1949-12-09

[Stage Direction]
Third report of standing committee on external affairs.-Mr. Bradette.


Right Hon. L. S. Si. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to lay on the table a summary of orders in council passed during the period November 1 to November 30, 1949.
The previous summary was tabled on November 30. As agreed, this summary does not include the minutes of treasury board.



MERCHANT MARINE


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a declaration of government policy with respect to the Canadian merchant marine.
During recent months the government has been giving very serious and careful consideration to the state of the Canadian deep-sea shipping industry. The main facts of the situation are fully set forth in the report of the Canadian maritime commission; since that report was prepared an increasing number of Canadian flag ships have been laid up. The government proposes to deal with the matter promptly.
The problem stated in simple terms is this. Canadian flag vessels are no longer able to pay their own way. This situation is not new. Not since the beginning of this century has the business of owning and operating deep-sea vessels really prospered in Canada. In fact from 1900 to 1919 there was very little Canadian participation in deep-sea shipping. However, the building of ships in Canada during the first world war led the government of that day into a post-war venture of a government-owned merchant fleet. That fleet proved to be uncompetitive in the world market, and when the Canadian government merchant marine was finally liquidated in 45781-189
1936, the total loss to the government, exclusive of interest on capital and other advances, amounted to over $82 million.
During the second world war it again became necessary for Canada to build ships to carry essential supplies. In 1946 the Canadian merchant fleet was the fourth largest in the world. The Canadian government at that time, instead of continuing to operate a government-owned fleet in a period of high freights, decided to dispose of its vessels.
In 1946 there was a strong demand for ships both in Canada and abroad. Companies in Canada were most anxious to purchase ships, and under these circumstances it appeared only right and proper to give to our own people the first opportunity to buy. Thus the bulk of the war-built fleet was sold to Canadian operators at reasonable prices and on favourable terms, but they purchased these vessels at their own risk. On the 16th day of June, 1947, my colleague, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, then Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Howe), in addressing this house said:
Hon. members are well aware that a merchant navy is basically an industry which, like other industries, has to pay its way if it is to survive.
During the years 1946 and 1947 ocean freight rates remained at high levels and Canadian owners were able to operate their vessels profitably and successfully. About the middle of 1948, however, Canadian ships began to experience greater difficulty in obtaining dollar cargoes and freight rates began to decline from their high wartime levels. In March of this year a steady decline set in which has continued and at present rates and at Canadian costs Canadian vessels cannot be operated without substantial losses.
As I have said, the Canadian government has sold all its ships, the majority of which have been purchased by Canadian owners. At the present time we have 118 dry-cargo vessels operating under Canadian flag, and an additional 58, which likewise have been sold, are due to be returned from United Kingdom flag to Canadian registry next year, making a total of 176 ships which we must take into consideration. I am advised that, in order to enable those ships to operate competitively in the world market, over $25 million in annual subsidies would be required.
The maintenance of a Canadian flag merchant fleet can be justified only on the basis of one or both of two assumptions: (1) that

Merchant Marine
the fleet is a net economic asset to the community, or (2) that the fleet is important for purposes of national security.
In considering the studies which are available to us on the subject, we have concluded that we are not justified from an economic viewpoint in maintaining a Canadian flag fleet by artificial means. It is not the intention of the government to maintain an industry at the expense of the taxpayer, and of other export industries, by the unhealthy method of subsidies, unless these countervailing considerations are very strong indeed.
There are many objections to shipping subsidies. They do not tend to promote a healthy and efficient industry. They constitute a steady and usually increasing drain upon public funds. In a world in which some types of ships are already in oversupply they represent a waste of the taxpayer's money.
I do not propose to go into all the difficulties involved in shipping subsidies, since the government's basic objection to a policy of subsidization rests on wider grounds. The world is still suffering from the effect of two great wars. Dislocation resulting from such wars has disrupted world trade to an extent that nations are taking extraordinary steps for the preservation of their economies. Our view has consistently been that it is not possible to seek a solution to our trade and currency difficulties on a purely national basis. Canada has goods to sell, but our European customers lack dollars to buy them. They cannot acquire such dollars unless we do our share of buying from them. In other words we must seek to encourage imports from countries to whom we desire to sell our goods and in this sense shipping services of other countries represent an import. We must not adopt measures which would hinder the revival of world trade and defer the achievement of balance between dollar and non-dollar trading areas. If we were to adopt a policy of subsidization of national shipping, it would be a protectionist measure disabling other countries from trading with us.
The problem of preserving some part of the fleet for national security purposes deserves further consideration. In a world at peace with itself, this would not be necessary. Each nation would perform those functions which it could carry out most efficiently and economically, and if Canada were unable to conduct deep-sea shipping operations as well as other countries, such operations would be abandoned. Safeguards would have to be set up to prevent countries engaged in shipping from discriminating against countries which had no shipping.

However, we must regard the world as it is and make a realistic approach to the problem.
Safeguards to prevent discrimination have been set up under the machinery of the United Nations, and the constitution of the intergovernmental maritime consultative organization is designed to prevent unfair shipping practices. But although Canada has ratified the IMCO convention, it has not yet received the agreement of sufficient nations to bring it into operation. Furthermore, unhappily, we cannot say that war is not a possibility. I am strongly of the opinion, however, that arrangements should be made between the peace-loving nations of the world to pool their shipping resources in the event of war. If proper assurances were received in this respect, it might not be necessary for those nations who cannot operate ships economically to continue to maintain merchant fleets to meet an emergency.
The maintenance of adequate ocean-going shipping, shipbuilding capacity and ship repair facilities is fundamental to the defence organization of the North Atlantic treaty. It is, like defence proper, a collective responsibility which the partners must share in relation to capacity, aptitude, and relative efficiency. An increasing degree of specialization along the lines in which each country can make the greatest contribution to the common defence and welfare is the natural complement of the principle of integration in defence planning which we, together with our partners in the North Atlantic treaty, have accepted and have begun to apply. The implications of this approach are plain.
The experience of two wars has made it plain that allies have to pool their shipping resources. This lesson has not been lost on the countries which are now associated, for purposes of common defence, in the North Atlantic treaty. It is our hope, to further which we shall use our best endeavours, that arrangements can be completed in peacetime which would ensure the prompt, fair and efficient use and allocation of all available shipping in any emergency. Conversations to this end are already under way. In particular, discussions on this subject have taken place between officials of the government of the United Kingdom and Canada. Those discussions have not yet been completed, but I believe that if Canadian ships are transferred to United Kingdom registry, arrangements can be made to treat such ships as part of the Canadian contribution to any allied shipping pool in the event of war. Similar conditions would govern any transfer of registry for operating purposes to the flags of other countries upon whose close co-operation in mutual defence we can confidently

rely. By proceeding along these lines and within the framework of security which we are building up, it should no longer be necessary for each individual country to risk the waste of its national effort in duplicating facilities and services which can be more efficiently carried out in peacetime by their partner countries, and which will be available to serve the needs of all should a war come.
The government has therefore decided that, for the next year-and I stress "for the next year"-while an allied defence shipping pool is being created, it is advisable to maintain some proportion of the present fleet under Canadian flag. For that purpose the government has decided to recommend the provision of a sum of $3 million as an aid to the Canadian ocean shipping industry for one year only. It is estimated that over 500,000 deadweight tons of dry-cargo shipping will remain under the Canadian flag, but it may be that not all vessels comprising that tonnage will receive assistance. The number of ships to be assisted, and the amount of assistance required by each, will be left to the Canadian maritime commission, who will administer the fund under the provisions of the act, if parliament sees fit to pass it.
It is recognized that the reduction contemplated in the fleet will compel a number of seamen to find shore employment. In order to assist them in this transfer, the government has decided to extend the vocational training scheme to admit eligible men applying on or before the 30th day of September, 1950, and commencing their approved training before the 31st day of January, 1951. The ministers of transport and veterans affairs will have discretion with regard to the restricting provisions respecting age and the granting of allowances as at present set out in the merchant seamen vocational training order. Hon. members know that the terms of that order restricted training to men under thirty years of age.


Mr. Green:: Is that being lifted?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: That is to remain the rule; but there will be discretionary provisions enabling the Minister of Veterans Affairs and the Minister of Transport in exceptional cases to extend the privilege to men who have passed the age of thirty.
The vessels of the Park fleet, which, I have said, were sold by the government to Canadian companies, were purchased under the terms of an agreement containing the following clause:
It Is one of the essential conditions of the present agreement that except with the prior written approval of the seller-
45781-189J
Merchant Marine
The government.
-the vessels sold will be operated under Canadian registry by the purchaser as well after as before the full balance of the final or adjusted purchase price and interest has been paid; and the purchaser agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, not to make any application for transfer of any of the vessels out of Canadian registry without the prior written approval of the seller.
If it had not been for this clause, Canadian companies could have transferred their ships to foreign flag at any time. That covenant has now been in force for about four years, and it is now felt, in view of what I have said, that it is fair to give relief in respect of this restriction, as it has been demonstrated that Canadian vessels with their present high costs cannot be operated. Applications from shipowners may now be made to the Minister of Transport, through the commission, to transfer flag, and transfers will be permitted under such conditions as he may impose. This is in conformity with what I said previously about the concern to have an arrangement for a shipping pool that would give us the confidence that ships would be available in the event of an emergency.
Such transfer of flag, of itself, does not of course affect the ownership of the vessels, which will remain in Canadian hands. In permitting transfers the government will see to it that there will be tonnage available to meet Canadian needs in the event of war, and it is hoped that by means of such transfers Canadian-owned vessels will be able to secure cargoes which have not been available to them by reason of currency restrictions.
Let me emphasize again that the relief which is now being granted to the shipping industry is temporary and for one year only. It is given to assist shipowners to meet the emergency created by the decline in the freight market, and in the hope that they will be able to reduce their costs in order to operate competitively.
May I take this opportunity to pay a tribute, which I think all hon. members would wish to pay, to the efficient and intelligent work which has been done by the maritime commission, under the chairmanship of Mr. Clyne, in coping with a most difficult and somewhat discouraging problem under the conditions which prevailed when they had to give all their time and energy in an attempt to find a solution to that problem.


Howard Charles Green: I should like to ask the Prime Minister one or two questions. I understand from his statement that legislation will be required, and I should like to know whether it will be introduced at this session, or not until the next. Then the Prime Minister said that an attempt would be made to retain a tonnage of approximately 500,000 tons, but I am not sure whether he said deadweight tons

Merchant Marine
or gross tons. The recommendation of the maritime commission was that there should be 750,000 deadweight tons, which I think is about 562,500 gross tons.
The Prime Minister said nothing about the $26 million now held in escrow, being the proceeds of sales that have already taken place. Under present provisions that money cannot be paid out. Would the Prime Minister explain what will be done with that money?
Finally, has the government given consideration to the fact that in some cases ships have been transferred to the Panamanian flag? Panama is not a member of the North Atlantic alliance, and I am wondering what would happen if ships are transferred to the flag of that country.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I shall deal with the last question first. There have been no ships transferred to the Panamanian flag, and it is not the intention to authorize transfers to that flag. The intention is to authorize transfers under conditions that would leave us with the assurance that ships would become available in the event of an emergency.


Howard Charles Green: Only to North Atlantic treaty nations?


Mr.   Si. Laureni@: I would not like to tie it down any more firmly than to say that when an application is made, the merits will be considered. The intention is to reach some kind of agreement within a year that would provide for the pooling of the ships that would be required in the event of an emergency by the members of the North Atlantic security pact.
With reference to the first question asked by the hon. member, it is 500,000 deadweight tons of dry cargo shipping, and I am told that that would be about forty ships. With regard to the amount now in escrow, under conditions which require it to be expended for the production in Canadian yards of Canadian ships, at the moment no change is contemplated in those restrictions.
The hon. member asked if it was intended to introduce the legislation at this or the next session. There is no intention of introducing it at this session. There is still the hope among a great many of us that this session may be pretty close to prorogation, and it was felt that, in view of the general interest in the matter, it would be desirable to announce government policy at this time, and the intention of the government to introduce legislation as early as possible in the next session to implement that policy.


Mr. Coldwell:: Mr. Speaker, this is a most important statement, and a number of questions have arisen in the minds of hon. members, as indicated by those asked by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green). I am at a loss to understand why this statement was not made yesterday before the estimates of the Department of Transport were finally completed, so that we could have obtained some information to carry back to the country. It is regrettable that we did not get this statement before those estimates were finally adopted.


Mr. St. Laureni:: I shall have to deal with the hon. member's remarks in two parts. The statement was not made before because it was not ready. We have been giving it careful consideration and have been expediting its preparation, but I was able to get it only this morning. Even when I did get it this morning, there was one change that it was found necessary to make.
With regard to the estimates of the Department of Transport, it was convenient to have them called yesterday, although it might have been preferable to deal with some other estimates and call the transport items today. I repeat that the reason this statement was not made before was that we were expediting its preparation, and I was able to get it in its final shape only a few minutes before I came into the chamber.


Mr. Knowles:: The minister said that we would not get the statement unless we put his estimates through last night.


Mr. Gillis:: There is just one question I should like to ask the Prime Minister, and I think it is important. Can he inform the house whether there is such a thing as a ship of Canadian registry? I understand that all Canadian ships are of British registry regardless of the flag they fly. That is, there is no such thing as a Canadian registered ship leaving a Canadian port.


Jean-Paul Stephen St-Laurent: Oh, there is. These ships are of Canadian registry.


Clarence Gillis: 
Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Transfers are made only .vith the authorization of the Minister of Transport. If owners could not achieve lower operating costs by transfer, it is probable they would have to lay up their ships. At the present time ships under Canadian registry, and with Canadian costs, cannot operate with-aut substantial deficits. It is for this reason ;hat the government will recommend that :or the limited number which will make up ;he 500,000 deadweight tons dry cargo, a subsidy be provided not exceeding $3 million :or the year.


Mr. Black (Cumberland):: The question I was going to ask has been partly answered. As I understand the policy announced by the Prime Minister, it will enable quite a proportion of the total number of Canadian ships to be transferred so that they may immediately operate under sterling costs.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Yes; that is what is
intended.


Howard Charles Green: Apparently the policy means that Canada is to retain approximately forty of her present ships. It is not the plan to have forty new ships?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: No.


Howard Charles Green: The policy is forty old ships.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: The policy is to provide a subsidy not exceeding $3 million under which it is hoped that the owners of approximately forty of these ships will undertake to keep them in operation under Canadian registry and the Canadian flag for the year during which they will get a portion of the subsidy.



HOUSING


Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to table further correspondence with the premiers of Saskatchewan, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick concerning rent control.
As hon. members will see from the further correspondence with the government of Saskatchewan, the government of that province has definitely undertaken to assume responsibility for rent control as from April 1, 1950, and, pending the enactment of the appropriate provincial legislation, has requested that orders 813 and 814 of the wartime prices and trade board, which come into effect on December 15 and authorize further increases in the rental ceilings, and other relaxations, be suspended in Saskatchewan.
Ministerial Statements
Hon. members will also note that in accordance with the policy announced in this house, the government has taken the necessary action to comply with these requests. Therefore the situation is that the wartime leasehold regulations will remain in effect in Saskatchewan as they now are, unaltered by orders 813 and 814 of the wartime prices and trade board, which will not be operative in that province. On April 1, 1950, all federal rent controls will cease to have effect in Saskatchewan.


Major James William Coldwell: I should like to ask the minister whether the announcement made yesterday by the premier of Alberta has the same effect.


Douglas Charles Abbott: As yet I have received no communication from the premier of Alberta as to the details of the plan which I gather it is intended will be adopted in that province. It would appear that some form of rent control legislation is to be introduced, to be effective from the first of April, 1950, and that we shall be asked to withdraw federal regulations from Alberta as of that date. As yet, however, I have received no official notification.


Major James William Coldwell: The same as in Saskatchewan.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes. I omitted to suggest that, as was done previously, the correspondence concerning rent control might be printed as an appendix to Hansard.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house that the correspondence be printed as an appendix to Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
(For text of correspondence see appendix, pages 3065-66.)



NATIONAL FILM BOARD


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (for the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply):: Mr. Speaker, at the request of my colleague the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Winters), I have been asked to give certain information in answer to a question which was asked by the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell) on December 7. The question was as to the cost of production of certain films. The minister was unable to give the figures at the time, but he undertook to provide them later.
The films with their production cost are as follows: "River of Canada", $7,267.07; "Four Seasons", $7,223.37.
There was also one which the hon. member referred to as "La Cite de Notre Dame", and

Canadian Red Cross Society which it is believed is the film board production "Montreal Tercentenary". The cost of that film was $9,948.98.



CANADIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY


Mr. A. A. Macnaughlon (Mount Royal) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. 222, to amend the Canadian Red Cross Society Act.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Alan Aylesworth Macnaughton: Mr. Speaker, this is a non-contentious bill. Its first purpose is to assist the Canadian Red Cross Society to expand its services in Canada, particularly with regard to the establishment of outpost hospitals and blood transfusion services across the country. The second purpose is to increase the membership of the central governing body so that representatives from the new province of Newfoundland may be included thereon. The third, and by no means the least important aspect of the bill, is that an amendment is required to the act to sanction the use of "La Societe Canadienne de la Croix Rouge" as the name of the Canadian Red Cross Society in the French language.
I hope, with the good will and unanimous consent of the members of the house, that it may be possible to have second reading of the bill today.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Mr. Speaker:: When shall the bill be read a second time?


Some hon. Members:: Now.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Later this day-at eight o'clock.


Mr. Speaker:: Later this day.

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



DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

[Stage Direction]
121. Departmental administration, $256,281.
Mr. Garson:: Mr. Chairman, at the outset of this sitting of the committee I should like to raise a question of privilege.
Before the resignation of the commissioner under the Combines Investigation Act becomes effective, he is endeavouring to complete two reports which he now has in the course of preparation. In this connection he has asked me, with regard to the first of the two reports, whether I would approve of getting out 100 odd copies of it, not printed but in mimeographed form. He said this was


the only way in which we could get the report published within the statutory period of fifteen days. He said if we did not publish it in mimeographed form we would not be able to get it published within fifteen days after its delivery to the minister. I asked him, if it was necessary to mimeograph on the present occasion, how it had been possible in the past to comply with the requirement that reports be published within fifteen days. Mr. McGregor then informed me for the first time that the combines investigation commission, and the ministers responsible for it in previous years, had had a great deal of trouble in complying with the section, and as a matter of fact had always found that if a printed report was to be published it was mechanically impossible to comply with it. He said that even when the report went from him in first-class order to a minister who knew all about its preparation, and who had been kept fully informed by him of its various stages, it had not been possible to accomplish publication of the printed report within the statutory period of fifteen days. This has happened not through any lack of attention or effort on his part, or through any indisposition of the minister to publish, but simply because the fifteen days provided in the act is too short.
In view of all the criticism that has been heaped upon me, some of it going to the extreme length of hinting that, like Charles I, I should be beheaded for this grave offence, I would ask members of the press gallery to give due publicity to the point I am now raising. That I should have raised it before in my argument I do not for a moment deny, but this is just another example of the position in which I have found myself from beginning to end in this matter. That is, having no direct knowledge of the matter which has been under discussion, I have been continually under the necessity of securing all the information I have required in these debates from other people, mainly civil servants; and having heard no suggestion at any time that the act should be amended to extend this period of fifteen days to a more realistic period, naturally I assumed that it had been found to be satisfactory. That is one reason why there was no provision in the bill brought down this session to extend that period. That is also why, in addressing ourselves to the matter of the publication of this report which has not yet been delivered to me, the commissioner and I have to put our heads together to devise unusual ways and means of managing to comply with the statutory requirement of publishing within fifteen days.

In my own case I was not the minister who was familiar with this matter. I came in as a new minister, totally unfamiliar with either the flour report or any of the matters out of which it had arisen, and found on my desk an accumulation of some six weeks' arrears of work, with the session to prepare for, and with a flour report in respect of which the period for publication was known to be completely inadequate but as to which the statutory period of fifteen days began to run some five days before I even got here.
I think I can say with reasonable modesty that I came to this city with a good name, which it had taken me twenty-two years of hard, diligent work in the public service to build up. There are those in this house who would take it from me because I did not comply within ten days with a provision which, as the records show, on several occasions it has been quite impossible to comply with in the fifteen day period.


Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Nor within ten months.


Mr. Slewart (Winnipeg North):: I do not
think anyone in this house was at any time attacking the good name of the Minister of Justice. Those of us who know him particularly well, including myself, a political opponent from Manitoba, have always paid tribute to his fairness and other very admirable qualities. If there is criticism directed to him it is not because he is Stuart Garson but because he is the Minister of Justice, and one who broke the law of this country.
I must say that I find his statement today singularly unconvincing. There has been criticism of the minister and the government, and I think that criticism is well merited, because justice in this country must be even-handed and impartial. Justice must apply to those in positions of power and prominence as well as to those in more humble walks of life; and the minister has broken the law. I do not say he has defied it; I say he has broken it. If fifteen days is not long enough, then we shall have to amend the act; but the law states that the period is fifteen days. I think most hon. members would go further and agree that the fifteen days should run from that date toward the end of February when the last amendment was made.
What are the chronological facts of the situation? The report was presented last December. I think it should be said in fairness to the minister, though he has not said it himself, that when that report was presented he was lying in bed in Manitoba,
Supply-Justice
a very sick man. Therefore he could not have been expected to know what was in the report. Nevertheless there must have been an acting minister at that time. A few days later, I believe, Mr. McGregor sent in a request for authorization to print the report. That authorization was not granted until some time in April. I believe the report was printed before the last parliament was dissolved; yet members of that parliament never saw it.
I point out that the minister has broken the law. There is a punishment in Canada for those who break the law. I must admit that I am not fully conversant with the law, not being a lawyer, but still I can read certain aspects of it. I maintain that the minister did not comply with the law; and here I speak of the Minister of Justice. In that case section 164 of the Criminal Code must apply, and that section reads:
Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to one year's imprisonment who, without lawful excuse, disobeys any act of the parliament of Canada or of any legislature in Canada by wilfully doing any act which it forbids, or omitting to do any act which it requires to be done, unless some penalty or other mode of punishment is expressly provided by law.
I hope the minister will realize that, to use the familiar cliche of the Minister of Labour, I am speaking in a kindly way, you understand. I do not want to see the Minister of Justice go to jail for Christmas; but if he does have to go to jail I suggest that he invoke section 574 of the Criminal Code and take some of his colleagues with him. That section deals with accessories after the fact, and reads:
Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to seven years' imprisonment-
This is more severe than the other section. -who, in any case where no express provision is made by this act for the punishment of an accessory, is accessory after the fact to any indictable offence for which the punishment is, on a first conviction, imprisonment for life-
Perhaps that is the wrong section. In any case I suggest that the minister's colleagues are liable to be sent down for about seven years for being accessories with him. I wonder if the minister has heard from the attorney general of Ontario, the province in which the offence was committed, as to his position under the law?


