1948-05-10

Mr. J. M. DEOHENE (Athabaska):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. I know, sir, that at times you have granted the privilege to some other members on matters similar to that which I wish to bring up, and I am sure that hon. members will bear with me, especially in view of the fact that it is noncontentious.
Tlie matter I wish to bring to the attention of the house, and of the people as well, carries a lesson which I hope we shall all take to heart. Last Saturday, sir, in the city of Calgary, in the province of Alberta, the Edmonton Flyers, representing the great city of Edmonton, won the senior championship in hockey, our national game, with the result that the Allan cup now rests in Edmonton. The lesson I wish to convey is this. Forty years ago, which is a long time in anyone's life, the young and ambitious city of Edmonton challenged for the Stanley cup and went to Montreal to play the Wanderers-and, by the way, they lost only by a goal or two.
The president of the Edmonton club in that year was none other than the genial member for Edmonton West (Mr. MacKinnon), who is still with us and has been a member of the cabinet for many years.
Only one more minute of your time do I wish to take up, Mr. Speaker. When we hear so much about things being "fixed," when there is so much suspicion cast around, I think it is well for our young people to learn the lesson of this game in Calgary on Saturday night. Two great teams faced each other when the series stood at three for Edmonton Flyers and one for Ottawa Senators. If Ottawa had won that game it would have meant that the teams would leave for Edmonton, where the largest gate in the history of Edmonton in a hockey game would have been assured, carrying a revenue of some $25,000. I heard the opinion expressed on the street that the Flyers would lose so that they would go back to Edmonton to play. Sir, they did not lose. They won the game in the last few minutes, putting everything they had into it. The club and the
players lost $25,000, but they proved to the people of Canada that integrity, honesty and honour still exist in this country, and that they cannot be bought.



REFERENCE TO REMARKS OF MR. DIEFENBAKER IN DEBATE ON APRIL 12

Mr. JEAN FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata):: Mr. Speaker, I too rise to a question of privilege, but before I state the matter of that privilege I wish to tell you, sir, how glad I am, as I am sure we all are, to see our friend the member for Lake Centre (Mr. Diefenbaker), looking hale and hearty.
That being said, what I am about to state as a question of privilege affecting all members of parliament is that since April 12 there has been a curse upon us, upon all of us, that curse having been pronounced by the hon. member for Lake Centre. At page 2860 of Hansard, the hon. member is reported to have said:
Following Magna Carta, because of the inclination on the part of some people to depart from its principles, a curse was placed on all who departed from them.
He read the curse, but before doing so he said:
According to the author I read, no king's minister,-
That is king with a small, not a capital, "k."
-no cabinet minister, no adviser or person who departed from those principles would ever be able to remove himself from the curse that was pronounced, namely, that he would be driven out of power or restrained by the people.
I have a vague idea of what a curse is, but when I look in the dictionary-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: *-I see that it is synonymous with "malediction" and "anathema", and means to lay under a curse, to call down a curse from heaven upon someone.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, the matter is serious, and I would ask the hon. gentleman to be more precise. I do not believe there is such a curse, and I want him to tell us who uttered that curse, and what power of attorney he ever had to use it against anybody. That is important at a time when the
House of Commons Debates

Minister of Finance is preparing his budget speech. How can he prepare a good budget speech with a curse on his head?
Mr. MaeINNIS: It would be a poor budget speech anyway.


Jean-François Pouliot: I hope the hon. gentleman will tell us what it is.


Mr. SPEAKER:: I have the honour to
inform the house that the Clerk has laid on the table the twenty-second report of the examiner of petitions for private bills.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, he did not answer. It was a papal curse, and he is not a monsignor to put it on us.



COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
Fifth report of special committee on veterans affairs-Mr. Mutch.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. J. A. BRADETTE (Cochrane) presented the first report of the standing committee on external affairs and moved that the report be concurred in.
Motion agreed to.
Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport) moved:: That the name of Mr. Jaenieke be substituted for that of Mr. Bentley, and the name of Mr. Knight be substituted for that of Mr. McKay, on the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Hon. DOUGLAS ABBOTT (Minister of Finance):: I think I should inform the house, Mr. Speaker, that I expect to bring down the budget a week from tomorrow, May 18, at eight o'clock in the evening.



HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES


Hon. COLIN GIBSON (Secretary of State):: I desire to move:
That the advisability of continuing the publication of the revised edition of debates and distribution of the unrevised edition of same be referred to the standing committee on debates.


Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):: Is the Secretary of State not going to explain what is involved in this motion?


Colin William George Gibson: It has
been brought to my attention that the practice of printing the revised edition of debates is an expensive operation both in time and in money. For the last year for which we have the complete figures-that is the edition of 1944-it required over 4,000 hours of work on the linotype machines, nearly 9,000 hours of hand work, and over 1,500 hours of press work, all of which could have been utilized to better advantage and at the same time provide a saving of time and space. On account of Hansard having to be reprinted for the revised edition, it is necessary each session to keep standing about 16,000 pages of type, involving some 88 tons of metal. That occupies a large section of the printing bureau's space which is required for other purposes. The printing of the revised edition of Hansard of 1944, which comprised 510 sets of volumes in English and in French, cost approximately $75 a set. With the increase in wages and in printing costs since 1944, it is estimated that the total cost will run to something about $46,000. I understand that revised editions of debates are not produced in Washington, London or France. It is proposed that the committee give consideration to doing away with the revised edition here, thereby making a considerable saving of expense.


Mr. COLD  WELL@: May I ask a question of the Secretary of State? Do I understand that a bound edition will be published, on better paper than that on which Hansard is printed? The daily Hansard will be bound and will be available as a permanent record of parliament; is that the idea?


Colin William George Gibson: That will be considered by the committee. I understand that if the daily edition is to be bound, it will be available to members within two or three months after the house prorogues, rather than about a year later as is the case with the revised edition at the present time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I make a suggestion to the Secretary of State? First of all I think there is merit in the proposal to refer to the standing committee on debates the matters covered by this motion. I would point out, however, that it is a number of years since the debates committee last met, and it is possible that there are a number of other matters which the committee might like to discuss.

Private Bills
When committees meet we find sometimes that we are prevented, by the limitations imposed by the terms of reference, from considering matters in which members may be interested. Actually this motion is rather broad, but I should like to ask the Secretary of State if he would consider having added after the word "same" in the last line some such words as "and any other matters relating to the debates". The purpose would be to give freedom to the committee, under the chairmanship of the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot), to discuss other matters without the bother of having to come back to the house. The Secretary of State may feel that the terms of reference are wide enough. If he would give the assurance that so far as he is concerned other matters could be discussed, that would be satisfactory. When we get into committee we are governed by the rules, but I am sure it would help if we had some understanding that, when the committee meets, there will be fairly wide latitude for the discussion of matters relating to debates, which after all is the purpose of the committee.


Colin William George Gibson: I would not be prepared to extend the reference to the committee. I understand that if the committee itself feels too much restricted in its powers, it can always apply to the house to have those powers extended.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 249, for the relief of Mathilda Welter Jackson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 250, for the relief of Joseph Thomson Mowat..-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 251, for the relief of Mary Hrychuck Fleury.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 252, for the relief of Anna Kathleen Burnie Beebe.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 253, for the relief of Jenny Muriel Pressley Scott.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 254, for the relief of Mary Pappas Gigantes, otherwise known as Marie Papa-datos Gigantes.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 255, for the relief of Gilbert Brinton Campbell.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 256, for the relief of Helen McGregor Hanley.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 257, for the relief of Yudit Mary de Bartok Richardson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 258, for the relief of Abraham Schechter.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 259, for the relief of Caroline Alice Woods Mayhew.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 260, for the relief of Giana Stephen Cantlie Lyman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 261, for the relief of James Gustov Reed.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 262, for the relief of Elizabeth Ruth Maitland Harley.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	263,	for	the relief of Daisy
Elizabeth May Fishlock	Wallis.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 264, for the relief of Gertrude Agnes Dorothy Cunningham McLarnon.- Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 265, for the relief of Jeannette Ore Paige.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 266, for the relief of Reva James Nathanson.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	267,	for	the relief of Gerald
Roderick Bartlett.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	268,	for	the relief of Dorothy
Jardine Palmer Petrie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 269. for the relief of Nellie Maisie Wingham Ca.rphin.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	270,	for	the relief of Beatrice
Gertrude Corbin Simand.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 271, for the relief of Margaret McCallum Cameron Baird	Brine.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 272, for the relief of Leila May Willett Ascah.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 273, for the relief of Joseph Ulric Stanislas Caron.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	274,	for	the relief of Edith
Elizabeth Walker.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	275,	for	the relief of Yvonne
Jeanne Leslie.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill	No.	276,	for	the relief of Bertha
(Brana) Hindes Ramer.-Mr. Croll.
Bill No. 277, for the relief of Ellen Gertrude Hinks Fairhurst.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 278, for the relief of Shirley Marder Berman.-Mr. Maybank.
Bill No. 279, for the relief of Vera Maud Thayer Gunn.-Mr. Maybank.

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

Mr. McKAY:: 1.	How many houses (a) have been constructed; (b) are under construction in Saskatchewan by Wartime Housing Corporation?
2.	What has been the cost to the government for each of the following types of houses: (a) 4-room; (b) 5-room; (c) 6-room?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	(a) The total number of houses constructed in Saskatchewan by Wartime Housing Limited up to and including March 31, 1948,
Questions

is 1,678; (b) the total number of houses under construction in Saskatchewan by Wartime Housing Limited as of March 31, 1948, is 464.
2.	The average construction cost for the erection of houses in Saskatchewan by Wartime Housing Limited is: 4-room, $3,599.31; 5-room, $4,229.84; 6-room, $4,344.90.


WARTIME HOUSING-NORTH VANCOUVER
Mr. MacINNIS:: 1.	Is Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation negotiating for the sale of houses built by Wartime Housing in North Vancouver?
2.	If so, how many houses are being offered for sale?
3.	Do the present tenants get the first option?
4.	If so, at what price and on what terms?
5.	What was the original unit cost of building these houses?
6.	If the present tenants do not purchase, will they be compelled to vacate?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	Negotiations have been completed for the sale of a number of wartime housing units in North Vancouver.
2.	There have been 391 units offered for sale.
3.	Yes.
4.	Terms: (a) A purchaser may buy for all cash. If he wishes immediate title he will be required to pay the full sale price; if he agrees to reside in the house for five years and obtain title at the end of that period, provided he does not default under the terms of the agreement, he will be allowed a discount of 174 per cent on the sale price. The reduced amount that he will be required to pay is known as the anticipated price.
(b) A purchaser may buy on deferred payment plan with a minimum down payment of 10 per cent and six months' taxes in advance. The balance is payable in monthly instalments which approximate his current rental over a period not exceeding twenty-five years. The standard contract provides for a reduction from the sale price to the anticipated price if the purchaser or his immediate family occupy the house for five years from the date of purchase and comply with the terms of their agreement. The monthly payments cover principal and interest, insurance and one-twelfth of the yearly taxes. The corporation undertakes to install permanent foundation walls, replace metal chimneys with masonry ones and where two adjoining properties are served by a double woodshed, to divide the same and move each half into its appropriate lot.
Prices: Average anticipated prices are: Small 4-room, $2,500; large 4-room, $2,750; 6-room, $3,200.
5.	The original unit cost of building these houses was: Small 4-room, $2,477.67; large

4-room, $2,847.85 ; 6-room, $3,015.64. These are original construction costs and do not include lot fees of $109 per lot payable to the municipality at time of sale, or cost of foundations (estimated at $750 per house) or other improvements.
6.	Tenants who do not wish to purchase may be asked to move to suitable alternative accommodation. If a tenant is moved to a smaller house than he now occupies, it must be suitable to house his family without overcrowding. A tenant will not be required to move more than once and a veteran will not be moved to accommodate a non-veteran. Furthermore, tenants who are required to move will be compensated for moving expenses by a grant up to but not in excess of $15.


CENTRAL MORTGAGE AND HOUSING CORPORATION LUMBER AND LUMBER SUPPLIES-PURCHASING AGENT
Mr. WHITE (Hastings-Peterborough):: 1.	Who is the purchasing agent for Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, for lumber and lumber supplies, in the province of Ontario?
2.	When was he appointed and who recommended his appointment?
3.	What was his occupation before appointment?
4.	What is his salary?


Mr. McILRAITH:: 1.	Mr. A. Hardman, Toronto, Ontario.
2.	Mr. Hardman was appointed on the 1st of January, 1947. Mr. Hardman was previously employed as purchasing agent, Wartime Housing Limited. When the operations of that company were taken over by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Mr. Hardman was employed by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
3.	See answer to No. 2.
4.	The question of salary has to do with the internal management of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and it has not been the practice to give this information.


SALE OF CANADIAN FISH
Mr. ISNOR:: What, if any, efforts are being made to stimulate the sale abroad of Canadian fish?


Mr. McILRAITH:: The trade commissioner service is so organized that trade commissioners are kept continuously posted on the supply position of various commodities in Canada, and are urged to promote the sale of all commodities, particularly those which are in excess of our immediate domestic requirement.
Having regard to the current supply position, special instructions were sent to the trade commissioners, in countries where particular types of fish would find a most ready sale.

Questions
Washington has been advised of the availabilities of certain types of fish and the various U.S. government purchasing agencies have been acquainted with our supply position.
Recently an interdepartmental fisheries export committee was organized for the purpose of ensuring the best possible co-ordination of the efforts of the two departments- Trade and Commerce and Fisheries-and the trade, to market Canadian fish abroad. Steps have been taken to create a senior trade commissioner position who will specialize in the marketing of fish in the same manner as the agricultural and timber trade commissioners deal with their commodities.
2 and 3. Quantity 37.500 6,500 17.500	Value $4,300 00 900 00 2,500 00	Disposition Granted Granted [DOT] Granted
200		Refused
7 oz.	5 00	Granted2,000	253 56	Granted5,700	Refused


KAMLOOPS, B.C., POST OFFICE BUILDING
Mr. FULTON:: 1.	From whom were the tenders received for the addition to the post office building at Kamloops, B.C.?
2.	What were the amounts of the respective tenders?
3.	To whom was the contract awarded?
4.	Has the contractor to whom the tender was awarded been paid in full for the complete addition ?
5.	If so, what was the total amount paid to him inclusive of any extra payments over and above the amount of the original tender?
6.	If not (a) how much has been paid to him to date; (b) how much more will be paid to him for extras beyond what has already been paid?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: 1.	Two quotations received.
(a)	l Bennett & White Construction Company Limited,
(b)	J. C. Taylor & Son, Kamloops, B.C.


IMPORT RESTRICTIONS-CIGARS FROM CUBA
Mr. PROBE:: 1.	Since November 17, 1947, how many applications have been received by the emergency import control division, Department of Finance, requesting permits to import cigars from Cuba?
2.	For what amount (weight and value) was each application?
3.	What was the disposition of each application for permit?


Mr. BELZILE:: In so far as the emergency import control division is concerned:
1. Seven.
Explanation
These cigars had been made up to particular specifications and each cigar individually labelled under a cellophane wrapper with Canadian merchants label prior to November 17, and therefore could not be resold in any other country.
Applicant requested permit for shipment of cigars to be used at company's convention.
Applicant arranged for shipment of samples (no two cigars the same) while in Cuba in October, 1947. Usable for demonstration purposes only.
Shipment in transit November 17 but was returned to Cuba in error by customs.
Applicant requested a quota for future purchase and importation of cigars from Cuba.
2.	(a) Bennett & White Construction Company Limited-$41,600.
(b)1 J. C. Taylor & Son-$49,396.
3.	Bennett & White Construction Company Limited.
4.	5 and 6. The total amount of this contract, including authorized extras totalling $2,260, is $43,860. The amount paid the contractor to date is $42,860, the balance of $1,000 being withheld pending completion of unfinished work.


UNSURVEYED MINERAL CLAIMS IN YUKON TERRITORY
Mr. BLACK (Yukon):: Who are those who wish to proceed with the development of the mineral resources of Yukon territory and are unable to ascertain the limits of the properties that can be secured either by purchase or staking, referred to in the notices sent to the owners of unsurveyed mineral claims in Yukon by the mining recorders of Yukon on instructions of the Minister of Mines and Resources?
Questions

Mr. MaoKINNON: Companies and individuals who have already made substantial investments in mining in the Yukon and are interested in its development in the future.


HEALTH AND WELFARE-BRAUND TREATMENT FOR CANCER
Mr. Me GARRY:: 1.	Can the Ministry of National Health and Welfare say whether or not the committee of inquiry set up in New South Wales, Australia, to investigate the Braund treatment for cancer nas completed its inquiries?
2.	If so, what were the conclusions of the committee ?


Mr. MARTIN:: 1.	Yes. The committee has completed its inquiries and its report was tabled in the New South Wales parliament on April 8.
2.	The report states that the committee found Braund's treatment was in no way a specific cure for cancer, nor could it retard the growth of cancer. The committee concluded from patients examined that Braund in no case had substantiated his claim to cure cancer.
On March 9, in reply to a question by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid), I informed the house that the Department of National Health and Welfare had directed inquiries to the government of New South Wales regarding the alleged Braund cure for cancer. At that time I reported the receipt of a preliminary report from the chairman of the committee appointed to investigate Mr. Braund's treatment, which recommended strongly against patients going to Australia for the purpose of receiving that treatment. I am now able to inform the house that the investigating committee's report was tabled in the New South Wales parliament on April 8. The report states that the committee found Braund's treatment was in no way a specific cure for cancer, nor could it retard the growth of cancer. They concluded from patients examined that Braund in no case had substantiated his claim to cure cancer.


INCOME TAX-COMPULSORY SAVINGS
George Black: Will refunds of income taxes called compulsory savings now being returned to taxpayers be taxed as income of the taxpayer to whom such refunds are made?


Mr. WINTERS:: The refundable portion of income tax is not treated as taxable income.


PORT ELGIN HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. NICHOLSON:: How much was spent on Port Elgin harbour improvements during the periods:	(a)	1921-
1930; (b) 1931-1940; (c) 1911-1947?


Mr. FOURNIER (Hull):: Fiscal Years
(a)	1920-21	to	1929-30	
$11,744	46(b)	>
1930-31	to	1939-40	
65,996	75(c)	1940-41	to	1946-47	
2,611	53



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. HANSELL:: How many people are employed by the wheat board and how many are in each classification, such as executive, management, secretaries, bookkeepers, stenographers, etc.?


George James McIlraith: Return tabled.


&quot;21&quot; CLUB, MONTREAL
Mr. SKEY:: 1.	Have the government any record of a Montreal organization formerly known as the "21" club?
2.	If so, what was the purpose of the club and when was it disbanded?


Colin William George Gibson: Return tabled.	*


RENTAL APPEALS-ONTARIO
Mr. WHITE (Middlesex East):: 1.	How many rental appeals in respect of homes, housing and domestic establishments have been heard and adjudicated upon in the counties of Middlesex, Kent and Lambton, province of Ontario, in each year to date since the inception of rent control?
2.	How many were heard before county and district court judges?
3.	How many have been determined in favour of (a) the tenant; (b) the landlord?
4.	In how many such appeals was there an application for (a) increase of rental; (b) decrease of rental?
5.	Of such appeals mentioned in question 3 were (a) increases of rental granted; (b) decreases of rental granted?


GRANTS TO HOSPITALS, ETC.
Mr. BENIDICKSON:: What grants have been made by the federal government within the past five years to general hospitals or sanitaria for construction, equipment or maintenance costs?


DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME-RAILWAYS
Mr. FULTON:: 1.	During the war why were the Canadian railways not compelled to adopt daylight saving time when that time was made applicable to the rest of the country?
2.	Do the same reasons still apply at present, or if there are other reasons, what are they?


Colin William George Gibson: Return tabled.

External Affairs


GOVERNMENT ANNUITIES
Mr. KNOWLES:: 1.	What was the total number of individual contracts (not including certificates to persons in group plans) issued by the government annuities branch in each month from April 1, 1947, to March 31, 1948, both inclusive? What was the same total for the period from April 1 to April 19, 1948?
2.	What was the number of certificates to individuals in group plans issued' by the government annuities branch in each month from April 1, 1947, to March 31, 1948, both inclusive? What was the same total for the period from April 1 to April 19, 1948?
3.	What was the total number of individual annuity contracts (not including certificates held by persons in group plans) held as at March 31, 1948, and as at April 19, 1948?
4.	What was the total number of persons holding certificates in government annuity group plans as at March 31, 1948, and as at April 19, 1948?
5.	What was the total number of new annuity group plans put into effect in each month from April 1, 1947, to March 31, 1948, both inclusive: (a) governmental bodies; (b) non-governmental bodies? What were the same totals for the period from April 1 to April 19, 1948?
6.	What was the total number of government annuity group plans (a) governmental bodies; (b) non-governmental, in effect as at March 31, 1948, and as at April 19, 1948?


