1948-04-28

[Stage Direction]
First report of the joint committee on printing.-Mr. Emmerson.

Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport) moved:: That the name of Mr. Tremblay be substituted for that of Mr. Halle on the special committee on veterans affairs.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, I should like at this time to make a statement with reference to the filing of income tax returns for the year 1947.
Extreme weather conditions in various parts of the country are making it impossible for taxpayers to get the appropriate income tax forms. In addition, there is a substantial increase, particularly in rural areas, in the number of taxpayers over the previous year. This has added greatly to the problem of distributing the various forms.
For these and other reasons, many taxpayers throughout the country are finding it extremely difficult to complete and file their returns on time.
As a consequence, the government has decided that the time for filing 1947 individual income tax returns will be extended from April 30 to May 31, 1948. This applies only to those returns known as T.l General, T.l Special, T.4-T.1 employees, T.l Farmers and T.l Prairie Farmers.
The penalty for late filing will be assessed if the taxpayer fails to file his return on or before May 31, 1948.
Individual taxpayers who ordinarily would be required to pay the balance of their tax on or before April 30, 1948, must now make payment of that balance on or before May 31, 1948. If they fail to do so, interest will be charged from that date.
72-1948-1 i
This extension does not relieve those taxpayers who are required to make quarterly or other instalment payments, from making such payments when due, nor does it relieve them from interest on any arrears of such instalments.
All returns, other than those listed above, required to be filed under the statute, must be filed on the due date.


Mr. A. L. SMITH (Calgary West):: Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege, on behalf of myself and I am sure of all prairie members, I wish to thank the minister for the timely and prompt action which he has taken in this matter. I also wish to advise him, to my regret, that according to a communication by telephone yesterday, flood conditions out there have reached the point now where they may be described as disastrous. A foot of new soft snow has fallen over that whole area, and it is difficult to prognosticate the ill effects that may follow. The Minister of Agriculture could no doubt do that better than I can. With respect to some crops the condition is quite serious.



PRIVATE BILL


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 212, to incorporate Canadian Cooperative Processors Limited.-Mr. Weir.


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Justice) moved the first reading of Bill No. 214, to amend the Prisons and Reformatories Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

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

Mr. McMASTER:: 1.	How many members of the Canadian army saw active service in what is known as the European front, i.e., that portion of Europe other than the British Isles and Iceland?
2.	What were the casualties suffered by the Canadians in the European theatre of war as above described?
Questions


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	The actual number of individual members of the Canadian Army who saw service in the European theatre of war, excluding the British isles and Iceland, is not immediately available. Approximately 368,000 individual members, however, did proceed to the United Kingdom and Iceland. The breakdown of this number into service in different theatres of war will be available in the near future from individual record statistics now in course of preparation.
2.	For European theatre, excluding British
isles and Iceland:
(a)	Fatal-all causes	18,375
(b)	Non Fatal-battle casualties....51,955
Total	 70,330


NATIONAL HOUSING-CONVERSIONS IN HAMILTON DISTRICT
Mr. LENNARD:: Of the twenty national housing conversions effected in the Hamilton, Ontario district, rvhat items were salvaged in each conversion and what were the estimated values of same?


Mr. McILRAITH:: When the administration of the twenty home conversion projects was turned over to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation on January 1, 1946, the following items of salvage were in storage for disposal. These were subsequently disposed of at the prices listed below.
Project No.-Salvage items-Salvage value
5-2-H.C.-2, 46 Arkledun Ave.-5 No. 30 hot water tanks, $10; 5 2.500-watt electric heaters, $10.
5-2-H.C.-4, 116 Main St. W.-1 jacket heater, Dominion H.10, $5.
5-2-H.C.-10, 68 Arkledun Ave.-5 No. 30 hot water tanks, $10; 5 2,500-watt electric heaters, $10.
5-2-H.C.-11, 79 Arkledun Ave.-4 No. 30 hot water tanks, S8; 3 2,500-watt electric heaters, $6; 1 No. 50 Rex gas heater, $6.
5-2-H.C.-12, 415 King St. E.-1 jacket heater Viking No. V.12, $5.
5-2-H.C.-16, 72 Victoria Ave.-1 thermostat for hot water control, $5.
5-2-H.C.-20, 28 Myrtle Ave.-1 Imperial jacket heater No. 12, $5.
5-2-H.C.-22, 5 Linden Place-1 Imperial jacket heater No. 12, $5.
5-2-H.C.-23, 800 Main St. E- 1 Imperial jacket heater No. 12, $5.
5-2-H.C.-24, 11 Torrance St.-1 Imperial jacket heater No. 112, $5.
5-2-H.C.-36, 609 Beach Blvd.-1 jacket heater Dominion H.10, $5.


SECURITIES INVESTMENT FUND
Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):: In sessional paper No. 29D dated March 23, 1948, in answer to a question asked by myself, the Department of Finance indicated that the securities investment fund from August, 1947 to January, 1948, inclusive, had purchased a net amount of approximately $300,900,000 of Dominion of Canada bonds: 1. Under what authority is this fund set up?
2.	How much does it amount to?
3.	How is it invested?
4.	Were the bond purchases made by the various government departments set out in this return made independently of each other, or were they made in conjunction with, or under the supervision of, the Department of Finance?


Mr. MAYHEW:: Stand.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Speaker, I wish to call attention to the fact that I put this question on the order paper on April 16, which is almost two weeks ago, with reference to the origin of the fund of $300 million which had been used in the purchase of Dominion of Canada bonds. The question was. under what authority was this fund set up, and so on. If there is a proper authority that question could be answered in half an hour. I wish to protest, with all the bitterness that my nature is capable of, against being brushed off. I wish to ask that this question be answered immediately, because there can be no earthly reason for its not being answered, unless it was done without authority, and in that case we should know.


SASKATCHEWAN IRRIGATION PROJECT
Mr. THATCHER:: During the calendar year 1947, how much money was actually spent by the federal government for (a) surveying and engineering; (b) construction on (1) the St. Mary's River irrigation project; (2) the Red Deer irrigation scheme; (3) the South Saskatchewan irrigation project?


Mr. McCUBBIN:: 1.	St. Mary's River irrigation project: (a) $130,154; (b) $746,189.
2.	Red Deer River irrigation scheme: (a) $130,154; (b) nil.
3.	South Saskatchewan irrigation project: (a) $152,616; (b) nil.


COMBINES INVESTIGATION ACT-DENTAL SUPPLIES
Mr. RAYMOND (Beauharnois-Laprairie):: 1.	Has the government given effect to the conclusions of the report made by the commissioner entrusted with the investigation of an alleged combine in dental supplies?

Questions
2.	What action has been taken by the government in order to put an end to the unfair practices disclosed by such investigation?


Mr. ILSLEY:: 1.	Yes. Prosecution was instituted and following the unfavourable result at the trial the crown appealed and it is expected that the appeal will be heard by the Ontario court of appeal in the near future.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


CANADIAN NAVY-PRIZE MONEY
Mr. MARIER:: 1.	Has the government received sums of money from the British government with regard to the payment of prize money to members of His Majesty's Canadian navy during the late war?
2.	If so, shall said prize money be distributed to those entitled to it, and when?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	While no prize money has yet been received from the British government, the matter is under consideration at present, and it is possible that money will ultimately be received. In addition, the Canadian government has in hand moneys resulting from prizes taken by the Royal Canadian Navy.
2.	When the amount is known, consideration will be given to the manner of dealing with it.
NATIONAL INCOME, 1939-1947 Mr. HANSELL:
What was the national income for each of the years 1939-1947 inclusive?


George James McIlraith: The national income and
the gross national product in Canada for the years 1939 to 1947 were as follows:
	National	Gross national
	income	product
	(Millions of dollars)	
1939 	.... 4274	5,5811940 	.... 5.236	6.7401941 	.... 6,544	8,4031942 	.... 8,273	10,4871943 	.... 8,941	11,2441944 	.... 9.596	11,8201945 	.... 9.644	11,6141946* 	.... 9,617	11.6561947t 	.... 10,735	13,052Revised preliminary estimate.	tPreliminary	estimate.


EXPORT OF CANNED MEATS
Mr. WRIGHT:: 1.	What quantity of canned beef, pork or other meat products are at present allowed to be exported to the United States?
2.	How are quotas for such exports allocated as between Canadian firms or exporters?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	(a) Spreads and potted meats, 579,009 lbs.; (b) Pork products, 207.000 lbs.; (c) Solid pack, other than pork products, 283,000 lbs.; (d) Stews, boiled dinners, hashes and chile con carne, 883,000 lbs.
2.	Individual company quotas have been established for the export of all types of canned meats to the United States of America. The quotas are based in relation to the packers' domestic production of canned meats during the period September 1, 1946 to July 31, 1947 inclusive, and the present quotas set up for the meat packers are in operation until June 30. 1948. Applications for export permits must be submitted prior to that date. In the case of canned hams, exports to the United States must be limited to 10 per cent of the quota covering canned pork products.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Frank Exton Lennard: Of the twenty national housing conversions effected in the Hamilton, Ontario district, 1. How many conversions were on a contract basis?
2.	How many conversions were on a cost-plus basis?
3.	How much rent has been collected on each to March 31, 1948?
4.	What has been cost of maintenance on each to date?
5.	What amount was owing to the crown on each on March 31, 1948?
6.	What are the completion dates?


George James McIlraith: Return tabled.


EXPORTS-MOTOR VEHICLES
Mr. STEPHENSON:: 1.	What was the number of automobiles and trucks exported from Canada to other countries of the world as of March 31, 1947 to March 31, 1948, by months?
2.	What was the number exported to each country?
3.	How many automobiles and trucks were manufactured in Canada from March 31, 1947 to March 31, 1948, by months?


Mr. WINTERS:: Return tabled.



MUNITIONS AND SUPPLY-RECONSTRUCTION- TRANSFER OF EMPLOYEES

['I could not hear the question asked by the hon. member, but I shall be glad to read Hansard and try to prepare an answer for tomorrow.']
Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: Return tabled.



Mr. SKEY:: 1.	How many North Star aircraft have the Canadian government purchased; (a) for what departments or companies have these purchases been made; (b) how many aircraft have been purchased for each; (c) at what price per aircraft were these purchases made?
2.	How many additional North Star aircraft have the government agreed to purchase?
3.	What is the maximum fuel capacity of the North Star aircraft without overload tanks?
4.	What is the gasoline consumption per hour at cruising speed of the North Star aircraft?


MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
[Stage Direction]
Mr. ARGUE;
For a statement showing the 1947 wheat yields, as set forth in the P.F.A.A. inspector's report, on all lands located in township 8 in ranges 8 and 9, west third meridian.
Mr. McCUBBIN:: Since the inception of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act it has been understood between the department and the farmers that information obtained by P.F.A. inspectors as to the yield on individual farms would not be made public. There are instances in which the farm operator would not wish to have this information disclosed, and the principle of treating it as confidential has been maintained in all P.F.A. dealings with individuals, municipalities and others.


Mr. ARGUE:: Mr. Speaker, I have discussed the matter with the minister and he informs me that provision is made by which the farmers concerned can ask for reinspection. In view of that, I shall be willing to let the matter drop.
Mr. SPEAKER; Dropped.


GREAT SLAVE LAKE AREA-PROSPECTING FOR MINERALS
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: For a copy of the agreements, documents and correspondence granting to Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company and Ventures Limited the exclusive right of prospecting for minerals over 500 square miles of land south of Great Slave lake or in that vicinity, and showing the boundaries of that area of 500 square miles.


FLOOD CONDITIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Public Works? Can the minister give the assurance that everything feasible is being done by his department to relieve the flood conditions in the Winnipeg area? I have in mind the control of the volume of water in the Red river which is exercised by the gates at Loclcport.


Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works):: I will inquire of the officials in Winnipeg. Perhaps something can be done in connection with the flow of water through St. Andrew's locks and if it is feasible we may direct operations to relieve the situation. I will make inquiries and give instructions accordingly.


Mr. GRAYDON:: Take another look at Etobicoke.


Mr. STEWART (Winnipeg North):: May I ask the minister to see that the situation in Winnipeg is corrected? My apartment is now flooded.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I direct a question to the Minister of Finance? Has his attention been called to newspaper reports to the effect that meat prices are rising in the city of Winnipeg because farmers are unable to bring in meat owing to the flood conditions? Will the minister have the wartime prices and trade board look into this in the hope that-profiteering of this kind may be nipped in the bud?


Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance):: I will draw my hon. friend's
remarks to the attention of the prices board.


CONDITIONS IN VICINITY OF DAUPHIN
Mr. F. S. ZAPLITNY (Dauphin):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. I regret I was not able to give him notice because the matter came to my attention only before I entered the chamber. I understand that a telegram was dispatched yesterday to the minister in connection with this matter. In view of the very serious flood conditions in the vicinity of Dauphin, the second within one year, will the minister assure the house that his department or the

Inquiries of the Ministry
government will lend all assistance possible to the people who are suffering from that flood?


Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture):: The matter of flood conditions in areas of that kind is in all parts of Canada the responsibility of the provincial government. I assume that representations have been made to the provincial government as well as to this government, and that matters will be discussed between them.


Gordon Graydon: May I suggest to the Minister of Agriculture that there are exceptions to the rule he has just laid down.


James Garfield Gardiner: Not in connection with this type of flooding.


Gordon Graydon: Yes, there are-for instance, the Grand river in Ontario.


Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: The answer is yes.


POSTAL SERVICE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. B. McKAY (Weyburn):: May I be permitted to address a question to the Postmaster General, a copy of which I have sent to him? In view of the fact that air mail volume is not approaching the capacity of Trans-Canada Air Lines for mail transport, and that planes are only partially loaded, when will the Canadian air mail rate be reduced to five cents, the same as in the United States, in order to develop new business?


Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Postmaster General):: This is, of course, a question of policy for the government; and we are not yet ready to say when or how we shall act in the future.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That was the answer given two years ago.


Ernest Bertrand: I would say that we should not reduce the postage rates too soon, for this reason: in the United States, immediately after the war their ordinary letter rates were reduced from three cents to two cents and from four cents to three cents. The air mail postage rate was also reduced. The result was that at the end of last year there was a deficit of $442,000,000.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Perhaps the government is partly loaded.


INQUIRY FOR RETURN
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Black: May I call the attention of the government to the fact that on March 10 an order was passed for a copy of all correspondence and communications between the Minister of Mines and Resources, all officials of his department and corporations and/or persons concerning the action now being taken by the minister affecting large numbers of owners of mineral claims in Yukon. I regret that illness makes it necessary for the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) to be absent from the house, but perhaps the acting minister could speed up the return on that order.


Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Acting Minister of Mines and Resources):: I shall be glad to make inquiries.	.


OATS AND BARLEY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Owing to lack of definite information with regard to the export regulations applicable to oats and barley, will the minister make a statement to the house outlining the regulations governing the export of those two commodities?


Right Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I could not hear the question asked by the hon. member, but I shall be glad to read Hansard and try to prepare an answer for tomorrow.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour) moved the third reading of bill No. 203, to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940.
Gordon Graydon: Before the bill receives its third reading, Mr. Speaker, I desire to make one or two observations. Perhaps I had better wait until quiet is restored in the house, because it is difficult for me to make myself heard.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Order.
Unemployment Insurance Act


Gordon Graydon: I must be lenient with hon. members, because I am afraid I myself am an offender in this regard.


Mr. MacINNIS:: Hear, hear.


Gordon Graydon: In that regard I take seoond place, however, only to the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis).
In rising to say a word on the motion for third reading of Bill No. 203, to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940, I do so because of certain statements which have been made from time to time with respect to this party's position on unemployment insurance. It is necessary, although I am sorry that it becomes so, for us again to place our record so clearly on the record that even those who are desirous of altering that record will not be able to do so without bringing upon themselves the condemnation of the electorate.
I have a personal reason for rising at this time, sir, because down through the years as a member of parliament, along with others in the Progressive Conservative party, I have taken a consistent and, I think, a vigorous stand in seeking legislation by this government with respect to unemployment insurance. It must be remembered that the party now in power had unemployment insurance in its platform as far back as the year 1919. It must be remembered also, Mr. Speaker, for those whose memory at times becomes conveniently forgetful, that it was not the Liberal party or the C.C.F. party, but rather the Conservative party, which in 1935 had the honour of bringing in the first bill for unemployment insurance in Canada. In addition to that-


An hon. MEMBER:: The Conservatives did not bring in unemployment insurance.


Gordon Graydon: We shall let the hon. member make his speech again, although I doubt if it is necessary. Not only was it our party that brought unemployment insurance legislation for the first time into the House of Commons, but it was this party as well which, during the sessions of 1936 and following years, saw the present government sending legislation which had been passed in the House of Commons to the Supreme Court of Canada and elsewhere for the purpose of ascertaining whether or not it was constitutional. This had the result of delaying legisla-lation from 1936 until 1940, when it was finally passed.
In 1940 the present government brought in a new measure with respect to unemployment insurance. I was one of those who tried to take a little lead, so far as our own party was concerned, in promoting and attempting to improve the measure that had been brought

down. I was a member of the special committee on unemployment insurance which was set up under the chairmanship of the then minister of labour, Mr. McLarty, and had much to do with the various debates and discussions which finally resulted in an unemployment insurance measure being passed by the House of Commons. That was in the year 1940. It was in that year that the measure received its third reading.
The point I wish to make is this. Nowhere in this report of the special committee on unemployment insurance which I hold in my hand will anyone find the slightest suggestion of any opposition on the part of the Conservative party to unemployment insurance or its principles, and scarcely any to its details. In addition, if one turns to Hansard of July 19, 1940, one finds that the Minister of Labour himself put his imprimatur on the position of our party at that time. This was toward the end of the debate, when the legislation was finally going through. At page 1786 of Hansard for 1940 Mr. McLarty said, with a great deal of truth:
It has been a congenial task for me as minister, sponsoring a bill such as this, to have received such wholehearted approval of the measure, in principle, as has been given this bill.
In addition, I was looking up the records and found that going back from third reading, which is indicated at page 2088 of Hansard for that session, at every single stage the bill went through without division and without amendment, and with the wholehearted approval of the Conservative party of that day.
That makes it very difficult for me, after such an active part in the consideration of that legislation as I tried to take at that time, to swallow the remark made by the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) over the air last Thursday night. This is what the minister said in that broadcast on The Nation's Business:
Next, look at unemployment insurance, introduced by the Liberals in 1941

Well, he was so much asleep that he even missed the year the measure was introduced. -and opposed by the Conservatives; another measure of social security introduced and put into effect by the Liberals.
I resent that statement, which was made over the air more than a week ago. The minister has had plenty of time since to correct it. If he did not know that was not the fact, he should have known it. If he did know it was not the fact, then I think this house and this party deserve an apology from the minister for having made that statement.

Unemployment Insurance Act
I well remember my old schoolmaster in the town of Brampton giving this good advice to his students: "You cannot at the same time whistle and chew a meal, and do justice to both". Neither can the Minister of National Defence look after our armed forces and at the same time keep an eye upon his political fences, as he was trying to do in that broadcast the other evening.
I want to say to you, Mr. Speaker, and to the minister that what we need is a man with both eyes on the defence of Canada. I want to say also that instead of taking his little pencil and trying to figure out the total time that has been taken up by some members of parliament, and what we have been saying in Hansard, he had better get out a great big pencil and figme the total strength of the armed forces of this country, for I can tell him those are the totals in which the people of this country are interested, not in all this small political nonsense that has gone over the air under the title The Nation's Business.
I would not have risen at all had I not keenly resented the suggestion that I and others who tried to do a good job in the committee which considered that measure, had opposed this legislation. I resent it when someone who should know better comes along and makes that statement. The minister was here then; but if he was asleep at that time I hope he will not continue to sleep now that he has such a big job as the defence of Canada. So far as our position is concerned, I hope it will be made clear in this instance as it should have been made clear in the instance brought up by the minister. Our name should be cleared of a blot and stain which it is beneath the dignity of any member of the government to attempt to put upon us.


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to-


Mr. COLD  WELL@: Is the minister closing the debate?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes. I have said all I should say about unemployment insurance. The bill has been passed unanimously, and no credit has been taken from any political party in this house in that regard. But I think a short history of the development of this legislation should be given. I do not believe this is the time or place for the Minister of Labour to defend the Minister of National Defence on an entirely different question.


Gordon Graydon: It is not a different question at all.


Humphrey Mitchell: Just a moment; I did not interrupt my hon. friend.


Mr. STEPHENSON:: He was in your department.


Humphrey Mitchell: He was not in my department.


Charles Elwood Stephenson: He was meddling
with it.


Humphrey Mitchell: Let me say to my hon. friend that those who know me best know that other people do not meddle in my department. I well recall the history of this legislation; and let it be said without fear of successful contradiction that, other than political organizations, the organization that should be given most credit for the establishment of this legislation in Canada is the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada.