Mr. Drew:: There might have been a general disposition to feel that this matter had been adequately dealt with in the earlier discussions had it not been for the extraordinary statement made today by the Minister of Justice. He now seeks to suggest that the criticism which has been directed in this chamber to the procedure followed was improper. He speaks of his reputation, and

Supply-Justice
suggests that people would take it from him. The implication is that those who have clearly stated what were the requirements of the law had some motive other than to place before this house the necessity of obeying fundamental and well-established principles of our parliamentary system and the responsibility of government to parliament. The minister comes in at this late hour, unrepentant, and even taking away any limited measure of regret that he expressed previously. Now he says that Mr. McGregor indicates that it will be necessary to have another report, which Mr. McGregor is completing, mimeographed if there is to be compliance with the law requiring publication within fifteen days; that that requirement is something with which it has not been practicable to comply all along. Did the commissioner say to the Minister of Justice that it takes ten and a half months to do it? Did he say to the Minister of Justice: You should amend the time within which publication takes place and be sure to allow ten months, because that is the time required? Unless that was said, then all this is meaningless. It does not make clear the elaborate and detailed explanation given by the Minister of Justice for the ten months' delay in complying with this requirement.
The fact is that on the basis of what the minister says this morning there could have been compliance with the act. The only requirement is that there be publication. There is not a word about printing. It is simply a matter of providing the material upon which the report can be published. This being so, the suggestion of the necessity for mimeographing imposes no limitation; it demonstrates the extent to which the minister feels it is necessary to go to explain what he did, rather than apologize for what he did. The suggestion conveyed, not in words but by implication, is that there was no substantial ground for the criticism which has been directed to the conduct of the minister and the members of the government who joined in this extraordinary procedure.
In the closing hours of this session, let the Minister of Justice not come to us and say that the delay in this case was the result of any procedural or mimeographing difficulty, when he spent such a long time explaining exactly why he had not published the report. In a nutshell, the story is that he examined the report and discussed it with the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and the Minister of Trade and Commerce was not willing to let it be published. As a result of the objection raised by the Minister of Trade and Commerce, publication did not take place. That is the explanation, and not that fifteen days

was not enough time. Then there were discussions with the officials, and the Minister of Justice explained that on different occasions he brought other senior officials and Mr. McGregor together, so that they could reconcile their points of view, if possible, in regard to this important matter. All that had nothing to do with any difficulty in complying with the requirement that publication shall take place within fifteen days.
If there had not been any great reason for concern before this morning, Mr. Chairman, about the measure of responsibility displayed by the government in regard to obligations of this kind, there is now, having regard to the explanation given this morning by the Minister of Justice. After reviewing in considerable detail each of the stages of the discussion of this report, after telling us of the discussion which took place with the Minister of Trade of Commerce and the different officials, and giving all the reasons why the report had not been published for more than ten months, the minister now comes before us and seeks to leave the impression that the difficulty in publishing this second report, except by the procedure of mimeographing-which is a well-accepted procedure in business and in government-is the explanation, in spite of the lengthy statement already made.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: I am sure my hon. friend does not want to misquote or misrepresent what I said, but I am afraid that, quite unintentionally, he is doing that at the moment. Perhaps I should state my point in order to make it clear. The breach of the act which is alleged is a breach of section 27, subsection 5, of the Combines Investigation Act. It states that any report of the commissioner, or of a special commissioner, other than an interim report or a report of a preliminary inquiry shall, within fifteen days after its receipt by the minister, be made public.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Not published-just made public.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Be made public. If my hon. friends on the opposite side wish to be technical, I can be technical too. I do not raise this point as a point of substance, but the act states it is to be made public, and does not state by whom.
The point I wish to emphasize is this. As to any allegation that the Minister of Justice has broken the law and is open to all the penalties that have been mentioned by the member for Winnipeg North, it relates to non-publication within fifteen days. As to the period of time the leader of the opposition is talking about, as I explained in my longer address upon this subject, that is not a

matter of law but a matter of propriety in respect of which, from the standpoint of the opposition, we may be open to criticism. Then there is the argument that once the section had been broken we should have published the report as soon as possible thereafter. The reasons which we gave for not publishing within that longer period of time, for not acting in a proper manner from a political rather than a legal standpoint, I presume are not concurred in by the members of the opposition. But so far as the breach of the act itself is concerned, I am sure even a layman would agree that the offence, if any, is complete when the fifteen-day period is up. It is complete, and it is at an end.
The matter of the publication of a report which is quite different from the report which was received is another matter, and I take it my hon. friend was not dealing with that.


George Alexander Drew: This matter becomes worse every time the minister makes further remarks about it. I am quite sure the minister has not forgotten that I said, and others have said, that if the minister had explained that he was in Winnipeg, ill, and unable to be here immediately after his appointment, and that after his arrival there was an accumulation of work which made it impossible to comply with the provisions for publication,- I use the word "publication", because that is what it means, to make public-no one in the house would have done otherwise than to say that was a reasonable explanation which we could accept. No one would say that the failure to publish for a few days, or even a few weeks, should be regarded as a serious breach of the law, or a serious breach of the responsibility of the Minister of Justice and the members of the government who concurred in the procedure. But the minister himself has made it clear and beyond all question that his inability to deal with this matter quickly in the month of January had nothing in the world to do with the fact that this report was not made public until a short time ago, for more than ten months after it should have been made public. He has made it perfectly clear why publication did not take place. He has made it clear that publication did not take place because the Minister of Trade and Commerce first of all objected, did not agree with the findings of fact, and because after all these consultations there was general disagreement on the part of the government with the facts as they were found.
The Minister of Justice, making his explanations worse on every occasion, has now said that the act does not say by whom publication is to be made. The minister has explained that he received a copy of the report of the 45781-190
Supply-Justice
commissioner with an explanation as to the date on which publication should take place last January. He has made it plain on his own statement that it was on his initiative that the publication did not take place so far as the commission is concerned.
The act may not say specifically by whom the publication is to be arranged, but it most certainly leaves no doubt that the Minister of Justice has no authority to prevent publication, and that is what took place here. The commissioner appointed under the act was anxious to have publication, and said so, and it was the act of the Minister of Justice- for whom many hon. members have expressed real sympathy, in view of their feeling that he was placed under compelling pressure by another member of the cabinet, and that being a newcomer to office he was not able to resist that pressure at the time-it was the act of the Minister of Justice that prevented it. But that feeling of sympathy for the position of the minister is certainly removed when he says here first of all that the act does not say by whom publication shall be arranged, and suggests-and more than suggests in his remarks today-that the criticism that has been directed to the procedure is merely an attempt to damage his reputation, established over long years.
Even in his last remarks of a moment ago the minister said that this may be wrong from the standpoint of the opposition. May I impress upon every hon. member the effect of his words, that this of course may be wrong from the standpoint of the members of the opposition. By that he suggests, and more than suggests, that the standpoint is not wrong from the point of view of those who support the government. It is the only interpretation that can be put on these words. If that is the interpretation, then it makes the matter increasingly serious. Let no one in this chamber suggest that we are attaching too much seriousness to this procedure. On Thursday of last week a debate took place in the House of Lords in Great Britain, the first stage of the debate having been in the House of Commons, in regard to the conduct of Lord Pakenham, Minister of Civil Aviation in the United Kingdom. The circumstances there were in no way comparable with what has taken place here from the point of view of the seriousness of the course that was followed; nevertheless there is at least this similarity that can be noticed. A year ago last October there was a crash of a Dutch KLM passenger machine at Prestwick airport. As a result of that crash all the crew and passengers died. Under the statutory provisions covering such circumstances the Minister of Civil Aviation, Lord Pakenham, appointed a prominent barrister, Mr. HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Justice
McDonald, to conduct an inquiry into the circumstances. After the taking of extensive evidence, a report was made. Lord Pakenham kept the report for a period of five months. When the report was recently released he disagreed with the findings of fact contained in the report and refused to accept them. Anyone who questions the seriousness of a matter of that kind from the point of view of our parliamentary and administrative procedure should read the record of what took place in the House of Lords a week ago yesterday.
Lord Pakenham made his explanation in the House of Lords. He expressed regret that he had followed the course he did, but reiterated his non-agreement with the commission's findings of fact. In the discussion that followed it was pointed out that he had not heard the evidence; that he had not had the opportunity of exploring the details, and yet without that evidence and without those details he was taking it on himself to challenge the findings of fact made by a highly competent inquirer with the evidence actually before him. We find such great world figures in both constitutional and procedural law as Lord Reading and Lord Simon taking part in the debate.
In the opening discussion of Lord Pakenham's remarks, Lord Swinton dealt with what had occurred, and without covering it in detail I should like to read these words from the London Times of December 2, which gives an extensive report of the proceedings:
It was Inconceivable that the minister should' reject the findings of fact of a highly qualified tribunal unless he could satisfy parliament beyond all doubt that there was no proper evidence to support those findings. It was almost inconceivable that with a highly qualified lawyer sitting with an assessor such a situation would arise. Certainly no such situation arose here.
In the present case Lord Pakenham had, under the advice or direction of high authority, not retracted his previous statement but had retracted the method in which it was made. Most of their lordships would be greatly surprised at the form which Lord Pakenham's statement took today. If a minister could, in practice, cavalierly override the findings of fact of a highly competent quasijudicial tribunal in such a way as to render the whole procedure, in Mr. McDonald's words, "nugatory, if not indecent," no lawyer of repute would in future be willing to undertake the task.
There is a remarkable similarity in the situation here to what is referred to in these remarks.
In case there be any doubt as to what the attitude of these men was in regard to what had happened, Lord Swinton said that he did not think that after what Lord Pakenham had done and said, confidence in the
TMr. Drew.]
administration of that department could be maintained so long as Lord Pakenham continued as minister of that department.
Let no one suggest that when a minister, in regard to an extremely important matter, fails to carry out his obligation to parliament and to the public, there is anything in the nature of personal attack, or anything in the nature of an attempt to destroy a man, when the established practice is pointed out and the suggestion made that the proper course is for that minister no longer to be the head of that department. That, after all, was the view of great constitutional and procedural experts in England last week in connection with a minor breach of the responsibility of a minister to parliament and the public, as compared with the breach we have before us here.
As I said earlier, most hon. members had much sympathy for the position of the Minister of Justice on the basis of his earlier statements; and most hon. members I feel sure regretted greatly that the Minister of Justice should have found himself in a position in which his conduct was open to such severe criticism as it was in this case. When it was indicated that established practice and custom suggested that he should no longer continue as minister in that department, having regard to the explanation he had given, it was with the feeling that he had given an explanation which did indicate why he had failed to carry out his obligation. But that feeling cannot be quite the same after the minister's statement this morning, which he seeks to convey the impression that the failure to carry out the obligation was the result merely of practical difficulties, and that a criticism of this course was an attempt to destroy his reputation.
The Minister of Justice will recall that in the earlier discussion it was pointed out that the amendment he introduced to the Combines Investigation Act, which amendment has now been passed, gives to him a greater measure of responsibility for prosecution by making it possible under the act for the minister, in his capacity as attorney general, to institute proceedings under the Combines Investigation Act or the Criminal Code. It was pointed out that in view of the admitted breach of law by the Minister of Justice, with the consent and agreement of the government, he was placed in an invidious position in regard to the prosecution of other people under the same law or other laws of parliament. Already this morning section 164 of the Criminal Code has been read to the house;
I think it would be well to read it again:
Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to one year's imprisonment who, without

lawful excuse, disobeys any act of the parliament of Canada or of any legislature in Canada by wilfully doing any act which it forbids, or omitting to do any act which it requires to be done, unless some penalty or other mode of punishment is expressly provided by law.
I can find no provision which exempts any minister of the crown from the provisions of that act. Even assuming that many people may not regard this as serious, let them remember that others are compelled to obey these laws.
Section 573 of the Criminal Code provides:
Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to seven years' imprisonment who, in any case not hereinbefore provided for, conspires with any person to commit any indictable offence.
Well, there may be those who feel that it is inappropriate even to suggest that these sections should be read in connection with action of this kind on the part of a member of the government. But there certainly was an omission, and a deliberate omission, to do something called for by the act; and we are left in the position that from the government's point of view the only person who can advise the house whether this applies to the Minister of Justice is the Minister of Justice himself. Has the Minister of Justice considered whether in his capacity as attorney general he should launch a prosecution under either of these sections? The very asking of that question indicates the extraordinary position in which the minister has placed himself.
No matter what measure of seriousness or otherwise may be attached to this act, there was a plan; there was a holding back of the report by definite agreement and for a definite purpose. The Minister of Trade and Commerce did not agree with the findings of the report, and, so far as the explanations given earlier are concerned, it seems that the government collectively did not agree with those findings. So they took it upon themselves to become the tribunal, without having the opportunity to hear evidence; they took it upon themselves to make a decision in regard to a quasi-judicial finding which under the act could become the basis of subsequent procedure, and under circumstances similar to those in which Lord Pakenham made the decision which is under vigorous criticism in Great Britain today.
I am not suggesting that we should necessarily follow any governmental procedure other than that established here. But the practice in the matter of the responsibility of the government to parliament has evolved from traditions brought here from Westminster, and their attitude toward matters of
Supply-Justice
this kind is at least helpful to us in determining what others, under the same procedure, believe to be the duties of a government and the duties of ministers of the crown responsible for the fulfilment of obligations under any statutory provision.
One of the greatest authorities on constitutional law, Dicey, says this in the ninth edition of "The Law of the Constitution," at page 193:
With us every official, from the Prime Minister down to a constable or collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without legal justification as any other citizen.
I do not think the position could be more clearly stated. The law was broken not because of pressure of time; the law was broken by a decision of the government concurred in by the Minister of Justice. No matter what the appropriate action would be on the part of any other member of the government, the fact is that the Minister of Justice is the minister charged with the legal affairs of this administration. In his capacity as attorney general he is responsible for the prosecution of individuals and corporations under the law as passed by parliament.
I can only conclude by expressing my regret that what was already bad was made infinitely worse by the spurious explanation given this morning by the Minister of Justice for what took place. The Minister of Justice, having taken the responsibility for breaking the law, and breaking it deliberately for over ten months, is not in a position to launch prosecutions under laws passed by this parliament without a feeling of injustice on the part of those who are prosecuted by him as Minister of Justice or as attorney general.
As has been said here before and on other occasions in this parliament, it is not open to hon. members to forget what minister it is who will be carrying out these responsibilities. I repeat that we are not dealing with this matter upon a personal basis in relation to any individual; we are dealing with the responsibility of parliament, and the fact that the government is responsible to parliament, and that if it fails in that responsibility it must take appropriate action to restore its position, otherwise the constitutional responsibility of the government to parliament will be impaired by the precedent so established.
As was said in the House of Lords last week in a much less serious case, no matter what our regard may be for the minister as an individual, no matter what our personal attitude may be as to the ultimate
2988

Supply-Justice
consequence of what has been done, the failure of the minister to observe the law as passed by the parliament of Canada disentitles him to continue in this office, no matter what other office he may get; and confidence in the administration of this act and other acts cannot be restored while he is the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
That is the situation with which we are confronted. The explanation given this morning only adds to the concern that everyone has as to what else may have been done by those who still hold this point of view in regard to the responsibility of government to parliament. What has been done cannot be changed, but it is our duty to maintain public confidence in our system of government. It is the duty of parliament to assert its authority and to demand that the government respect its responsibility to parliament as a whole. Therefore the course that has been indicated is the course that should be followed in the interests of the preservation of our system of responsible government and the restoration of confidence in the minds of the public that, to use the words of Dicey, every official, from the Prime Minister down to the constable or collector of taxes, shall be under the same responsibility as any other citizen for every act done without legal justification.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Chairman, I shall not take more than two or three minutes to answer the long speech of the leader of the opposition, delivered in the solemn tones he has used, with his reference to great principles and so forth. With all that no one disagrees; but with the facts as they exist I think no one can disagree, not even the leader of opposition and the other members of the opposition.
The leader of the opposition closed his remarks by saying that what has been done cannot be changed. That is the kernel of this whole debate. What has been done cannot be changed, and what has been done was done inadvertently by pressure of time. The law requires that a certain thing be done within fifteen days. The report was not published within fifteen days because neither the minister nor any member of the government had been apprised of it. After the fifteen days had elapsed, what had not been done could not be changed.
The law does not say that if there is inability to comply with the requirements during that period, it shall be done as soon as possible afterwards. The law says that it shall be done within fifteen days and it was not done within fifteen days. That is

the situation in fact. The leader of the opposition says that there was no lawful justification or excuse or anything else; but there was the factual justification and excuse in that the commissioner under the Combines Investigation Act says that it is now, in a different case, an impossibility to make publication in the way that has always been regarded as proper compliance with the statute. That is what had taken place before anyone's attention was called to the matter at all.
As the Minister of Justice said this morning, afterwards there was no possibility of complying with the express terms of the law, but there was the matter of propriety to be considered. Hon. members may form their own opinions whether the reasons given to justify the propriety of the delay after the fifteen days had gone by were or were not good reasons. That is something which has nothing to do with compliance with the statute. The statute had not been complied with, and could no longer be complied with. There remained the question of propriety as to what was the right thing to do afterwards.
Explanations have been given for the delay that occurred in choosing and fixing a time when publicity would be given to this report. The report contained suggestions that a line of conduct should be adopted which the government felt it was not proper to adopt under the circumstances, because we knew what had been the reasons for the conduct of those who are named as having been guilty of practices prohibited by the Combines Investigation Act.
That is the whole situation. The failure to make a report public is not a continuing offence as the leader of the opposition suggests. You cannot continue the offence. If a thing has to be done within a certain time, it has to be done within that time or it is not done within that time. After the time has expired there is no further possibility of going back behind its expiry and performing the act required. What has been done cannot toe changed; and it was not done, as the leader of the opposition suggested, by deliberate omission or by a plan for holding back the report. The question of publication did not arise at all before the fifteen days had expired.
The leader of the opposition said the law was broken not by pressure of time but by deliberate decision. That is entirely contrary to the fact. It was broken by pressure of time, and there was no deliberate decision not to publish within fifteen days, because the question had not arisen. Afterwards the law was not operative, because it could not be complied with, and it was a question, as

the Minister of Justice has said, of what it was proper to do after compliance with the statute had become impossible. The minister has explained why what he did then was considered by him and by his colleagues to be proper under the circumstances.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I am at a loss to know which is the more amazi'ng, the statement made this morning by the Minister of Justice or the statement just made by the Prime Minister. It seems to me that the longer this is carried on the worse it gets. I am surprised that the Minister of Justice reopened the question this morning at all. I shall try to deal briefly with some of the very simple facts about this case in relation to what has been said this morning. The Minister of Justice made a great play on the use of the words "publication" and "publish". Section 27 (5) of the act says nothing about publishing. It simply requires the report to be made public.
A few days ago I referred to the fact that the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act requires the Minister of Finance to lay on the table of the house on October 31, if parliament is then in session, the public accounts and the report of the Auditor General. On October 31 of this year the Minister of Finance had not secured the printed copy of the public accounts and the report of the Auditor General. Did he use that as an excuse for not complying with that section of the law? No; he tabled a typewritten copy. He obeyed the law and made it public. Many items in the Auditor General's report were in turn made public to the country by the press, which had access to it when it was laid on the table of the house. There were plenty of ways in which the Minister of Justice could have complied with the law by making the McGregor report public when he received it. All he had to do was to call in the press, lay one copy before them, and say, "Here it is." The press would have done the rest.
The Minister of Justice made a great deal out of the mechanical delay occasioned by the difficulty of having the report printed. I remind him, as the leader of the opposition has already reminded him, that in his earlier defence he said nothing at all about mechanical delay. In the earlier defence he, the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Prime Minister all said that deliberate decisions were taken to delay publication of the report. If there is any argument about that I have the references, and1-
Supply-Justice


Stuart Sinclair Garson: If my hon. friend will permit me to interject-I know he wishes to be fair: these decisions were all made after the statutory period had elapsed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I will come to that.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: That is very important.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Oh, yes; I have it in mind and I will come to it. I am not a lawyer, but I have learned a bit about law this week.
The point I wish to make is that in the previous defence that was made for the action of the government it was said by the three ministers I have named that deliberate decisions were taken to delay and to continue to delay. Granted for the moment that the decision was made after the fifteen days had elapsed, never before was it said to us that it was because they could not get the report printed. I will come to the point raised by the minister in a moment, but I submit the delay was not due to mechanical difficulties; rather it was deliberate.
The minister also sought this morning to rely on the absence of certain words in the section, an argument which I confess was startling to me. He said that section 27 (5) of the act says that the report shall be published within fifteen days after it is submitted to the minister, but the section does not say by whom. The section makes it perfectly clear it is the minister to whom the report is transmitted. The section also makes it clear that, if under certain circumstances the commissioner were to tell the minister that he did not feel it should be published, the minister still has the authority to override that recommendation and make the report public. In other words, the plain ordinary meaning of the language, which reasonable and ordinary people would take from it, is quite clear, namely, that it is the minister who must make the report public.
The minister threw out a question. Let me throw one to him. Who, does he think, is supposed to publish the report according to the section? Does he think it was Mr. McGregor? What would have happened if Mr. McGregor, when the report was not published by the minister within fifteen days, had taken it upon himself to publish it? That would have been the end of Mr. McGregor. The minister would have said: That is my responsibility.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: My hon. friend is really not being very fair in his comments upon what I said. What I said was that if my hon. friends of the opposition wished to be as technical as they are in all the arguments they advance, here was a matter upon which they could be technical. My hon. friend is

Supply-Justice
being technical about it now. I did not suggest for a moment that it was a substantial argument to which I was subscribing; I was suggesting that it was something to which my hon. friends might apply their technical minds.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister says it was not an argument on which he was relying, but he certainly threw it out, and the inference was that he had something there.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: For you to be technical about.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is very interesting that whenever we try to get down to the simple language of what the law clearly says-


An hon. Member:: Very simple.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is right; it is very simple. Tell that to the minister. When we try to do that we are accused of being technical. The law clearly says the report shall be made public within fifteen days. That has been the whole argument all the way through, and sections 164 and 573 of the Criminal Code, which have been read this morning are equally simple, clear and direct.
When the Prime Minister got into this a little while ago he developed the argument made by the Minister of Justice that the deliberate decisions made by the cabinet were made after the fifteen days had expired. There is no argument that deliberate decisions were not made. The Minister of Justice, the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Prime Minister have all given evidence of that fact.
May I draw the attention of the Minister of Justice to the fact that when I asked him on what authority the government relied when it made its decision to violate the law, he said it relied upon the fact that any democratic government is answerable to the people of the country for its acts. All right. If the government continued to make the decision to keep the report secret after the fifteen days had elapsed on the authority that it had because of its responsibility to the people, how does -the government explain that it kept it secret until after the 27th of June? How does the government explain that it proposed to submit this matter to the people, not when it was an issue but in 1953 or 1954, whenever the -next election takes place? It seems to me that is one of the most iniquitous features of this whole matter. We had a session of parliament last spring; we were here from January until the end of April. For all I know the report may have been printed during that period of time, as some of my friends say it was. We were here, but it was kept secret from us. Then the government went to the country. The Prime Minister has

said that the Liberals had all the trump cards, but this card was kept secret from the people as a whole.
I cannot understand -the law which the Prime Minister enunciated here this morning when he said there was nothing in the act which sets out what the government must do if they have broken the fifteen-days provision. In other words the inference is that if they have broken it by one day it does not matter if they continue to break it by ten months or ten years. Surely the plain meaning of the law cannot be stretched in that way. This morning the Prime Minister objected to the solemn tones of the leader of the opposition and to his references to great principles. I do not think it becomes the Prime Minister to use that kind of language. What we are trying to do is to defend some things that are simple, basic, sacred, and fundamental to our democracy

that is, the maintenance of the law, and the rule of law, which all must obey.
It was also said this morning by -the leader of the opposition and taken up by the Prime Minister that what is done is done and cannot be changed. That was what the leader of the opposition said; and the Prime Minister replied: Well, that's it; it has been done and cannot be changed, so what are you talking about? As I understand the whole rule of law, when people have done things that cannot be changed we may admit they cannot be changed, but there is such a thing as punishment; there is judgment which is meted out to people because they have broken the law. It is not pleasant for us to suggest that, as the other Stuart lost his head, this one should do so as well; or to suggest that he should spend a year in jail; or that the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Prime Minister, who conspired with him in this matter, .should spend seven years in jail, as set out in the Criminal Code. It is not pleasant for us to suggest that the minister should resign. But when the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister continually come before us and insist that they had the right to break the law, which is what they have done again this morning, we have no alternative but to take that position.
I regret that the Minister of Justice put this matter on a personal basis. He knows, as some of us on this side have said, that we do not treat it in that way. We are thinking of him in terms of the office he holds. But he has chosen to do it that way, and throughout the piece has not made one iota of apology or given one indication of being prepared to throw himself on the mercy of the house. No; they reopen the matter even after it has been

closed. I may say I had my file in this connection here on my desk, and even I was not sure that I could summon enough nerve to bring up the matter again when we reached the item dealing with the Combines Investigation Act, in view of the general opinion that this session should end. But the minister has done it for us, and done it in what spirit? He has done it in the determination to show that though he has clearly broken the law, he simply says: That is nothing; it is just an obsession with the members of the opposition.
Well, Mr. Chairman, the issue is really crystal clear. Even yet I believe the Minister of Justice and the government should change their whole attitude and express to the house and the country some real measure of apology. If they do not, we have no alternative but to continue to refer to what happened to that other Stuart; to continue to refer to instances in British parliamentary practice of ministers who have resigned because of acts like this, and to continue to refer to sections 164 and 573 of the Criminal Code, which provide one year's imprisonment in the one case and seven years' imprisonment in the other for those who do this sort of thing. The country expects some one of these courses to be followed.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I shall not detain the committee long, Mr. Chairman, but it seems to me that what has happened this morning is easily the most extraordinary thing that has happened during the course of this whole discussion. As the last hon. member to speak has said, it is probable that if the minister had not taken the most unusual course he adopted this morning of introducing this subject on a point of privilege, this matter might have rested where it was, at any rate for a time. But what has the minister done? First of all he has made what I might call, though I do not want to use the word in an offensive way, a sentimental appeal, which I am sure affected all of us, just as the last speaker said. But what did he do after that? Certainly there was no sign of a guilty conscience, but if there had been any sign of repentance it seems to me there still would have been a disposition on the part of those on this side of the house who have been critical to go as far as they could with the minister.
But what did we get then? We got a hairsplitting, logic-chopping defence. I am not going into the details, but it was the kind of defence a lawyer would bring up in a criminal case if he had no defence on the merits. He would get down to some technical, narrow and, as I said, hair-splitting issue; and if ever there was hair-splitting it was in the two suggestions made by the minister. The first
Supply-Justice
was that once you got to the sixteenth day it did not matter any longer. Here I turn to the Prime Minister's words, that once you passed the fifteen-day period the law was not operative. Apparently he took that idea from the Minister of Justice, though the Prime Minister is perfectly competent to reach his own conclusions. That was an extraordinary thing for the Minister of Justice to say to us-in effect, that once you got to the sixteenth day it really did not matter what happened after that. Then, as I say, we had nothing but what I would call a narrow, police-court, technical defence, there being no defence on the merits.
Then we come to the extraordinary speech by the Prime Minister, which to me is far worse than what was said by the Minister of Justice. In fact to me it is by far the worst thing that has occurred in this debate, partly because it came from the Prime Minister and partly because it came from a great lawyer. He began by saying that this had been done "inadvertently". As I understand it, that means without quite knowing what you were doing, when you were off guard, or when you were not looking. That was not the case here. One afternoon the Minister of Justice spent at least two and a half hours explaining to us in great detail how it was anything but inadvertent. He gave us a great many reasons, as a matter of fact, why it was justified, explaining to us how it had been carefully considered. After all that we have the Prime Minister come along saying it was "inadvertent" and pooh-poohing the seriousness of it, as was mentioned by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre.
Then we had perhaps the most extraordinary remark of all by the Prime Minister -that after the fifteen days the law was not operative. In other words, as I said a moment ago, once you got to the sixteenth day it did not matter what you did in the intervening months-incidentally during the time parliament was sitting, and during the time of an election campaign. According to the Prime Minister, during all that period they were perfectly free to do what they liked, because on the sixteenth day they had broken the law and therefore nothing worse could happen. It has been suggested to me that this is exactly as though a man who was carrying a pistol in his hand said, "Well, I am breaking the law anyway; therefore it doesn't matter much what I do with this pistol."
I have just one thing to add. When I spoke before on this matter I said we were still in the position of having had no apology and no promise for the future. It seems to me this morning that was doubly and triply underlined and doubled and triply worsened by the fact that the Minister of Justice came

Supply-Justice
here and raised the question again, giving this entirely new reason, this entirely new line of argument, more or less as an afterthought. Worst of all we have the Prime Minister coming in, again with no apologies and no promise for the future, pooh-poohing the whole thing and saying this is just a funny idea we on this side have dreamed up. I cannot help but believe that the minister, with his legal experience, must have listened to those sections of the code with some interest. I only knew of them myself yesterday. Certainly they seem to tell a very simple story.
Again I say, as I said before, that I hope and believe the government has not heard the end of this yet from the people of the country. I believe what has happened this morning will make the people of the country wonder what sort of custodians of the law they have in the Minister of Justice, and in the Prime Minister who aids and abets the Minister of Justice in the most extraordinary line of conduct he has followed this morning.