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): The hon. member for Stanstead (Mr. Haekett) raised a question on May 4, 1948, concerning the appearance before the Ontario municipal board of the consul general of the United States in Toronto. At that time I gave an undertaking that I would inquire into this incident and report to the house.
By international custom or treaty, and in accordance with instructions from their home states, consuls perform functions pertaining to the promotion of commerce and industry, the supervision of merchant shipping, protection for nationals of the appointing state, and certain notarial functions.
In the performance of these functions pertaining to commerce and industry, consuls must be allowed by the receiving state to watch over the execution of commercial treaties, to send reports to the home state on everything which can influence the development of its commerce and industry, and to give information to merchants and manufacturers of the appointing state necessary for the protection of their commercial interests. It is also generally admitted that in addition to the exercise of these duties of protection, consuls
may render certain assistance and help to their nationals who may be litigants before the courts of the jurisdiction where they perform their functions.
It seems clear in international law that a diplomatic envoy cannot be compelled or even requested to appear in a court as a witness in a civil, criminal or administrative procedure. But if he chooses to appear the courts may, and usually do, allow him to do so. By analogy, though there does not appear to be any clear rule of international law on this point, it would seem that a consul may ask a court within his consular jurisdiction to hear his statement on any matter in which the local interests of a national of his state may be involved. The court, of course, having control of its procedure, may decide the conditions upon which a statement may be given, and, having heard it, decide what weight, if any, should be attached to it.
In this particular instance, public notice had been given by the Ontario municipal board that it would hear the application of the M. & G. Convoy Company of Buffalo for a licence to carry automobiles in bond over provincial highways from one point in the United States to another. I understand it is the practice of the board to hear anyone whose statement is expected to be relevant. In the case of Mr. Russell, the chairman of the board decided to allow him to be heard. It is also our information that the proceedings of the board are usually informal and that witnesses are rarely put under oath.
I am informed that the consul general was acting in conformity with instructions from the United States Department of State, and for this reason he felt that he could not properly take an oath or be examined as an ordinary witness. This is quite clear from the letter he sent to the chairman of the Ontario municipal board on April 30. If I understood his statement aright the hon. member for Stanstead said it was competent to the board to receive a letter which would not be received as proof in an ordinary court of justice. I should like to read the letter sent to the chairman of the Ontario municipal board on April 30; I think it puts the matter in its proper perspective:
American Consulate General, Toronto 1, Canada, April 30, 1948
The Honourable
Chairman, Ontario Municipal Board, Parliament Buildings,
Toronto.
Sir:
I have the honour to refer to the hearing before your board on the morning of April 29, 1948, and beg to confirm herewith my verbal statement at that time . . .
Inquiries oj the Ministry
[Stage Direction]
The United States government is very much interested in the general proposal of freedom of movement by American trucking interests carrying in transit goods across Ontario from Michigan to New York, including this present application of M & G Convoy, Incorporated.
The consulate general in Toronto hopes for a favourable decision at an early date in this case by your honourable board. There may be other similar applications.
As my statement was made officially, I could not properly take oath to it or be examined or cross-examined upon it.
Respectfully yours,
H. Earle Russell, American Consul General.
It seems that all this amounted to, in fact, was to express before the Ontario municipal board what was well known to be the attitude of the United States with respect to this matter. This gentleman, in the exercise of his official functions, was seeking to render assistance to and further the commercial interests of nationals of his country before an administrative board. Whatever view may be taken of such an official act we must not forget that Canada too sends consuls abroad. When His Majesty issues a commission to the Canadian consul His Majesty grants-and I quote the language of the commission-
. . . full power and authority by all lawful means to aid and protect those Canadian citizens who may trade with or visit or reside within his consular district.
I therefore think this incident should not be magnified into one of considerable significance. In view of the controversial nature of this question and the discussions which have been going on about it for some time, however, I regret that it was considered necessary or advisable for the United States consul general in Toronto to ask to be heard by the provincial municipal board at this time.


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to present a bill to amend the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act to empower the Minister of Agriculture to appoint a director of rehabilitation and an associate director of rehabilitation.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of the resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.
Motion agreed to.
 ~i~ |


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Transport, concerning a matter with which I am sure he is quite familiar. When may his department expect a report from the engineering commission appointed to determine the feasibility of the strait of Canso project?


Lionel Chevrier: The board of engineers appointed by the government on February 11 last has held several meetings, and is actively engaged in reviewing plans prepared by the department dealing with the financial and economic practicability of, and the annual charges involved in, the construction of a bridge, causeway, tunnel or other improved facilities at Canso. I am informed it is expected that the report will be in the hands of departmental officers about the end of July.



FREIGHT RATES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. SOLON E. LOW (Peace River): Mr. Speaker, can the Prime Minister say when he may be able to make an announcement as to the decision of the cabinet with respect to the request made recently by seven provincial premiers on the question of freight rates?
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):: I regret I am not able to give my hon. friend any information at the moment.



FARM IMPLEMENTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. R. ARGUE (Wood Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of National Revenue. Can he inform the house how many Canadian combine harvesting outfits will be permitted to enter the United States this year, on what basis the selection will be made, and whether veterans and farmers in crop failure areas will be given preference?


Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue):: This is a question which might more properly be answered by the Minister of Labour.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, the arrangement
for the shipment of Canadian-owned combines to the United States is made by officials of the Department of Labour in Ottawa with the Department of Labour at Washington. Then the Department of Labour in Washington secures clearance through the United States immigration and customs officials. This has been going on for a number of years, as my hon. friend knows. It was developed more particularly during the war years. Last year 1,100 combines went to various parts of the central and southern states; this was the biggest movement on record. The average in previous years was about 600.
Might I add in passing that millions of dollars have been earned by this movement. Last year 412 of the owners of combines reported that they had received $3,325,000, which indicates that the owners of the 1,100 machines received close to $8,000,000, all in United States funds.
The movement from the United States to Canada is not as great. At most there have been 40 American combines taking part in this movement. I am informed that this year it is not expected that as many Canadian combines will be required by the United States, because of the late crop, particularly in New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas.
I might mention also the very friendly relations we have in connection with the movement of workers from Restigouche county in New Brunswick to Maine for the potato harvest, and from the southern part of Quebec for the lumber operations also in Maine. Then there is the movement of tobacco workers from the southern states into Ontario for the harvesting of the crop there.
When the movement does take place the selection will be made, as in the past, by the farm labour directors of the respective provinces; and of the dominion, which are involved in the movement.



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. L. SMITH (Calgary West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a question of the Minister of Justice, arising from an advertisement for old stock ale which appeared in Life magazine of April 26. In the advertisement are three cuts of a member of the mounted police force, who is obviously on duty, because he is carrying his gun. He would appear to have the line of his horse's
bridle in one hand and a bottle of this old stock ale in the other, and he is drinking from the bottle. In one of the other cuts it would appear that he is in very bad shape because he has the line of his horse's bridle over his elbow, while he pours the ale. The horse looks on, longingly; otherwise he. might joggle his arm.
I realize we have no control over the advertisements appearing in foreign magazines. But this force has a tradition, and drinking on duty is one of the things strictly forbidden; to suggest that they do so is absurd. My view is that something should be done, if necessary, to stop the magazine from coming into Canada if it is going to traduce the reputation of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, as is done in the advertisement I have just sent across to the minister.


Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I am much obliged to the hon. member for having brought this advertisement to my attention. I shall give consideration to the matter, and see whether anything can be done.


Arthur Leroy Smith: May I add that I assume no permission or anything of that kind was given?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Oh, no.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I am not speaking critically at all.


James Lorimer Ilsley: No permission was given.



INQUIRY FOR RETURN


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. D. J. McCUAIG (Maple Creek):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Secretary of State. On February 25, as appears at page 1605 of Hansard, an order for return was passed in my name respecting subsidies or subventions to industry. That was some time ago. Will the minister be good enough to say when I may expect an answer?


Colin William George Gibson: I shall have inquiries made.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. A. CRUICKSHANK (Fraser Valley) :: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of National Defence. According to Saturday's press, the army is to
National Housing Act

be issued second-hand air force uniforms. If that is correct, why are the fighting forces to have second-hand uniforms? I should like to know if the report is correct.


Hon. BROOKE CLAXTON (Minister of National Defence):: No, the report is totally and utterly incorrect.



REPORTED SHORTAGE IN TORONTO AREA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. TIMMINS (Parkdale):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply. I am informed that representations have been made to the minister or his department about a desperate shortage of nails in Toronto.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Winnipeg too.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Now that we shall be discussing the matter of housing for the next couple of days, will the minister bring in a report showing what the situation is, and particularly why one firm in Ontario, which is able to produce nails is not given some encouragement in that regard?



NATIONAL HOUSING ACT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Thursday, May 6, consideration in committee of the following resolution-Mr. Howe-Mr. Golding in the chair:
That it is expedient to present a measure to amend the National Housing Act, 1944, and in particular to authorize approved lending institutions to purchase from Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation mortgages held by the said corporation and to make loans to owners of rental housing projects not exceeding in amount 85 per cent of the estimated cost thereof; to authorize Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to guarantee an annual return of an amount to be determined by the corporation of rentals from rental housing projects for a period not exceeding thirty years, to make loans to owners of rental housing projects if such loans are not being made available by approved lending institutions; to authorize the governor in council to transfer lands vested in His Majesty to the corporation; and to make provision for the winding-lip and dissolution of Wartime Housing Limited and to vest in Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation power to provide rental housing out of moneys which may be appropriated by parliament for the purpose.
Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Chairman, at page 3639 of Hansard for May 5 the minister mentioned that some 13,000 rental units were being built under government sponsorship-

some under Wartime Housing, some under Housing Enterprises, and some under emergency shelter activities. Will the minister give a breakdown of the number in each category?


Right Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Reconstruction and Supply):: My officers will be with me in a moment, and I will then give the hon. member that information.


Mr. MERRITT:: I should like to ask the minister some questions with regard to the housing scheme for veterans in Vancouver which he announced. He said that he would accept applications from municipalities for a total of 12,000 houses. How many ex-service men have applied to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for wartime housing or its equivalent? How many applications are still active?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Applications for the 12,000 veterans housing units are made by the municipalities concerned. The application is made by the veteran to the local committee, which is usually of a municipal character. Usually the allocation of houses is made by a local committee on which the municipality and the local branch of the Legion have representation. I would not know how many applications have been made to these local committees, but the other day I gave the number of applications which had been made by municipalities to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: On what basis was the number of 12,000 arrived at? Was that the number you could build?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We estimated from experience how many units the cities throughout Canada were likely to ask for. We had to have a basis for the appropriation we would ask this parliament to grant, and we based our request for appropriation on probable applications for
12.000	units. If we actually have requests for
13.000	units I suppose we would build the extra thousand.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: The other day the minister gave figures as to the number agreed upon and the number under negotiation-3,500 and 5,200 respectively. How many are now under construction under the new scheme? Of the 1,115 under negotiation in British Columbia, how many have been agreed upon in Vancouver?


Clarence Decatur Howe: About 900 houses of the 1948 program are actually under construction. As to the Vancouver district, under the terms which were negotiated in the latter part of 1947, there are 600 houses under construction, with 500 additional houses under negotiation.

National Housing Act


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: The total number of houses under negotiation and under agreement does not measure up to the 12.000 which the minister gave. Is the minister running into difficulties in negotiation which have resulted in the scheme not being taken up to its full extent?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is only a matter of the willingness of the municipalities to make their contribution, which is limited to S600 per house. 'Wherever a city is willing to do its part, the federal government are willing to do their part. If my hon. friend wishes to stimulate house building in his own province he should campaign among the municipalities, because that is where the difficulty lies.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: I know that is the minister's attitude, but it is not necessarily the correct one. I have no doubt that the municipalities take the stand, that they are being called upon to do too much because of regard for their local conditions. What attempt has the minister made to interest the provinces, particularly British Columbia, to participate with the municipalities in this scheme?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I think the municipalities take somewhat the same view as the federal government; they dislike subsidized housing. That is the fundamental difference.


Charles Cecil Ingersoll Merritt: That is not my question. I wanted to know whether the minister had made any attempt to interest the provincial governments in this scheme.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The provincial government is involved with the municipality, because no municipality can make an agreement with the federal government without the consent of the provincial government. I have had talks with responsible members of the provincial governments, and they are well aware of the situation.


Mr. MacNICOL:: On Thursday last I asked whether it would be possible for Canada to embark on a program of prefabricated houses. The Toronto Daily Star gave wide coverage to my remarks, for which I am grateful to the reporter who represents that paper here in Ottawa. The result was that on Friday, Saturday and Sunday I was swamped with telephone calls, and I have received a great many letters here asking about the prefabrication program. There are quite a number of housing schemes around Toronto. I have seen some of them, and the prices are away beyond anything that I would pay. In all the groups that I have seen I would not pay more than S3,000 for any house.
People are anxious to get houses at reasonable prices. As I said on Thursday, under no circumstances can a working man afford to
pay S6.000 or $8,000 for a house, nor can he afford to pay a rental running as high as $80. Would it be possible for Canada to do what they ane doing in England and France with prefabricated houses?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Canada is using prefabricated houses in some sections. I think there are five substantial producers of prefabricated houses. The difficulty is the buyer's resistance; there is no fully prefabricated house that has entirely broken down the resistance of buyers. All houses built by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation are prefabricated to some extent. Panels are built off the job, and other work is done off site.
Another difficulty in connection with fully prefabricated houses is the meeting of local building bylaws. My hon. friend will recall that the Fairchild aircraft company produced prefabricated houses back in 1945 and 1946. These were substantial houses, and they met most of the requirements for a small house. But the difficulty was to meet the various building bylaws. Resistance developed to such an extent that the Fairchild house went off the market.
There is a preference among house buyers for the style with which they are familiar. I happened to be in southern California two or three years ago when an aircraft company there was considering going into prefabricated housing. Before doing so they decided to hold a competition to determine what design of house would be most acceptable to the buyer. They built one standard Cape Cod cottage, a style of small house which we all know in Canada, and two prefabricated houses. They took a ballot as to which was most acceptable to the public and 85 per cent of those voting favoured the standard Cape Cod cottages as against the two prefabricated designs. It is a combination of these circumstances which holds down the number of prefabricated houses that are being brought into use. One contractor in London, Ontario, who builds prefabricated houses, and moves them to a site in the neighbourhood, is working to capacity, but the plant has a very small capacity. He has a house which is acceptable in the London area and meets the bylaws of the city. About the only way I can see to bring about a much larger use of prefabricated houses would be to have localized operations of that kind, to meet the conditions of the particular locality.


John Ritchie MacNicol: I realize that if you are to erect prefabricated houses in a city, in Toronto, for instance, London or Hamilton, the local city bylaws will specify the kind of house that is permitted, but whether outside
National Housing Act

the city there are township bylaws to prevent the erection of prefabricated houses I do not know. I do not see why any objection should be taken to the type of house the minister mentioned, which is made by the Fairchild aircraft company just east of Montreal, on the south side of the river. I went there myself, and as the minister knows, a sample house has been erected just across the road. I thought it was a splendid house. At that time they were being sold for $3,000. If I had to choose between it and the type of house I see going up outside the city of Toronto, I would take the prefabricated house made by Fairchild.


Clarence Decatur Howe: They have shortened the name to Faircraft.


John Ritchie MacNicol: "A working man cannot afford to pay for the ordinary type of house that is going up around the city of Toronto. Can the minister tell the committee how many houses were made by Faircraft? I made an investigation at Steep Rock, which is in the next riding west of the minister's, and learned that the Steep Rock people had ordered fifty of these prefabricated houses. How many more they have on order I do not know, but their engineers were elated at the opportunity of being able to buy them. They expect the company to expand greatly. I hope it does. I was reading only this morning that within another year or two they expect to have a town of 7,500 people at Atikokan, near Steep Rock, and I hope this prefabricated house is so satisfactory that they have ordered a whole lot more. If they get them for $3,000 each, that will be good value for any working man. I do not know whether the program can be furthered in any way, but it is worth looking into very carefully. The low cost means a substantial saving to the working man who cannot possibly afford to pay the $6,000 or $8,000 mentioned in this bill.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Faircraft built 1,000 houses before they stopped the operation. The principal use for prefabricated houses is outside the cities, in paper towns like Marathon and Terrace Bay. The government itself is a substantial buyer of prefabricated houses for such outlying locations. In the cities there is practically no saving between the prefabricated house and the same type of house built on site. When the full accounts are paid the two usually cost about the same price.


Mr. MANROSS:: The minister quoted the Faircraft house and said they had stopped operations. He also mentioned the prefabricated house being made in the city of London. It costs a lot more than $3,000 erected on site. The prefabricated house made in London sells

for $4,790 erected on site. You buy the lot, and to veterans the city repays half the price of the lot after the house is erected. This house which sells at $4,790 has been approved by National Housing as well as by the lending companies. A down payment of $790 is required, leaving a mortgage of $4,000, and any mortgage company will take that risk. The house is moved to the site in two pieces. It splits in the middle, and you cannot see the joint when the house is erected. The roof is on hinges. The house requires 12 feet of clearance on the highway. The company is planning to distribute these houses within 100 miles of the city of London.
The chief difficulty which the company have had so far is the weather. They have not been able to build a big enough assembly line under shelter. They are building one house every five days now, but are hoping shortly, if we can give them some assistance, to build one every eight hours. Certainly that house is much cheaper than a house built on site. It includes plumbing, heating, wiring, grading of the front lawn and the house erected complete with a seven-foot basement.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Would the minister give us the breakdown by provinces of the units built by Wartime Housing, Housing Enterprises and Emergency Shelter?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Wartime Housing built 5,700; Emergency Shelter, 3,800; Housing Enterprises, 3,000; miscellaneous army construction, 500, making 13,000 odd altogether.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The annual report of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation gives detailed information about the activities of most of its branches. In the statement of assets it shows Housing Enterprises loans at $18,642,160; advances made to retire debentures and purchase outstanding debentures, $3,742,781, a total of $22,384,941. Will the minister give some information as to the location of these thirty projects, the average cost per unit, and the average rental per unit? If it is not feasible for him to give the information at once, he might put on the record the location of these different projects.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have not the information here, but I will ask the president of Central Mortgage and Housing to mail my hon. friend a schedule, if that will be satisfactory.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: That will be quite all right. Could we have the average cost per unit and the average rental per unit that is being charged?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I shall be glad to get that for my hon. friend.

National Housing Act


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The minister's officials have not the information here?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Not in such a form that it will answer the hon. member's question. We filed some information today on the cost of certain units, but the units vary so much in different parts of the country that it is difficult to give an over-all figure that means very much.


Mr. LOCKHART:: Earlier the minister said that in 1946 it took eleven months to build a house, but that in 1947 the time was cut down to eight months. Does the minister not believe that the same house could have been put up in 1939 in four or five months?


Clarence Decatur Howe: About five months.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Is there no hope of
cutting down the time required to build a house?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is tending in that direction. In the first quarter the average was seven and a quarter months.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: In connection with
Housing Enterprises Limited, I understand the schedule of rentals runs $42, $47, and, I believe, about $55. Is that the average across the country wherever these houses were built?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is the general rental range, but there are more expensive apartments.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: In the contracts made with tenants, is it true that no tenant who is, let us say, on piece work or who is doing seasonal work is acceptable in these houses?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It depends. If he is a veteran and has reasonable earnings over the year, I do not think they care whether his earnings are seasonal or not. They expect the tenant to have an income which will enable him to pay the rent that these projects demand. If he cannot pay the rent, an effort is made to get him accommodation within his means.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: The minister did not grasp my meaning. Has it been necessary for a man to have an assured income over the past year, we will say, in order to be able to rent one of these houses? Suppose at the moment he is engaged on piece work or on seasonal work: on that basis, if it continued for the whole year, he would have enough to meet the requirements. Veterans tell me that they have attempted to negotiate the rental of some of these houses, more particularly at $42 or $47, and they find that simply because of the kind of employment they have there is no hope for them. Being a veteran does not help
a man at all. Can the minister enlighten the committee further as to what the practice is? Is the report made to me correct, that they cannot rent these houses for the reason I have stated?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Generally speaking the married veteran with two children is taken care of, if not with one type of house then with another, and if there is a surplus of housing beyond that, the veteran with fewer points-the married veteran with one child-is taken care of. I think the point system is more important than earnings. Of course earnings are considered. It would be foolish for a veteran to move into a class of accommodation he could not possibly pay for, and it would be foolish for the managers of the project to permit him to do so. But if he qualifies on points and has any income whatever, which all veterans have, he is taken care of.


Mr. MacINNIS:: The minister mentioned Housing Enterprises Limited and said they had completed some 3,000 units. Is that correct?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Angus MacInnis: How many units altogether were started by Housing Enterprises Limited?


Clarence Decatur Howe: There were 3,313 started. They are all finished.


Angus MacInnis: In introducing the resolution on May 5 the minister, as reported at page 3640 of Hansard-there is reference to Housing Enterprises Limited-made this statement:
In light of all circumstances the government accepted this proposal. The corporation has taken over Housing Enterprises Limited and has completed and rented the 3,313 units in the 32 projects.
How many of these units did the government have to complete after they took over from Housing Enterprises Limited?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The government completed about 2,000 units. The rest were completed by the other company.


Angus MacInnis: Then it would seem that Housing Enterprises completed 1,113 and the government completed 2,200. How much money had the government spent on Housing Enterprises Limited?


Clarence Decatur Howe: When all the bills are paid- the accounts have not yet been straightened out-the cost will be about $26,000,000 for the 3,313 units.


Angus MacInnis: In reply to the hon. member for Lincoln the minister said that the rent of the units started by Housing Enter-
National Housing Act

prises Limited and completed by the government would be $40, $42 and $47. Is that correct?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is difficult to give an overall figure, because there are so many different types of accommodation started under the plan. I should think that is a fair figure for the single units. In the city of Toronto and in one or two other cities there are apartments that rent at a much higher figure than that.


Angus MacInnis: I understand that there are some apartments in Vancouver. Has the minister the rentals for those apartments? Can he give them now?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am sorry to say we have not got them. They are substantially higher, however, than the figures named.


Angus MacInnis: The reason I am inquiring particularly is that during the last session, though I have not the exact date-I believe it was on May 14-the minister referred to a firm bid that had been received for 400 units in Hamilton, and on that occasion I understood the rentals, when these units were finished, would be $55, $65 and $75. They were three-, four-, and five-room units. If the others were comparable, or if these were finished, the rentals would be away beyond what the minister has stated. I want the minister to remember I am just saying "if."


Clarence Decatur Howe: My impression is that when the range of rentals was placed before the government the project was not approved, and I think I am correct in saying that particular project was not actually built. When the government took over Housing Enterprises Limited it made every possible effort to reduce the rentals of the units. In some cases the amortization period was extended and interest on money was reduced, and every means was taken to bring the rentals to a reasonable level, so that today they are not too far out of line for the ordinary veteran family.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: On the basis of the figures the minister gave a few moments ago, 3,313 units at a total cost of $26,000,000 would represent $8,000 per unit. I do not see how it would be possible to rent these units at the figures mentioned by the member for Lincoln a few minutes ago. Can the minister explain how in these circumstances the rentals can be revised downwards?


