1948-03-24

[Stage Direction]
Second report of special committee on veterans affairs.-Mr. Tucker.

Right Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I desire to announce that an equalization payment of 3-623 cents per bushel will be made to western producers who marketed oats in the period from August 1, 1946, to July 31, 1947. The total payment will amount to $3,762,031.39 and will be made on 103,837,466 bushels. During the entire crop year an amount of $10,971,544.46 was collected in equalization fees. It will be remembered that an advance equalization payment of 10 cents per bushel, amounting to $7,227,341.55, was made on oats deliveries from August 1, 1946, to March 17, 1947, when the maximum price was increased and no further advance equalization payments made. As soon as the cheques can be written they will be sent to the handling companies, who will distribute them to the producers.


Mr. SMITH (Calgary West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce a question, because I did not hear precisely what he said with respect to oats and barley. I have tried- to get a copy of his statement, but it has gone to Hansard and so I must ask for the information. The minister spoke of three cents odd on oats. Do I understand that that is to come from the equalization fund or from funds to be voted by the parliament of Canada? The equalization fund, as I understand it, arises from permits granted on oats and barley.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The money comes from the equalization fund. Hon. members will recall that at the beginning of the crop year 1946-47 an equalization fee of ten cents was paid on all purchases. Later in the year the price was adjusted, and accordingly that equalization fee was dropped. But there remained an equalization fund equivalent to some three and a half cents a bushel applying to the total deliveries of the crop. It is that sum that is being paid out at this time.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, in view of its importance in the national interest I feel that hon. members will wish me to make a statement on the strength and recruiting for the active (or permanent) and reserve forces.
The authorized strength of the three services of the active forces is 42,145 officers and men. At the end of February the strength was 34,276, which is more than three times as large as at the outbreak of war in 1939. This number represents 80 per cent of the strength at present authorized. It is interesting to note that the proportion of regulars on strength compared with the target for March 31, 1949, is the same in Canada as in the United Kingdom. Unlike other countries which still have men who were enlisted for the duration of hostilities or who were called up for a limited period, all Canadian forces are permanent or regular.
It may be pointed out that in Canada as in other countries there has been a tendency since the war to use civilians for work which was previously performed by service personnel but which is obviously of a civilian character. This includes cooks, mess orderlies, clerks, certain mechanics, firefighters and other occupations of a civilian character at permanent establishments. Other civilians are engaged at prevailing rates in the dockyards at Esquimalt and Halifax in constructing married quarters and in general maintenance work.
The present strength of the army reserve forces is 33,369, with 1,829 C.O.T.C., making a total of 35,198. In the naval reserve there are 2.112, with 1,033 in the university naval training division, making 3,145. The air force auxiliary with 722 men is beginning to set up squadrons as ground crews and planes become available.
The total figures for the navy and army reserves and air force auxiliary are about the same as they were up to the period immediately before the war. But now there are also more than a million men and women in Canada who have had military service in the second world war, including a higher proportion of trained air crew than m any other country.
255S

National Defence
Last September a campaign to obtain recruits was set under way across Canada and has since been continued. This campaign included distribution of information, radio and newspaper publicity, exhibitions and parades.
The recruiting campaign has shown good results. During the year 1947 there were 31,688 approaches for active service in the three forces, resulting in 9,240 enlistments. The largest cause of rejection was the high educational standard required for the three services.
The standard has been junior matriculation or its equivalent. This was considered desirable because of the highly technical nature of work in the forces, particularly as a major part of the role of the active forces is related to administration and training. The active forces will serve as a nucleus about which to build a very much larger force should the need arise.
The problem of educational standards is serious. It has been estimated that each year about 6,500 physically fit boys reach 17i, who have junior matriculation and who do not go on to senior matriculation or the universities. To fill up our ranks with boys of this standard would take virtually all the boys having these qualifications-even then, we would not have enough. As it has turned out, we have been getting a very fair proportion. But steps are now being taken to reduce or adjust the educational standards so as to broaden the field; at the same time we shall increase facilities for in-service general education so as to achieve by one means or the other the standards that are necessary.
As to the flow of recruits, this year up to the 15th March, we have obtained a total of 1,625 recruits, of which approximately half are for the army alone. The flow into the army is at the rate required to keep the recruit schools full and to complete the authorized establishment by the time planned. The flow into the navy and air force is less than we require.
Parents and young men should realize that joining our navy, army and air force gives an opportunity for (1) service to Canada; (2) a career with good rates of pay and conditions of service; (3) continuing education and developing trade and other skills; and (4) an excellent pension at a relatively early age.
I am convinced that young men will come forward to fill up the ranks of the active forces.
We also want all the men we can get for the reserve navy and army and the auxiliary air force. The reserve forces are a major part of Canada's defence forces. In the event of

an emergency the reserves would again constitute the framework for the organization of larger active forces. Reserve force training is service of real national importance which should appeal to all young Canadians who are physically fit and are willing to offer their services for part-time training.
Attention should also be called to the remarkable opportunities for training as officers offered in the Canadian service colleges at Royal Roads and R.M.C., Kingston. This year there will be a number of vacancies for boys having senior matriculation or its equivalent. Application should be made by the twenty-second of May. Pay received for summer training should cover the whole cost of education for the second and subsequent years. By this means and through the university officers training plans, it is believed that we will have a large force of highly qualified officers with standards never excelled in this or any other country.
There is no necessity of pointing out today that either from the short or the long term point of view, active and reserve forces of the character which I have described are needed so that we can be ready to meet any emergency and maintain the existence of our country and the freedom of our people, so that we shall continue to say what kind of life we want to lead.
I hope that this effort to fill up our ranks will have the support of all parties, of all veterans of the two wars, and of the country as a whole.


Mr. COCKERAM :: The Minister of National Defence in his statement said that a time limit had been planned for the recruiting campaign. When does that time limit expire?


Brooke Claxton: I do not know what the hon. member has in mind because I did not make such a statement. With respect to recruitment for the army, the estimates are planned on the basis that it will be brought up to strength by March 31, 1949. I have not the dates for the navy and air force, but they are approximately the same.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 174, to incorporate The Canadian Association of Optometrists.-Mr. Winters.
Bill No. 175. for the relief of Winifred Audrey Meyer Holton.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 176, for the relief of Chester Adam Hart.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 177, for the relief of Marie Marguerite Cecile Gagnon Lescadres.-Mr May-bank.

House of Commons
Bill No. 178, for the relief of Samuel Reinhardt Lewis.

Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 179, for the relief of Ersilia Pace Imonti.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 180, for the relief of Helen Rose Noel Steele.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 181, for the relief of Edith Saltz-man Rashkovan.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 182, for the relief of Ida Malfara Romanelli.-Mr. Maybank.

Mr. SPEAKER:: I should like to make a statement to the house. Before the Easter adjournment it is considered desirable to reassure the staff of the house that revisions in salary rates for those classes which have not already been revised are under consideration now by the commissioners of internal economy, and it is expected that a resolution will be introduced within a few days after the Easter adjournment implementing the decision now under consideration.
The revisions so made will be dated back to October 1 in the same way as those already made by the civil service commission.



ARRANGEMENT WITH RESPECT TO EASTER ADJOURNMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the order, "Government notices of motion":
That when this house adjourns on Wednesday, March 24th instant, it stand adjourned until Tuesday the 30th instant.
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, may I say just a word on this motion. I think the motion had better be held until we see what progress is made this afternoon. If by any chance the house should not have concluded its discussion at six o'clock I shall move before that time that the house be not adjourned at six. That may or may not receive the approval of the house, but I imagine most hon. members are anxious to conclude today the measures we have been discussing.
Hon. members will understand that where assent to bills is required, arrangements have to be made with the other chamber in advance, also with the deputy of the governor general for his presence in the other chamber at a definite time. For that reason, if we are to conclude today, some little time will be required after we have finished our proceedings, to complete the final arrangements for assent to bills in the other chamber. If we do not conclude today, the house will sit tomorrow in the regular way.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: May I say a word to the Prime Minister?- and I would not raise this question at the moment if it were not likely that this will be the last sitting before the Easter recess. In view of the reported vital change in Bill 135 by a committee of the other place, what does the government propose to do to ensure that we get this measure through before we adjourn for Easter? This is a most important matter to western Canada.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I am sure that no one can say at the moment what is the position in the other house of the particular measure to which my hon. friend has referred. After we know what progress has been made there, I can perhaps give a definite reply.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: We shall not adjourn until we do know.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: We want to get that measure through.


Mr. KNOWLES:: It might be a good time for senate reform.


Mr. BRACKEN:: I suggest that if the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) reconsidered his proposal and divided the bill, we might get one part through both houses.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We will get it all through.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	Have the following officials of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers entered Canada in the past three months: Reid Robinson, Harvey Wildman, Rudy Hansen, Henry Horowitz, George Knott?
2.	If so, under what conditions did they enter ?
3.	How long are permits granted to persons of non-Canadian citizenship for temporary work?
4.	What are the conditions imposed for entry of persons under this category?


Mr. MacKINNON:: 1.	and 2. Reid Robinson entered Canada on the 24th day of January. 1948, and departed on the 2nd day of February, 1948, as accredited representative of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers. He entered again on March 4, 1948. Recently he has been taken into custody for examination by a board of inquiry under the provisions of the Immigration Act.
Harlow (Harvey) Wildman entered Canada on the 3rd day of June, 1947, as accredited
Questions

representative of the International Union of Mine. Mill and Smelter Workers. Within the last few days Mr. Wildman has informed the department that his union has assigned him to other work in the United States.
Rudv Hansen entered Canada on July 19, 1947, as accredited representative of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers.
Henry Horowitz entered Canada November 26. 1947. as a newspaper representative destined to R. Carlin, Kirkland Lake, Ontario.
George Knott entered Canada November 26. 1947, as accredited representative of the International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers, destined to R. Carlin, Kirkland Lake, Ont. He has since applied for a permanent landing. This application will be considered by a board of inquiry.
3.	There is no fixed period. Such persons are admitted for the temporary exercise of their respective callings.
4.	They are admissible if they do not come within the prohibited classes provided by the Immigration Act. No special conditions are imposed.


HOUSING-RENTAL APPEALS
Mr. WHITE (Middlesex East):: L How many rental appeals in respect of homes, housing and domestic establishments have been heard and adjudicated upon, by provinces, in each year and to date since the inception of rent control?
2.	How many were heard before county and district court judges?
3.	How many, by provinces, have been determined in favour of (a) the landlord; (b) the
tenant ?
4.	In how many such appeals, by provinces, was there an application for (a) increase of rental: (b) decrease of rental?
5.	Of such appeals mentioned in question 3, by provinces, were (a) increases of rental granted; (b) decreases of rental granted?


Mr. ABBOTT:: One of my parliamentary assistants spoke to the hon. member and he has agreed to drop this question.


James Horace King: Dropped.


Harry Oliver White: I am not going to drop it; I revised it and it is back on the order paper.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Dropped for rewording.
Question dropped.


GRANBY, QUE., MUNITIONS PLANT
Mr. BOIVIN:: 1.	What was the total cost of the plant built and equipped by the government of Canada about 1940, at Granby, province of Quebec, and used during the war for the manufacture of munitions?
2.	For what amount was it sold?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	The total cost of the plant fully equipped, including machinery, installation costs, ground improvements, fencing, etc., amounted to $387,274.41.
2.	This question is answered in two parts-
(a)	and (b), covering the land, buildings and equipment only:-
(a)	By order in council P.C. 7363, December 8, 1945, the land and shells of buildings (excluding all heating equipment, outside piping, pipe lines, piles and equipment, transformers, electrical panel boxes and coal) sold to the city of Granby for $12,500.
At time of sale the city of Granby was using such buildings as were suitable for the purpose of emergency shelter and yard.
(b)	Equipment:	Regarding the sale of
equipment, we are unable to supply dollar values as all movables from the lots and buildings were transferred to warehouses from which locations such equipment would be sold.


FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROL-CANADIANS TAKING UP RESIDENCE IN U.S.
Mr. HAZEN:: 1.	How many persons left Canada in 1947, and went to the United States, with the intention of permanently residing there?
2.	What was the total amount of Canadian currency and securities these people were permitted to take with them, or convert into United States currency?
3.	How many of these people were permitted
to convert into United States funds (a) over $50,000 Canadian currency; (b) $40,000 to $50,000 Canadian currency; (c) $30,000 to $40,000 Canadian currency; (d)	$20,000	to $30,000Canadian currency; (e)	$10,000	to $20,000
Canadian currency; (f) $5,000 to $10,000 Canadian currency?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Under the Foreign Exchange Control Act and regulations, a resident of Canada desiring to leave Canada permanently and transfer his assets from Canada is required to apply to the foreign exchange control board for change of status from a "resident" to a "non-resident" for foreign exchange control purposes. Information is not available as to persons applying for change of status to take up permanent residence in the United States as distinct from other United States dollar area countries although the large majority of applications are by persons desiring to take up permanent residence in the United States.
No permit from the board was required by a resident leaving Canada with not more than $150 (including not more than $100 in U.S. funds) up until May 1947. and $25 (including not more than $10 in U.S. funds) since that time. The information available does not

include residents who may have left Canada for permanent residence in the United States or elsewhere who took with them not more than these amounts during the periods indicated but did not make application for change of status.
In addition, a family group is normally dealt with under one application for change of status and no record has been kept of the number of individuals covered by such applications.
Subject to the foregoing, the replies to the questions are as follows:
1.	Number of applications approved for change of status for persons leaving Canada to take up permanent residence in United States dollar area countries-19,315.
2.	The total amount of Canadian dollars and securities declared in the applications referred' to in the answer to question No. 1 and authorized to be transferred from Canada was $46,305,464. Information is not available as to the amount of Canadian dollars and securities which were actually transferred from Canada.
United States dollars are not provided out of Canada's reserves at the official rate of exchange for transfers of capital from Canada by persons leaving Canada to take up permanent residence elsewhere, except for a small amount per applicant to meet travelling and initial expenses. The amount of United States dollars made available by the board for this latter purpose was $6,565,689. The balance was authorized for transfer from Canada only in the form of Canadian domestic securities or in Canadian dollars which the owner, upon becoming a non-resident, could convert into United States dollars in the unofficial market in the United States.
3. No applicant for change of status was permitted to convert $5,000 or more into United States funds in Canada at the official rate of exchange.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE-RED DEER OFFICE
Mr. SHAW:: 1.	During 1947 how many unemployed persons registered at the national employment service office, Red Deer, Alberta?
2.	How many applications for benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act were received by the Red Deer office during 1947?
3.	Of the applicants, how many were granted unemployment insurance benefits?
4.	Of those refused such benefits, how many appealed the decision?
5.	Of these appeals, how many decisions were reversed by the court of referees?
6.	In how many eases were the decisions of the court of referees appealed?
7.	Did the umpire in any instance reverse the decision of the court of referees?
Questions


Mr. COTE (Verdun):: 1.	1.857.
2.	572 initial claims; 53 renewal claims.
3.	515.
4.	25.
5.	Nil.
6.	(a) By insurance officer-nil; (b) By claimant-one.
7.	No.
Note: In these figures it is possible quite a number are "repeaters", but we have no way of determining how many.


NATIONAL REVENUE-CUSTOMS AND EXCISE OFFICE, LONDON, ONT.
Mr. MANROSS:: 1.	What was total number of employees in Department of Customs and Excise in London in each year 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946 and
1947?
2.	What was total payroll in each of these years?
3.	What was total amount of customs and excise taxes collected at London in these years?
4.	What is total number of employees now?


Mr. WINTERS:: 1.
Fiscal year 1941-42 .
1912-43 .,
1943-	44 .,
1944-	45 ..
1915-46 .,
1946-47 ..
2.
Fiscal year	Total Payroll
1941-42 			 $65,542.00
1942-43 			 67,353.21
1943-44 			 63,658.05
1944-45 			 64,290.29
1945-46 			 68,827.72
1946-47 			 76,562.46
3.	
Fiscal year	Total Revenue
1941-42 			 $11.376,569.78
1942-43 			 14,783,111.03
1943-44 			 13,800,861.31
1944-45 			 13,134,488.96
1945-46 			 13,545,189.17
1946-47 			 14,942,829.95
4. As of March 17, 1948-36.


MOTOR VEHICLES-FEDERAL TAX
Mr. CRUICKSHANK:: 1.	What was the cost of a standard Chevrolet sedan in Vancouver on March 13, 1940, and what was the total federal tax collected as of that date?
Number
of
Employees
.... 33
.... 32
.... 28
.... 30
.... 32
.... 35
Questions

2.	What was the cost of a standard Chevrolet sedan in Vancouver on March 13, 1948, and what was the total federal tax collected as of that date, 1948?


Mr. WINTERS:: 1.	Tlio department has no information as to the cost of the car in question; on March 13, 1940, the federal tax on automobiles was: fifty dollars-five per cent.
Excise tax-Automobiles adapted or adaptable to passenger use: (a) valued at not more than six hundred and fifty dollars-free; (b) valued at more than six hundred and fifty dollars, on the amount in excess of six hundred and fifty dollars-five per cent.
Provided that the tax collected under paragraph (b) above shall in no case exceed two hundred and fifty dollars per automobile.
Sales tax-Eight per cent.
Both the foregoing taxes apply on the Canadian manufacturer's sale price, or on the duty paid value if imported.
2.	The department has no information as to the cost of the car in question; on March 13, 1948, the federal tax on automobiles was:
Excise tax-(a) Automobiles adapted or adaptable for passenger use, with seating capacity for not more than ten persons each, valued at twelve hundred dollars or less- twenty-five per cent.
Over twelve hundred dollars but not more than two thousand dollars-twenty-five per cent on twelve hundred dollars plus fifty per cent on the amount in excess of twelve hundred dollars;
Over two thousand dollars-twenty-five per cent on twelve hundred dollars plus fifty per cent on eight hundred dollars plus seventy-five per cent on the amount in excess of two thousand dollars.
Sales tax-Eight per cent.
Both the foregoing taxes apply on the Canadian manufacturer's sale price, or on the duty paid value if imported.
sick mariners' dues


Mr. LESAGE:: 1.	What Canadian seamen and fishermen, if any, are covered by part V of the Canada Shipping Act, administered by the Department of National Health and Welfare?
2.	Do the sick mariners' dues paid by coasting, government, and fishing vessels of Canadian registry meet the cost of treatment of their crews? If not, what is the deficit?
3.	Do sick mariners' dues paid by foreign-going vessels meet the cost of treatment of their crews ?


Mr. MARTIN:: 
FILM BOARD-EMPLOYEES PAID IN U.S. FUNDS
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	How many employees of the national film board were paid in United States funds during the year 1947?
2.	How many employees were paid in United States funds during January, 1948?
3.	How many of these employees are Canadian citizens?
4.	Are any of these employees paid in United States funds, stationed in Canada?


Mr. WINTERS:: 1. 11.
2. 6.
3.	1947, 3; 1948, nil.
4.	No.


CANADIAN ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM SOCIETY
Mr. BENTLEY:: 1.	Is the government making a grant of money to the newly formed Canadian arthritis and rheumatism society?
2.	If so, how much?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	No.
The Minister of National Health and Welfare has promised whole-hearted support and co-operation to this society when, in the future, it has demonstrated its ability to act as the national co-ordinating agency, for which purpose it was set up.
Since the society is still in the early organizational stage it can readily be appreciated

Questions
that budgetary and other financial plans are still to be formulated and put forward by
the society.
2.	See answer to No. 1 above.


EMPLOYMENT OF DR. NOBLE
Mr. BENTLEY:: 1.	Is Dr. Noble, a veterinary surgeon, em ployed by the dominion government in the province of Saskatchewan?
2.	If so, since when; at what salary, and at what allowance for expenses?


Mr. McCUBBIN:: 1.	Yes.
2.	March 17, 1941.
Dr. Noble is employed by the Department of Agriculture in a dual capacity on a part time basis as required. When employed as a
stallion inspector he is paid $10 per day, plus living and travelling expenses. When engaged as a veterinary inspector he is paid $15 per day, paying his own living and travelling expenses.


EXPORTS AND IMPORTS-VARIOUS COUNTRIES
Mr. TIMMINS:: What value of commodities did Canada export to and import from each of the following countries in the respective years 1946 and 1947: Argentina. Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Burma, Ceylon, Chile, China, Colombia, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, French Union, Great Britain and Ireland, India, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, South Africa, Southern Rhodesia, Sweden, Syro-Lebanese customs union?


Mr. McILRAITH:: Country
Argentina	
Australia	
Belgium	
Brazil	
Burma	
Ceylon	
Chile	
China	
Colombia	
Cuba	
Czechoslovakia	
France	
French Possessions	
Great Britain and Ireland
India	
Luxembourg	
Netherlands	
New Zealand	
Norway	
Pakistan	
South Africa	
Southern Rhodesia	
Sweden	
Syria	
Exports	Imports
1946	1947	1946	1947$	$	$	$14,038,528	31,697,126	14,372,213	17.961,09938,193,663	60.294,201	19,753,939	14,222,47263,626,096	52,748.555	4,428,864	10,120,44924,601,962	31,659,949	14,018,295	13,887,719442,440	822,518	1,000	2,8572,139,770	4,078,598	3,745,337	11,652,5803,564,804	4,391,797	424,265	338,79142,915,143	34,984,364	2,321,239	2,303,7818,930,005	9,950,044	9,708,416	9,196,7415,269,891	7,501,550	13,227,720	23.751,4509,870,930	13,779,027	964,115	3,644,84374,380.394	81,058.035	4.609,849	8.755,39411.841,713	9,026,030	509,496	324,049597.506,175	751,198,395	201,433,220	189.369.85549,045,795	42,946,957	27,877,376	42,249,805Included in	Belgium.	33,883,373	55,939,827	2.496,988	3,529,50816,110.123	37,385.675	11,955,536	10,831,36919,266,569	20,319,773	835,595	4,998,641Included in	India.	68,632,865	67,138,413	7.891,625	4.256,3463,284,237	7,369,278	93,044	180,9879,132.653	17,461.181	3,681.277	3,184,486227,507	2,546,225	70.566	29,750
Note: Imports from Great Britain and Ireland include Canadian goods returned, mainly military equipment, valued at $60,092,099 in 1946 and $839,000 in 1947.


SALE OF GOLD ON FREE MARKET
Mr. CAOUETTE:: What steps, if any, have been taken by the government to allow the gold mining companies of Canada to sell their gold on the free markets?


Douglas Charles Abbott: None. The government's
policy in this connection was stated1 in the House of Commons on July 17, 1947.
VAL d'0R, QUE., POST OFFICE BUILDING


Mr. CAOUETTE:: 1.	Have any steps been taken for the construction of a post office building in Val d'Or?
2.	If so, when will the work start?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: 1 and 2. Steps are being taken towards the acquisition of a site for proposed public building at Val d'Or, for
Questions

which an item is included in the main estimates of this department 1948-49. When funds are provided for the construction of a building, immediate steps will be taken towards the preparation of plans and specifications.


BANK OF CANADA-L. RASMINSKY
Mr. CAOUETTE:: 1.	Is Mr. L. Rasminsky, executive assistant to the Governor of the Bank of Canada, a Canadian by birth?
2.	If not, -what is the country of his origin?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Answered by No. 1.


OLD AGE PENSIONS
Mr. REID:: What amounts are at present being paid old age pensioners in each province (a) total amount paid each recipient; (b) amount contributed by the dominion government; (c) additional amount or amounts paid by each provincial government?


Mr. MARTIN:: (a) The maximum amount which an old age pensioner or a blind pensioner may receive per month from pension and provincial supplemental allowance in each province is as
follows:
Prince Edward
Island ....	$30
Nova Scotia ...	35
New Brunswick.	30
Quebec	 30
Ontario	 40
Manitoba	 30
Saskatchewan .	30	($35	from	Apr.	1,	1948)Alberta	
35	($37	from	Apr.	1,	1948)
British Columbia 40
(b)	The maximum contribution by the dominion to the amount paid a pensioner in any province is $22.50 (75 per cent of $30) per month.
(c)	Supplemental monthly allowances paid by the provinces are as follows.
Nova Scotia-up to $5.
Ontario-up to $10.
Saskatchewan-from Apr. 1, 1948-up to $5.
Alberta-$5 (from Apr. 1, 1948-$7).
British Columbia-$10.


FILM BOARD-EMPLOYEES NOT CANADIAN CITIZENS
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	Are all employees of -the national film board Canadian citizens?
2.	If not, how many are (a) citizens of Canada; (b) not citizens of Canada?
3.	What are the names of all employees of the national film board who are not citizens of Canada, and where are these people employed?