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: I do not wish to interrupt this interesting debate, but yesterday I undertook to say that we would try to pass item 122, remission service. My colleague the Solicitor General, who administers this item, has an engagement and is forced to leave Ottawa this afternoon. With unanimous consent I should like to have item 122 called and try to have it disposed of before one o'clock, if that is possible.


George Alexander Drew: What will the procedure be with regard to the discussion that is now taking place?


Alphonse Fournier: I gave an undertaking that we' would consider the Department of Justice estimates this morning for some time, and then would revert to the Department of National Health and Welfare at three o'clock.


George Alexander Drew: I am not prepared to make any concessions. We came here this morning to discuss the estimates of the Minister of Justice, and, as a matter of privilege, he chose to make a further explanation of the unexplainable. He has raised the question, and has been supported in that by the Prime Minister. This is a most serious situation, and deserves continued debate. A remark was made which implied that, because something had happened, nothing could be done. I want to leave no suggestion that I think nothing should be done. I thought I had made a clear suggestion as to the first step, and that is that under our constitutional procedure the minister should resign, in order to restore confidence in his department. Unless the interruption is only for the purpose

of passing an item, and then returning to this debate, I regret very much that I cannot consent to any other procedure.


Alphonse Fournier: I did not think the leader of the opposition would take that position. Last night I announced, and I mentioned it twice, that we would take up for some time this morning the estimates of the Department of Justice for the purpose of passing item 122, remission service, in order to accommodate my colleague, the Solicitor General. Then I announced we would take up national health and welfare. I do not want to lecture the leader of the opposition, but under the rules, the business of the house is decided by the government. At three o'clock this afternoon we will take up national health and welfare.


Mr. Fleming:: I rise to continue this discussion, sir. What a spectacle we have witnessed in this House of Commons this morning! This is the most astounding chapter in what has been undoubtedly one of the darkest incidents, if not the darkest, in Canadian parliamentary history.
The Minister of Justice must have been lying awake at night thinking about this subject, because this morning he came here having thought up one bright new idea. He put forward the trivial excuse that he could not do otherwise than break the law, after spending hours in this house in recent weeks trying to justify what he did. Now he has dreamed up this latest excuse, and he says: Oh, I could not have done otherwise than break the law, because I could not get the report printed in time.
The minister began with what may fairly be termed a maudlin appeal to sympathy. It is completely irrelevant. Then he grasped at straws. He said: We could not have the report published, because we could not print it. That is not an answer -that would appeal to the intelligence of a public school child. The statute says it is his duty to make it public, and a delay in printing is no excuse for a failure to comply with that -provision. What we have witnessed here, sir, in this last and most trivial of all his excuses, this grasping at straws on the part of the Minister of Justice, has been an incredibly inept and desperate attempt to palliate, in a belated and blundering brainstorm, a deliberate, calculated and callous breach of the law.
Whether his breach of the law was due to inexperience in obeying -the law, or to weakness and impotence in the face of the behests of a blustering dictator in the cabinet, or a reprehensible attempt to cozen the votes of unsuspecting Canadians at the polls on

June 27, the fact remains that the Minister of Justice, who should be the chief law enforcement officer of Canada, has become Canada's No. 1 lawbreaker.
The Prime Minister, sir, in the amazing statement which fell from his lips this morning, tore to shreds that fundamental principle of our democratic and parliamentary institutions, that all men, regardless of rank and quality, are equal before and under the law. No man, whether or not he is a minister of the crown, has any right to override the law. It binds him just as much as it binds the humblest citizen in any walk of life. The Prime Minister, along with the Minister of Justice, has torn that fundamental rule to shreds. Those who sit with him on the treasury benches, participating as they did with the Minister of Justice in this deliberate breach of the law, are equally guilty.
Then, sir, what is the responsibility of every member in this house? I ask hon. members opposite, who will return to their constituencies shortly: are they going to go home and say that they have been parties to upholding this government in its wilful, flagrant breach of the law?


An hon. Member:: Yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is a tremendous responsibility for any Canadian to bear, most of all a Canadian who has been elected to parliament, and who has taken his oath to uphold the laws of this country.
Item stands.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE 252. Departmental administration, $794,605.


Mr. Blair:: When the house rose last night the minister had made a statement on the new products which were introduced in this country. I am glad the minister made that statement, because among other things he pointed out that while these products had been discovered, yet they were not available to the public at the present time. It remains for another discovery to be made. In ways other than the way the minister cited this product will have to be produced in a synthetic form. I appreciate the fact that in his speech the minister pointed out that these products are not available to the public. We would not like to delude the public into thinking that these things are available and could be used in the form of treatment.
The statement made by the minister deserves a great deal of consideration, because
Supply-National Health and Welfare this is one of the most important discoveries made for years. In fact it may revolutionize the whole system of treatment in medicine. In making this statement I should like to pay tribute to Dr. Collip and to Dr. Browne of McGill university and Dr. Selye, those Canadians who have done so much research and have played their part in making this product available to the public.
We should view with pride the fact that Canadians have been in the forefront in scientific research and investigation, and especially in the investigation of this product that will bring so much relief to suffering humanity. Therefore I wish to pay tribute to a man like Dr. Collip, for instance, who has done so much work in endocrinology, and to the other doctors who were associated with him, especially those Canadians who have made this product possible, and to the other workers. It is a sample of co-operation between research workers both in Canada and in the United States.
As the minister pointed out, we should be very careful to indicate to the public that while these products have reached the first stage in research, before they can become available to the public further work must be done, and that work is making them available to the public in a synthetic form.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Chairman, I have nothing to add to the words which the hon. member for Lanark has so well spoken concerning the statement made last night by the minister, except to say that every Canadian must view with a thrill of pride the noble part played by Canadians in the research work which has led to discovery and development of these two new drugs, cortisone and ACTH.
Sir, my remarks on this first item are going to be intentionally brief. We are dealing here with the estimates of a department which this year call for an expenditure of $397 million, in round figures, representing an increase of more than $21 million over the estimates voted for the same department last year. On the health side the total estimates amount to something over $47 million, an increase of more than $5 million over last year's estimates. On the welfare side the estimates amount to $350 million in round figures, an increase of over $16 million, compared with the total of $334 million appropriated on the welfare side of the department last year. In case there are any who look upon these proposed expenditures on health as large, I should like to say briefly, sir, that there is abundance of irrefutable evidence that ill health is one of the greatest causes of national economic loss. Dr. J. G. Cunningham, Ontario provincial director of industrial hygiene, recently estimated that
2994	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-National Health and Welfare
Canadian industry loses $100 million a year by sick absenteeism. He also pointed out that in Ontario alone a cut of one-third in time loss through sickness and accidents would save industry in that province alone $35 million a year, and that Canadian doctors are accordingly campaigning for wider industrial medical services. He added: Besides the dollar saving, they know industry will come to be the biggest field in preventive health work.
Can we assume, sir, complacently that the nation's health is sound? Those who so assume must have been rather rudely jarred by a statement made by Mr. J. H. Ross of Calgary, acting chairman of the National Council of Physical Fitness, in Ottawa on September 22, when he is reported to have said that there is a likelihood that Canadians are not as physically fit now as they were on V-E day. That is a striking statement from a man who is the acting chairman of the National Council of Physical Fitness. Therefore I say, sir, in the face of indisputable evidence as to the very serious loss that ill-health creates each year, no one will begrudge sound expenditures on the national health. All will wish, however, to see the utmost benefit from the taxpayer's dollar so spent.
But, sir, I do not think this committee can be satisfied with the progress that is being made in the field of health under the present administration. Had these estimates come up at an earlier stage of the session, I should have welcomed the opportunity to develop this theme more fully. But on this matter of delay in proceeding with a program of national health insurance I must perforce be brief. I recall, sir, what the Liberal party itself said in its promising mood, that mood in which it can be quite clear in its statements. When in such a mood it wrote into its platform at its convention in this city in 1948 these words:
The program-
That is to say, its national program of social security-
-will include-
And note the words that follow-
-health insurance covering medical, dental, surgical and hospital health services on a contributory basis.
I say, sir, these words are clear. There could not be anything clearer than that statement. In its promising moods that party is clear; but what about its moods of performance? Well, sir, there is anything but clarity in what we find by way of performance. On a number of occasions this house has tried to smoke out the present minister and the government on the subject of performing its promises to give this nation a national contributory system of health insurance, which 
will provide those benefits that were promised in the passage that I have just quoted from the national Liberal platform. We do not find a clear statement coming from the minister on the subject; we do not find performance, but lacking that on the ministerial level we do find something more encouraging on the official level.
I have before me a press dispatch of September 14, reporting a statement made by Dr. F. W. Jackson, director of insurance studies in this department, in his address to the Ontario Medical Association, District No. 5, at Streetsville that night. The press dispatch attributes to Dr. Jackson this statement:
A complete health service, including hospital and medical care insurance operated and organized by the provinces for the Canadian people, was predicted by Dr. F. W. Jackson.
Dr. Jackson said the evident demand for health insurance by the public and the acceptance of this fact by the major political parties would bring such a scheme into being.
"Our objective must be to see that everything medical science has to offer for promotion of health, prevention of diseases and cures of illnesses will be available to every citizen of Canada, no matter where he lives or what his economic status may be," said Dr. Jackson.
Now, sir, it is perfectly clear from statements which have emanated from responsible medical sources that the medical profession of this country is studying health insurance. At the same time that profession has set its face, as I hope we all have, against anything savouring of state medicine. For instance, one reads this report on the convention of the Canadian Medical Association at its meeting in Saskatoon on June 18:
The 13,000 doctors in Canada today are probably more concerned about health insurance than they are with any other facet of their profession.
Health insurance-how it is and how it might be operated in Canada and the forms it takes in other parts of the British commonwealth-overshadowed any other feature of the five-day Canadian Medical Association convention, which wound up here yesterday. Technological advances, usually the centre of interest, took second place . . .
The General Council held lengthy closed conferences on the subject and issued a report giving the association's official stand. It said the C.M.A. proposed to adopt "all means within its power to further the development and extension of prepaid medical care plans in Canada." But a national compulsory program of health insurance was described by Dr. Magner in an address as abhorrent to the medical profession.
On this same subject Dr. W. E. Gallie, former dean of medicine at the university of Toronto-


Mr. Martin:: Would it not be better to discuss this subject under item 267?


Donald Methuen Fleming: As there has already been a discussion of the subject of a national health insurance plan in which at least two other hon. members have taken part, I think it

Supply-National Health and Welfare
would perhaps contribute to saving time if I were to make my remarks now. I do not propose to discuss it at great length.
Dr. Gallie, in a statement at convocation of the university of Toronto on June 18, said:
State medicine must be resisted by every means within our power ... It medicine had been socialized thirty years ago, as it is now in Great Britain and New Zealand, Fred Banting and1 Charles Best never would have entered the medical profession. And diabetics would still be dying . . . State medicine would change our glorious profession into a political-ridden, form-writing department of the civil service.
I do not think I need develop this subject further, except to quote one more statement. This is the statement of Dr. A. D. Kelly, of Toronto, before the annual Canadian Public Health Association convention at Halifax on June 28:
We believe that the highest standards of medical practice are promoted by permitting patients freely to choose their medical advisers and the present opinion is that remuneration of doctors by fee-for-services also contributes to this end.
Sir, the Minister of National Health and Welfare has been asked repeatedly for a clear statement as to what the government are going to do, and do now, to fulfil their promise that they would introduce a national contributory health insurance plan. We do not want any more of those generalities, those evasions, which we have been given in the past. We want a clear statement, and we want an assurance of action.
I wish to make good my promise to be brief in these remarks on the first item. May I offer one or two suggestions to the minister as to how we might proceed more expeditiously, and, I suggest, more efficiently, in the discussion of the estimates. We have had considerable discussion on several occasions recently concerning reports and the giving of information. I think it is a deplorable fact that we must spend time in the committee of supply on these estimates trying to draw out information that ought to be available to hon. members long before they reach this stage of debate or this final stage of the session. If we are to do our duty in respect of these estimates it will be necessary to ask for certain information, but I want to place the responsibility for our having to ask for that information at this stage and in this committee squarely upon the shoulders of the minister, because the report of his department for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1949, has not been made available to hon. members. The last report from that department is the one for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1948, twenty months ago. The last fiscal year ended eight months ago. How much time is required to get out and to circulate these annual reports?
Section 11 of the Department of National Health and Welfare Act, chapter 22 of the statutes for 1944-45, states:
The minister shall submit annually a report to parliament in such form as may be prescribed by the governor in council.
That is to be done annually. Apparently the minister's idea is that he will submit the report to the next session of parliament, at which time it will be stale. I put the responsibility squarely upon the minister for failing to make available to members of parliament the report of his department for the fiscal year which closed eight months ago. We do not want any more excuses about the difficulty of having the printing done. Surely eight months is ample time to print all the reports of government departments. If it becomes impossible for the government, working at its lethargic pace, to have these reports printed, then certainly their minimum duty is to provide reports in another form which would not take as much time. There is a great deal of information an annual report contains which should be available to all members. Because of the default of the government in carrying out a plain duty, that report is not available.
The other suggestion, looking to the saving of time at this stage of the session and in this committee of supply, has reference to reports of expenditures over the year. For the last six sessions I have raised this question with the present minister, pointing out to him that before the estimates of his department pass we wish to know item by item, and in the aggregate, the expenditure of the department in the last year. We are given in the volume of estimates the appropriations for the year. This is a young department, and one can understand its difficulty in coming close in its estimates. We hope the department has now developed to the point where the estimates will be much closer and more accurate than they have been in times past.
To save time, I am asking the minister if he will give this committee of supply, before we leave the first item, the actual expenditures in the last fiscal year, item by item, so that it will not be necessary for us to rise on every item and ask the minister what the expenditures on that item have been in the last fiscal year.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Chairman, like the hon. member who has just taken his seat, I intend to be brief. I, too, join with other hon. members in saying how pleased I was last evening to hear the minister's statement that some important discoveries had been made for the relief of arthritis, one of the great scourges in our country. I am hoping that

Supply-National Health and Welfare that discovery will fan out to other incurable diseases of a similar nature which have caused untold misery and suffering among so many of our people for long periods of time.
This is a very important department. Like the hon. member for Eglinton, I too hope that during the lifetime of this parliament we may have a comprehensive plan of health benefits placed before the house for its consideration. Unlike the hon. member, I do not believe that we should fight shy of consideration of a completely socialized medical and health plan. I noticed his reference to Great Britain and New Zealand. Well, we shall know more of the working out of those plans in the course of the next few years. Although I did not bring it with me, I remember reading a statement made to a meeting of the medical profession in my own province by a well-known British doctor that was far from critical of all details of the plan in effect in Great Britain. I have followed closely the reaction of medical men and of the people generally in Great Britain. One point we should consider is that no matter what government may be in power in Great Britain after the next election, the popularity of the health plan inaugurated by the Labour government will be continued. The opposition party is pledged to expand rather than contract it. I have placed before the house on previous occasions evidence to show that doctors who were opposed to it when it was established are now speaking favourably of the plan.
I do not want to read any of these opinions at this stage of the session, because I do not think they would be of material interest in connection with the problem we are now discussing. What I really rose to say was this. We may talk about health plans all we wish; we may talk about advances in medical science; we may talk about the benefits conferred by a national health plan of medical aid and hospitalization, but after all, we must build up the health of the people right from the ground. In other words, we have to start by seeing that the children of this country are healthy and well fed. I have very high regard for the minister's interest in these particular matters. Interested as his department is in nutrition, I think the minister should place every pressure upon his colleagues in the cabinet and upon the various departments of government concerned so that there will be work for those who need work, help for those who cannot work; so that families will not be faced with undernourishment, which creates the greatest and most permanent difficulty in the field of health.
I have in my hand a clipping which I took from the Ottawa Citizen of the night before last. It is dated from Halifax, Nova Scotia, and reads:
Increasing numbers of undernourished children attending Halifax schools is causing city health and welfare officials serious concern, a civic official said yesterday.
Doctor R. G. Rice, director of child health for city schools, told the public health and welfare committee the situation was a result of poor economic conditions in many Halifax homes. The high price of milk had caused it to disappear from many tables in the city.
Breakfast was the poorest meal of the day for many children, he added. ''A surprising number of children come to school with no breakfast at all; others have only tea and toast."
Yesterday we were discussing the international children's relief fund. I warmly supported our contribution to that fund, but I said that while I believed in relieving distress among people beyond our borders, I thought that charity should begin at home and that we should see that something was done for the undernourished children of this country. The statistics show that because of the high cost of living, which has been made greater by increased rents, thousands of children are undernourished.
I do hope that a national health plan will not be delayed on the excuse that we have not sufficient hospitals, that we have not sufficient hospital beds, that we have not sufficient doctors or sufficient nurses. If we wait for all these we shall not put into effect the kind of national health plan that we need. I do not think we should wait until we have hospital accommodation and facilities. Indeed I think public opinion will support the building of hospitals and medical institutions and other facilities as they become more aware of the fact that they are needed. Once we begin to root out the people who need treatment in these institutions, public opinion will become aware of the necessity of providing greater appropriations for the hospital and medical facilities that we need.
I ask the minister not to delay this. Let us go forward. Let this parliament and this government fulfil the promise made in the Liberal manifesto which the hon. member for Eglinton read, so that we may have a national health plan. I should like to see that national health plan a part of a general social security plan. I am not sold on the piecemeal idea of saying: Let us have national health insurance on a contributory basis, or: Let us have old age pensions on a contributory basis. What we need is a comprehensive social security plan on a contributory basis providing for unemployment relief, family allowances, old age pensions, health and the other social security measures that we need.

The world is moving fast in that direction. I am not afraid to advocate what is sometimes called the welfare state. I know that that term has been used as a term of ridicule by the opponents of measures of this kind, but if we go back into the history of free peoples for the last fifty or one hundred years we find that as people became more secure in their jobs, with old age pensions at the end, with better health and all the rest of it, the efficiency of the individual and of industry has increased, apart altogether from the improvement in the field of health and the greater happiness of mankind. This is the main thing for governments to consider.
I know it is sometimes said that these social security measures would give the people a great deal of leisure, that they would not have to think so much of the future and it would therefore undermine initiative, and all the rest of it. Looking back over history I see that those within the British commonwealth, many men and women, who contributed to our culture, many of the great poets, the great writers, the great painters, the great thinkers and the great political leaders, were not faced with economic insecurity. Very largely they were people who were economically secure, both in their productive years and at the end of their lives. Consequently I think that this is one problem this parliament must face; it is one obligation that must be assumed, to see to it that we have a national security plan, and as part of that plan I would give priority at the present time to an all-inclusive national health plan.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Chairman, I feel that in the field of health the federal government is doing all that can be done within the terms of the constitution. While health grants are made by the federal government to the provinces, many of the provinces have not the funds with which to take advantage of them, because they are contingent upon the provinces being in position to put up dollar for dollar with the federal government. I am glad the government has seen fit to take steps to amend our constitution because I have been of the opinion for a long time that those in authority provincially, and who have had the responsibility for social security measures without having the funds to provide them, were very shortsighted in wanting to maintain their jurisdiction to take care of the poor, the maimed and the afflicted, without being in a position to do very much about it. In the time that the health program mapped out by the federal government has been in operation, it has done very little to take care of the people actually affected.
Supply-National Health and Welfare
So far most of the grants have been utilized in the expansion of hospital bed space. So far as my own province is concerned, and I think it is true of the whole of Canada, there is not much use building hospitals, training nurses and providing specialists if the people who are afflicted are unable to pay for these services. There is not much use improving, as they did, the Halifax general hospital and at the same time fixing the rates at $6 to $12 a day thereby making it impossible for ninety per cent of the people of that province to get into the hospital. That is something that will have to be corrected. I am reliably informed that some of the provinces have suggested to the minister that the federal government is placing them on the spot by offering certain amounts of money to be matched by the provinces for the purpose of expanding this program. That is positive proof we are not going to make the progress in national health we desire to make until such time as constitutional arrangements are made which will enable the federal government to put into operation the measures for which appropriations are made.
Last night I listened with a great deal of attention to the statement of the minister as to the development of new drugs, and I also read very carefully his statement in the press. I believe that the minister, as a layman in the field of medicine, feels that great progress is going to be made, particularly in the treatment of arthritis. In the section of the country from which I come, anyone who has worked for any length of time in heavy industry, particularly in the mines, is afflicted with some form of arthritis, rheumatism or allied diseases. Changing temperatures, heavy work and injuries from time to time bring that about. I know that the mining section of the north is affected in the same way.
I am sceptical whether the development of new drugs under the present plan will bring much relief to those who suffer from that affliction. In the great majority of cases those who suffer are unable to pay for specialized treatment. Drugs of that description are going to be expensive, and if they are going to be handed over to the drug manufacturers of North America, one of the biggest combines on the continent, after their development by the expenditure of public funds for research, very little of these drugs is going to trickle through to those who cannot afford them. The same thing applies to streptomycin and penicillin. They are expensive drugs, and in the great majority of cases those who need them most, and cannot pay for them, do not receive them. While we are taking the initial steps in the development of the two new drugs mentioned by the minister, with all their potentialities

Supply-National Health and Welfare in the field of medicine, I hope the government will also see that the formulas for these drugs are kept as the property of the Canadian government until such time as a price can be arranged to fit the incomes of people who may be in need of that particular form of treatment. There is no use developing them unless they are going to be made available to the people who suffer. I know that with all the talk you hear about developments in the field of medicine-


Mr. Hosking:: May I ask a question?


Clarence Gillis: Yes.


Henry Alfred Hosking: Do you say the same thing about insulin?


Clarence Gillis: Certainly I say the same thing about insulin.


Mr. Gauthier (Porir.euf):: You should not.