Arthur Leroy Smith: We put your bill through in record time. What are you kicking about?


Humphrey Mitchell: I am just giving the history, and I am not taking any credit away from my good friends the Conservatives.


Gordon Graydon: That is all we ask.


Humphrey Mitchell: If my memory serves me correctly, the original unemployment insurance legislation was put through this House of Commons by the Conservative government under the leadership of Mr. Bennett just prior to the 1935 election. I have a vivid recollection of the support given that legislation by the late Mr. Woodsworth, by my good friend the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) and I think by almost everyone in this house. If I remember aright the bill was passed under the treaty-making powers of the British North America Act, in that the international labour office had passed a convention, which was adopted by this country, favouring the introduction of unemployment insurance.
I remember the occasion very well. I was not a lawyer; I was a young member, and having spoken in support of this bill I was standing behind the curtains over there speaking to Mr. Lapointe. He said, "Humphrey, you cannot break a law by agreement. You have to amend the British North America Act." As assistant to the late Mr. Rogers I played some small part in drafting the amendment to that act. I also recall vividly that in the election of 1940 one of the main planks of the Liberal platform was the amendment of the British North America Act to make possible the establishment of unemployment insurance in Canada without any constitutional question.
Unemployment Insurance Act


Mr. FERGUSON:: You were still a young man then.


Humphrey Mitchell: I am a young man yet. At the moment-and I have no objection to that point of view-certain provincial governments are very jealous of their jurisdiction, and I think it is the duty of a government sponsoring legislation to see to it that such legislation comes squarely within the four comers of the British North America Act.
I thought I should make these few remarks to put the record straight, and to indicate that all parties in this house can take credit for the adoption of this very necessary legislation.


Gordon Graydon: Hear, hear. That is what we wanted the government to say. We did not want them to say we were opposed to it.


Humphrey Mitchell: No one has said you were opposed to it.


Gordon Graydon: Yes; your deskmate
said so.


Humphrey Mitchell: I think the record speaks for itself. The hon. member for Calgary West has said that this is good legislation.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Indeed he did.


Humphrey Mitchell: There was no destructive criticism from any section of the house in connection with the provisions of the bill. Let us be frank and honest about that. I believe this bill went through faster than any bill of its kind in the history of this parliament.


Gordon Graydon: It was good legislation and it was given good treatment.


Humphrey Mitchell: I cannot take full credit for that.


Gordon Graydon: You bring in a bill like that and you will have no trouble.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Record time on a fast track.


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes.


Mr. W. GARFIELD CASE (Grey North):: Mr. Speaker, as one individual who did not understand the full extent of the reference to giving credit where credit was due, let me say that I appreciate fully the frank statement of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell). I am glad the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon) made his interjection, so that we may know where we stand. Why should the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) go monkeying around with the Department of Labour, seeking to gain some political advantage with respect to a bill which is national in importance and will be of great benefit to all those who come -within its provisions?

I believe the Minister of Labour deserves great credit for straightening the matter out; I for one appreciate his frank statement of this afternoon.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Monday, April 26, consideration in committee of Bill No. 211, to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-Member of the force; member.
Wilfrid Garfield Case: Mr. Chairman, I feel this may be the only opportunity I shall have to say a word in commendation of the splendid service rendered by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. I believe they are appreciated by the people of Canada as an outstanding force in the regulation of law and order.
I was pleased to note that in the advertising prepared by the Ontario government for tourist purposes a full page was devoted to the work of the mounted police; and at a conference held in Toronto the only persons who found fault with that advertising were the two communist members of the provincial legislature.
I feel that those who are seeking to visit our country are impressed by the fact that this is a country in which law and order is respected. We as citizens of Canada appreciate more and more the service rendered by this great force. Indeed the regulations under which they work impose upon them great sacrifices which, for the glory of their unit, they are prepared to make. Throughout the length and breadth of the universe the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is known as the force that always gets its man.
During the past few summers, tourist vessels from Chicago and other points in the United States have been calling at my home city of Owen Sound. This splendid unit, the mounted police, have always provided an officer dressed in his scarlet uniform at that port. Let me say that citizens of the United States respect this police force, just as Canadians do. They feel that when they set foot on Canadian soil they are entering a land where freedom and justice prevail and where law and order is maintained.
I have taken this opportunity to pay my compliments and tribute to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act


Mr. DIEFENBAKER:: A number of questions were asked the other night about administration in general, and in particular as to the matter of investigation of subversive elements in the country. In concluding the debate the minister said that those matters did not arise particularly at this time and could not very well be answered or discussed by him. I do feel however that the country as a whole would like to have a general statement from the minister at this time with respect to the work being done. No other opportunity will arise for discussion of this matter. It is one that is being given much attention in the press of Canada, and of the United States as well. I refer to the whole matter of investigations made by the police forces having to do with subversive activities connected with communism.
I mentioned the other evening one matter which affects thousands of people in the prairie provinces, namely, the subtle forms of intimidation that are being practised by certain individuals in this country in order to extract from the people assistance for communist endeavours in other parts of the world.
I am not asking anything out of the way when I ask for a statement in this connection; for Mr. Hoover, the head of the federal bureau of investigation in the United States, has set forth in detail what that organization is doing. His statements, made in general terms, have given the people of the United States some idea of the extent to which subversive elements are widespread throughout that country, and also the measures being taken to prevent their continuance or development.
The other day I raised the question of intimidation of racial groups. I know that the minister within the last few days has received certain suggestions and recommendations in that regard. Representatives of an anti-communist group, persons of Slavic origin, came here and placed the matter before him. They were asking for some assurance that they would be protected against this sort of thing.


Mr. ILSLEY:: Against what?


John George Diefenbaker: Against the threats that were being held out that harm would be done to their relatives in continental Europe unless they adopted the suggestions of those who had got in touch with them. These men who were here the other day said that they had called a meeting in Toronto with a view to building up a solid front against communist activities. A number of persons with whom they had communicated said frankly to them that they were fearful
of attending any meeting, of showing their hand in any way, or of contributing their efforts to the combating of communist activities. These operators had instilled in their hearts the fear that should they act or show their hands their relatives abroad would be endangered.
After all, this is a matter under the jurisdiction of the minister, and I should like to know what the department is doing in this regard. Does it contemplate the introduction of an amendment to widen the sections of the criminal code which cannot now be used to punish those who do this kind of thing? If the legislation is widened it is possible that the relatives might be proceeded against, but in any event the fact that such legislation was on the statute book would in itself be a deterrent.
I should like to have a statement from the minister with regard to a number of matters affecting mounted police administration in respect to which the members of the force would like to have certain changes made. I shall not repeat them, because repetition will not make them any clearer. Would the minister be willing to indicate to the committee the attitude of the department toward these questions, and whether or not any changes are contemplated other than those covered by the bill which has been introduced?
I believe that when this force, which is great in service and magnificent in tradition, asks for the removal of a number of little pinpricking things, every consideration should be given to their request. The amendments provided for by this bill go a long way toward removing serious complaint. Over a period of two or three years we on this side of the house asked for an increase in the salaries of the mounted police, but the answer was that they were getting reasonably good pay. We pointed to the number of fully qualified men who had served only five years but who resigned or retired because of the hopelessness of their position as they saw it. I understand that normally a man must be in the service eleven years before he achieves the highest salary paid to a constable. Promotions have been too slow and opportunities for advancement too restricted. These things which they object to should be remedied if possible.
I come now to one other matter, the personnel report. I was joined in this by the hon. member for Regina City (Mr. Probe). The fact that the constable may not express his views in connection with adverse personnel reports affecting him has caused a great deal of resentment. We are asking the members of the R.C.M.P. to discharge great

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
responsibilities. Our safety depends on them. I suggest that we in this house should do everything we can to remove anything that might cause them not to have that degree of contentment without which efficient work is impossible.
I want the minister to understand that we are not in the position in which the minister of defence endeavoured to put us the other day. We are here to place suggestions before the government. We want to co-operate in this matter. The people are asking, through us, for the assurance of the Minister of Justice that all is well so far as internecine activities which might undermine the country are concerned.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Mr. Chairman, naturally I came in with the thought that the bill would be taken up section by section, but I shall answer the questions asked by the hon. gentleman in so far as I can.
I am not in a position to make a statement about the program of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in watching communists in Canada. I do not think it would be desirable for me to make such a statement in the house, ft is well known that for many years the R.C.M.P. has been keenly alive to the possibilities of subversive action, and I think they are as much alive today as they ever were, perhaps more so. If it is possible to make a more comprehensive statement without defeating the end that is sought, I will see if one can bs prepared and delivered on another occasion. I submit that the proper occasion for that would be on the estimates of the mounted police rather than on this bill.
With regard to the other questions that were asked, I should like to deal with one to which a number of speakers gave some attention the other night. I refer to the question of threats to persons of foreign origin or foreign parentage. Apart from those that were made across the floor of the house the other night, the only representation that has ever been made in this regard was contained in a letter which I received from a solicitor in western Canada advising me that a client or a person who had consulted him had stated that injury had been threatened to his relatives in one of the communist countries of Europe if he did not do certain things. I forget whether he was to join a communist organization, contribute to a communist organization or what it was. However, that is irrelevant.
This solicitor suggested that there should be an amendment to the criminal code to go beyond the present section dealing with threats to parents and other relatives. I

turned that over to officers of the Department of Justice and asked them to advise me whether such an amendment could be drafted and whether in their opinion it was desirable. Since the speeches were made the other night, in which several hon. members said that officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police themselves said that this is becoming almost a practice throughout the country, and after consulting an hon. member or two on this side of the house who said that there was some talk about it, I tried to ascertain just what, if anything, is going on. The information I got is that occasionally in conversation there is some reference to relatives of the displaced person or other person of foreign origin or foreign parentage in the home country or communist country. These references are not threats; they are merely reminders, I suppose, or hints rather than threats.


Mr. LOCKHART:: Will the minister permit a question?