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend is correct. The average unit cost is about $8,000. The rentals were brought down by extending the amortization period and extending low interest

rates. The government owns them directly; it is not in the hands of the mortgage company today. The government has lent at the cheapest rate at which a government can lend money to a project of that sort, so that even though the units cost $8,000, the rentals are approximately as stated.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: What is the average cost of the four-room unit that Housing Enterprises Limited built?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Built in what year?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: They are just finishing them up. They were finished and then they were abandoned. There was a four-room unit that was built. What was the over-all cost of that? It looks to me as if these prices are away out of line.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We thought they were away out of line. That is why we took them over. We did not like to lend money on the houses at the amounts that they were costing.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Can we not be told what they cost?


Clarence Decatur Howe: If the hon. member will tell me what project he is talking about, I shall be able to get the information. He waves his hand and asks, what do four-room units cost. What project is it he refers to?


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Three different types of units were built in the city of St. Catharines. There were 102 houses. The four-room unit, the lesser of the three, rents for $42 per month with some other service charges added. I should like to know what that particular four-room unit cost.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We will get that.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: I have been more
specific.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We will get the information.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: It seems to me we ought to have it.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: P.C. 1095 was an order in council having to do with a rental housing project in which the element of double depreciation was the main factor. It is stated in the order in council that it must be a rental housing project commenced prior to January 1, 1949. The first question I should like to ask the minister is this. If rental insurance comes in, is that the end of P.C. 1095 with respect to double depreciation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The double depreciation was put on for a period to test its value as a

National Housing Act
stimulation to the building of apartments. The intention is to dovetail it into the rental insurance.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Will double depreciation be a factor in this rental insurance plan? Or is it a project by itself?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It was a project by itself. It was announced a year ahead of the insurance principle. The insurance principle, I am sure,-although the regulations have not yet been worked out-will only apply to ordinary depreciation. Double depreciation is a right that the owner will have, which he can take advantage of if the earnings permit; but the government would not insure sufficient earnings to guarantee his ability to take care of double depreciation.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: It seems a reasonable
conclusion that the minister does not intend that double depreciation shall be any part of this rental insurance plan.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Coming to the rental
insurance plan, I rise to ask him some questions with respect to these items.


Clarence Decatur Howe: May I suggest that the hon. member is now discussing details of the bill, which is not before us? Would his questions not be more appropriate when we are considering the bill?


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: The minister is quite right. As I understand it, this project of rental insurance will have nothing to do with the construction of low-cost rental houses.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It will apply to the lowest-cost apartment houses that can be built, I assure the hon. member. It is not our intention to insure rentals of luxury apartments. They must be the lowest-cost apartment buildings.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: In his remarks on the
resolution the minister referred to rentals not over $80 per month; and in his statement as reported at page 3642 of Hansard he said:
It is likely, however, that most of the new houses will be in the moderate rental field because that is the type of housing in which landlords and builders are interested.
I am suggesting to the minister that when he refers to "the moderate rental field" he means something above the low-cost field.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No. It is the bottom of the apartment house band. Eighty dollars a month for a fully-serviced apartment-which means heat, light, and all services-is not a luxury apartment, to the best of my knowledge.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: How are the people
going to pay that?


Clarence Decatur Howe: What does the man who
rents a house for $40 a month pay for his coal, light and other services? He pays that. The hon. member laughs.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: No, he does not pay $40 a month.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Let us be realistic about this.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: He does not pay $40 for those services.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I am not so sure.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: The minister may not be so sure, but I know he does not. If the minister does not know that, I do.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Under this plan is it intended that not only will the builder, investor or professional landlord have sufficient revenue to take care of his taxes, interest on mortgage indebtedness, operating expenses and repairs, but over and above that, no matter what, he shall have a return of two per cent on the money which he has invested?


Mr HOWE:: Yes. The insurance should cover those items.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: When the minister was speaking on May 5, he outlined this new principle in rental housing, this matter of rental insurance. He says that if the resolution is adopted, more detailed examination of the proposal can be made when we are in committee of the whole. As this is a new principle, I think the minister at this stage should be prepared to tell us just how it works and to give us more details than he has given today.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The bill carries the detail. We are discussing the principle today. I think the principle is fairly clear. The purpose is that for a consideration the mortgage company will issue an insurance policy which guarantees that, for a period, the revenue from the building will amount to a minimum sufficient to pay the charges which were just mentioned by the hon. member for Parkdale. That is the principle of the bill.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: The minister mentioned a term. Do I understand that this term of guarantee for insurance will be thirty years?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It could go up to thirty years. It will probably be for a lesser period. It will depend on the term of the mortgage agreement. Certainly it may go beyond the term of the mortgage agreement. This bill gives the right to insure for that maximum period.
National Housing Act


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: The term of the mortgage is thirty years. There is a specific term in respect of the insurance. Do I understand that the government will be tied into this plan for a matter of thirty years?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Under the provisions of the bill the term of the mortgage is not to exceed twenty years. That is the difficulty which arises in discussing the bill when we have not the bill before us. As I say, if the hon. member will wait until the bill is brought down, the basic principle will be much clearer.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: The resolution reads:
. . . and to make loans to owners of rental housing projects not exceeding in amount eighty-five per cent of the estimated cost thereof; to authorize central housing and mortgage corporation to guarantee an annual return of an amount to be determined by the corporation of rentals from rental housing projects for a period not exceeding thirty years . . .
Is that part and parcel of this insurance plan, and if so, what is the factor of thirty years?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is felt that we should take power to insure the transaction to a point where the builder of the apartment can be completely paid out. It has nothing to do with the term of the mortgage, which is restricted to twenty years. The corporation, of course, will make an appropriate transaction for a special case, and it is taking the right to insure for the full term of thirty years if the circumstances seem to warrant this being done.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Then the minister said the arrangement "would retain the debtor-creditor relationship." Does this mean the builder goes on the covenant of the mortgage and remains there as an ordinary debtor in respect of the mortgage?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is what it means.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Or does he get off it?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It means just that.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: It means which?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That he does exactly as my hon. friend says; he stays on the covenant.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: He is a convenanter?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: He has to pay for the insurance he gets?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Oh, yes.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Since we are dealing here with a principle which underlies all housing, will the minister indicate the size of the commitment his department is prepared to recommend in respect of this insurance angle? Will he also put on record the amount of money this government is obligated for in guarantees under housing up to the present time? For instance, we are obligated for a very large amount of money on loans under the National Housing Act. I understand we are also obligated to some extent in connection with Housing Enterprises Limited. We are also obligated to the builders in respect to integrated housing. Could we have something put on the record before this resolution passes which will indicate whether in fact we are not subsidizing housing now and give us some idea of the fextent to which we [DOT] are obligated?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Our cash obligation under housing act loans is about $8,000,000.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Is that the over-all?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is on loans under the National Housing Act. That is what our cash guarantee to the mortgage companies amounts to.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: We are obligated for hundreds of millions of dollars, are we not, in respect of all our housing enterprises?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Housing Enterprises has been taken over and paid out. We own it.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: I was not referring specifically to that corporation, but to all our housing projects.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend would like to know how much money the government has invested in housing?


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: No, not particularly what we have invested, but the amount of guarantees we have given.


Clarence Decatur Howe: About $8,000,000. Those are the guarantees in the mortgage pool. We have an insurance pool on National Housing Act loans, and at the moment our liability to that pool is about $8,000,000.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Then in respect of this rental insurance, does it contemplate detached and semi-detached houses as well as multiple houses? Would a person building eight houses come under this scheme, or must it be multiple housing?


Clarence Decatur Howe: There must be eight family units involved. It does not matter whether it

National Housing Act
is horizontal or vertical, as long as there are eight units involved in one building.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: That is the minimum?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes.


Mr. McLURE:: I think I am in order in referring to a question I asked the minister on May 3, which appears at page 3535 of Hansard. At that time the minister said he was going to get the information on my question, which had to do with housing in Charlottetown. As the minister knows, housing projects on behalf of veterans there have not amounted to a great deal. Some three years ago an emergency housing plan was put into operation by the city, and one hundred families of veterans are still living in this emergency accommodation at the airport. The city carried it on for one year; then the provincial government took it over and has continued it up to the present. Now they have given these one hundred families notice that they must get out within a short time, because this property has been declared surplus and will be sold1 in the course of a month or so. I wanted to know if it is the intention of the minister to continue to provide this emergency housing for these veterans until such time as his department can do some building for them.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have no information on the proposal mentioned by my hon. friend. I might explain that the emergency shelter was provided under agreement between the city of Charlottetown and the federal government. The federal government contributed the wartime buildings and paid half the cost of conversion, and under the agreement the city was to operate the property and collect and retain the rentals. After a period the city dropped the project and refused to carry it on any further. The provincial government took over the city's obligation, so to all intents and purposes the provincial government are the owners and operators of the project. There would be no reason why they would let us know their plans, but we have not been advised of any plan such as that mentioned by my hon. friend.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: On May 5, at page 3641 of Hansard, the minister said:
The builder and the landlord know that economic rentals at today's level will see them through. However, they doubt whether present rentals will be maintained.
And at the top of the next page he went on:
This guaranteed rental will be about eighty-five per cent of the economic rental which the owner may charge his tenants during the first three years. The owner will pay a premium for his rental insurance at a rate to be set by the
5849-239i
governor in council. Provision is made for a lending institution to make loans up to eighty-five per cent of the estimated cost of the rental housing project. These are to be direct loans with all the funds to be advanced by the lending institution, rather than the usual joint loans under the National Housing Act.
The reason given was that there is very little risk involved. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that this is a very unfair type of subsidized housing. It is subsidized housing for the people who are prepared to pay up to $80 a month, and all hon. members know that this includes only a very small proportion of the Canadian people, a group who, as I mentioned the other day, somehow or other can find living quarters without subsidy. While there is no hard and fast rule, I think it has always been accepted that one should not pay more than two years' income for his housing, so the pedp'g who will occupy this housing should be those receiving at least $4,000 a year. For those getting only $1,000 a year the maximum would be $2,000. The majority of Canadians are not getting $4,000 a year and cannot afford to pay what is required to service that type of housing accommodation.
This is a case of heads I win, tails you lose, as far as the lending institutions are concerned. The minister states that under present inflated conditions landlords are prepared to build houses, and that they can find economic rentals. We are to have a three-year testing period, so it would seem that the government is counting on the depression being at least three years away. I am not one of those people who accepts the opinion that a depression is just around the corner, with the cost of living going up-


Clarence Decatur Howe: When did you change?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I think it is not just around the corner; it will come some time; but it is not very close.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Your story is that a depression has been around the corner since 1943.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I am not one of those who predicted a depression since 1943.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister is making provision for it in the bill.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: The cost of living is going up every month, and the lending institutions are prepared to build houses now and to accept 85 per cent of the rentals during the first three years. It is obvious that they are able to get a good deal more than economic rentals at the present time. The shortage of housing is so acute that rentals run at $100, $125 or $150. as members of parliament have
National Housing Act

found when they have come to Ottawa and looked for housing accommodation during the session. One can sell or rent a house at the present time for almost any price.
The government's own publication supports my theory that we are overbuilt for people who can afford to pay for units running at $8,000.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Would my hon. friend tell me where he finds that quotation?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I have not the statistics here; but the people who can afford houses at $8,000 are those who are getting $4,000 a year or more; and your own bureau of statistics, which comes under the Department of Trade and Commerce, has published all kinds of material to support my claim that we have built more housing than can be bought and paid for by people who are getting $4,000 or $5,000 a year and upwards.
What we are doing now is to guarantee that lending institutions will have a three-year testing period, and that they will have at least 85 per cent of the maximum rentals they can collect during that period. Then, for a period of twenty or thirty years they will be guaranteed at least the taxes, the debt services, the operating expenses and a reasonable return of two per cent on the investment. I submit that this is discriminatory legislation, and that it should be carefully scrutinized by the people of Canada.
I say that if the lending institutions want a guarantee of that kind they should not be permitted to take advantage of the increase. I believe costs are likely to go up in the next year, and the lending institutions are in a position where they can take advantage of the increase in the event of prices going up. They are guaranteed 85 per cent of prevailing rates, which are well above the cost of economic rentals, over a period of time. So at this stage I offer my protest against this type of discriminatory legislation which will serve to subsidize a small group of people in the higher income brackets.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I cannot follow' my hon. friend at all. In the first place, lending institutions do not build houses. I do not know why the hon. member is talking about lending institutions; he seems to have them on the brain. I do not know of a single lending institution in Canada that builds houses, apartments or anything else. Those institutions lend the money to others who do the building. But they do not lend the full amount, and they do not collect rents.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: We have not the bill before us, but it would seem that the rental insurance is limited to the class of housing which is needed the least. They will have 85 per cent of the guaranteed rentals, plus these other items I have mentioned, plus two per cent; so that they are in a perfect position. The details are not before us, but we shall have them soon. Apparently some people in Canada will have this guarantee, and it is expected that they will build some housing. If not, I do not know why we are wasting our time in a discussion of the legislation.


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is exactly the same as the position where a life insurance company is willing to guarantee my hon. friend, by taking the risk that he will live for a certain period of time. They may be too optimistic and they may be too pessimistic, but on the average they are about right. We are not guaranteeing anything. We are selling insurance on that prospect. My hon. friend has been saying, for the last four years, that a depression is just around the comer; anybody would have been right in betting against him there; anyone who had insurance against falling rentals would have been more right than my hon. friend. If my hon. friend is right and a depression is just around the corner, it might be expensive insurance. In other words, if I am right when I say I believe that this is a growing country and that it is likely to continue to grow and prosper, it would not be expensive. In any event, the government is setting a rate which it believes protects the situation in either direction.
MR. LOCKHART: I do not wish to hold up the resolution; but I gather from what the minister has said-somewhat heatedly at times-that any information with respect to the winding up of Housing Enterprises and the taking over by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and information respecting Wartime Housing Limited, will all be available when the bill is before us?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Yes. I had hoped to have it available now; I sent one of my officers out to get it.


Norman James Macdonald Lockhart: Then I shall suspend until later further questions I have to ask.


Angus MacInnis: I am glad the minister is so sure there will be no depression. If we could get that optimistic assurance over to the builders who build the houses we might have some houses built. That is the trouble, as was indicated the other day when he intro-

National Housing Act
duced the resolution; he cannot get the builders to see it that way. Consequently the government or the people of Canada have to take the shock.
At page 3641 of Hansard he said:
We have made a careful examination to ascertain the main reason for lack of rental housing by the entrepreneur. A number of -builders engaged in the rental field have been interviewed and the whole situation has been thoroughly canvassed. It will be remembered that rentals upon new units are no longer under rental control.
The field has been cleared for them. He continued:
Economic rentals in relation to today's costs are readily available. It is our own belief that the main deterrent to-new rental construction is the fear that although economic rentals will support present capital costs, the day will come when comparable rental units can be built at a lesser figure, with correspondingly lesser rentals.
Well, when the depression comes, prices will fall. He continued:
The builder and the landlord know that economic rentals at today's levels will see them through. However they doubt whether present rentals will be maintained.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I might point out that we can theorize all we like. I can have my theory of the future; my hon. friend can have his, and the hon. member for Mackenzie can have his gloomy picture of the depression around the corner. But the opinion which is important is that of the investor who ordinarily builds houses, and who can build or not as he likes. Neither the hon. member nor I can pass laws or theorize in any way to compel him to build houses if he does not feel like doing so.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister has just said that the investing company does not build houses.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I do not object to the minister's having theories, but I object to his finding fault with us when we have theories which agree with the theories which he finds among those who are expected to invest in houses. The fact of the matter is that investors will not invest without a government guarantee.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Probably investors believe my hon. friend. His election campaign in 1945 was fought on the belief that there was a depression just around the corner, and he had many supporters in that election. Perhaps many investors believed he was right at that time, and still believe he may be right in the future.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Apparently the minister did not follow my election campaign in 1945 very closely. He has not heard me say anything in the house about a depression. But what I do know is that under our present system a depression will come, unless the minister can find some way out. There are ways out.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: I should like to ask a question based on the last part of the resolution. Provision is made for the dissolution of Wartime Housing Limited. I understand that at the present time it has under way a great many houses. Is it intended that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation shall continue to t.ie completion of those houses, and that from *'*ear to year they shall continue with the work begun by Wartime Housing Limited? Further, is it intended that the Department of Reconstruction and Supply shall in the course of time, or shortly, go out of existence; and that housing in future will all be handled by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation? Can the minister tell us why it was necessary to change from Wartime Housing Limited to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation?


Clarence Decatur Howe: It is simply giving legal effect to a condition that exists today. Wartime Housing is a separate corporation charged with the building of houses for the federal government. The houses are owned by the crown. As a matter of fact, the staff of Wartime Housing Limited has been merged with the staff of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, although the two corporate identities still exist. We feel that we are getting far enough away from the war that "Wartime Housing" is no longer an appropriate name. We see no purpose in maintaining two corporate structures when one in fact is doing the work.
Wartime Housing Limited has no staff except a skeleton board of directors. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is collecting the rents of the houses owned by the crown in the name of Wartime Housing Limited and charging a fee for doing so. Central Mortgage is really performing the work and directing building activities.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Is it intended that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will conduct all housing projects in future and that the Department of Reconstruction and Supply will fold up shortly?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not know that the two are related. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is a crown company and always has been a crown company. At the moment it reports to the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, and it will report to some minister, regardless of the future of the Department of Reconstruction and Supply. I
National Housing Act

suppose the Department of Reconstruction and Supply will fold up when the particular functions of that department are liquidated, but I cannot say when that will be.


Mr. JOHNSTON:: What date was the rent control taken off new housing construction?


Clarence Decatur Howe: February, 1947.


Charles Edward Johnston: It seems to me that there is a degree of unfairness here. I think the underlying principle for the taking off of rent control in the case of new buildings was that the cost of construction was going up and that houses were badly needed. I had an instance drawn to my attention not long ago where a house being constructed was rented at the beginning of 1947. It was a privately constructed house being built for rental purposes. This house was rented in January and the rent control was taken off in February. Although it was rented, the final completion of the house did not take place until another five or six months had passed. If I recall rightly, there were some doors between the kitchen and dining room or something like that which could not be obtained and the house was not actually completed until well after February.
Because the house was rented before the cut-off date, the rent was controlled, but another man who had completed a house just after that did not have his rent controlled. This man could have refused to rent his house on the ground that it was not fully completed. If he had waited after the cut-off date his rent would not have been controlled. I think cases like this should receive a little more consideration.
I should like to say something about the subsidizing of new houses. No doubt it would cost the government a good deal to subsidize low-rental housing. The government are taking the position that because of increased costs of construction, material and labour, they do not think it would be profitable for them to go into the housing business. They feel that they could not afford to build houses to rent at the set rentals.
Surely, if the government cannot afford to go into building, we cannot expect the private individual to enter this field. If neither the government nor the private individual goes into the construction of low-rental houses, who is to build them? There is a drastic shortage of houses, and if you take these two parties out of the building field it means that no houses will be built.
if one reviews the building permits issued by the different municipalities he will find a falling off in the building of rental houses and 
house construction generally. It is true that there is an increase in commercial building, but that will not solve the problem of rental housing. It does seem to me that the government will have to reconsider the possibility of subsidizing low-rental housing. I do not see how you are going to stimulate this type of building unless that is done. Private individuals cannot afford to erect houses at the price suggested the other day by the minister, that is, $6,800, to rent at $37.50 a month. They just cannot do it.
There is just one other thing I should like to draw to the minister's attention. I refer to the contract which has been used in the past and which I presume Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is using. This is the standard form of contract. I spoke at some length on this a year ago when I had the contract before me and I do not propose to review at this time all that I said on that occasion.
It seems to me that when a man has made the payments required by the lending institution he should have a fair equity in his place, but the existing contract states that if a man fails even in his last payment he loses all equity in his place. In fact he could be prosecuted as a trespasser if he did not get out after having been given notice. It seems to me that that is unjust, and I think the minister should draw up a new contract where a man would have an equity in his place according to the payments he had made.
Such a provision would give some incentive to the man buying a house. He would know that, as payments were being made, his equity would be increased. Last year I placed the particular clause in the contract on Hansard. As I say, that clause would permit a man losing every cent he had paid in, and I do not think that is right. I agree that this is the standard contract, but I do not think it is a just contract. The contract should be revised and a new one made, so that the buyer will not lose all his investment. When we are discussing the clauses I shall endeavour to have the contract with me, and perhaps we can go into it then in greater detail. In the meantime I wish the minister would review the contract with a view to making it more equitable for the purchaser.


Clarence Decatur Howe: My hon. friend spent some time in proving that no one could build a low-cost house at present prices, but in the first three months of this year there have been more houses started than in any previous three months in our history. So his reasoning is not borne out by the facts.

National Housing Act


Charles Edward Johnston: Is there a $7,000 house renting for $37.50?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I would not say that there is.


Charles Edward Johnston: That is my point. The eost is so high that the entrepreneur cannot build a house to rent at that figure.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Who knows whether next year or the year after, costs will not be higher? They were higher in 1945; they were higher in 1946; they were higher in 1947; they are higher in 1948, and possibly they will be still higher in 1949. When is a man to make up his mind whether he wants a house or not? If he is married and has a child or two he cannot just wait until prices suit him. He has to build or go without a house.


Charles Edward Johnston: Then he may take a very great loss.


Clarence Decatur Howe: So far as equity insurance is concerned, I do not know any way in which a man can preserve his equity other than by keeping up his payments. No one can take away a man's equity in his home except the courts, and in a case of hardship the court will appreciate the representations made.


Charles Edward Johnston: Would not the court have to be governed in its decision partly by the contract a man signs?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps, but courts have been known to be lenient in hard cases.


Charles Edward Johnston: In the contract, if the
man fails to make one payment, he waives all his rights, even to go to court.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Oh, no. Nothing can take away a man's right to go to court.