Clarence Gillis: What I say is that if the government is going to provide public funds for research, once the formula is perfected, once tests are made and the drug is marketable, the government should see to it that its price is kept within the reach of the average person who may be in need of it. That applies to insulin or any other drug on the market where public funds were used to develop it. When I was interrupted I was about to say that I have taken an active interest all my life in the field of medicine. In the section of the country from which I come we developed our own scheme of co-operative medicine forty years ago. We hired our doctors on a panel system. We signed contracts with them and fixed the price for their services, including drugs, operations and everything else connected therewith. I helped to develop that system. We built our own hospitals and staffed them. The hospital boards consisted of members of the medical profession, mine workers and steel workers. We had the eight-hour day for our nurses a long time before it was ever thought of in similar institutions. I will say without fear of contradiction that medical services today in that particular part of the country were never at such a low level as they are at the present time.
Instead of building up and taking advantage of the advances that have been made, a deterioration has set in. Right at the present time the system of contracts and the arrangements we had, which I thought were very fine, are going by the board. Wrangling is going on in the community at the present time as to the fees for the medical profession and the price of drugs. In my opinion it has all come about because there has not been any supervision of the cost of drugs in this country. The du Pont company in the United States fixes the price of drugs for the whole

continent. That is why I say that drugs now being developed under government supervision should be carefully handled as to price and everything else so that people who suffer may have the advantage of them without the drug manufacturers fixing the price and using these drugs for commercial purposes rather than for suffering humanity.
Another suggestion I made ten years ago, and which I followed up from time to time, had to do with research in the field of silicosis. The mining districts of the north country are particularly bad. There was some talk about it in the house a few years ago but it has died out. Five years ago there was a lot of research being done. When I raised the question I was told the compensation boards were carrying on research, the Rockefeller institute was carrying on research, and everybody else was carrying on research. But nothing has come out of it. There are men in the north country particularly, and to some extent in the coal mining districts, forty or forty-five years of age, who are relegated to the scrap heap because they are suffering from that particular disability. There is nothing worse, and nothing is being done about it. The minister has in his department a small branch concerned with industrial hygiene.


Paul Joseph James Martin: They are working on that all the time.


Clarence Gillis: We do not hear a word about it.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We have not succeeded in getting all that we want.


Clarence Gillis: That does not do people very much good when they are suffering from that disability and have no means of livelihood. It is a compensable disease under the workmen's compensation acts of the different provinces. But just try to prove you have silicosis! It is rather difficult to make it stick for compensation purposes. I know the minister has not much control over that, but intensive research should be carried on as to that particular angle.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It is being done.


Clarence Gillis: Then don't hide it. Tell the people it is being done, publicize it, and give some hope to those who may be suffering from this disease.
My main reason for rising at this time was to focus attention on the fact that while I am sure the minister means well, when he gets up and tells us relief may be in sight for thousands of people in this country who suffer from arthritis I cannot help but think that when that drug is perfected a very small percentage of the people afflicted with arthritis will get the benefit of it if Mr. du Pont and company get hold of it and are permitted

to fix their own price. That is all I have to say now, though I have many questions to ask as we go through the estimates.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the minister nothing to say about the subject under discussion?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I thought the most convenient way might be to deal with it on the next item.


Donald Methuen Fleming: If the minister is not going to deal with that now, is he going to give us the expenditures by items; or must we go through the senseless rigmarole of asking for this information under each item?


Mr.   Marlin.@: What was the question?


Donald Methuen Fleming: For the third time the question is, will the minister give the expenditures by items for the last fiscal year?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I will give them as we come to the items; that is the best way.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Then we will just have to waste time asking for that information on each individual item.
There is one other matter on this first item; that is, these expenditures for educational and informational publicity, to give them their euphonious title. The estimates for this purpose which the minister is asking parliament to approve amount to $445,600 for this fiscal year, whereas the amount for last year was $413,640. Will the minister give the total expenditures under these items? Has he the total of the expenditures on educational and informational publicity scattered through the various branches?


Mr.   Marlin.@: It was $344,000.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Then you are $100,000 up on that this year.


Mr. McLure:: I want to ask just one question, and I think this is the proper place to ask it. On other occasions I have brought to the attention of the minister one class of people in my own constituency, and also throughout Canada; I refer to the incapacitated.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Could we deal with that when we come to the welfare item?


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Very well.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National health branch-health services-
253. National health	branch.-administration
Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister has not given the expenditures under the previous item and this item.
Supply-National Health and Welfare


Mr.   Marlin.@: The expenditures were
$657,660.23; unliquidated commitments, $19,799.19; total commitments, $677,459.42.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That figure is for item 252, I presume. I should like the same information for item 253.


Mr.   Marlin.@: The expenditure was $498,692.98; unliquidated, $4,462.94; total commitments, $503,155.92.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That cannot be right. That sounds like the expenditures under item 254, but I asked for the figures for item 253.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I am sorry, you are right. For item 253 the figures are as follows: Expenditures, $106,788.10; unliquidated, $30,577.20; total commitments, $137,365.30.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Perhaps the minister could indicate why, eight months after the close of the fiscal year, he should still find it necessary to set up amounts for unliquidated commitments.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That was at the end of the year.


Donald Methuen Fleming: But is the information not up to date on these items now?


Mr.   Marlin.@: As up to date as I can get it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
255.	Proprietary or patent medicines, $26,585.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Expenditures, $23,606.26;
unliquidated, $32.70; total commitments, $23,638.96.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
256.	Opium and narcotic drugs, $139,860.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures? I have to ask this on every item because the minister would not give this information at one time.


Mr.   Marlin.@: This is the only department with which this is ever done, but I am prepared to accommodate my hon. friend. I will do anything he asks, because I like him. Expenditure, $130,560.55; unliquidated commitments, $156.94; total commitments, $130,717.49.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
257.	Quarantine and leprosy, $272,797.
William Gourlay Blair: Could we have this broken down?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Expenditures, $255,205.20;
mitments, $156.94; total commitments, $258,431.46.


William Gourlay Blair: I wanted to know if the minister could break down the expenditures as between
3000	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare quarantine and leprosy. 1 want to know how many lepers there are and the cost of their maintenance.


Paul Joseph James Martin: There are nine at the moment, seven at Tracadie-


William Gourlay Blair: How much do they cost?


Paul Joseph James Martin: $11,000 at Tracadie, and
between $4,000 and $5,000 at Bentinck island.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I think a good many hon. members will wonder why it should be necessary to maintain these two establishments, one on the east coast and the other on the west coast, and why it should be necessary to maintain, the establishment on the west coast simply to provide for two lepers, one of whom I understand is an out-patient who is thought to be practically cured. The hon. member for Nanaimo recently asked some questions concerning expenditures on the leprosy hospital at Bentinck island, British Columbia, and the return to his questions indicates that substantial expenditures are being made there, in effect for the benefit of one in-patient and one out-patient, while at the same time a similar station is maintained on the east coast for seven lepers. Here is the information contained in this return, sessional paper No. 164. The first question was:
How many patients are cared for at the leper station, Bentinck island, British Columbia?
The answer was two. The next question was:
How many attendants and other persons are employed at Bentinck island, and what are their salaries?
The reply was two; one at a salary of $2,280 and the other at a salary of $2,240. 'The next question was:
What was the cost of maintaining Bentinck island, Including heating, lighting, etc., during the past year?
The answer given by the Department of National Health and Welfare to that question was $5,607.78, and it was pointed out that this did not include heating costs, which were met by the Department of Public Works.
Mr. Martin,: That is right.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The Department of Public Works replied that the heating costs were $2,300 for the year. Questions 4 and 5, which were answered by the Department of Public Works, were these:
4.	What improvements have been made in the accommodation, lighting plant and landing stage during the last two years?
5.	What was the cost of these improvements?
I shall not weary the house with the full details contained in the reply, but I believe


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is right.


Donald Methuen Fleming: We are all moved with sympathy for the lot of these unfortunate lepers, and we are not going to be penny-pinching in our provision for them. But why is it necessary to make improvements on a station on the west coast for the benefit of two lepers, when there is ample accommodation for them on the east coast?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I can only say that my hon. friend has stated the case correctly. Those expenditures were made. If he will recall, two years ago I was criticized, and correctly so, for the condition of the station in British Columbia. I have no other defence to offer. I did not create the disease of leprosy. It is an unfortunate condition, and we are doing all we can to isolate it, and isolate the people who have it. We are trying to make them as comfortable as possible. That is the only defence one can offer, and that is the only defence I have to offer.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the minister given
thought to moving them to the east coast?

Supply-National Health and Welfare Mr. Marlin: Yes, consideration has been 259. Immigration medical inspection, $842,773. given to that, but my technical officers Mr. Fleming: Will the minister state the advised against it.	expenditures?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Why?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Because of the character of the disease; I would' sooner have a separate place maintained for the care of these two people than be responsible for risking the spread of the disease.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is the objection to moving these two lepers from the west coast to the east coast because of the danger of the spread of the disease if they come in contact with other people?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I took the same position my friend takes, but the technical advisers in my department, and the department of health, have strongly advised against it.


Mr. Murray (Cariboo):: There is great danger of an epidemic of leprosy being started in the cities on the Pacific coast. On the other side of the Pacific ocean, the cities are alive with leprosy. It is all very well for someone in Ontario, protected by good hospitals, to object to this state of affairs, but it is a different matter if you are from the west coast. There could be an outbreak of leprosy. You might as well condemn the fire department because you do not have a fire one month. I hope the minister will maintain that station, and make it efficient, because he does not know when there will be an epidemic of that terrible disease, which modern medicine is steadily stamping out.


William Gourlay Blair: It would be interesting to know how many patients have been at that station, on an average, over the last ten years. I understand that a good deal of work is being done on leprosy in the United States, but those people are allowed to mix freely with others. I can understand the danger of contagion if those lepers have to travel, but I do not hold the view of the minister that there would be danger of an epidemic. This disease is rapidly being brought under control, and I think the time has come when we could concentrate these people in one institution. It would save some expense.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I thought I had the figures showing the average number of patients over the years. There were about four people involved, on the average.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
258.	Laboratory of hygiene, $340,014.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the minister give us the expenditures under this item?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The expenditures amount to $272,348.34; the unliquidated commitments, $4,662.52; and the total commitments, $277,010.86.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mr.   Marlin.@: The expenditures amounted to $779,279.07; unliquidated commitments, $912.04; and the total commitments, $780,279.07.


Mr. Wrighl:: This item covers the services of doctors who are in Europe inspecting immigrants before those people come to this country?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes.


Percy Ellis Wright: How much has been spent on these doctors in Europe, and what is the number of doctors involved?


Mr.   Marlin.@: There are about 23 doctors, and their average pay is between $5,400 and $6,000.


Percy Ellis Wright: That just gives me the salaries; what are the expenditures?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I do not have the amount broken down that way.


Donald Methuen Fleming: In connection with this item, the answer given by the minister as to last year's expenditure indicates that, with the supplementary estimates contained in votes Nos. 692 and 834, there will be an additional expenditure this year of something in the neighbourhood of $160,000 for this service. It appears that the flow of immigrants to this country is somewhat reduced this year as compared with last year, but it may be that, by reason of the considerable number of displaced persons entering, the proportionate expenditure on medical expenses has increased.


Mr.   Marlin.@: The biggest item in this expenditure was the equipping of Rockhead hospital.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is the balance of the expenditure approximately the same as last year, that is for the routine inspection of immigrants?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes, roughly.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
260. Child and maternal health, $96,005.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister give a brief description of the work that is done in connection with child and maternal health?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes. As my hon. friend is aware, the well-known book "The Canadian Mother and Child" is perhaps one of the most popular, not merely of its kind, but the most popular book in Canada. It now has a circulation of well over a million copies. While one would not want to attribute to that book the reduction in the infant mortality rate, the
3002	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare reduction in the maternal mortality rate, as well as the greater interest taken in post and pre-natal care, nevertheless it is admitted by all health authorities that the book has had a considerable influence.
Another book is now in the process oi being printed to cover the next age group of children. The division seeks to co-ordinate plans and co-operate with the provincial departments of health, both those that have separate child and maternal divisions, and those that have not but have officers who concern themselves with that aspect of the problem, in the hope not only of furthering the work of education among parents, children, school teachers and the like, but of formulating actual plans in some of the provinces. Actually Dr. Couture, who is the head of this division, has spent a good part of the past year in the actual organization of one of these divisions in one of the provincial departments. I think this is work that will commend itself to the committee. The general description that I have given indicates its character.
Some of the films that have recently been receiving a good bit of attention both here and in the United States, such as "The Feeling of Rejection" and "The Feeling of Hostility," were prepared in co-operation with Dr. Stodgill, who is the director of the mental health division of the department. Other films having to do with subjects such as nutrition receive the collaborative effort of the child and maternal division. From these general observations I think my hon. friend will appreciate the character of the work, while still admitting that there is a great deal yet to be done. The expenditures are $59,283.30; unliquidated commitments $5,589.45, total $64,870.75.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Can the minister indicate the ages covered by the publication "The Canadian Mother and Child"? Also, can he indicate the ages to be covered by the new publication to which he referred?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The first book "The Canadian Mother and Child" deals with infants; the second publication now being printed covers the ages one to six.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
261. Public health engineering, $158,640.
Clarence Gillis: Can the minister tell us how the sick mariners' fund is administered?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is the next item. I shall give the expenditures for this item. Expenditures, $127,429.66; unliquidated commitments, $1,791.96; total commitments, $129,221.62.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]

262. Treatment of sick mariners, $524,610.
Clarence Gillis: How is this fund administered? Is it contributed to by the shipping companies?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Clarence Gillis: And also by the provincial
governments?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Not by the provincial governments, Sick mariners' dues are collected at the rate of two cents per ton on a vessel's registered tonnage. The duty is collectable not more than three times in each year. Duties are collected on the same tonnage rate as at the beginning of confederation when the act began to operate. From 1867 to 1942 the duties collected and the expendi-furn were "pp''xin'ately equal. However, since 1912 tiie deficit has been steadily increasing. And tnat is due chiefly to the increasing number seeking medical attention.


Clarence Gillis: Is it compulsory for all shipping companies to contribute to the fund?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: On this point the Auditor General has some comments to make that I think should receive attention. I interject that this is a report of the Auditor General for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1949. We have not the report of the department for that year. At page 6 the Auditor General says this about the treatment of sick mariners:
23.	Expenditures in connection with sick mariners were approximately $475,000, while levies assessed' on shipping produced1 $225,000. The disparity illustrates the consequence when legislation sets a fixed rather than a flexible scale of levy to recover the cost of a service. Since confederation, it has been public policy to provide for the care of sick mariners and to assess shipping for the cost. Collections have been credited to revenue and expenditures charged to an annual appropriation.
Then he quotes section 305 of the Canada Shipping Act, to which the minister referred, and proceeds:
Up to five years ago, total levies collected had been adequate to offset costs, but since then costs have exceeded income by about $800,000. This has been mainly due to (a) higher cost of services, and (b) more crew members receiving treatment. Twenty years ago 6 per cent of ships' crews received treatment during a year; the rate is now 20 per cent.
24.	The extent to which treatment is provided at public expense for crews of vessels of 33 tons and under, most of which are fishing boats, is an illustration of the inadequacy of the levy rate. These boats pay dues of $2 a year; departmental statistics indicate that expenditures average about $36 a boat. With respect to larger vessels, mostly those engaged in transocean shipping, expenditures also exceed revenues, the ratio being about three to two. Audit query elicited information to the effect that the question is under review by departmental officers.


Paul Joseph James Martin: What the Auditor General says is quite true. The reason is of course that

our fishermen cannot afford to pay, and one is faced with the obligation of deciding whether or not, because they cannot pay, they Should be denied the best of medical attention. That is the problem: Expenditures, $474,291.60; unliquidated commitments, $353.95; total commitments, $474,645.55.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
263.	Industrial health, $125,180.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditures, $89,940.03;
unliquidated commitments, $10,768.35; total commitments $100,708.38.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
264.	Civil service health, $202,709.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditures, $170,389.28;
unliquidated commitments, $2,911.94; total, $173,301.22.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
265.	Nutrition, $143,635.
Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditures, $134,604.37;
unliquidated commitments, $4,744.78; total, $139,349.15.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
266.	Venereal disease control, $42,164.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditures, $35,362.06;
unliquidated commitments, $6.25; total, $35,368.31.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I have a question on this item which would not have been necessary if we had the department's report for last year. Can the minister give us an'indication as to the trend in the number of cases of venereal disease reported? The last existing report of the department indicated on page 154

that is the report for the year ended March 31, 1948-that a high point was reached in the number of such cases reported in the year
1946.	There was a substantial reduction in
1947.	Has that downward trend continued in the subsequent years?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes. The picture is better now than ever. Of course one must attribute much of this decline to the recent greatly increased use of penicillin, but the secondary reason is, of course, the grants-in-aid for control work, particularly the former. The report for the third quarter of 1949 shows, in comparison with the previous quarter, a reduction of 332 reported cases of total syphilis.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That is just one disease.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Compared with the same quarter one year ago there is a net decrease of
Supply-National Health and Welfare 378 cases of all types of venereal disease, or 5-7 per cent made up principally of 323 cases of syphilis and 50 cases of gonorrhoea.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the minister figures for the total number of V.D. cases reported in the year 1948?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes. In 1946 the total V.D. reported was 41,556; in 1947 it was 33,476 and in 1948 the figure is 27,491.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
267.	Health insurance studies, $56,451.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I think we will not try to rush over this too quickly. I should hope the minister might make an extended statement telling us what progress is being made in the study of health insurance, and when we may expect that study to be implemented by legislation.


Mr. Mariin:: I was hoping that we might pass this item, and deal with that matter at the end.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I would remind the minister that when we were discussing the general item I wanted to discuss this matter with him at that time, but he suggested that we wait until we reached item 267. We have now reached that item, and I suggest it should be discussed now.


Mr. Gray  don:@: I guess the minister has to make a speech.


Some hon. Members:: Later.


Stanley Howard Knowles: There seems to be a lot of prorogationitis around here. When we were on the general item, although some of us spoke about it, the minister did not discuss this matter of health insurance. We were asked to wait until we reached item 267, and I suggest the statement should now be made.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I suppose it could be made as well now as any other time-and I must say the committee has been most co-operative. I have already stated this session the policy of the government regarding this matter. I am prepared to do it again, but in doing that I am merely covering grounds which have already been covered.
I would remind the committee of the general proposals made by the government to the provinces in 1945. The national health program announced by the prime minister a year and a half ago effectively implemented three out of four of the proposals then laid before the provinces. Those proposals, in respect of a national health program, may be divided into three categories.
The first was that we were prepared to give money to the provinces-then nine, and now ten of them-to enable these provinces
3004	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare to make a survey of their health facilities, and to plan what they consider necessary for future development in their particular jurisdictions. We have had two meetings with all the survey committees of the provinces in Ottawa. We are having a third meeting on January 12, and I am hoping that at that meeting we shall have a fairly comprehensive progress report from most of the provinces.
I can say now that I know, from advance information which has come to hand, that that information will not be complete in all provinces. I have no jurisdiction, nor would I have any disposition to try to exert any pressure on the provinces to hasten their work. The job they have undertaken at our expense has been a colossal one.
We hope to have on January 12 or thereabouts, as I say, comprehensive, if not in some instances final, reports from provinces on the surveys they have been conducting.
In addition to that, when we come to the national health grants-and I was not being supercilious when I suggested that we should discuss the matter there, because I think perhaps that would be the best place to do it-
I can show the very great amount of preparatory work that is being done under the national health plan, and its tremendous achievements to date.
Let us take the one field of hospital construction. When the plan was announced we said that our objective was to see built in this country 40,000 hospital beds in the next five years. It was stated in the house that that was an impossible assignment, that it could not be done. I am in the happy position today of being able to say that, partly as a result of this plan, and the attitude and cooperation of the provinces since the plan was announced, there are under construction or are completed 18,500 additional hospital beds in Canada. That is no mean achievement, and there is no country in the world that has exceeded this record under this or any similar plan.
When we come to these grants we shall be able to show how we have assisted the provinces in setting up further health units and mental health clinics. The hon. member for Cape Breton South has talked about his province, as he properly should, although not with that complete accuracy we always expect him to display. I may tell him that in his province a number of public health units have been created under this plan, and mental health clinics, hospital beds, equipment for mental institutions and assistance for professional training-that same whole series of achievements has gone on throughout the country.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I think the minister's speech might have better been made on item 276, but perhaps that should not detract from the praise he sought to give to what has been done in the way of constructing hospital accommodation and the providing of grants to provinces for various medical matters. But may I say to him: What use is it to have 18,500 new hospital beds if Canadians who are ill cannot afford to get into them?
The fundamental problem in dealing with health and hospital and medical care is wrapped up in this question of health insurance. I would hope that the minister will tell us what the $38,000 voted last year was used for, and for what purpose it is proposed to use the $56,000 we are being asked to vote this year. I know that every time this question is discussed there are those who say there is no use discussing health insurance until we have all the hospitals and facilities and personnel that we need. As a matter of fact, when we were on the first item I had something to say about what I felt were the three requisites of a proper health program. For one point I stressed the need of having the equipment and personnel that are necessary. Then my second point was the need of health insurance, and my third point had to do with sickness benefits. I did not at that time indicate the sequence in which I thought those should come, but I want to say now that I feel that health insurance should receive attention first.
Some people in this chamber like to talk about the law of supply and demand. It seems to me that if we had health insurance and if people could afford the hospital and medical care they required, an effective demand would be created which should stimulate the government to provide the hospitals and services that are needed. Actually that is the way it has worked to a limited extent through the various Blue Cross plans which are in effect across this country. The more people there are with some means to pay for hospital care, the more hospital beds have been provided. I feel that that is
the point in the whole health program to which the government should be giving more strict attention than seems to be the case.
I want to join with the hon. member for Eglinton in asking how the vote was expended last year. The minister knows that for two or three years the portion of the amount voted that has been expended has been so small as to make it look as though not much was being done.


Paul Joseph James Martin: There is more now than ever before.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Perhaps the minister will tell me the amount right now.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Perhaps it might be more convenient if I gave that information just before the item passes. If I gave it to the hon. member now he might speak longer.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But if the minister waits until I am through I may speak again. The minister boasted about the proposals that had been made in the green books of 1945. I am a little surprised at his mentioning those green book proposals. It is for us to point out to the government how slow they are in implementing those proposals. The minister referred to the grants that are being paid under the announcement made by the former prime minister in May, 1948, but may I remind him that for the first time in the estimates now before us those grants have got over the $30 million figure, whereas the proposals made in the green books of 1945 called for federal health expenditures of $150 million per year. The government is now making a grant of only 20 cents on the dollar of what it promised.
I am disturbed by what the minister said just now about throwing this business of health insurance back to the provinces. I wonder how long this thing is going to go on? In this country we live from one dominion-provincial conference to another. Whether it blows up or whether it succeeds, the best we can hope for is another dominion-provincial meeting.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think my hon. friend will admit that I am no less interested in this subject than he is, but I have the responsibility of trying to push it forward while he has the responsibility of pushing me forward. If he were in my place would he do anything that would make it impossible to get agreement with those who under the constitution have the prime responsibility for this very matter?


Stanley Howard Knowles: I certainly would not stand up here at a time when we are trying to move in the direction of federal responsibility for social security and say that I think it should be done by the provinces. What is the use
3006	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare of the government asking for the power to amend the British North America Act? What is the use of talking about a national overall scheme of social security if the minister is going to say to the provinces: "We think that so far as health insurance is concerned you should handle it because your responsibility includes the field of health."


Paul Joseph James Martin: Don't make it difficult for me because we are going to have to sit down to discuss this one of these days.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I may have to do exactly what the minister said it was my job to do.
I may have to push him along a little bit.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Don't shove me off the precipice.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister has lost a little weight-working so hard, no doubt-so he should not be so hard to push. This business of going back to the green books of 1945 and doing nothing about it, this business of talking about meetings with the provinces and putting health insurance back on the provinces, simply is not good enough. All political parties and all people realize that what we need is a national over-all security program. As my leader said a few moments ago, one of the best places to get started with that program is in the field of health insurance. I hope that we are not going to have the same ineffective answers that we have had during the past number of years.
I should like the minister to tell me how much was spent during the past year out of the $43,897 that was voted? Will he also give some description of the kind of work that was done and what have been the results of that work? Will the minister tell us what recommendations have been made and whether he is going to do anything about those recommendations?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The expenditures last year were $20,500.55, almost $16,000 more than the year before.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Oh, oh.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend laughs, but that represents personnel. He knows that that is important. It is all very well to make lofty speeches about these matters, but a point is reached some time when you have to carry through your planning and studies and that requires competent people. We have as director of our public health insurance studies perhaps the most eminent man in the field of public health in Canada, Dr. Jackson. Everyone admits that. Everyone knows Dr. Jackson's views. With him is associated Dr. Langlois, a graduate of one of the medical schools in the province of Quebec, who enjoys a very high reputation in that province. We also now have Dr. Wride who held 

a very important post in the department of health of the province of Saskatchewan up until about six months ago. My hon. friend will know how eminent a man Dr. Wride is. He has had a great interest in this particular field for years. I need only mention these three individuals to indicate the character of the studies that we are making in the department. The research division is playing an important part in this work. Frequent visits are made to the ten provincial departments of health and conferences are held with provincial health people. Studies, reports, estimates of costs, and so on, are continually under way for the purpose of bringing up to date material prepared earlier so that we shall be in a position to deal with this matter in the most efficient manner when that time arrives.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What the minister has said makes some of us feel that it was worth while for us to take the time on former occasions to try to push him in this matter. If I have his figures more or less correctly, I gather that out of the $43,000 we voted last year some $20,000 odd was spent. He said that was about $16,000 more than the year before. The minister will remember in former years, when the department was spending only three or four thousand dollars out of $20,000 or $30,000 voted, we got after him pretty hard. I am glad to know he has brought it up to $20,000. I am also glad to know that he now wants $56,000 for the new year. Nevertheless it seems pertinent, inasmuch as the department spent only $20,000 out of $43,000 last year, to ask the question what it is they are anticipating for this year that requires nearly three times as much as they actually spent last year. I am not objecting to his wanting it. I am glad he wants it. But I want it spent because I want to get something done, and I think the minister should tell us what the $56,000 is for.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend may know something of the difficulty I had in securing Dr. Jackson. He had been deputy minister of health for Manitoba for a long time, and it was not easy to urge a man who had been in the public service of that province to leave, particularly at his age and with the interests he had. He came to us only a short time ago, as did Dr. Wride and Dr. Langlois. These gentlemen and others in the department are doing very valuable work, but for the sake of time I will not mention them all. They have already started a program of surveys of their own for certain very good reasons, as well as for close collaborative effort with all of the departments. Dr. Jackson, Dr. Langlois, Dr. Layton and Dr.

