding of a man that he have his claim

surveyed was never thought of. It was only when these people who are behind the scene got busy that this was put into force.
Amendment (Mr. Black, Yukon) negatived.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 14 agreed to.
On section 15-Schedule.
George Black: This section contains a schedule of fees. To some extent the fees have been reduced. I should like to call the attention of the minister and his staff to the fact that a fee for recording a mineral claim in Yukon is now $10, and the proposed schedule continues it, whereas in British Columbia it is only $2.50. Why it should cost more to record a claim in Yukon than in British Columbia, I fail to see.


[Stage Direction]
Schedule agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
[Stage Direction]
Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee of supply, Mr. Golding in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
Special-
S3. To provide for assistance to encourage tlie improvement of cheese and cheese factories, $1,700,000.
Mr. WEBB:: I see there is an increase of $200,000 in this item this year. Will the parliamentary assistant give us a breakdown of this item? I am particularly interested in the reconstruction of cheese factories. What districts of the province get this amount?
Mr. ROBERT MeCUBBIN (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Agriculture): The hon. member for Leeds asks a question with respect to the increase of $200,000 in this item. Materials have become more easy to procure than they -were during the past years. We find that more applications are now coming in for the construction of and assistance to cheese factories. We felt that during the coming year more would be needed. There is a decrease in the amount of bonus that we are paying, for the simple reason that our cheese production is down, and not as much will be needed.


George Robert Webb: I am interested in this, because I come from an area of fairly high cheese production. Is there any kind of breakdown that shows where these subsidies go?

Supply-Agriculture
Mr, McCUBBIX:	provinces, the total
amount paid last year was: Ontario, $341,535; Manitoba, $553; Alberta, $9,082; British Columbia, $1,037; New Brunswick, $484; Prince Edward Island, $401; Quebec, $688,798.


George Robert Webb: I am interested in the building of cheese factories. This refers to standardization of cheese pressing equipment, reconstruction of cheese factories and so on. Does this take in all that?


Robert McCubbin: Yes. Would the hon. member want a breakdown for his own county? If he does, we can get it for him.


Robert Earle Drope: How far does the department go in regard to subsidies for construction and reconstruction? What percentage of the cost is undertaken and what are the requirements?


Robert McCubbin: Fifty per cent of the cost.


Robert Earle Drope: What is the limit?


Robert McCubbin: Any amount within
reason.


Robert Earle Drope: It must be approved by the department?


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


John Alpheus Charlton: Is it provided for individuals as well as co-operatives?


Robert McCubbin: Either.


John Alpheus Charlton: In what way do you standardize cheese pressing equipment? Has the old equipment been changed? Has there been an increase in size?


Robert McCubbin: In diameter. There is a variation among the different cheese factories, and the department has tried to standardize them.


John Alpheus Charlton: What is the standard weight?


Robert McCubbin: The diameter of the hoop is fifteen inches, and the weight is ninety pounds.


John Alpheus Charlton: The regular 90-pound Cheddar.


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


John Alpheus Charlton: Has the department ever considered using the rectangular press? It has been used by some cheese factories. The cutting of cheese is greatly facilitated. The cheese can be cut into pound or halLpound portions, and in that way it is readily packed for retail sale. Has the department considered having the rectangular instead of the round press?


Robert McCubbin: That was considered some years ago but not recently. The presses are more easily held together by hoops.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The Minister of Agriculture only a short time ago told a deputation that, in the future, cheese would be put up in the rectangular shape instead of the present round one. In fact, in Peterborough county at the present time, the Trent cheese factory is putting out the rectangular cheese. The product is sold to one cheese man in Oshawa and he makes it up in half-pound and pound packages. I understand that last year he sold
198,000	pounds of cheese. I have tried the cheese, as have other hon. members, and it is really excellent, mild, medium and strong. I believe it is generally agreed that, in the future, cheese will be put up in this way.


Mr. JAENIGKE:: I understood the parliamentary assistant to give a breakdown on premiums paid on quality oheese.


Robert McCubbin: I did not give premiums.
Mr. JAEN'ICKE: I did not hear Saskatchewan mentioned. Are they entitled to anything?


Robert McCubbin: What I gave was for construction, but if the hon. member wishes I can give the premiums.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: By provinces?


Robert McCubbin: If the hon. member
wishes.


George Robert Webb: While the parliamentary assistant is looking up those figures, I see there is a reduction of $200,000 on premiums for high quality cheese. Is there any reason for that?


Robert McCubbin: The reason is that production of cheese was down. I have the figures for the premiums paid. The premiums are paid on the basis of one cent on 93 score and two on 94, and the amount of money paid in the different provinces last, year, 1947-48, up to the first of April of this year, was: Prince Edward Island, $459.89; New Brunswick, $1,407.52; Quebec, $98,733.57; Ontario, $801,330.23; Manitoba, $4,635.13; Saskatchewan, $283.02; Alberta, $8,387.04; British Columbia, $3,907.23; making a total of cheese premiums of $919,143.63.


John Alpheus Charlton: I understood that the figures given before included premiums and subsidies for building.


Robert McCubbin: No. The figures I gave before were for construction. This is premiums.


John Alpheus Charlton: What year was that for, in connection with construction?


Robert McCubbin: That was 1947-48.


John Alpheus Charlton: The figure here was only $200,000, and I understood that the figure for
Supply-A griculture

Quebec was $600,000 in subsidies for construction and that the figure for Ontario was something like $400,000, which makes a total of $1,000,000 right there. The total figure for last year was only $200,000, as I understood it.


Robert McCubbin: The Quebec figure for the amalgamation, insulation and refrigeration and pressing equipment-that is, on the building-is $668,708.


John Alpheus Charlton: That is just the building subsidy.


Robert McCubbin: Yes, and the pressing equipment. It is the amalgamation, insulation and refrigeration and pressing equipment.


John Alpheus Charlton: What was the figure for Ontario?


Robert McCubbin: I gave Quebec. The province of Ontario figure was $341,535. There was another one in Saskatchewan. It was Saskatchewan the hon, member for Kinders-ley was asking for, was it?


Frank Eric Jaenicke: Yes.


Robert McCubbin: Nothing was paid in Saskatchewan.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: That is the only province in which nothing was paid?


Robert McCubbin: Yes. There are not many cheese factories in Saskatchewan anyway.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: What is the condition under which those premiums are paid? I did not understand that.


Robert McCubbin: It is entirely on quality, not on quantity.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: Is that on cheese that is exported.


Robert McCubbin: On all cheese.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: For domestic use as well.


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: Have you an inspector in Saskatchewan to look at the cheese-


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: -to see whether or not it is eligible for premium?


Robert McCubbin: That is right.


John Alpheus Charlton: I should like to point out that it seems peculiar that in last year's estimates the amount for subsidies for construction and reconstruction of cheese factories was only $200,000. The subsidies in two provinces alone are over $1,000,000. Yet

the estimate for this year is only $400,000. I think that requires some kind of explanation.


George Robert Webb: I do not think they divided their figures very well.


Robert McCubbin: The amount is the same this year as it was last year.


John Alpheus Charlton: The amount of which?


Robert McCubbin: The total for premiums and for subsidies.


John Alpheus Charlton: The total amount is the same?


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


John Alpheus Charlton: But the amounts set aside in the estimates at page 108 are $400,000 in subsidies for building and $1,300,000 for premiums on high quality cheese.


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


John Alpheus Charlton: Do you take some of the amount that is set aside for premiums, for subsidies, if you do not have enough for the subsidies alone?


George Robert Webb: I think we had better start all over again, Mr. Chairman. There are two items here. All we are trying to do is to have those two items split up. There is a subsidy for construction, et cetera, and then there is a premium on high quality cheese. The parliamentary assistant must be amalgamating them there somewhere.


Robert McCubbin: I am sorry, but I was getting into the wrong figures. There are too many figures here for me. I will give them over again and I would ask hon, members to check them. I would ask them to mark them down.


George Robert Webb: What are we talking about now?


Robert McCubbin: We are talking about subsidies in connection with amalgamation, refrigeration, insulation and building, whatever you like to call it. I was getting at the wrong figures. The figures are as follows:
New Brunswick	 nil
Prince Edward Island	 nil
Quebec	 $ 35J92.31
Ontario	 100,620.19
Manitoba	 nil
Alberta	 2,630.52
British Columbia	 nil


Frank Eric Jaenicke: What about Saskatchewan?


Robert McCubbin: There could not have been any paid in Saskatchewan because the figures are not shown here at all.

Supply-Agriculture


Frank Eric Jaenicke: What was that $283 the parliamentary assistant told us about a little while ago? What figure is that?


An hon. MEMBER:: That is wrong.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: What is that $283.02 that he told us about?


Robert McCubbin: That was for premiums on quality.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: I did not understand that.


Mr. KNIGHT:: In view of the disparity between the amount of premiums in the two provinces, will the parliamentary assistant tell us what is the production for Alberta and Saskatchewan? In other words, what is the production of cheese in those two provinces, in pounds?


Robert McCubbin: The total make of cheese, that is, for 1947-


Frank Eric Jaenicke: Is that the same period for which the premiums have been paid?


Robert McCubbin: This is a calendar year. The premiums cover a fiscal year, from April 1, 1947 to April 1, 1948. But what I am giving is the calendar year of 1947.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: All right,


Robert McCubbin: The figures are as
follows:
Pounds
Prince Edward Island	 658,009
Nova Scotia	 nil
New Brunswick	 737,099
Quebec	 24,812,099
Ontario	 88,89 5.090
Manitoba	 3,699,099
Saskatchewan	 380,009
Alberta	 3,111,009
British. Columbia	 533,099


John Alpheus Charlton: Those figures are for the year ended December 31, 1947?


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


John Alpheus Charlton: Could the parliamentary assistant give the total for that year and the total for the year previous, so that we may see the reduction?


Robert McCubbin: I have the figures for the calendar year 1946:
Pounds
Prince Edward Island	 737,009
Nova Scotia	 nil
New Brunswick	 979,099
Quebec	 43,195,009
Ontario	 96,397,000
Manitoba	 3,228,000
Saskatchewan	 440,099
Alberta	 3,258,000
British Columbia	 689,090
Manitoba was the only province showing an increase in 1947 over 1946.


Mr. TUSTIN:: The first item shown in the details for this vote deals with the subsidy for cheese factories and equipment. When this item came up last year I asked the minister why it had been reduced to $200,000, and he told me it was because most of the factories had been reconstructed and re-equipped. Taking the figures the parliamentary assistant has just given, I find that the subsidies paid amounted to less than $140,000 out of the $200,000 voted last year; yet this year there is an increase to $400,000. Is it expected that there will be much more improvement in cheese factories this year than last year?


Robert McCubbin: Yes, that is the feeling of the department. Materials are becoming more plentiful, but at the same time they are getting more expensive. Nevertheless we hope there will be an increase in the construction and equipping of these factories.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-*
ST. Agricultural research special projects, $299,090.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH: The first item in the details shows $30,000 for salaries and wages. Does that include salaries being paid the scientists working on that project?
Robert McCubbin: This item is for agricultural research, and it concerns the projects at Lethbridge and Swift Current.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH:	My question
was whether the item of $30,000 includes the salaries being paid scientific workers on those projects.


Robert McCubbin: The amount of $30,000 covers wages and salaries.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
38. Land reclamation and development in British Columbia under such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council, $130,090.
Mr. JONES:: I should like to know to what lands this particular item has reference.


Robert McCubbin: If the hon. member will wait for just a moment I can give him the information.


Edward George McCullough: I have looked through the estimates but have been unable to find an item under which I could deal with a subject I wish to bring to the attention of the parliamentary assistant. This item is for land reclamation and development in the British Columbia area. I have in my constituency an important project commonly called the Souris river project, but there is
Supply-Agriculture

no provision in any estimate for that work. This year we had the misfortune of flood conditions, and much valuable grazing land was flooded. In addition the Saskatchewan prairie nurseries were severely damaged.
I have taken up this matter with the department of agriculture at Regina and with Mr. Gray of the P.F.R.A.; and I believe it is well known to the government that this Souris-Estevan project in the valley of the Souris river takes in from three to ten thousand acres of land. If we could get assistance from the federal government to control flood conditions in the spring, we could rehabilitate some thirty or forty families of veterans. I am quite interested in the matter because, as Mr. Gray of the P.F.R.A. states, through the pump irrigation system we could supply the land in that area perhaps more cheaply than at any other project in Saskatchewan. So next year I hope an item will be brought in under which we shall see some real development there.


Robert McCubbin: I should think that could be handled under the P.F.R.A.
In reply to the hon. member for Yale, the project in question is near Kamloops. It is a Veterans' Land Act proposition. We do a part; the province does a part, and the Veterans' Land Act administration does a part. It is a three-way project.


Owen Lewis Jones: Is there any other item through which the Minister of Agriculture intends to carry out his promise made during his recent visit to Yale, to develop the land around Westbank?


Robert McCubbin: The project at Westbank also comes partly under this item.


Owen Lewis Jones: Is the work at Westbank to be proceeded with?


Robert McCubbin: That is the intention of the department.


Owen Lewis Jones: Is it in these estimates? This sum would barely cover half the cost, and it is for Kamloops.


Robert McCubbin: It is just to make a start; once you get started, it will be carried on further.


Owen Lewis Jones: Kamloops is 100 miles from Westbank.


Edward George McCullough: How are these appropriations spent? We have quite large votes here, and I understand from the parliamentary assistant to the minister that some of these problems can be handled by the P.F.R.A. I quite agree with that; yet

here we have a vote for $200,000 for clearing and settlement of new land under such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council. How much of that was spent, and by whom?