Charles Edward Johnston: Yes, according to this contract, and that is one objection I have to it.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: In connection with the winding up of Wartime Housing, I was critical of this major venture of the federal government into the housing field early in the war, on the ground that many of these would be permanent houses, but I agree readily that the people living in them were happier because they were better and more cheaply housed than they otherwise could have been. I find by the annual report of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, at page 55, that the estimated completed cost per unit is just over $5,000, for housing, supplementary buildings, land improvements, covering 31,000 units. At pages 44 and 45 of the report I note that these units are being sold at an average of $2,500. My understanding was that an undertaking was given to the municipalities
that the houses would not be sold but would be demolished in due course. I note, however, that in Halifax, Montreal, Quebec and Victoria these houses are being sold. I take it that the local authorities have been consulted. Would the minister make a statement as to whether or not these wartime houses are not a fairly good investment from the federal point of view, and should they be sold at $2,500' per unit when they cost $5,000, and costs have been going up since then? Most of these houses have been kept in fairly good repair and it would seem to me that it is not wise to dispose of them at this price at this time. I know the veteran deserves special consideration, but the veterans should get housing of a little better quality than wartime housing. Would not the 31,000 units be a good investment for us to keep for a few years, and does $2,500 seem a fair price to be getting for them?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The $5,000 average cost
includes a good deal of land development; in fact $13,000,000 is in there for land development. Generally speaking, the houses being sold today for $2,500 to $3,000 did not cost $5,000, although that may have been the average cost of all houses. Generally speaking, the houses now being sold were built under low-cost conditions. One reason why we are selling wartime housing is that we are in an indefinite position with regard to it. These houses were built under contract for the duration of the war and one year thereafter, and in most cases these agreements with the municipalities have not been renewed; so that we are in the position of being obliged to remove the houses from the land at any time the municipalities ask us to do so. Our protection is that all the houses are occupied and we are not likely to be asked to move them, but the uncertainty of tenure is such that the crown is hardly warranted in spending money on such houses. Before we sell a house to a veteran we put in a concrete foundation, if the house does not have one, and we replace the wartime steel chimney with a brick chimney, and generally put the house in first-class shape before we sell it to a private owner, who has rights to the property and security of tenure. That seems a better disposition of these houses than the present indefinite position.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: At page 3639 of Hansard the minister referred to encouragement given for the additional production of soil pipe and plumbing fixtures. Can he give us details of what assistance has been given? At page 3642 the minister refers to the discussions
National Housing Act

that have been held with the Canadian federation of mayors and intimated that there is a softening-up process and that, so far as he is concerned, he is prepared to discuss with the provinces and the municipalities solutions of present difficulties. When I raised the question in the house on March 18 as to whether the minister had given leadership in convening such a conference he replied, no. Can he state now whether there is any possibility of his taking the initiative in convening a conference with provincial and municipal authorities to discuss the whole question of housing?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The minister meets with the provinces whenever they care to discuss with him any housing project, but he has had experience enough to know that representatives of nine provinces meeting in one room and holding diametrically opposite views can agree on nothing. If any province wishes to discuss any matter with me, and they practically all do from time to time, these discussions are held either in the province or in Ottawa.
There is nothing new to report on soil pipe or plumbing. Additional capacity was provided by Crane on a subsidy basis for excess production of bath fittings, on a basis of two cents a pound. The only other subsidy was to a firm in Winnipeg which had built additional capacity for producing soil pipe. I have not the details.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: Earlier I asked a question in all seriousness in regard to the production of nails. Builders in Toronto are in a desperate position in regard to nails. Representations have been made to the minister's department to see what can be done to cut through whatever obstacles are holding up production. Apparently at the present time the wire is not available, and I understand that the minister has control of the disposition of wire materials to various firms. I wonder if he would make a statement, if not now, at any rate within the next day or so when he has all the facts before him. This is not a facetious matter; as far as I am concerned, it is of considerable importance.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I shall be glad to state the position. I thought everyone had understood it. The bottleneck is not in nail-making machinery, but in the amount of wire rod that this country is capable of producing. Wire rod is divided between nails, bailing wire, barbed wire fencing and one or two essential uses to which wire is put. We cannot step up the amount of wire which the rolling mills can produce. It would take years and a heavy capital investment to do so. All we can do is to divide as fairly as we can the material that

the mills can produce as between the manufacture of nails and the manufacture of other commodities. I have asked our people to give all the preference they dare to give to nails, and we are going to take a bite out of wire products. There will be complaints about that, but you cannot distribute more than there is in toto. We are in process of diverting wire from other uses into nails. We are not going to make any barbed wire for a few months. I hope hon. members who have been worrying about nails will not start worrying about other products, because that is the only way to get more nails. In March, 1948, we produced 142,000-odd kegs of nails as against 130,000 odd in March, 1947. We are producing more nails than we ever produced before, but the complaints continue. I am disposed to go full out and fill every hardware store with nails and have people complaining about something else for a while. That is what we are going to do. We shall doubtless get other complaints.


The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:: I do not think we should enter into any long discussion on nails on this resolution.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You cannot build houses without nails.


William Henry Golding: We have to observe some order.


Harold Aberdeen Watson Timmins: There is one other feature to which I wish to refer. There are 12,000 wartime homes which the minister announced last October he was prepared to have built by Wartime Housing Limited, but apparently that number of houses will not be built because the municipalities have not all signified their intention of carrying on with the project. These projects have priority for nails, and the thought I am trying to express is that Wartime Housing Limited has been receiving more than its share of nails, and in respect of builders building under integrated housing, they have been receiving probably more from month to month than they should have been given. My informant, a reputable builder, tells me that when he went into a large wholesale house to get nails there was plenty available, but most of the nails went to three builders who were under the integrated plan, and the rest of the nails had to be divided among about 100 other builders. The hardware wholesaler was trying to do the best he could, but the fact was that the builder-I am referring to a private builder who incidentally carries on with the assistance and co-operation of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-could not get enough nails to go on with his project. Would the minister look into that to see whether or not some of these government agencies, such as Wartime Housing and integrated housing.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
are getting more than the amount they need, to carry on from month to month, and whether others are getting their share?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Any contractor who is building veterans' houses under any government plan can get his quota of nails. That quota is definite. His priority is for five kegs of nails per house, and that is all. I have looked into the stocks of nails in the hands of contractors for veterans houses, and they never exceed more than half a keg of nails per house under construction. It is all very well to theorize and to say that no one else can get nails because veterans houses get more than their share, but five kegs per house is, by all experience, the actual requirement for the type of house that is built under the government plan. The stock position is carefully watched. Everyone seems to feel that whereas he cannot get nails, everyone else has plenty. That is not the case at all. I do not know of anyone who has plenty. The veterans priority affords enough nails, which we guarantee under the government plan.


Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):: I have never spoken about nails before, but I am interested in nails today because I was approached on Saturday in my riding and told that nails were in scarce supply in Huntsville. I have a strong recollection that not long ago the minister said it was not a question of shortage but a question of distribution. Am I wrong in that?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Conditions change from
month to month. Speaking last winter, I said that the amount of nails produced was about equal to the amount consumed. This is the height of the building season, and builders are using more nails than they were when I made the statement about production being equal to consumption.
Resolution reported, read the second time, and concurred in. Mr. Howe thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 280, to amend the National Housing Act, 1944.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Wednesday, April 28, consideration in committee of Bill No. 211, to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act-Mr. Ilsley-Mr. Golding in the
chair.
William Henry Golding: Section 10 stood.


James Lorimer Ilsley: All of clause 10, which is a very long clause, was passed with the exception of that re-enacting and amending section 91 of the act. I asked that that stand because there was an error in one of the paragraphs of section 91-(1) (j). I should like to have two amendments moved. The first is:
That subparagraphs (iii) and (iv) of paragraph (j) of subsection 1 of clause 91 of Bill 211 be deleted and suhparagraph (v) be renumbered as subparagraph (iii).
I will explain the other amendment now. I will have them both moved because they are related. The other amendment is:
That clause 91 of Bill 211 be amended by adding thereto the following subsection as subsection (3):
"(3) a period during which a member of the force served as a special constable in the force or as a member of a provincial police force may in accordance with regulations be deemed to be a period during which the member served in the force and to be service for the purposes of this act."
The defect in the present section is that those who serve in a provincial police force cannot count their time in the provincial police force in the twenty years after which they may retire. This enables them to count that period. Perhaps we can take the motions one by one. I will ask my colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, to move the first amendment.


Mr. MacKINNON moved:: That subparagraphs (iii) and (iv) of paragraph (j) of subsection 1 of clause 91 of Bill 211 be deleted and subparagraph (v) be renumbered as subparagraph (iii).


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
James Lorimer Ilsley: Then I will ask my colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, to move the other motion which I read to the committee.


James Angus MacKinnon: That clause 91 of Bill 211 be amended by adding thereto the following subsection as subsection (3):
"(3) a period during which a member of the foTce served as a special constable in the force or as a member of a provincial police force may in accordance with regulations be deemed to be a period during which the member served in the force and to be service for the purposes of this act."


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The earlier part of (j) says "service means time served in the force" and so on. In other words, there is a definite statement that that service counts. Then, when we come to subsection 2 and, in particular, to this new subsec-

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act
tion 3 it says, "a period during which a member of the force served" and so on "may be deemed to be a period", and so on.


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: What is the reason for that? That is apparently in the discretion of somebody. It is not something that is as of right.


James Lorimer Ilsley: 
James Lorimer Ilsley: 
Stanley Howard Knowles: I think the minister explained his intention and the situation quite clearly, both today and on April 28. May I ask if he would indicate the section which makes it certain that, when a constable has had his comparable rank designated, he will get the pension of that comparable military rank?


James Lorimer Ilsley: It is at the beginning of
section 110 and reads:
110. (1) Subject to this section, a pension, in accordance with the rates set out in schedule A or B of the Pension Act, or compensation in

Prisons and Reformatories Act
respect of medical and hospital expenses at such rate and in such manner as the governor in council may, by regulation, prescribe, or both such pension and compensation, shall be awarded to or in respect of persons to whom this part applies who have suffered disability or who have died, when the injury" or disease or aggravation thereof resulting in disability or death in respect of which the application for pension or compensation is made, arose out of or was directly connected with service in the force.
That is the operative section which makes the Pension Act apply.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I understood the other part very well, but I find some difficulty here. The section the minister has just read says these benefits or pensions may be paid at such rate and in such manner as the governor in council may by regulation prescribe.


James Lorimer Ilsley: No, that is not what it means. It means the pensions are to be payable at the rates set out in schedules A and B of the Pension Act, but that the compensation in respect of medical and hospital expenses shall be at such rate and in such manner as the governor in council may by regulation prescribe.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Thank you; that is what was confusing me.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am afraid I am a little confused, too. The amendment provides:
For the purposes of the application of schedules "A" and "B" of the Pension Act under this section, the ranks in the force set out in the following table shall be deemed to correspond to the military rank . . .
And so on. As I understand it, this is an indirect way of fixing the pension rates, by saying these various people in the force shall be deemed to have pensions at the rank which carried these rates of pension last September?


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is right,


James MacKerras Macdonnell: In other words, this is an indirect way of doing it; instead of saying the commissioner or deputy commissioner shall have $2,160, you say you find that $2,160 was the rate of pension for a colonel, say?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Therefore it gets to the point where he is to have the pension, or emolument, or whatever it is, of a colonel, as that emolument may vary from time to time?


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is correct.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The minister said a moment ago the police officers were anxious not to have a comparison made with 5849-240J
army officers. I can understand that, and I know the reason for it. But do you not think this accomplishes just the opposite to what they wish?


James Lorimer Ilsley: There is no other way to do
it,	*


Arthur Leroy Smith: I do not know of any other way; I am not suggesting one.


James Angus MacKinnon: I move the amendment.


[Stage Direction]
Amendment agreed to.
Section 10 as amended agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of
Justice) moved the second reading of Bill No. 214, to amend the Prisons and Reformatories Act.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the minister make a statement on this bill?


James Lorimer Ilsley: If the house would like me to do so I can give a brief explanation of this bill. This provides a system of indeterminate sentences in the province of British Columbia in the same way that this system operates in the province of Ontario. In British Columbia they have established an institution called New Haven, where a serious attempt will be made to bring about the reform of certain prisoners who are sent there. In British Columbia it is considered that the Ontario system is good, and that it should be adopted in that province. This bill takes the sections of the Prisons and Reformatories Act which are applicable to Ontario and, I think without much if any change, applies them to the province of British Columbia.


John Ritchie MacNicol: What other provinces have the same system as Ontario?


James Lorimer Ilsley: None.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Then why not extend it to Quebec and the other provinces?


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-Imprisonment in New Haven.
John Ritchie MacNicol: I believe the Ontario
system is working very satisfactorily. Would the minister be able to say just what assistance
National Parks Act

the court in Ontario, which is referred to in this act, is to the operation of the whole penitentiary and penal system?


James Lorimer Ilsley: That is a big order; but they do have a system of indeterminate sentences there. They also have in Ontario a parole system. Perhaps I should have said, when I spoke on second reading, that it also introduces a parole system in British Columbia. A parole board is to be appointed there, just as it is in Ontario. None of the other provinces has asked for it. That applies to all sentences to provincial institutions.


John Ritchie MacNicol: That hardly answers my question. I have often appeared before the parole board at Queen's Park in Toronto, and I believe their operations are satisfactory. If they are satisfactory, how do other provinces carry out the same work? They must have some way of handling the situation. If they have not a parole board, how do they handle it?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Applications are being made constantly to the Department of Justice to let people out of jail and out of provincial prisons. We have to do the best we can with the applications. The prerogative of mercy is exercisable by the crown in the right of the dominion, in so far as all offences under the criminal code are concerned, no matter what the sentences are.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Does the minister find that the inquiries made by the parole board of Ontario assist the Department of Justice in coming to decisions?


James Lorimer Ilsley: Yes; I do not wish to be too definite about this, but I believe that almost invariably we follow the recommendation of the parole board of Ontario.


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


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Wednesday, April 28, consideration of the motion of Mr. MacKinnon for the second reading of Bill No. 209, to amend the National Parks Act.
Mr. A. J. BROOKS (Royal):: Mr. Speaker, on April 28 I had spoken briefly on this bill, and had referred particularly to the national park in New Brunswick. At that time I had stated that the people of that province were greatly pleased that a national park was to be established there. However, they had felt that the establishment of a park had been delayed much longer than was necessary.
 .
I had also pointed out that some surprise had been expressed as to the site of the national park, in view of the fact that inspectors of the federal government who inspected different sites in the province had selected another one. I would take this opportunity to read the report presented by Mr. J. Smart, chief inspector of national parks. In this report he referred to the examination of a proposed national park in New Brunswick. At page 4 of the report referring to the Mount Champlain site on the St. John river, the one which I understand was his choice, he said:
In Mr. Cautley's report of his 1936 examination of park sites for New Brunswick, he has covered very fully the features of Mount Champ-plain and I agree with him that this site is the most suitable for a park establishment, when considering it with the Lepreau and Albert county sites. It is true that the Mount Champlain site is not on the sea coast but this is rather a benefit on account of the drawbacks to the bay of Fundy coast, which is subject to frequent cold fogs, high tides, and the water is for the most part always in a riled condition due to the ebb and flow of the tide, and always very cold.
Those are not my views. I do not agree entirely with the views expressed here by Mr. Smart and Mr. Cautley with respect to the situation along the bay of Fundy. Then the report goes on:
Further, in making a comparison with the Lepreau and Albert county sites, consideration is given to the fact that the provincial government in acquiring it will not have such a heavy financial obligation as would be the case for the other sites. On the other hand the federal government will not have an expensive site to develop.
I shall not read the full report, but it sums up to the opinion expressed by these different men to the effect that the site on the St. John river, known as the Mount Champlain site, is, by considerable odds, the best in New Brunswick.
Mr. Smart closes his report in this way:
Some additional features which commend this site as a national park site, particularly in regard to developments:
1.	Number 2 provincial trunk highway passes through the portion on the river frontage. This highway is now paved to within about five miles of the proposed southerly boundary on the river frontage.
2.	Hydro electric power distribution passes through the area.
3.	The Canadian National Railways pass through the river frontage with a station located on the site.
4.	The Canadian Pacific railway main line has a station at Westfield within three miles on the park boundary and on the main highway.
5.	Passenger boat service available from all points between Fredericton and Saint John.
6.	Mount Champlain site is not too close to United States boundary.

National Parks Act
7.	Central to the larger centres of population of New Brunswick.
8.	Development costs will be low as compared with the establishment of other parks in Canada.
9.	Future administration costs will he low. A minimum personnel will be required to administer it.
10.	Ease of game and fire protection.
My point is that, in view of the report made by the inspectors from Ottawa, I would ask the minister why this site on the St. John river was passed over in favour of another site in New Brunswick. When I ask that question I should like to have it understood that, since it means nothing to me personally, I have no objection to the choice of any site in particular. However, when money has been spent to send inspectors to New Brunswick-and they went there on numerous occasions

I believe the people of that province should know why this site was chosen.
While I am on my feet, I should like to speak about national parks in general. There can be no question that they are one of the greatest assets we have in Canada. They offer the greatest attraction for tourist trade from all sections of Canada, and draw many thousands, perhaps millions, of citizens from the United States, who spend large sums in this country.
One point, however, which has occurred to me is that while we advertise to encourage United States tourists to come to this country, I believe we should try to have the people from one part of Canada visit other sections. Perhaps this could be done through our parks branch better than in any other way. During the war one would hear young men from different parts of Canada say, when in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick where they happened to be stationed in camps, "Had it not been for the war, we would never have seen this part of Canada." I believe that is true.
In my province I have seen thousands of cars every year from every state in the United States, but it is seldom that we see a oar from British Columbia or Manitoba or Saskatchewan. The result is that we in this country are strangers to one another. Means should be devised, through our national parks and through an interprovincial highway, whereby our people could visit the different sections of Canada. That would be all to the good as far as the unity of this great country is concerned. I recommend to the dominion government the construction of the trans-Canada and any other highways that are needed in order to bring our people closer together.
We have a good precedent from the days of confederation when one of the great bonds to join the different parts of the cquntry together was the railroad from the Atlantic to the Pacific. A great interprovincial highway would go far to join the different parts of Canada together.
It is not my intention to say anything more, but I do want to ask why this site in New Brunswick was chosen, because I am sure the people in that province will want to know.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Mr. Speaker, I did not think we would reach this bill as quickly as we have done, but I wish to say a word or two about the national parks' about which I know something, namely the three parks in Alberta. I hope that what I say will not be regarded as critical of any individual. Other provinces can speak for themselves, but I want to say that in those parks in which there are mountainous areas we have the most neglected of all the natural resources owned by the dominion government. It may be true to say it is easy to criticize, but this is one place where I hope criticisms will be helpful.
We have Banff, Jasper and Waterford parks. Some money has been spent, but it has been very little. I should like to deal first with the winter aspect. Competent persons who have skied in Switzerland and Austria inform me that we have snow conditions and ski runs in those areas which cannot be equalled anywhere in Europe. There is, however, a complete lack of accommodation for people who would go there. We have all heard of Sun Valley, I think, in Idaho in the United States, but we also know they have seasons when there is no snow at all. Therefore it has become a rather hit-or-miss place of amusement and entertainment.
In the three parks in the western part of our province we have conditions for winter sports not met with anywhere else, with the possible exception of the large mountain just outside Seattle, the name of which I have forgotten.


Mr. COLDWELL:: It is Mount Baker on the right.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The hon. member tells me that it is Mount Baker. There is nowhere else in the world where they have that sort of thing. I am not saying anything against skiing in the Laurentians. I have visited two or three of the more famous places and I have no doubt that skiing conditions are excellent. One thing I did notice was how important this sport is in Montreal
National Parks Act

and Ottawa. On week ends literally trainloads of people go out to these places.
I happen to be a life member of a ski club in Banff. We have tried, without receiving very much assistance, to do something to provide accommodation for skiers. They finally have what I believe is called a tow, so that it does not mean that you go downhill in a hurry and then take all afternoon to get back again for a second shot at it.
In the summer time we put a few fish in the streams. At Banff there is a small hatchery which is doing a good job. It is unfortunate that when they chlorinated the water there they did not advise the hatchery, because scores of thousands of fish which were coming along nicely died as a result. There was no liaison between the fisheries and the public works which had to do with the chlorination of the water.
In the province there is a brewing company which is operating, at its own expense, a splendid hatchery in Calgary. It is one of the places that we suggest strangers should visit. They have fish there in all sizes. Then there is the question of housing in the town of Banff which is in a most unsatisfactory condition. They have been talking for years about beautifying Banff, but progress is at least slow.
What I have in mind is this. We need a complete revamping of the administration of our national parks. It is unfortunate that ministers do not seem to stay long in this portfolio, and it is still more unfortunate that the hon. gentleman who has had that portfolio since I came here has been ill for the last year or so. I should like nothing better than that the acting minister should have the portfolio because, as we learned today, it took him forty years to make a winning hockey club in Edmonton. He must have had tremendous vision to look forty years ahead. I played against the fellows they had there when he was president, and they were not nearly as good as the hon. member for Athabaska (Mr. Dechene) tells us.
We need someone at the head of the department who will do more than the patchwork which is now being done with our parks. There is no other place in the world better suited for the holding of the winter Olympic games than Banff in the national park of that name. People are always afraid of what it will cost, but money laid out in the next few years will bring greater returns to this country than anything else I know of. The tourist dollar is just as good as the dollar of anyone else.

It so happens that I know something of these mountains. I have had at least twenty or thirty pack trips centering on Banff and lake Louise, and going into and through those mountains, and anyone who thinks he can see the mountains from a train or a motorcar simply does not know what he is missing. In other words, you must do it on foot, or on the back of a mountain horse, and the horses walk all the time on these pack trips, so they will not trip you down the side of a gully or anything like that. The beauty which is there and the resources, resources in the sense that you can get a dollar from people for looking at something- why, the eastern slope of those mountains is a treasure house that nobody really knows anything about. At the present time, if one does go to see them he is so worried and burdened with the idea of trying to find a place to sleep and eat or something of that kind that the place has fallen into disrepute.
What I am asking from this government is this, that when the minister who is now acting decides that he is no longer going to act but to take his ease which he has well earned, not in the other place but in some other place-I am not appointing him over there because he is too valuable here-


John Ritchie MacNicol: He would not refuse the other place.