Mr. WINTERS:: 1.	No.
2.	(a) 567; (b) 26.
3.	Name	Location
Apuzzo, A. (U.S. citizen), U.S.
Bobet; J. (French citizen), Canada.
Carter, M. (U.S. citizen), U.S.
Cunliffe, B. (British subject), Canada. Donohue, V. (British subject), Australia. Dowling, M. (British subject), Australia. Gilg, T. (Swiss subject), Canada.
Glunz, R. (U.S. citizen), Canada.
Golightly, J. (British subject), England. Hacche, A. (British subject), Canada.
Hager, M. (U.S. citizen), U.S.
Jenner, H. (British subject), England.
Leigh, M. (British subject), England. Murray, R. (U.S. citizen), U.S.
Randall, H. (U.S. citizen), Canada.
Rose, R. (U.S. citizen), Canada.
Schachtel, M. (British subject), Canada. Schmidt, A. (U.S. citizen), U.S.
Slater, C. (British subject), England.
Swift, M. (British subject), England.
Troke, H. (British subject), Canada.
Waite, A. (British subject), Canada. Webster, P. (British subject), Canada. Wilson, A. (British subject), Canada. Mitchell, P. (British subject), U.S.
Nieto, J. (Mexican subject), Mexico.


CANADIAN ARMY OFFICERS OF RANK OF MAJOR-GENERAL AND ABOVE
Mr. FULTON:: 1.	How many officers of the rank of major-general and above are presently serving in the Canadian army (Active) ?
2.	What was the maximum number of officers of the rank of major-general and above serving at,any one time with the Canadian Active Service Force during the war 1939-1945?
3.	During the period when this maximum number of officers of the rank of major-general and above was serving, what was the largest number of troops (all ranks) on active service?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Nine.
2.	Forty-one.
3.	489,683.


FARM IMPROVEMENT LOANS-BOOKLET &quot;CANADIAN NEWSPAPER REPORTS&quot;
Mr. FRASER:: 1.	What was the total cost to the government for the printing of the booklet "Canadian Newspaper Reports" dated February 25, 1948?
2.	How many of these booklets were printed for administrator of the Farm Improvement Loans Act?


Mr. ABBOTT:: 1.	$409.
2.	5,000.

Questions


NAVAL SERVICE OFFICERS OF RANK OF REAR ADMIRAL AND ABOVE
Mr. FULTON:: 1.	How many officers of the rank of rear admiral and above are presently serving in the Royal Canadian Navy (Active) ?
2.	Whait was the maximum number of officers of the rank of rear admiral and above serving at any one time with the Royal Canadian Navy during the war 1939-1945?
3.	During the period when this maximum number of officers of the rank of rear admiral and above was serving, what was the largest number of naval personnel (all ranks) on active service?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Four.
2.	Six.
3 . 92.880.


AIR FORCE OFFICERS OF RANK OF AIR VICE-MARSHAL AND ABOVE
Mr. FULTON:: 1.	How many officers of the rank of air vicemarshal and above are presently serving in the Royal Canadian Air Force (Active) ?
2.	What was the maximum number of officers of the rank of air vice-marshal and above serving at any one time with the Royal Canadian Air Force during the war 1939-45?
3.	During the period when this maximum number of officers of the rank of air vicemarshal and above was serving, what was the largest number of personnel (all ranks) on active service?


Mr. LAPOINTE:: 1.	Nine.
2.	Twenty-five.
3.	212,378.


FEDERAL GRANTS TO MUNICIPALITIES FOR MUNICIPAL SERVICES
Mr. CHURCH:: 1.	What action is the government taking towards granting some form of aid to municipalities (besides Ottawa) for similar municipal services rendered free to federal authority by Canada's municipalities?
2.	What action has been taken since the debate last session on this matter, if any?


Douglas Charles Abbott: 1 and 2. This matter is receiving the active consideration of the government and an announcement will be made in due course.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE-ROUYN, QUE., OFFICE
Mr. CAOUETTE:: 1.	Who is in charge of the unemployment insurance office in Rouyn, Quebec?
2.	What salary does he receive yearly?


Mr. COTE (Verdun):: 1.	Mr. G. J. Primeau.
2.	83,000.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. IIARKNESS:: 1.	How many (a) permanent; (b) temporary appointments to the civil service have been made for the calendar years 1945, 1946, 1947?
2.	How many of these were based on the results of a competitive civil service examination?
3.	In how many of the above cases was the examination (a) WT.itten; (b) oral; (e) written and oral?
4.	In the case of the appointments without civil service examinations, what is the basis and method by which they were m ade ?
5.	How many of the persons appointed as in (a) possess the veterans' preference?
6.	In the case of the appointments without civil service commission examination, how many of the appointees possess the veterans' preference?


Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West):: Return
tabled1.


IMPORTS OF ARGENTINE CORNED BEEF
Mr. HARKNESS:: 1.	How much Argentine corned beef was imported into Canada in the years 1946 and 1947: (a) in 14-oz. tins; (b) in total?
2.	Was this Argentine meat paid for in American dollars? If not, how was it paid?
3.	What was the price per 14-oz. tin paid for this beef by the importer?
4.	What is the retail price at which the 14-oz. tins are being sold in Calgary and Edmonton?


SELECTIVE SERVICE AND EMPLOYMENT OFFICE- HEADQUARTERS IN LONDON, ONT.
Mr. MANROSS:: 1.	What rent did the national selective service and national employment office pay for their headquarters in London in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
2.	How many employees did they have in
1944,	1945, 1946 and 1947?
3.	What was their total payroll in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
4.	What does their total staff number now?


Colin William George Gibson: Return tabled.



WARTIME PRICES AND TRADE BOARD-LONDON. ONT.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. MANROSS;
1.	When did wartime prices and trade board move into dominion public building at London. Ontario?
2.	What rents have been paid annually since?
3.	What was total number of employees in each year, 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
4.	What was total payroll in each year, 1944.
1945,	1946 and 1947?
5.	What is total number of employees now?
Colin William George Gibson: Return tabled.
Orders for Returns



NATIONAL REVENUE-INCOME TAX DIVISION, LONDON, ONT.

Mr. MANROSS:: 1.	When did the income tax division move into the Victory building in London, Ontario?
2.	What rents have been paid annually since?
3.	What was the total number of employees in London in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
4.	What was total payroll in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
5.	What is total number of employees now? Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West): Return
tabled.



VETERANS AFFAIRS-GARVEY BUILDING, LONDON, ONT.

Mr. MANROSS:: 1.	What did the government pay for the Garvey building, King street, London, now occupied by Department of Veterans Affairs?
2.	What was (a) the date of purchase; (b) total cost of alterations; (c) cost of office and other equipment?
3.	How many employees were in this building in 1944; 1945, 1946 and 1947?
4.	What was their total payroll in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
5.	What is total number of employees now?



VETERANS AFFAIRS-ROBINSON LITTLE BUILDING, LONDON, ONT.

Mr. MANROSS:: 1.	What rent did the Department of Veterans Affairs pay for the Robinson Little building on Richmond street, London, in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
2.	How many employees did they have in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
3.	What was their total payroll in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
4.	What were their other expenses in 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
5.	What does their total staff number now? Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West): Return
tabled.



OLD CUSTOMS HOUSE BUILDING, LONDON, ONT.

Mr. MANROSS:: 1.	What government department is now using the old customs house in London, at the corner of Queens avenue and Richmond street?
2.	What annual rent do they pay for it?
3.	How many employees were there in the building in each year, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946 and 1947?
4.	What was the total payroll in each of these years?
5.	How many employees are there now?
6.	When does the government expect to he through with this building?
7.	Is it for sale?



FEDERAL EXPENDITURES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES

Mr. PROBE:: Since the appointment of royal commission on industrial training and technical education, 1910, what yearly expenditures have been made from federal money, by provinces, for (1) agricultural education; (2) industrial education; (3) academic education (elementary or secondary school); (4) university grants or scholarships; (5) veteran education; (6) training of unemployed or civilian handicapped; (7) national research council; (8) foreign scholarships to Canadian students; (9) vocational Bchool and/or university equipment or buildings; (10) visual education; (11) libraries; (12) physical education; (13) any other educational purposes (specify) ?



QUAKER ROAD HOUSING ENTERPRISE, WELLAND COUNTY

Mr. LOCKHART:: 1.	In connection with the houses made available to veterans in what is known as the Quaker Road enterprise, in Welland county, Ontario, what water supply is available to the veterans?
2.	What was the total cost of the present water system installed?
3.	Is the supply considered sufficient for the future?
4.	What water rates are paid by the veterans occupying these houses?



PAYMENTS FOR LEGAL SERVICES

Mr. CAOUETTE:: 1.	What amounts, if any, were received from the different departments or offices of the federal government by the following lawyers since January, 1940, to date: Right Hon. Louis S. St. Laurent, Quebec, Quebec; Henri Drouin, Amos, Abitibi, Quebec; Jean Louis Baillargeon, Val d'Or, Quebec; Lucien Cliche, Val d'Or, Quebec; Paul Cuddihy, Rouyn, Quebec; Leo Bureau, Rouyn, Quebec; Leopold Larouche, Rouyn, Quebec; Camille Beaubien, Rouyn, Quebec; Arthur Lefebvre, Rouyn, Quebec; Gerard Cournoyer, Sorel, Quebec?
2.	For what services were they paid?



IMMIGRATION AGREEMENTS-EMPLOYMENT IN MINES

Mr. CAOUETTE:: 1.	Is the government a party to an agreement with immigrants now entering Canada for employment in this country?
2.	If so, what are the terms of such agreement ?
3.	For what period are they' guaranteed work by the government?
4.	Does the government reimburse mining companies for a part of the salaries or wages paid to immigrants employed in the mines of northwestern Quebec? If so, what amount or in what proportion?

Inquiries of the Ministry
5.	Do the immigrants employed in the mines of northwestern Quebec pay the same rate of income tax as the Canadian miners? If not, for what reason?
6.	For what period are mining companies bound to keep immigrants in their employ?
7.	Are mining companies obliged to employ the said immigrants?



DOMINION CROWN CORPORATIONS

Mr. CAMPBELL:: 1.	What are the names of all dominion crown corporations, including those set up during the war ?
2.	What was the amount of capital expenditure advanced by the dominion government to each of the crown corporations?
3.	Do these same crown corporations pay or have they paid interest and depreciation to the dominion government?
4.	Do the crown companies have a board of directors, or if not, to whom are they responsible?



CIVIL SERVICE-EMPLOYEES IN SASKATCHEWAN

Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many federal civil service employees are there in the province of Saskatchewan?
2.	How many federal civil servants in the
province of Saskatchewan are receiving salaries (a) less than $1,000;	(b) $1,000-$1,200;	(c)$1,200-$1,400;	(d)	$1,400-$1,600;	(e)	$1,660-
$1,800; (f) $1,800-$2,000; (g) over $2,000?



MOTION FOR PAPERS


Mr. FULTON:: For a copy of any report or recommendation made by the chief engineer to the Minister of Public Works concerning the repair, alteration or moving of the wharf at Arrowhead, B.C.



TAXATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Peel):: I
should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. In view of the introduction yesterday in the Ontario legislature of a measure imposing a provincial amusement tax for hospital purposes, to become effective upon the implementation of this government's commitment to vacate the amusement tax field, will the minister indicate when that will be done?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I can add nothing to what I said in a letter to the Premier of Nova Scotia, I think in April of 1947, when I stated that
in view of the special interest which the provinces have in amusement and pari-mutuel tax fields, among other fields, the dominion government would vacate these fields as soon as circumstances will permit.


Gordon Graydon: Would the minister indicate when he expects it will be possible to do so?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Obviously not. That would be indicating what might be in the budget.


Gordon Graydon: It is going to be in the budget?



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):: I should like to ask the Minister of Labour if he has anything to add to the statement he made in the house on March 15 in regard to the seamen's strike. Can the minister say what is the attitude of the shipowners to the union's proposals made to him for arbitration?


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: In reply to the hon. member for Vancouver East, and also in reply to an inquiry from the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor), I might say that this dispute is a long standing one. I have had a commissioner, Mr. Justice McNiven of Regina, on this matter for three months. He was able to make arrangements for an agreement between the shipowners and the Canadian seamen's union, but it was not possible to come to an agreement with the executive officers, engineers and wireless operators. The result was that a strike ensued of the executive officers, engineers and wireless operators. Yesterday my deputy received from the men's organization the following telegram, copy of which had been sent to the shipping federation of Canada and the shipowners' association (deepsea) of British Columbia:
Following telegram addressed to Mr. Mae-Namara by board of management Canadian merchant guild Vancouver dated March 23 is submitted herewith for your consideration: "Foreign-going deck officers of the Canadian merchant service guild agreeable to signing articles and immediate sailing of ships on basis of immediate implementation of full McNiven report on the understanding that the points at difference between both the owners and the guild namely, hourly overtime and pro rata leave be settled through a three-man arbitration board whose decision shall be final and binding. Further, that no person or articles shall be penalized under the provisions of the Canada Ship-
Inquiries oj the Ministry

ping Act nor shall any member of the guild be discriminated against by the shipowners. Please advise if this proposal acceptable to shipowners."
The immediate situation is that I am awaiting a reply to that questionnaire. Last week I met a group of shipowners from Montreal but no conclusive arrangements were made to terminate the dispute. I can go no further than that at the moment.



UNITED NATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. SOLON E. LOW (Peace River): Mr. Speaker, I desire to direct a question to the minister of external affairs, of which perhaps the Prime Minister or the parliamentary assistant might take note with a view to giving an answer before we adjourn today.
I refer to dispatches from New York indicating that the United1 States delegation to the united nations is asking for a special session of the assembly to consider a trusteeship proposal for settlement of the Palestine problem. My question has two parts. First, will Canada's representative on the security council support the request for such a special session of the general assembly? Second, is General McNaughton's reported statement today to be interpreted to mean that Canada does not favour the trusteeship proposal as an alternative to partition?
William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I might answer that question. I do not think the house should be given the information the hon. member has asked for, in advance of receipt officially by the government of statements that may be made at New York by our representatives. I do not think we should undertake to say what our representatives will say there.



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Arthur Leroy Smith: Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask a question. I do not know whether it should be addressed to the Minister of National Defence, the Minister of Veterans Affairs or the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply. I received this telegram only a moment ago. It is marked 2.20 p.m. It is short; perhaps I might read it:
Newspaper reports indicate that 135 houses at Currie barracks for Department of National Defence have been let to Bird Construction without calling for bids. We strongly protest

this on the grounds that our own contractors and subcontractors should have a chance to figure on this job.
Would the minister state what the situation is so that I may be in a position to reply to the telegram?



FLOOD CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On ithe orders of the day:
Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Ottawa East (Mr. Richard) put the following question:
In view of the fact that the government now owns the riverfront from Rideau falls to Hog's Back will the minister state (1) what assistance has been offered in the past to the adjoining municipalities to prevent floods;

The answer to that is none, in cases where the federal government has no control, jurisdiction nor responsibility. His second question was:
(2) whether his officers have studied the responsibilities of the dominion government to assist in the prevention of floods on the Rideau river, and its liabilities therein, especially in the ease of an emergency?
The answer is that the Rideau river channel from Rideau falls to Hog's Back is not navigable and is therefore under the control of the province and not the dominion. It is not considered that the dominion has any responsibility or liability, as the problem in its two phases, that is, in emergency or in final solution, is one of municipal control. It is one for the province and municipality to attend to.


Mr. RICHARD (Ottawa East):: If I may ask a supplementary question, is the minister taking into consideration the fact that the government not only owns the riverfront but thousands of dollars worth of valuable residential property which it might protect if the provincial government does not act?


Alphonse Fournier: I consulted my officials on that problem and I was told that if the properties all belong to the federal government and the damages were suffered by the federal government and not by private owners, we should attend to the properties belonging to the federal government.


Arthur Leroy Smith: If the minister will permit a supplementary question, when he says this river is not navigable does he mean that you cannot get a boat up the river, or is he using the word in its legal sense? Practically all streams are navigable. Does the minister mean that legally this river is not navigable?

Excise Ta.x Act Amendment


Alphonse Fournier: I understand there are rapids on the river and that it is not navigable. I do not want to go into the legal question of whether it is a navigable stream. Judgments in the past have established quite definitely the meaning of navigable rivers.



INQUIRY AS TO PARTICIPATION PAYMENTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. McCULLOUGH (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker. I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. As this is probably the last day before the Easter recess, would he state the amount of the wheat participation payments and when the payments will be made?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The leader of my hon. fi iend s party mentioned an amendment to the wheat board act in another place. I said that I would make a statement after the wheat board bill had passed. I am afraid I cannot do so at this time.



EXCISE TAX ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of Bill No. 172. to amend the Excise Tax Act.
Mr. J. M. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario). Mr. Speaker, I know there are some people in this house who believe that this bill has been quite adequately discussed in committee, and I do not propose to take very much time. I had that opinion when I came into the chamber; and since the threat of the Prime Minister, though delivered as the Minister of Labour would say "in a kindly way," I feel still more strongly that I should be brief, and I shall be brief. Nevertheless I feel that it is desirable on the second reading of this bill to state why we in this party regard it as a bill which we should oppose, as we have opposed it, to the end.
W e regard it as ill-conceived, arbitrary, illegal and destructive.
In one respect, Mr. Speaker, I think this bill might be described as almost unique. Often on previous occasions when we have opposed government bills I have felt that I was able, in some measure at any rate, to understand the reasons which moved the government to the passing of the bill, but I confess that here I am in a complete fog. I cannot understand what moves the government to pass this bill. There is an old saying that the heart has its reasons which reason cannot tell, and I can only assume that the government also have reasons which reason cannot tell, and I propose to leave it at
that; but I should like to ask the house to recall very briefly the background which has led us into what seems to me to be a sea of troubles.
The house will remember that this bill is designed to assist in meeting-very inadequately, I think-certain troubles which arose from a most unwise decision of the government in July, 1946, a decision to which they have adhered with what I suggest is unhappy obstinacy. The result of that, as you will recall, Mr. Speaker, was that in a year over a billion dollars of our gold and United States exchange cataracted away. Were there no warnings given the government? Yes, there were warnings given constantly during the session of 1947 and again during the summer after the session had ended. But unfortunately inaction was persisted in constantly until in the middle of November an announcement was made over the air by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) imposing this tax. This imposition was illegal. In order to try to escape the illegality the minister has had to resort to hair-splitting which, I am sure, was very disagreeable to him. He has had to say that there was no tax, and there was only an indication that parliament would be asked to pass a tax, and that the people need not pay the tax. I am not going to labour the point, Mr. Speaker; I am just going to say it is playing with words-playing with words to say there was no tax when every customs official had been told to act under the notice which had been given; it is playing with words to say there is no tax when people had goods coming from the United States in customs warehouses and could not get them until they paid the tax. As a matter of fact the truth is that it was announced as a tax, intended as a tax, collected from the Canadian people as a tax, and if it was not a tax all I can say is that a great fraud was practised on the Canadian people.
I have just one other remark to make on this question of the lawlessness of this tax, and that is to recall to the memories of hon. gentlemen the fact that when the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. Merritt) asked the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent), an eminent lawyer, whether he considered the tax legal, the hon. member remained glued to his chair.
I have said that the tax, in spite of all the months of delay, was, so far as we could see, passed in a hasty and ill-considered manner. The reason I say that is that it was no sooner passed than it was found necessary to begin to make changes in it. The minister frankly told us the changes were made because they found
Excise Tax Act Amendment
[Stage Direction]
cases of distress. Well, Mr. Speaker, what I want to say to you is that they are going to find more cases of distress and they are going to have to make more changes. Incidentally I understand that in the bill the right is reserved to make still further changes; and while I am on this point I would make the suggestion that this measure will in the end prove to be a ridiculous measure because it will fail in what is intended and I believe the government will be under pressure to make more and more changes.
But I want to make a further point. Notwithstanding the fact that changes have been made to lessen distress-and I am not going into details-there is plenty of distress now. There is plenty of anger and disappointment. There are people whose businesses are being ruined, and they will very properly ask why it is that they were victimized in this way.
If I have given anything approximately fair as a description of the situation which we have at the present time-let me interject here to say what has already been said, that in Bill 3, however much one may object to certain features of it, there were effective powers retained; but in this bill I believe the whole thing is ill-conceived and will not be effective. I now come back to what I was about to say. If I have given anything approximately fair as a description of the confusion, the distress and the difficulty which are being caused by this bill, you will agree with me, Mr. Speaker, and the house will agree, that valid reasons are necessary, strong and overwhelming reasons that the bill is necessary; and I shall look now for a moment at the reasons.
The first reason given, the reason which I think we all thought was the overwhelming one when we got into the debate, was the saving of United States exchange. As to that I wish to make two observations. It is clear that not only was no figure in the minds of the administration when this tax was announced as to what might be saved in that way-there was an estimate with regard to Bill 3, but apparently no estimate here at all, according to the Minister of Finance. Second, though this bill has now been in effect for four months there are still no figures of the slightest value. In answer to the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) the minister said the other night-I paraphrase his words-that he had no figures now and doubted if he ever would have any figures which would show him exactly the effect of this bill. At my request he did produce certain figures which he was good enough to give us yesterday, but after examining these

my feeling is that the savings effected are trivial, and it will take a lifetime of the trickle savings of United States exchange which we would make in that way to begin to recover the billion dollars which cataracted away in the early months of 1947.
It is not surprising that a measure of this kind, conceived in iniquity, should have a very dishonourable life-and it certainly has had a dishonourable life so far. It was defeated in committee-
An hon. MEMBER:: Has it any parents?


Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):: And what happened? We then saw really a very shabby spectacle. It was defeated in committee, and I assumed that with the power of its brute majority the government could have found a way within the rules, when it came back to the house, to summon up its-


James Horace King: Order. Under the rules the hon. member has no right to refer to what has been settled by a vote of the house.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Prime Minister did it.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I thought in doing that, Mr. Speaker, I was following a distinguished precedent, but I bow to your ruling. I shall just say this-


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Prime Minister did it on February 10.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I shall just say that I regretted, as I think everyone in the house did, that that ruling which we had all heard and which had been made, I venture to say, with the approval of the government, was then overturned by the vote of the government.
I said, Mr. Speaker, that I would be brief, and I have finished. I just want to say that for these reasons and for other reasons which have been given in this house, we believe not only that this bill is a bad bill but that it does not make sense. I am not going to refer to the other reasons. The United States exchange reason was supposed to be the great one. I submit that it is trivial; that there is no evidence that it will have the slightest effect. All the evidence we have is that its effect will be trivial. The other reasons I shall not pause to enumerate, except to say that I think each of them was weaker than the last. They were obviously conjured up in order to support the weakness of the first one. I did not envy the Minister of Finance his task, but it seemed to me as soon as we tried to pin him down to one reason he flitted off to another. I think that was the only thing he could do because each was so weak that he tried to get strength

Excise Tax Act Amendment
from the others, but I think this strength was a very unhappy evidence of weakness and no strength at all.
I now wish to move in amendment, seconded by the hon. member for Calgary West:
That the word "now" be omitted and the words "this day six months" added at the end of the question.


Mr. F. E. JAENICKE (Kindersley):: Mr. Speaker, we in this group have carefully considered the provisions of this bill and its general effect, and after due consideration and deliberation we have come to the conclusion that we must oppose the second reading of the measure.
There are several reasons why we feel that this bill is not in the interests of the Canadian people, and these reasons may be summarized as follows:
First, the tax is not necessary for revenue purposes, and it is inflationary.
Second, the tax is an unnecessary burden on the vast majority of the Canadian people.
Third, there is so far no evidence that the tax will have the expected1 result of conserving United States currency by reducing the consumption of United States goods or of domestic goods with United States content, or by creating an over-all current account surplus.
And lastly, in voting for this bill we would condone a serious breach by the government of our constitution.
With respect to the first objection I have mentioned, namely, that the tax is not necessary for revenue purposes, I do not think that it needs further argument, since the minister himself has admitted1 as much. It has not been introduced for that purpose, and especially is it not required for that purpose because of the rumoured budget surplus which is said to be something around $700 million.
The second reason for opposing the bill is that it places an additional unnecessary burden upon the people, and I think that is particularly true of the young people who are just starting out in life. And when we talk about young people, we necessarily have in our minds our veterans who have come back to us and who wish to establish their homes and take their places in this great Canadian family of ours. Their re-establishment is hard enough as it is, with their rent so high, the cost of building materials and other necessities being what it is, and this only makes it harder for them by putting an additional burden upon their shoulders, a burden which I consider absolutely unnecessary.
In view of the representations we have heard from different members from all sides, even the government side, and the evidence to
which we listened while the bill was in resolution stage in committee, very few articles subject to the tax or duty can be considered luxuries. Most of them are necessities, and I think it is altogether wrong to levy an indirect tax upon such articles. It seems to me it is always the common man, the little man with little means, who bears the heavy burden of indirect taxation, and on general principles we in this group are against any increase in indirect taxation.
We must of course consider, and we in this group have considered that there are sections in the bill referring to the repeal of other taxes. We have fully considered this and have come to the conclusion that the new taxes to be imposed are much greater than the relief which will be afforded by the repeal of these taxes as provided in the last few sections of t'he bill.
On page 2131 of Hansard the minister gives figures and indicates that there has been collected close to $6,000,000 in the last three and a half months since the taxes have been imposed. On these figures we must expect that the new tax is imposed by the measure will be considerably greater than the relief which is afforded by the repeal of the tax on sugar and electric current, et cetera.
Our third reason for opposing the bill is that there is no evidence that the measure will have the expected result of conserving United States dollars. The minister explained that there were two principal reasons for the measures: first, reducing the consumption of United States made goods or articles with high United States content, and second, the creating of an over-all current account surplus.
I do not think that the bill will accomplish that purpose, and there was evidence in the committee to that effect. I think I have listened diligently to all the discussion that took place in committee, and to say the least, any evidence that was produced was most unsatisfactory, contradictory and unconvincing.
Take the case of automobiles. The minister quoted figures yesterday that did not seem to me to give any evidence of success in reducing the consumption of United States made goods or goods with high United States content. On the contrary, I rather take the word of the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Gibson), who spoke on Monday and who told us that he had been in Windsor and had talked to some manufacturers. He said at page 2483 of Hansard:
I was in Windsor the other day and they assured me that they had enough orders to keep them going for the next two years.
Excise Tax Act Amendment

That was certainly evidence, coming from that side of the house, that it was not successful as far as automobiles are concerned.