Robert McCubbin: I think the hon. member is dealing with the next item. We would wait for an application from the province and then we would assist.


Edward George McCullough: I am
happy to hear the parliamentary assistant to the minister say that, because some of us have been asking for these things for years. If the parliamentary assistant will come to my constituency I can show him one proposition which is capable of development and which would provide many happy and contented homes for veterans, provided that we can get some assistance from the federal government.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-*
39. Clearing and settlement of new lands under such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council, $200,000.
Mr. HARKNESS:: I am a little confused by the discussion which has gone on. Do these new lands have anything to do with veteran settlers? What are these new lands for, and who are the people it is proposed to settle on them?


Robert McCubbin: When any group of
settlers, veteran or otherwise, rvant to settle on new lands, if the province wishes to, assist them and will make application to the dominion, the dominion will give assistance through this vote.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Was any of the money, voted last year, spent?


Robert McCubbin: No application came
from any province.


Mr. McCUAIG:: There is one project in my riding where I understand that the department will not give title to the land. Some of the returned men there want to buy land but they cannot obtain title.


Robert McCubbin: Is the hon. member not discussing P.F.R.A.?


Duncan John McCuaig: Yes.


Robert McCubbin: We are far past that. If the hon. member for Maple Creek .wishes to get the information we will certainly give it to him.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Agriculture
Special-
1,1. For assistance in construction of potato warehouses under regulations to be approved by the governor in council, $400,000.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Where are these warehouses? I was wondering what facilities there are in Canada to hold potatoes over until the spring or summer. Just the other day I bought 10 pounds of Prince Edward Island potatoes for a friend of mine and I had to pay 87 cents.


Mr. McLURE:: The hon. member got them quite cheap.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I think they are extremely nice potatoes, but a little high in price.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: How much of this item was spent last year to assist, in the construction of potato warehouses? Have regulations yet been approved by the governor in council with regard to the building and construction of potato warehouses? How is this assistance given? Does application have to be made at a certain time of the year? My province is probably more interested in this than most provinces, and I should like to have that information.


Robert McCubbin: The hon. member for Queens is certainly justified in asking for that information, because his province gets all the money. The co-operative make application to the province and, if they will put up 25 per cent and the province will put up 37J per cent, the dominion puts up the other 37J per cent. It is a three-way split, 75 per cent between the dominion and the province and 25 per cent by the co-operative.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Can an individual do that, or must it be a co-operative?


Robert McCubbin: I am told that it must be a co-operative.


John Alpheus Charlton: The parliamentary assistant to the minister said it was all spent in Prince Edward Island.


Robert McCubbin: Yes, because that was the only province that made application.


John Alpheus Charlton: The other provinces could get a share, but they just did not apply?


Robert McCubbin: If a co-operative in your district or mine will make application to the department at Toronto and the province passes on it we would be willing to pay our share.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Can I take it for granted that this $100,000 will be set aside for Prince Edward Island?


Robert McCubbin: I would not say that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
After Recess
The committee resumed at eight o'clock. Special-
42. Agricultural Products Act-To provide for losses incurred in respect of the purchase, sale and export of agricultural products under the Agricultural Products Act, including authority for the Minister of Finance, at the request of the Minister of Agriculture, from time to time, to pay amounts in the aggregate not exceeding $40,00*0,006 out of any unappropriated money in the consolidated revenue fund as recoverable advances, $100,000.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH: I see that $100,000 was appropriated in 1947-48. How much of that was spent?
Robert McCubbin: This item is for the purchase and sale of products to the United Kingdom under the British agreements. Not a single dollar was spent last year, and none may be spent this year, but we have to set aside a certain amount for use if necessary.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Are fur products included under this item?


Robert McCubbin: No, just agricultural products such as beef, bacon, cheese, eggs and so forth.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Under what item do furs come? They are under the prices support board.


Robert McCubbin: No, not to my knowledge.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: The prices are supported on the market in a decline. I think they come under the marketing act as one of the products of the farm.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Demobilization and reconversion'-
J,3. Freight assistance on western feed grains, $7,760,000.	-
Douglas Scott Harkness: Would the parliamentary assistant explain the present situation regarding freight assistance on western feed grains? This item shows the biggest reduction from last year, but I understand that a further amount is to appear in the supplementaries. Just what is the situation?


Robert McCubbin: This amount covers the period from April 1 to August 1 of this year, and a further amount will appear in the supplementaries to cover the period from August 1, 1948, to July 31, 1949.


George Hugh Castleden: Does this include freight assistance given to eastern millers on the bran portion of the wheat which they turn into flour?
Supply-Agriculture


Robert McCubbin: This covers feed grains only.


George Hugh Castleden: It includes no assistance on bran?


Robert McCubbin: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Demobilization and reconversion
[Stage Direction]
H. Freight assistance on agricultural lime :or soil amendment purposes, $350,000.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH: To which prov-nces is this assistance being given?
Robert McCubbin: Most of it went to the maritime provinces and Quebec. The amounts paid were, in round figures: Prince Edward Island, 118,654; Nova Scotia, 128,141; New Brunswick, 151,686; Quebec, $149,978; Ontario, $5,698; British Columbia, $4,550.
Mr. TOWNLEY-SMITH: I notice that the prairie provinces are not included. I think it is an excellent idea to assist farmers who are anxious to amend their soil. In the prairie provinces we have a deficiency of phosphorus, and a large quantity of it is supplied in the form of phosphatic fertilizers. I would suggest to the parliamentary assistant that it might be a good idea from the economic point of view to assist our farmers in the west who use these phosphatic fertilizers, just as assistance is given to other provinces which are using lime.


Robert McCubbin: This does not refer to soil fertilizers but only to limestone for soil amendment purposes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Demobilization and reconversion-
J,6. Meat board, including quality premiums on A and B1 grade hog carcasses, $6,153,702.
George Hugh Castleden: What were the amounts paid in, 1947 to the packing companies, to which companies were payments made, and what was the number of carcasses on which the special bonus was paid?


Robert McCubbin: The premium was not paid to the packing companies but to the producers entirely.


George Hugh Castleden: Through the packing houses?


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


George Hugh Castleden: Is there any grading of these hogs as A and B1 hams when they come on the domestic market?


Robert McCubbin: No.


George Hugh Castleden: So that the premium is not reflected in the price.


Robert McCubbin: Not a particle.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The vote is approximately the same as last year, so that the department, I take it, estimates that the number of A and B1 hogs will be approximately the same as last year. Is the vote approximately the same because you estimate the total production will be about the same as last year, or because you estimate that the quality will be improved though the total production may be decreased? What is the situation in regard to that? Why is the same amount being appropriated as last year.


Robert McCubbin: It is very difficult to estimate at this time, but we feel that it will be approximately the same as last year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Can the minister tell us whether the policy of paying a premium has been successful, as shown by the fact that, relatively speaking, there are more A hogs and B1 hogs as time goes on? As I understand it, the purpose of this is to get improved quality. Can we have any information as to whether the system has been successful and whether quality is improving?


Robert McCubbin: As near as we can figure it out, it is just about holding even over the years, although the subsidy or bonus, whatever you like to call it, should not be discontinued. I feel that it is a help to the hog producer of this country. It encourages him to produce quality hogs rather than quantity. The quality has not changed much over the years.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Being in the hog business myself, I certainly do not think the premium should be discontinued. What I was trying to get at was what effect it has actually had on production in the matter of increasing quality. The last figures I saw showed that, out of eighty grade carcasses in the west, relatively speaking, the percentage of selects was considerably less than the number in eastern Canada. Has this situation been corrected to any extent? Is there any explanation of the situation? Apparently the A and the B1 grading in the east are considerably higher than in the west. Naturally a lot of hog producers in the west look on that situation with a considerable amount of suspicion. Can the parliamentary assistant give us any information in regard to that point?


Robert McCubbin: That is a very hard question to answer. Why there should be more grade A's and B's in Ontario than in western Canada might be easily answered by saying that we are more particular in the types of liogs we try to produce in eastern Canada than they are in western Canada.

Supply

Agriculture


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I should like to give the hon. member for Calgary East an answer to his question as recorded in Hansard of last year when this matter was discussed. At that time the Minister of Agriculture said that the best bacon hog in Canada, in fact in the world, was the bacon hog of Prince Edward Island. I just want to say to the hon. member for Calgary East that the quality of the hogs in the west will improve very soon, because within the 'last six months no fewer than four carloads of pigs have been shipped from Prince Edward Island out to that section of the country for breeding purposes. Last week two carloads of breeding sows were shipped from Prince Edward Island to Ontario. It is worthwhile to turn up the record of last year and see what the Minister of Agriculture said with reference to the quality. I do not want to be too boastful, but the Minister of Agriculture said at that time that any good farmer who would buy one of these good sows from Prince Edward Island and have a litter of ten, provided that he knew how to raise hogs, would have no difficulty in having ten select premium A's, unless there was one runt.


Robert McCubbin: It is a well known fact throughout Canada that Prince Edward Island does raise a high-quality hog. I am glad to hear the hon. member say that sows from that province are going into other provinces where they may assist in every way to improve the quality of hogs. We want to assist in the years that lie ahead. If we are to hold the British bacon market it will depend on quality hogs.


John Thomas Hackett: With your consent, Mr. Chairman, and with the consent of the parliamentary assistant and the committee, I ask to be permitted to put a few questions on item
45.	I have been here consistently for the last week-


William Henry Golding: Order. Let us
pass item 46 first.


James Arthur Ross: I presume that this is the board which handles the processed beef which goes to Britain under the contract and to other European countries.


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


James Arthur Ross: Can the parliamentary assistant tell us where they enter into the shipment of beef to the United States? Is it intended that they shall handle the bulk of the beef which is shipped to the United States in processed form? Under the negotiations that are being entered into, will producers be able to ship their live cattle to the United States as was done prior to the embargo of 1942?


Robert McCubbin: When the embargo is lifted there will be free and open marketing as far as beef cattle are concerned. Any farmer or any shipper will be able to ship as he did in past years, and the beef will not be handled under any meat board or association of any kind.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Demobilization and reconversion -
17. Special products board, $26,060.
Robert McCubbin: I want to be clear where we are. We have passed item 46 and are going back to item 45.


John Thomas Hackett: I am asking the committee to revert to item 45.


William Henry Golding: I thought we would deal with these two items, and then the hon. member for Stanstead could raise his point on item 45.


John Alpheus Charlton: I have a question to ask. In the auditor general's report, two items appear on pages 20 and 21. I asked the Minister of Agriculture a question when the estimates were up before. On pages 20 and 21, items Nos. 61 and 62, having to do with the production of seed, are detailed. I think I had better read No. 61 because it is hard to understand:
Vote 477. Beginning in 1943-44, the agricultural supplies board entered1 into contracts with growers, under a plan styled "The dominion seed program", to ensure adequate production of vegetable seeds. Seed produced by growers, but not disposed of by them, was purchased by the board and stored pending resale. The cost of seed thus purchased was $234,358.74, including freight and storage. Sales amounted to $9,615.25. Thus, $224,743.49 is invested in 208,898 pounds of unsold seed.
That comes to $1.07 a pound. Can the parliamentary assistant give some explanation of the item?


Robert McCubbin: The hon. member for Brant has brought up this question before. I had a little statement prepared. If hon. members do not mind I should like to read it. This may not be the information desired, but, if not, the hon. member can question me further. After the harvesting of the 1946 crop, world prices of many kinds of vegetable seeds dropped considerably. This was particularly true with respect to carrot and onion, two kinds which the board 'held in considerable quantity. During the latter war years it was possible to dispose of all amounts of seed in excess of domestic requirements to such agencies as UNRRA. The policy of the agricultural supplies board was to avoid offering its holdings on the domestic market at prices lower
566S

Supply-Agriculture
than those prevailing. Efforts to dispose of the seed were, therefore, largely confined to the export market, and the final sale was made in 1947 for post-UNRRA relief purposes.
Figures referred to in the auditor general's report for 1947 cover purchases and sales to March 31, 1947 only. Obviously, all seed which the agricultural supplies board purchased and was unable to dispose of immediately was held in storage for resale. Since March 31, 1947, the dominion seed program has been brought to a close; and the following figures cover activities, not only up to March, 1947, but up to the conclusion of the program. A total of 237,403 pounds of seed was purchased at a net cost of $238,093.36, including freight and storage. Total sales amounted to 2161)85 pounds, and $123,772.94 was recovered. Purchases exceeded sales by 20,418 pounds.
The total loss of money involved for the entire period that the program was in effect amounted to $114,320.42, which was accounted for by (a) the reduction in resale value and (b) the loss of 20,418 pounds of seed which had to be destroyed owing to loss in germination while in storage.


John Alpheus Charlton: Part of the 200,000
pounds odd has been sold since this report came out. Did that cover onion seed alone?


Robert McCubbin: There were seeds of
almost every variety in it, such as beets, mangels, spinach, cauliflower, lettuce, carrots, cucumbers, radishes, parsnips, tomatoes, and so on.


John Alpheus Charlton: In what provinces was it carried out?


Robert McCubbin: Mostly in British Columbia and Nova Scotia, and some in Ontario.