Stodgill have been on the go continually outside the department in conferences in the capitals of the various provinces and in setting up adequate systems by which statistics and cost figures can be obtained, all of which are necessary in the development of any scheme that one may have in mind, and which one will deal with at the proper time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I assume these doctors have complete freedom in their research?


Paul Joseph James Martin: They have the most complete freedom.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And that the minister will give serious consideration to the recommendations they make?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The minister certainly will.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
268.	Dental health, $52,748.
Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditure, $36,946.74;
unliquidated commitments, $3,689.52; total commitment, $40,635.26.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
269.	Hospital designs, $24,810.
Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditure, $16,973.30;
unliquidated commitments, $30; total commitment, $17,003.30.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
270.	Mental health, $90,725.
Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditure,	$67,899.79;
unliquidated, $8,515.18; total, $76,414.97.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
271.	Blindness control, $46,120.
Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditure,	$24,352.88;
unliquidated, $8,737.16; total, $33,090.04.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
272.	Epidemiology, $25,880.
Paul Joseph James Martin: Expenditure,	$17,230.51;
unliquidated, $264.83; total, $17,495.34.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
273.	Grants to institutions assisting sailors, in the amounts detailed in the estimates, $2,600.
Mr.   Marlin.@: Expenditure, $2,400; unliquidated, nothing; total, $2,400.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
274. Medical services-Indians and Eskimos, $10,713,316.
Mr. Shaw:: Realizing as I do the desire on the part of most, if not all, members to see the business of this session concluded at an early hour, I shall make an effort to limit my remarks to as few words as possible. In the light of circumstances to which I shall refer it would be rather difficult for me to justify
Supply-National Health and Welfare my presence here if I did not bring before the minister, the house and the government at this time a problem which to me is a tragic and sordid picture, in fact appalling.
I refer to a band of approximately 320 Indians who are found in the district west, northwest and southwest of Rocky Mountain House in the province of Alberta. It includes approximately 120 Sunchild Cree Indians and approximately twenty Chippewa Indians, all of whom are treaty Indians, and a further band of approximately 200 Indians of the Chippewa tribe who have not accepted treaty. In what I am going to say this afternoon I want to make it perfectly clear that my principal purpose in speaking is to bring a problem before the minister rather than to level charges at the minister or at the government because of things which have not been done.
Speaking only recently in the United States the Minister of National Health and Welfare made one or two very significant observations which are closely related to this problem.


Murdo William Martin: The minister always tries to make significant observations.


Mr. Graydon:: That is what Vishinsky does.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister does not always succeed.


Frederick Davis Shaw: In one case the minister said:
We are determined to keep abreast of the advances of medical science and to be impatient and intolerant of anything that debars our people from the best of health care.
The Indians are "our people". I want to emphasize that. Secondly the minister said:
In our democracies any neglect of the citizen's right to health opportunity dishonours the concept on which our countries were founded-that we should organize society for the good of all.
These Indians would be included in the word "all". Thirdly the minister said that in surveys which had been made recently his department found some health statistics that gave little cause for pride. Unfortunately I am going to have to say later, when referring to certain statistics, that there is little cause for pride in the information which I will bring forward.
Finally, and this is most significant in the light of what I am going to say later, the minister made an interesting statement when speaking to the American Public Health Association on October 25. I am quoting from the Journal for October 26, and since part of these words are in quotation marks I presume they are designed to represent exactly what he said. This was the statement:
Canada ... is determined not to permit "lack of money to lead to neglect of health."
That neglect of health is not tied up to any specific group of people; I would rather look upon it as being all-embracing. In
3008	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare referring to this group of Indians I want to stress again that we have approximately 120 treaty Indians and some 200 non-treaty Indians. I realize that the 200 could go quite some distance toward having their problems solved were they prepared to accept the treaty, but there are a couple of very significant reasons why they have failed to do so, and I am going to have to mention those reasons a little later because they are tied in with this question of health.
It would alarm hon. members, I am sure, if I were to tell them that one-half the Indian children in that area never reach the age of sixteen. In the second place, it is asserted by reliable authorities that one-half the Indian babies born there are buried almost before they see the light of day. When the mobile clinic was in Rocky Mountain House a few months ago some of those Indians presented themselves for X-ray. Of those who presented themselves, thirty per cent had tuberculosis, either active or inactive. The doctors, who are very close to this problem, estimate that fifty per cent of all the Indians in that area have tuberculosis, either active or inactive. I have before me something that will be rather interesting, eight or ten admission reports relating to cases of Indians taken to the Charles Camsell Indian hospital in Edmonton. Each report is signed, and the ages of the Indians range from five years to thirty-four years.
I am not going into great detail but here, for example, is the card of a youngster five years old. The diagnosis is: far advanced; has apparently been ill for one year and failing steadily; worse in the last few months. Prognosis: hopeless. Here is the card of a boy sixteen years of age: far advanced; apparently ill for months but going downhill rapidly in the last two or three months. Prognosis: practically hopeless. Here is the card of an eleven year old child, which states that as nearly as they can determine this condition commenced in 1946, yet the child entered hospital only this year. I could go through all these admission reports and present a most appalling picture.
I might add to what I have said already that the doctors advise me that of all the Indians in that area who presented themselves for military service during the war, not one was passed as physically fit. There are no statistics I can get hold of that could be considered as reasonably reliable with respect to venereal disease, but here again the doctors who are on the spot advise me that the number affected is liable to run over fifty per cent, basing this estimate upon those who have come to them for other reasons.

Is it any wonder that I call this a tragic situation? Let us not forget that these people are human beings. Let us not forget that they love life, too. Let us not forget that they feel pain, as we do. Above all let us never forget that these Indian mothers and fathers love their children, too. Apart from that, however, they are an absolute menace to the white population among whom they circulate freely.
I have already said that some further assistance could be given 200 of these Indians if they would accept the treaty; but I doubt ii any great advantage would accrue to them when I consider the conditions that exisl among the 120 who are already treaty Indians Even among those Indians the situation is appalling. These conditions, we know, resull from a number of things including impropei and inadequate housing which leads to pneumonia and other diseases. They have nc definite employment; and there is no plan oi properly executed enterprise with respect tc these treaty Indians, though we have officials who are presumed to be looking after theii interests. They have practically no educational opportunities; but above all else nc satisfactory steps have been taken to conduc' a comprehensive health survey in that area which to me is absolutely essential.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I wonder if I might say a word after which my hon. friend may not find ii necessary to go a great deal further. He will recall bringing this matter to my attentior earlier. As a result a survey was undertaken and a nurse is to be appointed. We had hoped to get her out there quickly, but she ha: to leave another post to follow up on tha' survey. I want to thank my hon. friend foi bringing the matter to my attention. I car say also that arrangements have been made with the doctors there which I believe are satisfactory. Following my hon. friend's sug gestions I think he will find that we are taking corrective action.


Frederick Davis Shaw: No one is more delighted thai I to hear that. I will not quibble over the fact that this action is long overdue. It ha: come; that is wonderful, and it certainly permits me to slice about seventy-five pe: cent off what I was going to say. But I tel the minister that in a few days I shall b( going back to Alberta. A few days after that and for the succeeding days, weeks ane months, I shall be in close touch with thi problem. I shall go among these Indians anc talk to the doctors and the nurse.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I hope you will keep mi advised. If not, I shall go out there myself


Frederick Davis Shaw: That is fine; and from time ti time I shall be back to let the minister knov
iMr. Shaw.]

Supply-National Health and Welfare
what further steps I believe should be taken. No one is more delighted than I that I am able to close my folder leaving unsaid seventy-five per cent of what I was going to say. Before resuming my seat, however, I want to get this quite clear. As the minister knows, we have been having a difficult time with respect to medical services.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Very difficult.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I know Drs. Greenway and Laing, and they are one hundred per cent. They want to do a job, and they can do it; but they also want fair compensation for services rendered.
In conclusion, I should like to pay tribute to a man who is well known to the officials of the Indian affairs department here. I refer to Mr. Henry Stelfox of Rocky Mountain House, who for more than forty years has given not only his time but his counsel and means in trying to bring into the lives of these people a bit more comfort than would otherwise have been the case.


Mr. Harkness:: During the past two or three years, there has been a considerable improvement in the medical services, hospital facilities and so forth, provided for our Indians. I am extremely pleased that this progress has taken place. I should like to commend Dr. Moore for the excellent work he has done in that regard. I believe he deserves the thanks, not only of the Indians, but of all the people who are interested in the welfare of the Indians.
An instance was brought up, however, by the member for Red Deer, which illustrates there are still many places for improvement in the medical services provided our Indians and Eskimos. I trust that the government will press forward, just as rapidly as possible, to eliminate situations such as the one describe^- to us. In doing so, I would ask that they sei. aside what might be called the slow processes of bureaucracy and red tape, which hold up the proper treatment of Indians when there is not an Indian medical officer available. The ordinary doctor will not treat an Indian because the doctor has had difficulty in getting paid.
As the minister knows, there was a considerable number of Indians at Banff and Canmore, who were engaged in clearing the brush from the Spray river power development. For a time at least the doctors in Canmore and Banff refused to treat these Indians, because they were not able to get satisfactory pay for the services they performed. It seems to me that the difficulties which are experienced along that line deny the Indians treatment, because of certain red tape regulations. Things of that nature should be wiped out. Surely, it is possible to get
45781-191 '
some sort of arrangement into operation, under which instances such as the one mentioned will not take place.
I should like to ask the minister what new hospital construction is covered by the item, which I see at the back of the book, amounting to approximately $2,300,000. What proportion of that money is for infirmaries, small hospitals, on individual reserves? Will the minister say what hospital facilities there are now on the Hobbema reserve, and what the medical situation is on the Saddle Lake reserve?


Mr.   Marlin.@: About 50 per cent of that amount represents smaller hospitals or nursing station units. As my hon. friend knows, I was out to the Hobbema reserve, and he was kind enough to extend some hospitality to me, as did his colleague from Calgary West. The hospital that was under construction there was burned. We have advertised for tenders for a new building and I am hoping that situation will be corrected.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Will the minister say how soon it will be corrected? It was for that reason I brought the matter to his attention.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Tenders are being advertised almost at once, and we will proceed as quickly as we can. Presumably it will be spring before construction can be commenced.
The main hospitals under construction are the big hospital at Sioux Lookout, which we hope to open some time in the new year; the one at Moose Factory which fills a long-felt need in one of the most congested areas of our Indian population, and in which, unfortunately, the t.b. rate is quite high. This will form part of a series of hospitals for attacking t.b., which I think deserves some of the commendation which hon. members have seen fit to give to the departmental personnel.
Unfortunately the Coqualeetza hospital was burned, but we are still occupying part of it. We have a fine hospital at Nanaimo. The Charles Camsell hospital at Edmonton is a 350-bed hospital, and is one of the best t.b. hospitals in the country. Supplemented by the one at The Pas, and one at Brandon, as well as by others that are about to be opened, and nursing stations which have been opened all over the country, I believe the hospital situation will be taken care of. I will not say this represents a new departure, but at least it represents a new attitude on the part of the government towards this highly important matter.
The departmental budget might not be a full indication, but it is some indication of the improvement, or of the new attitude, and the steps being taken. This year the budget amounts to approximately $11 million. When one considers that in 1945-46 it was around
3010	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare $2-5 million, one can get some appreciation of the importance of the work that is being done. I should like to say to the house and to the country that, while we are spending a lot of money, it is bringing results. I have indicated that the increase in the budget is almost ninefold, from $1,400,000 in 1940, to $11 million in 1949. The results of this increased expenditure are seen in the following figures: First of all, X should say that the Indian population represents one per cent of the population of Canada and, at the same time, represents 10 per cent of the tubercular population. Now, that is the challenging situation which we are seeking to meet.
During the period I have mentioned, the number of patients under treatment for tuberculosis has increased nine times, from 200 to 1,800, and the death rate has fallen over 600 per 100,000 of population to about 300 per 100,000 of population. The hospitalization program we have under way, and the increased medical personnel to go along with that program, together with what is being done by the voluntary workers for the Indian population with regard to it.b., makes our progress in this regard certain.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am glad to see that this problem of t.b. among the Indians is receiving so much attention. On the question of X-ray tests for t.b. among the Indians, will the minister state the proportion of our total Indian population that has received this test?


Mr.   Marlin.@: About 62 per cent. With the X-ray facilities we are installing, we hope to be able to accelerate that. In the hon. member's province, Alberta, it is 90 per cent.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Will the minister state
whether anything has been done along that line amongst the Indians, not only in my province, but in the far north in the Northwest Territories, and right across Canada?


Mr.   Marlin.@: To the extent that medical personnel can be recruited-and I must say it is not easy-and to the extent that we can get nursing personnel, we are making great progress in that particular in some areas. Take the James bay area, the area that I mentioned, and which is thickly populated. Almost every Indian, except a fraction of one per cent, has received X-ray examination. That has revealed a story, of course, that is not a very happy one; but it is far better to know it now than to know it too late.


Mr. Hatfield:: What is the difference between a treaty Indian and a non-treaty Indian in regard to medical service?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The legal position of course is that the treaty Indian is given treatment.
I must say that it is not always possible to draw the line.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Among a very large number of people, including the officials of the minister's own department, there is a widespread belief-I believe it is a correct one-that a great deal of the tuberculosis and other diseases to which Indians are particularly subject, and many of the earlier deaths of infants, are due to dietary deficiencies. If these dietary deficiencies could be corrected a great deal of the health problem would be solved. What is being done by the medical services for the Indians from the dietary point of view? Are they supplying any of the vitamins to overcome the deficiencies? Are they supplying extra food with a view to improving health conditions, apart from just keeping these people alive?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend of course has touched one of the basic points. The answer to his questions is yes. Through our nutrition people we are making surveys. We have the advantage of surveys which are made by other groups. We use our medical personnel, nurses and doctors, and our own departmental literature through the schools and so on where they have access to Indians. They do not always have access to them but we use whatever agencies we can to bring home to the Indian the importance of good nutrition. Family allowances of course have been a great help in this particular. I can only say to my hon. friend that the very vital and basic point that he has emphasized is one that has been very much on our minds in the pursuit and the discharge of these duties.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I make one further suggestion to the minister as to how he can overcome these dietary deficiencies to quite a considerable extent. He should persuade the Indian affairs department to increase the amount of what is called welfare allowances to Indians who are destitute and Indians who are partially destitute and unable to make a decent living or provide themselves with proper food. If the allowance which has been $7.80 a month per person were increased to twice that amount it would improve affairs . considerably. If it were increased to anything like the dominion's portion of the old age pension payment the more extreme of these dietary deficiencies would be overcome. I am quite sure the minister could do more by urging on the government that this measure be taken than in any other way.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I shall note my hon. friend's remarks carefully.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
275. Civil aviation medicine, $44,015.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Mr, Marlin:: Expenditures, $16,460.45;
unliquidated commitments, $1,654.73; total commitments, $18,115.18.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health grants-
General health grants-
276.	To provide for the following grants to the provinces, under terms and conditions approved by the governor in council-health survey grant to assist the provinces in surveying present health services and facilities, including hospitals, and in studying ways and' means of improving and extending the same; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $5,000 to each province and the balance according to population but the total payment available to any province in no case to be less than $15,000, $150,000.
Hospital construction grant to assist the provinces in the provision of adequate accommodation for hospital and health services; to be distributed on the basis of $1,000 per bed for active treatment beds, $1,500 per bed for chronic or convalescent beds, or in the case of other health facilities on an equivalent basis; provinces to match or exceed dominion contribution which shall in no case exceed one-third of total cost, $13,000,000.
General public health grant to assist the provinces in strengthening general public health services; to be distributed on the basis of 40 cents per capita of population, to provinces which maintain at least their standard and extent of service in this field as at March 31, 1948, $5,143,600.
Tuberculosis control grant to assist the provinces in an accelerated and intensified effort toward the eradication of tuberculosis and to extend progressively the provision of free treatment; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $25,000 to each province and the balance to be divided 50 per cent on the basis of population and 50 per cent on the basis of the average number of deaths from tuberculosis in each province over the previous five years, $3,000,000.
Mental health grants to assist the provinces in the prevention of mental illness and' in extending progressively the provision of free treatment; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $25,000 to each province and the balance according to population, $4,000,000.
Venereal disease control grant to assist the provinces in extending and intensifying their present efforts toward control of venereal disease; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population, $500,000.
Crippled children grant to assist the provinces in an intensive program for the prevention and correction of crippling conditions in children, rehabilitation and training; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province, the balance according to population, $500,000.
Professional training grant to assist the provinces in the training of personnel for public health and hospital staffs; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population, $500,000.
Public health research grant to assist the provinces in stimulating and developing public health research, $200,000.
Cancer control grant to assist the provinces in programs for the control of cancer; to be distributed according to population, with any such programs for cancer control to be approved and the cost thereof to be divided equally between the dominion and the province concerned, $3,500,000.
Mr. Harris (Danforih):: There is a sentence or two I should like to put on the record but they may more properly come under the 45781-191J
Supply-National Health and Welfare second section of this particular item. I do want to say this, sir, because it is the only opportunity that some of us have, who may be interested in hospital work, to say something on behalf of the government which is doing so much in this day and generation toward this work. I would be the last man in this house to start paying compliments to ministers and their deputies but they are doing a good job. I will go that far. We admire the way in which they attend to business. We admire the way in which they respond to every request of hon. members, and they respond as fast as they can, I will go that far.
I hold in my hand a special delivery letter dated December 8, showing the accord and the co-operation which the minister is receiving in his department from the inspector of hospitals for the province of Ontario. I just wish to say to him "thank you" for the kindness that he has shown some of us charged with a responsibility in that regard over the last two decades. The city of Toronto, which contains nearly one-tenth of the population of Canada, is doing very well in hospital work. I have no authority to speak for the hospital for sick children or for other children's hospitals, but I have authority to speak for one small 400-bed unit which is trying its best to do a real job for the citizens in the community. On their behalf I want to thank the minister, his deputies and particularly Mr. Hughes and Mr. Jackson who have under review the finalizing of a grant of $2,500,000 which is being spent in my particular community. I am sorry, sir, if I have delayed the committee, but I wanted to put that on the record at this time.


Mr. Fournier (Maisonneuve-Rosemont):: Would it be possible to have the total amount of money that has been granted to the provinces since the government initiated the policy of grants?


Donald Methuen Fleming: May I make a suggestion to save time?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I can put a table on Hansard.


Sarto Fournier: Put the statistics on Hansard.


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend will understand that these national grants give only a partial picture. I do wish that we could have more time to go into this matter. This matter takes second place to no item that comes before this House of Commons. I wish I had time to describe fully the great things that are being done. I am not taking credit for the government. I am merely stating that this plan has provoked a whole series of achievements in so many lines throughout every province of this country that I am
3012	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare sure this House of Commons is proud of having had something to do with establishing it. The table is a general table. It does not tell all the story. Of course no figures will tell the story; but to the extent that tables can tell the story these tables will.
I can think of what is being done in the little province of Prince Edward Island. If I told that story I could give a picture that would encourage every hon. member; but it is not possible to do that in figures. I could tell what is being done in the province from which the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Eosemont comes. I am sure he would be very happy to know the series of health achievements in that province alone, not only with regard to hospital construction alone, but with regard to equipment for

mental hospitals, with regard to the work being done on crippling conditions in children, the work being done in cancer research and cancer treatment, the work being done in the strengthening of public health units, and so on.
I want to thank the hon. member for Danforth, who has just spoken, for his words of commendation of the department. May I in turn say to him that that was due only to the institution itself, and is in part a tribute to the great work that he himself has performed throughout the years in connection with that particular hospital. So I will put the two tables on Hansard, with the unanimous consent of the house, in answer to the question of the hon. member for Maisonneuve-Rosemont. They are as follows:
ALL NATIONAL HEALTH GRANTS (including P.C. 1690)
Amounts Approved and Expended During Fiscal Year 1948-49
Province	Grant available	Number of projects	Approved	Expended	Equipment ordered but not delivered as at March 31, 1949Amount	Per cent of amount available	Amount	Per cent of amount available	Per cent of amount approved	$	$	$	$Prince Edward Island..	293,913	50	268,704	91-4	161,188	54-8	59-9	46,660Nova Scotia	1,542,084	57	701,855	45*5	428,319	27-8	61-0	75,199New Brunswick	1,226,191	93	575,519	46-9	464,860	37-9	80-7	-8,986,080	60	5,685,228	63-1	2,617,833	29-1	46-0	-9,668,425	134	3,144,656	32-1	1,475,245	14-96	46-9	189,3611,806,331	93	1,022,202	56-5	451,833	25-0	44-2	16,0322,002,077	112	1,058,629	52-l	662,501	32-9	62-6	53,1001,969,032	80	935,830	47-5	314,094	16-0	33-5	208,174British Columbia	2,529,236	140	2,037,874	79-9	1,178,691	46-4	57-8	89,686Total	*30,123,369	819	**15,430,497	51-2	7,754,564	25-74	50-25	678,212
* Total includes $100,000 for Public Health Research not included in Provincial figures. In addition, Provincial figures and total amount have been increased by appropriate portions of $3,069 voted in Supplementary Estimates as a carry-over from 1947-48, for V.D. Control.
** Figures in this column embody $3,069 referred to above.
NOTE:-
With respect to the table set out above, the figures given under the headings "Expended" represent only payment by the Department of National Health and Welfare to the Provinces of claims submitted by them covering accounts (properly audited) which have been paid by the Provinces and for which they are entitled to be reimbursed. "Expended" does not in any way represent the amounts actually spent by the Provinces on projects for which approval has been given by the Department of National Health and Welfare under the National Health Program. The Provinces have until the end of the fiscal year to submit their claims; in the meantime the Department has no knowledge of what expenditures have been made by the Provinces, in respect of approved projects, other than those represented by claims already submitted.
In the case of the Hospital Construction Grant, claims by the Provinces in respect of approved projects are submitted in four instalments, namely, upon completion of 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of construction. It is understood that the period of construction of nearly all projects will extend over one or more fiscal years.
In the case of the Health Survey Grant, the basis of payment is an advance by the Department of National Health and Welfare to the Provinces, at the time projects are approved 15% and payment of the balance upon receipt from the Provinces of claims covering accounts (properly audited) which have been paid by the Provinces. While the Health Survey Grant is not recurring it is anticipated, in the light of statements received from the Provinces, that the total amount thereof will eventually be required by and paid to the Provinces.

Supply-National Health and Welfare



ALL GRANTS

[Stage Direction]
Amounts Approved and Expended for the Period April 1, 1949 to December 1, 1949
Province	Grant available	Number of projects	Approved	Expended	Amount	Per cent of amount available	Amount	Per cent of amount available	Per cent of amount approvedNewfoundland	923,518	61	444,626	48-1	2,967	0-3	0-7Prince Edward Island...	287,740	55	267,894	93-1	16,398	5-7	6-1Nova Scotia	1,570,002	91	1,349,820	860	203,505	13-0	151New Brunswick	1,248,576	142	482,809	38-7	118,024	9-4	24-4Quebec	9,149,881	82	6,019,409	05-8	1,712,759	18-7	28-4Ontario	9,883,728	242	5,291,484	53-5	1,132,889	11-5	21-4Manitoba	1,836,181	134	1,033,853	56-3	224,2S9	12-2	21-7Saskatchewan	2,015,922	196	1,539,244	76-3	362,758	18-0	23-6Alberta	2,012,169	126	1,599,033	79-5	267,692	13-3	16-7British Columbia	2,010,220	139	1,563,876	59-9	193,900	7-4	12-4Total	(a)31,743,091	1,268	(b)19,592,048	61-7	(c)4,296,160	13-5	27-5
Note: Totals include appropriate figures for Public Health Research not included in provincial figures as follows:
(a) Includes $205,148 as grant available. (b) Includes $198,547 as amount approved.
(c) Includes $60,920 as amount expended.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the minister indicate what those tables include?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The second includes all amounts approved and expended from April 1 to December 1, 1949, and the first, in connection with national health grants, all amounts approved and expended during the fiscal year 1943-49.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Are those amounts broken down by provinces?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Clarence Gillis: I am not satisfied with having them placed on Hansard.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Would the hon. member ask specific questions?