Douglas Charles Abbott: They might be export orders.


Frank Eric Jaenicke: That may be true, but even the figures the minister gave yesterday certainly showed that the reduction in the month of January or February was a very small reduction of a very few hundred thousand dollars as against seven or eight millions. On the other hand, the member for Parkdale (Mr. Timmins) quoted on Monday, at page 2491, from a memorandum of the radio manufacturers, showing a considerable drop, and the memorandum quoted ends with this paragraph:
Final figures for February sales and production are not yet available, but indications are that still further drops have occurred, and already there have been drastic cut-backs in factory production and employment.
I emphasize the word "production". To that argument the minister said, and again I quote, from page 2491:
I am delighted to hear that the tax is doing what it is intended to, but I do not believe that is possible.
I fail to see how the minister's delight is compatible with his idea of an over-all current account surplus.
On page 2131 of Hansard, on March 11, the minister said, in answer to a question I put to him:
The secondary purpose, if I may so describe it, is to reduce the consumption of articles in this country which for the time being we can do without. I think X explained yesterday afternoon that if we are to continue to export to the war devastated countries of Europe, we must reduce consumption in this country, whether the things we consume are of United States content or not. In other words we must create what I refer to, and what the economists refer to, as an over-all current account surplus.
From that argument I understand the minister to say, and I think I am right, that we must reduce consumption but not that we must reduce production. As a matter of fact he was emphatic, at another time in the committee, that we must reduce consumption and also increase production. I suggest that the figures he quoted with respect to radio sales and the memorandum of the radio manufacturers from which I quoted a moment ago and which appears in yesterday's Hansard, indicate that not only consumption but also production is going down, which I thought the minister was trying to avoid because of his endeavour to create this over-all current account surplus. Taking a bird's-eye view of all we have heard in committee and in explanation of the necessity for this bill, I

fail to see that the minister has established that this taxation measure will conserve American dollars.
Now I come to the fourth objection I quoted, that is the objection in connection with the legal and constitutional aspect. I had intended at the end of my speech to introduce an amendment but will have to refrain from doing so because of the amendment just introduced by the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Macdonnell). We were going to propose this amendment:
That in the opinion of the house the action of the government in arranging by ministerial announcement for the collection of taxes, of which parliament had not yet been advised and which parliament has not yet 'mposed, is contrary to established parliamentary practice and wdthout constitutional authority.
As I say, I shall not be able to introduce that amendment now, but I should like to say just a few words as to the legal and constitutional aspect.
I spoke on this matter a few weeks ago and shall not repeat what I said then, but I must emphasize again that the action of the government in collecting this tax since last November is entirely illegal and unconstitutional. I will say that the prerogatives of parliament were crucified. I know, of course, that if parliament passes this bill the tax will be made retroactive to November 18 and the crucified body will be resurrected; but, Mr. Speaker, the ugly nail holes will still be there.
The case I quoted in committee a few weeks ago, Bowles v. the Bank of England, only concerned itself with an ordinary budget resolution introduced while the house was in session. This is something altogether different. The minister does not contend that his announcement was a budget resolution. It strikes me that new taxes, yes and even increases in taxes already in existence, are always imposed by way of the budget, at least in British parliaments; and I have been unable to find a case where a measure has been brought in to raise taxes apart from the budget. The budget represents the general financial program of the government for the year. We have always had budgets. They are a development in our constitutional practice. Reading the historic background of the development of the committee of supply and the committee of ways and means, I find that the function of the committee of ways and means is to find the revenue required for the expenditures voted by the committee of supply. In fact in the early period of constitutional government taxes which were to be imposed as recommended by the committee were always earmarked for certain expenditures. Then we had the gradual development of the genera!

Excise Tax Act Amendment
budget and the elimination of the special appropriation; but the fundamental principle, the inherent principle is still present even in our modern budget, namely no taxation without need. In other words the people are not to be taxed unless the money is needed for some expenditure for their general benefit or the benefit of the state. This became clear to me on Monday in listening to the citation and quotation of the authorities on the points of order raised at that time, and after I had an opportunity of studying some of those authorities. Therefore I believe the situation which confronts us is unique. In addition to offending against the legal principle laid down in Bowles v. the Bank of England, the action of the government in collecting the tax since November has disregarded the principle that there should be no taxation unless there is need of it.
I would urgently plead with the government that these things should not happen again, and that at this session a bill should be introduced similar to the bill introduced in Great Britain in 1913 so they could act in case of emergency, and also to make budget resolutions legal whenever the budget is introduced. In these times of unrest and fear, Mr. Speaker, particularly fear that the concepts of a foreign ideology are making inroads upon our democratic institutions, we refuse to be parties to a measure which contains that apparent lighthearted and gross disregard of the prerogatives of parliament.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Mr. Speaker, I assure the house that I realize many of us would like to be in places other than this, and therefore I shall not detain hon. members for more than a very few minutes. I have seconded this amendment, and I think I owe it to the house and to myself to tell you why I have done so. I want to compliment the hon. member for Kindersley (Mr. Jaenicke) on what in my judgment was his best effort since I have been in this House of Commons. Some of his others have been very good, but I believe this was his best. The natural eloquence which is his I always find very effective, but in listening to him, it did occur to me that he might have used another cross-that is, the cross of gold, upon which William Jennings Bryan refused to see the American people crucified.
All I intend to do today is recite chronologically, I hope, a few facts in connection with this whole matter, and then ask the members of this house if they can find it within their conscience to do what I am going to suggest the government is asking
us to do here. We all know we have a dollar crisis. The fact 'that we knew it months before any action was taken is of no consequence now-I mean in the realities of the situation. The real facts are before us. We all knew there were two wavs of dealing with it. One was by embargoes, by the rationing of the influx of goods, and so on. The other was by replacing those imports with things we might produce or process or make in this, our own country. But then we had an additional reason, which is this very excise tax with which we are dealing. I do not say the government is going out of its way to introduce bills in a new form, but this resolution contains four sections imposing taxation and two sections releasing the people from taxation. Accepting everything the hon. member for Kindersley says, that we have in fact no need of money from this peculiar tax, then obviously all of us would be in favour of the releases which are made in the bill. So we find ourselves in this position in this house, as we do so often. We have a bill brought forward containing some things we 'think are good, and also containing some things w'e think are bad. Hon. members must make up their minds-not definitely on one thing, but to balance one against the other. And so while I do not like that which is bad. yet I do not want to oppose that which is good. I am frank to admit that many times my mind has been a hodgepodge in endeavouring to decide, or to direct my own thoughts, as to which portion of a piece of legislation overbalanced the other portion.
It seems to me that something can be done in the house about that. This legislation is the kind I have described. Then what happens? Measures had to be taken-at least so the government thought-and had to be taken quickly. What was done by the advisers of the minister, about whom the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) becomes so eloquent almost weekly? In a state of fog they went into a grab-bag and came out with this excise tax in their hands. That is not said with any desire to be unduly harsh; I believe it is said truthfully, because no satisfactory reason has yet been given by the minister or by anyone associated with him for having taken this action.
May I say I admire the minister's astuteness, and that of his advisers, in looking for reasons. But this cold fact remains, that after four months of operation of this tax-and at the moment I am not concerned about the argument as to whether or not it is a tax- after four months of operatic n those respon-
Excise Tax Act Amendment

sible for the measure are unable to tell us whether or not it has assisted us in seeking our objective. They state further, and state it frankly-and in passing may I commend the minister for his frankness-that they do not know that they ever will know-


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am sure my hon. friend wishes to be fair. What I said was that it could not be measured in terms of dollars. One cannot tell how many goods would otherwise have been sold if we had not imposed the tax.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I accept completely the statement made by the minister. But what he did say was that he never would know in terms of savings in United States dollars the extent to which this may have been an assistance. Is that more nearly accurate?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think so.


Arthur Leroy Smith: That is what I intended to say. Now, what is our position? Here we are, members of this House of Commons, supposed at least to be intelligent. We are going to vote upon a measure which at its inception was unconstitutional, and which has been collecting taxes for four months completely without authority. Accepting the minister's last answer to me, our position is that we do not know whether or to what extent we may be helping our position.


Douglas Charles Abbott: We know our dollar situation is improving, though.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The minister says our situation is improving. Again he gets out his three-pronged fork; I hope he has something better on the other two prongs than he has on this one.
I repeat-and I want everyone to know what we are doing-that we are being asked to vote upon a measure which was unconstitutional in the beginning, to vote for the imposition of a tax over a period of four months, a tax which had no basis in law or regulation under law. We are asked to vote for a measure we do not know; nor is there any evidence to support the thought that it is helping us in our dollar position.
In other words, to use the language used by the minister in the beginning, we entered upon an experiment. That experiment has lasted four months. If we approve this measure it will last indefinitely. Yet it will continue to be nothing but an experiment. That is obvious from the answers the minister has given.
So here we sit-I was going to say 244 of us. but I might have been a little bit out in my calculation if I had said that, on this

beautiful spring afternoon. In any event, here we sit, those of us who are in this House of Commons-and to do what? To vote for something born in a fog, something which lived in a test tube-
Mr, ABBOTT: The hon. member should have paused; they were ready for applause.


Arthur Leroy Smith: -carried on as an experiment in a test tube. But the doctors, chemists and others now do not even know what they put into the test tube in the beginning. Yet we are asked to vote for legislation under those circumstances.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And after it was defeated the other day.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Yes, after it was defeated the other day, although if possible I wish to avoid anything which might be considered harsh. Why are we asked to vote on this measure? This is a tax which in the case of each of us bears heavily upon people we know and know well. Let any member look at his correspondence. Let us see what the people who are writing to us are saying. It is bearing very heavily upon them.
The luxury argument went out the window days ago. There is nothing to it, absolutely nothing left to that argument. But people who require necessities are paying 25 per cent more than they otherwise would.


Douglas Charles Abbott: And paying less for sugar, too.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I did not hear the minister's interjection.


Gordon Graydon: You put the sugar in to catch the flies.


Arthur Leroy Smith: We pay a cent less for coffee; but the fact that occasionally the government gives a cent here and a cent there does not excuse them for socking the people 25 per cent on this particular job.
That is exactly the spot that we as members are in. There is no justification even in one's imagination-and, sir, one needs imagination if he votes for this measure-certainly no reasons have been advanced in its favour. Here we sit in this, the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada, voting completely in the air, not knowing where we are going, except to say that we are voting for the continuation of an experiment which has almost died of old age. It is four months old now, but we are trying to revive it, bring it back to life and give it the use that it neither had nor deserved.

Excise Tax Act Amendment
Mr. SOLON E. LOW (Peace River): Mr. Speaker, I shall be a man of very few words. I do not like the tax. My constituents do not like the tax. The people throughout Canada do not like the tax, and they have not asked for it. Indeed a great majority of them have protested strongly against the imposition of it. Therefore I have no alternative but to voice the dissatisfaction of the Canadian people with whom I have to deal and whom I represent.
I agree with every single thing said on this side of the house today. Furthermore I say to the minister and the government that when I spoke a few days ago on this very same measure I contended that the government had not investigated the alternatives within their power which would bring up production. Once again I say that because of its failure to investigate what can be done by calling upon the people to increase production and to take care of the export trade which we need to balance our dollar position, I have no alternative but to oppose the measure.
During the war with nearly 2,000,000 people out of production we produced almost at the same level as our production today. Those 2,000,000 people are back in Canada and ready to go to work. You cannot tell me that that increased number of people could not bring up our production in desired lines away beyond what is being produced today if the government called seriously for that increased production. I charge that the government has gone ahead bullheadedly, determined to put this thing through for some unknown purpose and for some reason that they certainly have not divulged to us here. I must protest in the name of my people and I shall support the amendment.
The house divided on the amendment (Mr. Macdonnell,	Muskoka-Ontario)	which *
negatived on	the following division:
 YEAS Messrs:	
Aylesworth	Fraser	
Barrett	Gill is	
Bentley	Graydon	
Blackmore	Hatfield	
Blair	Hlynka	
Boucher	Hodgson	
Bracken	Irvine	
Bradshaw	Jackman	
Bryce	Jaenicke	
Burton	Knowles	
Cardiff	Kuhl	
Case	Lennard	
Casselman	Lockhart	
Castleden	Low	
Charlton	MeCuaig	
Cockeram	McCullough	(Assini-
Coldwell	boia)	
Coyle	Macdonnell	(Muskol
Daniel	Ontario)	
Maclnnis
McKay
McLure
McMaster
Manross
Merritt
Moore
Probe
Quelch
Skey
Smith (Calgary Stephenson
Stokes Strum, Mrs. Timmins Townley-Smith Webb
White (Hastings-Peterborough) White (Middlesex East)
West) Wright
Zaplitny-57
NAYS Messrs:
Arsenault Beaudoin Beaudry Benidickson Bertrand (Laurier) Bertrand (Prescott) Black (Chateauguay-Huntingdon) Blanchette Boivin Bonnier Bourget Bradette Brown Chevrier Claxton Cloutier
Cote (St. Johns-Tber-ville-N apierville)
Cote (Verdun)
Dechene
Denis
Dion (Lake St. John-Roberval)
Dionne (Beauce) Douglas Eudes Fontaine Fournier (Hull) Fournier (Maison-neuve-Rosemont) Gariepy
Gauthier (Portneuf) Gibson (Hamilton West)
Gingues
Gladstone
Golding
Gour (Russell)
Gourd (Chapleau)
Grant
Gregg
Halle
Harris (Grey-Bruce)
Healy
Howe
Jutras
King, Mackenzie
Lafontaine
Langlois
Lapointe
Little
McCann
McCubbin
Macdonald (Brantford City)
Mellraith
Mclvor
Martin
Matthews (Brandon)
Michaud
Mitchell
Nixon
Parent
Reid
Richard (Gloucester) Richard (Ottawa East) Robinson (Simcoe East)
Ross (Hamilton East) Sinnott
Smith (York North)
Tremblay
Tucker
Viau
Warren
Weir
Winkler-71
( Translation):


Mr. HEON:: Mr. Speaker, I am paired for the whole session with the hon. member for Joliette-l'Assomption-Mbntcalm(Mr. Lapalme). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.
(Text):


Mr. JEAN:: I was paired with the hon. member for Waterloo South (Mr. Homuth). Had I voted, I would have voted against the amendment.


Mr. MacNICOL:: I was paired with the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.
257(3
Excise Tax Act Amendment


Mr. HAZEN:: I was paired with the hon.
member for Shelburne-Yarmouth-Clare (Mr. Baker). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: I was paired with the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. Gauthier). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.


Mr. MENARY:: I was paired with the hon. member for Cape Breton North-Victoria (Mr. MacLean). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I was paired with the hon.
member for Stanstead (Mr. Hackett). Had I voted, I would have voted against the amendment.


Mr. FERGUSON:: I was paired with the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor). Had
I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.


Mr. DROPE:: I was paired with the hon. member for Northumberland, NB. (Mr. Maloney). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.


Mr. CLEAVER:: I was paired. Had I voted, I would have voted against the amendment.


Mr. GIBSON (Comox-Alberni):: I was paired with the junior member for Halifax (Mr. Dickey). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.
Main motion (Mr. Abbott) agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into
committee thereon, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
Sections 1 to 4 inclusive carried on division.
Bill reported on division.
Mr. ABBOTT moved the third reading of the bill.


John Bracken: Mr. Speaker, the bill before us is a bill confirming the tax which was imposed by radio on November 17 last-imposed illegally, imposed unconstitutionally and imposed without precedent in any British parliamentary institution. The tax it imposes is unfair, unjust, inequitable and1, as someone has said, not needed. The last mentioned point has been emphasized by the minister who introduced the bill. The bill taxes articles which are essential in our wa3T of living; it is discriminatory and it hits unfairly the low-income groups of this country.
On the basis of the government's own arguments, they have not satisfied the house that
	.
this measure is an essential one or that it in any way accomplishes the purpose of the government in attempting to save United States dollars. Yet in the first section, this Bill No. 172 imposes an excise tax of 25 per cent oni a long list of goods needed by the ordinary people of this country. In these circumstances I wish to move, seconded by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon):
That the said bill be not now read the third time but that the same be referred back to the committee of the whole for the purpose of reconsidering section one thereof.


Gordon Graydon: I desire to say just a word in connection with this amendment, namely what has been so well said by others in the house and what no doubt has been entertained in the thoughts of hon. gentlemen opposite as well but unexpressed. As the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) said, this bill was conceived under strange circumstances and' under circumstances that we in this house hope will never be the circumstances surrounding the conception of any legislation again in this house. We cannot ever afford to repeat what has been done with respect to this measure which is now up for third reading. Not only was it illegal in its conception-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Gordon Graydon: That is all right. If the zoo will only keep quiet over there we shall go on with this measure.


James Horace King: Order.


Gordon Graydon: Not only was it illegal in its conception, illegal in its pronouncement to the Canadian people but illegality has been piled upon illegality. The motion which has just been moved by the leader of the opposition asking for reconsideration by the committee of the whole of the particular section which he has mentioned gives this house an opportunity to reconsider the illegal and wholly unconstitutional infringement of the rights of the house, because this particular part of the bill was voted upon by the committee of the house and was defeated, and in that way the government forces were defeated. Mr. Speaker, you are going to suggest that I am reflecting upon the previous vote of this house; but I am going to say to you, sir, that there cannot be one rule for me and another rule for the Minister of Finance.


James Horace King: Order.


Gordon Graydon: I want to say to you, sir-


James Horace King: Order. The hon member must resume his seat. I must say to the hon member that the rules apply to everyone, and

___________ Excise Tax Act Amendment
even to himself. It is against the rules to refer to a matter which has already been settled by a vote.


Gordon Graydon: That being the case, Mr. Speaker, I am going to accept your ruling as I normally would. Since you have made that ruling, it only emphasizes the impossible position of the Minister of Finance in connection with the previous vote, because when he rose after that vote had been completed he reflected upon it, and when that irregularity was continued it only piled injustice upon injustice in this house and I resent it.


James Horace King: Order.


Gordon Graydon: I resent it, and I am going to protest with all the vigour I have in my power.


James Horace King: Order. I must call the attention of the hon. member, who has some experience, to the fact that he more than anybody else should be one of the first to abide by the rules of the house. It is a rule which is known by every hon. member that when the Speaker rises the hon. member who has the floor should resume his seat. I would ask the hon. member to abide by the rules and when the Speaker rises, to resume his seat and not to refer to a matter which has already been settled by a vote. Moreover, as he knows, the house is supposed to ignore what has happened in a committee of the house unless a report from the committee is before it.


Gordon Graydon: What you have said now is perhaps the most concise and clear spanking that the Minister of Finance has ever had from the Speaker, because what you have said is only too true. I was wishing to see whether or not I would be dealt with in connection with a reflection on this vote in the same way as the Minister of Finance was dealt with by this house in connection with the other one.


Douglas Charles Abbott: You are putting on a good show.


James Horace King: I would suggest to the hon. member who is an old parliamentarian that he knows the rules quite well and that the Speaker has no spanking to give to any member of the House of Commons. I want to repeat that if he wants to argue against the government, or against any party in the house, it is his privilege, but I will not stand for anybody bringing the Speaker into the debate.


Gordon Graydon: 
Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: I am going to say very few words. There are times when the House of Commons has to stand by fundamental principles. I believe that this is one of these times. As has been so well said by hon. members on this side of the house and particularly by my hon. friend and colleague, the member for Kindersley (Mr. Jaenicke), we regard the action of the government in attempting to impose these taxes as being illegal from every historical point of view. Right from the early days of the Stuarts when taxation without the consent of parliament was stubbornly resisted by our forebears it has been a fundamental principle that until the taxes have been approved by parliament they shall not be imposed. There has been a variation of that in recent years, so that when the budget comes down the taxes immediately go into effect; but, as the hon. member for Kindersley pointed out, even that was challenged in the mother of parliaments, and challenged successfully, with the result that the parliament at Westminster enacted a special measure to legalize budget impositions under these circumstances.
I agree with those who have said that this is unprecedented in Canadian history. I know of no precedent for the imposition of these taxes. The government does not require the money, with the large surplus it has; and, as my hon. friend who has taken his seat has said, this does impose an additional burden on the poor, on those least able to bear it in many instances. Of course it is not wholly on the poor, but it is to a large degree, and consequently I think the leader of the opposition is perfectly right in moving for the reference back of this particular clause, not because we believe it can be carried, but because I think parliament should make an

Excise Tax Act Amendment
effective and dramatic protest against what has been done. For that reason we are supporting the reference back.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I presume I close the debate, Mr. Speaker.


An hon. MEMBER:: No; the leader of the opposition does.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have only a word to say. I had hoped that it would not be necessary for me to participate at this stage, because, in my experience in the house, this debate has hit an all-time high for repetition of various points made. Every important point made has been repeated at least ten times, and in most cases by the same speakers.
I congratulate the hon. member for Mus-koka-Ontario (Mr. Macdonnell) on his genius for repetition and his attempt to convince by repetition. I also congratulate him on his mastery of the art of argument by assertion.
I have nothing more to add. I have already answered several times all the points raised. I do not intend to repeat them now. I only wish to refer to a point made by both the leader of the opposition (Mr. Bracken) and the leader of the C.C.F. (Mr. Coldwell), that this is taxation of the poor.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: As well as the well-to-do.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No one has emphasized the fact that under this measure a cent tax is being removed from sugar, which everyone uses, the tax is being removed from tea and coffee, which almost everyone uses, the tax is being removed from the domestic use of elec-tricitj' and gas, which everyone uses, and that the aggregate of these is estimated to be $21,000,000 a year. A tax is being imposed on a good many things which not everyone uses, or which not everyone needs to buy while this taxation is in effect.
I will not take any more time to emphasize that point, and I emphasize it only because no one, in criticizing the tax, has seen fit to bring it out.


Joseph Jean: I was paired. Had I voted, I would have voted against the amendment.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I was paired with the hon. member for Stanstead (Mr. Hackett). Had I voted, I would have voted: against the amendment.

Excise Tax Act Amendment


Hughes Cleaver: I was paired with the hon. member for Bow River (Mr. Johnston). Had I voted, I would1 have voted against the amendment.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I was paired with the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent). Had I voted, I would! have votedi for the amendment.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: I was paired with the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor). Had I voted, I would have voted in favour of the amendment.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I was paired with the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. Gauthier). Had1 I voted, I would have voted' for the amendment.


Robert Earle Drope: I was paired with the hon. member for Northumberland, N.B. (Mr. Maloney). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.


Lewis Menary: I was paired with the hon. member for Cape Breton North-Victoria (Mr. MacLean). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.


John Lambert Gibson: I was
paired with the junior member for Halifax (Mr. Dickey). Had I voted1, I would have voted for the amendment.


Mr. ROBINSON (Bruce):: I did1 not vote, but had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.
( Translation):


Georges-Henri Héon: I was paired with the hon. member for Joliette-l'Assomption-Montealm (Mr. Lapalme). Had I voted, I would have voted for the amendment.
(Text):


James Horace King: Is the house ready for the main motion?


Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Big-gar):: Before you put the main motion, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) has never attempted to answer the constitutional question in connection with this matter, and I think, before this bill passes, he should tell the house what constitutional authority there is for the imposition of taxes when parliament is not sitting and without the consent of parliament.
As I said a few moments ago, I regard that as a fundamental principle of our constitutional procedure, a fundamental principle of the historic development of the imposition of taxes by parliament; and I believe that in what has been done by the government in this particular we have a violation of all parliamentary procedure in connection with taxation. So, in order to put ourselves on record I am
going to move, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis):
That Bill No. 172 be not now Tea<l a third time, but that it be resolved that in the opinion of this house the action of the government in arranging by ministerial announcement for the collection of taxes, of which parliament had not yet been advised and which parliament has not yet imposed, is contrary to established parliamentary practice and without constitutional authority.
Might I suggest to the government that in order to obviate any constitutional difficulty in future the government consider bringing in a bill similar to the act introduced into the British House of Commons and passed in 1913, known as the "provisional collection of taxes act". That legislation, was brought in to obviate the constitutional malpractices which had grown up there and with which we are now faced in our own parliament. I suggest that as a parliament we should not tolerate this violation of the historic procedures in connection with the imposition of taxes upon His Majesty's subjects, without making the most emphatic protest of which we are capable. We have made that protest this afternoon; and while perhaps this amendment may delay the house to some extent, I believe it is worthwhile in order to bring home to the government and the country the need, particularly in these days when our democratic institutions are being called into question and when parliamentary procedures in many countries have passed out, to have this democratic country stand behind fundamental principles of parliamentary government, which the action of the present government has violated in this particular.
Mr. NORMAN J. M. LOCKHART (Lincoln) : I should like to add just a word before the amendment is put, to say that I shall certainly support it. I happened to be perhaps one of the few in this house a few years back who acted in the dual capacity of mayor of my city as well as representative of my constituency in the House of Commons. On frequent occasions municipal councils take for their guidance the procedure in the House of Commons at Ottawa. I shall preserve the Hansard of this session; I shall preserve the words of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) and of those who have supported him in this illegal action; and I shall return to my fair city and warn the municipal council that never again can they follow the procedure they have followed through the years heretofore, as precedents on which illegal action may be taken as it has been by this government. This action will go down in history. And so I raise my voice in protest before this
Excise Tax Act Amendment

measure becomes law. I want to remind the house that municipal councils and those having lesser authority than the House of Commons have always taken this house as their precedent.
Having said that, I now propose to support the amendment so ably presented by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar.


James Horace King: The amendment before the house is moved by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) and seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis)-
That Bill No. 172 be not now read a third time, but that it be resolved that in the opinion of this house the action of the government in arranging by ministerial announcement for the collection of taxes, of which parliament had not yet been advised and which parliament has not yet imposed, is contrary to established parliamentary practice and without constitutional authority.
I would call the attention of the hon. member-


Stanley Howard Knowles: If Your Honour is going to give a ruling, would you permit an hon. member to speak?


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: On a point of order; if you propose to give a ruling on this, will you hear discussion on a point of order before the ruling is given? In looking up previous copies of Hansard, I find that that was the custom of the house.


James Horace King: At different times hon. members in the house have drawn the attention of the Speaker to the fact that it is very unfortunate that they cannot discuss Speakers' rulings. It is a ruling of the house that Speakers' rulings are not debatable.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: That is right.


James Horace King: If I permit hon. members to enter into a discussion before I give my ruling, I wonder what they are going to discuss, since they do not know what my ruling will be.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: That-


James Horace King: One moment. If the hon. member would like to call my attention to the fact that on account of such precedent or on account of such standing order he believes his amendment is in order, I will hear him with pleasure. But I would remind the house that it is not the duty of the Speaker to listen for about an hour to argument in favour of or against the amendment, and that when I feel I have been enlightened sufficiently I shall give my ruling.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: When I saw Your
Honour rise with the book of rules in your hand I anticipated that you were about to give a ruling, although a point of order had not been raised. Therefore I ask that, before your ruling is given, an opportunity be afforded to those of us who believe that this amendment is in order, to discuss the point of order which we believe was in your mind.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Because-


James Horace King: If the hon. member would permit me, actually we have before the house an amendment.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Yes.


James Horace King: To the third reading of a bill.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Yes, that is right.


James Horace King: And the hon. member wants to rise to speak to a point of order. There is no point of order. Then, if he wishes to speak I have reason to believe he wishes to speak on his amendment.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: No.


James Horace King: I have a ruling to give on the amendment.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: May I-


James Horace King: He cannot rise on a point of order because there is no point of order.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: I have already spoken on the amendment, and have therefore exhausted my right. I anticipated that you were about to rule.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I speak to the amendment?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I have asked Your
Honour if I might speak to the amendment. The chorus of "No's" across the way would seem to indicate that I am not entitled to do so.


Mr. CASSELMAN:: That is only the steamroller.


James Horace King: The hon. member may speak on the amendment, because it is his privilege to speak on the amendment. If it is accepted he' will be able to speak to it. If it is refused there will be no amendment before the house.

Excise Tax Act Amendment
I would call the attention of hon. members to citation 710 in Beauchesne, third edition, which states:
The question for the third reading is put immediately after the report from the committee of the whole. All amendments which may be moved on a second reading of a bill may be moved on the third reading with the restriction that they cannot deal with any matter which is not contained in the bill.
Then there is a reference to May, page 421. The citation continues:
On the second reading of a bill, an amendment may be moved expressing opinions as to any circumstances connected with its introduction or prosecution, or seeking further information in relation to the bill by committees or commissioners, the production of papers or other evidence, or the opinion of judges.
And I emphasize these words:
This cannot be done on the third reading because it is not directly connected with any provision of the bill. The question for the third reading may be negatived, but as previously stated (in reference to the second reading) such a vote is not fatal to the bill.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Before you rule, would you permit an hon. member to speak?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am not asking to debate the ruling. I am asking to speak before your ruling.


James Horace King: Under that citation I am obliged to declare the amendment out of order.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: Since no opportunity was given to discuss the possibility of a ruling I must respectfully appeal that ruling.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We have asked a dozen times.


Mr. CHEVRIER:: You did not ask at the opportune time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Where have you been?


James Horace King: Those in favour of sustaining the Speaker's ruling will say "Yea".


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Yea.


James Horace King: Those opposed will say "Nay".


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Nay.


James Horace King: In my opinion the "Yeas" have it.


Arza Clair Casselman: On division.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


James Horace King: Call in the members.
Mr. Speaker put the question as follows:
Mr. Ooldwell moved, seconded by Mr. Mac-Innis:
"That Bill No. 172 be not now read a third time, but that it be resolved that in the opinion of this house the action of the government in arranging by ministerial announcement for the collection of taxes, of which parliament had not yet been advised and which parliament has not yet imposed, is contrary to established parliamentary practice and without constitutional authority."
I declared that amendment out of order and I based my ruling on citation 710' Beauchesne, third edition, which reads as follows:
"The question for the third reading is put immediately after the report from the committee of the whole. All amendments which may be moved on a second reading of a bill may be moved on the third reading with the restriction that they cannot deal with any matter which is not contained in the bill. On the second reading of a bill, an amendment may be moved expressing opinions as to any circumstances connected with its introduction or prosecution, or seeking further information in relation to the bill by committees or commissioners, the production of papers or other evidence, or the opinion of judges. This cannot be done on the third reading because it is not directly connected with any provision of the bill."
Following my ruling, Mr. Coldwell appealed.


Georges-Henri Héon: I was paired with the hon. member for Joliette-l'Assomption-Montcalm (Mr. Lapalme). Had I voted, I would have voted -with all due respect to you, Mr. Speaker- against your ruling.
(Text):


John Ritchie MacNicol: I was paired with the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent). Had I voted, I would have voted against Your Honour's ruling.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: I was paired with the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Isnor). Had I voted, I would have voted against Your Honour's ruling.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I was paired with the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. Gauthier). Had I voted, I would have voted against Your Honour's ruling.


Lewis Menary: I was paired with the hon. member for Cape Breton North-Victoria (Mr. MacLean). Had I voted, I would have voted against Your Honour's ruling.


Robert Earle Drope: I was paired with the hon. member for Northumberland, N.B. (Mr. Maloney). Had I voted, I would have voted against Your Honour's ruling.


Hughes Cleaver: I was paired. Had I voted I would have voted to sustain Your Honour's ruling.
Main motion (Mr. Abbott) agreed to, bill, read the third time, on division, and passed.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, before you call the next order, I move, seconded by Mr. Abbott, that the house be not adjourned at six o'clock. That is in accordance with what I proposed earlier this afternoon.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of Bill No. 173, to amend the Customs Tariff.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
Section 1 agreed to.
On section 2-Date of coming into force.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: There was one bit of information the minister was going to give.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes; my hon. friend asked about the reduction in the tariff on coffee. Tariff item 28 covers coffee, green, imported direct from the country of growth and production, or purchased in bond in the United Kingdom. Since 1936 this coffee has been duty-free under the British preferential tariff, with an intermediate tariff rate of three cents per pound and a general tariff rate of five cents per pound. At Geneva the most-favoured-nation rate on this item was reduced from three cents to two cents per pound, and the concession was brought into effect on November 18, 1947, instead of on January 1, 1948, when the other tariff reductions made at Geneva became effective.
The imports under tariff item 28 amounted to 46,000,000 pounds, valued at $4,110,000 in 1939, and to 50,400,000 pounds valued at $13,104,000 in 1947.
Tariff item 29, the item covering green coffee, n.o.p., is not covered by this bill. This item carried a rate of 2| cents per pound plus 7j per cent ad valorem under the British preferential tariff, a rate of three cents per pound plus 10 per cent ad valorem under the intermediate tariff, and a rate of five cents per pound plus ten per cent ad valorem under the general tariff. At Geneva tariff items 28 and

Interim Supply
29 were combined, and the rate on all green coffee was made free under the British preferential tariff, with a most-favoured-nation rate of two cents per pound.
I am informed that practically all the green coffee imported into Canada comes under tariff item 28, the item covered by this bill.


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

[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
Motion agreed to, and the house went into committee, Mr. Golding in the chair.
Douglas Charles Abbott: Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $179,134,768.66, being one-sixth of the amount of each of the several items to be voted, as set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1949, laid before the House of Commons at the present session of parliament, and in addition thereto the sum of $2,965,800.33 being one-third of the amount of items 43, 67 and 447, the sum of $1,462,158.50, being one-sixth of the amount of items 151, 154, 155 and 206, and the sum of $2,037,567.83, being one-twelfth of the amount of items 5, 15, 19, 36, 40, 46. 54, 174, 180, 184, 185, 186, 196, 198, 208, 209, 210', 211, 445, 449 and 452 of the said estimates be granted to His Majesty on account for the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1949.
He said: Mr. Chairman, I have had an opportunity of discussing this matter with the leaders of the three opposition parties. The form of the bill which will be based on this resolution is exactly the same as that of the bill passed last year and in previous years.
The general proportion of one-sixth for all services is intended to provide for all necessary ordinary requirements to the end of May.
The additional proportions requested for certain special items are necessary, due to the seasonal and sessional nature of the services affected, such as certain agricultural services, the sessional expenses of the Senate and the House of Commons, seasonal expenses of the Department of Mines and Resources and other services involving total commitments coming for payment in the first few months of the year.
I am asking an additional one-third of three special items. The first is an item of $6,000,000 odd for freight assistance on western feed grains. That vote will expire on July 31, the end of the crop year. So that in effect I am asking for two months supply on that. The second special item is general post-UNRRA relief, which is a revote, and the
payment of which will fall due within the next month or six weeks. The final special item in this category is the item relating to trade and commerce exhibitions. It relates to the international trade fair at Toronto and other exhibitions where an unusually large amount of the particular vote will be required in the first month or two of the fiscal year.
The passing of the bill will, of course, not prejudice the rights and privileges of hon. members to criticize and discuss any item in the estimates which will come up for consideration from time to time throughout the remainder of the session, and the usual undertaking is hereby given that such rights and privileges will be respected and will not be curtailed or restricted in any way as a result of this measure.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: However much repetition there is.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.



WAYS AND MEANS


[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of ways and means.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Golding in the chair.
Douglas Charles Abbott: Mr. Chairman, I desire to move the following resolution covering the amounts dealt with a few moments ago in committee of supply:
Resolved, that towards making good the supply granted to His Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1949, the following sums be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada, namely:
1.	The sum of $179,134,768.66, being one-sixth of the amount of each of the items as set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1949, and
2.	The additional sum of $2,965,800.33 being one-third of the amount of items 43, 67 and 447, the sum of $1,462,158.50' being one-sixth of the amount of items 151, 154, 155 and 296, and the sum of $2,037,567.83 being one-twelfth of the amount of items, 5, 15, 19, 36, 40, 46, 54, 174, 180, 184, 185, 186, 196, 198, 208, 209, 210, 211, 445, 449 and 452 of the said estimates, as set forth in the resolution concurred in this day in the committee of supply.


Mr. CASE:: Is this the resolution on which the minister gave the undertaking that we would have the right to refer to and criticize any items in the main estimates that are being dealt with?
2584

Interim Supply


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes; it refers not only to the resolution but to any items included in the schedules to the bill.


Gordon Graydon: It gives us the right to vote against the bill.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Resolutions reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Abbott thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 183, for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1949.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
Mr. ABBOTT moved the second reading of the bill.
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
Wilfrid Garfield Case: Have we copies of the bill?


Douglas Charles Abbott: We never do that.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: We just vote blind.
Sections 1 to 6 inclusive agreed1 to.


John Bracken: Are these sections all parts of one resolution, or are they separate sections?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Separate sections of the bill. I sent a copy of the bill to my horn, friend.


John Bracken: Is the minister quite sure they are all separate sections?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes.
Section 7 agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. ABBOTT moved the third reading of the bill.


John Bracken: Before the bill is given third reading I should like to ask a question. What is the total of the main estimates for the coming fiscal year?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have them right here. The total of the main estimates for the present year to be voted, including statutory items, of course, is $1,985,146,060.84.


John Bracken: The minister asked for one-sixth of the main estimates?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes.


John Bracken: In certain instances one-third additional-


Douglas Charles Abbott: In the three instances I
gave.


John Bracken: And in certain other
instances one-sixth more to be added?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is right.


John Bracken: And in certain others one-twelfth more to be added?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes.


John Bracken: The total comes to $180 million odd.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is correct.


John Bracken: The minister says that the total is nearly $2,000 million, one-sixth of which is some $300 million. We are not voting
the statutory items?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is correct.


John Bracken: I wish to ask one other question. The minister pointed out that later on we would be free to discuss any items now passed without any curtailment of our privileges. Assuming that the money is all spent, when we come to discuss the items what advantage will there be in discussion? Can we then have the government go back and collect the money it has spent because of our generosity today?


Douglas Charles Abbott: We have heard a good deal about the constitution. I am not quite sure how that works out in this case. For obvious reasons, interim supply is voted each year to the extent of one-sixth of the items in the estimates. If the house rejects any item of ordinary estimates I am not quite sure how the matter is resolved.


John Bracken: It is not a question of rejecting it, but after the money is spent what good will it do to talk about it?


Douglas Charles Abbott: What is being voted is a relatively small proportion, and if the vote were reduced to one-half it would still be adequate to cover what had already been spent. In no case is authority being asked for more than half, and only in exceptional cases where expenditure has to be made early in the year. There is no principle involved.


Mr. BOUCHER:: How long has the custom of asking for interim supply prevailed? Am I right in assuming that it started at the outbreak of the war and is being continued, or has it been going on for years?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Mv understanding is that it has been going on for as long as parliaments have been voting supply. Obviously, when you estimate twelve months in advance and

Supply-Secretary oj State
take some little time to vote, some provision has to be made to carry on the essential services of the country, and it is done by means of interim supply.


Mr. IRVINE:: If, when ive come to the main estimates, these items are not carried, it will be the business of the C.C.F. The minister need not worry.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: We ought to be grateful to the minister for coming and asking us at all and not simply taking it.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Golding in the chair.


[Stage Direction]
629. Citizenship registration branch-further amount required, $1,220.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Could we have an indication of the order in which these items are to be taken up?


Colin William George Gibson: I have asked for permission to have my items considered early because I have an engagement tonight.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: Am I to understand that we will take 588 later?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes.


Mr. SKEY:: Under this item would the minister consider issuing certificates of citizenship to members of parliament?


Colin William George Gibson: The certificate will be issued to any member who files application and pays the required fee. If he is a veteran there is no fee. This money is required for the microfilming of old naturalization certificates so that we may secure much-needed space by doing away with bulky files.
Mr. GRA\ DON: Has any Canadian citizenship been revoked so far because of subversive or communistic activities on the part of any citizen?


Colin William George Gibson: Not on those accounts, and I do not think that under the act there is provision for it.


Gordon Graydon: Is it the intention of the government to amend the act to make that possible?


Colin William George Gibson: Any policy of the government in that respect will be announced in due course.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The act will have to be amended by parliament.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Having regard to the opinion expressed by the Minister of Agriculture about certificates of citizenship, can the Secretary of State tell us whether he has taken out one?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, I have one, and so have my family certificates.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: No, but the Minister of Agriculture.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
631.	Canada Temperance Act-further amount required, $1,500.
Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Is this for legal services?


Colin William George Gibson: The total amount of accounts received and taxed by Justice has already exceeded the amount in the main estimates by nearly $900. The amount expended to date is $4,500, unpaid accounts on hand $887, and estimated further accounts amount to $612, which leaves a further amount required of $1,500.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: This is administration in respect of the Canada Temperance Act?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes. The accounts come into my department and are taxed by the Justice department.


Mr. CARDIFF:: If this act does not work any better in other parts of Canada than it has in the county of Huron. I object to any more money being spent on it.


Wilfrid Garfield Case: Does any of this money result from references to the privy council for legal fees or anything of the kind?


Colin William George Gibson: It is purely for the Canada Temperance Act.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Patent and Copyright Office-
632.	Administration division-further amount
required, $200.	.
Gordon Graydon: Last year the government increased by $1,500 the fees for obtaining patents so as to take care of printing costs. What progress has been made in connection with the printing of these patents as authorized?


Colin William George Gibson: I am glad to say that the patent office has been able to
Supply-Secretary oj State

get into a new building. We have more commodious quarters. The question of printing patents is being taken up between the king's printer and the commissioner of patents, and very good progress will be made on that work.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Has the increase been adopted in fees in respect to patents?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes. They were adopted last year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Public Printing and Stationery-
616.	Printing and binding office publications for sale and distribution to departments and the public-further amount required, $50,000.
George Russell Boucher: Can the minister give us an idea of the regulation with respect to the printing of various pamphlets, especially as regards numbers? Recently some pamphlets were printed for the Department of Agriculture which were desired in my own riding. I made application for some and was told I was allowed only twenty-five, that the rest were being sent out by the department itself to a list of people. Frankly, if we are going to vote money each year for the printing of publications of this kind and a member of the House of Commons who desires some for distribution within his own riding is limited to twenty-five or fifty copies, I think this item should be reduced to $1, because I resent that sort of treatment.


Colin William George Gibson: This $50,000 is for the printing of publications for which payment will be received; but when the payment is made it will go to the Receiver General of Canada. Last year we received something like $100,000 from the government and $144,000 from the sale of publications, so the profit was nearly $44,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: What was the original amount to which this $50,000 now is to be added?


Colin William George Gibson: The amount in the main estimates was $60,000, and there was a further amount of $65,000 in the supplementary estimates.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Then if I added those figures correctly the amount originally voted was $125,000, and now you ask for almost fifty per cent more. That does not seem to me like estimating at all; it seems just like guessing, unless there has been a drastic change in the situation.


Colin William George Gibson: As my hon. friend says, this is an estimate only. This item covers orders received by the printing department from various government depart-

ments. The printing department does the printing and supplies the publications, which are put up for sale. The printing department cannot know a year in advance what orders will be received from other government departments.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I do not want to press the point, but I would have thought that year in and year out the thing would average, and there would be a fairly normal figure. If that is not so, there is nothing more to be said about it.


Colin William George Gibson: Last year the amount expended was $99,999.97, or practically $100,000. This year there has been a good deal more printing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-
588. Government's contribution to unemployment insurance fund-further amount required, $5,000,000.
Angus MacInnis: Before this item passes I want to say a few words in connection with a situation that has developed since the end of the wrar, when we have had more unemployment than we had during the war years. In most cases the municipal and provincial governments look after unemployables, but neither the municipalities nor provinces nor the dominion government make provision for employable persons who are unemployed. That is the case with persons who have not qualified for unemployment insurance, and those who have exhausted their benefits under that legislation.
In the proposals made by the dominion government to the provinces in 1945 the dominion agreed to take care of that class of unemployed person. Last winter-and perhaps the situation is still not as good-the number of unemployed was larger than at any time since this act came into effect. A great many persons, young men in particular, found themselves unemployed without having sufficient contributions under the act to entitle them to the benefits of the act. I have a letter from which I should like to quote in order to show how people feel about this situation; and while I am on this point I would suggest to the Minister of Labour that perhaps a better public relations job could be done in connection with unemployment insurance than is done. In 1940 when the act was passed there was considerable opposition to it among workers, but I found that when I spoke to them and explained to them the purposes of the act and its limitations, it was accepted as

Supply-Labour
something worth while. I am convinced that much of the criticism of the act is due to a lack of understanding of it and a lack of appreciation of its limitations.
The writer of this letter is a father whose son, seventeen years of age is unemployed. Most hon. members of this house with boys of that age have them at school, but this young fellow was working and had contributed to the unemployment insurance fund for 171 days. He needs 180 days in order to be eligible for benefits. Another young lad referred to in this letter, not a son of the writer, had contributed 178 days. He was two days short of the required number of contributions, and was not eligible when he became unemployed. I am not suggesting that the act should be stretched even for a day to meet cases of this kind.


Humphrey Mitchell: Might I ask my hon. friend, for my own information, what city that was in?


Angus MacInnis: This was in Swift Current,
I have written this man, and I should be very glad to show the minister my letter if he would care to see it. This man feels, and I think rightly so, that something should be done to assist these young fellows when they are not eligible for unemployment insurance. Referring to the boys he says:
They cannot get work, so what is left for them to do. Nothing but loiter around pool halls and walk the street, or join the army or some other branch of the services.
Then he uses language I will not repeat in this house, and goes on:
I spent five years and eight months in the army, and now I am beginning to wonder what it was all for. I thought we were going to have a better Canada for our sons and daughters, but it looks pretty grim now for our boys and girls. They don't want something for nothing. They want work and a chance to make a living, but at present it looks as if the soup kitchens will have to come back unless those boys and girls can get at least 180' days' work a year.
My suggestion to the minister and the government is that as quickly as possible they revive the proposals made to the provinces in 1945, and call a conference of the provinces in order to have those proposals discussed, and if possible accepted and thus extend protection to young men, and old men as well who cannot qualify for unemployment insurance.
I want the minister to understand that I am not at the moment finding fault with the administration of the act. Those who are charged with its administration must administer it according to its provisions. If they once [DOT]
begin departing from that they will get into trouble, because there will be no line as to where they should stop.
But there is something that must be done here. Let us consider these two young boys of seventeen or eighteen years of age. In this formative period of their lives they find themselves at loose ends, without any protection from society. It is a serious situation for them. It may be only for a short time, but on the other hand it may be for a considerable time.
During the past few weeks we have heard a good deal about the dangers of communism. I would be the last one to say that it is not dangerous. But we should remember that communism grew out of bad social conditions and the suppression of a people's just aspirations. We are not going to put an end to communism or eliminate it by suppression at this stage. We will eliminate it and prevent its growth only if we can convince the people of this country that their welfare is our consideration at all times. I suggest to the minister that as soon as possible he try to convince his colleagues in the cabinet, if indeed they are not already convinced, that here is a situation that should be remedied, and without delay.


John Ritchie MacNicol: It is not often that a minister or any of his officials receives a word of praise. I am pleased to be able to accord that praise today. I refer to the administration of the department's offices on Spadina avenue, Toronto, where I have had occasion to go to observe-not for myself, may I say- what has been going on. So far as I could see, from the manager down, the officials there are trying to do their best to alleviate the troubles with which they come in contact daily. That is not an easy task to carry out without difficulty, but I believe they are taking care of the situation as best they can.
Any time I have had occasion to make inquiries in that branch in Toronto I have been accorded the utmost courtesy-and they did not know I was a member of parliament. Many people go to that office daily and have been treated with the courtesy which is their right and due. So far as I can see they are waited on promptly, just as I saw this kind of work done in England. I congratulate the departmental officers in the Spadina avenue office in Toronto upon the way they are carrying on their job.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: Mr. Chairman, I should like to endorse much of what was said by the hon. member for Vancouver East, who has drawn attention to conditions in connection with the operation of the act about which the minister
Supply-Labour

and his deputies will probably want to know, and about which perhaps they will wish to effect remedies when possible.


Humphrey Mitchell: I do not wish to interrupt the hon. member, but perhaps I might be permitted1 to say that consideration is being given to amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act. Perhaps rather than discuss details at this time it would be better to do that when the bill is before the house.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: I thank the minister for his reference. I believe he has already made a similar statement in the house. However, very briefly I should like to mention one or two points which have come to my attention so that the minister and his officials may give them consideration when they are considering the amendments.
The first is consideration of conditions under which contributions can be returned to those declared permanently ineligible in some way or another for receipt of benefit when they become unemployed.
The second is with regard to young women who marry and, we hope, permanently withdraw from the business world. It seems to me that these girls never have an opportunity of deriving benefit from the many contributions they make, and that the act should take that fact into consideration.
The third recommendation is that the minister and his officials should consider seriously the addition of a clause which would permit the collection of unemployment insurance by those who have to withdraw from the labour market because of illness arising through no fault of their own. I realize that they are covered by workmen's compensation legislation, but I think there should be a sickness clause added to the unemployment insurance measure.
Can the minister give the house the total reserves now on hand in the fund?