James Lorimer Ilsley: In a minute, yes. I have asked the deputy minister of justice to see whether any strengthening of the criminal code is possible in that regard, and he advised me at noon that he would work on it this afternoon. I do not think the house should have too high hopes of anything of much value being done, because certainly it seems to me that if I were a communist approaching a non-communist with a view to getting him to contribute money or do something else of that kind, I would not be making a threat. It is a little difficult for me to understand how a reference to his family in the old country could be made the subject of a criminal prosecution. I think it would be pretty difficult; but as I say, the Department of Justice is giving consideration to something of that kind.
Whether it would accomplish anything, even if proper criminal legislation could be passed, is another question; because I doubt whether any information would ever be given. If we did have legislation of that kind I doubt whether anyone would1 ever inform or lay a charge. Certainly he would not if he had any real fear of retaliation or prosecution of his relatives in the country from which he came.
My hon. friend asked whether any other amendment to the act was proposed at this session. The answer is no. These are the amendments that were proposed for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act at the present session. I think that they deal with everything that needs to be dealt with. They do not deal with everything that has been

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
brought before the department for attention; they do not by any means adopt all the suggestions that have been made, but I think they include all the suggestions that should be acted upon.
May I say a word with regard to pay. My hon. friend said that for years it has been urged that the pay of the R.C.M.P. has not been high enough. Well, the pay that is adequate today may not be adequate tomorrow. I have no reason to think that the pay of this force has not been comparable with that of other forces and with the armed services throughout the years. Recently, of course, there have been increases to the civil service and to the armed forces, and the time had come when another pay increase was desirable for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; that pay increase has been provided for by regulation. I think the force is fairly well satisfied with the pay increases that have been provided.
A question has been raised about the rule that members of the force are not shown reports on themselves.	The commissioner
informs me that anything adverse in the reports is shown to the members of the force.


John George Diefenbaker: Does the minister Say that that is a fact, that anything adverse is shown to the member of the force so that he can answer it?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes;	the	commissioner
informs me now that the officer or non-commissioned officer or constable against whom anything adverse is being recorded is paraded, warned, and told of the entry that is being made in his record against him.


Mr. HAZEN:: Does he have to sign anything then?


James Lorimer Ilsley: No.


Mr. PROBE:: Will the minister indicate to the committee what effect, if any, this legislation will have on adjustment of the amounts of pension of those who are now in receipt of superannuation?


James Lorimer Ilsley: It has no effect on them at all.


John Oliver Probe: There are former members of the force, now on superannuation, who are contributing. These men are constables or N.C.O.'s, or were of that rank at pension time, and they are still contributing to the widow's portion of the superannuation. I have mail covering this specific point, showing that pension deductions are being made to cover the widow's allowance following the decease of the husband. In view of the fact that widows are now being covered by the terms of this bill, is
it proposed to cancel the contributions, which in some cases are fairly high? I have one that comes to S18 and some cents a month, and it has been running that way for twelve years. Are these payments to the pension fund being cancelled or returned, or what is being done about them?


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is a complicated matter. The hon. gentleman is now taking the case of a superannuated member of the force who for some reason is making contributions to the dependent's pension fund.


John Oliver Probe: Exactly.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I think I am correct in this; this is my information. If the person is superannuated he would not be making contributions to that fund unless he were paying up for back service of some kind. He has an option under this bill of changing to the new pension scheme contemplated in this bill. Any person now in the force may change over from the present pension plan to the new pension plan, and provisions for transition are provided for. If he wishes to remain with the present pension plan he has the option of doing so. I presume hon. members understand the difference in principle between the two pension plans. The present pension plan provides for a free pension to the member, but a wholly member-financed pension for the dependents. The government makes no contribution to the dependent's pension under the present system, but the member of the force makes no contribution to his own pension. Every present member of the force who wishes to continue along that line may do so. Of course none of his contractual rights are taken away from him.


John Oliver Probe: That is true only of constables and N.C.O.'s.


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is true of everybody.


John Oliver Probe: Officers were on a different basis before.


James Lorimer Ilsley: What I have said about the non-contributory plan applies only to those below the rank of officer. The present pension plan, so far as officers are concerned, is a contributory plan. The government contributes to that, and' so do the officers. The officers may continue under their present pension system, in accordance with the arrangements they have already made, or they may transfer to the new one, which is more favourable in some respects, less favourable in others, but on the whole more so, I should think.


Mr. BRYCE:: I asked the minister some questions the other night about the superannuation scheme. When the new scheme is inaugurated I hope it will be a scheme where-
3414	COMMONS
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act_
by, when a man decides to take advantage of the superannuation act, he will not have to continue to make payments after he has paid to the government everything he owes them. I tried to explain to the house the situation with regard to the wardens in our penitentiaries who come under a scheme such as this. They had so much to pay because they had not already made those payments, but after they had paid that up and were all clear they still had to keep on making payments until the day they died. That is not a good scheme, and I raise my voice against it now. I would ask the government not to have a scheme like that but to see to it that when a man has paid his dues to the government he will not be required to keep on paying until he dies, because there are some people who live to ninety.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I think my hon. friend must be under some misapprehension. This is quite simple-at least if I can make it so. The principle that applies to penitentiary employees is exactly the same as the principle that applies in the civil service. A man may have temporary service when there is no deduction from his pay, and that arrangement may go on for ten years. He may then become permanent and may wish to take advantage of the superannuation fund. He may desire to have the time during which he was not making contributions count for pension purposes. If he wishes to have that time count for pension purposes he must make the contribution in respect of that period. He must pay 5, 5J or 6 per cent, as the case may be, of the pay he received during that period in which he made no contributions, and he must pay interest on it, into the superannuation fund. If he pays that in a lump sum, that is the end and he needs to make no further contributions. But many persons are not in a position to make a lump-sum payment. Many persons desire to have deductions made in the future, either from pay or sometimes from pension, until they die, and a calculation is made to determine how much shall be deducted from pension to be put into the fund, being that amount which the person had not contributed in respect of the period during which he was not under the superannuation provision, when he was merely a temporary. That is the reason these deductions continue until death. They are merely the equivalent of the contributions which had not been made and which have to be made if the person is to be pensioned in respect of that period; otherwise there would be discrimi-

nation between that person and someone else from whose pay deductions had been made from the beginning of his service.


William Scottie Bryce: The minister has made that plain, and I understand it, but I am dealing with penitentiaries. I will take the matter up with him privately and thresh it out, because there are men in our penitentiary service who have paid their debt to the government, which they owed by reason of coming in late under the pension scheme from temporary service, and still they have to keep on paying until they die. This does not concern the mounted police. I hope that when the minister is preparing the bill he will see to it that no man shall have to keep on paying until the day of his death. These people I am speaking of do not owe the government anything and they are still making payments.


James Lorimer Ilsley: This scheme is the same as the other one.


William Scottie Bryce: Then it is no good.


James Lorimer Ilsley: My hon. friend is wrong about the other plan. No one has to keep on paying superannuation contributions which he does not owe.


John Oliver Probe: What facilities have the rank and file of the R.C.M.P. for making representations with respect to pension plans, conditions of service or pay? How can they make representations either to the commissioner or to the Minister of Justice? Where a man has been crimed, as will happen even in the R.C.M.P., what appeal is there from the commissioner's adverse decision for the R.C.M.P. constable or the non-commissioned officer under subsections 1 and 2 of 31?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Those having complaints may go to the personnel department which exists for the purpose of dealing with complaints, and they may also go to their own officers and make complaints.


John Oliver Probe: They are denied power of association, however, by that order in council which I mentioned the other night.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I believe there was an order in council which was passed after the Winnipeg strike or at some other time. At any rate, it has been long outstanding and I have received no complaints with reference to it.


John Oliver Probe: I have had some representations.


James Lorimer Ilsley: The other question was-


John Oliver Probe: Appeal from adverse decisions.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
Mr. 1LSLEY: If a member of the force is dissatisfied with the decision of the deputy commissioner or assistant commissioner, there is an appeal to the minister. I have always understood in the department that they have an appeal to the minister. Certainly they do once in a while write to me, and they are outspoken. I believe that has happened twice.


Mr. ADAMSON:: There is one suggestion I wish to make with regard to the question of intimidation. The intimidation is undoubtedly very real; it does exist. The minister asked how the criminal code might be amended. I suggest to him that any organization or any individual collecting funds for use outside Canada, for charitable purposes or for a service outside Canada, should be registered with the federal government. During the war we had the War Charities Act and it created no great hardship in the raising of funds for charities. Much of the intimidation comes from persons who have been citizens ofj or who are descended from persons who were citizens of countries behind what is known as the iron curtain. They approach others asking for donations for charitable or other purposes. A great deal of the trouble in this respect might be overcome if the appropriate act, whether it be the criminal code or some other statute, were amended to provide that anyone soliciting funds for charitable purposes or for other uses outside Canada should be registered with the federal government. I believe that is in accordance with what the United States government has done, and it is particularly useful in this country, where we have had recently a number of serious attempts at intimidation, particularly of displaced persons. Persons coming to this country, often with little or no knowledge of our language, have frequently been met and have been made to undergo certain pressure tactics by communist groups to join the communist party. In any case their faith in the democratic system under which we live in Canada is exposed to danger and may be shaken. I think that has been proved in numbers of cases, and is particularly true of displaced persons coming from Europe to work in the mining and logging industries.
There is one more case which received a good deal of attention in the press recently. That is the case of the Soviet embassy's advertising in the foreign language newspapers of this country, particularly the Baltic language newspapers, and stating that it was necessary for those persons who were Baltic citizens at one time to register with the Soviet embassy. I believe that case has been taken up by the Department of External Affairs.
Nevertheless, that advertisement constituted a definite threat to those people who read the foreign language newspapers and whose knowledge of English is not great or is perhaps nonexistent. In my opinion that amounts to a threat. Not only that, it amounts to an abuse by the Soviet embassy of its rights and is a departure from the ordinary course of diplomatic behaviour in Canada or in any other country. No Canadian embassy would ever dream of doing such a thing in any foreign country, and I consider this definitely amounts to a threat. That case is particularly interesting today when, although perhaps from a de jure point of view there is a difference between the Soviet government and the communist party, there is perhaps no difference from a de facto point of view. I believe the government should consider an amendment to the criminal code particularly with regard to that matter.
I have one more suggestion to make with regard to pay to the mounted police. In the force today there are a number of officers who must undertake special extra training. I am thinking of the matter from the technical point of view, and am referring to those who are doing, shall we say, flying operations or special operations with regard to medical and legal work. These men must have high technical qualifications. Frequently they are university graduates. I believe that some recognition of these extra duties should be given in this act. I have read the act cursorily, but I believe that the men who are thus specially trained should receive special consideration with regard to pay.
Another matter to which I wish to refer is with regard to these men who are doing work in the intelligence department of this great force. An intelligence officer frequently does not wear a uniform. He must assume various types of dress. He is required to mingle in all classes of society. In this day and age he must be a diplomatic and cosmopolitan person indeed. Particularly with regard to the clothing and travelling allowances of persons doing this work, I think the regulations should be made more liberal so that under no circumstances will an officer of the force who is doing intelligence work ever need to think of the extra cost of, shall we say, spoiling his civilian clothes or having to take, in the line of duty, chances which might damage his property. I mention that matter inasmuch as several officers have mentioned it to me.
In conclusion, I want to say that in the federal bureau of investigation I think the minimum salary starts off at the rate of