Mr. HERRIDGE:: In the fall of 1945. I brought up the question of the appointment of an egg inspector for the southern interior of British Columbia, and the minister said then it was impossible to appoint one, owing to shortage of staff. I raised the matter again in 1946 and was assured that it would be taken into consideration. Again in 1947 I brought it up and it was still being considered. The southern interior of British Columbia is still without an egg inspector.
We have had an increasing poultry industry in that part of the province. I am referring to that portion of British Columbia which extends from the Okanagan valley to the Alberta boundary, being bounded on the north by the main line of the Canadian Pacific railway and on the south by the international border. A good many eggs from this district are shipped to the special products board, while great numbers are sold locally in the

stores. The organized poultry men have been anxious for some years to have an egg inspector appointed to assist in instructing those who are shipping eggs to the special products board and also for the purpose of having a check on sales in the domestic market. They have made frequent representations to the department in this respect, and so have I on their behalf, but so far nothing has been done.
I urge the parliamentary assistant to bring the matter again to the attention of the minister, because at the present time the poultry industry in the southern interior of British Columbia cannot be properly serviced, so far as this aspect of inspection is concerned, by the inspector located in Vancouver.


Robert McCubbin: One of the officials of the poultry division of the Department of Agriculture is leaving for British Columbia next week, and the matter will be drawn to his attention to see whether something can be done.


Mr. McKAY:: Can the parliamentary assistant say why there is this substantial reduction in this item for this year, amounting to $59,000? May I ask a further question with regard to the details of services given on page 110 of the estimates? Of the expenditures this year amounting to $25,000 under the special products board, $20,000 consists of miscellaneous items. That sounds odd to me, and I think we should have a breakdown, because if you have $4,000 for temporary assistance; services of forwarding agencies, $1,000, and $20,000 for miscellaneous, it would seem that an explanation is called for.


Robert McCubbin: The reduction from
$84,000 to $25,000 is accounted for by the fact that this is practically all for departmental administration, salaries. There is a cutting down in this department and that is the reason for the reduction.


Eric Bowness McKay: Are the activities being definitely cut down?


Robert McCubbin: Some of the officials who were in the department, such as egg inspectors, have been transferred back to the Department of Agriculture, and they will not be paid through this vote but through departmental votes. It is a reconversion period, and it is simply a matter of the changing of officials who are being paid through a different channel.


Eric Bowness McKay: What about my question with regard to the miscellaneous item of $20,000?


Robert McCubbin: The $20,000 covers travel, telegrams, telephone calls. It includes the expenses of our officials who are going around the country under the board.

Supply-Agriculture


Eric Bowness McKay: How many officials are there on the board?


Robert McCubbin: It is difficult to give a direct answer to that question. There are the expenses of the advisory committees who are brought in under the special products board. Their expenses are all paid and they are numerous. It would require a good deal of research to get the information for which the hon. member asks.


Eric Bowness McKay: The parliamentary assistant cannot tell me how many officials there are on the board?


Robert McCubbin: There are four officials on the board. That covers all other expenses of members on the advisory committees as well.


Clarence Gillis: What is the function of these advisory boards?


George Hugh Castleden: The same as the fish board.


Robert McCubbin: With regard to all these boards, the members come from any of the provinces in the different parts of Canada. They come here to advise upon things like egg contracts; or if it were the meat board, it would be meat contracts. They advise in respect of these various products that are shipped overseas. I think it is a legitimate thing. It is something that the federation and other organizations have been asking for. I think producers in the different parts of Canada should be consulted in an advisory capacity.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
William Henry Golding: The hon. member for Stanstead wishes to revert to item 45, dairy products board.
Demobilization and reconversionko. Dairy products board, $19,546.


John Thomas Hackett: I should like the parliamentary assistant to tell the committee how many pounds of creamery butter were produced in each of the years 1947, 1946, 1945, and the first three months of 1948.


Mr. GRANT:: You might as well ask for 1932.


Robert McCubbin: To answer the question asked by the hon. member for Stanstead, I have here the amounts for the different provinces. Is that what the hon. member wants?


John Thomas Hackett: Yes.


Robert McCubbin: I have the figures for 1946 and 1947. I have not them for 1945.


John Thomas Hackett: Have you any for 1948?


Robert McCubbin: No, I have not any for 1948. I am told that we may have them. I think we have them here. But we will give the others first and then give those for 1948. Is that satisfactory?


John Thomas Hackett: Yes.


Robert McCubbin: The figures are as follows:
Butter Production
Province	Pounds
	1946	1947
Prince Edward Island .	. 3,896,066	3,660,000Nova Scotia 	. 6,988,000	6,617,000New Brunswick 	. 6,921,000	6,908,000Quebec 	. 85,355,000	97,527,000Ontario 	. 69,171,000	77,030.000Manitoba 	. 26,049.000	26,265,000Saskatchewan 	. 37,005,000	36,330.000Alberta 	. 30,744,000	32,068,000British Columbia 	. 5,332,000	4,436,000


John Thomas Hackett: Has the parliamentary assistant the figures for the first three months of 1948?


Robert McCubbin: I did not hear the question.


John Thomas Hackett: Are the figures the parliamentary assistant intends to give now, those for the first three months of 1948?


Robert McCubbin: No. I will give the figures for the five-month period to June 1; from January to the end of May. The figures are as follows:
Butter Production (January 1-June 1, 1948)
Province	Pounds
Prince Edward Island	 784,000
Nova Scotia	 1,987,000
New Brunswick	 1.600,000
Quebec	 19,306,060
Ontario	 24,661,000
Manitoba	 7,804,000
Saskatchewan	 9,972,000
Alberta	 9,633,000
British Columbia	 1,676,000


William Earl Rowe: Is that for four months?


Robert McCubbin: That is for the five months, January to June 1.


William Earl Rowe: Has the parliamentary assistant the relationship between those figures and those for the five months of 1947? Is there an increase over 1947?


Robert McCubbin: I have not checked that up, but I have the figures for the first five months for 1947, the same as I have for the first five months of 1948, if the hon. member wishes them for purposes of comparison.


William Earl Rowe: Is there an increase? If so, what, is the percentage?


Robert McCubbin: I have not checked that up yet. There is a 6-6 per cent decrease.
Supply-Agriculture


William Earl Rowe: A 6-6 per cent decrease in the first five months this year?
Mr. MeOUBBIN: Yes, over the first five months of last year.


William Earl Rowe: A six per cent decrease.


John Thomas Hackett: In order to make arithmetic easy, since there appears to have been produced in the first five months of 1948 in the province of Quebec, 19,305,000 pounds, let us say that it is 20,000,000 pounds. That would be 4,000,000 pounds to the month. If you multiply that by twelve, you will get 48,000,000 pounds for the year. I am aware that this would not be a fair method of computation, because naturally there is more butter produced during the summer season than during the winter season; but the difference is not 50 per cent. I should like the parliamentary assistant to state, if he can, the anticipated production of butter for the year 1948, and if it exceeds 60,000,000 pounds.


Robert McCubbin: The hon. member's arithmetic may be all right in practice, but it is not all right in butter making, if he is quoting four winter months to us.


John Thomas Hackett: Five months.


Robert McCubbin: Yes, four winter months and one summer month.


John Thomas Hackett: That is right.


Robert McCubbin: Of course, the high
period will be in June and July.


John Thomas Hackett: I am aware of that.


Robert McCubbin: Of course I can only take last year's figures. In the province of Quebec there was an increase of 12,000,000 pounds in 1947 over 1946. What it will be this year no one can answer until the end of the year.


John Thomas Hackett: I understand that the parliamentary assistant has not the figures for the first five months of the years 1946 and 1947.


Robert McCubbin: I have for 1947.


John Thomas Hackett: What are they?


Robert McCubbin: I have them for 1947, yes. Do you want them for the province of Quebec?


John Thomas Hackett: We might take them all.


William Earl Rowe: Let us have the figures for Quebec and Ontario, the largest producers.


John Thomas Hackett: Will the parliamentary assistant give us the figures for Quebec and Ontario?


Robert McCubbin: In the province of
Quebec there is little change. In the first five

months 20,942,000 pounds were produced in 1947 and 19,305,000 pounds in 1948.


William Earl Rowe: That is in Ontario?


Robert McCubbin: That is Quebec. In the province of Ontario the figures are 26,349,000 pounds in 1947 and 24,661,000 pounds in 1948.


John Thomas Hackett: Then will the parliamentary assistant please state how many head of dairy cattle were exported in 1945, 1946, 1947 and 1948?


Robert McCubbin: I am sorry I have not those figures for the hon. member for Stan-stead, but I have seen them and, if my memory serves me aright, this year they are a little in excess of last year. More cattle were shipped this year.


John Thomas Hackett: And last year was a little in excess of the year before?


Robert McCubbin: I am comparing the first five months of this year with the first five months of last year; but I am not in a position to say how great the excess may be.


John Thomas Hackett: Then will the parliamentary assistant be good enough to say how much butter was imported into Canada in 1945, 1946, 1947 and 1948?


Mr. WARREN:: Just before that question is answered, I wonder if the hon. member for Stanstead would permit a question. The hon. member seems to be handling the dairy industry for the official opposition, and I should like to know if he has ever had the pleasure of milking a cow.


William Earl Rowe: No, but he knows more than the cow.


John Thomas Hackett: I do not think I shall waste the time of the committee on this line of argument. I have had some experience from which I hope I have derived profit, and when that experience becomes pertinent I shall draw upon it. In the meantime, I should be glad if the parliamentary assistant would answer the question.


Robert McCubbin: The hon. member wanted the information for some years back?


John Thomas Hackett: I asked for it from 1945 on.


Robert McCubbin: The figures are as
follows:
Butter
imported
Pounds
1943		 1,154
1944		 740
1945		 3.495
1946		 25,692
1947		 5,118,869

Supply-Agriculture


John Thomas Hackett: Has any butter been
imported in 1948?


Robert McCubbin: A few pounds were imported, perhaps two or three hundred pounds.


John Thomas Hackett: Then will the parliamentary assistant be good enough to say what the price of creamery butter is in Canada at the present time?


Robert McCubbin: The hon. gentleman
realizes that the ceiling price is sixty-seven cents. I have today's prices on the commodity exchange. Will that be all right?


John Thomas Hackett: Yes.


Robert McCubbin: There were 600 boxes at 66j[ cents and 400 boxes at 662 cents, making a total of 1,000 boxes.


John Thomas Hackett: Then can the hon.
gentleman give the latest prices he has for the same commodity in the United States?


Robert McCubbin: From 80J to 81 cents.


John Thomas Hackett: I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the committee for permitting me to get this information at a time which may not have been convenient to all concerned.


John Alpheus Charlton: The figures the parliamentary assistant put on Hansard were for imports of butter. Would he place beside those figures the exports of butter in each of those years, so that we may get the net position? I think it is rather misleading now.


Robert McCubbin: I shall have that information in a moment.


John Alpheus Charlton: I believe the parliamentary assistant will find that there were exports in each of those years, and that the net position will be an export position.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: From time to time one hears alarming and, for all I know, exaggerated predictions as to the butter shortage we shall face later in the year. Can the parliamentary assistant make any comment on that? Has the department any forecasts which may be given now either to prove or to disprove these assertions? I have heard that a shortage of 30,000,000 pounds is anticipated.


Robert McCubbin: I am not in a position to answer that question. The hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario is speaking of rumours. Though production may not be as high as it was last year, we still have the production for seven months to come in, and I have every reason to believe that production in Canada will take care of the consumption for next winter.
5849-360i


Mr. SMITH (Calgary West):: Well, Mr. Chairman, this is not a rumour; it is a fact that we are short 30,000,000 pounds right now. This is a prognostication, but it is quite possible and even probable that we shall have no butter at all, at least not nearly enough butter to supply our own people, next November. Are those not facts?


An hon. MEMBER:: No.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Who said that?


Ralph Melville Warren: I did.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Why don'l you ask someone who knows something about it?


Ralph Melville Warren: There is good grass.


Robert McCubbin: I am not in a position to dispute what the hon. member for Calgary West has just said, but I do not think anyone can say how much we are short at the present time.


Mr. COCKERAM:: We are short, though?


Robert McCubbin: I am not saying we are short. The consumer is getting all the butter he wants now, and at the ceiling price, a curtailed price, for which he should be thankful. The producer is not kicking; he is getting a fair price. When you have the producer and the consumer satisfied you have gone a long way. As far as next winter is concerned, we still have seven good months ahead of us, and I hope that production will be high enough to take care of consumption next winter, though of course I am not a prophet and do not wish to prophesy.


William Henry Golding: Order. I would remind hon. members that this item was passed quite some time ago.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Oh, no.


William Henry Golding: What did the hon. member say?


Arthur Leroy Smith: I beg your pardon, sir.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Surely no one wants to be technical about this very important matter.


William Henry Golding: We do not want to get into a long discussion on an item already passed.
M11. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario): I appreciate the technical point, but you, Mr. Chairman, and the parliamentary assistant were good enough to waive that, and surely the substance of the discussion war-
Supply-Agriculture

rants further inquiry. May I ask the amount in storage now as compared with the amount n storage a year ago?


Robert McCubbin: 
Edward George McCullough: Being a farmer, I know a little about this. We have heard from a lot of pseudo-experts tonight. I want to tell my hon. friends to my right that, since I have come into the house, they have advocated a policy which has brought about the situation we are facing today.


William Henry Golding: If the hon. member wishes to ask the parliamentary assistant any question on this item he should do so.


Edward George McCullough: The
reports are that we are about 30,000,000 pounds of creamery butter short in storage as compared with last year. The reason for that shortage is the same as that given by a rancher. He said that when people were prepared to pay prices for cattle they would get the cattle. When our dairy farmer gets the proper price for his dairy products, he will supply them. If necessary, there should be subsidies to meet the costs of production. Then we would have sufficient milk, milk products and butter in this country. My hon. friends to my right are disturbed but this is all due to the policies they have advocated.


James Arthur Ross: What policies?


Edward George McCullough: Decontrol; no subsidies.