Humphrey Mitchell: They amount to


Lawrence Wilton Skey: What was the amount in 1939, before the war?


Humphrey Mitchell: There was no such act before the war.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: You were in the red?


Humphrey Mitchell: No, there was no
Unemployment Insurance Act then. However I could give the hon. member figures for a later year, because I believe that is what he wants. In 1942 the amount was $43,964,246.68. I observe in passing that this big fund is an indication of the employment situation in the

dominion. As I said to a labour delegation not long ago, I hope it gets bigger and bigger, because the bigger the fund, the less unemployment there is in Canada.


Lawrence Wilton Skey: I should like to complete my remarks by telling a story which I believe the minister will appreciate. I know of a British company which put in a combination scheme for its employees, and when putting in the scheme an actuarial mistake was made. Now the total amount in the pension fund is greater than the whole capitalization of the company concerned. The directors are so tied up that they cannot touch the fund and no one can do anything about it. Those poor working men, for a period of about 150 years, have been paying into the fund and no one in the firm has received a benefit comparable to the contributions made. I would hate to see that happen here.


Humphrey Mitchell: You cannot laugh it off as easily as that, by telling a story. In 1920, I believe it was, the British fund was insolvent. The government of that day had to pour millions upon millions of pounds into it, and for obvious reasons. I hope I shall never live to see the day when we will have conditions such as we had in the thirties, but if we should ever reach that unfortunate situation, $400,000,000 would be only chicken feed.


Alan Cockeram: Last night I asked about annuities.


Humphrey Mitchell: I have that information.


Alan Cockeram: I am wondering why an increase of $5,000,000 is necessary at this time, in view of the fact that that is almost sixty per cent of the amount voted for the whole of last year. This amount seems large, coming as it does at the end of the financial year.


Humphrey Mitchell: As I have said, employment conditions are so good at the present time that there has been what I suppose might be described as a slight miscalculation. I think it is fair to say that this is the biggest business in Canada. We have 3,125,000 clients at the present time, and that is big business. Hundreds of thousands of people pass through the offices every year. The government's contribution is 20 per cent of the amount contributed by the employer and the employee. During the period April 1947 to January 1948 the contributions to the fund by employers and employees through the sale of unemployment stamps and by means of bulk payments-some firms paid in that way- and other means, totalled $64,163,074.33. The government's contribution of 20 per cent of

Supply-Health and Welfare
those contributions amounted to $12,832,614.87. An amount of $3,457.58 was paid on account of 1946 in 1947-48. That makes a total of $12,836,072.45.	The amount of $12,500,000
which was voted last year lasted only until January of this year. The government was indebted to the fund as of yesterday in the amount of $3,900,000 and it is estimated that $1,100,000 will be necessary to meet our obligations to the fund between now and the end of March.
My hon. friends may think that that is a lot of money to spend between March 24 and March 31, the end of the financial year, but the fact is that many contributions for March are made in April. It is estimated that to take care of the government's contribution in that regard we will require this additional amount.
Yesterday when my supplementary estimates for the annuities branch were before the committee I said in reply to a question by the hon. member for York South that the extra amount required was due to increase in business and that the increase would be $3,250,000 for this fiscal year over the previous fiscal year. I thought perhaps the committee would be interested in the total figures showing the business which is being done by the annuities branch. For the last fiscal year ending March 31, 1947 the receipts were $72,009,764, a gain of about $25,000,000 over the preceding year, the total receipts in which amounted to $46,954,536. In the fiscal year ending March 31, 1945 the receipts totalled $33,076,436; for the year ending March 31, 1944 receipts totalled $26,600,097.75; for the year ending March 31, 1943 receipts totalled $20,415,365. In 1947 there were 194,623 individual contracts and certificates issued. This included 612 group contracts.
The hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario asked me about the commissions paid to annuities representatives. The following is the scale:
1.	For immediate annuities and single payment deferred annuities commission is one per cent of premium.
2.	For deferred annual payment annuities the scale is graduated according to when payment is to be completed.
3.	There is a maximum commission payable for an annuity or annuities on the life of one person of $50.
4.	In the case of retirement annuity plans, rates applicable to individual annuities apply but only up to a maximum of $400.
5.	If a representative's commissions for the current month exceed $300, they are subject to a reduction of 50 per cent of the excess.
If commissions thus calculated exceed $500 they are subject to a reduction of 75 per cent of the excess.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
National health branch
[Stage Direction]
608. Medical services-Indians and Eskimos- further amount required, $500,000.
Alan Cockeram: Will the minister explain this item?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Owing to the increased cost of hospitalization and medical care the amount of $2,000,000 already provided for special professional services will be inadequate this year. As my hon. friend knows, hospital costs are mounting and the cost of everything has gone up tremendously. We have a program that will require this extra amount which was not provided in the original estimate.


Alan Cockeram: How many doctors are included in this scheme?


Paul Joseph James Martin: There are about 700 part time doctors and about 60 or 70 permanent doctors. We have doctors in communities where there are Indians who render medical service and professional attendance; their fees are up and hospital costs are up. As a matter of fact we have not been able to meet the demands made upon us by hospitals in many parts of Canada with regard to payments.


John Bracken: What is the amount for this item for the next fiscal year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Approximately $7,187,530.


Robert Earle Drope: Have the fees charged by part time medical officers been raised?


Paul Joseph James Martin: In some areas, yes.


Robert Earle Drope: How much?


Paul Joseph James Martin: It depends upon the area. There is no uniform basis covering the whole country.


Robert Earle Drope: I take it that there is no standard system, that each case is worked out individually.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We work out each case in the light of conditions in the locality, just as we do with hospitalization.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
613. Railway mail service-further amount required, $470,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: What is the total amount paid for railway mail service and what percentage does this additional amount bear to the total?
Supply-Post Office


Hon. ERNEST BERTRAND (Postmaster General):: East year postal gifts which were sent to England showed a large increase. During the month of November they were up 42 per cent, mostly Christmas gifts being sent to England, but the average increase for the other eleven months in the year was 16 per cent. In 1946 it cost for the full year $443,000; in 1945, $376,000, and in 1944, $411,000. The rate of increase in expenditure for the other eleven months of 1947-48 was slightly over 16 per cent compared with the same period in 1946-47.
The provision made in the main estimates in 1947-48 was $2,385,000. We were short in our estimate by $470,000, which is the amount now being asked for. We did not think our Canadians would be sending so many gifts to England, and we had to transfer an allotment of $130,000. That meant that the total expenditure last year was $2,985,000. The provision in the main estimates for 1948-49 is $2,765,000, and if our Canadians are just as generous in sending gifts abroad this year as they were last, we shall be short again.


George Russell Boucher: The minister's figures
include the whole cost of giving the service, but do not include the revenue. I presume that when he spoke of a loss he meant the cost.


Ernest Bertrand: That is right.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
61-i. Air and land mail services-further amount required, $150,060.
Alan Cockeram: Does the same explanation apply to this item?


Ernest Bertrand: As the hon. gentleman knows, we have been paying supplements on the rural mail contracts. These supplements and other expenditure exceeded our estimate by $150,000. The main estimates for 1947-48 amounted to $10,750,000. That was expended, plus further supplementary estimates of $400,000, and the amount now applied for, $150,000, is the amount we are short. The estimate for 1948-49 is $11,980,000.


Alan Cockeram: The minister said the expenditure was $10,000,000 odd. I see by vote 313 that the estimate last year was $17,488,000. What is the explanation of that discrepancy?


Ernest Bertrand: The figure my hon. friend has quoted was for air and land mail services, but the vote now before us is for ordinary land conveyance, including rural mail delivery.


Alan Cockeram: The wording of the
item in the main estimates is exactly the same as the wording in 614, "air and land mail
services".


Ernest Bertrand: The wording is the same, but I am dealing now with mail by land, not by air.


Alan Cockeram: We are up in the air on this.


Ernest Bertrand: We shall be when the main estimates pass.


Mr. CHARLTON:: Was there not a surplus in the Post Office department last year?


Ernest Bertrand: Yes, a surplus of about $8,000,000, but it goes to the receiver general. If we had a surplus of $35,000,000 it would go to the receiver general. All we can spend is what is appropriated by parliament.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
617.	Ottawa-maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc.-further amount required, $225,006.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: What was the original estimate which is now being increased by $225,000? I want to get an idea of the percentage of errors.


Alphonse Fournier: Less than five per cent. Last year the estimate was $5,753,382. We under-estimated by $225,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: What does that cover?


Alphonse Fournier: Light and power, $40,000; furniture $50,000; materials and supplies, $135,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is that just for public buildings in Ottawa?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.
618.	Maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc.-further amount required, $260,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: What is the explanation of this?


Alphonse Fournier: The total vote for 1947-48 was $7,122,209. We under-estimated by $250,000, which comprises materials and supplies, $100,000, and furniture and fittings, $150,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Supply-Public Works
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-Ontario-
624. Thames river - redredging - further amount required, $15,290.
John Ritchie MacNicol: I presume this is for dredging at the mouth of the Thames river. Have the departmental engineers ever considered following the program of the engineers who look after the mouth of the Mississippi, of constructing a channel so that the water will run away faster and take the sediment out to deeper water? The mouth of the Thames river, as I have seen it in the springtime, is loaded with sediment which is dissipated and makes sand bars across the mouth of the river so that when a flood comes down the river the flow of water is blocked by the sand bars. Have the engineers ever considered constructing a channel right out into the lake?


Alphonse Fournier: I could not give a definite answer. These works were started last year with an estimate of $45,000. We found as the work proceeded that that amount was not sufficient to open the channel. It is difficult to make an accurate estimate of the cost of works of this kind. Often our engineers will report as the work proceeds that they will not be able to complete it with the amount at their disposal. I will take serious note of what the hon. gentleman has just said and ask my officials for a report.


John Ritchie MacNicol: There have been some serious floods on the Thames river, and one of the causes of these floods is that the water cannot get away fast enough once it gets down to the level land around Chatham. It cannot get away to the lake, and particularly at the lake the flow of the water laden with sediment at the mouth of the river into the lake has created sand bars. Floods are becoming very serious in western Ontario. This government will have to combine with the provincial government and other bodies to eliminate the floods on this river. One of these springs the city of Chatham will be seriously damaged, as was the city of Dayton on the Miami river a few years ago. It is a big problem. I should like the minister to consult with his engineers on this question and assist in eliminating floods by allowing the water of the Thames river to get away more freely.
Mr. _ FOURNIER (Hull): This natural bridge is caused by these floods. The expenditure of these moneys is justified to try to alleviate the condition, hecause this sand bar is formed by the spring floods coming down. We have not devised a means yet to eliminate
it. As I said a moment ago, I shall certainly refer the remarks of the hon. gentleman to the engineers to see if they can find a way to stop these floods.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
628. Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for, not more than $5,000 to be expended upon any one work-further amount required, $11,950.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is that a work of art?


Alphonse Fournier: No. We just passed the national gallery. These are miscellaneous works.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
LEGISLATION House of Commons-
592. General administration-estimates of the Clerk-further amount required, $108,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: There were certain questions I planned to ask at this time, but I was glad to hear Mr. Speaker answer some of them at three o'clock this afternoon. My questions had to do with what progress is being made in the matter of salary increases for employees of the House of Commons, and also whether these increases might be made retroactive to the same date that applied in the case of civil servants. I am sure the Speaker noted how pleased the house was with the announcement he made at three o'clock that increases would be forthcoming shortly and that they would be made retroactive to October 1 last. May I ask His Honour the Speaker at this time if he can say whether the matters now under consideration include a pension plan for sessional stenographers, assuming that they meet certain conditions?


James Horace King: I am very glad to take this occasion to call the attention of the house ' to the fact that the Speaker is not only the hon. gentleman who from the Chair has from time to time called the hon. member to order and has to decide whether an amendment is in order or not-


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Can we talk back to the hon. gentleman now?


James Horace King: As the hon. member knows, he is at the same time something like the manager of a big office building or a hotel. He is responsible for the restaurant; he is responsible for the cafeteria; he is responsible for giving hon. members efficient and pleasant stenographers and messengers
Supply-Legislation

and good service. I may say that in that respect he is as much interested as anybody- I would say more than anybody-in trying to do everything possible to recognize the good service given by all the employees of the House of Commons. I believe hon. members will give me credit for having tried, since I have been Speaker of the house, to do everything possible to help these people. Last year we considered what we could do to guarantee a position to everybody who is working in this house and to increase their salaries as the salaries of other people working in the government have been increased, to try to be agreeable and to help. Hon. members should not forget-and it is very important- that contrary to the rules in other departments of the administration of the country, the employees of the House of Commons are not responsible to the government nor to the administration of the country; they are responsible to the house. Therefore it is the privilege of the house to employ all the employees that we need for good service in the house, and I believe we should do everything possible to keep that privilege.
I hope that hon. members will understand the explanation that I am giving them. I understand that some hon. members believed from my pronunciation that I am just back from England or that I am living in Toronto, but unfortunately even if my English is not too good I hope that my words will be perfectly understood. The positions of all employees of the house are being considered at the present time by the internal economy commission of the house. A report will be made and tabled in the house. As I said this afternoon in my statement, it is the intention of the government to introduce in the house as soon as possible after Easter a resolution and a bill founded on that resolution in order that those who are entitled to be appointed permanently will be appointed, permanently; salaries will be decided for such and such a job, and I have every reason to believe that all the employees will be perfectly satisfied.


Jean-Thomas Richard: As one who has taken a special interest in all of the employees of the House of Commons, together with my colleague from Ottawa West I must say that I am rising at this time particularly to congratulate our Speaker on the special attention ho has given in the past two years to the staff and to the service in this house. I have confidence that his intentions are good, in the case of employees of this house, and that their fate could not be in better hands. I am sure that justice will be done to any claims which may be made on oehalf of employees of the house.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am sure we are all grateful for the statement that Mr. Speaker has made on this occasion. There are one or two comments I wish to make. His Honour indicated, and I think rightly, that the employees of the House of Commons are in a different category from the employees of the government, and I think it is correct to say that both the members of the House of Commons and the employees themselves want it to remain that way. His Honour referred to this as a privilege, and correctly so. I simply make the obvious remark that privileges carry with them responsibilities and that of course is the reason we are all interested- that is why Mr. Speaker is interested-in meeting our responsibilities to these people.
The Speaker referred to the comparison between employees of the House of Commons and the employees of the government generally. It is true that there have been increases in salaries for many classifications of civil servants, and I hope this will be done for all employees of the House of Commons. I hope that consideration will be given to some of those who have been here a long time and have not had increases for quite a number of years. Some times it happens that an employee's salary in terms of daily wage does not look too bad, but when it is realized that he has been on that same rate per day for a good many years and the cost of living keeps going up, he feels it is unfair to him if he does not get some increase as well.
I was glad to note what the Speaker said, that consideration was being given to all employees. I hoped he would be able to answer my question about stenographers in relation to pension plans. Did his reference to making some members permanent cover that phase of the matter?


James Horace King: I do not wish to make any commitment. After all, I am chairman of the committee which is known as the internal economy commission, and it has to approve a report which will be tabled in the house, but I may say to my hon. friend that I have always been an employer throughout my life, as I am at the present time in this House of Commons, and thank God, I understand the problems of employees, just as I understand, as a father, the problems of my children. I assure him that I will do everything possible, as I have done in the past, to give justice to these people and to give them security. They will receive what they deserve.
I am very sorry that, as the hon. member knows, we were so busy with committees and the business of the house that we could not

Supply-Legislation
settle the matter before Easter. I should very much have liked to make a declaration, for the benefit of the employees of the house, that such a decision has been reached before the Easter recess. Unfortunately that could not be done, but I assure my hon. friend that something will be done to their satisfaction. Moreover, it will be retroactive, so that they will not lose anything.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman-


Clarence Decatur Howe: We all love the employees of the house. Sit down.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What did the hon. member say?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We all love the employees of the house.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What was the rest of the remark?


Clarence Decatur Howe: You have spoken three times.


The CHAIRMAN:: The member for Winnipeg North Centre has the floor.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Another question I wish to direct to Mr. Speaker arises out of his reference to his responsibility for what he called1 a hotel- namely this building-with a good1 many activities included. One problem that does face this parliament right now, a problem which will become more acute after the next election, when there are ten more members, is that of office space for the members. This is a problem that lias been brought to the Speaker's attention many times. Can he tell the committee now whether any progress has been made in securing additional office space for members, so that some of the crowded conditions experienced at the present time may be relieved, and so that there may be room for the ten additional members after the next election?


James Horace King: I wish my hon. friend understood French. May I say this to him: "Une jolie fille ne peut donner que ce qu'elle a". That means that a nice girl can only offer what she has. Many members on both sides of the house have asked me for a private office. I should like very much to accommodate them if the space were available in this building. Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, we need more accommodation for the requirements of the House of Commons.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: On behalf of the backbenchers, and I occupy the bench farthest back on this side, may I say something with respect
to the acoustics of the chamber, now that we have Mr. Speaker himself in the benches. I cannot always hear what is going on for more than five minutes at a time, and it is disconcerting, when one is trying to listen to debates, to have those w'ho occupy the front rank discussing matters of importance back and forth at the beginning of the day when the rest of us cannot hear what is being said. On behalf of the backbenchers, may I say that we would appreciate it if something could be done and done soon, so that all of us in the house, even if we are comparatively new and unimportant, shall feel that we have some part in what is going on.


Gordon Graydon: May I intervene with reference to those who find employment in the House of Commons and the parliament buildings. I should not like word to go out that because some members are speaking a little more than others about the good points of those who work here, we have not all just as keen and as effective an interest in the welfare of these people. I think that goes for everyone in the house. We have received the most courteous and efficient service as members. I have been here now for almost thirteen years and I must confess that we owe a great debt of gratitude to those who have served us in one capacity or another on the staff of the House of Commons and in these parliament buildings. I want to say that Mr. Speaker will have the sympathetic support of those who sit in this part of the house, as I am sure he will receive the support of those in otheT parts, in giving these people a square deal. I need not say more to indicate that we are unanimous on this matter, as far as the membership of the House of Commons is concerned.


Mr. McIVOR:: I just want to say that we on this side of the house are just as much interested as anyone else in seeing that the staff of the House of Commons, particularly the stenographers, get a square deal. I take this opportunity of thanking the Speaker and those responsible for those employees getting paid during the holiday, and I hope he will give favourable consideration to the granting of pensions to those who have given long service.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Progress reported.
James Horace King: Mr. Chairman, before you proceed with another department, I should like to read a message I have received from government house.
Supply-Mines and Resources


James Horace King: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following message:
Ottawa, March 24, 1948
Sir,
I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable Thibaudeau Rinfret, Chief Justice of Canada, -acting as deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber today, 24th March, at 8.30 p.m., for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.
I have the honour to be,
Sir,
Your obedient servant,
J. F. Delaute,
Assistant Secretary to the Governor General.

The house again in committee of supply.


[Stage Direction]
Mines and geology branch-
597. Yukon coal development, $100,000.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Before the hon. member for Yukon left for his holiday, I was pleased to hear him laud the fine support he had been given by the Minister of Reconstruction and those associated with him in inducing the government to support the development of coal in the Yukon. The hon. member said it was good coal and that it would be of great help to the Yukon, to Whitehorse, Dawson md the other communities, so I should like die minister to tell us whether the develop-nent has already commenced, and if so what .onnage has been developed? I want to express my own appreciation of his support in promoting the development of coal in the Yukon.


Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Acting Minister of Mines and Resources):: As acting minister, on behalf of my colleague who unfortunately is ill, I might say that, due to the depletion of readily -accessible supplies of wood fuel, an urgent demand has arisen in the Yukon Territory for coal for domestic fuel, mining operations, shipping, et cetera. In 1947 certain mining interests in possession of a coal mine at Tantalus Butte undertook to re-equip the mine, bring it into production, and operate it to meet the needs of the Yukon, if the government would lend funds not exceeding $300,000 to assist in developing and operating the colliery, the loan to be on a repayment ' basis of $2 per ton of coal sold or used, and to carry interest at 3J per cent per annum. Authority was granted to the Department of Mines and Resources to enter into an appro-

priate agreement. Funds were made available by the Department of Reconstruction and Supply, subject to reimbursement by a supplementary estimate. The mine is being re-equipped and developed and some production has already been secured. It is anticipated that $100,000 will be expended in the current fiscal year.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That ought to help the development of the whole Yukon because, as the minister said-, the amount of timber now available is almost negligible and the cost of what is there is excessive. It runs in my mind that when I was in Dawson they were paying as much as $30 a cord for wood for which I would not pay a dollar. So, if this mine can be brought into development it will mean a great deal, and I am glad to hear the minister say that some coal is being turned out.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands, parks and forests branch-
599.	Administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act-further amount required, $900.
Mr. ZAPLITNY:: Could the acting minister tell us whether any representations have been received recently from game and fish associations across Canada, asking for the revision of the Migratory Birds Convention Act?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am afraid I cannot give the hon. member that information at the moment. I was notified only today that I would be acting minister of the department, but I will get the information and give it to the hon. member.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: That is quite satisfactory.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands, parks and forests branch-
600.	Forest and wildlife conservation-further amount required, $29,938.
Mr. COCKER-AM: I suppose the same situation applies in connection with this item? Can the minister say why this expenditure is required?
James Angus MacKinnon: This additional amount is required to cover costs resulting from forest fires during June, August and September in Highlands national park, Cape Breton.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian Affairs branch-
CO'i. Welfare of Indians-further amount required, $100,00-0.
Mrs. STRUM:: I should like to know what this represents.


James Angus MacKinnon: This is the estimated amount required to provide the minimum

Supply-Trade and Commerce
assistance to Indians to prevent suffering. Because of price increases, the cost of food supplies which were contracted for last year is much greater than was estimated. Indians in northern Canada are having a poor fur catch for the second year in succession. Rabbits, a source of food, are scarce. Because of these circumstances and the increased cost of living, the department has had to give financial help.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: Then this applies to the ration position, does it?


James Angus MacKinnon: Yes.


Gladys Grace Mae Strum: Then is the minister contemplating the payment of old age pensions this year?


James Angus MacKinnon: I could not say. I will have to inform the hon. member later.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
636.	Exhibitions, including authority to refund from revenue deposits received for contracts for space at the Canadian international trade fair, further amount required, $90,000.
Alan Cockeram: Will the minister tell us about this item?


Clarence Decatur Howe: An appropriation of $550,000 has been made in the main estimates for a trade fair in Toronto. Every nation of the world will be represented by its products-


Gordon Graydon: Every one?


Clarence Decatur Howe: You would be surprised at some of the countries which will be there in full force. The amount of $550,000 was provided for the next fiscal year, but it was found that a portion of the money will be required this year to make alterations in the buildings. Therefore the sum of $90,000 is being moved ahead from the appropriation of next year into this year's vote. That is why it is here.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: We do not expect to make revenue from the fair, do we?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, but we expect we shall break even.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian government travel bureau-
637.	To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada-further amount required, $175,-OOO.
John Ritchie MacNicol: Each of the nine provinces is spending large sums of money, and properly so, in the promotion of the tourist business, one of our best businesses. I have
been wondering whether what is done in the provinces overlaps that done by the dominion. Is there any duplication?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The purpose of the dominion travel bureau was to co-ordinate and supplement the work of the provinces. In my opinion that is what is being done. This amount of $175,000 was for a special drive put on for winter business this winter, in advertising skiing resorts and winter holiday opportunities in Canada. I believe the effort was reasonably effective. The resorts had a good winter.


John Ritchie MacNicol: What is the total amount of money spent by the federal government and the nine provinces?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It would run into probably $4,000,000 or $5,000,000; and in my opinion that is not too much. I think we should spend more rather than less money in advertising the travel possibilities of Canada.


Mr. FRASER:: Does the minister not think the government should have some plans for the trans-Canada highway, in order to attract tourists here, because at the present time we have not proper roads through Canada. They have to travel too much in the United States.