Arthur Leroy Smith: That is something, with great respect, which the hon. member does not know, although if the minister accepts my advice he will go there.
What we need and need so badly is a complete reorganization of the department. Remember, I am not complaining about the individuals in it, not for one minute. But for a tremendous problem like this you must have leadership. You cannot have the department head perhaps cutting off his own head by leading the pack too far. What we need in those parks is some place where the average fellow can take his jalopy and go up there and find a meal that will not break him, and find a bed to sleep in, camp grounds, and all that kind of thing.
There is no reason why our golf courses, for example, in the two parks, the one at Banff and the one at Jasper, should be so expensive. A man must be almost a millionaire in order to have a round of golf on those very fine courses. Much of the dominion's money went into those courses. It is perfectly true that now the one in Jasper is operated by the Canadian National Railways and the one in Banff has been turned back and is operated by the Canadian Pacific Railway

National Parks Act
Company, but the people of Canada largely paid for those courses.
I had occasion to speak to the acting minister the other day and I must say that he gave me his confidence and his complete concurrence in the idea which the younger men in the Gyro club at Banff have. They told me, and I conveyed this to the minister, that what they want is a sports director, somebody who would bell the people where to go and what they would find when they got there. They are not asking for any money from the dominion government to pay this man. A man of this type should never be a civil servant. Their idea is to have owners of hotels and rooming houses, cottages, these bungalow camps, and so on, charge the small matter of ten cents added to the night's lodging, and the Gyro club would administer that and employ someone who knew the business of sports director. This is done in many skiing places in the United States. In that way a fund would be got together which would not cost the government anything. All that the club is seeking is the permission of the government to make arrangements with these people to charge the extra ten cents and turn it over to them, to be expended by them; but in order to do that they require the consent of the government, because the government is in charge of the rates for sleeping and eating accommodation.
Let me again repeat that the acting minister received me with the greatest of sympathy and co-operation and I trust that shortly that small thing will have been accomplished. But I only look at that as a beginning of the great things which may be done. These are modem days of good roads, and even in that far-off part of the country we have now good roads to both places. I think the Edmonton-Jasper road has been completed and affords an enjoyable drive.
Here we have a bill setting out these areas, territories and so on. What we need is not a gentle prodding of those responsible for the national parks in this country, but we need to give them encouragement. The present men are all right, but we need to give them a few dollars to spend, and let us have in the operation a little less of centralized government. When you think, Mr. Speaker, that you can scarcely do anything, certainly nothing of any account, in a national park without reference to Ottawa, you will immediately see how difficult it is to make any progress. That is not the fault of the officials, nor am I going to blame the government for it. It is our fault in this House of Commons because we have not interested ourselves enough in one of our greatest assets, to convert it into what it
should be; first, a great national playground for our own people, and, then, a money-making institution, the money to be derived from those persons who would visit us here in the Dominion of Canada.
I close with one sentence, since I see it is just about six o'clock. It is a repetition, if you like; but it is this, that we here try to realize what an asset these places are. Look abroad and see what they have done in other countries without anything like the natural facilities that we have. Then we shall come to appreciate ourselves and provide these conveniences, and the return of good will and in money will be beyond belief in this Dominion of Canada.
At six o'clock the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we had a couple of interesting and appreciative talks about our national parks, but the hon. gentlemen who were speaking about them confined themselves to New Brunswick, the maritime provinces and British Columbia. I thought what they said about the beauties of their respective parts of the country was well said, because we do possess a wonderful heritage of beauty and grandeur in Canada.
I had the privilege two years ago of motoring around the Cabot trail, driving through the Annapolis valley, visiting Annapolis Royal and seeing what was done there to reconstruct the first French fortress in North America, and I can also emphasize what the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) said this afternoon with regard to the Rocky mountains.
I should like, however, to point out that quite often the prairie land is thought of as rather flat and uninteresting country whereas it is nothing of the kind. Across the prairie land there are beautiful valleys and lakes, and not only has the national parks branch taken advantage of some of these beauty spots, but, I am glad to say, the provinces have done so also. I am thinking of my own province of Saskatchewan and a lovely little resort around Carlyle lake district where, during the depression, the government of the day built a chalet to give accommodation to people from the United States as well as from Canada.
In the northern part of Saskatchewan we have the Prince Albert national park at Waskesiu. There is a playground in that whole northern region, not only for the prairie province of Saskatchewan but for the people
National Parks Act

who live in the equally flat part of the prairies in North Dakota and in Montana.
A great deal more than has been done should be done to encourage tourist traffic from that area. Of course the great lack all through our country is lack of the kind of roads they have in the United States. Until we get better roads, hard-surfaced roads free from dust, we shall not have tourists coming into the country year after year to see the various national parks and the beauty spots in them.
A great deal has been done in recent years by provincial governments to remedy that situation, but in my opinion we need the co-operation of this federal parliament as well as of the provincial governments in order to provide the kind of roads that are necessary to attract tourist traffic to this part of Canada.
Driving from the United States border to Prince Albert over a good gravel road is much easier nowadays than it was a few years ago when we had only dirt roads. But through Swift Current or through Regina and Saskatoon co-operation between the dominion and the province should be established in order that good roads would encourage tourists from the prosperous middle west of the United States to visit our north country.
I know that not only have we fine parks in western Canada and in the north of the prairie provinces, but lately roads are being pushed still farther north. North of Prince Albert, north of the park, the government of Saskatchewan is pushing a road through to that beautiful lake, Lac la Ronge, which is said to contain 11,000 lovely islands and where opportunities for camping and fishing and other pastimes are unsurpassed. .
Thus we have in our country, in fairly close proximity to the prairie lands of the middle western states, a holiday area which it would be very difficult to beat-a beauty and sport area teeming with fish-and I believe a great deal could be done to popularize these places.
In Manitoba, right on the borders of Saskatchewan, there is the beautiful and well laid out Riding Mountain park. Last autumn I drove through it as I have done on other occasions and was struck then with the beauty of the lake, the beauty of the evergreens and the rolling hills that surround it. I repeat, a great deal could be done to popularize these resorts.
As the hon. member for Calgary West said, however, much depends on accommodation, accommodation en route and when you get there. I have done a great deal of driving at one time or another across our country from coast to coast. I believe I have crossed the

continent about fifteen times by automobile, usually, I must confess, through the United States because the accommodation and roads were so much better than in Canada.
Our dominion tourist bureau is doing a great deal to make the people who are operating concessions in the parks, and who are operating tourist accommodations to and from the concessions, conscious of the need of better accommodation. That accommodation will have to be provided through some co-operative plan between the public authority, the province, and perhaps the individual operating the camp, so that there may be provided the kind of accommodation that our United States friends particularly look for, because they have excellent accommodation in their own land.
I wanted to say a word in appreciation of what is being done. Like the hon. member for Calgary West, I do not intend to criticize the personnel of the department. I believe that with the limited means at their disposal they have done a good job, but I think much more needs to be done if we are to get the kind of tourist traffic we desire.
I have spoken only of tourist traffic, but as a matter of fact these holiday resorts are of great value to our own people. That is the real incentive which should possess us in building up these parks as great playgrounds of the north, not only for summer but for the winter as well, as the hon. member for Calgary West suggested.
Much has been done in that direction in the Laurentians, in that beautiful part of our country north of the St. Lawrence; but all across this country, no matter where you are, whether in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, the province of Quebec, this beautiful province of Ontario or in the prairies or British Columbia, there is much beauty and great enticement to those who could enjoy a holiday at reasonable cost.
I am glad that in some of the resorts like Waskesiu there are facilities for campers who have very limited means at their disposal, and more of that should be done. We may cater to some extent for United States dollars from tourists, but, after all, our main incentive should be to give our own people opportunities for enjoying the varied beauty of the country in which we live.
I quite agree with those who said today that if we go from one end of the country to the other we shall find that this land in which we live is unsurpassed in the variety of its beauty and the variety of opportunities for sport and for play; and I am glad indeed to give all the support I can to the minister

National Parks Act
and his department in their efforts to build up these areas in Canada which have been so wisely set aside-I say wisely set aside- as national parks, game reserves and so on, where not only we but those who come after us may enjoy the beauties of this land and get a little closer to nature in order to find health and renewed strength for the day-to-day work which the majority of our people must do.
I merely rose to say that whatever we can do to assist the department in carrying out the development of our national parks we shall be glad to do.


Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):: I have great confidence in the minister, Mr. Speaker. I believe that he senses, and will do so more and more as the days go by, the tremendous responsibility he has assumed and the great, opportunity which is his by reason of his having taken charge of the mines and resources of this country.
We in Canada have not yet proved that we can live without going into debt. Up to the present time we have been inclined to use our resources prodigally, but I believe the time is now here when we must settle right down and say to ourselves that there is no more last great west to go to, that we must stop right here and make this great heritage all that we hope to have it for our children and our children's children. We must therefore conserve every one of our resources and improve them so that they will be better for our children than they were for us. That can certainly not be said to have been done by any generation of Canadians that has yet lived.
I have often thought we give too little attention to our wild animals throughout the country. When we travel over the area from Winnipeg to Port Arthur and on to Sudbury, going through reaches that look to be worthless when judged according to ordinary standards, we are actually passing over regions of Canada that I have thought could be made into extensive and attractive parks which would draw tourists from all over the world.
We should be taking much more care than we are taking of our game birds, fish and parks.
Since the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) has mentioned our parks, I think it only fitting that I should say a word or two in appreciation of the parks of Alberta.
The park in my constituency is the Water-ton Lakes park. If any hon. members happen to be out in southwestern Canada, they will miss a rare treat if they fail to visit Waterton Lakes park. The people around that country all call it "Wonderful Waterton", and wonderful Waterton it is, with its vast and varied mountains; its lakes of great number, size and beauty; and its streams with more than one romantic waterfall. All these things tend to make it a place of great attractiveness. There are forests in the park. It is true they are not comparable with some of those found in certain other areas of Canada, but for that particular region they are respectable forests. There are wilderness trails in Waterton Lakes park. One can drive along on the Akimina highway, for example, and three minutes after leaving Waterton Lake townsite, can feel himself completely lost and alone; and unless he had a guide or a good road to get him back, he would be lost. But there is a good road to get him back.
There are numerous wild animals. There are not many places in Canada where you can drive along the road and have a bear cross your path and dodge into the thicket, or a deer or elk-run along a little way in front of you and dash off into a ravine. But you can have these pleasing experiences on the Akimina highway of Waterton Lakes park.
At one time this park used to be famous for its fish. Men used to travel by wagon for a hundred miles in order to be able to fish in the great lakes which are the main attraction in Waterton Lakes park, and which have given it its name. I regret to tell the minister that these fish are no longer abundant. It is no longer easy to catch them. In fact people are often greatly disappointed when they come to Waterton Lakes park, having heard of its fame as a fishing centre, and find themselves unable to catch any fish.
The park is unique in Canada because it adjoins Glacier national park which is on the other side of the United States border. The two parks together have been formed into an international peace park. In the Glacier national park there is the Logan highway which is, I think, one of the greatest attractions to be found in western north America.
AH these things go to show that the Water-ton Lakes national park is a potential treasure house for Canada with regard to tourists. We should be able to make it, to United States tourists, one of the greatest attractions for thousands of miles.
There are two or three things about this park to which the minister would be well advised to give attention. One of these is the fish. People will travel a long way in order to fish. We in Canada should be able to go and have a pleasing holiday fishing whenever we
National Parks Act

choose. There is a fish hatchery at Waterton Lakes park, but it is not in any way capable of discharging the responsibilities which ought to be attached to a fish hatchery. I fancy that it can supply, year after year, just about one-tenth as many fish as it needs to be able to supply. There are a number of problems associated with improving the efficiency of that fish hatchery. I do not wish to disparage the men who are in charge of the fish hatchery; I think they have done the best they could with the means at their disposal. But that whole matter of the fish hatchery should be given genuine attention, with the determination to make the fish hatchery discharge the function it ought to discharge with respect to that park.
The suggestion has been made-and I throw it out to the minister as worth considering- that supplementary breeding pools for the fish could be established at various points along certain small creeks in the neighbourhood; for example, Fish creek, that runs through the village of Mountain View. Along Fish creek a good many ponds could be made in which small fish could be raised from the time they were taken from the hatchery until they could be safely put into the open waters where they would have to look after themselves. This little creek could be used because, being a small stream running along through the valleys, its waters are warmer than those of the lakes immediately adjoining the fish hatchery, and warm water is much more conducive to the growth of the vegetable matter which the fish eat in their younger stages. In some parts of the United States they tell me they put into the water a special kind of fertilizer which encourages the growth of the plant life used by the fish.
It is suggested that if this stream is made into pools, as it could be, together with two or three other creeks such as Lee creek, which runs down from the mountains into Cardston, we could increase the productiveness and effectiveness of that fish hatchery at least tenfold. This ought to be done. Then the fish could remain in the pools until they could be moved into the open waters, and during that period they would be free from the danger of the larger fish. I suggest that the minister give this very careful attention and have the members of his department go to work on the problem, not next year but right away. If they say there are difficulties in the way, let the minister say, "Very well; we want you to remove those difficulties. That is exactly what you are on the job to do. We want results, and no excuses."
I am positive, if the minister says this to his officials and gives them the money with

which to accomplish results, they will do so, and it will pay us many times over in United States dollars.
There is another difficulty in the park. In times past the people established a townsite there of which they ane very proud. They have become a bit choosey, if I may use that word, with respect to the houses. They do not want cabins that are not equal in size, appearance, romantic appeal, and all the rest of it, to those built by the more or less wealthy people who first went into the area and built themselves summer cottages. Nevertheless we must have, in connection with Waterton Lakes park, a great many cabins which will not be too costly to the tourists. We must have enough cabins so tourists will not be warned away and perhaps go to some other place for the night, making Waterton Lakes park merely a place to visit in the daytime. There must be tourist cabins. I would not like to suggest to the minister just how many cabins should be erected, or how costly they should be, or just w'here they should be located, but again I say he should tell the members of his department that he wants enough tourist cabins put up in and around the park to accommodate all the tourists who may come to Waterton lakes in a year. The cabins would not need to be open all the time. It would be better if they were built to provide comfortable camping, but in such a way that they could be left closed until they were required. All the cabins might be left in charge of one of the businessmen there, with instructions to render them available when they were called for.
I am not sure that we can depend upon private enterprise for these cabins. I would be inclined to think the government should own the tourist cabins, because it wants to have spent in Canada all the United States dollars that can be brought here.
There are other, smaller considerations which, nevertheless, are worthy of attention. There is an excellent golf course just outside the main park. Men who have played on the finest courses in America tell me they know of no other course anywhere on this continent that surpasses this golf course. They say all the time a person is playing on the course he can either look up toward the mountains at magnificent scenery, up what they call Pass creek, or down toward the lakes upon surpassing beauty, because the course overlooks lake Linnet and other beautiful lakes.
This course is not very well cared for. I believe it could be kept in first-class shape without very much expenditure, and arrangements could be made to have water made

National Parks Act
available, so that if it should begin to dry up the grass could be kept green and beautiful, as people enjoy and expect to have in a place like Waterton Lakes park. So I would suggest that the minister give attention to this golf course detail.
Then, back behind the townsite is an area which really should be attended to. The main townsite is beautiful, laid out in streets and so on, with a really attractive appearance. Right behind the town, however, there are some bits of country that were badlands. If we are to bring this park up to the standard we would like, I believe it will be necessary to landscape that badland area. In these days, when we have machines which will [DOT]bring soil from quite a distance without very much effort, it should be possible to landscape that area and make it just as attractive as the rest of the park. Perhaps that could be made a place to put a number of the tourist cabins.
In closing, I would say the minister will need a great deal of money. I hope he may be successful in seeing to it that his department is not made the victim of any cheeseparing. I hope he is influential with treasury board, so that plenty of money will be made available for him to accomplish in our national parks the things he desires. And I trust that he will approach this whole problem with the wisdom I know he possesses, and that he will not be satisfied merely to carry on as his predecessors have, however well they may have done. The minister should look upon this problem as one which requires leadership. All the provinces of Canada are keenly interested in their parks. I believe the function of the minister, as should be the case with any federal department, is to give leadership, to give inspiration, to bring about co-ordination, to invite the men in charge of the parks in the various provinces to consult together and lay plans, and bring about co-operation so that there will be no duplication of effort and no park in the whole country will be neglected.
I may have something more to say about the Waterton Lakes park on a future occasion.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, the Acting Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. MacKinnon) has a great quality. He is a good listener. While hon. members have been making fine speeches about this matter, I noticed the minister taking notes of all the suggestions that were made. This is a fine example. He knows there is something worthwhile, something worth considering in every speech made by a member of parliament.
This bill is just a compendium of the descriptions of the national parks coming under
this department. Many regulations concerning these parks have been passed and published separately. I am not going to deal with them; but I want to tell the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore), who just made the speech of a businessman, that I do not agree with him in one respect. He suggested landscaping. I cannot conceive the idea of finding a rock garden in the middle of a forest.


John Horne Blackmore: I am sure the hon. member would not wish to gather the wrong impression. I was referring only to a certain portion back toward the main townsite where there have been washes which have destroyed the top soil, and where a little soil brought in would make it possible to raise grass. I know the hon. member would rather see grass growing than see gumbo.


Jean-François Pouliot: I do not wish to be unfair to the hon. member, but I am a firm believer in the unspoiled and radiant beauty of untouched nature. For me the idea behind the creation of national parks under government jurisdiction was to keep nature in its original form so as to give joy to future generations who will live to see that beautiful nature.
One part of the country which impresses all tourists is the north shore of the Gaspe peninsula. There is nature in her primeval state. Then, the mountains of the west are so great, so impressive, that the commander-inchief of the united nations armies, General Eisenhower, was proud to have his name given to one of them; no mean honour for any man.


John Ritchie MacNicol: It was Castle mountain.


Jean-François Pouliot: Yes. It is a signal honour for any man to have his name attached to a big mountain. When tourists come and see that imposing mass of granite, they wonder what it is. They are given the answer, "This is Mount Eisenhower", or "This is Mount Edith Cavell". I believe the names of all the most prominent nation builders in this country should be given to the most imposing mountains in our national parks. Those parks are visited by great numbers of people who stay there for a certain length of time. This would be a sort of pilgrimage people from Canada, from the United States and from all parts of the world would make when they visit those parks.
The list I have before me does not include any park in Quebec, although in that province there are some beautiful parks. In that connection I think of Rougemont park in the vicinity of Montreal; and Laurentide park in the Laurentians, north of the city of Quebec,
?786
National Parks Act

attracts large numbers of tourists. Then there is another park in the Gaspe peninsula.
I believe the Canadian travel bureau should advertise those parks, as well as the ones which come under the department. Mr. D. Leo Dolan, director of the Canadian travel bureau, and a former journalist, is a man of great industry and ability. I am sure he will miss no opportunity to advertise all the parks of Canada, so that tourists will not suffer the embarrassment of choice when they plan a trip either for the summer or the winter, as has been suggested.
When advertising is sent out inviting tourists to our national parks, they must not be deceived. Canada must deliver the goods. While they will admire those beautiful spots, they must have comfort. I can remember in earlier days when the roads in the national parks were built with unemployment funds. It was a good idea at that time. But those roads leading to the parks must be kept in first-class condition, and tourists must be well fed when they get there.
Further than that, the smell of French-fried potatoes ought not to be breathed at the same time as the perfumes from the pines and the firs. That would spoil their trips, and I hope there will be a regulation, if indeed there is not already one, forbidding French-fried potato wagons entrance to the park. They smell bad enough along the streets, and I hope the minister will make that prohibition in due course.
I am not going to speak at greater length on this subject, because all hon. members seem to share the same view. The minister is to be congratulated upon the interest he has shown in the conservation, maintenance and improvement of the national parks. He should also be encouraged to have Canadians visit their country to a greater extent, and to admire its beauties. Different sections of the country should be advertised without discrimination. It is natural that someone from British Columbia would say that no mountains can equal the Rocky mountains. That is a legitimate and natural feeling. Others from the prairie provinces would say that we should go to see the beauty of the prairies; and those from Ontario will speak about the Algonquin park and Muskoka lakes sections. Those from the maritimes will tell us about the beauties of their part of the country.
Two beautiful ladies who sat together asked a gentleman this question:	"Which one of
us do you find the more beautiful?" His answer was, "Both of you are beautiful, my ladies."


John Ritchie MacNicol: He was playing safe.


Jean-François Pouliot: He was a wise man. He was telling the truth, and he was not a flatterer. Let us compare the nine Canadian provinces to nine equally beautiful women. It becomes most difficult to make a choice of one as against another, except where the ties of affection bind us to a particular part of the country. But challenge anyone to say that the nine ladies, who are the nine provinces of confederation, are not equally beautiful and worth visiting.


Mr. WILLIAM BRYCE (Selkirk):: Mr. Speaker, I do not rise in any critical mood, either of the minister or of his department. I have only suggestions to make, but first I should like to endorse what the leader of my group said with regard to Riding Mountain park in Manitoba. The department should be congratulated upon the work that has been done there.
I want to remind the minister that this summer the provincial government of Manitoba is building one of the most modem highways in Canada in order to bring in United States tourists. I know that when they are brought in you cannot send them all to Riding Mountain park, and I want to suggest to the minister that he have his department arrange to set aside some land in the interlake country as a national park or a national preserve for wild animals.
I have travelled a great deal in the north and have met many United States tourists. Their desire is to go as far north as possible. You can go 450 miles north in my constituency and still be in touch with Winnipeg. In addition to the new highway I have told the minister about, we are building other new highways north of Winnipeg. This would be an ideal situation for a national park and I ask the minister to give it serious consideration. Get the site now and the park will come later.