Robert McCubbin: The hon. member for Brant asked a question a while ago with regard to exports of butter.


John Alpheus Charlton: I simply wanted to show the export position versus the import position, so that it would not appear we had imported butter every year. We have imported some, but we have also exported.


Robert McCubbin: Last year we exported
3,125,000	pounds, and the year before we exported 4,509,000 pounds to Newfoundland and British West Indies.


John Alpheus Charlton: The net is on the export side?


Robert McCubbin: That is right.


William Earl Rowe: Every person seems to have the belief that there will be a shortage of

creamery butter this coming winter. That is understandable perhaps with present prices of milk and milk products. There has been a great deal of controversy with respect to oleomargarine, and this has caused considerable concern among the dairy farmers of Canada. I should like to ask the parliamentary assistant if any consideration has been given to permitting the manufacture of a new substitute for butter. It is said that this can be produced from milk and dairy products. While it has not the same fat value as butter, it is supposed to have the same food value. I understand that its manufacture is prohibited at the present time, but it might provide a substitute for creamery butter. Has application been made to the department for permission to produce this product which could replace creamery butter in a time of critical shortage?


George Alexander Cruickshank: Made out of what?


William Earl Rowe: Milk and dairy products.


Robert McCubbin: Some representations
have been made to me about it, but no representations have been made to the Department of Agriculture.


William Earl Rowe: Or to the government?


Robert McCubbin: No representations have been made to this department at any rate.


William Earl Rowe: I am simply asking for information ; I do not want to embarrass the parliamentary assistant. I understand that this can be manufactured from dairy products, and in a time of critical shortage it could take the place of butter. I think dairymen throughout the dominion would much prefer to have butter replaced with a product produced from milk rather than with oleomargarine.


George Alexander Cruickshank: What is it?


William Earl Rowe: It is a substitute for butter. If they were allowed to manufacture it, then I could name it. It is manufactured from milk and dairy products and would be an asset to the dairy industry.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
161. Departmental administration, $306,232.
James Angus MacKinnon: Mr. Chairman, I was sworn in as Minister of Mines and Resources on June 11, eleven days ago. I am not on that account asking for any compassion, although I am very much appreciative-


William Earl Rowe: That is a good item to start
with.

Supply-Mines and Resources


James Angus MacKinnon: I have been in close touch in many ways and for many years with the Department of Mines and Resources, the old department of the interior, but from the other side of the desk. My first experience with the department was back in the early days when I was an employee of the then minister of the interior, the Hon. Frank Oliver, publisher of the Edmonton Bulletin.
I think everybody admits that he was one of Canada's great statesmen.
I should like to give a brief summary of the estimates of the department before we proceed with the individual items. The estimates of the Department of Mines and Resources provide for a considerable increase -$12,150,000-over those of the previous year. In large measure this increase reflects a situation which has been accumulating for a number of years. During the depression and war years, expenditures for improvements in the national parks and Indian reserves and for the development of the Northwest Territories and Yukon were, of necessity greatly curtailed. The result has been that the ordinary facilities in the parks and Indian reserves have so deteriorated that larger appropriations are now required to meet the most urgent needs. We are under most severe pressure from the Northwest Territories and Yukon where we have nearly twenty years of arrears to make up. Normal development of these areas cannot be longer delayed.
With the cessation of hostilities and the resulting increase in available manpower, the mining industry is stepping up its activity and making more requests for mineral dressing investigations. Also, reconversion problems and post-war increase in industrial activity have resulted in man}' demands for physical metallurgy investigations.
A new laboratory will shortly be completed and equipped with semi-commercial sized rolling mill, extrusion press and other equipment primarily for work on light metals and their alloys. Operation of this laboratory will account for a considerable part of the additional appropriation now asked for.
Similarly, with the forest industry, post-war demands for investigation and research in silviculture, fire prevention and forest management have greatly expanded, and this is reflected in this increase in the estimates. There has been a much larger use of timber in recent years, first to meet the needs of war, and subsequently the demands of peacetime requirements. For many years our industries dependent on the forest for their raw material were able to cut out, and move on to areas of new supplies. There is a limit to the distance
that industries can go for supplies, and more industrialists are now giving thought to a policy of forest management to continue production on accessible forest lands.
It will be seen that a large part of the increase in our estimates is to provide funds for the operations of the eastern Rockies forest conservation board, a joint dominion-provincial organization created by statute last year to plan, direct and supervise the construction, operation and maintenance of all projects and facilities required for the proper protection and conservation of the forests and the protection of the watersheds within the area of the eastern Rockies.
The demand for accurate maps for the development of Canada's natural resources, particularly of northern Canada, is reflected in the increase in the appropriations requested for the surveys and mapping units of the department, which include also the charting of our shores. It is intended this year to provide two new hydrographic ships for this purpose.
If Canada hopes to attract United States tourists, it will be necessary to appropriate sufficient funds to ensure that present facilities in our national parks are attractive and adequate and that improvements are made where required. It is particularly important that facilities be made available for the man in the average income bracket. Therefore an active parks program must be initiated at once. A new road development program for the parks is planned, which will include the reconstruction and preparation for hard-surfacing of roads which are inferior in quality and the improvement of hazardous portions of existing roads. A modest building program will also be undertaken.
The government of New Brunswick recently transferred to the dominion an area of land for the creation of a n_tional park, and it is proposed to make a start on the new park this year.
As mentioned before, during the depression and war years expenditures for buildings and other construction projects in the Indian reserves were so curtailed that not only is it necessary now to ask for substantial increases for the repairs to Indian buildings and houses, but the accumulation of new building needs has reached the stage where it is not possible to carry on the administration of Indian affairs without considerably increased appropriations for building purposes.
A substantial increase is required for Indian education. It is proposed next year to provide ninety-seven new classrooms for day school purposes and four residential schools in isolated
Supply-Mines and Resources

locations. There are 12,000 Indian children of school age for whom no educational facilities have yet been provided. We can make some progress with the adult Indian, but the education of the child is where the work must begin if the Indian is to become a useful citizen. 'His health, habits, energies and ambitions must be supervised and directed, and this can best be done through the school, where early and continuous training will fit him to take his place in the life of the country. This cannot be accomplished without modern, clean, well-lighted school buildings and qualified teachers.
A large part of the increase in the vote for Indian welfare is necessary for the construction of Indian houses. In most cases the Indians build their own houses from material supplied, in many instances the lumber being from their own sawmills. In this way the greatest number of houses is secured with the minimum expenditure of funds.
It is necessary to ask for a considerable increase for immigration purposes also. This is due largely to the necessity of providing adequate facilities both in Canada and abroad to deal with the increasing flow of immigrants and visitors to this country.


Mr. MacNICOL:: I do not want to say anything that will bother the minister, because I know he has been only a short time in this department, and I know his whole heart is in the development of this country, particularly the western country and the far north. But there are three general programs I should like to ask a word about, and if the minister cannot answer, that will be all right.
In former years there was always an item in these estimates for proceeding with the work of development of oil from the tar sands at Fort McMurray. I do not see anything in the estimates for that purpose this year; yet I know that this country has an investment there in cash of approximately $2,000,000 in one way or another. If the minister knows,
I would ask him just what the position is at Fort McMurray today. The main separation plant was burnt down. I saw it after it was burnt. I may be going there again this year, but I am not sure that I shall have time to go. Can the minister tell the committee just the situation of the buildings there which belong to the government and whether any equipment is still there? If he cannot answer that, I have two other questions to ask.


James Angus MacKinnon: There will be a substantial item in the supplementaries to provide for further research work in connection with the development of the so-called tar sands at Fort McMurray. All the plant and equipment

that we had at Waterways has been sold to the Abasand company. They are maintaining the buildings and the refinery.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Have they rebuilt the
separation plant?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The refinery, then, is just standing where it was before, at the rear of where the separation plant was located? Is all the equipment under protection? The new Abasand company, an Edmonton company, is under the direction, I believe, of the Alberta government.


James Angus MacKinnon: This is entirely separate from the development down the Athabaska river, which is being assisted by the Alberta government.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I do not think I shall worry the minister any more, because I can see he is not familiar with the matter.
I observe an item in the estimates for coal development in the Yukon area, and I am glad to see that item. My hon. friend the member for Yukon is familiar with the Yukon's resources, and I am very glad we have coal in the Yukon. Part of the business of the Department of Mines and Resources should be the development of coal anywhere. Is the minister conversant with the probable development of hard coal in the Highwood area of Alberta?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am familiar in a general way with the coal resources of the Highwood area and other high-grade coal resources in other parts of the eastern slope of the Rockies. I do not know just what information my hon. friend seeks. But he did refer to the development of coal properties in the Yukon.	Moneys have been
advanced to assist in the opening up of coal deposits there to serve the Yukon on a basis on which the government hopes to be reimbursed through sales.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The minister is new in the department. I hope he will be better by next year. The minister will be more familiar with what the department is doing with reference to oil, if it comes under his department. Will he tell us how much oil has been delivered in the Leduc area so far and what the prospects are?


James Angus MacKinnon: I should like to give what answer I can to the hon. member. The so-called Leduc sector of the Edmonton oil field is, as everyone knows, under great development at the present time. Unfortunately, the work there has recently been held

Supply-Mines and Resources
up by a very large producer getting out of control. That difficulty has not yet been fully overcome.


Arthur Leroy Smith: They got it under control the day before yesterday.


James Angus MacKinnon: The hon. member for Calgary West must have later information on that than I have. On my last inquiry I was informed that, although they were making great progress in getting the well under control, they had not yet succeeded. I am delighted to know that the well is now under control.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The last newspaper from the west carried that information.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am sorry, but I cannot give the figures of the amount of oil produced there. The amounts vary from day to day.


Harry Grenfell Archibald: I was pleased! to hear the minister say that his department was taking an interest in putting better roads in our national parks. Of course roads in the west are a major problem. The great trouble is that you maj' have good roads in the parks, but in the process of getting to the parks you wreck your car. I notice in the votes that money is allocated for road construction into the Northwest Territories, and into the Yellowknife district.
Within my own riding <we have an area called Atlin, in which placer mining is carried on to a considerable extent. I do not want to ride the. Department of Mines and Resources, because I do not believe they are wholly to blame for what happened. It might be this unknown quantity called the treasury board. British Columbia offered to pay their share of the road amounting to $100,000 from Atlin up to the Yukon border if the federal authority would pay their $100,000 and build their half of the road from the British Columbia border to the Alcan highway. This investment of $200,000 would have produced almost as large an amount as that. It would have paid for itself in the actual value of gold produced. On top of that you could liken it to a park area, because perhaps it is the most beautiful townsite in Canada. At Atlin lake there is fishing and hunting for big game. It is my understanding that, although the government of British Columbia offered to pay its $100,000, the federal government would not come through with its half. It would have been an acquisition to the country. It would have been an attraction to the tourists and would have side-tracked many who go to Fairbanks. They would have turned down and gone to Atlin. I should like the department to keep that in
mind when making up next year's estimates, because it is impossible to develop that placer mining field unless roads are put in. They cannot get the heavy equipment in until the road is built.


Edward George McCullough: I am happy that we have the minister as head of this department. I was glad to hear what he had to say in regard to the government taking action on conservation of our forests and investigation into our mineral resources and how to use them. If wre had had proper conservation of our forests in the past twenty-five years we would not have had the terrific forest fires which I myself saw in flying over the Chapleau area of northern Ontario. It is to be regretted that, owing to policies followed in Canada under which timber operators were given large timber berths and allowed to cut the timber and leave slashings in the forests, huge fires have resulted. The department has been unable to prevent terrible losses, amounting to millions of dollars, in our timber berths. I hope that the minister will take measures to guard against further fires of that kind.
Another matter to which I should like to refer is that of our various mineral deposits. I want to refer particularly to the potash deposits in Saskatchewan. I am told by authorities of the federal government that these deposits are of extreme importance; and, should we exploit them properly, they will perhaps be of as great significance as the potash deposits in Germany. Indeed they offer as great an opportunity for potash development as we find in some of the fields in Mexico. If the minister has any information on that I should like him to pass it on to us. Will he give us any communications or plans of development of the potash deposits that have passed between the federal government and the government of Saskatchewan? I think he will readily recognize that it is a tremendous proposition. It would take sums of money running into many millions of dollars properly to develop that field. If we had a progressive attitude toward that development we could have a large export surplus of potash to send to other countries, and this would assist us to correct our unfavourable balance of trade with other nations.


James Angus MacKinnon: There has been correspondence between the department and the government of Saskatchewan regarding the development of potash resources, but no decision has been arrived at. In connection with the forests, it is the intention of the department to bring in, at the next session, a forests act which will look toward the development and preservation of our timber resources.
Supply-Mines and Resources


Mr. GREEN:: Will the minister not make a statement in reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Skeena? It is of the utmost importance that a road should be constructed between the Atlin country and the Alaska highway. Apparently the provin-nial government has offered to pay half the cost. What position is being taken by the dominion government?


James Angus MacKinnon: I do not want to block my own estimates. I was quite ready to answer the question of the hon. member for Skeena by informing him that the item of which he spoke-and of which he spoke as being a matter that was lost for this session- is still under consideration. I am not sure what the result will be. Instead of being a cost of $100,000 to the provincial government and $100,000 to the dominion government, it is expected by our officials that the cost will be at least double that to both the province and the federal government. But the need is recognized. The wealth of the mineral field that this road will open up is recognized. Everything cannot be done at once. We are building roads in the Yukon territory alone this year to the extent of $425,000.