Clarence Decatur Howe: All things in their time. At the present time manpower in Canada is being used to the full in other ways. As soon as we have surplus manpower we shall certainly undertake that.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I am suggesting that the government should now have a plan, with the different provinces, in deciding where the highway will go. Then, when we have plenty of manpower and materials, let the road be built. But that plan should be drawn up now.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think there is a lot in what you say.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I suggest to the minister that when we come to the estimates after the Easter recess we should have an answer to the question asked by the hon. member for Davenport, as to what is being done by other agencies spending money in Canada.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I shall be glad to have that information when the main estimates are under consideration, and when the officers of the branch will be with me.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I understand that practically all this money is spent on advertising.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.
Supply-Trade and Commerce


John Ritchie MacNicol: I will not detain the house much longer, but we know the minister had much to do with the construction of the Shipshaw project, which is in this country the greatest power plant we have. I have been wondering if by some method the tourist bureau could advertise that project, and bring the facts associated with it to the attention of the people of the United States. Recently, when I was at Boulder dam I was told by an engineer there that Boulder dam is gradually becoming the greatest tourist attraction in the United States. I looked at it and said to myself, "Yes, it is a great tourist attraction; but Shipshaw is a great attraction, too." By what means or method can we bring Shipshaw to the attention of the tourist public? It would mean much to that part of Canada.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I believe I can say that all the transportation facilities into the Saguenay are booked up fully for the next summer season. I believe it is a mere matter of transportation, to make the Saguenay more readily accessible to tourists.


Gordon Graydon: Has the Canadian travel bureau moved from its former quarters to more commodious ones, or is it still in the same place?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is still in the old supreme court building. I believe those quarters are reasonably satisfactory.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Some weeks ago I asked a question regarding customs regulations. I said I believed that many citizens of the United States felt they would not be able to come to Canada during the coming season because of customs regulations. They have the feeling that those regulations have been changed. I suggest that the publicity bureau should do everything possible to tell United States tourists that the regulations concerning their entry into Canada are exactly the same as they always have been.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We are doing everything we can in that direction, even to the extent of getting out a film on the subject.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I sincerely hope it is not got out by the national film board,, and that some commercial company does it. Otherwise it would not be done properly.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
6SS. Canadian Commercial Corporation-To reimburse the Canadian Commercial Corporation for expenses incurred in purchasing materials, supplies and equipment, etc., on behalf of the Department of National Defence under chapter 51, statutes of 1947, and approval of the amount
rMr. Howe.]
of $86,060 paid from national defence appropriation for this purpose in the year 1946-47, $548,066.
George Russell Boucher: Is this total expense
incurred by the Canadian Commercial Corporation in purchasing for the Department of National Defence? What are the total estimated expenditures on such purchases, so that we may know to what extent they have been acting this year in purchasing for the Department of National Defence?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The amount of $548,000
shown here is the total expense of operating the Canadian Commercial Corporation for the last twelve months. The reason it appears as a special supplementary is that it had been the intention of the government that each department would pay the corporation for the services performed for that department, as in the case with private firms. The Canadian Commercial Corporation purchases for foreign governments. In that case a fee is charged the government for the work performed by the corporation.
But the policy was reversed, and it was decided that, so far as the Department of National Defence is concerned, instead of charging that department a fee for making purchases for it, the cost of purchasing for that department would be borne by the Department of Trade and Commerce under an estimate as indicated here.


George Russell Boucher: Under what authority was the expense incurred?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The Canadian Commercial Corporation was organized to purchase for the government. It was authorized by order in council to purchase for the armed services. It took over that responsibility from the Department of Reconstruction and Supply.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: As an agent?


George Russell Boucher: I understand that it was done as an agent for the Department of National Defence.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


George Russell Boucher: I do not see how it has the authority to incur this expense and to ask the House of Commons to vote this amount. I feel it should have authority other than that of an agent if it is to do that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The Department of Trade and Commerce can have an agent that works free, if it wishes, so far as I know. That is the situation here. It is just a matter of government policy. It is felt that, as the management of the Canadian Commercial Corpora-

Supply-Trade and Commerce
tion is a responsibility of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, the Minister of Trade and Commerce should pay its bills rather than have it charge a fee to other departments of government for which it performs services. The policy may be right or wrong, but that is the policy.


George Russell Boucher: There is one difficulty that I see in the whole idea of the Canadian Commercial Corporation. If things are to be done in this way it will be impossible for the members of this house or the country at large to know just what the Canadian Commercial Corporation is costing the Canadian people, to know just how expenditures are allocated. In other words, it will be almost impossible for a member of this house to get any definite information as to the activities, expenditures and operating expenses of the Canadian Commercial Corporation. Certainly, if we charge each department a fee for what the Canadian Commercial Corporation does, certainly if they get certain moneys from the Department of National Defence; if they get moneys from foreign governments, it will be impossible for the members of this house and the country at large to know anything about the financial success, failure or efficiency of this corporation.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I just pointed out that the Canadian Commercial Corporation does not collect fees from other departments of the government for services performed for those departments. The Canadian Commercial Corporation is a crown company and an audited statement will be presented to parliament in the usual form. All the information that my hon. friend desires can be obtained from the report of the corporation.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Is this collection of public funds in addition to those appropriated with respect to national defence?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. These costs were formerly charged to the Department of National Defence; they are now being paid direct by the Department of Trade and Commerce and the expenditures of the Department of National Defence will be reduced accordingly.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: If I understood the minister correctly, what has really happened is that, instead of the Canadian Commercial Corporation acting as agents, as the minister said was originally contemplated, in fact it is now acting as principal; is that correct?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, it is not correct at all. It acts as agent of the Department of National Defence; it buys what the Department of National Defence instructs it to buy. In
other words, it is an agent but instead of adding a fee to each purchase, as is the case when it purchases for a foreign government, it performs that service at no cost to the department.


George Russell Boucher: Can the minister give us any reason why the Department of Trade and Commerce should be charged for work actually done for the Department of National Defence? Why should the charge not be made against the department for which the work is done? It seems to me that it would be just good accounting to charge disbursements or expenses to the department for which the service is rendered.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I may say that the view expressed by my hon. friend was my own view; but, after looking into the matter, the treasury board instructed that, since the Minister of Trade and Commerce was responsible for the management of the Canadian Commercial Corporation, it preferred that all expenses of the corporation relating to departments of government should be paid for by the Department of Trade and Commerce. If you ask me why, I cannot tell you; I am simply saying that those are the instructions which were received.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should like to make a suggestion which I will not express at the moment. If I understood correctly what the minister said, the original basis has been altered. Whether that is within the terms of the original legislation, I do not know. I suggest that when the item covering the Canadian Commercial Corporation comes up this question might be brought up again and in the interim the minister might look into the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
639. Canadian wheat board-To reimburse the Canadian wheat board for expenses incurred from August 1, 1944 to July 31, 1947, in regulating deliveries of grain, allocation of railway cars and administration of regulations relating to maximum prices of grain, $733,249.81.
Lewis Elston Cardiff: Can the minister tell us exactly what these expenditures are for?


Clarence Decatur Howe: This represents certain
expenses incurred by the Canadian wheat board in performing services not related to the selling of wheat but to the rationing of elevator space, to the administration of the grain regulations, to the allocation of railway cars and other services performed on the instructions of the dominion government and for which the dominion government pays the wheat board direct.
Supply-National Revenue


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Now that the wheat board act amendment has been passed by both houses, I should like to ask the minister if he is prepared to inform the house and the country within the next few days what the participation payments will be?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Not having a quorum of my colleagues here, I am afraid that I could not get them to confirm anything I might say. I shall endeavour to put out a press statement not later than tomorrow afternoon.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE Customs and excise divisions-
609. General administration-further amount required, $10,000.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: I should like to ask the minister what has been done in connection with the Hamilton office and what was the cause of the whole thing.


Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue):: There was fraudulent action on the part of some employees who were dismissed.
Mr. FRASER; Were there other irregularities in that office? Were there other things in the office?


James Joseph McCann: I do not know what the hon. member is referring to when he says "other things."


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Were there not other causes besides fraudulent reports?


James Joseph McCann: There were irregularities and fraudulent practices on behalf of seven employees who have been dismissed.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
611. Ports, outports and preventive stations, including pay for overtime of officers notwith* standing anything in the Civil Service Act, and temporary buildings and rentals - further amount required, $198,000.
George Russell Boucher: Could the minister explain this rather large item?


James Joseph McCann: The $3,000 in other paylist items is to meet the government's contributions to unemployment insurance. The $2,000 in the living allowance item is to provide living allowances to additional examiners at Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, and a new man at Tulsequah, British Columbia. The amount of $25,000 for uniforms is due to the necessity of providing uniform clothing for additional staff at border offices and to meet the increased cost of material and manufacturers' costs.

The additional $15,000 in the printing and stationery item is due to insufficient funds being provided in the main estimates to cover increased printing requirements made necessary by additional forms required to implement the exchange conservation program. The amount, of $25,000 in travelling expenses is to meet the expenses for increased travelling and the increased cost of meals and hotel accommodation. The amount of $8,000 in telegrams and telephones is to cover the cost of additional installations in Montreal and Toronto and to provide funds to meet increased service rates by several telephone companies.
The amount of $35,000 for cartage is to cover the rising costs in contracting for the transportation of imported goods to the examining warehouse for appraisal and the increase in the number of packages requiring examination. The additional amount of $5,000 required for postage is due to the increased volume of mail being dispatched, on which postage is required and the more general use of air mail services. The $5,000 advance in express and freight is due to increased shipments in office supplies to ports, outports and preventive stations. The amount of $1,200, is to provide funds for a 25 per cent advance in rentals allowed by government with respect to commercial properties; $4,500 to provide for higher costs of material and labour in regard to repairs and upkeep of buildings; $43,300 to meet the purchase cost of necessary properties together with the increased costs of material and labour in connection with the construction of buildings, improvements, et cetera; $1,000 is required to meet cost of equipment renewed or replaced and $25,000 for the purchase of five prefabricated units for the temporary housing of customs officers at the new international terminal at Blackpool, Quebec, on the new boulevard highway between Montreal and New York city.


Alan Cockeram: The minister said that the uniforms will cost $25,000 in addition to the $75,000 already spent. How many extra men are being taken on at the border?


James Joseph McCann: All told, because of the new regulations, we have taken on approximately 240 men and women.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: What provision has been made to look after Peterborough this year? Last year the taxation division put in a little office for a short time. What is to be done this year? Has the minister any information on that?

Supply-Transport


James Joseph McCann: No. Is my hon. friend speaking on item 612?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Yes, the taxation division. I know of some people who went into the temporary taxation office in Peterborough last year and had income tax papers checked, and then about two months ago they received word) that they owed extra money. I do not know if that was the fault of the staff, the regulations, or what it was. I think Peterborough should have a permanent taxation office, with the proper facilities for checking papers. The office they did have was very poor and was understaffed. It was occupied for only a short time and, being understaffed, the officials there were rushed off their feet. There should be provision made for a j'-ear-round office in Peterborough. It is seventy-five miles to the nearest office at Belleville.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
61,0. Departmental administration 

 further amount required to provide for an additional deputy minister for the Department of Transport to be appointed by the governor dn council and to be called the deputy minister of transport for air services, to hold office during pleasure, and to have and exercise such powers, duties and functions with respect to the air services branch of the said department as may be specified by the Minister of Transport-amount required for 1947-48, $2,000.
Mr. MOORE:: A serious educational problem confronts the village of Churchill in northern) Manitoba. It has been brought about because of a property situation in Churchill which is peculiar in our Canadian economy. Ninety-nine per cent of the $3,300,000 of property in Churchill is administered by some department of the federal government. The total amount of property taxable for school purposes is only $38,000, and the revenue obtainable from that small amount of taxable property is not sufficient to operate a school at Churchill. It is true there is a public school there now which looks after the needs of thirty-five students, but in addition there are forty students who cannot get into the school and for whom no educational facilities are provided. The situation has been brought to the attention of the department of education of the Manitoba government, which takes the stand that, since there is no taxable property there, they cannot increase the provincial grant to the school at that point. I have talked with the deputy minister of education of Manitoba and he takes the stand that I am giving to the committee. The people in Churchill are anxious that something be done at the earliest possible
moment to provide a suitable school to take care of the educational needs of the pupils at that point, and I submit that they have a very good case for assistance from the federal government. The deputy minister of educa-That is another reason, I submit, why there province the Department of Justice makes an annual grant of $2,550 to the federal district of Stony Mountain for school purposes. I submit therefore that the federal government should recognize the request of the community of Churchill, because most of the property there is federally owned.
The other day a return was brought down, showing the grants made by the federal government for educational purposes, for vocational training, and the grants to the various provinces totalled $225,000 a year. That is another reason, I submit, why there should be federal aid for the public school at Churchill. The community of Churchill is not by any means destitute. The people there are hard working and they are willing and anxious to pay their fair share of educational costs, but because of the peculiar property situation that exists in that community, it is very difficult for them to have a school constructed at that point out of funds raised from local taxation.
There is another point I want to bring out. Five miles out of Churchill there is an army barracks, where quite a number of members of the armed forces live with their wives and families. The federal government immediately recognized the needs of the army and built a school at the barracks to take care of the children. I am not quarreling with that at all. I think the school was necessary, and it was a good thing that the government went ahead and built one, but I say that the people of Churchill are entitled to the same consideration and steps should immediately be taken by some department of the federal government to set aside funds for the construction of a school at Churchill before another term passes. The time for education for young people is limited indeed, and it would be a disgrace if the children living in that area were to lose one more term of school because of inaction either by the federal or the provincial government.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maritime Freight Rates Act-
6',9. Additional amount in excess of the sum of $3,042,000 already appropriated, to authorize and provide for the payment from time to time during the fiscal year 1947-48 to the Canadian National Railway Company of the difference (estimated by the Canadian National Railway Company and certified by the auditors of the
2600	COMMONS
Supply-Government Owned Enterprises__
said company to the Minister of Transport, as and when required by the said minister) occurring on account of the application of the Maritime Freight Rates Act, between the tariff tolls and the normal tolls (upon the same basis as set out in section 9 of the said act with respect to companies therein referred to) on all traffic moved during the calendar year 1947 under the tariffs approved on the eastern lines (as referred to in section 2 of the said act) of the Canadian National Railways-further amount required, $1,099,529.39.
Douglas King Hazen: Is the minister in a position to tell us when the transport commission will deliver judgment in the application of the railways for an increase in rates?
Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport)1: I am afraid I could not answer that question. It is a matter for the chairman of the board of transport commissioners. The board is a court, and when it is ready to hand down judgment I presume it will issue a press release giving details. I am not in a position to say when that will be, whether it will be soon or in the distant future.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Cannot you use any moral suasion?


Lionel Chevrier: Would the hon. gentleman like to see the judgment handed1 down?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
GOVERNMENT OWNED ENTERPRISES Deficits-Transport-
660.	Additional amount in excess of the sum of $707,960 already appropriated, to provide for the payment during the fiscal year 1947-48 to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the national company) upon application approved by the Minister of Transport, made from time to time by the national company to the Minister of Finance, and to be applied by the national company in payment of the deficit (certified by the auditors of the national company) in the operation of the Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals arising in the calendar year 1947-further amount required, $224,855.96.
Mr. McLURE:: I take objection to the language of this vote. It says, "government owned enterprises". Then it refers to "deficits, transport". These deficits are charged up to the Prince Edward Island ferry service. I brought this matter up in the committee on railways, and they said they would see that the matter was given its proper name. Instead of a deficit it should be a service, because the government owes this service to the province. It should not appear in the public accounts as a deficit. May I give as an example the deficits on the canals in Quebec and Ontario. They run to over 84,000,000. That amount does not appear in the public accounts as a

deficit; it appears as a government service to these provinces. Under the terms under which we entered confederation in 1873 this service was guaranteed to us. It now appears as a deficit against our province. It is not a deficit.	.
Another thing about this vote is that it runs to the year ending March, 1948, and amounts in all to 8931,855.96 but no breakdown is given. W'e have never any details of one cent of the amount that appears in the vote. There must be some bookkeeping service on this, and this committee should know the items that caused this deficit, as they call it, or as a service, as it should be called. When the main estimates come down I hope that we shall have a breakdown of this 8931,000, so that we may know what it is, and then we shall be able to find out what the earnings- are, and if the government still insist on calling it a deficit we shall know how that deficit comes about. It should not be called a deficit, because it is a government service.


Lionel Chevrier: May I say to the hon. gentleman the reason there are no details is that this matter is submitted to the committee on railways and shipping where a full opportunity is given of discussing the details.
With respect to the first part of his statement concerning the objection to the manner in which it is described, may I say this is an accounting matter with the Canadian National Railways, and they have decided to set it up in this way. I drew the hon. member's representations of last year to their attention and they were considered, but the accountants of the railway have come to the conclusion that this is the proper way in which to do it.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: With regard to the amount of this account, surely the Minister of Transport is not going to pay this bill unless he has an account of it.


Lionel Chevrier: That is right.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Where does the deficit come from?


Lionel Chevrier: We do not pay this bill until it is certified by the accountants of the Canadian National Railways. They have certified that this is a further amount required for the fiscal year 1947-48.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT Air service-radio division-
652. Issue of radio receiving licences-(transport department only)-further amount required, $344,000.
Mr. JACKMAN:: I presume the fees which are collected and taken in constitute the gross

Supply-T ransport
amount, and any costs of collecting are deducted from the amount.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, that is right. The change arose out of the change in the act last year. My hon. friend will perhaps recall that the radio committee recommended to the house, and the house approved, a new method by which, instead of the cost of collecting fees being charged back to the revenue of the corporation, the house decided that the corporation should have the gross amount collected, and that the cost of collection would be paid from the consolidated revenue fund.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: The amount was not set up in the original estimates?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It was too late; it was after the estimates were passed.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: This is the whole amount?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
GOVERNMENT OWNED ENTERPRISES Deficits-Transport-
661.	Amount required to provide for the payment during the fiscal year 1947-48 to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the national company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport, made from time to time by the national company, to the Minister of Finance and to be applied by the national company in payment of the deficit (certified by the auditors of the national company) arising in the calendar year 1947, but not including amounts charged to proprietor's equity of the national railway system as defined in chapter twenty-two of the statutes of Canada, 1937:
Canadian National Railways, exclusive of eastern lines, $5,280,432.77; eastern lines, $10,604,761.51, $15,885,194.28.
Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: Before this item is carried, may I just pass a few remarks on this deficit of the Canadian National Railways. Those of us who were here in the depression years know perfectly well that from year to year we were faced with very large deficits. It has always seemed to me to be unfair to saddle the railway with at least a great deal of this deficit. Those of us who know the history of the Canadian National Railways realize that the railways which now comprise the Canadian National were taken over at a value which was not warranted at the time and that they are now loaded down with a capitalization upon which they cannot possibly meet all the obligations that they have to meet in various ways. I suggest again to the committee, as I did in the years before the war, and as other hon. members have suggested, that we should reconsider the capitalization of the Canadian National Railways and remove
from that railway a great deal of the deadweight which it carries and which should never have been carried by the railway. If I may put it in this way, it was an error on the part of parliament and the government of Canada, and until we have removed that tremendous burden from the railway it will never be able to make a comparable showing. May I say that it has a depressing effect on the whole of the staff of the railway? They seem to say, Well, we have such an impossible burden; what can we do? If we want efficiency from the employees of the railway we have to give them a chance to be able to show the people of Canada that they are rendering good service and that the railway is not placing an impossible burden on the people of the country. I plead with the government once again to reconsider this whole matter, and when the time comes, to come forward with a recommendation to relieve the railway of a tremendous burden which it should not be called upon to carry.


Lionel Chevrier: I am glad my hon. friend brought that point out, because it is one which is receiving careful consideration. Hon. members will remember that when the Minister of Trade and Commerce was Minister of Transport he did bring in a measure having to do with the recapitalization of the Canadian National Railways. Various forms of recapitalization have been suggested, but the government have not yet reached any decision. I can assure my hon. friend that the matter has been given some attention. There is no unanimity in the house on that point. It is a veiy debatable point. I see the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario looking at me very carefully. I am sure he has very strong views on this, too.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I will express my own views.
Mr. CHEI/RIER: I have heard them expressed to me on previous occasions in the house. All I can say is that the matter is receiving consideration.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Since the minister has referred to it, I think I had better express my own view. I agree with the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar that for an operating staff constantly to carry a deficit is a very depressing thing, but I would ask the minister whether there has not been a great deal of relief given by way of writing off certain indebtedness to the Canadian National Railways. I would also make this point. My feeling at the moment is that at a time of high operating volume the real reason the railway has a deficit is that there has been a huge rise in its costs without a corresponding rise in its rates. That is the $64 question, I know.
2602	COMMONS
Supply-Government Owned Enterprises__


Lionel Chevrier: My hon. friend is right. There is no doubt that the reason for the increase is higher wages, increased1 cost of materials and so forth, even though there was an increased volume of traffic.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am merely pointing out that what is happening today is distinctly different from the thirties to which the hon. member for Rose-town-Biggar referred. At that time the deficit was due to a lamentable falling off in business.


Lionel Chevrier: Is my hon. friend in favour of recapitalization?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister will remember that I asked what had been done. My impression is that a lot has been done. I would not wish to express an opinion on recapitalization until I knew more about the rise in costs and something of the important decision which we are to have on freight rates.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: The item is large and has too much significance in the economy of this country to be passed over so lightly.
I remember at the time of the 1940 election one of the main questions in my riding was the C.N.R. deficit, which has now fallen into insignificance, but nevertheless is important in principle. Would the minister be good enough to tell the committee what the $15,000,000 appropriation covers by way of deficit? I understood that the railway has always earned its operating charges even during the worst years of the depression. The wording of item 661 is, "to be applied by the national company in payment of the deficit (certified by the auditors of the national company) arising in the calendar year, 1947, but not including amounts charged to proprietor's equity of the national railway system as defined in chapter twenty-two of the statutes of Canada, 1937." I assume that the railway has earned all operating charges and has earned-or has it?- interest on bonds held by the public, but has not earned interest on the bonds held by the government.


Lionel Chevrier: It is government loans.
Mi'. JACKMAN: I do not recollect the exact form of their accounts at the moment. What does the $15,000,000 really go for?


Lionel Chevrier: This matter is always discussed at length in the committee on railways and shipping, but the $15,000,000 arises when operating revenues are placed against operating expenses, and then, when the miscellaneous items are taken off there is net income available for payment of interest to

the extent of upwards of $27,000,000. Interest on funded debt and government loans more than equals the net income available for the payment of interest. The interest on funded debt is $23,000,000 and interest on government loans $20,000,000, which accounts for the $15,000,000 deficit.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: I notice that the deficit is divided into two parts, one dealing with eastern lines, $10,000,000, and the other dealing with other than eastern lines. Can the minister designate what comprises the eastern lines and what are the other lines?


Lionel Chevrier: The eastern lines are those extending from a point at Diamond Junction in the province of Quebec, including all the eastern part of Quebec, and the provinces of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: Is there any substantial difference in the rates charged between the eastern lines and the other lines?


Lionel Chevrier: The Maritime Freight Rates Act provides for a 20 per cent reduction in the eastern line territory.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: It seems strange that the deficit in the eastern lines is twice as much as that on the other lines. Would one of the reasons be that the lower freight rate brings less revenue?


Lionel Chevrier: That is not the only reason. There are many other reasons. The volume of freight is higher in the other section than in the eastern end.


Frederick Samuel Zaplitny: But that could be a contributory reason?


Lionel Chevrier: Yes.


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I think it should be said that there was a substantial write-off of C.N.R. capitalization some years ago, in the neighbourhood of $800 million, which offset any surplus and unnecessary capitalization the C.N.R. might have. One thing that the war has proved is that Canada needs a second railway. It is absolutely essential. The Minister of Reconstruction and Supply would agree, I think, that the country needs this railway; it has a useful function to perform, and will be needed not only in wartime but in ordinary times. It is a good, well-managed, serviceable railway, by no means a white elephant, and should be able to earn charges under any proper system of rate making. What is the status of the application for higher freight rates at the present time? Does the minister not think that the method of being granted

Supply-Government Owned Enterprises
higher freight rates is rather antiquated if it takes so long? It is over a year since this city was inundated by high-priced lawyers for provinces, railways, the government and others. We should have that streamlined a bit. It should be pointed out also, in answer to the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, as my colleague has said, that there has been no increase in rates since the 1930's.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: Are you in favour of an increase in rates?


Harry Rutherford Jackman: I do not know of anything else in the economy that has not gone up in view of the fact that wages and supplies have increased substantially. I am not in favour of an increase in rates if the railways can maintain adequate service for the people, but I should think the managers of the railways would have to be nothing less than wizards to maintain adequate service with 1948 wages and material costs and 1930 freight rates.


An hon. MEMBER:: What about calling in six per cent bonds for a change?


Mr. QUELCH:: What percentage of the capital stock is held in Canada?


Lionel Chevrier: The capital stock of the Canadian National is all held in Canada.


Victor Quelch: None held in Britain?


Lionel Chevrier: None.