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I will take just a moment or two. The minister may reply when he answers the question asked by the hon. member for York West regarding possible changes in the criminal code. The hon. member has covered the point fairly well. In his remarks he said that donations were requested for specific purposes. It is not only a request; it is a demand. I can assure the minister of that. I may advise the minister that I made it my business to pass on to the officers of the R.C.M.P. certain information pointing out that a dead set was being made by certain active communist workers to specialize on their point of contact with the displaced people. I sent to the department the evidence in a specific case. I had the gentleman who was kind enough to come to me about the matter interview one of the officers of the R.C.M.P. staff.
I will go a step farther. There is a definite circulation of subversive literature going on in certain parts of the country. I am wondering if steps are being taken to stamp this type of thing out. I should like to cite to the minister one instance which occurred quite recently. Within the last two or three weeks a man was caught distributing, in the dead of night, this particular subversive literature. He was brought in by one of the local police officers. He was caught with a copy of the literature. He openly defied the police officer and said, "I am a communist and proud of it." That was his attitude, and these threats are actually being made.
There has come to my attention something else, which perhaps the minister knows about; that is, the practice of sending teen-age children back to certain foreign countries, supposedly for education. Several people of European origin have told me of being approached in this connection, and that many of these children have gone back. I believe the country concerned, as far as I was told, was Czechoslovakia. I should like to know if there is any law or regulation under which
Canadian citizenship could be taken away from any person proved guilty of doing things of this kind. I think that would have a definite effect, because they value that citizenship and guard it closely once they get it, since it protects them in case they get in trouble and go a step too far.
I mention these things so that the minister may know the anxiety I feel, because I have come closely in touch with these matters; and I have other information I want to pass on to the officers of the mounted police within a very few days. I am digging up more all the time.


Mr. SHAW:: WThen Bill No. 211 came before the house for second reading the hon. member for Lake Centre made reference to a matter it had been my intention to raise. I appreciate the fact that it has been discussed, but I should like to refer to it again.
The hon. member indicated that he considered it most unfair to members of the force that when they come up for trial they should be denied the privilege of being represented by counsel. Without making reference to any specific case, I have an incident in mind in making these remarks. As matters stand at present,' a commissioned officer may issue orders or instructions. An N.C.O. on detachment may conscientiously carry out such orders or instructions, but somewhere someone may err. The commissioned officer is in a position to lay a charge against the N.C.O. He may also hear the charge, and may also impose sentence, though the original error in judgment, made in good faith, may be attributable to the commissioned officer involved. It seems to me the N.C.O. is placed in a most unfortunate position. He is not represented by counsel. It is not as though the charge is being heard in a civil court. I understood the minister to say such a man could appeal to a personnel board or to the minister-


James Lorimer Ilsley: No, he does not go to the personnel board. In the case the hon. gentleman is describing, the officer would be holding an investigation under oath for the information of the commissioner, and if the constable or non-commissioned officer is dissatisfied with the decision of the commissioner he can get in touch with the minister.


Frederick Davis Shaw: The unfortunate part, of it is that the N.C.O., who may be desirous of continuing with the force, is placed in the position that he has to appeal against the decision of his superior officer, and he is a bit hesitant about doing that. He fears the repercussions that may follow; he sees the possibility of a reduction in rank at some time or another,

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
without a great deal of justification; he may experience a transfer to a much less desirable detachment. As I say, he is placed in a much more unfortunate position than he need be if he were given an opportunity in the first place to obtain the assistance of counsel or, as I have heard many people suggest, if he had the right to appear before a civil court. There may be arguments against that, but certainly it appeals to me as preferable to the existing practice.
In what I say I do not want it to be considered for a moment that I am endeavouring to detract from the great work of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. On previous occasions I have expressed myself in this connection. One would have to be blind indeed to fail to appreciate the great work done by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, both now and when they were known under another name. I do feel, however, that injustices have been imposed upon N.C.O.'s and constables under the present method of conducting trial of charges laid by commissioned officers.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Under the regulations a member of the force being investigated has the right to request the assistance of any officer, non-commissioned officer or constable in the force. He may not have outside counsel, I admit, but he has the right to be assisted or represented by another member of the force.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Are they made fully aware of that right?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes. In the only case I can remember reading through I was impressed with the great intelligence shown by the man being investigated, who was permitted to cross-examine and did cross-examine, with much ability, the witnesses who appeared against him. He was found guilty and dismissed from the force, and appealed to me. I was struck with the fairness of the proceedings. That man did not require the assistance of anyone; as far as I could see he certainly did not need it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Is there a verbatim transcript of these hearings?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.


Mr. ISNOR:: I am not going to take very much time, Mr. Chairman, nor shall I go over the ground already covered with respect to this fine body of men. On more than one occasion I have gone on record in that regard. I remember that in the Nova Scotia legislature in 1929 I said I felt that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police would be a much better body of men to carry out the work of patrolling our province than men selected locally, 5849-2171
because they would be a more independent body, and for other reasons I mentioned at that time. So I do not propose to deal with that point at all beyond saying that I believe the Halifax division is composed of men of a very fine type. I believe I should make that statement because of the splendid type of service they have given, not only in the capital city but throughout the province.
I wish to bring two matters to the attention of the minister, because I consider them important in view of the effect they may have on the service. I notice that in section 1 it is proposed to drop the word "marine." Unless I hear very good reasons for it, I am inclined to think this is a mistake. In the Department of National Defence we have the armj-, navy and air force, each with its own work to do, but all under one head and operating efficiently. I believe it is a good thing to have them all under one department. But I say that on the east and west coasts the marine section has a certain type of work, and does that work well. Instead of dropping the marine section, I would hope there would be a general expansion of the branch, and added duties which would perhaps give us greater protection along the shore and at the same time carry out a still greater degree of rescue work.
I feel that if the marine section of the mounted police were expanded or enlarged it could be closely co-operative with the Royal Canadian Air Force, and perform the duties carried on by the coast guard in the United States. They could be of valuable assistance along the Atlantic shoreline, and I suggest that the minister might discuss this matter with the commissioner who, I believe, appreciates the points I am raising. What I have said about the Atlantic coast applies equally to the west coast. That is all I wish to say about the marine section. I thought it was a mistake to drop the word "marine". It is about the same as taking away the uniform worn by members of the mounted .police.
There are two other matters I would bring to the attention of the minister. The first has to do with the transfer of men from one section of the country to another. This is done often. Perhaps it is a matter which the commissioner and officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police understand more fully than I do. However, with t.he housing situation as it is throughout certain sections of Canada, and in view of the fact that a number of these men are married, it seems to me unreasonable and not in the best interests of those concerned to transfer a man from Halifax to

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
Vancouver, or from Halifax to Ottawa, Montreal or Toronto, where housing conditions are similar to those we have in Halifax. A man for a long period of time would have to maintain two homes. I should think that at the present time it would be good policy not to bring about any unnecessary transfers; indeed it would be wise to keep them at the lowest possible minimum.
Then, it is my understanding that transportation is provided upon a man's leaving the force or retiring therefrom. The rule is that a man taking his superannuation must signify immediately his intention of moving to a certain section of the country. A short time ago a member of the force took his superannuation; but when, in the regular way, he was asked the question as to whether he wanted transportation he was unable to say that he did require it. He had been unable to secure housing accommodation where he wished to go, and for that reason was unable to accept transportation, or to say, "Yes; I want transportation for my wife, myself and furniture". Two months later he did find a house and then made application for transportation, this time only for himself and his wife, without the furniture. I feel that there should be a time limit, or that some leeway should be given, so that cases of this kind could be given favourable consideration. I quite realize that regulations must be followed; but common sense should be exercised and a certain degree of reasonableness shown in borderline cases like this one.
I have presented these facts as briefly as I could, sincerely hoping that, with his usual good judgment, the minister will give them the attention they deserve.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Was that man refused transportation?


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: He has not yet received it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: But he was not refused it.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: In a sense, yes.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Was it to go to the same place?


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: Yes.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I shall give consideration to the matters the hon. member has raised, although, with the exception of the one having to do with the marine section, they do not have reference to the present bill.
The marine section is not abolished, but the force amounting to the marine section is incorporated into the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. This means they have the same ranks,

and their ranks will have the same description now, by regulation, as those in the mounted police, namely officers, non-commissioned officers, constables and so on. Before this they were known by all kinds of names, such as skipper-lieutenants, and descriptions of that kind. They are now brought into conformity with the rest of the force so that an officer now means a commissioned officer of the force. It is not necessary to add, "and also an officer of the marine section", because he has the same rank.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: The marine section will still be maintained?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes; it is not provided for in the act. This is merely the definition of "officer".


Arthur Leroy Smith: There is greater opportunity for promotion in a larger field.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I do not know about that; I should think there would be more mobility.


Mr. HANSELL:: I do not wish to open up the subject of pay, because it has already been discussed, and it comes into this bill only indirectly in view of the contributory pension scheme. It does affect one's pay, because there comes a time when people speak in terms of their take-home pay. I do not think the minister or any other person can compare the work of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police with that of the civil service, or other types of employment such as driving trucks or operating garages, or with the work of men who would take odd jobs here and there. I say that because the mounted police to a great extent offers a life's work, otherwise I do not suppose the pension scheme would be before us. When a man joins the force he does so with the idea of making it his life's work.
I was wondering if the minister would care to place on Hansard, without any discussion of the matter, the scale of pay that the mounted police receive.
I think it can be said that the work of the R.C.M.P. is highly specialized. While at times they are used as highway patrols or something like that, that is only a small part of their work. They have to be schooled and as they are in the service they have to become highly specialized in their work. Their work is comparable with that of many of the professions, and that is why I believe this matter of pay should be taken into consideration.
Before I take my seat there is one more question I should like to ask the minister. Does the R.C.M.P. carry out secret service work, or is there a secret service or intelligence

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
branch in Canada? Perhaps I had better put it this way. There is such a thing as military service. Is that a separate branch from the R.C.M.P., or is there such a branch? Is the R.C.M.P. the branch of government service that takes care of intelligence work throughout the country? If that is so, then their work becomes highly specialized.
I am interested in this for more reasons than one, which I think can readily be guessed. There are more dangers in this country than most of us realize. When we think of espionage and sabotage we think in terms of blowing up a public building, a factory, a ship or something like that, but there are more than buildings and factories that can be sabotaged. The thinking and the minds of the Canadian people can be sabotaged. That is a branch of intelligence which seldom comes into the picture, but it is an important one, because what is happening today in Canada and what has happened in the past is conditioning our own people to receive that which is absolutely foreign to our concept of democratic citizenship.
I think I have said a lot in these last few sentences. There are just the two questions I have asked the minister. First, will he put on Hansard the scale of pay and, second, will he state whether there is any other body in the country doing intelligence work? Perhaps that last question should be answered privately, because I have no desire to embarrass the minister.