Mr. YOUNG:: I should like to ask the minister a question. I understand that he is a new minister and I am a new member, so that we start on a fairly even level, although possibly he will have the advantage. I should like to inquire especially about the policy of this department in regard to Indians who are over the age of seventy. In British Columbia there are a number of Indians living in reservations on the borders of the constituency I represent, and I understand from them-I should like to check this with the minister-that recently this department has granted an increase of $8 a month to these aged people. Previously they were receiving something in the nature of $5 a month, which was given them in the form of necessities by the Indian agent. The condition of these people at the present time is most necessitous. We are all aware that anyone of the white race who is asked to live on $40 a month as an old age pension is in no paradise; and when we consider that these Indian races eat as we eat and have to live as we have to live, what they receive is a remarkably small sum. Does the department intend to increase the amount? When I say "increase," I do not mean increasing it another $8, but increasing it in line with the cost of living.


William Henry Golding: Old age
pension comes under the health and welfare department and not under this.
rMr. MacKinnon.]


Stanley Howard Knowles: But is this not an Indian affairs matter, Mr. Chairman? Perhaps the hon. member could ask the question under item 213.


William Henry Golding: Item 213 would be the vote.
Mr. CASTLEDiEN: If the minister would prefer to wait until we get that item to discuss Indian affairs, we could do so.


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Bureau of mines-[DOT]
18i. Mineral resources investigations, $1,135,857.
Howard Charles Green: Will the minister explain the work carried out under this vote?


James Angus MacKinnon: The apparent increase is $512,723. However, in 1947-48 there was provided in votes 532 and 534 of the demobilization and reconversion estimates the sum of $384,500 for services being carried on in the divisions of mineral dressing and metallurgy and mineral resources. This will be continued in 1948-49 under, the main vote. The difference between this amount and the apparent increase of $512,723 represents an actual increase of $128,223. The vote provides for office, laboratory and field investigations relating to metallic minerals, industrial minerals, fuels and mineral economics, including those directly connected with post-war problems, and the laboratories equipped to carry out investigations on both small and semi-commercial scales are housed in several modern buildings on Booth street, Ottawa. Investment in buildings and equipment is almost $3,000,000. As a group, these laboratories are probably without their equal anywhere. The services provided are in ever-increasing demand by industry and by other government agencies.


Howard Charles Green: The help is available to all the provinces and not merely to the Northwest Territories?


James Angus MacKinnon: It is for all Canada.


Alan Cockeram: I wish to congratulate the minister on this increase in the estimates of the department, and I would ask him whether these laboratories are being extended in any considerable degree. To what extent will the increase be available for increase in the metallurgical staff dealing with these problems? It is well known in the mining industry that there has been great delay in getting results, and with this increase we hope that the service can be brought up to date.

Supply-Mines and Resources


James Angus MacKinnon: The staff is being constantly increased. We have just finished equipping a new laboratory and are planning the erection of two additional buildings at an approximate cost of $35,000.


Alan Cockeram: There is an increase of only four in the permanent staff. That is what I had in mind. There should be a greater increase in the technical personnel of the department.


James Angus MacKinnon: While there is an increase of only four in the permanent staff, there is a large increase in the temporary staff.


Alan Cockeram: The minister says there is a large increase in the temporary staff, but in spite of the increase in wages over last year there is an increase of only $2,000 for temporary staff. It seems to me you are spending a great deal of money but not filling up the staff to do the job you propose to do.


Edward George McCullough: When these expenditures are made for investigation into mineral resources in any province, are they made on a proportionate basis with the province concerned? When you go into a province to investigate certain mineral resources, does the department spend dollar for dollar with the province?


James Angus MacKinnon: There is no formula that is used in all cases. It is a matter of arriving at an arrangement in accordance with the necessities of development.


Alan Cockeram: Will the minister state whether he will increase the personnel of that branch above $2,000 for temporary assistance so as to give better service to industry?
'Mr. MacKINNON: From what I learn from my officials, there is a much larger increase than would be indicated by the $2,000 mentioned, and the staff is, I am told, being increased.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch'- Bureau of mines-
160.	Investigations of radioactive ores, $134,200.
John Ritchie MacNicol: This vote calls for
$134,000 odd. This particular branch does not seem to have any head. Most of the expenses are connected with temporary staff in the amount of $78,000 out of $134,000. Much of the rest is for travelling expenses and supplies. Just what are they doing and where are they finding the material, if that can be stated?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that this is a subject in respect of which, inasmuch as it deals with radioactive ores, the department is
careful in the information it makes public. I can say, however, that the project has been underway since 1945 and was undertaken at the request of the Minister of Munitions and Supply and the president of the national research council. At the outset the objective was to improve the recovery of pitchblende from the ore of the crown company, Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited, but this has since been expanded to include ores from other sources. The investigation is part of a much larger and highly secret project on atomic energy which is being carried out by certain government departments.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I thought it had reference to other ores, because the country owns the whole area at Great Bear lake and, I presume, all the properties roundabout. I can quite realize that the department does not want to reveal where they are, and I will not press the question if they do not wish to. I was wondering where those other areas are in which the investigators are trying to discover radioactive ores.


James Angus MacKinnon: It is nearly all research work done here in Ottawa.


Alan Cockeram: That is apart from Eldorado Mines, I take it?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes.


Alan Cockeram: Can the minister tell us how many investigations for the last year are covered by that item? The vote is for $134,000. How many separate analyses were made of radioactive ores in the last year?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am afraid I cannot give that information.


Howard Charles Green: Is that work done for the atomic energy control board?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes, and for Chalk River.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Dominion forest services-
168. Forest research and investigations, $649,639.
Lawrence Wilton Skey: I was pleased to hear the minister say a few minutes ago that the government planned a forest act next year. Will he outline to the committee what this forest act will embrace or what sort of thing is being contemplated by the government?


James Angus MacKinnon: The details of the contemplated forest act have not yet beeh worked out, but it is planned to assist the forest industry throughout Canada.
Supply-Mines and Resources


Lawrence Wilton Skey: May I ask if the minister plans to call a conference with the forestry branches of the provincial governments before passing this act, in order to find out how the federal government can help them?


James Angus MacKinnon: It has been my good fortune in another department to work closely on matters of mutual interest to the provinces and the dominion. I am quite sure that this problem will be approached on the same basis.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: May I just tell the minister what I have been trying to get at in the last two questions? It is simply this. The provinces obviously need help in fire prevention. The federal government holds within its hands the greatest weapon by means of which to protect the provinces against forest fires; I refer to the Royal Canadian Air Force. The minister's department has already been able to work ably and well with the R.C.A.F. in the mapping project. In regard to forest conservation and protection from fires, the minister's department should undertake, with the provinces of Canada, a regular plan of action and scheme to put a force of machines to work, and not just one, as they have at the present time in northern Ontario. They should put a whole force of machines into action, with dry ice and every other form of fire-fighting equipment, so that we can conserve our natural wealth. In that way our armed forces at the same time will be doing the country a great service.


Edward George McCullough: I am happy to hear what the hon. member for Trinity lias just, said, coming as I do from a province in which we have given great consideration to the losses in our forests and in which we have undertaken to train young men to jump by parachute from planes in order to stop forest fires in their early stages. This has meant that we in Saskatchewan feel that if we can get co-operation from the federal government in this regard, we shall go a long way in inducing the menace of fires and the destruction of our valuable timber.
I should like to ask the minister with regard to this item 168-which is for the substantial amount of 8640,000, an increase of 84)1,000 over last year-if it is the policy of the government to investigate the by-products of our timber. in Saskatchewan we now have research going on to utilize a great deal of our timber which formerly went to waste in the form of slabs and portions of our trees which could not be used for lumber. I should like the minister to give us at some length, if he would be so kind, information in that regard.


James Angus MacKinnon: This involves specialized studies including the following:
Silvicultural investigations concerning the growth of different tree species, natural regeneration, and methods to improve forest stands peculiar to the various forest regions of Canada; to determine the factors affecting the forest growth, reproduction and depletion in all its phases and to evolve from such studies basic data for improved forest management on areas accessible for exploitation.
To determine the forest inventory of Canada with relation to its accessibility for marketing, the volume of merchantable timber available to industry and the relationship between production and depletion, so that industry can be geared to the growth potential of the forest.
To develop scientific methods to expedite the collection of forest inventory data through technique and scientific devices to interpret forestry data from air photographs.
The study of factors of tariffs, taxation, et cetera, on sale of forest products in world markets as they affect both the internal and external economy of Canada.
And finally, to determine and correlate the factors involved in measuring forest fire danger, including temperature, humidity, rainfall, wind velocity and evaporation, as they affect the inflammability of the various forest fuels; the design, testing and development of equipment and methods to increase the efficiency of forest fire detection and suppression.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Will the minister tell us how much money he has at his disposal for expenditure in the matter of detecting and fighting forest fires? It is one thing to have a beautiful plan laid out for the next twenty-five years; and it is another thing to have something with which to stop a forest fire next week, if it breaks out in Ontario or British Columbia or Albert and destroys more forests than all our highfalutin ideas on reforestation would replace in 100 years. We w'ant to know what we are to have done right away. How much money has the minister available to spend?


Arthur Leroy Smith: More forest fires are put out by rain than by anything else.


James Angus MacKinnon: Apart from the protection of our forests in our national parks, in the Yukon, Northwest Territories and experimental stations, forest fire protection is a matter purely for the provinces.

Supply-Mines and Resources


John Horne Blackmore: I will grant that,
according to the British North America Act, it is a responsibility of the provinces, but it should be borne in the mind of every member of the government of Canada that every stick of timber that is destroyed in any province is a loss to Canada. We can just figure out the responsibility of the government in the light of that fact. I suppose it is too late for the minister to bring any influence to bear upon the government this year, but I would suggest that for next year he request that a liberal allowance be granted with which to co-operate in putting out fires which may occur at any time in any province of Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Dominion forest service-
169. Forest products research, $435,862.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: This item deals with
forest products research, which is a matter of deep interest to many people living in British Columbia, where the forest industry is of such importance. It is of particular interest also to many people I have the honour to represent. I should like the minister to give us some information in detail as to the type of research being carried on in connection with forest products, the staff engaged in that program in British Columbia at the present time, and the projects on which they are working. Again, I should like to know how this information is given to the operators of forest industries and others concerned. I speak with some knowledge of the forest industry in my own constituency, since I have been engaged in it to a certain extent for nearly forty years. From my experience I can say we have a tremendous waste in forest products even today. For instance, if it were not for the expensive equipment required we could make from sawdust excellent briquettes which burn satisfactorily, but at the present time all these processes are far too expensive to be used by small mills. I could go on almost endlessly mentioning the things in which we are interested as far as forest products research is concerned, but I should like the minister to give us some idea of the projects being undertaken at this time, and particularly the work being done in British Columbia.


James Angus MacKinnon: This vote provides for the operation of the forest products laboratories, which are in three units: first, the Ottawa laboratory, concerned with research and studies primarily affecting the sawmilling and wood-using industries in eastern Canada; second, the Vancouver laboratory, which is conducting studies and tests affecting this 5849-36] i
industry in the western coastal region; and third, the Montreal laboratory at McGill University, operated by the pulp and paper research institute of Canada under a joint agreement between the dominion government, the Canadian pulp and paper association and McGill University, which serves the pulp and paper industry only.
I might mention some of the work carried on at the Ottawa laboratory. There is the division of timber mechanics; the division of wood chemistry; the division of wood utilization and lumber seasoning; the division of wood preservation and timber pathology; and publications.


George Randolph Pearkes: Is this a grant to the forestry branch of the University of British Columbia?


James Angus MacKinnon: The University of
British Columbia provides the space on the campus and we provide the buildings and personnel to carry on the work.


George Randolph Pearkes: You make no financial grant, in the same way as you make a grant to McGill University?
'Mr. MacKINNON: That is scarcely a good comparison, because the work at McGill is being carried on by the pulp and paper industry, McGill university and the dominion government. There is no direct grant for this purpose to the University of British Columbia at the present time.


George Randolph Pearkes: The timber industries in British Columbia make a grant to the University of British Columbia. I hope that the government will consider doing the same thing next year.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I should like to offer a suggestion to the minister, because of the deep interest in this subject on the part of a number of the people I represent. I understand that the forestry branch of the government of Sweden, which carries on similar investigations, is in the habit of keeping in close touch with the development of logging and sawmill machinery, and other machinery allied to the lumber industry, and that in northern Europe there have been developed in recent years some efficient small sawmill units and things of that type which are not in use in Canada at the present time. I am just offering the minister the suggestion that our forest products research branch, or some branch working closely with it, should give some attention to that subject, so that these newer ideas may be brought more quickly to the attention of our lumber operators and people interested in the forest industry.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Mines and Resources
[Stage Direction]
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Eastern Rockies forest conservation board-
171. To provide for the salaries and expenses of dominion members of the board and their alternates and sundry expenses in connection with the maintenance and operation of the Ottawa office of the board, $30,000.
Alan Cockeram: Will the minister please explain this item, especially in view of the next item, which is for the sum of $175,000? The details given for this item simply show-amounts for temporary assistance and travelling expenses, and do not show anything for the salaries of the members of the board. How many members are on this board, and what salaries are paid?


James Angus MacKinnon: The board consists of three members, two appointed by the dominion government and one by the province of Alberta. I believe the chairman, General Kennedy, receives a salary of $12,000 a year. The other appointee of the dominion government is Mr. Wardle, of the Department of Mines and Resources. He is a civil servant, who receives no special salary for this work. At the moment I do not remember the representative of the province of Alberta or his salary.


Alan Cockeram: Where doe3 General
Kennedy's salary appear? I see only $12,000 for temporary assistance.