Mr.  M. J. COLD WELL@Rosetown-Biggar: I do not want to enter into a discussion of freight rates, but what we have to bear in mind is that this country is largely bound together by bands of steel. Our railways are a vital part of confederation and, under ordinary business freight rate conditions, freight rates from many parts of Canada to the coast are prohibitive. It is part of the obligation of maintaining a united Canada to subsidize, if you will, the carrying of freight over long distances in this country. When you think of the distance between Ontario and western Canada, and across the mountains to the coast, and again from Quebec right through to Prince Edward Island, literally thousands of miles of non-revenue producing railway, you realize that a freight rate structure comparable with that of the United States with which we compete is an impossibility in this country. And if we boosted freight rates to do all that the hon. member for Rosedale would ask us to do, I think it would kill the competitive spirit of Canadians in the remote parts of Canada in the marketing of their produce across the seas.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Deficits-Transport-
662.	To hereby authorize and provide for payment during the fiscal year 1947-48 to Trans-Canada Air Lines to be applied by Trans-Canada Air Lines in payment of the deficit (certified by the auditor of Trans-Canada Air Lines to the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply as and when required by the said minister) resulting from the operations of Trans-Canada Air Lines during the calendar year 1947, less the surplus accruing from the operations of the Trans-Canada Air Lines (Atlantic) Limited, during 1947, and less the accumulated surplus of the Trans-Canada Air Lines as at December 31, 1946:
Trans-Canada Air Lines deficit, calendar year 1947, $1,761,042.84.
Less: Surplus Trans-Canada Air Lines (Atlantic) Limited, year 1947, $136,303.31.
Less: Accumulated surplus Trans-Canada Air Lines as at December 31, 1946, $255,061,23. $1,369,678.30.
John Oliver Probe: This item is to provide for additional sums for Trans-Canada Air Lines and it is under the Department of Transport. I thought the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply was in charge of Trans-Canada Air Lines. Has that been changed? Is it no longer a condition that the Department of Transport is in sole charge of Trans-Canada Air Lines?


Lionel Chevrier: The position has not changed. This item is still a division of the Department of Transport which has, by virtue of the Transfer of Duties Act, been under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Reconstruction.


John Oliver Probe: I notice there is indicated here, in the accumulated deficit we are asked to provide for under 662, a deficit on account of Trans-Canada Air Lines itself of $1,761,000 odd for the calendar year 1947, and at the same time, while the Canadian end of Trans-Canada Air Lines has a large deficit, Trans-Canada Air Lines (Atlantic), which I presume is our overseas service of T.C.A., has a reasonable surplus of $136,000. The net deficit, based upon the operations of the Canadian portion of T.C.A. combined with the oceanic or overseas portion, amounts to something like 81,624,000 for 1947. At the end of the previous year there was an accumulated surplus, apparently on domestic operations, of some $255,000, which is being applied to the deficit of $1,624,000, leaving the house to provide some [DOT]$1,369,000. Would the Minister of Transport explain why, as between 1946 and 1947, we suddenly go from an operational surplus of about a quarter of a million dollars to a deficit, on the domestic operations of this line, of roughly a million and three-quarters? Has traffic fallen off, or what are the changed conditions that brought about this deficit in the domestic operations of Trans-Canada Air Lines?
2604	COMMONS
Supply-Government Owned Enterprises


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend is quite mistaken when he says we suddenly plunged from a surplus last year to a loss this year. We had a substantial loss last year. This is a very big subject, and I do not know that we ought to examine the accounts of Trans-Canada Air Lines just now, when we shall be doing it all over again in committee within the next two or three weeks.


John Oliver Probe: I am quite agreeable to a short statement from the minister.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The history of Trans-Canada Air Lines shows surpluses as follows:
1940		  $539,000
1941		 302,000
1042		 494,000
1043		 147,000
1944		 7,000
1945		 32,000
In 1046 there was a loss of $1,629,000, which was met out of the accumulated surplus of previous years, leaving a surplus of $255,000 at the end of 1946. This year there was a loss of about $1,700,000 on the domestic air lines and a small profit on the transatlantic operations; and the net loss was sufficient to take up the balance of the earned surplus of previous years and require a deficit vote, the first this parliament has ever been called upon to provide. The reason is the increased costs associated with the change-over of equipment, together with the unusual amount of pilot training. These have created costs which the line has not been able to meet from earnings.
I might add that, coupled with those circumstances, was a very bad spring in 1947. If my hon. friend is familiar with air line operations he will know that every air line in the world had a heavy deficit for the first half of 1947. A series of crashes, bad weather and other circumstances brought about that situation. It is hoped that the tailspin is pretty well over, and this year we hope to come out with a decent operating statement. A number of circumstances added together have brought about the deficits of the last two years. I hope my hon. friend is not going to pursue the matter, because we could carry this on until midnight and still I would not have told him the whole story.


John Oliver Probe: No. I wish T.C.A. exceedingly well, but of course I am puzzled to find a domestic deficit while there is a surplus on our overseas operations. Surely the changeover of equipment took place in both connections; at least there was the acquisition of these North Star planes for the overseas service, which I presume would amount to the same thing. Pursuing that just a bit further, however, I should like to know if

there is a difference in the rates per passenger mile as between T.C.A. domestic and overseas operations. Is there a different rate of mail subsidy? Is there a different rate charged for express service as between domestic and overseas operations, which in the one case might make it appear that there is an unfavourable operating ratio and in the other perhaps create a surplus? Would the Minister of Trade and Commerce comment briefly on that point? I do not want a long explanation.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes, there is a decided difference. The rate on domestic lines is about six cents a mile, while the rate overseas is about twelve cents a mile, or perhaps more. One reason for that is the very large tonnage of gasoline that has to be carried in order to take the plane over three thousand miles; but that is common to all air lines. The rates charged by Trans-Canada Air Lines are comparable with those on land lines to the south, and the rates charged across the Atlantic are comparable with those of competing services.


John Oliver Probe: When the minister says six cents and twelve cents, what is he talking about? Are those passenger rates, mail rates or express rates?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Passenger fares.


John Oliver Probe: What about the mail rates?


Clarence Decatur Howe: They are in about the same proportion.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Is the cost of planes included in this deficit?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The cost of purchasing planes is a capital expenditure. The cost of amortizing the planes is an operating cost.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I have one personal complaint to make. Last summer the minister undertook that he would put the seats in these planes further apart, and he has not done so.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If my hon. friend will try our transatlantic planes, which will shortly be in domestic service, he will see the difference.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT National harbours board-
663.	To provide for payment to the national harbours board of the amount hereinafter set forth, to be applied in payment of the deficit (exclusive of interest on dominion government advances and depreciation on capital structure) arising in the calendar year 1947 in the operation of the Quebec harbour, $70,481.14.
Mr. McKAY:: Would the minister tell us whether or not there are any other harbours

Supply-Veterans Affairs
showing a deficit and why Quebec harbour, which is under the harbours board is the only one in this list?


Lionel Chevrier: The deficit in Quebec harbour was not anticipated when the main estimates were in preparation. I have a lengthy statement here which I can place on Hansard if the gentleman wishes.


Eric Bowness McKay: That is not necessary.


Lionel Chevrier: The deficit is voted separately because, when the main estimates were prepared, it was not anticipated that there would be an over-all deficit in the Quebec harbour, but it has turned out that there is a deficit of $70,481.


Eric Bowness McKay: It is not included in the other list?


Lionel Chevrier: No.


William Irvine: There are many questions I should like to ask on these transport items. I presume there will be a more opportune time later to do so. Am I right?


Lionel Chevrier: Unquestionably there
will be an opportunity on the main estimates.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
653. War veterans allowance board-administration-further amount required, $5,500.
Mr. LEN'NARD: What is this additional amount for?
Hon. MILTON F. GREGG (Minister of Veterans Affairs): This item covers an underestimate in connection with the expense of investigating cases in the field.
Item agreed to.
656. Widows' allowances-world war I-further amount required, $100,000.
Mr. LENNARD:: Are these items to provide moneys for the additional rates of pension that may be authorized shortly?


Mr. GREGG:: If the hon. member will turn to item 669 he will notice that the amount there is for world war II, and that in item 654 the amount is for world war I. That makes $4,00(1,000, altogether. It was estimated that the bill now before the parliamentary committee would reflect an increase of $12,000,000. This amount is for the six months since October 1; and the other $2,000,000 of the $6,000,000 is from the main estimates of last year.


Gordon Graydon: I should like to ask one question with respect to item 655, which has to do with war veterans allowances. Representations are made to me from time to time -and I fancy they are made to other hon. members-seeking an interpretation respecting the earning power of veterans receiving war veterans allowances, so that they will not be tied down quite so closely in respect of the amount of money they can earn outside their allowances.
Veterans of world war I, particularly, have a strong claim on parliament because of their age, and I think there should not be too much by way of restrictions placed upon the amount they are permitted to earn outside their veterans allowances. I am sure the minister must know of a great many cases of that kind. Now that so many years have gone by, I suggest that we should not be too close in our limitations as they affect these older veterans who, in most instances, have had a pretty difficult time. I hope the leniency the government may have by way of discretion will be afforded these men in a way which would meet the wishes of many veterans throughout the country.


Milton Fowler Gregg: If, as and when the bill in resolution stage on the order paper dealing with veterans allowances should come into force, provision is made therein in connection with war veterans allowances in a manner similar to that having to do with pensions. I cannot comment upon that bill until it is before the house, but I can assure hon. members that the point just made has been borne in mind.


Angus MacInnis: Many representations are made to me in connection with war veterans allowances. I appreciate that the matter is now or shortly will be before the veterans affairs committee and before the house. We can deal with these matters at that time. I would suggest to the minister, however, that any veteran of world war I who is in receipt or who may be in receipt of war veterans allowance should be paid it without any means test whatsoever. The mere fact that he is eligible for war veterans allowance is in itself sufficient proof that he has very little income. Not only should there not be any means test, but for his own welfare he should be encouraged to add as much as possible to his income. It would be good for him, and it will be good for the country.


Frank Exton Lennard: When the war veterans allowance legislation does come before the house I would strongly urge that consideration be given to imperial veterans who have resided in this country continuously for twenty years. Their case has a great deal of merit, and I feel that they should be given every consideration
Supply-Veterans Affairs

before the committee on veterans affairs. I know they have made some advances by way of presenting a brief to the chairman-perhaps not to the minister. I should hope that at the proper time their case would be given full consideration.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I add one sentence? I hope consideration is also being given to including service in England in world war I as service in a theatre of war.


Mr. BLACKMORE:: Before this item passes, may I say that up to the present time I believe altogether too much attention has been given to the monetary aspect of our treatment of our returned soldiers. I believe the time has come when the country, the government and the House of Commons as a whole should look upon veterans as assets of Canada, and look upon their case in terms of giving them a living. Up to the present time the whole attitude appears to have been that of giving them an existence. The more meagre and stingy that existence, the better we were satisfied.
This principle is entirely wrong. It must be borne in mind that each of the boys who returned from overseas is a possible father of a Canadian family. We are doing a great deal to increase the population of this country. I can think of no finer blood to go into the future of Canada than the blood of those who went to fight for this country.
I want to see each and every one of those men placed in a position in which, in comfort, he could have and support a family in Canada. If we have that attitude we shall do away with many of the contemptible and disgraceful rules which restrict and hamper and discourage our boys and their wives at every turn. If the general purport of my remarks is taken and applied throughout the whole range of the treatment of veterans in this country, before long we shall find our veterans happy.
At the beginning of the war we used to say that we wanted to ensure to Canadians that no one who went into any of the services would foe any worse off because of his going in, and no one who did not go into the services would be any better off because he did not go.
Many hon. members who were in the house in those days will recall distinctly that such was the purport of the remarks of responsible ministers in the house. We have now gone a long way from the path indicated by that general attitude. I wager that those poor chaps who sat on the floor of the house the other day are far worse off than they would have been if they had not gone. And the worst of it is that, in accordance with the rules being laid down by

the government, I see no means whereby those boys can ever have made up to them the losses they sustained because they went into the services.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Payments to or for veterans and dependents-
659. To authorize payment under the Veterans Insurance Act to Joan Snow, widow of the late Frank Rennie Snow, of the benefits to which she would have been entitled under that act had his application for insurance thereunder been formally approved, by the superintendent of veterans insurance, before his death, $1.
Frank Exton Lennard: Would the minister explain this vote of SI?


Milton Fowler Gregg: This is to correct a technicality in connection with an application in Winnipeg concerning a veteran's applicant for war veterans insurance. The premium had been paid, but the application had not been finally signed as approved. Meantime the man died. I am told by my legal advisers that this is a means of making it possible to deal with that insurance in the ordinary way under the insurance act.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Administration service-
56S. Publicity and extension division-further amount required, $825.
Frank Exton Lennard: As an hon. member stated this afternoon, some of these necessary bulletins are in short supply and' I am wondering if this amount is sufficient. Should not more be voted to permit the reprinting of some of these bulletins?


Mr. ROBERT McCUBBIN (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Agriculture):: This is only in connection with the royal winter fair.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Production service-
56i. Health of animals-compensation for animals slaughtered-further amount required, $200,000.
Gordon Graydon: I should like to have the privilege of addressing a question for the first time to the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Agriculture. I shall not be very long because I know that the pressure of business calls for brevity. There exists in the health' of animals branch a situation which is reaching a dangerous and critical stage for many breeders of cattle, particularly for those who export the kind of cattle that are permitted1 to leave this country. I am told that the veterinary service in the health of ani-

Supply-Agriculture
mals branch is undermanned at the present time to the extent of nearly 100 qualified veterinarians. There is a gradual decrease in the number through superannuation and for other reasons, and very few are being taken on to replace them.
This situation has become particularly critical for the T.B. tested areas, of which the county of Peel is one. In order to give hon. members some idea of the extent of the export business, this one county exported about $1,500,000 worth of cattle in 1947. Our T.B. tested time expires in June of this year. We export to South America and other countries. I do not know when I have had as many representations from agricultural districts as I have had on this particular point. There are countries which normally want to find reasons for not allowing our cattle to come in and they may find in this particular situation a reason for keeping them out. When the time expires in June in that particular area, then, of course, the danger signal is out.
I should like to ask the parliamentary assistant to convey to his minister, to his deputy and to those in charge of this branch the concern which most of us in these areas have and ask him to see if something cannot be done to provide the veterinary staff which is so necessary to keep these areas T.B. tested.
The Ontario veterinary college under Doctor MacNabb is doing a magnificent job, but I understand that very few of the graduates this year will enter government service in the federal field. I am told also that we will be lucky if we do not lose at least 60 per cent of the graduates to the United States and other places. The situation is so urgent that I do not make any apology for bringing it to the attention of the committee at this time. I have not exaggerated when I say that the situation is critical and dangerous, and it calls for the immediate attention of the government by way of remedy and rectification.


Mr. BRYCE:: I quite agree with what the hon. member for Peel has said, but I am going to refrain from dealing with that matter at this time. I should like to know if the additional $200,000 is to cover animals slaughtered out of T.B. free areas or animals slaughtered to go into the domestic beef trade.


Robert McCubbin: I will answer the last question first. This is for animals in TH. tested areas. I want to thank the hon. member for Peel for his kindly words and tell him that every effort will be made by the department to see that additional veterinarians are available. We will try to make things so attractive in Canada that they will stay here and do the work which is so necessary through-5849-166
out the length and breadth of the country, particularly in western Ontario.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: The county of Huron was voted a restricted area before the war, but during the war that type of work was set aside. We are now waiting our turn and I believe we are either third or fourth on the list. We have heard nothing as yet and I should like to know if there has been any improvement in the number of veterinarians in the department?


Robert McCubbin: There is some improvement, but not much. There are a good many young men in the Ontario veterinary college who will graduate before long and I hope and trust that a lot of them will stay in Canada and help those counties which wish to be T.B. tested.


George Russell Boucher: What is the department doing to induce these young men to stay in Canada?


Robert McCubbin: Canada is still the best country in the world.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Production service-
567.	Grants to fairs and exhibitions, as detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $4,481.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: What is this amount for?


Robert McCubbin: Twenty-four hundred and eighty-one dollars is for the Regina winter fair which found that they needed more than they had asked for. The other $2,000 is divided into four amounts of $500 among Amherst, Sherbrooke, the central Canadian exhibition in Ottawa and the Vancouver exhibition.


Douglas King Hazen: How is it that the Regina fair gets so much more than the other fairs?


Robert McCubbin: It is the classification, of
course.


Douglas King Hazen: Amherst, Nova Scotia, gets only $500, while Regina gets $2,481.


Robert McCubbin: Amherst got much more than that. This is $500 extra.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Marketing service-
568.	Subsidies for cold storage warehouses under the Cold Storage Act, and grants, in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $16,567.72.
Frank Exton Lennard: Do I understand that this amount of $16,567.72 is detailed in the main estimates?


Robert McCubbin: Yes.


Frank Exton Lennard: And no grants will be made for cold storage plants of which the details are not in the main estimates?
Supply-Agriculture


Robert McCubbin: I think that is right. This amount is for three cold storage plants, all in British Columbia.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
570.	Prairie Farm Assistance Act administration-further amount required, $250,000.
John Bracken: Where is this money spent? What province receives the biggest share of this $250,000?


Robert McCubbin: I am not in a position to say which. There was a crop deterioration in midsummer that was not looked for when the main estimates were brought down, and sufficient money was not provided in the main estimates. This additional amount had to be spent.


John Bracken: Does the parliamentary assistant think that any of this is to be spent in Saskatchewan?


Robert McCubbin: I am not in a position to say.


Gordon Graydon: It would be a fair guess.


John Bracken: I do not think we should pass this item until we hear where the money is to be spent.


Robert McCubbin: It is to be spent in the three prairie provinces, wherever it is needed.


John Bracken: I think it will be needed in Saskatchewan this summer.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I see an item of $122,000 for travelling expenses under Prairie Farm Assistance Act administration. That seems an outrageous amount of money to spend on travelling around Saskatchewan. There might be some travelling done in Manitoba and a little in British Columbia, but how in the world can any group of men spend $122,000 in travelling expenses? This is an extra amount too.


Robert McCubbin: I admit that the amount is large, but there were a great many applications, and the investigation of each and every one of them involves a lot of travelling.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I guess that is as good an answer as any.


Eric Bowness McKay: What is the total estimated for administration of the act up until March 31?


Robert McCubbin: For administration,


John Alpheus Charlton: There is an item of $500,000 in the main estimates for 1948-49 for Prairie Farm Assistance Act administration. What was the 1946 expenditure?


Robert McCubbin: I have not that information befbre me, but I should be glad to get it for the hon. member.


Alan Cockeram: 
Robert McCubbin: The conditions required it. A great many districts in the west had a poor crop and a great deal of investigational work had to be done.


Alan Cockeram: It has nothing to do with the election that is coming off in Saskatchewan, has it?


Robert McCubbin: Not a thing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special
[Stage Direction]
571.	To reclaim and to prevent the flooding of valuable agricultural lands in the valley of the Lillooet river, near Pemberton, B.C.-further amount required, $50,000.
Harry Oliver White: A year ago when this item came up I mentioned this expenditure in British Columbia. Considerable damage had been done by flooding in other parts of Canada at that time, but no help was forthcoming from the federal treasury. This year, in western Ontario particularly, the flood damage has been greater than usual, and I noticed by yesterday's Free Press that the provincial government more or less says that this is a problem for the municipalities. Damage from flooding is becoming so serious that it is more than a municipal problem, and I think this expenditure in British Columbia should be discontinued or the policy be extended right across this country. How long is this assistance to be continued for British Columbia?


Robert McCubbin: That is a very fair question. The day may be coming when consideration will have to be given to damage by floods not only in British Columbia but throughout the length and breadth of Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
572.	To authorize and provide for payment of subsidies on oats and barley used as feed for livestock under such regulations as may be approved by the governor in council-further amount required, $6,500,000.
John Alpheus Charlton: Some explanation should
be given of this $6,000,000 item.


Robert McCubbin: The Minister of Finance explained it last night in reply to a question by the leader of the opposition. The main estimates provided up to July 31 only, and

Supply-External Affairs
2609'
from August 1 to October 23 an additional amount was require# for subsidies.


Alan Cockeram: Is it all cleaned up now?


Robert McCubbin: I understand that it is.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Demobilization and reconversion-Agricultural supplies board-
66.',. Feeds administrator, including freight assistance on western feed grains-further amount required, $4,050,000.
Alan Cockeram: May we have an explanation of this $4,000,000 item?


Robert McCubbin: This is freight assistance on western grain moved to eastern Canada. When the main estimates were brought down we did not realize that there would be such a poor crop in eastern Canada, and more grain was brought down than we thought would be brought down. Therefore an additional amount had to be put in the supplementary estimates for the paying of the freight.


Alan Cockeram: Why is this under demobilization and reconversion? It is not a demobilization and reconversion expense at all.


Robert McCubbin: All these subsidies and freight assistance items are temporary votes and were put in the reconversion vote.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

William Ross Macdonald: Order. We are not on a particular item. We are reverting to the Department of External Affairs in order that certain answers may be given to questions asked last night.


Mr. W. E. HARRIS (Parliamentary Assistant to the Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Yesterday the leader of the opposition asked a few questions of the Secretary of State for External Affairs and I should like to give the answers now. I shall take only a few moments of the committee's time. The total contributions to international organizations which have been paid or will be paid for the fiscal year 1947-48 amount to $11,919,541.49. This total includes a contribution of $5,467,921.12 to the international refugee organization and a payment of $5,000,000 to the international children's emergency fund which was made out of the vote for post-UNRRA relief. I have, had prepared a statement showing the various; organizations and the amounts included in the-main estimates and the supplementary estimates, the amounts already paid and to be-paid, and I should like permission to put it oej Hansard. I have already given a copy to the leader of the opposition.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Agreed.


Walter Edward Harris: The table
follows:
-	Main Estimates 1947-48	Supplementary Estimates June 1947	Supplementary estimates March 1948	Amount paid	Amount to be paid	Total payments in fiscal year$ cts. 895.000	00 125.000	00 96,000 00	$ Ct8.	$ cts. 17,800 00 9,021 00	$ cts. 882,792 00 125,000 00 95,475 00 57,526 20	$ cts. 17,718 46 9,021 00	$ cts. 900,510 46 134,021 00 95,475 00 57,526 20 176,434 50 5,467,921 12 5,000,000 00
Food and Agr. Organ							
United Nations Educ., Scientific and Cultural Organ			57,600 00				
			176,500 00		176,434 50 2,733,960 56	
		5,468,000 00 5,000,000 00*		2,733,960 56 5,000,000 00		
Inter. Children's Emergency Fund..						
Totals for U.N. and Subsidiary						
	1,116,000 00	10,525,600 00	203,321 00	8,894,753 76	2,937,134 52	11,831,888 28
International Red Cross							
	20,000 00 14,500 00 1,300 00 2,600 00			20,000 00 14,220 80 1,292 80 4,040 00 303 97 2,181 60		20,000 00 14,220 80 1,292 80 4,040 00 303 97 2,181 60 37,496 27. 4,433 83* 872 64< 2,811 30*
Imp. Economic Comm							
						
		8,100 00 325 00 2,200 00				
Commonwealth Communications						
Comite Inter. Tech. d'E. Jur. Aeriens							
						
			37,750 00 4,500 00 875 00		37,496 27 4,433 83 872 64 2,811 30	
Int. Amer. Committee on Social						
Int. Commission on Air Navigation						
		2,850 00				
						
	38,400 00	13,475 00	43,125 00	42,039 17	45,614 04	87,653 211
						
	1,154,400 00	10,539,075 00	246,446 00	8,936,792 93	2,982,748 56	11,919,541 49
						
Paid out of Vote of *20,000,000 for Poet U.N.N.R.A. Relief.
5849-166J
Supply-Agriculture


Alan Cockeram: Is that $30,320.90 which the Department of Labour paid in addition to the $176,520?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


Alan Cockeram: How many people
attended the last conference last year?


Walter Edward Harris: I am unable to tell the hon. member that. I can give him this information. So far this fiscal year one general conference has been held in Geneva, three meetings of the governing bodies and four industrial committee meetings.


John Alpheus Charlton: The parliamentary
assistant has not answered the question I asked last night regarding the international federation of agricultural producers.


Mr. HARRIS (Grey-Brace):: We have
searched our records and we cannot find an organization by the name the hon. member used. If he will give us better information we shall hunt for it.


Douglas King Hazen: Last night I asked how many paid employees were in the international labour organization. Has the hon. member these figures?


Walter Edward Harris: My information is that there are 486, but that is the war establishment. All the appointments may not be filled.


[Stage Direction]
Demobilization and reconversion-Agricultural supplies board-
C6i. Feeds administrator, including freight assistance on western feed grains-further amount required, $4,650,000.
John Bracken: I should like to revert to this item for a moment. It has to do with freight assistance on western feed grains. The details given on page 19 of the supplementary
estimates read as follows:
Freight assistance on western feed grains, $2,050,000.
Subsidy on wheat used as feed for livestock,


[Stage Direction]
The items we are now passing are for the present fiscal year which will end in a few days. I would like to ask a question with respect to the subsidy on wheat used as feed for livestock. Is that subsidy being continued? With respect to the other item, that policy is in effect now and the minister may not wish to say what the policy is to be in the long run. Provision has been made to continue it in effect for how long?
Douglas Charles Abbott: I am afraid I am not in a position to answer that. Perhaps the parliamentary assistant to the minister can do so. This vote is to cover the administration of the feed grain assistance policy to March 31, 1948, and of the $4,050,000, which is provided here, $2,050,000 is to cover the freight assistance on western feed grains and $2,000,000, the subsidy on wheat used as feed for livestock. I am afraid I cannot answer offhand the question as to whether the policy is to be continued or not.