James Lorimer Ilsley: With the consent of the committee I would place on Hansard these rates of pay and allowances.


Mr. COCKERAM:: Those are the new
rates?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The new rates.


Arthur Leroy Smith: But not
perquisites?


James Lorimer Ilsley: In addition, the members of the force are found, so to speak. They get their food and uniform and boots and they receive medical, dental and hospital care. They are pensioned for disability if disabled in the course of duty and they are under a pension scheme to which the government makes a large contribution. These things are all in addition to the rates of pay and allowances.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I merely thought they should all be shown together.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I would feel better about it if that were done. What happens is that someone looks at this and sees that a constable receives $3.50 a day, and he thinks that is not very much.


Arthur Leroy Smith: That is what I was talking about.
Mr. ILSLEY': A third-class constable receives $3.50 a day or $5.90 if married, but that is just the beginning because there are these other things as well.


Mr. BENTLEY:: Are all the items on that list?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Perhaps I had better wait and put the whole thing on together.


Thomas John Bentley: I think it would be better.


Arthur Leroy Smith: A man in a detachment has his house.


Alan Cockeram: Have the Arctic allowances been increased?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Living allowance was increased fifteen cents a day and the pay was increased seventy-five cents a day. The matter was considered for some time, and there was a feeling, on the part of some in the government service for whose opinion I have great respect, that to have the pay compare with that paid in other comparable forces it should be increased sixty cents a day with a 25-cent increase in the allowance, or a total of eighty-five cents. It was finally decided to give an increase of seventy-five cents a day in the pay and an increase of fifteen cents a day in the allowance, which is a little better. In fact it is much better for the kind of people we want to recruit.


Alan Cockeram: I had in mind the Arctic regions, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories where the cost of living is so much greater than in other places. Has that been taken into consideration?


James Lorimer Ilsley: There are special living allowances for those regions where the cost of living is high.


Thomas John Bentley: Could the minister give some indication what part of the allowance is deductible for income tax purposes and what part is tax free?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I shall try to get that information. I had better not put this list on the record this afternoon. There will be sections in this long act under which it will be in order to put, it on the record. I shall try to get a complete statement as well as the income tax information.


Ernest George Hansell: We want a true picture, so that we may as well leave it to the minister to decide when to put it on. Will the minister answer my other question?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Was the question as to whether this is the only intelligence branch in the public service?


Ernest George Hansell: Yes.
3420	COMMONS
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act


James Lorimer Ilsley: The armed forces have their intelligence branches.


Ernest George Hansell: Perhaps I had better talk to the minister privately about this, because it is a delicate matter.


Frank Exton Lennard: Is there an allowance for those on plainclothes duty?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Fifty cents a day.


Frank Exton Lennard: Is that a clothing allowance?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes. .


Frank Exton Lennard: I rather hesitate to comment. The men that I know are of a very high type. I doubt very much whether fifty cents a day as a clothing allowance is enough when one considers the work they have to do and the different circles in which they have to move. I doubt very much whether it is adequate to permit them to do the job they are supposed to do.


John Oliver Probe: I do not want to delay too long the passage of this section, but the amendment deals with members of the force and states:
"(c) 'member of the force' or 'member' includes the commissioner and every other officer, non-commissioned officer and man or woman of the force."
As a matter of statistical interest, can the minister indicate how many women are in the R.C.M.P. and whether they are on the same pay classification as other members of the force, whether their duties correspond with those of other members and whether they are subject to the same discipline and promotion?


James Lorimer Ilsley: There are no regular women members of the force at all at the present time. There are some women who are special constables, but none who are constables, noncommissioned officers or officers. This makes provision for adding them some time in the future, but I may say there are no definite plans for adding them either.


Mr. MASSEY:: I wish to make a few remarks in regard to my high opinion of the force as a result of my contact with it during the years in various ways and the magnificent work done. I should like to associate my voice with those who have uttered panegyrics when discussing this legislation.
My chief purpose in rising now is to ask the minister a question. I refer to a particular case and the decision made in that case, namely, an officer or constable of the R.C.M.P. who served the forces well and

faithfully for many years prior to the war. He asked for his release from the R.C.M.P. in order to become a D.A.P.M. with the R.C.A.F. He was released from the service of the R.C.M.P. in order to join the R.C.A.F. He was one of the first of the D.A.P.M's. I personally saw him at work, and for the time that he was with me he did a perfectly magnificent job of a highly specialized nature. He continued to do his good work; he was promoted consistently until he attained the rank of wing commander, which was a very high rank, as the minister knows, for a D.A.P.M. During the course of his duty he had to report to Newfoundland, and during a trip there he was torpedoed and suffered a severe illness consequent upon the exposure. However, he ultimately returned to duty where he remained until the end of the war, and then he endeavoured to rejoin the R.C.M.P. At that time he was told he was over-age and could no longer be a constable in the R.C.M.P. He had retired from the R.C.A.F. because his services were no longer required. He had been released from the R.C.M.P. and could not rejoin them because he was over-age. He now finds himself with only a very small pension from the R.C.A.F. and with no pension whatsoever from the R.C.M.P. and no hope of getting any.
It would seem to me that the position of that man is most incongruous. He did not leave the R.C.M.P. to take up some civilian employment or to get a better job or really to change his duties. He virtually changed his uniform. The service in the R.C.M.P. is the service of his country; the service in the R.C.A.F. is the service of his country. Just because he wears a different uniform for six years he loses the benefits of a pension, and that man today, living in British Columbia as he does, is endeavouring to eke out an existence and not too successfully. It appears on the surface that if what has been done is within the four corners of the act in regard to pension, then the act is definitely at fault.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Is the man not on pension from the R.C.M.P.?


Denton Massey: No, he is not.


James Lorimer Ilsley: What were the circumstances of the separation from the R.C.M.P.?


Denton Massey: He asked to be released from the R.C.M.P. in order to join the R.C.A.F.


James Lorimer Ilsley: How long had he been in the R.C.M.P.?

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act


Denton Massey: I have not the file before me, but it was a matter of many years. I would say fifteen years or more, perhaps twenty. He was highly thought of. I do not hesitate to give the minister the man's name. His name is Hammond. I think the commissioner knows something of the case. I bring it up at this time not merely to draw the minister's attention to that particular case; but if what has been done is unquestionably within the four corners of the act as it now exists I suggest that the act is definitely at fault, and when we are making a revision of the act a case of that sort should be considered and the act amended so that such an injustice should not arise. That is my purpose in bringing the matter to the minister's attention now.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I am told that Hammond is a pensioner of the R.C.M.P., went on pension and enlisted in the R.C.A.F., and his services in the forces do not count for pension in the R.C.M.P. in those circumstances.


Denton Massey: As I understand the case, the man in question was on active service in the R.C.M.P. at the time he enlisted in the R.C.A.F. He was released from the R.C.M.P. in order to join the R.C.A.F.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I will find out about the case. I think I have some correspondence on it. What the hon. gentleman says is so. If a person withdraws from the R.C.M.P. and then enlists in the armed forces he cannot be regarded as a member of the R.C.M.P. for pension purposes.


Denton Massey: But my point is this. It is true he terminated his service temporarily, he hoped, in these circumstances, with the R.C.M.P. in order to serve with the R.C.A.F. The minister must realize that at the start of the war the P.M. services, whether with the R.C.A.F. or with the army or navy, were very much limited. They required experienced men. It was a little tough at the start of the war to enforce discipline and provost marshals were required. Naturally one would seek provost marshals from the sources where he could get the best men.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Just a minute. This man could not have been in the provost corps, or what the hon. member is saying would not apply at all.


Denton Massey: Well, he was, ipso facto.


James Lorimer Ilsley: In the provost corps?


Denton Massey: Certainly, with my staff.


James Lorimer Ilsley: In the provost corps?


Denton Massey: Yes.


James Lorimer Ilsley: He had separated himself from the R.C.M.P.?


Denton Massey: I tried to make it clear that he asked for release from the R.C.M.P. in order to join the R.C.A.F.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I will look into the case. At the beginning of the war in 1939 the force was circularized and asked not to enlist for active service except in a particular way. Some of the men disregarded these instructions and did enlist. This man was one of them. The mystery to me is, how did he get out to join the provost corps?


John Oliver Probe: No. 1 provost corps.


James Lorimer Ilsley: That was encouraged. The provost corps was organized from the force. Why did he leave the force?


Denton Massey: I am going back to the start of the war in 1939 when the air force was 3,000 all ranks and nobody had ever heard of a provost marshal in it. Suddenly they found themselves enlisting thousands of young lads, and certainly there was some provost corps necessary in the R.C.A.F. from early on. The minister well knows the difficulties which were faced at that time. Experienced men were required. Police constables were not good enough. Some R.C.M.P. constables came into the service at that time. Hammond was one, and he was commissioned. When I first knew him he was a flying officer.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Why did he leave the
R.C.M.P.? If he had not left the R.C.M.P. he would not be in any trouble today.


Denton Massey: I think the man was far more interested in serving his country than in getting a pension. That is the plain answer.


James Lorimer Ilsley: No.


Denton Massey: Yes, it is, ipso facto. He left the force in order to join the R.C.A.F.


James Lorimer Ilsley: They were encouraged to join the provost corps as members of the R.C.M.P. Why did he separate himself from the R.C.M.P. to join?


Denton Massey: Because provost corps was army. I am talking about the R.C.A.F. This man came into the R.C.A.F. and not the provost corps.


James Lorimer Ilsley: This was not covered by the authorization given to members of the R.C.M.P.?


Denton Massey: No.