James Angus MacKinnon: This vote provides for the salary of the chairman of the board, for the travelling expenses of the chairman and the other dominion member, and for the maintenance and operation of the Ottawa office.


Alan Cockeram: But it just shows temporary assistance; that is what I am getting at. What do you pay the permanent members of the board, and where is that shown in these estimates?


James Angus MacKinnon: The chairman of the board is not a civil servant.


Alan Cockeram: Then where would he get his salary?


James Angus MacKinnon: Out of this sum we are voting.


Alan Cockeram: There is $12,000 for temporary assistance. Does that represent the salary of the chairman of the board? That is what I should like to know.


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Eastern Rockies forest conservation boards-
17Z. Dominion contribution towards annual maintenance, including staff and expenses, $175,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: This has to do with the reforestation of the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains, which I have been pressing for some years and which I am glad to see now is under way. Last year, if I remember rightly, we voted a total of some $6,000,000 to be expended over a number of years. Last fall, on a call to the bureau of reclamation offices in Denver to inquire into what they are doing on the eastern slopes of their mountains, where they are reforesting, I learned something which may indicate one of the causes of the excessive floods in British Columbia. I learned that forest fires in the United States had a serious effect on the watersheds of the big rivers there, because the accumulation of soot from the burning fires prevented the growth of the glaciers, which is most important. These fires strip off the forests, and the result is that the run-off is much more rapid than it otherwise would be. I have been wondering whether that is not one of the causes of the rapid runoff in the British Columbia watersheds.
I notice that this vote is just for the eastern slope of the Rockies. The destruction in the Fraser river watershed is about 30,000 acres a year. In ten years this means that 300,000 acres of forest have been destroyed. This means that the winter accumulation will run off much more rapidly than it otherwise would. This was one of the major causes of the terrible floods in the Fraser valley. There should be a vote, at least by next year, for the reforestation of the slopes of the Rocky mountains in the Fraser river watershed.
I am all for this vote, having promoted this matter for years. I simply ask if it would not be well to make an investigation of the Fraser river watershed to see if the floods which they have had this year and which are higher than in any recorded year in the past, are not partly the result of the denuding of the mountain slopes.


James Angus MacKinnon: The problem of the western slope of the Rockies is a problem for British Columbia; the problem of the eastern slope becomes a problem of the dominion government inasmuch as the water supply of three provinces, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba, is affected.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I outlined all that when the bill was going through, but I am going to ask the minister to consider the reforestation of the slopes in the Fraser river watershed that

Supply-Mines and Resources
have been burned off. It is a dominion matter, because we have agreed to pay half the expenses of the results of the floods.


James Angus MacKinnon: We are now and have been working on an investigation of the Columbia river watershed in conjunction with the United States, but I shall give consideration to what the hon. member has said.


Howard Charles Green: Why is that work being done on the Columbia river watershed?


James Angus MacKinnon: It is an international matter.


Howard Charles Green: Is it the intention to undertake forest conservation measures in any other part of Canada than the eastern slope of the Rockies?


James Angus MacKinnon: We can initiate such undertakings only in the Northwest Territories, the Yukon and the national parks; the initiation of a project of that kind elsewhere would have to be by the province.


Howard Charles Green: Would the dominion be willing to enter into a scheme, say with the province of British Columbia, of forest conservation?


James Angus MacKinnon: I can always discuss it with my colleagues.


Howard Charles Green: Is the dominion in a position to enter into negotiations with the province for forest conservation?


James Angus MacKinnon: If British Columbia, which owns its own natural resources, including the timber resources, came to the dominion government with a proposal for joint control of some kind, consideration would be given. I do not think anything further can be said.


John Horne Blackmore: Although it has not been mentioned, it is an obvious matter that a large percentage of the forest fires, which do great damage in Alberta, originate in British Columbia. That is no reflection upon British Columbia; it is just the fact. How can we take care of forest fires in Alberta unless there is some provision for co-operating with British Columbia in taking care of forest fires when they are just beginning?
It seems to me to be somewhat inconsistent to say that the problem belongs to British Columbia when the eastern slope of the Rockies is a dominion concern because it affects three provinces. Fires in British Columbia affect two provinces, and perhaps three. A forest fire starts in British Columbia, gets out of control and' crosses the Alberta border where we are completely unable to handle it. It seems to me that the minister should take a more far-reaching and long-range attitude toward this whole matter of forest conservation.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Having seen a forest fire, I should like to ask a question. Is it not a fact that there is no way of stopping a forest fire that has got going, except by rain or a change in the wind? You can go up behind a fire with your buckets and gas engines, but all you can do is to try to see that it will not start again.
The second thing I want to ask is this. If the dominion and the provinces are going into fire prevention, would there not be a complete duplication of effort? If you are referring to contributions, that is an entirely different matter; but would it not be extravagant to have side by side a dominion fire protection service and a provincial fire prevention service?


James Angus MacKinnon: What has been said by the hon. member for Calgary West is a statement of fact rather than a question. I do not think there is any doubt but that once a large fire gets rolling, it is practically impossible to stop it, except by rain or by har ing it. burn itself out.


John Horne Blackmore: I am glad the hon. member for Calgary West mentioned this matter, because it gives me a chance to clarify my position. I am not stupid enough to suppose that the dominion government should set up an independent fire prevention service, but the dominion government could co-operate with the provinces in much the same way that it has co-operated with British Columbia in connection with the floods. Canada did not have a flood prevention service in British Columbia; all we did was to assure British Columbia that we would be behind them in everything they intended to do.
Did the dominion government take any part in fighting the forest fires which have raged recently in Ontario?


Lawrence Wilton Skey: They are still going.


James Angus MacKinnon: The dominion government did not participate except in our own reserves.


John Horne Blackmore: Did Ontario seek the assistance of the dominion government?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am told not.


John Horne Blackmore: If they had done so, would the dominion government have been prepared to help them?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The dominion government lent planes to Ontario to help with the dry ice proposition.


John Horne Blackmore: I just want to get some information. Along with others, I have been here for thirteen years and have been greatly
Supply-Mines and Resources

dissatisfied over the fact that apparently nothing is being done to take care of our forests. We have only one set of forests; when they are devastated, we shall have no forests, and the next generation will not be in anything like as fortunate a position with respect to forests as we are. That is a position which ought not to exist. In Germany and many European countries they take the greatest care to see that every time a tree is cut down, another is planted in the ground in its place. If we would use anything like husbandry in respect of our forests we would have a magnificent assest for a thousand years for coming generations. What I should like to see is something done right away, not twenty-five years from now after the forests have been largely destroyed. I should like to see a start made tomorrow. Has the minister any intention or idea of starting such activities?


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: The province of Ontario is already doing for itself all the things the hon. member has mentioned and is spending its own money in doing it. Why duplicate the work? You would have the dominion and the provincial fire-fighters falling over themselves, each trying to do the same job. Why spend the taxpayers' money twice?


John Horne Blackmore: That remark is utter nonsense. To say that Ontario has done all it possibly could is sheer tommy-rot.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: That is a matter of opinion.


John Horne Blackmore: If Ontario does not need help I may tell the chairman and the committee that Alberta, British Columbia and Saskatchewan do. They have not as much money to spend, but have relatively as many forests to take care of as Ontario.


James Angus MacKinnon: Earlier this evening I stated that the dominion is in touch with the other provinces, Ontario for one, for the purpose of making a study of the most scientific methods of fire protection.


John Horne Blackmore: Has any progress
been made? What has actually been done besides getting in touch?


George Randolph Pearkes: What steps does the federal government take to protect its own forest lands against fire? There are thousands of acres of dominion-owned forest lands in British Columbia, on Indian reserves and elsewhere. What steps does the federal government take to protect dominion forests?


James Angus MacKinnon: The dominion government is using the best methods known to safeguard the forests in the parks and on other

dominion-owned lands. There is an extensive system comprising fire rangers, look-out towers and water stations all through our national parks.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch-* Geological survey of Canada-
173. Geological survey administration and miscellaneous services, 1-114,000.
Mr. FULTON:: On this and many other items under this department, it is necessary for members to have before them the latest report of the department. I find that the latest report of the Department of Mines and Resources is for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1946, which is over two years ago. It is extremely difficult for members to know what is being done and to examine the estimates as they should be examined without up-to-date reports before them. Can the minister tell us when the report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1947, will be available?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am advised that the report for 1947 is almost ready and will be distributed very shortly.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Will it be distributed before the end of the session?


James Angus MacKinnon: It is still in the hands of the king's printer. It may possibly be distributed before the end of the session.


Edmund Davie Fulton: In the list of reports and returns to be made to the House of Commons by public officers and private corporations in accordance with standing order 84, the departmental report of Mines and Resources, including the reports of directors of branches under the minister, is to be made during the session. That appears on page 8 of the list of reports to be presented to the House of Commons. If the report is in our hands before the end of the session it will technically comply with that requirement, but it is a matter for strong comment that we have not the report in our hands now when the estimates of this department are being considered. The report should be hurried up and made available without delay.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Geological survey of Canada-
17J/. Geological surveys, $842,492.
Alan Cockeram: I notice an increase of fourteen, in the staff, but only three more geologists. Are more geological parties going out this year than last? The amount for

Supply-Mines and Resources
temporary assistance is down. I am inclined to think there has been a cut in this service rather than an increase.


James Angus MacKinnon: There are twelve geological parties in British Columbia, nine in Alberta, four in Saskatchewan, ten in Manitoba, three in Ontario, five in Quebec, two in New Brunswick, two in Nova Scotia and one in Prince Edward Island. The service is larger this year than last.


Alan Cockeram: How does it compare in expenditure? Have you more geological parties out this year than last?


James Angus MacKinnon: There is an increase of $200,000 for this purpose this year.


Harry Grenfell Archibald: Last year the department carried on an aerial survey of northwest British Columbia, which covered the Groundhog coal fields. I do not think that aerial photography has been completed. When is it planned to send out a ground crew in that area?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that a ground crew' is there now.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch

Surveys and mapping bureau-
175. Surveys and mapping bureau administration, $14,590.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: On several occasions I have complained about mapping. The present minister, who W'as then in another department, corrected what I complained of at that time. The only complaint I have to make now' is that I noticed the other day a T.C.A. map which left out Prince Edward Island, probably because the T.C.A. does not operate in that province. Just the same, when it was making a map, it could have included Prince Edward Island.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific surveys branch- Surveys and mapping bureau-
177. Canadian hydrographic service, $2,364,941.
John Ritchie MacNicol: It is utterly impossible at this stage of the session to inquire exhaustively into such large expenditures. I notice that, of this 82,361,911, approximately 81,600,000 is for materials and equipment. Obviously we cannot get the list of that at the present time. Then I note that about $400,000 is for temporary assistance and wages. Why is there such a large amount earmarked for temporary assistance?


James Angus MacKinnon: This item looks large, but hon. members must remember that provision is made for the purchase and fitting of two hydrographic ships.


George Randolph Pearkes: For a considerable period of time there has been dissatisfaction among the crews of two hydrographic ships on the w'est coast, the William J. Stewart and the Parry. It came to a climax last month when they were asked to sign at last year's wages, which w-ere $27 to $40 less than the wages that were paid on government ships of the same kind for -the same ratings on the east coast. Some adjustment was made. Have the wages been brought up now, so that they are comparable with wages paid on the east coast? Have the crews signed on to the satisfaction of all concerned?


James Angus MacKinnon: The wages were
adjusted through the joint efforts of this department and the Department of Labour. I am informed that the men have all signed on and that the rates are satisfactory.


George Randolph Pearkes: A good deal of difficulty was experienced last summer in maintaining these ships. There was a tremendous turnover of personnel. That was largely on account of living conditions on the William J. Stewart. Is any provision made in this item for the improvement of living conditions, general layout, messing quarters, galleys and so forth on that vessel?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that improvements were made in living conditions on the William J. Stewart. I have not the details, but improvements were made.


George Randolph Pearkes: Structural improvements?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am sorry, I have not the details.


George Randolph Pearkes: I wish the minister would look into that, because I think there is still room for a great deal of improvement in the actual structural lay-out of the vessel.


James Angus MacKinnon: I shall do that.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I should like to revert to item 176 for a moment, which was passed over. It includes the expenses of the geographic board of Canada. I understand that the provinces as well have their geographic boards which deal with the naming of mountains and lakes in the provinces. I presume that the national geographic board is particularly concerned with the naming of mountains and lakes in the Northwest Territories, the Yukon, and so on. What were the expenses of the geographic board of Canada? Who are the members of the board? What do their duties
Supply-Mines and Resources

consist of? What policy is followed in naming mountains, lakes and natural features under their jurisdiction?


James Angus MacKinnon: It is impossible for me at the present time to give all the information asked for by the hon. member for Kootenay East as to the membership of the geographic board. I believe the board consists of some fifteen members. The provinces are represented on this board. I shall be glad to take note of the hon. member's question and send him the information personally.


John Horne Blackmore: I notice there is an increase of over SI,500,000 with respect to the hydrographic service. I am not begrudging the increase. I was wondering why the increase. Have we undertaken more extensive services than in the past?


James Angus MacKinnon: I have just explained that the large increase in the vote is caused by the purchase of two ships at a cost of $1,500,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services-Surveys and mapping bureau-
178. Geodetic survey of Canada, $471,821.
Howard Charles Green: There is some suggestion that permission should be obtained from the United States for British Columbia to use the highway connecting the two cities of Grand Forks and Rossland, but on the other side of the boundary. Can the minister say just what progress has been made with these negotiations, or what the position is with regard to that question?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that that does not come under this department. That possibly comes under external affairs.


Edward George McCullough: Does
the international peace garden come under the jurisdiction of this department?