Mr. DANIEL McIVOR (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, it would be an easy matter for every hon. member who has visited any of our national parks, to spend at least forty minutes in eulogizing the usefulness of those parks and the service they render to Canada. As one visits the national parks in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario as I have, he cannot but feel grateful to the government for having established those parks.
However, my purpose in rising tonight is to tell the minister that a national park is being born at the head of the lakes. It will probably be known as Mount McKay park and it will not have to take second place in scenic beauty and usefulness to any park in Canada. I expect that the parks boards of both cities,

National Parks Act
the chambers of commerce and the city councils will have a strong and intelligent delegation wait upon the minister before this session closes.
We have one of the best ski jumps or ski slides to be found in Canada. The lake is about 800 feet up the mountain and is the source of the city's supply of good water. There is a wonderful view from the mountain and at the present time a gravel road goes up about halfway. From the top you can see some of the finest scenery in all Canada. If the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) were here he would say that is true. I ask the Acting Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. MacKinnon) to keep his eyes open for the delegation from the head of the lakes.


Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Speaker, not so long ago this house was reminded of Canada's critical dollar situation in our relationship with the United States. It suddenly became a reality that we were tremendously in debt to our southern neighbour. I appreciate what the hon. member for Temis-couata (Mr. Pouliot) has said with respect to honouring a great American by changing the name of Castle mountain to Mount Eisenhower. We do not mind our United States friends taking one of our mountains, but we do not want them to take the whole country. As far as the economic grip which the United States now has upon Canada is concerned, it would almost seem that they are about to take us over.
But that need not be; that does not have to occur if the present administration exercises some foresight with respect to our tourist trade. Not many years ago a senate committee investigated our tourist trade and it was brought out in evidence at that time that in dollars and cents our tourist trade amounted to more than our combined foreign trade. That was hard to believe but that was the evidence.
I notice that the Department of Trade and Commerce is spending nearly $2,000,000 for trade commissioners abroad. I do not begrudge that. I notice that nearly half a million dollars is being spent on exhibitions and trade fairs abroad. I do not begrudge that, because it is nice to do business with the rest of the world. But here is an opportunity in our tourist trade to build up credits in foreign countries.
If one reads the newspapers these days he is struck with the tremendous amount of advertising being done by other countries to attract tourist business. This advertising is being carried on by the war-torn countries of
Europe, countries such as Great Britain, France, Italy and so on. I would not think there would be a great deal of pleasure in a tourist going to some of those countries. What are they doing this advertising for? They are doing it because they want foreign credits.
It seerris to me that it would be an economically sound venture to spend money to attract tourists to Canada. There is no doubt that every hon. member would like to take part in this debate and extol the beauties of his own constituency. A year ago I travelled from Halifax to Vancouver. I could not help thinking what a tremendously fine country we have. The hon. member for Temiscouata says that every province is naturally proud of its own domain. But there is one thing lacking, and the government knows all about it; that is, that you have to get into these national parks and you have to get out of them, and people who want to get into those national parks have to travel over roads that make us ashamed of ourselves. Make no mistake about that.
Last year, living near Calgary, in the province of Alberta, on the connecting link between Waterton park and the Banff national park, I took a trip through there and went on down to the United States. As soon as I left that little bit of hard-surfaced road in the southern part of Alberta and got to Cranbrook, I did not know whether I would have any automobile left to go the rest of the way. You cannot expect United States tourists, after travelling on their own magnificent highways, to be pleased even with our national parks if all the joy of travel is taken away from them by bad roads before they reach the parks.
I was talking to a United States tourist in the city of Vancouver who had travelled through the Banff national park and the Jasper national park and had then taken the all-Canadian route from Banff through to Vancouver. He said to me, "Brother, never again will I go over that highway." Yet some of the most beautiful scenery in Canada is to be seen along that highway. I am not overaccentuating its attractions at the expense of other provinces, but I doubt whether there is a greater tourist attraction in Canada for scenery, wildlife and big game than in the Rocky mountains from the United States boundary north as far as you can go, or at any rate as far north as Jasper in Alberta. Banff and lake Louise to my mind excel almost anything you can find anywhere else. You cannot, however, travel from Banff national park to Jasper national park without
37SS
National Parks Act

going over a graveled highway, moderately maintained, but at the same time you never know whether you are going to skip the road or not. Surely in a country like Canada where we have a tourist attraction of this sort, we should be able to build first-class, hard-surfaced highways.
Some years ago the United States put on a great campaign with the slogan, "See America first." I do not know whether they still use that slogan, but I think it would be a good thing for us to take a leaf out of their book and put on a great campaign to see Canada first. I tell you, Mr. Speaker, that a great many Canadians have not yet seen this country, and if they want to travel from one end of this country to the other by car they cannot do so, simply because we have not a national highway. We just do not have it. We have not even got a trail connecting some of the provinces. When Mr. Bennett was prime minister years ago he attempted to build part of a national highway by seizing upon the depression to pay the unfortunate unemployed a few measly dollars to exist in camps and start work on a national highway. That highway is not there any more. Trees are growing up between the rocks in the middle of the highway. I wonder if the present government is waiting for another depression to use the same methods of providing relief work by building a national highway.
We have a wonderful country, Mr. Speaker. We have some wonderful gravel and dust roads. I do not know whether I should refer to private enterprise versus socialism and government ownership, but I am going to tell you that there is one thing that private enterprise has done in Canada. To a large extent it has made our national parks famous. If it had not been for the Canadian Pacific Railway Company doing something in the way of putting up million dollar hotels, such as the Banff Springs hotel and the Lake Louise Chalet, we would not have had any hotels to amount to anything.


An hon. MEMBER:: What about Jasper?


Ernest George Hansell: I do not know if we have such a good thing at Jasper, but I am saying that the Canadian Pacific Railway Company at least had the vision in the early days to capitalize on these scenic jewels which exist in some parts of the Rocky mountains, and they took a chance on investing millions of dollars in some of these places because they had faith in this country. Are we to say that the Canadian Pacific Railway Company had

more faith in this country than the present government has? It would almost seem that way. We had better stop just playing with words about this thing. The hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) has said that the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen) -the acting minister is in his seat-should go before the treasury board, taking with him his files, his statistics, his photographs and all that he has and say to them: Now, gentlemen, I want so many million dollars. But while he will go in there with his files, his statistics, his photographs, his engineers and his experts, the treasury board will go in there with a little bit of blue pencil in their pocket. It is easy enough to say to the minister: Go in there and persuade these men. But that is one place where I fear the pen will be mightier than the sword and the treasury board will take that blue pencil and whittle down the minister's demands.
However I am not going to be too hard on the treasury board in this particular matter, because the minister may have the drop on me. I find that there is an increase in the estimates of the Department of Mines and Resources of approximately $5,500,000 for national parks. I am glad to see that. I do not know just what the expenditure is for, because when I turn to the page that is supposed to give the details I find that it shows
85.000,000 of an increase for the acquisition of land, construction of buildings, works and structures. I do not know what that means. I do not know whether that means roads or some more chalets and hotels or what, but I am going to say this. Let us stop fooling with this thing and pave this country with highways which will be an attraction to tourists and which will lay right on our doorstep, right in our public treasury, millions and millions and millions of dollars. That is what we want from our United States friends, and I am positive it can be done.
I do not know whether I should suggest that each party leader rise and say what he is willing to do. Maybe we should not have a political battle. I should like to see the leader of the Progressive Conservative party rise and say, "This is what we would do in respect of highways, and particularly those highways in and entering our national parks; this is 1he way we would get the money, and this is the way we would do it." I should like to hear the story from our socialist friends. When it comes to saying, "This is the way we will get the money," I fancy they would say, "We will soak the rich".
Our present administration like to say what they are going to do, but they are always

National Parks Act
stuck when it comes to finding the cold cash. We are willing to go to bat on this and not only tell you, Mr. Speaker, what we would be willing to do but where we could get the money.


Mr. H. W. HERRIDGE (Kootenay West):: It was not my intention to take part in the debate, but as the member representing one of the greatest scenic park areas in Canada, the Kootenay, I could not sit still after listening to the advertising campaign which has been carried on by the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore), the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor) and the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell).


Ernest George Hansell: Hear, hear.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I see the hon. member for Comox-Alberni has his eagle free-enterprise eye on me, and I presume, in what I have to say tonight, we shall be in general agreement. The district I represent is very scenic. The farms and ranches are scenic. As a matter of fact, some years ago a neighbour of mine had such a scenic ranch that on one occasion while he was picking apples from a tree twenty-five feet high, the ladder slipped and he fell into the lake.
British Columbia has four national parks: Kootenay park, Glacier park, Revelstoke park and Yoho park, four of the most beautiful national parks in Canada, and we have also in British Columbia an extensive provincial park system comprising some of the most magnificent public parks in the country. In addition to that, we have local parks. I do not mean parks within city bounds but parks adjacent to some of the municipalities and cities, and I challenge any hon. member to cite an instance of a greater demonstration of local enterprise-and I am a great believer in local enterprise being tied up with provincial and federal enterprise-than can be found in Ross-land, with a population of 4,000, where, as a result of public contributions, in the last six months $50,000 has been raised to build one of the finest ski lifts in America in order to develop Red Mountain area adjacent to that city.
We all know that the first great ski jump in Canada was built in the Revelstoke national park, on which jump was made the first leap of over 300 feet in the world's history.
I am not going to discuss these matters at length. I support all that has been said by previous speakers, by the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith), the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) and others, in urging the development of national parks, because I believe they are an asset which
a great number of our people do not appreciate and in many cases do not even realize that we have.
I support what has been said about the provision of accommodation at reasonable prices in those parks for summer and in some cases for winter use, and in that respect I would point out to the minister that there is a good opportunity, in the appointment of men in the national parks service, to think of those veterans who, by reason of shell shock or war injuries, might be suitably employed in this connection, particularly in the summer, under the beneficial conditions that are found in the national parks service. I hope that when appointments are made to that service consideration will be given to employing many of those men who are not really able to take their place in ordinary industrial or commercial life.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, that we have to carry on an advertising campaign outside Canada. 1 do not believe that some of the beauty spots of the west have received the attention of the travel bureau to the extent that they should. While we are all interested in bringing tourists into the country, personally I am particularly interested in making our national, provincial and other parks available to the working people of Canada.
As a matter of fact, there is a very small percentage of the working population of the country who have an opportunity to enjoy many of our national parks. I hope that when it comes to a question of advertising, both abroad and at home, there will be co-operation between the federal and provincial governments to prevent unnecessary overlapping, the unnecessary reproduction of pictures, and the unnecessary printing of literature.
This is a field in which there should be the closest co-operation if both the federal and provincial governments are to receive the greatest return for the money expended.
There is one other point that I should like to emphasize. I think we should be doing more to develop the hot springs in our national parks instead of allowing them to be developed by large corporations like the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. All credit to them for what they have done at Banff. I say, however, that those hot springs still under the ownership of the state should be developed by the state for the people of the country, and particularly for people with'modest incomes.
Not only is it necessary to advertise abroad, but it is necessary to advertise at home. I think we have to bring to the attention of the Canadian people many features concerning the national parks, their accessibility, their beauty, and the possibilities they offer for recreation. We must do more advertising along this line if
National Parks Act

we are to have a full appreciation and greater enjoyment of our parks. I find that there are hundreds of people who have little idea of the beauty of the national parks of Canada, and the opportunities for recreation.
I meet people from, the prairies coming into my own district, people who have lived on the prairies for years and who come possibly for a short summer holiday, and I find they are amazed at the beauty of the national parks, their accessibility even under present conditions, the recreation and enjoyment they afford, the hunting that can, be had in adjacent areas, and wonderful fishing.
We should inform the Canadian people about our Canadian national parks, and we should also do much more than we are doing in the schools. The ignorance of the average child is amazing when, it comes to a question of what national parks we have in Canada, their location, and what we are trying to do in their development.
In that connection the service of the national film board could be used even more extensively to bring these facts home to the Canadian people through various men's and women's organizations. At this point I would say that if you want to develop local interest in a particular problem, or focus attention on that problem, you can never do better than to get the women's organizations in the community interested in your objective. I believe the services of the national film board, in co-operation with local organizations, could do a great deal of necessary educational work among the public and among our school children with respect to this great natural resource, our national parks.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I want again to emphasize one point. I make it because of my experience in the provincial legislature of British Columbia and my understanding of the activities of the minister's department in Ottawa. I believe we must have the closest co-operation between the federal and provincial governments if we are to get the greatest value for the dollars expended in advertising and in the development of our national parks.


Mr. H. G. ARCHIBALD (Skeena):: I
should like to say a few words, Mr. Speaker, about the national parks and the associated problem of roads. I have heard various members mention the fact that they have national parks within their ridings. My riding consists practically of one national park, taking in 135,000 square miles of unspoiled beauty. The only trouble is that you can get around only by riding a mountain goat or by taking to the air.
	i
I should like to bring in one note of discord, if you wish to call it that, amidst all this beauty, and that is the problem of a road from the Alcan highway down into Atlin, which itself is the most beautiful townsite on the North American continent. Among the resources are natural game and placer gold, but heavy equipment cannot be brought in there. The province of British Columbia offered to pay for its share of the road up to the Yukon border, which was one-half. It offered $100,000 to the Department of Mines and Resources. But the federal authorities could not even go to the extent of matching that $100,000 to pay their half of the cost of the road from the Alcan highway down to the Yukon border, and that at a time when the tourists from the United States are going up the Alcan highway in increasing numbers. There is a marvelous opportunity there for the development of gold resources, in addition to the natural beauties of British Columbia, with the lakes, mountains and wild game, such as grizzly, mountain goats, mountain sheep, caribou, moose, anything you want.
When I hear various members asking for paved highways, I marvel. All we want is a trail in there over which we can drive with a Chevrolet car-of course with western springs. We just ask for that type of road. It would more than pay for itself on top of that. But the thinking of what is called the treasury board on the other side of the house is something that is beyond me.


Mr. G. R. WEBB (Leeds):: After listening this afternoon to hon. members speaking about national parks, it would seem to me, Mr. Speaker, that we are pretty much in agreement as to the actual value of the parks. To you, Your Honour, to all members of this house and to the people from far and near, I want to extend an invitation to come to the province of Ontario. We have some parks in Ontario, but unfortunately not nearly enough. Since I happen to come from the most beautiful part of the province, namely, the county of Leeds right on the St. Lawrence river, I felt it my duty to rise and say a few words.
We have eleven parks but they are all islands. These are not large parks-they range from four acres to twenty-five acres-but they are valuable. As the minister tonight seems to be paying a great deal of attention to what is being said, I thought it might be wise to bring to his notice the fact that we fall far short in providing anything like enough accommodation to take care of the thousands and thousands of people who live in the United States so near to our border and who cross

National Parks Act
into our country every year. We are finding it more difficult all the time to provide accommodation to satisfy these people when they come here.
I want to suggest one or two things, and I believe the hon. member for Lanark (Mr. Blair) will agree with me in what I say. In addition to the great St. Lawrence river, we have a chain of lakes known as the Rideau lakes chain. With all due respect to the beauty of western Canada which has been expounded on, I think I can say without fear of successful contradiction that we have the most beautiful part of Canada, which is undeveloped.
In that connection I would urge that the matter of a park be taken up as soon as possible, with co-operation between the provincial government and the federal government, and that we get together and make a park. We do not want a small park. While I must admit that we cannot boast of wild animals in this particular area, I think I can say that we have plenty of wild life to satisfy anyone who wishes to go there. We have fishing. Apparently I am not going to be the last one to speak tonight, so I shall not get into the question of whether or not we have the greatest possibilities for fishing; but we certainly have wonderful opportunities. The man who speaks last always has the advantage of talking about fish, because he can always make them a little bit longer than the fellow who spoke before him. Therefore I shall not get into any competition in that respect.
I will, however, say this. In our county we can provide all kinds of entertainment, such as fishing and out-of-door life of all descriptions, that is not surpassed by any other place in Canada. The sooner the people of this country realize that we have this beautiful territory, the better it will be for the people of all parts of Canada.
We must join together and see that there is no part in the entire Dominion of Canada that has not a national park, so that when tourists come into Canada they can travel from one part of the country to the other and find that they will be well received in these parks. They must find that there are places where they will be entertained, so that they will be satisfied, in order that they will come back again. I believe we can pretty much forget the monetary side of the matter. If we treat these people right, they will come back. We must give them accommodation and make it worth their while to see our country, which is the finest country in the world.


Mr. JAMES SINCLAIR (Vancouver North):: Since other British Columbia members have spoken, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I
should add my word or two about the national parks situation as it affects British Columbia. As the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Archibald) says, our province is just one enormous national park, if you count mountains, streams and forests as national parks. But I think it requires a little bit more than that. It requires a little development to make a park in the sense of a place where the people of Canada, and the people of British Columbia in our case, may enjoy themselves. The great criticism of the national parks in British Columbia is, first of all, that they are too far away from the people of that province. Most of the really good parks are on the Alberta side of the Rocky mountains, in Banff and in Jasper. Until recently the cost of staying in one of those places was beyond the resources of the average Canadian on holiday. I think it is a truism to say that there are far more people in New York who visit our national parks in the Rockies than there are in Vancouver.
The location of the parks is one thing, and the type of accommodation which is afforded is another. The Rocky mountain parks are six hundred miles by road from Vancouver, and the roads are poor. I do not like to use the people of the United States as an example, but in the state of Washington to the south of us the people have shown what can be done in developing territory such as we have for the use of the people. At Mount Baker, some few miles from the city of Bellingham; at Mount Rainier, fifty miles from the city of Seattle; above all at Mount Hood, a short distance from the great city of Portland, the American national parks system and American forest service have developed entire areas for year round use, both as wonderful ski territory and for summer alpine visits; with good roads and low-cost hostel accommodation, which draws from the cities people who need this type of relaxation.
In British Columbia, the average person on the coast-and, after all, over two-thirds of the people of our province live on the coast- has no opportunity to visit our national parks. Yet some forty miles from Vancouver we have the fourth of these four great peaks in the Pacific northwest, in the Garibaldi area. Some years ago I had perhaps the happiest job I shall ever have in my life, that of surveying for the provincial government the principal winter sport areas throughout the west. In my survey which took me to Sun Valley, Mount Shasta, Mount Hood, Mount Baker and all through the Rocky mountains, I never saw any country to equal the Garibaldi country at the head of Howe sound.
National Parks Act

So I suggest that if the national park system would start considering our national parks, not in terms of United States tourists but in terms of our own people, especially the sort of people who do not have an opportunity to travel very far from home in their two weeks' holidays, we would be in a far better position. I would rather see hundreds of low-cost hostels, such as the Americans have, throughout Banff and lake Louise than these glorified hotels which cost $15 to $20 a day. That is the type of thing which would make our parks truly national.
I should like to offer one other suggestion in connection with this national parks development, and it partly concerns this Ottawa development. We are having a tremendous development here; and I think Canadians even from as far away as British Columbia will admit that our national capital should be a beautiful place. More than that, however, the approaches to this country, our front doors, should also have a lovely appearance. In the city of Vancouver we are very fortunate in that some sixty years ago there were some citizens with singular foresight, who reserved that great peninsula, Stanley park, as a virgin stand of forest. I would say Stanley park is probably visited by more Canadians than any other park in this country; and of course it is as great a source of pride to our prairie Canadians as to the British Columbia Canadians.
On the north shore of the harbour entrance, however, is a long, low range of land at present covered with forest, which is a vacant Indian reserve. The people of Vancouver are most anxious to obtain that land and transform it into a park, so that for all time the spectacular sea approach to Vancouver city will remain a lovely thing. Unfortunately, however, the metropolitan parks board is having great difficulty in getting anywhere with the Indian affairs branch, which also comes under the Minister of Mines and Resources though in another category. Surely this is one matter about which not different departments of the government but this one department should do something, to see that, instead of being turned into gravel pits and an industrial development, the northern shore of the first narrows entrance to Vancouver is kept as green and lovely as is the Stanley park side, which is under the control of the city of Vancouver. The metropolitan parks board have done everything they can in the way of buying adjacent private land, and also in securing co-operation from the provincial government, but this is a problem solely for one -*epartment of the federal government, the

Department of Mines and Resources. It can bring together the unused Indian land which could be acquired by the metropolitan parks board and the national parks system, to ensure that for all time our loveliest harbour entrance shall remain as it is today.
So I leave these two suggestions with the minister: first, that the national parks system look into the problem of the Indian reserve at the entrance to Vancouver harbour, and, second, that our national parks policy henceforth be concentrated on making our national parks available to our ordinary citizens, by developing parks closer to the large metropolitan areas and seeing to it that in these parks we provide accommodation within reach of the Canadian citizen of ordinary means.