Clarence Gillis: And I am not pressed for time, either, on this particular subject. I agree that perhaps the minister likes to see things done, and he makes statements to the effect that we would be amazed if we knew what was being done.


Paul Joseph James Martin: And that is right.


Clarence Gillis: Well, I want to know what is being done. I do not want to read it in Hansard tomorrow. I want to know the extent of the money granted by parliament, and to what extent it is being used in my own province. This particular grant merely states that $15,000 is the maximum amount that can be voted to any province for the purpose of surveying the whole field of health. You cannot do much with $15,000. So far as I am concerned-


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is just a survey.


Clarence Gillis: I want the minister to tell me what has been done in Nova Scotia in connection with the grant under discussion at the present time.


Mr.   Marlin.@: What grant? There is a series of grants. The hon. member must appreciate, as I am sure he will-


Clarence Gillis: Not under this item.


Mr.   Marlin.@: What particular grant is the hon. member asking about?


Clarence Gillis: Just a moment, now; I want to know about this maximum grant of $15,000 for the purpose of a health survey. I want to know this: Has the province of Nova Scotia used it? Have they submitted their plans to the minister? Are those plans complete- and what are they, in the field of health survey?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The province of Nova Scotia is making a survey. Their report is not finished. I am hoping it may be completed when we meet on January 10. We have approved $33,000 for that province.


Clarence Gillis: That grant has been available for the last two years at least.


Mr.   Marlin.@: The last what?


Clarence Gillis: The last couple of years.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes, it has-to all the provinces. But the hon. member must appreciate that a survey cannot be made overnight.


Clarence Gillis: I know that.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Keeping in mind the great advances Saskatchewan has made in certain
3014	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare particulars, it too is in the same position as most of the other provinces. My hon. friend must not fail to appreciate that this survey is not just a matter of sitting down at a desk and making a priori conclusions. It is a matter of getting out in the field and making a survey. And that is being done by this province.


Clarence Gillis: The minister says the grant has been available for more than two years. It has. The survey made by the province of Nova Scotia in the field indicated by the vote has not been completed. They have been over three years on it. So far as the minister is concerned, he cannot tell me what that province is going to do, or what their plans are. Living as I do in that province, and coming from it, so far as I know nothing has been done.


Murdo William Martin: Oh, that is not true.


Clarence Gillis: Oh, yes, you have had a new wing added to the Victoria General hospital in Halifax-which people cannot get into. Some people who want specialized treatment are still in the position they were in twenty-five years ago. And if they are doing any cancer research work, certainly they have not set up any diagnostic organization. I know of no place where one could go to have that work done-unless you have money and travel some distance.
I am interested in getting something done. As I said a moment ago, I think the federal

government are doing what they can, within the confines of the constitution. But there is a great amount of laxity in the provinces. It should not take three years to make a survey in connection with this grant. They have a good medical set-up, and facts and figures and statistics, and all the requirements. And if they have not gone on with something, then there is something wrong.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member has been good enough to say that the federal department is doing all it can. However, I could not permit his statement to go unchallenged, in fairness, as to what the provinces are doing.


Clarence Gillis: What are they doing?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I will not say we are completely satisfied, but they are doing a great deal of splendid work in Nova Scotia, as in the other provinces.
Now, if the hon. member will ask specific questions I shall try to answer. For instance, I can tell him now the number of hospital beds constructed in Nova Scotia since this grant came into effect.


Clarence Gillis: I should like to know that.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The figure is 1,067.


Clarence Gillis: Where are they located?


Murdo William Martin: 
[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
277.	Welfare branch administration, $36,155.
Howard Charles Green: At the spring session an amendment to the Old Age Pensions Act was passed increasing the basic pension from $30 to $40
[Mr. Martin.!

a month, of which the dominion contributes three-quarters. In the amending bill no provision was made for raising the total income that could be received by a pensioner. In other words, the total income, including the pension, and what little a pensioner might be able to earn, or had coming in by way of revenue, was not increased at all. In the case of the single pensioner the ceiling remains at $600, and in that of the married pensioner, where his wife is also receiving a pension, the total they can receive by way of income remains at $1,080.
The effect has been, of course, to take out of the act one of the basic features which, from the start, has been that a certain income would be allowed over and above the pension. From the time the Old Age Pensions Act first became law there was a provision-and it has always been considered a fundamental part of the law-that the pensioner could get income from some other sources, up to a certain amount. That feature is now gone because of the failure to raise the ceiling at the last session.


Mr.   Marlin.@: This might better be brought up under the old age pensions item.


Howard Charles Green: I have just about finished. The situation is summed up in the headings of different editorials which were published on the subject in the Vancouver newspapers. For example, one was headed "Unfinished business" and another, "A matter for correction". The articles went on to point out that this situation should be remedied without further delay. I mentioned this in my speech in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne and I regret exceedingly that no move has been made during this session to raise that ceiling. Can the minister tell us why nothing has been done and what possibility there is of the government raising this ceiling so that these pensioners will be able to get the same amount above their old age pensions they could get before the amendments were passed?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I will deal with that when we come to the item.


Howard Charles Green: Could the minister not answer it now?


Mr.   Marlin.@: It might start a whole discussion if I did it now. I will deal with it at the right time, if the hon. member does not mind.


Donald Methuen Fleming: What were the expenditures?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The expenditures amounted to $27,665.16; unliquidated, $700.70; total commitments, $28,365.86.


Donald Methuen Fleming: There are several items covering educational and national publicity
Supply-National Health and Welfare scattered through the estimates and the minister gave the total as $334,000. How much of that was paid to persons outside the government?


Mr.   Marlin.@: There would be very little. There might be some for writing scripts and things like that, and perhaps some printing. The photography work is done in the department as well as most of the writing, and films are done by the film board.


Donald Methuen Fleming: We may take it that none of this went to outside advertising agencies?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Oh, no.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: For a number of years we have brought up the question of incapacitated people. I brought it up myself in 1945, 1946 and right down to the present time and I should like to know what is being done to help these people. I was pleased to read in the press what the Prime Minister had to say about it, and I quote as follows:
The government of which I am the leader will do everything within its power to provide adequate welfare and security to the less fortunate.
He was dealing with the incapacitated people. The Prime Minister is then quoted as having said:
At times we are accused of paternalism on account of our social legislation.
Far be it from me to make a charge of paternalism against the government in connection with their treatment of the incapacitated. I would say that the present government, as well as the last, has shown a most flagrant disregard for the incapacitated people in our province. What program is there for this class of people this coming year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The difficulty of dealing with a specific question on the general item is that one never finishes the subject. This question would be better asked on the specific item. My hon. friend knows that health grants and special grants are made, and there is provision for assisting with disabling conditions in children. Then there are grants for the care of tubercular people and general health grants. In a number of provinces projects have been put under way to deal with invalidity situations. Complementing all this is the work carried on by the Department of Veterans Affairs and our own work on behalf of the blind by way of pensions and particular programs to improve their eyesight. Then there is the general assistance we give to various blind organizations, notably the Canadian National Institute for the Blind.
The general problem which my hon. friend poses is not only the concern of the federal
3016	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare government; it will be discussed at a conference being called by the Minister of Labour, to which are being invited federal and provincial officials and representatives of voluntary agencies. It is hoped that out of this conference there will emerge a clearer picture of the problem as well as concrete and practical suggestions as to a useful course of action to be followed in the future by governments at all levels. Beyond that there is no more that I can say at the moment.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Family allowances-
278.	Administration, $1,808,198.
Donald Methuen Fleming: The Auditor General has drawn attention to certain matters which I think call for a statement from the minister. On pages three and four of his report the Auditor General refers to a situation which has arisen through the method used to verify the age of children. He lists 144,662 cases as at March 31 where payments have been made pending verification of the age. In paragraph nine on page four he points out that overpayments subject to recovery at the end of the year, which I presume means March 31, amounted to $429,394. He points out further:
Overpayments occur, as a rule, because (a) proof of birth is not established, or (b) children are not being maintained by the applicant.
I think the committee is familiar with the statement made by the deputy minister of welfare indicating that steps were being taken to recover some of these amounts, but in paragraph 10 the Auditor General proceeds to make some concrete recommendations in reference to safeguards when he says:
From birth to the age of 16, family allowance payments total $1,128. The extent of overpayments and the time lag between date of payment and receipt of data from the bureau of statistics make desirable the introduction of safeguards; for example, requiring (a) evidence of birth to accompany application, and (b) a parent to furnish annual declarations that the child is alive, is being maintained by the parent and, if of school age, is attending school.
I think those comments are worthy of the most serious consideration, and I ask the minister what steps he is proposing to take in the light of those recommendations?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend has called attention to a statement made when I was away and which otherwise would have been made under my name. That statement was made by the deputy minister on the welfare side on my instructions because I realized that while the press reports no doubt were intended to be helpful, actually they did not give a true picture of the situation. In order to put things in a proper perspective may I


say that in the last two years only $163 of overpayments have resulted through a lack of immediate birth verification. When you consider that in the last two years between $500 million and $600 million has been paid out by way of family allowances, and that there have been overpayments in the amount of only $163 for want of immediate birth verification, I think my hon. friend will find that the situation is one for which the administration of family allowances should be commended. I may say that the $163 was recovered. I think that statement ought to be underlined.
There were, on March 31 last, overpayments, in the amount stated by my hon. friend, of $429,394, out of gross disbursements made to date exceeding $1,100 million. Overpayments not yet recovered represent less than one-twentieth of one per cent of total family allowance payments.
Since the statement of the Auditor General came out, I have had an opportunity of examining the overpayment situation in those countries where family allowances prevail, and while I do not propose to give all the details today-it would take too long- my hon. friend will find that we not only compare very favourably but that our record is a record indeed in this respect.
The question really boils down to this. We have to make up our minds what we wish to accomplish with regard to birth tion as to birth verification, when family ance payment to be made as quickly as possible after birth? That was the intention of the house when the act was passed, and I think properly so.
In the case of the province of Quebec we were unable to get the same kind of collaboration as to birth verification, when family allowances came into being, as we got in the other provinces, and that fact accounts for the seemingly large proportion of overpayments in that province compared with other provinces. It was not because honesty is less prevalent there than elsewhere, but rather because it was not possible to obtain the same measure of early verification that we were able to get as a result of the co-operation given by other provincial governments.
As a matter of faot, a very small amount of the total overpayments are due to want of birth verifications. It is due to many other factors such as overpayments resulting from situations arising in respect of non-attendance at school, non-maintenance, the death of a child, non-residence, duplicate accounts, immigration regulations, children working for wages, and so on.

Therefore it is wrong to assume that the mere fact that birth verification does not immediately attend the registration for family allowance is the main circumstance which provokes this overpayment situation. We are anxious to give the payments to parents as quickly as possible at a time when they need them. If we had to wait until such time as the birth certificate came in, the family allowance payment would be delayed beyond measure, and our experience has shown that the trust which we place in the ordinary Canadian parent is more than justified. I do not think I need to say any more than that. We have to make up our minds whether we wish to provide family allowance payments as early as possible or wait until they are backed by a birth certificate. If the latter takes place, parents may not get the family allowances for several months, possibly longer. We feel the time to give the family allowance is as early as possible. Current verifications are now taking place as quickly as possible, and as I have indicated there have been overpayments in regard to new applications in the last two years only to the extent of $163 for want of immediate birth verification.


Donald Methuen Fleming: To complete the information for members of the house as to administration,
Supply-National Health and Welfare will the minister give the figures-I presume he has them in his report-on the cost through the Department of Finance and the Department of Public Works? There is such a statement on page 94 of his report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1948.


Paul Joseph James Martin: National health and welfare costs of administration in 1948-49 were $1,697,858.58, for finance $2,082,951.73, and for public works $165,312.09, making a percentage of 1-45, a truly remarkable record of administration for which the directors of the family allowance administration are entitled to our undying thanks. When you realize that 3-5 per cent represents the cost of administration of family allowances in Great Britain compared with our 1-45, I think I may say it is a truly remarkable achievement.


Donald Methuen Fleming: With the consent of the committee, will the minister put on record the same sort of statistical table he put on Hansard on June 11, 1948? I think he has it there.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


The Deputy Chairman:: Has the minister
unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The tables are as follows:



TREASURY OFFICE-DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE

[Stage Direction]
Family Allowances Division
Statistics Based on March, 1949, Family Allowances Payments
Province	Number of families in pay	Number of children in pay	Average allowance per child	Average allowance per family	Total amountPrince Edward Island	
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	12,920 88,927 70,010 488,263 575,961 101,917 115,170 124,173 147,630 3,579	32,621 207,282 181,921 1,302,242 1,140,778 211,752 258,370 266,133 279,769 7,785	$ cts. 5 90 5 90 5 81 5 80 5 96 5 95 5 96 5 95 5 93 5 84	$ cts. 14 89 13	76 14	96 15	47 11 81 12	36 13	37 12 75 11	24 12	71	$ 192,439 1,224,093 1,056,297 7,555,992 6,803,098 1,259,377 1,539,635 1,582,711 1,659,147 45,478Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest Territories and Yukon	
National	
Note: N.W.T. and Y. adjustment payments not	1,729,150	3,888,653	5 89	13 25	22,918,267 15,561 22,933,828
3018	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-National Health and Welfare

[Stage Direction]
Family Allowances Payments (1949)
Province	April	May	June	July	August	September	October$	$	$	S	$	$	$Newfoundland	703,836	805,032	816,275	816,213	818,071	819,676	827,242Prince Edward Island...	192,294	204,523	199,267	199,806	200,919	201,871	202,318Nova Scotia	1,226,273	1,287,130	1,267,865	1,268,797	1,272,132	1,273,702	1,276,793New Brunswick	1,058,245	1,136,592	1,103,830	1,108,371	1,113,130	1,115,260	1,118,501Quebec	7,575,108	8,185,084	7,914,429	7,947,343	7,963,280	8,000,703	8,015,351Ontario	6,818,767	7,007,328	6,958,632	7,010,664	7,070,580	7,091,267	7,100,465Manitoba	1,263,127	1,301,629	1,292,855	1,300,170	1.308,200	1,305,931	1,310,461Saskatchewan	1,537,599	1,593,503	1,575,489	1,587,842	1,589,744	1,584,832	1,580,409Alberta	1,587,337	1,633,176	1,625,681	1,641,446	1,656,105	1,662,881	1,657,802British Columbia	1,665,796	1,696,350	1,700,206	1,718,096	1,734,692	1,728,951	1,740,949Northwest Territories &	Yukon	48,295	47,589	51,578	51,311	49,495	49,371	50,674National	23,676,677	24,897,942	24,506,107	24,650,059	24,776,348	24,834,445	24,880,965
Frederick Davis Shaw: It is assumed where Indian families qualify for family allowances that the cheques are given out through the Indian agents. Is that correct?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I did not hear the question.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Where Indian families are
eligible for family allowances, are the cheques given out through the Indian agents to those families?


Mr.   Marlin.@: In about 78 per cent of the cases they are sent directly to the families.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I wish to bring to the minister's attention one strong recommendation-it is one of a number-which I have received. The recommendation is that, so far as the situation at Rocky Mountain House is concerned, more care be taken with regard to the proper receipt by the legal recipients of the family allowance cheques. I wonder if the minister would bear that in mind.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I shall be very glad to.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
279.	Administration, $65,610.
Mr. Mallais:: I should like to ask the minister Whether administration of old age pensions, so far as applications for pensions and other facts are concerned, is left exclusively in the hands of each of the provinces?


Stanley Howard Knowles: But within the provisions of the federal act.
(Translation):


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is definitely a provincial responsibility.


Auguste Maltais: Do some provinces pay old age pensions without benefiting from the 75 per cent contribution of the federal government?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The answer is no.
[Mr Martin.!
(Text):


Auguste Maltais: I have in my hands a letter from one of the ministers of the province of Quebec in which he states:
(Translation):
To sum up, in the province of Quebec, old age pensions and pensions to the blind were paid for the first time under the Union Nationale government, in accordance with a provincial act and a provincial order in council, and the increase in the maximum pension from $30 to $40 was provided for by the Union Nationale government, under a provincial act.
Such indisputable facts will enable pensioners to draw their own conclusions.
(Text):
Following that I should like to know whether this statement is correct. Is it right to say that it would not have been possible to enforce the law in any province unless the province had the assistance of the federal government?


Mr.   Marlin.@: My hon. friend knows perfectly well, and he may want to pass this information on to interested parties elsewhere who desire it, that the Old Age Pensions Act was first passed by the federal government. The federal government has been responsible for the increases in the basic pension on three different occasions, for the increase in the outside income allowable, and of course the federal government pays 75 per cent of the basic pension.


Howard Charles Green: Will the minister answer my question now?


Stanley Howard Knowles: My question is very simple. When is the means test going to be done away with?


An hon. Member:: Tonight.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Good. We would like you in the cabinet.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I did not ask that jocularly. It is a serious question, and is something that a good many members advocated in the last election campaign. It is the feature of the Old Age Pensions Act which people feel most offended by at the present time, and I think a statement by the minister is in order.


Paul Joseph James Martin: As to the question asked by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, 75 per cent of old age pensioners have received the full benefit of the increase in the old age pension provided for by the house last year.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the minister give the figures?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend will appreciate that what we were aiming at was to try to put the full amount of the increase into the hands of the pensioners to further purchasing power. Those whose income took them up beyond a certain level did not benefit, but they were only about 10 per cent of the total figure. Fifteen per cent of the total received part of the increase. As to the question of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, I simply want to say that the federal government's views with regard to the means test were stated in 1945 in the proposals made to the provinces. My hon. friend may smile, but that does not add anything to it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I do smile, because the minister goes back to those proposals time and again but does nothing about them.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Let me finish my statement, and perhaps my hon. friend will agree that I have dealt with the matter pretty responsibly. In 1945 the government did make a certain proposition to the provinces, which was conditioned upon certain other actions by the provinces involving tax agreements and the like. That proposal inevitably was part of a whole pattern, a whole series of proposals.
Our means test in this country is as liberal as any other means test found in any part of the world. That is the first thing. No country has eliminated the means test. They have it in the United States; they have it in Australia; they have it in the United Kingdom; and they have it in New Zealand. Those are the facts. There are difficulties. I am not saying our situation is perfect; but until such time as we have a contributory system of old age pensions I say it is irresponsible to talk about the elimination of the means test.
To talk about liberalizing the means test is another matter. No one has a greater interest in this matter than I have, but I believe one
45781-192i
Supply-National Health and Welfare must put the whole subject before the country. We are spending now on federal account $100 million on old age pensions. The old age population of Canada represents a growing percentage of the total population. There are
625,000	people of the age of seventy in Canada today. Of that number 275,000 are in receipt of old age pensions. There are 4,200,000 children receiving the family allowance. Total family allowance payments are less than $300 million. If we were to leave the basic pension at the present level of $40 a month and eliminate the means test completely, without lowering the age, the cost would be $300 million. I ask the house to bear that figure in mind. To leave the old age pension at the basic rate of $40 per month and lower the age for women only to 65 would cost $391 million. To leave the pension at $40 a month and lower the age to 65 for men and women would cost $491 million. To put the pension at $50, lower the age and take away the means test would cost $614 million.
Those are the facts. I ask hon. members to consider them. No one can take away from my appreciation of the importance of our social welfare plans in the kind of economy we have in the western world; but having in mind the facts I have just stated, bearing in mind that we hope there will be extensions of other phases of social security at the right time and in the light of conditions that prevail, hon. members should ask themselves whether they think, in the absence of a contributory system of one sort or another- there being several kinds of contributory systems-it is possible to completely eliminate the means test. I say it has not been done anywhere. I say that the abolition of the means test must be associated with the adoption of the principle of contribution in some form, a matter which is receiving our fullest attention.


George Alexander Drew: I intend to deal with only one aspect of this matter, Mr. Chairman, because I do not desire to make any extensive remarks in regard to what should be done. That is so for the simple reason that anything suggested cannot be done at this particular point, no matter how much we might wish it. At the moment we are dealing with items calling for expenditures based upon legislation already adopted. No matter how convincing any argument might be at this time it cannot change the basis upon which these items are put forward. It is within the power of the house, if the arguments presented should be so convincing, to strike out any item. It is not within the power of the house as a whole to increase an item, except on motion of the government. Therefore I wish to make it clear that my failure to enlarge upon what I think should be done arises only because
3020	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare personally I do not feel that a discussion can produce any practical results at the present moment, and that the appropriate time for such a discussion will be next session, when we have the broad program of legislation under consideration.
In making that statement I am not presuming to be critical of anyone who has expressed an opinion in regard to a subject which is of great concern and great importance to the people of Canada. The only reason I am rising to speak at the moment is that I do want to place on record the simple circumstances which relate to why as yet there has not been any effective provision for action by the dominion and provincial governments to deal with this subject on the basis of a broad, joint contributory plan. I am not quite sure why the minister introduced the fact that proposals had been put forward by the dominion government in 1945 embracing certain provisions of this kind; but since this does become a record I wish to make it quite clear that there is only one reason why consideration has not yet been given to a broad, contributory plan approved by both the dominion and the provinces. That is because the dominion government has firmly refused to reconvene the dominion-provincial conference since the last conference adjourned on motion of the dominion government on May 3, 1946. This may be constant repetition in the minds of some people, but obviously only by constant repetition can the truth be kept clearly before the people. Because of the fact that this has been raised by the minister I can only express my regret-


Mr. Warren:: That is not quite the truth.


George Alexander Drew: It is the exact truth; and I intend to keep that truth on record in this house. I want to express my regret that the dominion-provincial conference at which general problems of this kind can be discussed, as announced recently, will not take place until next fall. This means that on the very proposition put forward by the minister there can be no consideration until the session of 1951, on the basis of joint action by the different governments. I would point out that the conference that will be called is only being called because it is necessary, owing to the termination of the financial agreements that were signed, and which were not, incidentally, the financial arrangements before the conference of 1945-46.
That is all I propose to say, but I wish to make it quite clear, and the record cannot be challenged, that these joint plans can only result from the combined action of the dominion-provincial governments, in view of both the constitutional position and the administrative problems involved. It is a


matter of regret that the conference has not been convened to deal with that up to now, and the next conference will not be called until the autumn of the coming year. I can only express the hope that when this conference does meet, the dominion government will indicate a willingness to meet the provinces upon a basis of co-operation, which was not displayed in the previous conference, and which they have not displayed in the intervening period.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister quoted some figures that are well-known to those of us who have followed this matter closely during the years. The point seemed to be that it was irresponsible for anyone to request such a thing as the removal of the means test-*


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, I did not suggest that. Look at the context of what I said.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I believe the minister used those very words. He went on to anticipate some of the other things I was going to talk about, such as the lowering of the age limit-


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member told me if he was allowed to make a speech on the general item, he would not make a speech on this one.


Stanley Howard Knowles: This is not a speech; I am just asking some questions. The minister implied that it was irresponsible to request the removal of the means test-


Paul Joseph James Martin: If you inferred that, I withdraw the implication, because it was never intended.


Stanley Howard Knowles: -because of the amount of money it would cost. May I tell the minister that he ought to direct remarks like that to the members on his side of the house. Practically every one of those members made it a plank in his election campaign that he would work for the removal of this means test.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, no.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the members wish to deny it, they can. I went across a good part of this country during the election campaign, and I saw the advertising the Liberals were putting out. It did not jibe with what the minister said here. It said, "I stand for the removal of the means test pending-not after, but pending-the adoption of a contributory plan."


Ralph Melville Warren: Who said that?


Stanley Howard Knowles: I read it over the name of the member for Vancouver Centre the other night, but I saw it in many parts of the country.


Ralph Melville Warren: Don't put words in my mouth.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I would not expect the member for Renfrew North to know what this is all about, but the people of this country were led to believe that the Liberals stood, at long last, for the abolition of the means test.


An hon. Member:: Might I ask the hon. member a question?


Stanley Howard Knowles: When I am finished. I submit that the minister is off on the wrong foot when he says it is irresponsible-


Mr.   Marlin.@: I said that I withdrew the implication. Why do you keep on repeating when I have already said that?