James Angus MacKinnon: To what peace garden does my hon. friend refer, the one south of Brandon?


Edward George McCullough: Yes.


James Angus MacKinnon: It does not come under the parks branch of this department. Representations have been made to the department and to me by the hon. member for Brandon and others, urging that this international peace garden be brought under the parks' jurisdiction. No decision has yet been arrived at. I have been in correspondence with people interested in the park, looking to the possible giving of more assistance in some way to that project,


George Randolph Pearkes: Are there any re-surveys, or are any changes planned in the northern boundary between Canada and Alaska west of Prince Rupert?


James Angus MacKinnon: There have been discussions between the Canadian authorities and the United States as to the definite location of the boundary, but there is nothing really to report on it at the present time.


George Randolph Pearkes: When did the last discussions take place?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that these discussions have taken place on and off for several years until quite recently, at the technical level.


George Randolph Pearkes: No decision will be
reached in that respect, I hope, without reference to the province of British Columbia, because of the vital importance of this to certain industries there.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am sure that the province of British Columbia will be kept informed of what is being done, as it is at the present time.


Howard Charles Green: Is the province of British Columbia consulted, or is it merely informed of what is done by the dominion? The provincial government is veiy much concerned in the issue.


James Angus MacKinnon: I cannot conceive of this being done without the full knowledge, consent and co-operation of British Columbia.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I was going to ask the minister a question of which I am sure he would not have knowledge. Perhaps his officials can tell him if there is a report of the international joint commission in connection with the diversion of the water from Chamberlain lake in Maine, which is one of the main sources of the Allagash river which flows into the St. John river and is therefore in the international watershed, in which water is diverted out of Chamberlain lake within the St. John river watershed into the Penobscot watershed in Maine. If there is a report I should like to obtain one.


James Angus MacKinnon: The international joint commission does not come under this department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Surveys and mapping bureau-
181. Legal surveys, including grant of $356 to assist in printing the publication of the Canadian institute of surveying, $468,088.
Alan Cockeram: This is one of the new branches of the Department of Mines and

Supply-Mines and Resources
Resources. Can the minister give the number of employees a year ago and the number today?


James Angus MacKinnon: I have not that information before me, but I shall be glad to get it and send it to the hon. member.


Alan Cockeram: I should like to get it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch-[DOT] Surveys and mapping bureau-
183.	Map compilation and reproduction, $309,405.
Lawrence Wilton Skey: Can the minister give some details of the work being done in map compilation?


James Angus MacKinnon: The purpose of the vote is to maintain the map compilation and reproduction division. The work of the division is to prepare, compile and draw maps from existing information, which includes a topographic series of maps, electoral maps, road route maps, maps for use of various government departments, natural resources, railway maps, maps of Canada and all types of compiled maps.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Thank you. That is for the armed forces as well?


James Angus MacKinnon: That work is done by the armed forces in co-operation with our people.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: In this department, do you put together the aerial maps taken by the photographic unit of the R.C.A.F.?


James Angus MacKinnon: Maps are made from aerial photographs taken by the air force and by private companies engaged by the department of Mines and Resources.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Therefore this is not the entire expenditure?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch-[DOT] Dominion water and power bureau-
184.	Dominion water and power bureau, including the administration of the dominion water and power and irrigation acts, and including grant of $350 to the international executive council, world power conference, $384,900.
John Ritchie MacNicol: What particular function does the department perform' in relation to water power and irrigation?


James Angus MacKinnon: This vote is used for the work of the dominion water and" power bureau in making hydrometric measurements and securing essential data on the flow of
international waters, and the administration of the Dominion Water Power and Irrigation Acts.


John Ritchie MacNicol: All you do is to make a compilation of the flow of rivers.


James Angus MacKinnon: That is one of the purposes.


John Ritchie MacNicol: You have nothing to do with irrigation?


James Angus MacKinnon: Nothing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Dominion water and power bureau
[Stage Direction]
185.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $280,000.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: This amount is the same as that voted last year for surveys in the Columbia river basin, a project in which the people of my constituency, and indeed the people of British Columbia as a whole, are interested. Can the minister give some information as to the program being carried out this year in connection with these surveys? What work is to be done?


James Angus MacKinnon: The carrying out of studies and surveys in Canada has been entrusted to the dominion water and power bureau of the mines, forests and scientific services branch of the Department of Mines, by the Canadian section of the international joint commission. This bureau has its own staff, and by securing the co-operation of other services of the department and of the Department of Public Works, it arranges for necessary field surveys and investigations, and office studies which are now in progress.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I saw a newspaper report to the effect that a contract had been let to a private company for drilling for dam sites on certain rivers. Can the minister give more detailed information? Are dam sites to be drilled for and, if so, on what rivers? What districts will be surveyed?


James Angus MacKinnon: We are drilling for dam sites on various rivers. I have no further details.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister not give better information on the work that is being done? This is a substantial sum of money being spent, and the whole plan is of the utmost importance to the interior of British Columbia. The hon. member for Yale mentioned the question yesterday in connection with the level of Okanagan lake. Is the department not in a position to give a more complete report on the plans?
Supply-Mines and Resources


James Angus MacKinnon: There is little I can add to what I have said, except that the work is proceeding in various sections of the Columbia river valley.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Is it not proceeding in conjunction with the bureau of reclamation in the United States? I saw plans of it in Denver. The United States has as much to do with this work as we have, if not more. It is going to raise the height of the Grand Coulee fifty feet, which will back the water up into Canada a long distance beyond the boundary. They have their plans all ready, and they told me in Denver that we were working with them. I am in favour of it.


James Angus MacKinnon: We are. The work is being done under the control of the international joint commission.


John Ritchie MacNicol: And the bureau of reclamation in the United States?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What minister is responsible to parliament in connection with the international joint commission?


James Angus MacKinnon: The Secretary of State for External Affairs.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch-[DOT] Dominion water and power bureau-
186.	Lake of the Woods control board, $10,375.
Mr. SINNOTT:: At the present time the dam at Lake of the Woods is causing considerable trouble in the vicinity of Lac du Bonnet. I believe that the agreement which they have with the United States for the control of these waters is to hold back the waters for a considerable time, and the dams are then opened wide, with the consequence that volumes of water rush out at once, reaching Lac du Bonnet some weeks later. The farmers in the district there living along the banks have their grain seeded and, when the waters are let out with such great force, the river sometimes rises five or six feet, backing up and flooding out the farmers in the district. I would ask the minister to look into the matter and see whether this can be remedied so that better control of the waters will be established'.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- Dominioin observatories-
192. Dominion astrophysical observatory, Victoria, B.C., $50,679.


George Randolph Pearkes: I notice on page 169 of the estimates that the permanent staff of the astrophysical observatory outside Victoria is being reduced by one. Possibly he has been

replaced by a temporary officer, but I notice that the salaries of at least three of the scientists employed in that observatory have apparently been reduced, because the amount provided is less than that .provided last year for these particular individuals. May I ask whether it is a fact that the salaries have been reduced? I ask that question, because these men are highly skilled scientists who are rendering a valuable and useful service, not only to the community in which their laboratory is located but to the whole of Canada. I am -under the impression that the salaries are far too low. I hope that there has not been a reduction in any individuals salary. Perhaps the minister would make some comment.


James Angus MacKinnon: I may say that the only notable increases in -the vote are in salaries and acquisition of new equipment.


George Randolph Pearkes: If the minister would be so kind as to look at page 169, he will see that apparently the salary of the assistant dominion astrophysicist has been reduced from $5,100 to $4,920; that the next item has been reduced from $4,425 to $4,290; and similarly for the third item there has been a reduction from $3,825 to $3,690.


James Angus MacKinnon: The only explanation I can give to that is that newer people come into the office at a lower step in the salary
range.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands and development services branch-
193. Branch administration, $44,500.
Edmund Davie Fulton: I notice that in this branch there are, as far as I have been able to find, at least two publicity editors, editorial assistants and so on. What is the responsibility of those officers? On page 170, in the details of services, and again at page 172, will be found set forth the items relating to publicity editors and their salaries.


James Angus MacKinnon: Will the hon. member please repeat his question? I could not follow it.


Edmund Davie Fulton: My first question was that in this branch there are a number of appropriations for publicity and for salaries of publicity editors. If the minister will look at pages 170 and 172 in the details of services, he will see where that detail is given. What is the responsibility of those officers?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that these people get out the publications relating to publicity for the parks.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Edmund Davie Fulton: Do they have anything to do with the preparation of the magazine Domarl That is what I really wanted to ask.


James Angus MacKinnon: None, I am informed.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Can the minister say what officer of the department is responsible for it?


James Angus MacKinnon: Although I have not yet had time to see it, I am told that Domar is produced by the editorial and information division at the offices in Ottawa.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What is the cost of that per month? I believe that is a monthly publication.


James Angus MacKinnon: The cost per month is $403. including all charges.
Mr. FL'LTON: Including what?


James Angus MacKinnon: Including mailing and all charges.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is there any subscription for the magazine?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed not.
Mr. MaeNICOL: What is the editing in this department for? There is an item of publicity editor, S3,120. It is not much, but what does he do?


James Angus MacKinnon: What vote is that
under?
Mr. MaeNICOL: Vote 194. It is on page 170 of the estimates.


James Angus MacKinnon: The answer to that is just the same as the one I gave to the hon. member for Kamloops.
Lands and development services branch-
191i. Lands division-administration of dominion, ordnance and admiralty and public lands; seed grain collections, $197,885.


Duncan John McCuaig: I see that seed grain collections come under this item.
I should like to bring to the attention of the minister and the committee the matter of the old outstanding 1914-1923 seed grain relief. The answer to a question on the order paper shows that $10,132,640 was given out by the federal government between 1914 and 1923 for seed relief; that $8,417,887 was paid back; that $1,432,900 in interest was paid back, leaving an unpaid balance of principal and interest of $1,431,003 and $1,652,009 respectively. That was as of March 31, 1948. It further shows that no notices of this account were sent out by the government since 1930; that is eighteen years ago. It shows further that the bookkeeping in connection with this account cost $22,000 to keep it open.
Most of this relief was given out in 1914. I would say that not over fifteen per cent of
the people who received this relief are now residing on the land. A great part of this land is today held under grazing lease, or has gone back in what is called "gone-back preemption." I should like to point out to the committee that between 1923 and 1938 all the relief given out was cancelled by the governments concerned. The Saskatchewan government on its own responsibility cancelled 50 per cent of the 1938 seed relief.
In view of these facts, I should like to say to the minister, first, that in my opinion this account is a dead horse, having regard to any equity that is left in the land against which the relief is charged; second, that it was considered to be almost a national emergency in the years that this relief was given out; third, that eighty-five per cent of the people who received that relief are either dead or have left the land; fourth, that this seed and relief has been cancelled in every province, and I do not see why the federal government hangs on to this old item, at some cost in keeping the accounts. A question placed on the order paper asked the cost to the federal treasury of keeping this account open since 1945, and the answer was 822,000. I believe it would be a good thing to wipe off this amount, and I would ask the minister to give that suggestion his serious consideration. Perhaps he would care to make some comment on it.
Mr. 8INNOTT:	If the province of
Saskatchewan will pay it off, we will wipe out the bookkeeping item.


James Angus MacKinnon: This matter has been submitted in the past to committees of which I have been a member, and I shall be glad to give it further consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands and development services branch-Northwest Territories and Yukon services-Mackenzie division-
196. Forest conservation, including Wood Buffalo park, $324,810.
John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: I should like to ask the minister a question, and to say I am happy to see him in his present position. He has a kindly face, and I know he has a kindly regard for the progress which may be made in Canada. In my riding there is a vast territory to be explored, with rich possibilities both in mining and as a farming community. The district I speak of is northeast of Lac du Bonnet. The Wadhope Mines are situated there, as well as the Bissett mines. A large mine has been opened at Cat lake, which has extensive lithium deposits; and in addition we have in that territory copper and zinc which has never been touched. So tonight I would
Supply-Mines and Resources

ask the minister to consider putting in next year's estimates an amount of not less than $100,000 for this project, which is deserving and will pay for itself a hundredfold if we have an opportunity to develop it.


John Ritchie MacNicol: May I ask the hon. member where the lithium deposit is located?


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: At Cat lake, which is about thirty miles northeast of Lac du Bonnet.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That is the mineral called spodumene?


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: Yes.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Does the hon. member need the money for a road, or what?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands and development services branch-Northwest Territories and Yukon services-'Mackenzie division-
Roads, buildings and water systems-construction and improvements-
197. Roads (revote $441,000), $585,700.
John Horne Blackmore: What roads are these and why is there a decrease of over half a million dollars as compared with last year?


James Angus MacKinnon: The principal item here is for the completion of the Grimshaw-Slave Lake road, or that portion of it within the Northwest Territories. The amount provided for that is $471,700. Other items are the construction of streets and roads in Yellowknife township, $69,000.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does this include the
road on the north side of the lake from Slave Point?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes, it includes the last portion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands and development services branch-Northwest Territories and Yukon services-
204. Coal development, $150,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Is this the vote for the coal which has been developed at Whitehorse and Dawson?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands and development services branch-National parks services-
206. National parks and historic sites services, $7,372,878.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Does the minister know whether a monument or any other marking is to be erected to the late Lucy Maude Montgomery? I understand that this has 
been brought to the attention of the historic sites committee, and I should like to know whether any action is to be taken in this respect.


James Angus MacKinnon: I believe the historic sites committee has under consideration the placing of what is called a marker at the home of the late Lucy Maude Montgomery.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: There is an increase here of nearly $5,000,000. Would the minister have something to say about that?