Alan Cockeram: That is in addition to the $18,000,000 already provided?


Douglas Charles Abbott: When the amount of
$18,000,000 for freight assistance and then $2,000,000 for subsidy payments were submitted in the main estimates it was understood that the policy under which these expenditures were made would expire on July 1, 1947; but, as I have said, the feed grain assistance policy was extended to March 31, 1948.
Resolutions reported, read the second time and concurred in.




[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved that the house go into committee of ways and means.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.
Douglas Charles Abbott: Resolved, that towards making good the supply granted to His Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1948, the following sum be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada, namely:

Home oj Commons
The sum of $79,809,337.98 being the amount of each of the items set forth in the further supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1948, as set forth in the resolution concurred in this day in the committee of supply.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Abbott thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 184, for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1948.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, considered in committee, reported and read the third time.
James Horace King: Mr. Abbott moves that the bill be now passed and that the title be as on the order paper.


John Bracken: Is it not contrary to the rules to pass more than one stage at one sitting?


Douglas Charles Abbott: By unanimous consent, of course. I am assuming that was given.


James Horace King: The present motion is not debatable.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the senate to Bill No. 3, respecting emergency measures for the conservation of Canadian foreign exchange resources.
He said: The amendments are simple. There were two articles, biscuits not sweetened, and biscuits sweetened, which were removed from the prohibited list and put on the quota list, and biscuits sweetened or unsweetened, valued at less than twenty cents per pound, were put in the second schedule.
Mr. COLD  WELL@: And match sticks?


Douglas Charles Abbott: And vegetables fresh, in the natural state, or cut or shredded, were added to the first schedule to prohibit air-t.ransported vegetables from being flown in from the United States.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, amendments read the second time and concurred in.

William Lyon Mackenzie King: If the house, Mr. Speaker, will revert to "government notices of motions",
I should like to move in amended form the motion that appears in my name, that when this house adjourns on Wednesday, March 24, instant, it stand adjourned until Tuesday, the 30th instant. That motion is to be amended to read "Monday, April 5 next" instead of "Tuesday, the 30th instant". Perhaps the Minister of Finance would move that amendment.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I so move.


James Horace King: Mr. Mackenzie King moves that when this house adjourns on Wednesday, March 24 instant, it stand adjourned until Tuesday the 30th instant, to which Mr. Abbott moves in amendment that the words "Tuesday the 30th instant" be deleted and the words "Monday, April 5 next" be substituted therefor. The question is on the amendment. Shall the amendment carry?


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Motion as amended agreed to.

William Lyon Mackenzie King: That concludes the business. No doubt hon. members will wish to know the proposed order of business immediately after the Easter adjournment. In considering the matter, the government thought it would be advisable to bring forward as soon as possible measures pertaining to the appointment of committees or measures likely to be referred to a special or standing committee. There is a resolution on the order paper in regard to the appointment of a joint committee of both houses of parliament to consider the question of human rights and fundamental freedoms. I assume it would be the wish of hon. members to have that committee appointed forthwith. There is the resolution with respect to the introduction of a bill regarding the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act. It appears as Item No. 9 on today's order paper. That bill of the Minister of Labour is to be referred to a committee. It is therefore advisable it should be introduced at a very early stage after recess. Item No. 20 on today's order paper is a resolution relating to an amendment to the War Veterans Allowance Act to extend the provisions of that act to a neglected child or children, et cetera. The bill founded on that resolution will, I assume, go to the committee on veterans affairs. There is also a resolution in the name of the Secretary of State for the introduction of the measure to amend the Dominion Elections Act to make provision inter alia for an increase in salary of the chief electoral officer. That bill, I assume, will also be referred to a committee.
Business oj the House

There is the measure respecting gold, No. 7 on the order paper today:
Resuming the adjourned debate on the motion of the Minister of Finance for the second reading of Bill No. 7, respecting emergency payments to assist in meeting the increased cost of production of gold.
It was understood, I think, that this measure would be taken up immediately after the measures we have dealt with today. It might be regarded as the first measure to be taken up after the Easter recess. The others I have mentioned might be brought forward in the order most convenient to hon. members.
What I have said will serve as an indication of the measures that may occupy the first few' days of the session after the Easter recess. It is understood that when discussion begins on the estimates, the first to be considered will be those of the Department of External Affairs.


John Bracken: Would the Prime Minister call the committee on printing as soon as we resume on April 5? I understand that committee wants to meet in order to provide for the printing of the evidence of the Hong Kong inquiry.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: A day or two after I proposed the motion, the chairman of that committee informed me that he was arranging to have the committee meet at once. He found, however, it would be more convenient to hon. members on the committee if the committee met after the Easter recess. I understand that has been arranged.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Since apparently we have reached the end of today's proceedings, in the absence of the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) I should like to draw the attention of the Prime Minister to the fact that on April 5 the Essex county tourist association is inaugurating Canada's first national wildlife week, which, as the right hon. gentleman knows, was instituted to commemorate the-great work done by the late Jack Miner. They are holding a dinner in Windsor that day and, as the Prime Minister knows, they were very anxious to have him address that meeting. However, since he had made other arrangements and was unable to accept the invitation-


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Oh, go on; sit down.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Thanks very much. As the Prime Minister knows, the Minister of National Health and Welfare will be the speaker on that occasion. Since this will be the first time we have had a national wildlife week in Canada, I thought it would be only

fitting for the government to make some announcement that this is going to take place, and that the dinner is being held in Windsor to inaugurate that week.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: It will be a pleasure to have that done. I shall see that something along the lines my hon. friend has mentioned is announced. I am only sorry, as I know the minister of health also is, that my hon. friend himself is not to be the chief speaker at the dinner. He should be, for he was the one who introduced the measure in this house.
Now, Mr. Speaker I suggest that the sitting be suspended until word comes from the other house that the deputy of His Excellency is ready to receive us.


Stanley Howard Knowles: While we are on the business of the house, I should like to address a question to the Prime Minister. He will recall that some days ago I brought up the matter of the motion of December 8, which still governs the business of the house. I need not go into all the points we raised at that time; I am sure the Prime Minister will remember them quite well. He then indicated that when this point had been reached, that is the Easter recess, and we had dealt with certain measures which were indicated as being of an emergency character, the government would give consideration to bringing in some other motion to govern the business of the house from now on, and at least make more convenient our procedure from day to day.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Yes. It is the intention of the government to do exactly as I said and have a motion brought in on one of the opening days after the recess.


Arthur Leroy Smith: With respect to the business of the house, I want to ask the Prime Minister when the committee in regard to rules is going to operate. After the farce we have seen here in the past week, I think it is time that committee met, and it should be the first business of this house to see that it does meet.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I suggest that it bring in a rule against repetitious debates in committee, too.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I did not say that, but why not have it done?


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend's party
have been the worst offenders.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I do not know anyone who needs it more than the minister does.

The Royal Assent


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have not been repetitious.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: As my hon. friend will recall, I brought on the motion for the establishment of that committee some weeks ago. It has been left to the members of the committee themselves to decide when they should meet. His Honour the Speaker stated, I believe, that a meeting would take place during the recess or immediately after.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I assume that the committee has a chairman. The matter was raised by the hon. member for Peel within the last week, and we now see the absolute necessity of doing something to avoid all the nonsense we have been through during the past ten days.


James Horace King: I can assure the hon. member for Calgary West, as I assured the hon. member for Peel, that I am anxious to have the committee meet, and it is my intention to call a meeting right after the Easter recess. I have just received information that it will be about half an hour before we are invited to proceed to the other chamber, so I would suggest that this sitting be suspended.
At 9.10 p.m. the sitting was suspended.
At 9.20 p.m. the sitting was resumed.



THE ROYAL ASSENT

[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Right Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, the house went up to the Senate.
And having returned.
Mr. SPEAKER informed the house that the deputy of His Excellency the Governor General had been pleased to give in His Majesty's name the royal assent to the following bills:
An Act to amend the Farm Improvement Loans Act, 1944.
An Act to incorporate National General Insurance Company.
An Act respecting the Trust and Loan Company of Canada.
An Act respecting the Eastern Trust Company.
An Act respecting the New Westminster Harbour Commissioners and to provide for the refunding of maturing financial obligations.
An Act to amend the Continuation of Transitional Measures Act, 1947.
An Act to amend the Agricultural Products Act.
An Act to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act, 1935.
An Act to amend the Excise Tax Act.
An Act to amend the Customs Tariff.
An Act respecting emergency measures for the conservation of Canadian foreign exchange resources.
An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st of March, 1949.
An Act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st of March, 1948.
Mr. MacKINNON moved the adjournment of the house.
Motion agreed to and the house adjourned at 9.40 p.m. until Monday, April 5 at 3 p.m.
The following items were passed in committee of supply:

[Stage Direction]
Department of Agriculture Administration service-
563.	Publicity and extension division-further amount required, $825.
Production service-
564.	Health of animals-compensation for animals slaughtered-further amount required, $200,000.
565.	Live stock and poultry-further amount required, $20,000.
566.	Plant products-seeds, feeds, fertilizers, insecticides and fungicides control-further amount required, $5,000.
567.	Grants to fairs and exhibitions, as detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $4,481.
Marketing service-
568.	Subsidies for cold storage warehouses under the Cold Storage Act, and grants, in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $16,567.72.
569.	Live stock and live stock products- further amount required, $25,000.
Special
[Stage Direction]
570.	Prairie Farm Assistance Act administration-further amount required, $250,000.
571.	To reclaim and to prevent the flooding of valuable agricultural lands in the valley of the Lillooet river, near Pemberton, B.C.- further amount required, $50,000.
572.	To authorize and provide for payment of subsidies on oats and barley used as feed for live stock under such regulations as may be approved by the Governor in Council-further amount required, $6,500,000.
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-
588.	Government's contribution to unemployment insurance fund-further amount required, $5,000,000.
589.	To provide that, notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act or the Civil Service Superannuation Act, the appointments of
Supplementary Estimates
[Stage Direction]
J. E. Neish as employment adviser, grade 3 and of L. J. Ricks as employment and claims officer, grade 4, of the unemployment insurance commission, shall be deemed to have been made in accordance with the provisions of section 11 D of the Civil Service Superannuation Act which shall apply thereto, and that each of such persons shall be deemed to have been on leave of absence from the unemployment insurance commission while on active service with His Majesty's armed forces effective August 1, 1941, $1.
Legislation
The Senate-
590.	General administration-further amount required, $9,500.
591.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment to each member of the senate who attended the first part of the present session which commenced on December 5, 1947, and ended on December 19, 1947, of an amount representing the actual transportation and living expenses of such member while on the journey between Ottawa and his place of residence after the Christmas adjournment of parliament on December 19, 1947, and on the return journey from his place of residence to Ottawa at the end of the recess which commenced on that date, or at any other one time during the present session, $5,000.
House of Commons
[Stage Direction]
592.	General administration-estimates of the clerk-further amount required, $108,000.
593.	Estimates of the Sergeant-at-Arms- further amount required, $20,000.
594.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment to each member of the House of Commons who attended the first part of the present session which commenced on December 5, 1947, and ended on December 19, 1947, of an amount representing the actual transportation and living expenses of such member while on the journey between Ottawa and his place of residence after the Christmas adjournment of parliament on December 19, 1947, and on the return journey from his place of residence to Ottawa at the end of the recess which commenced on that date, or at any other one time during the present session, $12,000.
General-
595.	Printing of parliament, including salaries of staff of the joint distribution office-further amount required, $70,000.
Mines and Resources
Mines and geology branch-Bureau of mines-
596. Explosives Act-further amount required, $833.33.
597.	Yukon coal development, $100,000.
Lands, parks and forests branch-National parks bureau-
598.	National parks and historic sites services -further amount required, $30,000.
599.	Administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act-further amount required, $900.
600.	Forest and wildlife conservation-further amount required, $29,938..
Surveys and Engineering Branch-Dominion Water and Power Bureau-
601.	lo provide for the refund of water-power rentals paid by the Calgary Power Company and uoposited to the consolidated revenue fund Y"lch>
in accordance with the terms of the Alberta Natural Resources Transfer (Amendment) Act 1945, is payable in part to the Indians of the Stony Indian reserve and in part to the province of Alberta, $1,733.76.
Indians Affairs Branch
[Stage Direction]
602.	Branch administration-further amount required, $4,107.41.
603.	Indian agencies-further amount required, $20,000.	.
Welfare and training-
604.	Welfare of Indians-further amount required, $100,000.
605.	Indian education-further amount required, $14,000.
National Defence Pensions and other benefits-
606.	To authorize the governor in council to grant a pension, effective April 1, 1947, to the widow and children of the late Paymaster Commander Francis R. W. Nixon, in accordance with the terms of the Militia Pension Act, including for purposes of such pension his service in the R.C.N. under the age of eighteen years and notwithstanding the payment of a gratuity to the widow under the said act, $1,287.55.
National Health and Welfare National Health branch-
607. Opium and narcotic	drugs-further amount required, $10,000.
608.	Medical services-Indians and Eskimos -further amount required, $500,000.
National Revenue Customs and Excise divisions
[Stage Direction]
609.	General administration-further amount required, $10,000.
610.	Inspection, investigation and audit services-further amount required, $23,500.
611.	Ports, outports and preventive stations, including pay for overtime of officers notwithstanding anything in the Civil Service Act, and temporary buildings and rentals - further amount required, $198,000.
Taxation division-
612.	District offices-further amount required $317,000.
Post Office
613.	Railway mail service-further amount required, $470,000.
614.	Air and land mail services-further amount required, $150,000.
Public Printing and Stationery
615.	Printing, binding and distributing the
annual	statutes-further	amount required
$15,000.	'
616.	Printing and binding official publications for sale and distribution to departments and the public-further amount required, $50,000.

Supplementary Estimates
Public Works Department Architectural branch-
617.	Ottawa-maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc.-further amount required, $225,000.
618.	Maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc.-further amount required, $250,000.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-Quebec-
619. Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $50,000.
Ontario-
620. Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs-further amount required, $25,000.
Engineering branch-Maintenance and operation of graving docks, locks and dams, etc.-
621.	Kingston graving dock, $8,500.
622.	Locks and dams-further amount required, $106,000.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-Quebec-
623.	St. Ignace de Loyola-reconstruction of pier, $20,000.
Ontario-
624.	Thames river - redredging - further amount required, $15,200.
Whitby-towards repairs to harbour works- further amount required, $50,000.
Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest Territories-
625.	Bell Rock (Fort Smith), N.W.T.-wharf, $5,000.
British Columbia and Yukon-
626.	Columbia river-protection work-further amount required, $13,000.
General-	.
627.	National gallery of Canada-further amount required, $1,120.
628.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for, not more than $5,000 to be expended upon any one work-further amount required, $11,950.
Secretary of State
629.	Citizenship registration branch-further amount required, $1,220.
630.	Trade marks branch-further amount required, $2,000.
631.	Canada Temperance Act-further amount required, $1,500.
Patent and copyright office-*
632.	Administration division-further amount required, $200.
633.	Copyright and industrial designs division -further amount required, $2,800.
634.	Contribution to the international office for the protection of industrial property, international copyright union office and union for the protection of literary and artistic works-further amount required, $1,600.
Trade and Commerce Standards division-
635.	Electricity and gas inspection services, including administration of the Electricity and Fluid Exportation Act-further amount required, $4,500.
636.	Exhibitions, including authority to refund from revenue deposits received for contracts for space at the Canadian international trade fair -further amount required, $90,000.
Canadian Government Travel Bureau
[Stage Direction]
637.	To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada-further amount required, $175,000.
Special-
638.	Canadian Commercial Corporation-to reimburse the Canadian Commercial Corporation for expenses incurred in purchasing materials, supplies and equipment, etc., on behalf of the Department of National Defence under chapter 51, statutes of 1947, and approval of the amount of $80,000 paid from national defence appropriation for this purpose in the year 1946-47, $548,000.
639.	Canadian Wheat Board-to reimburse the Canadian \\ heat Board for expenses incurred from August 1, 1944, to July 31, 1947, in regulating deliveries of grain, allocation of railway cars and administration of regulations relating to maximum prices of grain, $733,249.81.
Department of Transport
640.	Departmental administration - further amount required to provide for an additional deputy minister for the Department of Transport to be appointed by the Governor in Council and to be called the Deputy Minister of Transport for Air Services, to hold office during pleasure, and to have and exercise such powers, duties and functions with respect to the air services branch of the said department as may be specified by the Minister of Transport-amount required for 1947-48, $2,000.
Marine service-
641.	Marine service administration-further amount required, $15,000.
642.	Marine service steamers, including icebreakers-maintenance, operation and repairs- further amount required, $174,500.
643.	To provide for Canada's share of the cost of the North Atlantic ice patrol-further amount required, $17,230.
644.	Administration of pilotage, including authority for temporary recoverable advances to certain pilotage districts-further amount required, $9,000.
645.	Miscellaneous services relating to navigation and shipping-further amount required, $9,000.
646.	To provide towards the construction of a lighthouse supply and buoy vessel for the east coast-capital, $11,500.
Canadian Maritime Commission-
Mail subsidies and steamship subventions (formerly under the Department of Trade and Commerce).
Western local services
[Stage Direction]
647.	Prince Rupert, B.C., and Queen Charlotte islands, service betw-een

further amount required, $162,320.
Supplementary Estimates
[Stage Direction]
Vancouver and northern ports of British Columbia, service between-further amount required, $187,680.
Eastern local services-
648.	Halifax, Sherbrooke, Spry Bay and Tor Bay, service between-further amount required, $4,700.
Quebec, Natashquan and Harrington, service between-further amount required, $155,000.
Quebec or Montreal and Gaspe, calling at way ports, service between-further amount required, $48,000.
Railway service-Maritime Freight Rates Act-
649.	Additional amount in excess of the sum
of $3,042,000 already appropriated, to authorize and provide for the payment from time to time during the fiscal year 1947-48 to the Canadian National Railway Company of the difference (estimated by the Canadian National Railway Company and certified by the auditors of the said company to the Minister of Transport, as and when required by the said Minister) occurring on account of the application of the Maritime Freight Rates Act, between the tariff tolls and the normal tolls (upon the same basis as set out in section 9 of the said act with respect to companies therein referred to) on all traffic moved during the calendar jrear 1947 under the tariffs approved on the eastern lines (as referred to in section 2 of the said act) of the Canadian National	Railways-further
amount required, $1,099,529.39.
650.	Additional amount in excess of the sum of $800,000 already appropriated, to authorize and provide for the payment from time to time during the fiscal year 1947-48 of the difference (estimated by the board of transport commissioners for Canada and certified by the said board to the Minister of Transport, as and when required by the said minister) occurring on account of the application of the Maritime Freight Rates Act, between the tariff tolls and the normal tolls (referred to in section 9 of the said act) on all traffic moved during the calendar year 1947 under the tariffs approved by the following companies: Canada and Gulf Terminal Railway; Canadian Pacific Railway, including Fredericton and Grand Lake Coal and Railway Company and New Brunswick Coal and Railway Company; Cumberland Railway and Coal Company; Dominion Atlantic Railway; Maritime Coal, Railway and Power Company; Sydney and Louisburg Railway; Temiseouata Railway Company-further amount required, $200,000.
Pensions and other benefits-
651.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act or any other act or law, for payment out of the consolidated revenue fund to the widow of the late Pierre Trudelle, formerly clerk of the Department of Marine at Quebec, of contributions, without interest, made by the late Pierre Trudelle to the civil service superannuation fund, $790.03.
Air service-
(Control and supervision vested in the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply by order in council P.C. 529 of 10th February, 1948).
Radio division-
652.	Issue of radio receiving licences-(transport department only)-further amount required, $344,000.
Veterans Affairs Department
653.	War veterans' allowance board-admin istration-further amount required, $5,500. Payments to or for veterans and dependents-
654.	War pensions-world war I-further amount required, $2,000,000.
655.	War veterans allowances-world war I- further amount required, $1,600,000.
656.	Widows allowances-world war I-further amount required, $100,000.
657. Allowances-orphaned	children-world war I-further amount required, $1,000.
658.	To authorize, subject to the approval of the governor in council and in lieu of any compensation to which his dependents may be entitled under the Government Employees' Compensation Act, 1947, payment of pensions to the dependents of the late Doctor Murray R. Bowie under the pension act in the same manner and subject to similar terms and conditions as if Doctor Bowie had been killed on duty while serving in world war II as an officer holding the rank of major in His Majesty's Canadian forces and to provide for the immediate payment of $1,0'00 to the widow of Doctor Murray R. Bowie, $1,000.
659.	To authorize payment under the Veterans Insurance Act to Joan Snow, widow of the late Frank Rennie Snow, of the benefits to which she would have been entitled under that act had his application for insurance thereunder been formally approved, by the superintendent of veterans insurance, before his death, $1.
Government Owned Enterprises Deficits-Transport-
660.	Additional amount in excess of the sum of $707,000 already appropriated, to provide for the payment during the fiscal year 1947-48 to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the national company) upon application approved by the Minister of Transport, made from time to time by the national company to the Minister of Finance, and to be applied by the national company in payment of the deficit (certified by the auditors of the national company) in the operation of the Prince Edward Island car ferry and terminals arising in the calendar year 1947-further amount required, $224,855.96.
611. Amount required to provide for the payment during the fiscal year 1947-48 tp the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the national company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport, made from time to time by the national company, to the Minister of Finance and to be applied by the national company in payment of the deficit (certified by the auditors of the national company) arising in the calendar year 1947, but not including amounts charged to proprietor's equity of the national railway system as defined in chapter twenty-two of the Statutes of Canada, 1937:
Canadian National Railways, exclusive of eastern lines, $5,280,432.77; eastern lines, $10,604,761.51, $15,885,194.28.
662.	To hereby authorize and provide for payment during the fiscal year 1947-48 to Trans-Canada Air Lines to be applied by Trans-Canada Air Lines in payment of the deficit (eerti-

Supplementary Estimates
fied by the auditor of Trans-Canada Air Lines to the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply as and when required by the said minister) resulting from the operations of Trans-Canada Air Lines during the calendar year 1947, less the surplus accruing from the operations of the Trans-Canada Air Lines (Atlantic) Limited, during ^ 1947, and less the accumulated surplus of the Trans-Canada Air Lines as at December 31, 1946:
Trans-Canada Air Lines deficit, calendar year 1947, $1,761,042.84.
Less: Surplus Trans-Canada Air Lines (Atlantic) Limited, year 1947, $136,303.31.
Less: Accumulated surplus Trans-Canada Air Lines as at December 31, 1946, $255,061.23, $1,369,678.30.
National harbours board-
663.	To provide for payment to the national harbours board, of the amount hereinafter set forth, to be applied in payment of the deficit (exclusive of interest on dominion government advances and depreciation on capital structures) arising in the calendar year 1947 in the operation of the Quebec harbour, $70,481.14.
Demobilization and Reconversion Agriculture-Agricultural supplies board-
664.	Feeds administrator, including freight assistance on western feed grains-further amount required, $4,050,000.
Public Works Architectural branch
[Stage Direction]
665.	Vancouver-Construction of temporary offiee building for Department of Veterans Affairs-To complete payments on contract, $18,098.
Transport
Railway and Steamship service-
606. To provide for payment of the claim submitted by the Danish War Risk Cargo Insurance Institute of Copenhagen, Denmark, in respect of certain portions of the Danish consigned cargo laden in the M.S. Europa at the time of her seizure in prize in April, 1940, $195,416.77,
Canadian Maritime Commission-
667. Steamship subsidies stabilization fund (formerly under the Department of Trade and Commerce)-further amount required, $30,060.
Air service-
(Control and supervision vested in the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply by order in council P.C. 529 of February 10, 1948.)
Civil aviation division-
G68. To hereby authorize contribution of an amount not exceeding $780,000 to the State of Michigan, U.S.A., Department of Aeronautics, towards the construction and development of airways facilities at Houghton and Grand Marais, Michigan, U.S.A., for use of Canadian aircraft and costs of operation and maintenance of such facilities to March 31, 1948, as certified to by the Controller of Civil Aviation, and approved by the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, less $721,049.85 already paid under authority of vote 628, airways and airports, capital, construction and improvements, demobilization and reconversion appropriation, 1946-47, $58,950.15.
Veterans Affairs
669.	Pensions-world war II, and pensions granted under the authority of the civilian government employees (war) compensation order P.C. 45/8848 of 22nd November, 1944, which shall be subject to the Pension Act-further amount required, $2,000,000.
670.	War veterans allowance board-allowances to dual service veterans (world war I and world War II); to veterans, world war II only, and North West Rebellion, 18S5-further amount required, $125,000.
5849-167§
[Stage Direction]
Monday, April 5, 1948