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am telling the minister, and I am telling the Liberal members of this house, that it is one of the things the people of Canada thought this government would implement, as soon as possible after the election.
I should like to say further with regard to this whole question of a contributory plan, Mr. Chairman, that it seems to me that what we are getting now is the use of that phrase "contributory plan" as an excuse for doing nothing. Some day we shall have to insist on a statement of policy by the government, as to what they mean by a contributory plan. Do they mean by it merely a plan for a few more items, or do they mean an over-all plan? At the moment, the government is simply saying, we cannot take away the means test until we get a contributory plan, and we cannot do that until we get an amendment to the B. N. A. Act, and we cannot get an amendment to the B. N. A. Act until we have several more conferences.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I did not say that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In other words we do not get the problem solved until we have two or three more elections. I can tell the government that that is not good enough. The minister boasted today that the means test which is now in effect is the easiest means test there is, compared with the other countries. I should like to tell the government that the means test, so far as the other income it allows is concerned, is worse now than it was when the Old Age Pensions Act was brought into force in 1927. At that time, a single pensioner was permitted $125 of other income, while today a single pensioner is only permitted $120 of other income.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I do not want to prolong this debate, but my friend knows that I have said that is not the situation. Only ten per cent of the old age pension receiving population are affected by that, so when my friend says it is worse than ever before, he is not dealing with the situation accurately.
Supply-National Health and Welfare


Stanley Howard Knowles: What I said was perfectly correct. I said that when the Old Age Pensions Act was brought into force, it allowed a single pensioner $125 of other income; is that not right?


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is right.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Today it allows $120 a year to a single pensioner; is that not worse? In 1927, when the act was brought into force it allowed $250 of other income for a married couple, while today it allows only $120 between them or, in other words, $60 each. That is a great deal worse. I submit there is nothing I must withdraw at all, and my statement is quite correct. That means test allows old age pensioners today a smaller amount of other income than was the case when the act was first brought in.
What the minister is trying to say, to deflect the discussion, it that, despite what the means test is, it affects only a small percentage. I should like to have the figures to prove the percentage he quoted. We had some unsatisfactory discussion about that point last session. Certainly, from the correspondence I receive the most offensive thing to our old people today, is the amount by which the pension is cut down, because of the application of this means test.


Some hon. Members:: Six o'clock.


Louis-René Beaudoin: In my opinion, we will expedite the business of the house if hon. members are allowed to make their speeches without interruptions.


Stanley Howard Knowles: 1 want to remind the minister, as I did last April, that this same situation developed back in 1943. In that year, Mr. Ilsley raised the pension from $20 to $25 a month by order in council. When he did it, he did not raise the total amount of income that the pensioners could have, and the result was that the amount of other income the pensioner could have was reduced from $125 a year down to $65 a year. We kicked about it then, and we got the same sort of answers we are getting from the Minister of National Health and Welfare now. By continuing to complain about it-and even Liberals went out across the country and found that it was most offensive, and they joined in the complaining-in six or eight months' time Mr. Ilsley corrected that, and put the ceiling back where it was.
I believe I have made it clear that I think the means test should go, and I believe the member for Vancouver-Quadra agrees with me. If that cannot be done immediately, I believe the member for Vancouver-Quadra and the rest of us who have spoken about it
3022	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare agree that the least the government should do is to put the ceiling back where it was before the amendments of last April.


Howard Charles Green: I have not yet received an answer to the question I asked. The minister has said that there are 75 per cent of the old age pensioners getting the full benefit of the $10 a month increase which was put through last April. I think he also said that 10 per cent got no benefit at all.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is right.


Howard Charles Green: That means that approximately
25.000	old age pensioners in Canada got absolutely no benefit from the increase of last April.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Because they had outside income.


Howard Charles Green: Because the ceiling was not raised.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes, that is right.


Howard Charles Green: That also means that about
37.000	other old age pensioners got only a portion of the $10 increase because the ceiling was not raised. Is not that correct?


Mr.   Marlin.@: They had $50 a month to live on.


Howard Charles Green: That may be; but the result is that 62,000 or 63,000 old age pensioners did not get this increase of $10 a month.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Ten per cent only did not get it.


Howard Charles Green: Let us get down to figures;
62.000	approximately did not get the increase.


Some hon. Members:: Six o'clock.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I wonder if we could go on.
I should like to finish.


Howard Charles Green: Sixty-two thousand did not get the full increase of $10 a month. We are now to understand from the minister that government policy is to keep that ceiling where it is at the present time. I can only say that it is a great tragedy for at least
62.000	senior citizens of Canada. It is entirely out of line with what this house had in mind when the amendment was passed last April.
I do urge upon the government that at the next session they lift the ceiling so that allowable income will be put back to where it has been ever since the Old Age Pensions Act was introduced.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the minister give us figures instead of percentages of those who benefited?


Clarence Gillis: It is six o'clock. If we are going to sit overtime tonight-


Some hon. Members:: Let us finish this item.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I gave the figures in a return to the hon. member for Lake Centre.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the minister put them on the record now? If they are in a return they are not on the record.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It has already been given in the return.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Six o'clock.


Clarence Gillis: I am going to call it six o'clock.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Would the hon. member mind going on for a few minutes. I would like very much to finish, if we can.


Stanley Howard Knowles: There are still some important items.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I know my hon. friend will try it for a few minutes.


Clarence Gillis: I am in this position. We sit in the house for two months early in the session and listen to a lot of abstract discussions that mean nothing except giving hon. gentlemen a chance to make a speech. The meat for which this parliament is called is here. We are dealing with money that runs this country and goes back into the lives of our people. At every session the same thing happens. We are sandwiched between Christmas and the estimates. I am prepared to sit here and discuss these things properly, and I do not care so long as I get home by Christmas eve. I just don't like this business. I could not say what I want to say in the next twenty minutes or half an hour. I do not want to keep hon. members here listening to me. I do not like this procedure. The government is going to get stuck one of these times with this kind of thing unless we come to an understanding to deal with the estimates earlier. In my opinion under the welfare department we are discussing matters that vitally affect the people of the country.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I agree.


Clarence Gillis: It should not be rushed and hon. members should have a thorough understanding of it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Six o'clock.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Clarence Gillis: I am through with it. I cannot say what I want to say.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
279.	Administration, $65,610.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Expenditures $63,550.78;
unliquidated commitments, $1; total commitments $63,551.78.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
280.	Administration, $60,887.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I have not got these. Could I give them later?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
281.	Assistance to provinces, $85,689.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Expenditures?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Expenditures $100,353; unliquidated commitments none; total commitments $100,353.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
282.	Assistance to schools of social work, $50,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Six o'clock, Mr. Chairman.


Donald Methuen Fleming: If hon. members are willing to carry on, I think we can finish up very quickly.


Stanley Howard Knowles: No. It has already been suggested that we sit for an extra hour tonight.
The Depuly Chairman: Unless we have unanimous consent it is difficult to carry on. As has already been pointed out, in December benevolence is in season. If hon. members do not object perhaps we can carry on for a few minutes. May I point out that once we reach the heading "Miscellaneous grants" there is nothing contentious that I can see. If unanimous consent is given perhaps we can call item 282 and carry on for a few more minutes.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Would you set a time?


Louis-René Beaudoin: I shall see six o'clock in about twenty-five minutes' time.


Donald Methuen Fleming: In keeping with the feeling of the committee, I shall be very brief. I know there are others who are of the same mind as I am in regard to this item of assistance to schools of social work. For that reason I am going to be brief.
A brief was submitted to the minister by the national committee of Canadian schools of social work on this item. I consider the contentions in the brief in support of increased grants for schools for social workers are unanswerable. I do hope that the minister will make the most strenuous efforts to increase those grants. They are needed by Canadian schools of social work to cover part of their administration expenses, and to provide student bursaries. The personnel situation in social work in Canada
Supply-National Health and Welfare is still very critical, and unless these schools receive federal assistance there is going to be a continuation of the crisis in the matter of personnel engaged in social work. The fact that the D.V.A. assistance is in process of being reduced as the number of student veterans who are attending the schools of social work graduate contributes to the critical situation that exists.
In line with the program that the national committee of these schools submitted to the minister it had been expected that grants in the neighbourhood of $130,000 would be available this year and $178,000 next year. For my part I commend this to the minister and urge him to give it active support.


Mr. Knight:: I am afraid I cannot take the responsibility of delaying the committee. The chairman himself and the minister will have to do that. In my opinion this is one of the most important items that we have discussed and I propose to discuss it. Personally I should like to back up the remarks made by the hon. member from Cape Breton South. I consider this haste with the estimates scandalous and unrealistic. In my opinion, if these estimates are to be discussed as they should be discussed we should sit here until Wednesday night at the very least.
Having said that I shall say that I am deputed by a number of my colleagues to shorten this debate by saying on their behalf what I am about to say. Perhaps that will substitute one speech for four. I have been spoken to in that regard by the hon. member for Winnipeg North, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, the hon. member for Kootenay West and the hon. member for Yale, each of whom had expressed his intention to say a word or two.
I was glad to hear the minister say that he took second place to no one in a desire to promote social welfare. Here is his opportunity. Personally I think this grant should be increased. I myself have had some connection with welfare work. I realize, and the committee must realize, that there is a great dearth of social workers in this country. I remember a number of years ago, when the present Prime Minister was minister of justice, I asked how many trained psychiatrists there were in connection with the penitentiaries, and he said there was one such person, and that he was attached to Kingston penitentiary.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I wonder if the hon. member would object if I said this-possibly to help him to abbreviate or to shorten what he is about to say-
3024	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I am doing very well without help.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I regard the work the hon. member is urging as highly important, and I can only say I regret it greatly if this measure were not continued in another year.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I can see one advantage in having these estimates brought forward under pressure. The minister is prepared to commit himself earlier than he would otherwise.
I want the estimate not only continued, but increased. I said I had been connected with family welfare work in Saskatoon, and one of the disadvantages with which we found ourselves faced was a lack of trained personnel for social work. It was almost impossible to obtain properly trained and qualified workers.
Some people think that good intentions are all that are necessary for the social worker.
I know however that, in addition to a natural aptitude for his work, he must have training of a high degree. I am referring to training in psychology or psychiatry, and human relations. The demand for social workers is increasing, and I propose to give one or two reasons why. In the first place mental instability is decidedly on the increase. We find that the average age of occupants of prisons is becoming lower. We find that the number of divorce cases in almost all the provinces, and throughout the country, is becoming higher.
Then there is the matter of the government's social program to be considered. There are increased public services rendered by governments in connection with which trained social workers are necessary. Personnel will have to be supplied. There are a number of schools of social welfare, which are entitled to this grant as the hon. member for Eglinton has pointed out. These are connected with universities-I shall not read the list because I think that is hardly necessary.
The grant in 1946-47 was $100,000, while in the two following years it was $50,000. I was disappointed when this year's grant was only $50,000 because, as I said in my opening sentence, I think it should have been increased.
These grants have substantially increased enrolments in these social schools. Without that assistance I doubt if the enrolments would have increased, and many of the students would not have been able to take the course. The grant for 1949-50 of only $50,000, in spite of the representations which have been made to the Department of National Health and Welfare, is disappointing. I might have said that the fact the D.V.A. training


scheme is now completed has some bearing on this question, because a great many people who were prepared to go into social service work under that scheme find it is no longer available to them.
The estimates this year would seem to indicate that any increase of this $50,000 in the future is uncertain. I would urge upon the minister the necessity for increasing this amount. I do not know what the schools have applied for. I have not read their brief with care.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is $178,000 for the next
year.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: May I say, as my last word in this connection, that bursaries are necessary. The average student going into this work would be better qualified if he had a B.A. degree, or an academic degree of some sort with which to begin his studies in social work. The temptation for those with degrees is to go right to work and earn a living at once. I have known of several cases of people with considerable aptitude who said, "I cannot afford it; I will have to go to work at once at the thing for which I have been trained." Had there been some inducement in the form of a bursary or a scholarship these people, with their leaning towards social work, might have been induced to take further studies. I think we would get a much better type of person by that method. Under present circumstances they are reluctant to spend more time in schools or universities. As a final word let me express the hope that the minister will see fit in future to increase this amount.


Mr. Croll:: Mr. Chairman, may I associate myself with what has been said by the hon. member who has just spoken, and the hon. member for Eglinton. I had intended making some extensive remarks, but those hon. members have pretty well covered the ground, and there is nothing much further to say. I would add only this statement, that I think the grant is not large enough. As was pointed out by the hon. member for Saskatoon, it has been cut from $100,000 to $50,000, and is inadequate.
The amount is not assured. It is given for only one year, rather than for a period of years, which would give some opportunity to do planning. Some of the effect is lost. My suggestion is that the minister ought to give some assurance that these grants would be continued for a period of three or five years so that the responsible schools may be built to a point where the people in the communities involved may take advantage of them.


Mr. Proudfool:: I, too, wish to commend the minister and the government for their assistance to schools in connection with social work. I should hope that he and the government might see fit in future to increase this grant substantially.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister not answer?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I have already spoken. I cannot add to what I have said.


Stanley Howard Knowles: All the minister said was that he would regret it if it was not there next year. Surely he can put it in more positive terms.


Mr.   Marlin.@: What more can any minister say? I do not run this government; I am only a member of it.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The most important member.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I feel that tlnis is an important matter, and I cannot take any other attitude. The hon. member knows that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
285. Health League of Canada, $10,000.
Mr. Hansell:: I have said nothing in the discussion of the health estimates.


Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):: Neither have I.


Ernest George Hansell: I had a forty-minute speech to deliver on this item, but if the minister will give an answer yes or no to my question, I shall cut it down to forty seconds. I am sure hon. members appreciate the work being done by the Health League of Canada. Part of that work is the publication of a fine magazine called Health. I have a grievance- and this is the point at which I would have made my forty-minute speech. I find in this magazine some advertising for cigarettes. One of these ads is most appealing, showing the picture of a rather glamorous-looking young lady with a cigarette in her hand. It is very appealing, indeed.
The part which struck me most, however, was that in the ad there appear in small type these words:
Awarded the certificate of the institute of hygiene for quality and purity.
I know I might be very unpopular in making a speech of this kind, and by vast numbers of people I may be considered a crank. May I say that history has proved that anything worth while is always done by a crank. That advertisement would give the impression that it is a pure and highly desirable habit to become a cigarette smoker. I want the minister to give a simple answer of yes or no. I think the minister has played quite a part in holding up his own estimates by saying too
Supply-National Health and Welfare much. If I were a minister of the crown and wanted to pilot through my estimates I would try to look as dumb as I could.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am doing my best.


Ernest George Hansell: I guarantee that I would get my estimates through faster than those of any other department. Does the minister support that kind of advertising in a magazine which is supposed to be published in the interests of the health of Canadian citizens- yes or no?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The government has nothing to do with the magazine. It is published by a voluntary organization. If I had anything to do with it I would give that matter careful consideration.


Ernest George Hansell: I know the government has nothing to do with the magazine but $10,000 is being given to this organization which publishes this magazine. My forty-minute speech will be made some other time.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health grants-General health grants-
694. To provide for the following grants to the provinces, under the terms and conditions approved by the governor in council-Health survey grant to assist the provinces in surveying present health services and facilities, including hospitals, and in studying ways and means of improving and extending the same; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $5,000 to each province and the balance according to population but the total payment available to any province in no case to be less than $15,000-further amount required, $19,779.
Hospital construction grant to assist the provinces in the provision of adequate accommodation for hospital and health services; to be distributed on the basis of $1,000 per bed for active treatment beds, $1,500 per bed for chronic or convalescent beds, or in the case of other health facilities on an equivalent basis; provinces to match or exceed dominion contribution which shall in no case exceed one-third of total cost-further amount required, $334,629.
General public health grant to assist the provinces in strengthening general public health services; to be distributed on the basis of 40 cents per capita of population, to provinces which maintain at least their standard and extent of service in this field as at March 31, 1948-further amount required, $132,400.
Tuberculosis control grant to assist the provinces in an accelerated and intensified effort toward the eradication of tuberculosis and to extend progressively the provision of free treatment; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $25,000 to each province and the balance to be divided 50 per cent on the basis of population and 50 per cent on the basis of the average number of deaths from tuberculosis in each province over the previous five years-further amount required, $176,614.
Mental health grant to assist the provinces in the prevention of mental illness and in extending progressively the provision of free treatment; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $25,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $122,171.
Venereal disease control grant to assist the provinces in extending and intensifying their present efforts toward the control of venereal disease; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $15,944.
3026	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare
Crippled children grant to assist the provinces in an intensive program for the prevention and correction of crippling conditions in children, rehabilitation and training; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $15,944.
Professional training grant to assist the provinces in the training of personnel for public health and hospital staffs; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $15,944.
Public health research grant to assist the provinces in stimulating and developing public health research-further amount required, $5,148.
Cancer control grant to assist the provinces in programs for the control of cancer; to be distributed according to population, with any such programs for cancer control to be approved and the cost thereof to be divided equally between the dominion and the province concerned-further amount required, $90,093.
Clarence Gillis: There are a number of things I should like to know about this item but I am particularly interested in the grants to provinces to help crippled children; how is that applied?


Paul Joseph James Martin: A province will put on a project. For instance, Saskatchewan recently put on a project to provide for the examination by dentists of some 45,000 children of high school age, which was approved.


Clarence Gillis: What is done with the grant to Nova Scotia? During the last five months I have tried to get something done for some incapacitated children but I could get nowhere. I was told to go to the Rotary Club or get in touch with the Red Cross and so on.


Paul Joseph James Martin: A total of $26,945 was available for that purpose in Nova Scotia.


Clarence Gillis: Have any projects been recommended there?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes. One of the last projects concerned X-ray equipment for the children's hospital in Halifax. There is another project for the provision of braces for children. Those are the only two I have before me now.


Clarence Gillis: When a grant is made to a province is it made to all children who may be in the category, or must children who need assistance pay for it?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That would be a matter of policy for the particular province.


Clarence Gillis: The minister is doing all right in his department because he is making funds available. But once the funds get into the hands of the provinces do they apply to the people the department has in mind or are they told that if they are not in position to pay, the services are not available or it would be on a charity basis? Are these people to be told to go to the Rotary Club or the Red Cross for assistance? People do not want to be placed in the position of having to ask
[Mr. Hansell.l

for charity. I hope at the next dominion-provincial conference the government takes a strong stand in an effort to bring our people out of the field of charity as far as grants by the federal government are concerned. If this cannot be done with the consent of the provinces we should bear in mind that we can now change our constitution.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Alphonse Fournier: I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again this day.
Progress reported.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.
Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Speaker, to meet the wishes of most members of the house, with unanimous consent I should like to move that we give priority to the bill entitled an act to amend the Canadian Red Cross Society Act.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Cruickshank:: Mr. Speaker, I presume the normal procedure will follow immediately afterwards.



CANADIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY


Alan Aylesworth Macnaughton: the second reading of Bill No. 222, to amend the Canadian Red Cross Society Act.


Major James William Coldwell: Is the hon. member in charge of the bill going to explain it?


Alan Aylesworth Macnaughton: Mr. Speaker, I should first like to take the opportunity to thank members of the house for their great co-operation and assistance in allowing the house to proceed with the second reading of this bill. I take it to be a tribute to the work of the Canadian Red Cross Society. This morning I tried to outline briefly the general purposes of the measure, and with your permission I shall go over the same ground again. The purpose of the bill is to allow for the expansion of the Red Cross Society in Canada. Section 1, for example, is an amendment to remove the limitation on the value of real estate which can be held by the society. This is necessitated by the rise in the value of real estate, and also because the society wishes to expand its services, particularly with regard to the establishment of outpost hospitals and blood transfusion services across Canada. Section 2 deals with the governing body.


Mr. Smith (Calgary West):: What are the figures on the increase in real estate holdings?


Alan Aylesworth Macnaughton: Under the Canadian Red Cross Society Act the limitation is $100,000. I believe the actual value is approximately $150,000 now. Therefore we can easily see one of the reasons for the amendment. The second major point is that, with the addition of the new province of Newfoundland, the society desires to enlarge its governing body from forty to sixty members. That also entails the enlarging of the executive committee from approximately a minimum of seven to eighteen, or perhaps a few more. Last but by no means least is the desire of the society to sanction the use of the following words, "La Societe Canadienne de la Croix Rouge", as the name of the Canadian Red Cross Society in the French language. If hon. members will co-operate in passing the bill, I am sure that the extension of the services of the Red Cross Society will be helped very materially.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Speaker, the members of the official opposition are very glad to support the bill, and to commend the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton) for bringing it before the house. I suppose there is no organization in Canada which has done finer work through the years than the Canadian Red Cross Society. I think it has the support and admiration of Canadians from coast to coast. We are only too glad to do what we can to help the society. It is worthy of comment that one of the main reasons given by the society for asking for these amendments is so that it may go further in its wonderful work of establishing outpost hospitals and extending blood transfusion services across Canada. This society seems to have had the faculty of keeping in touch with developments from year to year, and of always being ready to serve where the need is greatest. We are very glad to be able to support the bill tonight.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, it is not often that one has an opportunity of saying a word concerning an organization of this description. While the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green) said he was glad to rise on behalf of the official opposition to commend the hon. member for introducing the bill, and also to express appreciation of the society, I am sure that all of us, wherever we sit in the house, share the sentiments that he expressed. I know of no society in the world which throughout the years has done more for suffering people than the Red Cross. Too many people have looked upon the Red Cross Society as a purely wartime institution, but
Canadian Red Cross Society those who have lived nearer the outposts of the country, and in the newer provinces of Canada, have an appreciation of what the Red Cross has done between wars.
I know that during the depression years the Red Cross Society performed splendid work on the prairies in the province of Saskatchewan in aiding many people who were suffering from adverse conditions. Outpost hospitals in our northern regions were an example of what might be done in a bigger way as the days went by. This afternoon we listened to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin) outlining some of the problems of his department and expressing the hopes that he and all of us have in relation to the extension of public health services on a much wider scale in Canada. When we think of what we hope to do concerning public health, of necessity we think of organizations that have laid a foundation for the kind of thing we want to do on a much larger scale than can be done by a private organization such as the Red Cross Society. During the last war the Red Cross Society inaugurated a splendid blood bank service which it has carried forward into peacetime. It organized the taking of blood in order to facilitate its use in transfusions.
One has an opportunity on an occasion of this sort to say something by way of appreciation of what this great society has done. I think the house will be pleased to learn that the governing body is to be enlarged because of the society's activities in our new province of Newfoundland. Therefore I want to say, and not only on behalf of my own party because I know my views will be shared by all members of the house, that we appreciate what the Red Cross Society has done throughout the years in war and in peace, and we hope that the measure which has been introduced by the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton) will enable the society to go forward and perform still finer work from one end of Canada to the other, including the new province of Newfoundland. We support the bill.