Alan Cockeram: What land was purchased, and what was the price?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am told that this increase is largely explained by the initial development of a new national park in New Brunswick, together with road improvement projects throughout the other parks, and necessary construction work such as sewer and water supply projects, combined with certain essential construction work and the improvement of the parks in general. In addition, maintenance costs have risen sharply since preparation of the estimates for 1947-48.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I wonder if the increase in this item might possibly have anything to do with the new departmental publication called Domar which, according to one of its first issues, was devoted to the policy of sponsoring "better and bumper" picnics. Does the minister know anything about that?


James Angus MacKinnon: I mentioned that as yet I have not had an opportunity to see the magazine.


Mr. HAZEN:: How much is it proposed to spend this year on the park in New Brunswick; what will be the nature of the work, and how many men will be employed?


James Angus MacKinnon: It is estimated that about $500,000 will be spent this year in the construction of roads, playgrounds and buildings.


Alan Cockeram: I asked the minister what land was purchased and at what price, and what buildings were purchased, and at what prices, for this $4,894,000.


James Angus MacKinnon: The province of New Brunswick acquired the land.


Alan Cockeram: For how much?


James Angus MacKinnon: I have no idea.


Alan Cockeram: There must be some figure, because we have the amount of $4,894,000 this year.


James Angus MacKinnon: That has nothing to do with the cost of the land itself, which was

Supply-Mines and Resources
acquired by the province of New Brunswick and transferred to the dominion, free of charge.


Alan Cockeram: But the explanation given is, "Acquisition of land and/or construction of buildings, works and structures, $4,894,210." What does the government get for that amount of money?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am told that this is merely the title of the vote, and that it covers all parks.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: That is nearly $5,000,000. I think we are entitled to a little more information as to what land has been purchased. Surely we can have some explanation. That is a good deal of money, and we should know what it is for before we pass the item.


James Angus MacKinnon: I think the only way I can give a fairly complete answer is to state the expenditures in the various parks. It will probably serve the purpose of the hon. member if I give three or four of the large items. The estimated expenditures for this year were
as follows:
Jasper		 $2,308,520
Banff	 756,650
Kootenay	 687,500
Riding	Mountain	 487,500


Douglas Gooderham Ross: It refers to acquisition of lands.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am told that that is just the heading in the estimates.


Harry Grenfell Archibald: Last year I was in Dawson and I had an opportunity to look over some of the old landmarks in that town. There is just one of the old dance halls left, this particular one having been built in 1898 or 1899. I found it of great interest to go through that.


James Angus MacKinnon: Did you see the
photographs?


Harry Grenfell Archibald: I should like to see that dance hall restored. If it were in Skag-way they would have Dan McGrew lying out in the middle of the hall and would be making a fortune out of it. We put up all kinds of monuments to a life of virtue, but we have nothing yet to a life of sin. If that old dance hall were saved, when the highways opened up, United States tourists would be flocking in and hundreds of thousands of United States dollars would be kept in this country. It would be of great interest to those people. This i3 part of our history and every child has read about it.


James Angus MacKinnon: I was not asking the hon. member if he had seen any postcards;
I was asking him if he had seen the painting of the Floradora sextette that is in that hall?


John Alpheus Charlton: Has a grant been made to the Bell homestead at Brantford, the Mohawk church, or the birthplace of Pauline Johnson?


James Angus MacKinnon: I shall have to get that information for the hon. member.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: There is to be a great increase in the expenditures on national parks.
I am particularly interested in Prince Albert national park, because so many of the people from my constituency go there for their summer holidays. I understand that Jasper and Prince Albert parks are to share in a road building program. I should like to know the nature of the top surfacing and for what length of road the improvements will be made?


James Angus MacKinnon: The main road in Prince Albert park is being prepared for hard surfacing.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Is that the road in the park or the road leading to the park?


James Angus MacKinnon: In all cases the road work is being done within the parks.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Will the asphalt construction be carried out this year?


James Angus MacKinnon: Not this year.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Is the minister planning to build housing of any type in that park?


James Angus MacKinnon: No housing program is contemplated.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I hope that the minister will see that the people in the low-income brackets are taken care of. I am thinking particularly of the shack tenters and ordinary tenters who, in the past, did not receive sympathetic treatment from the former superintendent. While I had to condemn the attitude of the superintendent who was there last year toward these people, I want to commend the attitude of the present superintendent. I understand that he is a great improvement over the last man. Is lumber still being cut by a private company at a nominal fee inside Riding Mountain park?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that the shack-town space in Prince Albert park is being increased this year. The policy of providing attractions for people in the lower income groups is being emphasized throughout all our parks. I am informed that an old timber
Supply-Mines and Resources

licence was in operation at the time the Riding Mountain park was established and some timber is still being taken out.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: How long is that contract likely to go on? I understand that that company has the privilege of cutting timber in perpetuity, that it is permitted to go in and cut anything that is saleable. I do not want to be sarcastic, but I hope that the government has no reforestation program for that particular park, because they would be simply reforesting so that a private company might continue to cut. There has been a tremendous exploitation of the timber on our common land and surely, when some of those lands are enclosed as a national park, there should be some way to stop this iniquitous-I used that word advisedly-contract.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am informed that we are reducing the size of the timber 'imits as cutting operations take place.


Edmund Davie Fulton: 
James Angus MacKinnon: Perhaps the hon. member for Kamloops would be satisfied if we

gave him a breakdown for one of the parks, say Banff or Jasper. I cannot do so right now.


Mr. CASSELMAN:: Put the breakdown on the record tomorrow.


James Angus MacKinnon: I shall be glad to do
that tomorrow, for Banff park.


Alan Cockeram: For the whole thing.


James Angus MacKinnon: I am sure hon. members do not realize how much detail they are asking for. It would fill pages of Hansard to put the whole breakdown on the record. I am suggesting a sample breakdown.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Could the minister not tell us how much in each of the parks will be spent for roads, how much for buildings, how much for salaries, how much for new construction or work not previously done in the parks? The figures could be grouped under main headings, so that we would have some idea of what new work is being undertaken.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: All the detail that is given of the $2,300,000 for Jasper is that it is for land and the construction of buildings. Surely we can be given more details than that.
Item stands.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Alphonse Fournier: Tomorrow we
shall consider amendments made by the senate to Bill No. 196, to amend the War Veterans Allowance Act, 1946; Bill No. 394, to amend the Department of National Defence Act; Bill No. 338, an act respecting income tax. Then we shall go into supply and consider the estimates of the Departments of Mines and Resources, Public Works, Labour, Fisheries and National Revenue. I do not know that Public Works will be the second department to be taken up. Labour may come ahead of that.


Arza Clair Casselman: Will the minister have the income tax bill reprinted before it is presented?


Alphonse Fournier: There has been no order from the banking and commerce committee to have the bill reprinted. We have the bill as it was sent to the committee, and the amendments will be moved as each section is called.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I understood the Minister of Finance to say the other evening that the bill was being reprinted.

Supply


Alphonse Fournier: I got information during the evening. I am told that the committee which sat on this bill did not put in a request to have the bill reprinted, and it has not been reprinted.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: What do we do after we get through with all that?


Alphonse Fournier: If we pass all those items of business tomorrow there will not be very much left.


[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]:

[Stage Direction]
33.	To provide for assistance to encourage the improvement of cheese and cheese factories, $1,700,000.
34.	To provide assistance for the replacement of maple production equipment, $300,000.
3*5. To provide for administrative expenses, Agricultural Prices Support Act, 1944, $60,000.
30. To reclaim and to prevent the flooding of valuable agricultural lands in the valley of the Lillooet river, near Pemberton, B.C., $275,1500.
37.	Agricultural research special projects,
[Stage Direction]
38.	Land reclamation and development in British Columbia under such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council, $130,000.
39.	Clearing and settlement of new lands under such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council, $200,000.
40.	Protection and reclamation of maritime dykelands under such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council, $100,000.
41.	For assistance in construction of potato warehouses under regulations to be approved by the governor in council, $100,000.
Agricultural Products Act-
42.	To provide for losses incurred in respect of the purchase, sale and export of agricultural products under the Agricultural Products Act, including authority for the Minister of Finance, at the request of the Minister of Agriculture, from time to time, to pay amounts in the aggregate not exceeding $40,000,000 out of any unappropriated money in the consolidated revenue fund as recoverable advances, $100,000.
Demobilization and reconversion-
43.	Freight assistance on western feed grains, $7,750,000.
44.	Freight assistance on agricultural lime for soil amendment purposes, $350,000.
45.	Dairy products board, $19,546.
46.	Meat board, including quality premiums on A and B1 grade hog carcasses, $6,153,702.
47.	Special products board, $25,000.

[Stage Direction]
161.	Departmental administration, $305,232. Mines, forests and scientific services branch
[Stage Direction]
162.	Branch administration, $90,578.
Bureau of mines-
163.	Bureau of mines administration, $34,000.
164.	Mineral resources investigations, $1,135,857.
165.	Explosives Act administration, $60,000.
166.	Investigations of radioactive ores, $134,200.
Dominion forest service-
167.	Dominion forest service administration, $49,790.
168.	Forest research sand investigations, $649,639.
169.	Forest products research, $435,862.
170.	Grant to Canadian forestry association, $4,000.
Eastern Rockies, forest conservation board-
171.	To provide for the salaries and expenses of dominion members of the board and their alternates and sundry expenses in connection with the maintenance and operation of the Ottawa office of the board, $30,000.
172.	Dominion contribution towards annual maintenance including staff and expenses, $175,-0*00.
Geological survey of Canada-
173.	Geological survey administration and miscellaneous services, $114,000.
174.	Geological surveys, $842,492.
Surveys and mapping bureau-
175.	Surveys and mapping bureau administration, $14,590.
176.	Topographical surveys, including expenses of the Geographic Board of Canada, $999,048.
177.	Canadian hydrographic service, $2,361,911.
178.	Geodetic survey of Canada, $471,821.
179.	To recoup the Ontario northland railway (formerly Temiskaming and Northern Ontario Railway Commission) in connection with its claim for injury to John Hedin, $240.
180.	International boundary commission, $41,214.
181.	Legal surveys, including grant of $350 to assist in printing the publication of the Canadian Institute of Surveying, $468,088.
182.	To provide for the pajunent of fees of the board of examiners for dominion land surveyors, of the secretary and of the sub-examiners and for travelling expenses, stationery, printing, rent, etc. (the fees of B. W. Waugh, J. E. R. Ross and J. L. Rannie, members of the board, and A. W. W. Cole, secretary, are to be paid out of this sum), $2,100.
183.	Map continuation and reproduction, $309,405.
Dominion water and power bureau-
184.	Dominion water and power bureau, including the administration of the dominion water power and irrigation acts, and including grant of $350 to the international executive council, world power conference, $384,000.
Supply-Mines and Resources
[Stage Direction]
185.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $280,-
000.
186.	Lake of the Woods control board, $10,375.
187.	To provide for the expenses incurred under the agreement between the dominion, Ontario and Manitoba, confirmed by the Lac Seul Conservation Act, 1928, moneys expended to be largely reimbursed, $20,650.
188.	To provide for acquiring flowage easements and discharging claims of owners of riparian lands in Ontario below the outlets of the Lake of the Woods affected by regulation under the Lake of the Woods Control Board Act (revote), $500.
189.	Geographical bureau, $88,496.
190.	National Museum of Canada, $143,500.
Dominion observatories-
191.	Dominion Observatory, Ottawa, $268,694.
192.	Dominion Astrophysieal Observatory, Victoria, B.C., $50,679.
Lands and development services branch-
193.	Branch administration, $44,500.
194.	Lands division-administration of dominion, ordnance and admiralty and public lands; seed grain collections, $197,885.
Northwest Territories and Yukon services- Mackenzie division-
195.	General administration, operation and maintenance of services, including Wood Buffalo park, $574,252.
196.	Forest conservation, including Wood Buffalo park, $321,810.
Roads, buildings and water systems-construction and improvements-
197.	Roads (revote $441,000), $585,700.
198.	Buildings (revote $139,300), $366,500.
199.	Water and sewages (revote $371,800), $665,000.
200.	Arctic division, administration, $110,387.
Yukon division-
201.	Administration, $127,000.
202.	Roads, $430,000.
203.	Buildings, $35,000.
204.	Coal development, $150,000.
Grant to Yukon council-
205.	To authorize payments to be made from the consolidated revenue fund in respect of each of the years 1948 to 1951, inclusive, to the Yukon consolidated revenue fund in accordance with an agreement to be entered into by the Minister of of Finance, with the approval of the governor in council on behalf of the government of Canada, and the controller of the Yukon Territory with the approval of the council of the Yukon Territory, on behalf of the government of the Yukon, such agreement to provide, on such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon, for payment for each such year of the total of amounts calculated on the following basis: (a) grant in lieu of grants for support of government and legislature and other special grants, $60,000; (b) annual subsidy of eighty cents per head in respect of a population of eight thousand persons, being the estimated population for the year 1948, the first year of the proposed agreement, $6,400; (c) compensation to the government of the Yukon in consideration of its agreement to refrain, and to require the municipalities in the Yukon Terirtory to refrain, from levying personal income taxes, corporation income taxes, corporation taxes and succession duties, as defined in the agreement, during each such year, the amount for each year to be computed in accordance with section four of the Dominion-Provincial Tax Rental Agreements Act, 1947, for which purpose the amount of the statutory subsidies is the amount set out in paragraph (b) and the guaranteed minimum annual amount is $89,365, the estimated amount for the 57ear 1048 being $135,006. The estimated total amount required for the year 1948 being, $201,406.
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, June 23, 1948