Mr. A. W. STUART (Charlotte):: Mr. Speaker, many hon. members from the western provinces have taken part in this debate, and coming from the maritime provinces I feel that I should also say a few words. After listening to the debate, I am convinced that the difficulty in selecting a site for a national park in New Brunswick was due to the fact that little could be done that would in any way improve the beauty we already have. To emphasize that fact, I want to tell a little story about a gentleman from my county who died a few years ago, and naturally went to heaven. When he was passing in through the pearly gates St. Peter asked where he was from. When he told him he was from Charlotte country St. Peter replied, "Step inside, but I know you will be dissatisfied after you get there."
I wish to associate myself with the remarks of many of the speakers who have taken part in this debate. It has been good to listen to various hon. members bring before the minister and the house the problems from their provinces. A matter was brought up today by the hon. member for Royal (Mr. Brooks), as to the selection of the national park in our province. I realize that at the time the selection was made, several spots in the province were being considered. Only one could be chosen; and, regardless of the site selected, many of us would feel that we were robbed. In my own county, the Lepreau area, which borders on St. John county, for many years had been considered a natural site for a national park. It was looked over very carefully ; but my information is that it was considered to be too close to the international border and for that reason was given up. That site would have been fifty or fifty-five miles from the state of Maine. It borders on the bay of Fundy, which in itself would be a

National Parks Act
guarantee of beauty. In that area are wonderful salmon streams and a paved road running through to Saint John. The area also contains a marvellous game reserve, and in many ways I feel was superior to any other site under consideration in New Brunswick. For some reason or another, however, it was decided to go to Albert county.
We realize, of course, that Albert county has plenty of beauty also, and that when the road is completed through from St. John county to St. Martins, through the mountains, they will have a beautful spot. I know the people of my county were very much disappointed when the selection was made, and I imagine the hon. member for Royal received the same report from his section of the country.
When this park is built, however, I believe the minister should take note of the discussion this evening and see that plenty of tourist accommodation is provided. In our province we have some wonderful tourist accommodation, but we also have other accommodation which is not so good. Through the town of St. Stephen, which is twenty miles from where I live and which is called the gateway to the maritimes, we get many visitors from Maine, New York state, Connecticut and Massachusetts. I believe the provincial and federal governments should take some steps to provide supervision of these tourist cabins. If a tourist comes in and finds the accommodation not so good, the report he makes when he goes back home may be harmful and have far-reaching effects. In my own home town, we have some very nice hotels, including the Algonquin hotel operated by the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. The accommodation there is good; but in the country places between the towns and cities I believe a great deal could be done to improve the accommodation available for tourists.


Jean-François Pouliot: If I may be permitted to ask a question, I believe Campobello, where President Franklin Roosevelt used to spend his summers, is in your county?


Andrew Wesley Stuart: It is just another jewel in the crown.


Mr. R. R. KNIGHT (Saskatoon City):: Mr. Speaker, this has developed into a most delightful and leisurely debate; if indeed one may call it a debate. We have heard poetry from Temis-couata, have listened to descriptions of the beauties of British Columbia and Ontario, and have heard even the financial wizardry of our friend the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell).
I agree with the hon. member in the idea of a national highway and would support him in
it, because I believe, until we have that highway, we shall never have any great success in the tourist business. I believe, if we had a national highway running through northern Ontario, and dividing into two branches at Winnipeg, one following the main line of the Canadian National and the other of the Canadian Pacific to the west coast, we would have something on which to base a tourist industry. It might then develop that we would see some of our friends from the east more frequently than we do now. It is to be regretted that in the west we do not see many people from Ontario, and certainly many less from Quebec. I am sure they would be welcomed. Perhaps because of the very fact we are in the west, those of us who live out there have probably become greater travellers than our compatriots in the east.
Let me at this point make the single observation concerning national parks that I had in mind when I rose to speak. I would urge upon the minister and the government, that they are trustees for the preservation of the playgrounds of the common people of Canada. I believe the object in the operation of national parks is to provide the greatest joy for the greatest number. That point was brought out b}f my leader the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) and in some respects was repeated by the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair).
I have no intention of indulging in a Cook's tour or a geographical survey, as some hon. members have done. I shall attempt to stick to the impact of the single idea I have in mind. I would refer particularly to Prince Albert national park on lake Waskesiu. I had some trouble a couple of years ago in impressing upon the people who manage that park that those who have tents and shack-tents-and I do not know whether hon. members are familiar with that last term; I hope they will never have to live in one-should have equal or even better privileges than people who can afford expensive cottages.
The situation was that there was a first-class street, if it could be so described, facing the lake. The people who were in those shack-tents have frequented that street for ten or twelve years. One day they were informed they would have to move back into the bush so that the place could be zoned for a group of expensive cottages which were to be erected on land to be leased for that purpose by the dominion government. We thought that was unjust treatment at the time, but it was done. These people were put out of their ordinary locations.
I would emphasize upon the minister the fact that in my view those are tire people who
National Parks Act

need a holiday near a good, clean, blue-water lake. They go up there, a distance of 180 miles, every year, as soon as the schools close. It offers a cheap way to get a holiday. They can turn their children loose. There is water and fishing and bathing. There are the great and mighty woods, and flowers and trees, things which these children have no other opportunities during the year to see.
People who are in better financial circumstances can choose places. They can go to those resorts about which the hon. member for Macleod was speaking. They are millionaire propositions, anyway, that is, so far as Banff, Jasper and lake Louise are concerned.


Mr. GIBSON (Comox-Albemi):: That lets us out.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: But these are people who have only the one chance to breathe clean, fresh air. And I do not think that, after they have established themselves in shack-tents for ten or twelve years, they should be asked to go back into the bush so that a place which was capable of accommodating sixty families before might now be occupied by twenty families in expensive properties. That is the point I wish to strike home.
One other matter I would mention is the importance of making a wise choice for the position of superintendent. I would say it is much more important to have a superintendent imbued with that idea than to have one with the idea of keeping his park very tidy and perfectly run, so that when the inspector comes from Ottawa he can get a high mark.
The point is that the people about whom I have been speaking need holidays, and should have an opportunity to get them. Public parks are, to my mind, places where we should attempt, by the preservation of fishing, the woods and the flowers and shrubs, and those things which most ordinary people and all children love, to heal the scars which have been created in great part by a careless and greedy commercialism.


Angus MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Macdonnell) has asked me if I have a national park in my constituency. No, I have not; but I have many people in my riding who would like to have an opportunity to go to a park once in a while. That is my reason for saying a few words in this debate.
If I had not sat across from the Acting Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. MacKinnon) for several years, and come to the conclusion that he is a pretty wise individual, I would be afraid that he might be carried away by all the oratory we have heard this
[Mt. Knight.]
evening about national parks, and that he would go on a jamboree of spending the resources of the country in order that a few Americans might have an opportunity to shoot wild game.
I agree with the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair) that our first step toward making recreation available to our people should be the development of those park sites which are close at hand, so that they would be accessible to the people living in our large cities. The hon. member referred to Stanley park. I agree with him that perhaps no other park in Canada is used so much as that playground in Vancouver.
But there are many people in Vancouver who find it difficult to afford the means to go to Stanley park with their families for a picnic once in a while on Sundays. It is these people I am thinking about. Today the great majority of people in British Columbia are far more interested in the debate we had earlier this afternoon than they are in this one. They are more interested in learning how they are to get homes in which to live than they are in having an opportunity to shoot wild game in a national park.
The hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell) issued a challenge to the leaders of the different parties to say where we were going to get the money to develop our parks. But parks are not built by money. May I tell him that parks are built with the labour and sweat of those who build the roads and other improvements which make them parks.


An hon. MEMBER:: Still no money.


Angus MacInnis: There is plenty of money. But the first thing we should do with that money is to build houses for the people of Canada. We are not doing that. If we are to put our people at building roads around parks and building facilities for millionaires to use, there will not be sufficient labour available to build homes. And it is homes we need at the present time, not roads around hundreds of thousands of acres of parks. Only after we have provided our people with homes should we consider spending money on national recreational facilities.
Not one person out of one hundred in Vancouver will ever see Banff, lake Louise or Jasper. I have never had the time myself to stop off at Banff or lake Louise, although I had the means to go there. A great majority of the nearly 500,000 people in greater Vancouver will never see those places unless we have another war and air fields or military camps are established nearby and they get a chance to visit them in that way. Let us put

National Parks Act
first things first. Parks are a luxury, and what the people of Canada want now are homes in which to live.


John Lambert Gibson: Mr. Speaker, it occurs to me that the house and the country would be disappointed if in a discussion of the beauty spots of Canada no mention was made of Vancouver island. I notice that the other two members from Vancouver island are not in their places tonight, so I think I should call the attention of the minister to the fact that that area is the most accessible in British Columbia to the vast, majority of the population to which the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair) referred. Yet there is no national park in that great country.
The minister has been there, so that I do not need to tell 'him about the magnificent timber to be found there as well the largest game fish, including the Tyee salmon. It occurs to me that the government should try to make some arrangement with the Canadian Pacific Railway Company for the development of the forbidden plateau area behind Courtenay. This land is owned by the Canadian Pacific, being part of the old Esquimalt and Nanaimo land grant. It is private property, and I understand that the government never takes over land as a national park unless it has title to all minerals, timber and everything else.
It would seem to me that the government might explore the possibility of making an arrangement with the Canadian Pacific and allowing them to retain the mineral rights. It would appear to be a great deal to ask a private corporation to give up something when they do not know whether it has any value. I ask the minister to discuss this matter with his deputy and see if something cannot be done.
All along the Pacific coast with its view of the great Pacific ocean there are no facilities for the public of Canada to come and take a look. An airport costing $7,000,000 was built at Long Beach, one of the most magnificent natural sites in Canada. It was the intention to put in a road during the war, but difficulties developed. The necessity for that road is still there, because that country has great natural resources in timber and minerals. It is not always necessary to take 10,000 square miles as a national park; it seems to me that smaller areas could be developed.
I should like the minister to take up this matter with his deputy to see if something cannot be done on Vancouver island. As I
say, that is the most accessible part of our province to the great majority of our population.	11


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Speaker, it is clear this is not a debate on national parks but has developed into a competition as to the scenic beauties of the different constituencies. The district of Muskoka has many of the advantages which the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) desired to have available to the people. It has facilities to fit any purse, and it is crowded with people of all kinds who come long distances because of its convenience.
At the present, time I have the honour to represent Muskoka, but, due to the great kindness of those responsible for the redistribution bill, if I am successful at the next election I shall also represent Parry Sound, which is much larger than Muskoka.


An hon. MEMBER:: Not yet.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I admit that I may have to improve my brand of hockey. If I am to be judged by that I doubt very much if I shall be successful, but there you are and we shall have to face that when we come to it. These two areas offer every type of facility for enjoyment and they are most accessible to everyone. I consider I would be remiss in my duty if I did not bring them to the attention of the house.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Mr. Speaker, I had not intended to say anything, but I notice that the hon. member for Essex South (Mr. Clark) is not in the house at the moment and I feel I should say a word about Point Pelee, one of the Ontario national parks. I rarely talk about my own riding, so I hope the house will forgive me if I speak about another part of Ontario.
Point Pelee has an area of about six square miles and it extends farther south toward the United States than any other part of Canada. It is a beautiful park, although largely in the raw state as yet. I should like the minister to take up with his department the preservation of the east coast of the point which extends some ten or twelve miles into lake Erie.
Some two or three weeks ago I made an examination of the park, and I found the east coast being destroyed by wave action, to such an extent that I presume perhaps a quarter of a mile had already been washed off the point. The department ought to take vigorous measures to preserve this park which is important to that part of Canada. Every year it is
National Parks Act

visited by thousands of people from Detroit, because it is an interesting and beautiful park. It is not at all like the parks which have been mentioned and with many of which I, too, am familiar, having visited them all. However I shall say nothing about them tonight. I rose merely to bring this matter to the attention of the minister and his officials, in the hope that they will proceed before long to correct this damage. The last storm caused a great amount of damage along the east coast of Point Pelee national park.


James Angus MacKinnon: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to follow the various speakers. We have had a most interesting discussion this evening, although I did not anticipate it on this bill. I rather expected that these various matters which have been covered tonight would more likely come up when the departmental estimates were before the house.
I should like to take this opportunity to express my regret at the absence, through illness and far recuperation, of my colleague, the Minister of Mines and Resources (Mr. Glen). It has been my pleasure to attempt to carry on during his absence, but I, and I know also all hon. members, sincerely regret his absence.
I do not propose to discuss the attractions of the various parks, and I shall certainly not attempt to compare one with the other. We are giving considerably more attention this year to our parks than we have been able to give in recent years. The hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell) forestalled me, but last year our expenditures on national parks were some two and a quarter million dollars, whereas this year we will spend about seven and a third million dollars, or something over five million dollars more. That money is being expended to improve facilities in our national parks and to build roads leading into the parks.
The hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) mentioned several practical matters as to conditions in Banff national park. I am glad to be able to tell him that some of the suggestions he made in the debate this afternoon are being carried out by the parks branch. I refer particularly to the supervision of sports in the parks.
' Various members have spoken of the advisability of co-operation with the provinces in promoting the tourist industry in relation to the national parks. We have received from and are giving to the various provinces the most active co-operation in this work, and I take this opportunity to acknowledge the co-operation we are receiving from the provinces.

The hon. member for Royal (Mr. Brooks) asked a question as to the location of the national park in New Brunswick. There are few members of this house to whom I would be more anxious to give a courteous and complete answer, but I think my hon. friend really did not expect me to explain why the park in New Brunswick was located in a particular part of the province.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I have asked the question a number of times in other sessions and I have never got an answer, so that I really did not expect one from the minister.


James Angus MacKinnon: The province of New Brunswick is so fortunate as to have not only one delightful site for a park but four or five, I am told. I tried to find out during the dinner recess if there were any special reason for locating the park in one place more than another, and I was unable to get any explanation except that there was such a plentiful supply of delightful scenery and excellent locations in the province that there was great difficulty in making the final selection.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: When the department sends out its inspectors to inspect the different sites and they report on one site being better than another, does the department take that inspector's report into consideration, or did it choose the site for this national park for some other reason?


James Angus MacKinnon: I have no doubt that the department took into consideration the reports received from its inspectors as well as information gleaned in other ways. I am quite sure that there is general satisfaction in the province of New Brunswick that there has been established there what will be a great national park.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: We are pleased indeed that there is to be a national park there.


James Angus MacKinnon: As I said, Mr. Speaker, I expected that a good deal of this discussion would come up on the estimates of the department. The bill before us is nothing more or less than a consolidation of various special acts under which the various national parks were organized and for the creation of a national park in New Brunswick.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee, Mr. Golding in the chair.
On section 1-Parks.
Mr. HAZEN:: Has the dominion government received a good title in fee simple to the lands described on pages 29 and 30 of the schedule to

National Parks Act
this bill, which constitute the New Brunswick national park, containing 79^ square miles?
My second question is this. If so, has the land been conveyed to the dominion, and if it has, was it conveyed by deed or instrument in writing from the government of New Brunswick to the dominion government? If so, what was the date of this deed or instrument, and has it been recorded in the office of the registrar of deeds in Albert county, New Brunswick?
A third question is, have the families who have their homes in what is now this new national park-and there are a number of them 

been compensated for their properties that have been forcibly taken away from them? If they have not, will they be allowed to remain on their properties until they are compensated adequately for the loss they have sustained? It is, I might add, a serious matter to take a person's home away from him by process of law, especially when his home and his means of livelihood are closely associated as they are in the case of many of those who have lived for many years in the area which has now been taken over for this national park. These people should be liberally compensated before they are forced to move. Can the minister tell us just what the position is?


James Angus MacKinnon: The government of New Brunswick provided the land free of encumbrance to the dominion for a site for a national park. They also undertook to compensate the people whom it was necessary to dispossess in the acquiring of the lands. I am advised that the dominion government, naturally after long negotiations, has recently secured a good title and that conveyance has been made. I think it has been recorded, although I cannot say so definitely. If it has been recorded, it must have been very recently.


Douglas King Hazen: Can the minister give me the date of the conveyance from the province of New Brunswick to the dominion?


James Angus MacKinnon: I am advised it was about five or six weeks ago. I have not the exact date.


Douglas King Hazen: Can the minister tell me whether the families who have lived' in the area for many years have been obliged to move or are they still living there?


James Angus MacKinnon: I have no official information on that. It is a matter between the province and the owners of the property.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask one question for information, and if the minister has not the information, perhaps the hon. member for Temiscouata will have it? When this amendment is made, the section will read:
The lands described in the schedule to this act constitute the national parks of Canada.
I notice that the schedule has eight parts, indicating that there is at least one national park in each of eight provinces. Are there no national parks in the province of Quebec?


James Angus MacKinnon: There are no national parks in the province of Quebec.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is there any particular reason for that; any constitutional reason, provincial or otherwise?


James Angus MacKinnon: No.


[Stage Direction]
Section agreed to.
Sections 2 and 3 agreed to.
On section 4-Repeal.
John Ritchie MacNicol: May I ask the minister whether the description of the boundaries of Wood Buffalo park, particularly as referred to on, page 13 of the bill, are correct. I begin half-way down the page:
. . . thence westerly and northerly following the said low water mark of the southerly and westerly shore of lake Athabaska to a point nearest the beginning or southern end of the main channel of the stream known as riviere des Rochers;-
That is called after a few large rocks in the river.
-thence easterly in a direct line to the centre of the said main channel of riviere des Rochers at its southern end; thence following downstream the centre of the said main channel of riviere des Rochers to a point nearest the centre of the main channel of Slave river.
What is the significance of that? The Slave river is formed at the junction of riviere des Rochers and Peace river. I have been over the area and am fairly familiar with it. I do not understand what that means, "to a point nearest the centre of the main channel of Slave river". That would be past the junction of the Peace river and riviere des Rochers? I am not finding fault; if that is what it means, that is all right.


James Angus MacKinnon: I know the hon. member has been in this locality and I have crossed it myself not only by air but by ship. I know the surveys were made under the direction of the surveyor general and I take them to be correct. I believe the Slave river is so called after passing the confluence of the Peace river and the four channels of the river that empties lake Athabaska.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The Peace river flows into riviere des Rochers about forty miles north of Lake Athabaska. It flows in from the west through about five mouths, and what I should like to know is this. Does the boundary begin
Whaling Agreement

at the confluence of the last mouth of Peace river with riviere des Rochers, after which it i3 called Slave river?


James Angus MacKinnon: I shall be glad to get a plan to show it to the hon. member.


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


Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Speaker, may I ask that you revert to government notices of motions in order that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacKinnon) may move a motion for the Secretary of State for External Affairs.


James Horace King: Government notices of motions.
Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (for the Secretary of State for External Affairs)' moved:
That it is expedient that the houses of parliament do approve the international convention for the regulation of whaling, signed at Washington on December 2', 1946, and that this house do approve the same.
He said: Mr. Speaker, I wish to make a short statement. This is a motion only, to approve Canada's participation with fourteen other countries in an international agreement for the regulation of the whaling industry. The senate has already discussed this matter and, after a brief debate, fully approved the international whaling convention signed by Canada at Washington on December 2, 1946. There is not a great deal I can usefully add to the discussion which occurred in the other place on February 12 of this year.
The Washington convention is not the first agreement in regard to whaling, in which Canada has taken part. Such a convention was signed at Geneva in 1931 and again at London in 1937. The present agreement is based on the principles of the London convention. One new feature of the Washington convention, however, is that under its provisions an international whaling commission is established for the first time, modeled on the Canada-United States international salmon and halibut commission. This commission will be composed of one representative from each participating country. Until the Washington convention comes into full effect, a protocol signed at Washington by the interested nations continues in force the regulations agreed upon in London.

Because of scientific and technical progress in the industry, it is necessary from time to time to revise and amend these international arrangements governing whaling activities. As in the case of the pacific fur seals, unless some international rules are observed, whales might also in time become almost extinct. There are many kinds of whales and this agreement seeks to eliminate over-fishing of any type. The killing of young whales is absolutely prohibited. Protection is also given to certain other varieties, and catches are limited in certain areas. Each of the contracting governments agrees to take proper measures to punish infractions of these regulations which come within their respective jurisdictions. The proposed international commission will have power to make regulations, but it will be the responsibility of the contracting governments to provide the necessary protection and to enforce such regulations.
Canada should take an active interest in the whaling industry because her Arctic territory is inhabited in considerable numbers by certain types of whales. The whale is particularly valuable in producing large quantities of oil and whalebone. Refined whale oil makes a valuable contribution to the world's supply of edible oils. In making its decisions, the new commission will take into consideration the interests of consumers of whale products. Also aborigines are free to kill whales for food under the Washington agreement.
Canadian commercial whaling activities have not been extensive. Since 1911 the industry has functioned to some extent on both the east and west coasts of Canada. In 1911 a whaling station was established by a private firm on the north shore of the St. Lawrence, but its operations ceased in 1915. A company operating on the Pacific coast commenced whaling operations in 1910. About 600 men were employed at one time by this firm, but its operations terminated in 1943. A new firm has recently been organized in British Columbia and is now applying for a licence to carry on whaling activities off the west coast. This company expects to use at least three whaling vessels this season. The adherence of Canada to the Washington convention will have no serious modifying effect on this particular project.
The nations which were represented at Washington and whose delegates signed the whaling convention were: Argentina, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Denmark, France, The Netherlands, Norway, Peru, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, the United States and the

Whaling Agreement
Union of South Africa. When six of the signing governments, including The Netherlands, Norway, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingom and the United States, have deposited ratifications, this convention will come into force. It also becomes binding upon any other government which joins in ratification. Any contracting government may withdraw from the convention on June 30 of any year by giving six months' notice.
I believe it to be a wise thing for Canada to enter into this international agreement and to take its place in the world whaling industry.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I should like to ask a question of the minister. Is it my understanding that Soviet Russia and Canada have agreed to use whale oil for the manufacture of oleomargarine in competition with butter in Canada?


James Angus MacKinnon: The answer is no.