James Lorimer Ilsley: This man, then, acted in a manner contrary to the circularization of the members of the R.C.M.P. at the beginning of the war.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act


Denton Massey: If you want to put it that way. The man did an excellent job of work, a most useful job. I could detain this committee for an hour reciting his qualifications and commenting on the work he did while I was adjutant at Trenton. He did a magnificent job in cleaning up a serious situation in Trenton, so much so that he was moved to Halifax, where he did an equally outstanding job, and from there he was sent to Newfoundland. That was when the torpedo business happened. He was used for special work because he had had training with the R.C.M.P. and was the sort of man we needed in the air force for our purposes. We got him there and now he is penalized.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 3 to 9 inclusive agreed to.
On section 10-Definitions.
James Lorimer Ilsley: I should like to have this section carried too, but an amendment is required to section 91. Section 10 is a very long one running over a great many pages. Perhaps it might stand. Does the committee wish to take the various parts of the section one by one?


Stanley Howard Knowles: What part does the minister propose to amend?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The amendment to the part I propose to amend has not yet been drafted. It is necessitated by a last-moment emergency. It will be found on page 5 of the bill in (j).


Stanley Howard Knowles: Why not let 91 stand?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Perhaps that might stand and we could carry the rest of it.


John Oliver Probe: Before the rest of it is passed, I would call the minister's attention to subsection 3 on page 7 of the bill, which comes under section 94. Subsection 3 reads:
A contribution made under this section or under subsection 2 of section 93 may be made in one sum or by instalments of equivalent value payable by reservation from pay and allowances or otherwise, for life, or for a period of years or for life whichever is the shorter-
And so on. I made reference earlier to a case that has necessitated some correspondence, in which a sergeant-major of the R.C.M.P. had retired some twelve or thirteen years ago, at which time it was calculated for him that, in order to keep certain superannuation benefits active, he could pay in cash at that time, in 1935, the sum of $2,859.28, or elect to pay for life the sum of $219 a year. He elected the latter, and he states that by last year he had contributed the sum of $2,609.75, leaving a balance of $249 still due on the full amount. In the intervening years
[Mr. Ilsley.l
he had made practically the full payment except for a few dollars remaining unpaid at the present time. He made monthly payments of $18.25 on account of prior service contribution to the widows' pension fund for the rest of his life. That was the option he chose. In view of the fact that he has made approximately the full payment demanded of him, what is the justice in continuing this monthly payment of $18.25 for the rest of his life for the purpose of enabling his widow to benefit?


James Lorimer Ilsley: I believe I have seen something about that case in my own correspondence. I should like to have the name so that I may look into it, but I will give the hon. gentleman my surmise of the explanation. This contributor apparently elected to pay for his full life.


John Oliver Probe: That is right.


James Lorimer Ilsley: He must have had a life expectancy which he has exceeded.


John Oliver Probe: I see the insurance angle.


James Lorimer Ilsley: If he had not reached the life expectancy the fund would have received only half the amount paid in. There must be cases where more than the original amount is paid in; otherwise the fund would not be receiving enough money.


John Oliver Probe: As a matter of fact, the man who was pensioned off twelve or fifteen years ago on the old rates of pay is penalized to some extent, the minister must admit, with respect to his pension expectancy as compared with those who are now in process of being pensioned off at more attractive rates of pay. On that basis could not some consideration be given cases such as this? I see the minister's point all right. There was authorized a commutation of $2,800 in lieu of life expectancy of so many years, or alternatively he could pay $18.25 a month. He has made that payment. The interest has been four per cent. The fund has benefited by these payments and he is not receiving any increased pension because, as the minister said a few moments ago, no consideration is being given to increasing the pension. Would the minister consider increasing some of these pensions that were based on lower rates of pay while in service? I may say that this is the case of Sergeant-Major Hannah.


James Lorimer Ilsley: I cannot hold out any hope that we shall disturb the old scheme. It would upset everything if we did. That pensioner, like others, received free pension for himself to which he made no contribution whatever. It was non-contributory. He purchased a pension. He went into the fund

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
under which his dependents would be pensioned according to a certain plan. The fund cannot begin waiving payments. The process would be endless.


John Oliver Probe: What I am asking the minister to do here is precisely what we are doing in the case of military pensions which were granted at a certain rate following the first world war. I think the principle has been soundly established in this case, even though it is not covered by the amendment.


James Lorimer Ilsley: We are not doing it for civil service pensioners, for people who were under a pension scheme. Disability pensions are entirely different. What about annuitants or anyone else?


John Oliver Probe: I would not argue about commercial annuities.


The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:: Shall clause 10 carry with the exception of 91 (j) ?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.
Section with reservation agreed to.


William Henry Golding: Shall I report
progress?


James Lorimer Ilsley: There is something else which I might as well explain now. It is at the very end. It is in section 110 on page 15 of the bill. I am sorry to have to explain this because it is difficult to explain. These sections in part VI, dealing with injury or death on service, provide for the application of the pension scale in the Pension Act to members of the R.C.M.P. who suffer disability or die. In order to apply the provisions of the Pension Act, which provide pensions at varying rates for various ranks, we must state in some way or another, directly or indirectly, what ranks correspond to the ranks in the R.C.M.P. For certain reasons it is undesirable to name the ranks. So it is proposed to say this:
(3) For the purposes of the application of schedules "A" and "B" of the Pension Act under this section, the ranks in the force set out in the following table shall be deemed to correspond to the military ranks in respect of which the rates of pension set out in the attached table are applicable.
One of those figures is $840, which is not yet settled as being the disability pension for certain ranks in the armed forces. We must therefore tie to something that is settled. So I propose an amendment which will make this subsection read differently and which will cross out the words "are applicable" and will substitute the words "were applicable on the thirtieth day of September, 1947." Then the figures that will be inserted here 5849-218
will be the figures that were applicable on the thirtieth day of September, 1947, which is the day before the new rates of pensions will become applicable. That does not mean at all that these figures on page 16 will be the rates at which the R.C.M.P. are pensionable. It means that they will be pensionable at the rates applicable to the ranks to which these figures were applicable on the thirtieth day of September, 1947.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The reference is to the disability pension act?


James Lorimer Ilsley: The Pension Act, which relates to disability pensions in the army. I have explained the situation. I think the best way is to let this stand. We can pass everything, with the exception of 91 (j) that we have already mentioned and of this subsection 3 of section 110 of the act. Then I shall bring in a properly written amendment. We can pass everything but that. The rest of the act is all right as far as I know.


William Henry Golding: Is that agreeable to the committee?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


William Henry Golding: Shall I report progress?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.
Progress reported.



NORTHWEST TERRITORIES ACT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Acting Minister of Mines and Resources) moved the second reading of Bill No. 9, to amend the Northwest Territories Act.
He said: I do not want to delay the passing of this simple bill, Mr. Speaker, but I think I should make a brief statement. Supplementing the information given in the explanatory notes, I may say that even before the transfer of the natural resources to the western provinces in 1930 the provincial governments administered the game and fur regulations. Similarly, the Yukon territorial government deals with these matters by territorial ordinances. It is desired to place the Northwest Territories council in exactly the same position so that the .administration of these particular resources which are of such intimate concern to the local people should be subject to control and administration by the Northwest Territories council. This will enable necessary changes in policy to be made effective promptly to meet the changes which
Northwest Territories Act
[Stage Direction]
often occur suddenly owing to climatic conditions or forest fires. Already the Northwest Territories council has been authorized to fix and does fix the royalties which must be paid by those exporting fur from the territories.
The other feature of this legislation is the provision which will enable appeals from the judgment of stipendiary magistrates in civil matters. In criminal matters there is already a right to appeal to a provincial court, as set out in the criminal code. The reason why this amendment only provides the right to appeal to the Alberta courts is that the only stipendiary magistrates are in the Mackenzie district of the Northwest Territories, which is directly north of Alberta.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
Section 1 agreed to.
On section 2-Appellate jurisdiction from stipendiary magistrate.
George Black: I wish simply to point out to the minister who is in charge of the bill and to the committee that the wording of the section which provides that appeal from stipendiary magistrates in the Northwest Territories, which territories include the district of Mackenzie, is to the appellate division of the supreme court of Alberta, which is quite appropriate. This emphasizes what I have repeatedly pointed out to the minister, to the government and to the house, namely the impropriety of having added the Mackenzie district of the Northwest Territories to Yukon as an electoral district. Appeals from all parts of Yukon go, not to the appellate court of Alberta but to the appellate court of British Columbia, because in fact practically all the business and all the communications of the Northwest Territories go to British Columbia on the west coast of Canada.
At this session of parliament I hope the minister and his government will see their way clear to undo the wrong that has been done to the people of the Mackenzie district and of the Yukon in uniting them as an electoral district. Because of the importance of the Mackenzie district, I believe the people of Mackenzie are entitled to a member in this house, just as the territory of Yukon has had a member for many years. It has never had a population which would entitle it to a member, but because of its importance as a producer of wealth in this dominion it has been given that privilege. The Mackenzie district is in exactly the same position, and the govem-

ment should follow the same course in connection with Mackenzie that has been followed in connection with Yukon.