Jean-François Pouliot: Before the motion is carried, I wish to say a few words. I remember that I made a few jokes in 1935 when Mr. Bennett made this agreement a part of his social legislation. Social legislation was extended to whaling. It was quite funny, because whales were supposed to belong to the old order. He, however, brought whales into the new order; and they took up such a large space in it that everyone was astounded. I wonder what number of whales are caught in Canadian waters each year? Some people may learn something about whales through reading the agreement. The agreement is not with the resolution. I hope it will be in the schedule to the bill. We are told that it is about the same thing as the previous convention. Article 6 of the convention on the regulation of whaling, approval of which Mr. Bennett moved in the house on June 4, 1935, is found at page 3252 of Hansard of that date, and reads as follows: Article 6
The fullest possible use shall be made of the carcases of whales taken. In particular:
1. There shall be extracted by boiling or otherwise the oil from all blubber and from the head and the tongue and, in addition, from the tail as far forward as the outer opening of the lower intestine.
The provisions of this subparagraph shall apply only to such carcases or parts of carcases as are not intended to be used for human food.
We do not know what we are eating when we hear of these substitutes. Then there is article 10, which I can read in view of the fact 5849-241
that our lady colleague is not at present in the house. It reads as follows:
Article 10
1.	The high contracting parties shall obtain, with regard to the vessels flying their flags and engaged in the taking of whales, the most complete biological information practicable with regard to each whale taken, and in any case on the following points:
(a)	Date of taking;
(b)	Place of taking;
(e)	Species;
(d)	Sex;
(e)	Length: measured, when taken out of the water; estimated, if cut up in water:
(f)	When foetus is present, length and sex if ascertainable;
(g)	When practicable, information as to stomach contents.
2.	The length referred to in subparagraphs (e) and (f) of this article shall be the length of a straight line taken from the tip of the snout to the notch between the flukes of the tail.
That phraseology, Mr. Speaker, may be highly technical, but it is quite amusing to those who are profane.
Then there is article 17 which is full of solemnity. It shows how busy were the bureaucrats of the defunct league of nations. I presume that those of the united nations will have a similar occupation. Article 17 reads as follows:
Article 17
The present convention shall enter into force on the ninetieth day following the receipt by the secretary-general of the league of nations of ratifications or accessions on behalf of not less than eight members of the league or non-member states, including the Kingdom of Norway and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
As regards any member of the league or nonmember state on whose behalf an instrument of ratification or accession is subsequently deposited, the convention shall enter into force on the ninetieth day after the date of the deposit of such instrument.
And so it goes on. Is it necessary to have all that solemnity about whales? I can imagine all the fellows there in the big building of the league of nations at Geneva trying to find new words in order to show their importance in the drafting of a so-called convention like that. And by the way, it was not a convention; it was a draft convention that was left for anybody to accept or reject. But they called it a convention in order to make a greater impression on the people with regard to what they were doing in the whaling business. Now' the same thing is happening. We hoped that the united nations would be superior to the league of nations, but they indulge in the same trifling business as did the dead league. They will go on like that
Whaling Agreement

until we have a new war or until the people cease to be credulous enough to give them any importance.
We are all for the protection of the whaling industry. But why should people waste time in big efforts to write instruments like that one, which is the laughing stock of all those who peruse Hansard and see it. I was surprised, when I read it again, to see the false solemnity of those who want to impress us with words which may have a special meaning but are certainly not understood by those who harpoon whales.
When the matter comes before the committee I hope the minister will be kind enough to tell us what was the percentage of whales killed in Canadian waters during the last year. I hope he will tell us what was the total number of whales killed in Arctic and Antarctic waters, and what was the percentage killed in Canadian waters, so that we may know exactly what our interest is in the matter. I hope the minister will be kind enough to tell us that and also how many people in Canada are interested in the hunting or harpooning of whales. It is a fine sport. It cannot be indulged in, in a national park, but it deserves special consideration because one whale in itself is big business.
Mr. W. CHESTER S. MeLURE (Queens):
[ understand that each of the sixteen countries subscribing to this convention is permitted to have factory ships, as they are termed, and I should like to ask the minister one or two questions on that basis. When whales are taken, how are they processed, and to whom go the proceeds of this whaling, under the permit issued to each country?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I wonder if the minister is going to answer my hon. friend?


James Angus MacKinnon: We are not in committee.


James Horace King: I suggest that the minister may answer when he replies.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We do not go into committee on this.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am not sure that I understand this. Apparently we are now asked to approve this international convention, which I for one have never seen, though perhaps that is my own fault. The minister has made a statement concerning it; and while I do not want to fall into the false solemnity of which the hon. member for Tem-iscouata (Mr. Pouliot) made such pleasant fun,

which I enjoyed, I should like to ask one or two serious questions, though not solemn ones, I hope.
First of all, I notice that the government does not seem to take this matter very seriously. This convention was signed on December 2, 1946, and I am interested to know why some seventeen months should be permitted to elapse before it is brought into the house for approval. Then it seems to me we are being asked to act blindly in this matter, and I do not feel that I am able to give an intelligent vote on it at the moment. Perhaps, after I ask a few more questions, I may be more intelligent.
I understood the minister to say that one of the duties wTe assume under this convention is the virtual policing of a certain section of the ocean. If I am correct in that, then it seems to me to raise certain questions. How do we do that? We are right next door to the U.S.S.R., which is one of the signatories to this convention. Are we in fact responsible for a certain section of the ocean? If so, how do we make that control effective, or is it all just talk and play acting? Second, what do we do if we find any infractions? The minister was at pains to tell us that the industry had been rather a trivial affair here in Canada, and I realize that. I understand that in England it is not so trivial now, that they are beginning to eat whale meat as a substitute for other meats they cannot get; and I know that in times past it has been a serious matter and can become such again.
Personally I do not feel that we should be asked to vote on this without knowing something more about it. I do not know what would be the sensible thing to do. I take it we have not seen this convention. If I am wrong in that the minister will tell me; perhaps we should have seen it. Perhaps we are not being asked to vote as blindly as I think we are, but as far as I am concerned the vote as it stands would be a meaningless thing.


Douglas King Hazen: I agree with the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) that we should have more information about this agreement and this international convention for the regulation of whaling that was signed, I presume by the dominion government, in Washington on December 2, 1946. No doubt the purpose of the agreement is to protect the whaling industry and to prevent the wanton destruction of whales. I presume it is largely a conservation measure. Well, in 1936, I think it was, the minister told us that a previous agreement had been entered into at Geneva. Since that agree-

Whaling Agreement
ment was entered into, has there been an increase in the whale population? Have the regulations made at that time been effective? Have they- been lived up to; and, as a result, has there been an improvement in the number of whales? I think the minister might give us some information along those lines.
Then the minister told us that the convention of 1946 establishes a permanent international commission, and I think he said in that respect it differed from the previous Geneva agreement. I should like to ask who the Canadian representative on this permanent commission is and whether his time is fully taken up with his duties there, or whether he is a member of one of the government departments, part of whose time is occupied as our representative on this commission.
We have been told also that the commission will have power to adopt the rules and regulations at present embodied in the schedule to the agreement, which I have not before me, and to adopt new regulations. Do those regulations have to be approved1 by the parliament of Canada before they come into force, or is this commission to be given power to make any rules and regulations it may see fit, which will impose liabilities upon the people of this country, with the parliament of Canada having no say about the matter? I think we should have some information on that point.
Another point has occurred to me. I understand that Japan has not signed this agreement. Further, I understand that Japan is getting a whaling fleet ready again to go on the high seas. Can Japan go out and use her fleet as she sees fit, not complying with the regulations which have been agreed to by the countries which have signed this agreement and with which they must comply?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: 
George Alexander Cruickshank: I should like to ask the minister one or two questions.


James Sinclair: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has already spoken in this debate.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Well, of course, if the hon. member who is sponsoring oleomargarine is afraid to face it-


James Horace King: Order. I am sorry, but an hon. member is allowed to speak only once. He may not speak twice.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I only asked a question.


James Horace King: The hon. member may proceed.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I only asked a question before, Mr. Speaker; I am now going to make a speech. If the oleomargarine interests are going to try to keep the hon. member for Fraser Valley quiet when he wants to speak for the protection of the dairy farmers of Canada, then I will make a speech. I want to know in this connection just how Canada is prepared to dispose of her share of the whaling industry. My hon. friends will have their innings; I am speaking on behalf of the dairy farmers. How does Canada intend, under this so-called treaty, to handle her share of the whaling industry on the high seas?
I want an explanation of that from the ministry. I want to know how whale oil has. been disposed of in the past,


Andrew Wesley Stuart: Oleomargarine.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am delighted to* hear that interjection, because I know perfectly well that is the reason whale oil has been introduced into this debate; it is to be used for margarine. Also, through you, Mr. Speaker, I want to know how whale oil is disposed of in Newfoundland.


Andrew Wesley Stuart: Oleomargarine.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Again I appreciate the interjection.


James Horace King: Order. I must ask hon. members not to interfere when the hon. member for Fraser Valley is speaking; and I would ask the hon. member for Fraser Valley not to-anticipate another debate.
Whaling Agreement


George Alexander Cruickshank: I never even once interjected the reference to oleomargarine. But my hon. friends from the maritimes who are sponsoring this whale oil business brought margarine into it, because they know that is the only reason they want whale oil.
I should like to ask through you, Mr. Speaker, that the minister, who is so conversant with the fishing industry in British Columbia and throughout Canada, tell us the advantage it will be to any part of Canada to enter into this treaty with respect to the whaling industry, in order that certain interested parties in a place I am not allowed to mention, a place I can only dream of, and never hope to attain-


An hon. MEMBER:: Heaven.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Well, it is not so far away, in another part of this building. I want to ask the minister what revenue came .to Canada from the whale oil business. Some of my hon. friends who advocate margarine want to speak about this. They can speak for themselves. I want to ask a straight question, through you, Mr. Speaker: What is the revenue to the Dominion of Canada from whale oil, and how many gallons have been produced and sold through Canada? How were they disposed of in years past? How is it proposed to dispose of the future production of whale oil in Canada? What will be the expected production of whale oil in years to come?


Stanley Howard Knowles: A whale of a question.


George Alexander Cruickshank: That is all right; these oleomargarine experts can have their say. They will have an opportunity to make their speeches; let me make mine.


James Sinclair: We made ours on the margarine debate, though.


George Alexander Cruickshank: What is the expected production of whale oil? I will bring it down to a given period of time. What is the expected production of whale oil in the Dominion of Canada for the next four years? How is that whale oil to be disposed of in Canada? What adverse or favourable effect will it have on the economic situation in Canada?
I hope the minister is getting all these down, because I want answers to them. I represent
458,000	dairy farmers in Canada; not some ten manufacturers and processors of whale oil in a place not so far from here, in the other chamber. I would ask the minister how much whale oil was produced over the period of the last ten years and what the estimated production of whale oil will be in the next ten years.

Quite frankly, I am definitely opposed to the use of whale oil in the production of butter. My hon. friend can have all the say he wishes, to use it for butter. I shall have my say later.
I have another question, through you, Mr. Speaker: have any direct connections been made with Russia? I understand that if it snows on a sunny day we blame everything on communism. I want to know what direct connections have been made with Russia with respect to whale oil production; and in that connection has anything been mentioned about oleomargarine ?


Arthur Leroy Smith: Mr. Speaker, before the minister makes his speech, which will close the debate, and in order that we may all vote intelligently, may I say I have always understood that a whale is a mammal and gives milk from which butter may possibly be made; that is, if we can only catch the whale and milk her.
So in order that we may catch up with thi3 question, I should like the minister when he closes the debate to tell us how many teats has a female whale?


John Lambert Gibson: Mr. Speaker, this discussion reminds me of the fur seal debate which took place a short time ago. I should like to remind the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank) when he talks in such disparaging terms about the whale, that, after all, the whale is a mammal and. more than that, it is a mammal which takes a bath every day. And I think probably from that point of view it might be as clean as anything in the line of a dairy product.


Arthur Leroy Smith: And should be under the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner).


John Lambert Gibson: I am certain that in that event we would have no fear that the oil would ever be used for oleomargarine.
I am happy to be able to say that in my view this will help the whaling industry in Canada. It is extremely important that Canada should take the whales which go past our coasts. The purposes for which we use the oil eventually, I cannot say; but I do not think it should be necessary for anyone who manufactures whale oil in Canada to explain to the dairy farmers what they intend to do with that oil, or how much they intend to make. I believe there will be a large quantity of whale oil made in the next ten years; I would not care to hazard a guess of how much that would be.

Canadian-Australian Air Agreement
It would appear to me that, although I know very little about the whaling convention, that convention was made necessary by virtue of the fact that there had been a heavy depletion of the whale population in the Antarctic seas, through international factory whaling ships which go there. It was felt necessary to take some steps to protect these great mammals and see that their numbers were not further depleted.
I believe that Canada should subscribe to this convention and take our part in co-operating with other nations of the world in seeing that the whale population is adequately cared for.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: How is the division of whales made? Who says what country will have a certain number of whales?


Arthur Leroy Smith: Cut them down the back.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: The minister referred to one company that was processing whales, and I should like to know what company that is.


James Angus MacKinnon: Mr. Speaker, there has not been a whale caught or killed in Canada since 1943, and I think that statement will provide answers to most of the questions asked by the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank). The Washington convention made in 1946 provided for the convention being ratified by the various governments interested. Up to date the only governments which have ratified the convention are those of Iceland, the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia. The purpose of this resolution is to give ratification by the Canadian parliament to the agreement of 1946.
I was asked the powers that Canada could exercise in carrying out the regulations. Canada can police only her owm territorial waters and has the power to issue or cancel whaling licences. Japan is not a party to the whaling agreement, because that country is still under United States occupation. The whaling commission has not yet been formed, and it will come into existence when the convention comes into full force. Any country may reject the regulations on ninety days' notice according to article V, section 37, of the treaty.
In order to set the mind of the hon. member for Fraser Valley at rest in connection with oleomargarine, I may say that there is no thought of which I have any knowledge to use whale oil for the purpose of making oleomargarine. The hon. member for The Battle-fords (Mr. Campbell) asked about the division of whales among the member nations; but, as I said, no whales have been caught or killed in Canada for five years. What I am asking
for tonight is the ratification of the agreement entered into in 1946, which has been approved by the four or five countries I have indicated.


Mr. JOHN BRACKEN (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to know what financial obligations on the part of Canada this will involve. The minister has explained that it involves the setting up of a whaling commission which is to be given certain powers. There will be certain expenses to meet, and I should like to know what provision is made for financing those and what share Canada will be required to pay?


James Angus MacKinnon: My information is
that Canada will have one representative on this whaling commission. The expense will be very small, being merely that for one individual.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I should like to ask the minister a question.


James Horace King: The hon. minister has closed the debate. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


George Alexander Cruickshank: On division.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: On division.
Motion agreed to on division.



TRANS-CANADA AIR LINES-AIR SERVICE TO AUSTRALIA

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ALPHONSE FOURNIER (Minister of Public Works) moved that the house go into committee of supply.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, before Your Honour leaves the chair, there is a matter upon which I should like to say a few words and I think this can be done without keeping the house from getting into supply tonight. I am glad the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe) is in his place, because what I wish to speak about relates to a matter under his supervision.
A few days ago on the orders of the day I directed certain questions to the minister with regard to air service between Canada and Australia. I asked the minister if he could indicate what progress was being made by Trans-Canada Air Lines in implementing the Canadian-Australian agreement, and I also asked this question:
Is it still government policy that when this service is put into effect by Canada it will be by the government-owned air line, and not by any private company?

Canadian-Australian Air Agreement
In reply to that question, the minister told me and the house that the T.C.A. had been fully occupied in establishing a transatlantic operation as well as an operation to South America, and therefore it had not been possible to give attention to the Australian service. I certainly have no quarrel with the minister's reply to that part of my question. In fact it is to the credit of the T.C.A. that it does not rush in, but it takes its time and makes sure that its operations are well established. However I was somewhat concerned over the nature of the minister's answer to my other question. Let me repeat the question that I asked in its precise terms, as recorded on page 3653 of Hansard for May 6, 1918. It was as follows:
Is it still government policy that when this service is put into effect by Canada it will be by the government-owned air line, and not by any private company?
The minister's reply to that question was as follows:
So far as government policy is concerned. I dare say when the matter is considered the government will be able to announce its policy.
I then asked:
Has there been any change?
But to that there was no reply. I may say that this is a matter which I have followed with some interest for a number of years. As the minister and other members of the government know, I have frequently expressed strong support of most aspects of the government's aviation policy.
On April 2. 1943, the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) made a basic statement with respect to the government's aviation policy as from that date. Part of that statement, as reported on page 1777 of Hansard of April 2, 1943, was in these words:
Trans-Canada Air Lines will continue to be the instrument of the government in maintaining all transcontinental air transport services and in operating services across international boundary lines and outside Canada.
Then, on page 1778 the Prime Minister gave these words as a conclusion to his statement of that day:
The policy of the Canadian government on air transport may be summed up as follows:
(a) The government sees no good reason for changing its policy that Trans-Canada Air Lines is the sole Canadian agency which may operate international air services.
And so on.
Next year, starting on March 17, 1944, we had an interesting and somewhat extended debate on civil aviation. This was begun by the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply in a speech on that date, commencing at page

1571 of Hansard. On page 1579 of Hansard he quoted the statement of the Prime Minister which I have just quoted as having been made on April 2, 1943, and he confirmed that policy on behalf of the government, namely, that Trans-Canada Air Lines would be the sole Canadian agency to operate international air services.
The matter came up the next year in October, 1945, when the Trans-Canada Air Lines Act was amended. The amending bill provided for certain subsidiary corporations under T.C.A. for the handling of certain special operations. This subject was discussed in the course of that debate, and the minister reaffirmed the government's policy that international operations were to be carried on solely by Trans-Canada Air Lines.
The matter came up again the next year, 1946, in various ways, but I shall confine myself to the statement which the minister made in this house on August 30, 1946, as recorded at page 5640 of Hansard. On that date the minister announced to the house an agreement between Canada and Australia for air services between the two countries which had been signed at Ottawa on June 11. After making an oral statement to the house, the minister placed on the record a lengthy statement giving the details of the Canadian-Australian agreement, and part of that statement read as follows:
It-
Namely, the agreement that had been signed.
-provides for an exchange of traffic rights between Canada and Australia so that an air line designated by the government of Australia may put down and take up at Vancouver passengers. mail and cargo from Australia, while an air line designated by the government of Canada, which will be Trans-Canada Air Lines, may put down and take up in Australia traffic to and from Canada.
The significant phrase in that statement from which I have just quoted is the one to which I gave emphasis, namely, that the chosen instrument of Canada for the Canadian-Australian service would be Trans-Canada Air Lines.
We had a further discussion about aviation policy in the house last year, 1947, when the policy of the government was again reiterated. In other words, at no time since April 2, 1943, has there ever been any reluctance on the part of the government to state its international aviation policy. It has always been clear and definite that Trans-Canada Air Lines was to be the chosen instrument of the government for any service crossing an international border or for any service between

Canadian-Australian Air Agreement
Canada and any other country. The statement which the minister gave in reply to my question the other day was the first to show that there has been any reluctance to state the government's policy. Instead of answering my question in the manner in which I thought he would-I thought perchance he would tell me that I knew what government policy in this matter was, or words to that effect-he said:
So far as government policy is concerned I dare say when the matter is considered the government will be able to announce its policy.
I am not speaking with any heat about this matter, Mr. Speaker, and I am not anxious to throw out any unwarranted suspicions; in fact,
I want to cut my remarks short, so that the minister can reply tonight because I do not want this matter to be left over. My reason for raising it is that I feel it should be settled. Perchance last Thursday when I asked my question on the orders of the day the minister did not take time to realize its import; possibly he was just giving the stock answer for a minister to give, that the government s policy would be announced in due course. My hope is now that he will tell me that I am all wrong in my suspicions and in my lack of assurance about this matter. I hope he will tell me that it is still government policy that any air operation across the border or from Canada to any other country will, so far as Canada is concerned, be operated by Trans-Canada Air Lines.
Just one other thought I wish to express and it is this. We have in the service that goes from the Yukon across to Alaska a case where the policy of the government operating the service is implemented by T.C.A. subletting that particular operation to Canadian Pacific Air Lines. That may meet the letter of the law, but I am sure it does not meet the spirit of the government's policy. That would not be a proper implementation of the spirit of the Canadian-Australian agreement in which the government specifically said that Trans-Canada Air Lines would operate that service. There is more I could say, but I shall sit down for the specific purpose of enabling the minister to answer me and I hope he can set aside my fears and suspicions about this matter.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I must say I do not understand the position of my hon. friend. He has spent five or ten minutes in approving the policy of the government, and then he asks me to deny it or confirm it. On the orders of the day a few days ago, he asked me the question he read out a few minutes ago, which was roughly to the effect, what was
T.C.A. doing in the Pacific and what was government policy in connection therewith? I answered that part of the question for which I am responsible. I am the minister responsible for Trans-Canada Air Lines and I told him exactly what Trans-Canada Air Lines was doing. I am not the minister who announces government policy on civil aviation. The Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) announced to the house two or three weeks ago that that responsibility had been transferred, and my hon. friend cheered when that announcement was made, so that he should know it better than any other man. Why he asked me the question I do not know. I do not think I am called upon to answer questions outside my jurisdiction.


Major James William Coldwell: What the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) was asking was, will the minister confirm the policy that has been laid down by the government from time to time and by the minister himself?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The minister will do what any other minister would do, refer my hon. friend to the responsible minister in that regard.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Most unsatisfactory-as usual.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, and the house went into committee of supply, Mr. Golding in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
95. Departmental administration, $277,000.
Item stands.

[Stage Direction]
309. Departmental administration, $1,096,287.
Item stands.
Progress reported.

John Bracken: Would the minister state the business for tomorrow?


Mr.   GLAXTON@: Tomorrow we shall proceed with the second reading of Bill No. 220, to amend the Loan Companies Act; committee of the whole on Bill No. 126, to amend the Pension Act; second reading of Bill No. 208, to amend the North Fraser Harbour Commissioners Act; second reading of Bill No. 248, to provide for carrying into effect the treaties of peace between Canada and Italy, Roumania, Hungary and Finland. Then we shall move to go into committee of supply
Business oj the House

and call one new department, and then proceed with the estimates of the Department of Agriculture. If we complete those we shall take up Transport.


Major James William Coldwell: Did the minister say, call one new department?


Brooke Claxton: Yes.


Major James William Coldwell: That is putting the departments in pretty fast. It may interfere with hon. members having an opportunity to raise grievances.


Brooke Claxton: There are still ten or twelve more departments to be put in.


Major James William Coldwell: Two have been put in tonight and one is to be put in tomorrow-


John Bracken: And four were put in the other night.


Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier):: There are about twelve more departments still to go in.


Arthur Leroy Smith: What department will be called tomorrow?


Brooke Claxton: I do not expect that we shall reach that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You have done pretty well today.


Brooke Claxton: We may reach it, in which case I am sure hon. members would wish to facilitate the business of the house.


Major James William Coldwell: We do not wish to see private members deprived of their opportunities.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, May 11, 1948