Gordon Graydon: As one coming from another part of Canada than that w'hich the hon. member who has just spoken comes from, I wish to add a word in support of what he has said with respect to the joining of these two very large areas in one electoral district. This is a matter which normally would arise in another debate, but I hope the chairman and the committee wdll bear with me, because I am not going to take much time now.
It seems to me that the situation in Yukon has been accepted and recognized for many years, and as far as I know there has never been any desire on the part of residents of the Yukon to make any change There we have a small population, but there are special problems in the Yukon which I think call for a member of parliament who is particularly conversant with the situation there. We in central Canada have no conception of the problems that arise, as a result of the distances which must be covered in that constituency, in connection with electoral representation in the House of Commons.
So it is in the case of Mackenzie, which seems likely to become an important and more thickly populated part of this country. It seems to me that they need a member of their own to assist in the development of that district. The situation in connection with representation there is far different from the situation with respect to other great sections of our population which perhaps have a greater past than future, though this may not apply to many districts in Canada. Nevertheless it seems to me that legislation of this kind, and similar matters which may arise from time to time in future, urgently demand the presence in this house of a member representing that district, in order to guide, promote and advance the development that is sure to take place in the Northwest Territories.
It is really a scandal that this house should have added the Northwest Territories to Yukon, when each district has special problems which are difficult enough to handle as it is, without trying to throw the problems of both districts into the lap of one man. I appreciate the privilege you have given me, Mr. Chairman, of saying these few words. I know my remarks have been out of order, but I do not apologize for having made them because I believe this matter goes to the very root of the development of the Northwest Territories. We believe that Yukon is entitled to a member, and certainly the Mackenzie district is equally entitled to a member. It seems to me

Dominion Water Power Act
that these arguments are unassailable, and I should like to see the suggestion of the hon. member for Yukon carried out. After all, what we did last session can be changed if we find what we did was wrong, and I believe that the government should consider what I believe is the almost unanimous opinion of this house that each of these districts, in which all the people of Canada are interested, should have a member. It is for these reasons that I, coming from central Canada, have risen to support the hon. member for Yukon, who I think has an unassailable argument in his favour.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Section 3 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Acting Minister of Mines and Resources) moved the second reading of Bill No. 11, to amend the Dominion Water Power Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I think I should make a brief statement at this time. Early in 1946 it was decided to expedite the economic development of the Northwest Territories, including the expansion of the mining industry, by the development of a hydro electric development in the Snare river drainage basin, by the crown, for the supply of power to the Yellowknife district where a demand for mining purposes already existed.
On February 15, 1946, an order in council, P.C. 507, was passed upon the recommendation of the Minister of Mines and Resources concurred in by the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply under the authority of the Dominion Water Power Act, R.S.C., 1927, chapter 210, approving the construction in the name of His Majesty of the Snare river power development. The order also authorized the making of arrangements for the construction of a transmission line from the development to the Giant Yellowknife gold mines property, where an immediate market for power already existed.
Subsequently the deputy minister of justice expressed the opinion that, while the Dominion Water Power Act appeared to contemplate that such projects would be constructed on behalf of the crown, the act did not in express terms authorize such construction. In other words, his opinion was that the act did not provide the necessary authority for the order in council.
The development was proceeded with under authority of the wording of a vote approved by parliament for the project in the supplementary estimates for 1946-47, vote 775; and the wording of a vote approved by parliament for the project in the main estimates for 194748, vote 165. Similar authority is asked in the woiding of the vote submitted to parliament in the main estimates for 1948-49, vote 210. It was felt, however, that in view of the opinion of the deputy minister of justice the Dominion Water Power Act should be amended to remove all doubt as to the power of the governor in council to authorize the construction of power developments on behalf of the crown, if such construction were considered desirable.
Section 12 of the Dominion Water Power Act sets forth the various matters with which the governor in council may deal and the purpose of the bill is to insert after paragraph (o) of the original act a new provision:
(p) for the construction, maintenance and operation by the minister of any undertaking upon lands of the dominion; and"
The amendments provided by paragraphs (o) and (q) are of a minor nature only and do not in any way change the sense of paragraphs (o) and (p) of the original act which they replace.
This bill, which has been prepared by the deputy minister of justice, on enactment will provide authority for the construction of power developments on lands of the dominion on behalf of the crown.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Do we understand that this merely has the effect of confirming what has already been done by the government in connection with these power developments?


James Angus MacKinnon: That is right.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is it clear that, so far as the future is concerned, the reference to lands of the dominion-and if the hon. member's bill is passed that will mean lands of Canada-refers only to lands in the Yukon and the Northwest Territories?


James Angus MacKinnon: This refers only to
the Northwest Territories.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The passing of this
legislation has no bearing upon the ownership by the crown of the power plants referred to in the minister's statement. This will not alienate that ownership?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.
Dominion Water Power Act


Mr. HARRIS (Danforth):: I should like to ask only one or two questions. All hon. members deeply regret that the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) is laid aside for a day or two; and perhaps we also realize that the minister who is conducting the bill through the house may not have full knowledge of the situation.
I know the Minister of Mines and Resources himself visited Yellowknife, and that visit was favourably reported in the news of the north. It was pointed out that he had given encouragement to this struggling community on one of the farthermost frontiers of Canada.
I am not sure whether the minister conducting the bill through the house has been out there.


James Angus MacKinnon: At various times.


Joseph Henry Harris: In Yellowknife?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes, at Yellowknife.


Joseph Henry Harris: I am happy to know that. It so happens that a cousin of mine operates the local newspaper, and every two or three weeks I receive the news from the north. I had not noted the minister's visit, or that he was so well versed in knowledge of that country.
May I first sound a note of encouragement with respect to the magnitude of the work going on in that frontier section? It is pleasing to note that this work is gripping the imagination of those who have funds to invest; it is calling forth the Canadian pioneer spirit, so that we may develop our frontiers more and more.
I am wondering if this bill is necessitated so as to give further help to the two large mining developments out there. I have been trying to remember their names but, since the minister has been there, he will know them. No doubt he was well entertained while he was there. Would the minister give the committee an idea of the value of this development to the mining interests which are at present making such a success of their development of one of Canada's natural resources.


James Angus MacKinnon: I have been personally acquainted with this field from the time I first went into Yellowknife, when it was only a prospect taken up by the first prospectors. I have been there several times since then but, unfortunately, not in the last couple of years. From my residence in Edmonton, however, I am in close touch with developments in that territory.
The power development is for the use of the town of Yellowknife, and more particularly for the use of the three important mines there, the Giant Yellowknife, the Con and the Negus.
(Mr. MacKinnon.]
This development will be sufficient to take care of what we believe will be a great centre in the mining development of Canada.


Joseph Henry Harris: While I am on my feet may I make one further observation. In the pioneer stage of this development, one which might be of great importance in days to come, I believe all departments of government should encourage these pioneers. I am thinking particularly of the individual men and women who go out to pioneer in that remote part of Canada. They should be encouraged in every possible way to stick to their jobs, so that, in due course, if the development turns out to be really worthwhile it may add greatly to the assets of the country.
In this connection I am thinking particularly of radio development, so that these folk, numbering around 2,000-


James Angus MacKinnon: About 3,000, I think.


Joseph Henry Harris: In order that these 3,000 individuals may be part and parcel of the enterprise with which they are connected, the department in charge of radio should see that these citizens have every advantage in the matter of radio coverage, so that they may keep in touch with the outside world.
Then, the social services with which we are blessed in the more thickly populated areas should be extended to them in the full, bearing in mind the hardships they undergo during the winter months when temperatures drop below 40 degrees below zero. Yet, despite these conditions, these people carry on, and they should be given every possible encouragement.
I understand that this amendment to the Dominion Water Power Act is just a matter of straightening out the present legislation.


James Angus MacKinnon: That is right.


Joseph Henry Harris: It has nothing to do with further development. Nevertheless those of us who live in parts of Canada which do not require so much of the pioneer spirit should lean backwards in our support of those who are out on the frontier.


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


[Stage Direction]
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Acting Minister of Mines and Resources) moved the second reading of Bill No. 209 (from the senate) to amend the National Parks Act.

National Parks Act
Pie said: Mr. Speaker. I should like to make a brief statement of further explanation in connection with this bill. There is little I can add to the explanation printed in the bill. However I would emphasize that the chief purpose of the bill is to consolidate the descriptions of the national parks of Canada, because this is very desirable from an administration viewpoint and for the convenience of those who desire the information. These changes were not included in the 1947 amendment of the National Parks Act, since the department was then completing arrangements with New Brunswick for a national park in that province and it was desired that the list of parks be complete.
The National Parks Act of 1930 cancelled three parks and confirmed the remainder as they then existed, with the exception of five, for which detailed descriptions were provided in the act.
All parks established prior to 1930 were set aside by order in council under the old Forest Reserves and Parks Act. There have been many changes in these parks since the first ones were established in 1911. Since the passing of the National Parks Act in 1930, three parks have been cancelled by legislation, namely, Wawaskey, Buffalo and Nemiskam.
A few changes have been made in the boundaries of some of the other parks. The Cape Breton Highlands national park and Prince Edward Island national park were established under provisions of the Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island National Parks Act of 1936 as amended. Some changes were made later in the boundaries of these parks.
The New Brunswick national park was established pursuant to the provisions of the National Parks Act of 1937, which made special provision for the establishment of this park.
It is considered that there will be few further changes, if any, in the present boundaries, and it is very desirable in the administration of these areas to have a complete description of each park duly authorized by statute. No doubt many hon. members have noticed that during the past year orders in council on a great many subjects have been consolidated and brought up to date. This has involved a great deal of labour, but it is hoped that the consolidation, now available as a result of this work, will be of great assistance and save much research.
The same idea is carried out in the bill now before the house. In other words, it will only be necessary to refer to the National Parks
Act as now amended to get a complete list of the parks.
The second section brings the practice for gazetting regulations under the National Parks Act in line with prevailing practice. Section 3 sets up the new schedule. Section 4 provides for the repeal of the special acts no longer necessary as a result of this consolidation.
Mr. A. J. BROOKS (Royal):: Mr. Speaker,
I wanted to say just a few words with reference to national parks. I think it is a splendid idea to determine definitely the boundaries of these national parks. I am also pleased that we are to have a national park in New Brunswick. I believe the idea was first mooted in 1936, but inspections had been made even prior to that. The people of our province were disappointed that a park was not established at the same time as the parks in Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia. I think all the sites should have been chosen at the same time, because New Brunswick has lost considerable tourist revenue in the years from 1936 to 1948. Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia had no difficulty in choosing their park sites and the parks were developed shortly after the sites had been chosen.
Anyone who has visited the Cape Breton national park knows they have one of the finest parks in Canada. The national park in Prince Edward Island is small, but it is beautiful and is attracting a great many tourists from the United States and other parts of Canada.
Four or five sites in New Brunswick were inspected. There is a feeling, which I think is justified, in certain sections of the province that the best site was not chosen. I also understand that the site chosen was not the one recommended to the department. I realize that the minister who is now doing the work of this department is new to the department, but if he will go back in the records I think he will find that the present site was the second choice, not the first.
I do not want to condemn this site even though it was the second choice. It is in the county of Albert and the park takes in part of the bay of Fundy and some fine hills and lakes. The site which was the first choice was on the Saint John river. I should like to say to hon. members who have not visited that river that we consider that historically and geographically it is one of the finest rivers, not only in Canada but in the world. I am not so sure about the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon), but I do know that the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Black), who has lived on the Saint John, will bear out that statement. It has been called the Rhine of America.
hational Parks Act

Since we have no park on the Saint John river and since the precedent has been 'well established of having two or three parks in a province, I think the department should consider establishing a park on the Saint John river. As I say, I have no objection to the park that has been established in Albert county, but I think we should have a park on the Saint John river.
On motion of Mr. Brooks the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

James Angus MacKinnon: The business for
tomorrow will be the estimates of external affairs.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, April 29, 1948