George Alexander Cruickshank: should like to say a brief word on this measure. I believe the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton) will be the first to acknowledge that many years before I ever arrived here certain rules of procedure were laid down by someone far more learned than I am. The hon. member for Mount Royal came to me this afternoon and was the first to admit the existence of such rules. I said I would gladly stand aside for such a measure although I had the privilege of speaking at eight o'clock tonight. I think the hon. member is probably a little bit more experienced than some of the

Canadian Red Cross Society members who interrupt from time to time. As it happened, during the first great war I was grateful for the service I was given by the Red Cross. I know what they did for me and those who served with me. But particularly do I know and appreciate, on behalf of the people of my riding, what the Red Cross did during our time of trouble last year, when we had flood conditions in the Fraser valley. To me it is not a question of being asked to contribute to the Red Cross. To me it is a privilege to contribute in any form, whether by donating blood or giving money. What the Red Cross has done, not for the Fraser valley, not for the province of British Columbia, not for Canada, but what it has done for the whole world entitles it in my opinion to the support of every hon. member of this House of Commons. I can assure the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton) that I am entirely behind any effort he makes in behalf of this magnificent organization.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Mr. Speaker, I rise to take part in this discussion because, in spite of what some people may think, I have an interest in the subject that has been raised. Like other hon. members I am anxious to compliment and commend the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton) on bringing forward this bill. Some people may criticize the Red Cross because of the way its money is raised; but the simple fact is that when people are in trouble, when danger threatens or disaster strikes in any part of Canada or the United States, this organization stands ready to alleviate the sufferings of the people concerned. So anything we can do to help the Red Cross must appeal to every member of this house.
I have had some experiences in this connection, one of which might interest the house. The Red Cross is based upon the Geneva convention. During the early days of the last great war the president of the Canadian Red Cross happened to be a friend of mine who lived in Regina, and who is now a member of the court of appeal of that province. We graduated in law together; and if the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) were here I might suggest to him that I would like to join my friend of law student days on the august bench of my province. But that gentleman learned something, which I want to tell you about. When he assumed office as president of the Red Cross and came to Ottawa there was not a single copy of the Geneva convention in this city. In a worthy effort the government had the splendid idea that, as part of the war effort, it should take care of the financial responsibilities of the Red Cross. I am not criticizing the government

of that time for this, because we all assumed we knew what the Geneva convention said. That action, of course, would have been entirely opposed to the whole principle on which the Red Cross was founded. That organization only operates in other countries in time of war because of the fact that it is not supported by the governments of any of the contending parties. That is the whole basis of the Geneva convention. So this splendid chap had to keep on searching until at last-and I am looking at the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Croll)-he found a copy of the Geneva convention in the public library in Toronto. From that copy many other copies were made, so now I take it that if anyone should seek a copy of the Geneva convention it will be readily available.
I merely mention that incident, Mr. Speaker, because we all have certain things preached to us for years and we assume that they are like the laws of the Medes and Persians and cannot be altered. The fact is, of course, that the Red Cross in Canada and every other country in the world is based absolutely upon the Geneva convention.
It would be a waste of your time and mine, Mr. Speaker-and frankly I have more time than you have-to try to deal at length with the continuous achievements of this organization. Perhaps the knowledge most of us have is largely confined to the communities in which we live. Following the remarks of the previous speaker I remember how shocked we all were two>
sessions ago when we learned of the conditions then existing in the province of British Columbia and particularly in the Fraser valley, from whence my friend comes. If ever I was really proud of the parliament of Canada it was when this parliament to a man supported the expenditure of public money to meet that emergency. But the Red Cross were there first. They looked after the job; all we did was provide some money, most of it after the event, to back up the excellent work done there by various organizations.
I was not alive during the Crimean war, and the name of the nurse who founded the Red Cross escapes me for the moment-


Some hon. Members:: Florence Nightingale.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Incidentally my younger brother is married to another Florence Nightingale. Even to have this matter discussed in this house must recall to everyone who has read any history the heroic deeds of that noble woman. That was the beginning, not particularly of the Red Cross in our country, but of the idea of the Red Cross as between countries. The Red

Cross of the world owes its origin to her efforts on that occasion, when she looked after not only British soldiers but the soldiers of our enemies. Today in this House of Commons, we can do a trifle more towards this worthy cause.
I understand this bill contains three sections. I have not a copy of the bill, but I think I can speak fairly accurately from memory. May I say that the sponsor of the bill called on me today, and gave me an opportunity of reading the bill. There are only so many copies of it in English, and so many copies in French. I told him I knew what it meant, and I am for it; go out along the highways and byways and see some of these other chaps, so you can bring them into the picture. I have been handed a copy of the bill,	and I am going to preserve
this	among	my	mementos.	I have fourgrandchildren, all boys. My grandchildren will say, "Did old super-granddaddy get this particular copy in the House of Commons?" The	answer	will	be, "Yes, he	did, and youjust	follow	old	granddaddy;	you will be
broke, but you will have an awful lot of fun."
This bill contains three sections. I hear a number of those wealthy Conservatives around me laughing. I notice that I buy my own lunch, as a matter of fact, rather regularly, so we can let that go. Gentlemen, do not be cynical about what I am going to say, because your pipe line bills would not have got to first base, anyway. I should like to say that the unanimous consent given to the member for Mount Royal shows that the principle of hard things, money things, is not the most important in our lives. It means that human understanding and sympathy are still the main factors that control the thinking of the members of this House of Commons. For that I compliment them, including myself.
Some people laugh at sentiment. They say, "That is sentiment." Listen, Mr. Speaker, and gentlemen of this House of Commons: Unfortunately, on one side the controlling factors in human conduct are still greed and selfishness, but on the other side the controlling factor is sentiment. I am happy that it is so. I do not want to be one of those people who live by pure reason. Psychologists tell me that at about 32 years of age those fellows go to their mental institutions, and they never leave. Those fellows are the gold medallists in our universities. The answer is that they have single-track minds. They are confined to one idea, so they have a good development on one side of their cerebellum,
Canadian Red Cross Society while the other side pushes in, and out goes sanity; that is the whole story of insanity in this country.
Old as I am, I still remember that the pleasant things that have happened to me throughout life have been those of sentiment. Perhaps I am quite unable to reason; I do not know. When I meet a fellow who is too reasonable, I know from the outset that he is utterly wrong. I can assume that, and experience has proven that I have nearly always been right in my judgment of that sort of person.
I shall not take any longer-


Mr. Fulton:: Just another five minutes.


Arthur Leroy Smith: My great difficulty is that all my forensic life-for the benefit of some of you chaps who do not practise law, that means a blow-hard fellow who talks a great deal-in the courts, I have been subject to a control almost equal to that exercised by you, sir. In so far as I am concerned, I am more controlled by what you think than by what you say. You and I have never had a bit of difficulty since this House of Commons opened a short time ago.
Telepathy is a great thing. I am not a telepathist, but I think you are because, you know, we have been talking about these rays, and that sort of thing. All I need to do is look in that direction, I do not even have to look at the Speaker. Something emanates from him that tells me I am wrong. As a matter of fact, I think it is starting about now, so I shall not go very much further.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Arthur Leroy Smith: You know, Mr. Speaker, I mean every word I am saying about you.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I did not know that word "order" was automatic. Apparently I started something I did not intend to do. I think the inclusion of Newfoundland-I do not know how to pronounce it. We have seven members from that province, so we get seven pronunciations; none of them really knows how to pronounce it. It means that this is probably the last word we shall hear about it. We are going to give that province a lot more bonuses, but we went into this with our eyes open. I think it will be well worth everything which we put into it. I do say that it is perhaps the last sentimental link which unites this tenth new province with us, and makes it part of this country. I say, Mr. Speaker, what could be more fitting than our joining with them in this grand sentiment of the Red Cross, and through the Red Cross

Canadian Red Cross Society to help the unfortunate wherever they may live, and irrespective of what may have happened to them.
Seriously, I believe that it is a link between us. For years and years we have read of the sentiment that binds us to the British commonwealth, or that new word, the commonwealth, if you like. Let no one, unless he be stupid-that is too harsh a word, let us say "dumb" because it is better understood by most people-unless he be dumb, dare contend otherwise than that sentiment is something which is stronger than bonds or steel chains in binding peoples together.
May I close, and it is only half past eight-


Mr. Rinfrel:: Another five minutes.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Let us make it another three minutes, and then we shall both be happy. These people have been quite generous to me, Mr. Speaker, in these interjections. You do not know how I appreciate them. I really love the original thinking that is behind the interjections which I get. My difficulty is with my hearing. I have not yet got one of those hearing aids, but when I get it I am going to share it with the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) so that we shall both hear a little better and perhaps we shall both be greatly benefited as we go along. He is a man of prejudices and does not like them. I would wear them on both ears to hear anything that you say, sir, and particularly the intelligent and brilliant remarks that come from the opposite side of the house. And if I were in a tough spot I would need only turn to these gentlemen, these hon. gentlemen, on my right. May I say, sir, that I use the word "honourable" in its very best sense because I know of no one who is able to pronounce the word "carried" just the way they do.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I am glad to have the desk-thumping so ably led by my very great friend and great scientist; but he told me he was going to do that, and therefore it is just an arrangement between him and myself. He nods his head in approval. What I said was completely untrue so he and I stand on the same basis. I know that, because anyone in this house who speaks untruths is doing something which is quite beyond parliamentary language. I said a moment ago that I spoke an untruth. I immediately withdraw the statement with respect to myself and hope that I shall not be penalized by having myself named and expelled again from this august assembly.
I am closing with this one remark. We have Newfoundland coming in. They want to own more property. The blood banks in the province and in the city in which I live, which
(Mr. Smith (Calgary West I. J
are operated by this Red Cross Society, are in my judgment the greatest single contribution to human effort for the saving of life and the relieving of pain that science has yet developed, if it were for nothing else. Remember, in all these various communities they need properties in which these blood banks can be carried on. It cannot be done without it. It is an enlargement of the activities of the Red Cross which we knew nothing about just a few years ago. Therefore the bill introduced by the hon. member for Mount Royal, that 200-foot hill they have in Montreal, is a splendid thing, a splendid contribution to decency and efficiency in the relief of pain and suffering.
May I close, as I began, by complimenting the hon. member, who is a new member, for taking the interest which he has in this matter, and permitting us, unanimously I hope, to agree with every line that he has put into the bill. It is but the expression of human kindness, of human decency from all of us, and I hesitate to think of the attitude of mind of anyone who might oppose this noncontroversial and splendid objective which he seeks to promote.


Mr. J. H. Dickey (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that we all agree with the words of appreciation which have been used in the house tonight with respect to the work of the Red Cross Society. I certainly am not going to take up the time of the house to repeat what has already been said several times, but I do want to say that it is my belief that this bill will be extremely effective.
As you know, sir, one of the purposes of the bill is to improve the transfusion service of the Red Cross Society. I am sure that at least three hon. members who have preceded me in this debate will recognize the very appearance of this bill on the order paper as a life-giving transfusion to their ailing filibusters.


Arthur Leroy Smith: What you need is an operation, not a transfusion.


George Alexander Cruickshank: That is all right, I will give him plenty.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I only wish that time permitted me to say all the things which I should like to have the opportunity to say in praise and commendation of the work of the Red Cross; but in view of the swift passage of time and the proximity of nine o'clock I regret that I shall not have the opportunity which 1 shouiu ukc .u ,.ay my tribute to the organization whose principal act it is sought to amend here tonight.
The hon. member who has just spoken seemed to confuse the issue. I rather felt that, instead of the word "transfusion", had

he used the word "translation" he would have been closer to the principle involved in the bill before us; because, as I understand it, we are faced with the necessity of finding in the French language words adequate to express what we say in the English language with regard to this great organization whose bill is before us this evening.
With practically everything that the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) has said I find myself in complete agreement. Indeed, I am lost in admiration, Mr. Speaker, of the brilliance, the erudition and the well balanced mentality of the graduates of the Methodist college, so different, if I may say so, from the graduates of other institutions of learning whom occasionally we hear condemned in this house.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I hope the hon. member will permit me to say that I am the only continuing Methodist in Canada.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to permit the hon. member to say that; but I think he will permit me to say that, from whatever institutions of learning one may be fortunate or unfortunate enough to have graduated, when we in this House of Commons are brought face to face with a bill in support of the Red Cross Society those petty differences which we may have had in the past, and not only those, but the major differences which may have divided us, disappear, and we are united in the tribute which we wish to pay to that particular organization.
No words, Mr. Speaker, are adequate to express the admiration which we have for the work of the Red Cross Society. I recall the floods in British Columbia last year; I recall the work which the society did during the war years. I recall not only the major disasters of war, famine, flood and pestilence, but also the minor disasters where perhaps just one family was involved, perhaps a fire had levelled a humble dwelling to the ground and one family's lifework and life's saving had been wiped out overnight.
In a nation of 13 million people, all too often unfortunately the suffering of one single family is lost sight of, even by those great and beneficent agencies set up under our Department of National Health and Welfare, and under our provincial welfare departments. Even to those departments, working on a grand scale, the suffering of one individual or one family may be overlooked- not deliberately, but accidentally. But this never happens to the Red Cross. I have yet to hear of a single case where the sufferings of an individual or a family have been overlooked by this organization.
Canadian Red Cross Society
The Red Cross is but the expression of that great and welling charity, and the desire to do good and to bring relief to our fellow human beings, which exists in the hearts and souls of all people. However, while we all may have that desire, we do not always know in what way it can be manifested, or in what way we can best apply those sentiments which exist in the breasts of all of us. The Red Cross organization exists as a means through which we can translate into practical action the best and finest sentiments in our hearts.
For that reason it is my pleasure to support the principle of this bill and to congratulate the hon. member on the other side of the house who has the distinction and honour of having moved second reading. I take special pleasure in supporting the bill, because in my own community I have gained considerable knowledge of the work of the Red Cross Society.


Mr. D. A. Riley (Saint John-Alberl):: Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure and privilege to say even a few words in support of the bill introduced by the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton). I have had a great deal of experience with the Red Cross Society, particularly as it operates in the constituency of Saint John-Albert, and more particularly in the city of Saint John. Any legislation which will enable this society to broaden the sphere of its activities is one well worthy of the interest of this house.
During the war Canadian Red Cross Society units in Saint John did a tremendous work. Even after the cessation of hostilities it has not slackened its efforts in any way. In every case of suffering, Red Cross workers are first on the scene.
I should like to recall an incident which occurred a couple of years ago in the county of Saint John when we were unfortunate enough to have a rather serious forest fire. One morning at eleven o'clock, urged by the Red Cross workers, hundreds of housewives, office workers and professional people dropped their tasks and rallied to the support of the men who were working day and night to keep the fire away from their homes.
I speak of this only as an instance typical of the splendid work carried on by this great humane organization, which rallies under the banner of the red cross to relieve suffering wherever it is to be found.
I am sure hon. members are most anxious to give second reading to this bill, and I commend it to their best consideration.


Percy Ellis Wright: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to talk this bill out, so in what I wish to say I shall be brief. I feel however

Canadian Red Cross Society that as a representative of one of the northern constituencies of western Canada, where a great part of the work of the Red Cross is carried on, I would be remiss in my duty if I failed to say something concerning that work.
I know that in my own constituency when the boys came back from the first world war, and settled in little settlements forty miles or so from the nearest town or hospital, the Red Cross were the first to go out and establish outpost hospitals to serve those boys, just as they had served them during the war.
Since that time they have continued to do that work, and to follow the settlements back into the northern parts of the western provinces. May I say a special word in appreciation of the services of the nurses who have gone out to those outpost hospitals and in many cases served three, four, five or ten years in them, far removed from the cities, and lacking many of the amenities of life. Yet they have given a service to the community where there was no doctor, and very often great hardship-travelling at night by dog-team or perhaps by sleigh, and acting so as to serve the community in which these outpost hospitals were situated. These nurses deserve a special word of tribute from members of the House of Commons, and it gives me pleasure to tender it. May I commend the hon. member for Mount Royal upon having brought this bill before the house. I am sure it will receive unanimous support.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish briefly to express my support of the bill and in a few words my appreciation of the work the Canadian Red Cross has done throughout the years. Like the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank) my first direct contact with this organization was in the first world war. There I had the opportunity to appreciate the great work it did among the troops overseas.
I must confess that I always consider I owe the Red Cross a debt of gratitude, because it was in a Red Cross hospital that I first met my wife.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Hear, hear; that was the best break you ever had.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Realizing the work the Red Cross Society had done among the troops overseas, upon my return from overseas I had my first opportunity to see it in action on the *civilian front. I remember well the immediate response of this society to the Halifax disaster. In British Columbia I had the opportunity to serve on the committee which organized the campaign for the Red Cross in the southeastern section of that province. Since that time through the years we have seen it working in the outpost


hospitals mentioned by the hon. member for Melfort (Mr. Wright). May I add that in my own constituency there is a small Red Cross hospital serving an isolated district, and doing very effective work.
May I pay tribute to the people who serve those hospitals and who at times carry on their work under difficult conditions. In the second world war the Canadian Red Cross repeated its great work, and since the close of that war has continued to carry on in the civilian field, particularly in connection with shipments of food, drugs, medical supplies and other commodities overseas which, I understand, in one year exceeded a value of a million dollars. This is a great organization with over 900,000 senior and 800,000 junior members, and with a budget of $5 million for 1949. These figures alone indicate the great support the Canadian Red Cross Society receives from the Canadian people, and the appreciation of the work it has done, is doing, intends to do and will continue to do.
I am pleased to see the sponsor of this bill receive congratulations from hon. members, and to see the house express such unanimous support of the bill and the work of the Canadian Red Cross Society.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Mr. Speaker, I should like to take just a few minutes to express my wholehearted approval of this bill and of the work of the Canadian Red Cross. I should like to compliment the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton) for introducing this bill. I congratulate the government and hon. members of the house upon giving unanimous consent to permitting it to be considered at this time. I assure the house that I shall not prevent its passage by speaking too long.
One can only speak of an organization as he comes in contact with it in his own community. One of my chief contacts with the Red Cross in Calgary has been through its blood bank. The work they have done in that regard in Calgary is sufficient to enlist the support of anyone who has the general welfare of his community at heart. I have come in contact with the work of this organization through an extremely good friend of mine, Mr. Hugh Farthing, who has headed the organization in Alberta for the last two years. The work done by this organization and the time that numerous citizens of Calgary and Alberta have devoted to furthering its interests are added reasons why this bill should go through.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Dion in the chair.

Sections 1 to 3 inclusive agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, December 2, consideration of the motion of Mr. Maybank for the second reading of Bill No. 66, respecting Alberta Natural Gas Company, and the motion of Mr. Fulford: "That this question be now put".
George Alexander Cruickshank: Mr. Speaker, I had not expected to be called upon to speak tonight but my good friend, the hon. member for Mount Royal (Mr. Macnaughton), came to me this afternoon and asked if I would defer in his favour. I referred him to Your Honour. I think hon. members will agree that no matter before this house has been more worthy of consideration than the one we have just been discussing.
I have not much time to speak tonight. All I shall probably have time to say this evening is that, since I have had the honour and privilege of being a member of parliament, in my opinion there have been two bills which have been all-important to my riding, to my province and to Canada as a whole. The one was the bill that provided for reinforcements for the troops overseas and the other is this present bill.
I sincerely believe that. I appreciate the sincerity of those who disagree with me, but I think they should credit me with the sincerity of my beliefs in the matter.
On motion of Mr. Cruickshank the debate was adjourned.


Mr. Speaker:: The hour for private and public bills having expired, the house will resume the business which was interrupted at six o'clock.

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



MINES AND RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
172. Departmental administration, $365,500.
Alistair McLeod Stewart: Mr. Chairman, last February I brought to the attention of the house a situation where certain collaborators of the nazis had been allowed to enter Canada. The hon. member for Kamloops says "alleged collaborators." I have proof positive that they were collaborators of the nazis. Owing to the dissolution of the last parliament I could not continue the case
Supply-Mines and Resources which I was building up against one of them, Jacques de Bernonville. Several men were involved and perhaps I might refresh the memory of hon. members by giving in brief the dossiers I have and which are based upon official information given to me in certain returns brought down to the house.
Jean Louis Hue, who lived in the region of Saint Gaudens in France, was looked upon as the local recruiting agent for the dreaded militia of Vichy. He tried to use his authority to compel his subordinates to follow the directives of Vichy and was himself a member of the militia to whom he delivered weapons. He was sentenced by a magistrate at Toulouse to five years' imprisonment and national degradation for life. Sentence was passed in September 1945.
Julien Labedan was a uniformed and armed member of the militia who took part in operations against the maquis of Haute Savoie and unhesitatingly followed the orders of Darlan. He was sentenced to death at Toulouse during January, 1945, for treason.
Georges Montel, a doctor and surgeon, was appointed first assistant to the mayor of Annecy by the Vichy government and was an impassioned speaker for the cause of that government. He is reputed to have urged that war be declared against Britain and the United States. In 1946 he was sentenced to hard labour for life by the court of Haute Savoie.
Andre Boussat, another doctor, was found guilty of dealings with the nazis and sentenced by the court at Agen in July, 1945, to penal servitude for life. He was a moving spirit as well as an ardent propagandist for the militia.
Michel Seigneur, still another doctor, was a strong Vichyite and a member of the militia. He attended the school for militia leaders where his file stated that he was an "excellent element from every standpoint; among the first of his year; perfectly in his place." In March, 1945, he was sentenced to death at Poitiers. These men are now here in Canada.
There is still another and very much worse case. I refer to de Bernonville who worked with the Germans in north Africa and became military commandant of the Lyons area. As I said before, amongst his duties there was the identification of British and other allied officers who had been dropped into France by parachute and were subsequently caught. He was accused of having caused the death of many Frenchmen. In February of this year I partially placed upon the record the sworn testimony of Maurice Nedey who had been tortured by de Bernonville, but my time

Supply-Mines and Resources expiied before I could complete the statement. I may say now that Nedey was sent to Buchenwald camp and most fortunately escaped from there. A member of the house in the previous session, the member for Charlevoix-Saguenay, who I believe was counsel for de Bernonville, took exception to the things I said and he answered me on February 24, 1949. I am not going to take the time of the house to answer him, but I can assure hon. members many of the statements he made were quite inaccurate. I can only point to his allegation that according to the French ambassador ninety per cent of the maquis were communists. He stated the French ambassador said that, which is certainly not the case. He mistranslated a telegram, and he was responsible for other misstatements which can be proven. In approaching all these charges he implied that I was necessarily a sympathizer with communists, or communism. I repeat now what I said very bluntly before, that the man who thus accuses me, or any other members of my group in the house, is either a liar or a knave, and in all probability both. He accused me of harbouring sentiments against French people because I opposed the entry of these collaborators into Canada. That also is not true because when the government of Canada placed French citizens on exactly the same basis as any other individuals coming to this country, we were amongst the first to welcome this move. Even more stupidly I have been accused of anti-Catholicism because I opposed the entry of these men to Canada. I think my record in the house and outside of it will prove that I have no intolerance of any group because of race or religious belief. Such a concept is anathema to me. I do not know the religion of these men. All I know is their political records, and it is solely on the political basis that I oppose them.
I should point out, however, that when de Bernonville was sentenced to death it was not, as the member for Charlevoix-Saguenay said, when there was an alleged reign of terror in Toulouse in 1944. He was sentenced to death in October, 1947, when the premier of France was Mr. Paul Ramadier, and the minister of justice was Mr. Andre Marie who, if he were in this House of Commons, would feel perfectly at home in the ranks of the Conservative party.
I am told that once again a board has been set up to consider the de Bernonville case. I do not know whether or not that is so, but I should like to produce certain other evidence I said I had. I am not going to read it all, but if the minister does not have

copies I shall be very happy to supply him with these statements. There is one given by Julien Lessaque which reads:
I, the undersigned, Lessaque, Julien, commandant at Givry (Saone et Loire) attest that my brother, Lessaque, Jean, twenty years of age, from Rosey, Saone et Loire, belonging to the Cruchand Maquis took part in the battle with his group on June 12, 1944, with the occupants of Givry. He was wounded and captured by the militia stationed at Cortiamble, a suburb of Givry, under the command of de Bernonville. He was questioned and tortured and while in prison at Chalon, he managed to send me word. This paper was sent to the commandant of Chalon and Saone and was never returned to me. On July 18, 1944, I learned that my brother had been shot by the Germans. I am sure that my brother had only as his object to fight the aggressor and to liberate the country. It is therefore de Bernonville who is entirely responsible for his arrest, tortures, and his death. I truly hand over this present attestation in order that it may be put on the file of this unworthy Frenchman.
It is signed at Givry on November 23, 1948. I shall only read one other. There are others if the minister wishes them. This one is written by one Madame Bonnet whom de Bernonville made a widow. It reads:
I, the undersigned, Vv. Bonnet, Maurice, declare under oath having been arrested on May 31, 1944, by a group of militia men who were at Chalon-sur-Saone under the order of commandant de Bernonville. After having been closely questioned at the hotel Moderne, I was taken to the prison of Chalon-sur-Saone. I admit that they were not looking for me but for my husband as being a member of the resistance and who had just escaped them. I was to be released on June 24, as my husband was arrested again on June 9 during a battle at Givry, Saone and Loire, together with militia men and a group of F F.I. of whom he was the leader.
Very severely wounded by seven shots during this battle and taken prisoner, he went through terrible tortures, namely, hanged by the feet regardless of his severe wounds, then turned over to the Germans who left him forty days in the Chalon prison without any care and shot him on July 18 with one of his men (Lessaque) who was arrested with him. I add that de Bernonville was perfectly aware of the tortures inflicted by his men on the French he ordered to arrest.
That is signed by Madame Bonnet at Chalon-sur-Saone on November 21, 1948. As I say, there are many other instances which I could give to the house. But now I want to point out that one, Jean Bonnel, a resident of Montreal, said that de Bernonville was one of the heroes of France and instead of sending him to his death we should kiss his feet. He added these words:
I will do everything to keep de Bernonville from being delivered to the present government of France, a government of cretins, assassins and bandits.
One who is now a member of the house and also mayor of Montreal, Camillien Houde, stated that the deportation of de Bernonville would be "an iniquity". He went on to say:
This crying injustice-we can call it this infamy -cannot pass in silence.

We have other amazing declarations such as that of the judge of the court who, according to newspaper reports, said that he would ask the authorities at Ottawa to grant de Bernonville asylum in Canada along with his family. I think I might add to these testimonies that of Pierre Laval who was shot as a traitor in France. I will translate this very roughly. It is signed by Pierre Laval at Vichy and dated the 6th of July, 1944. It is to the effect that de Bernonville was becoming energetic in the militia. He proved on numerous occasions his ability to maintain order in Haute Savoie and distinguished himself in the way he defeated the maauis in certain engagements, details of which I have already given to the house.
I do not think there is any argument at all for the presence of de Bernonville in Canada. I am informed that the government intends to press for his deportation, and I hope they will be successful in their endeavour. There is more to it than merely the matter of de Bernonville. There is also the matter of statements which were made last year by ministers of the crown when this whole most obnoxious business was first exposed. The then minister of mines and resources declared in public that these men had been screened, and that they were accepted as being proper applicants for entry into this country. He was seconded in his statements by the then acting prime minister, who is now the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Both of these gentlemen said these men had been screened. I challenge the accuracy of that statement because it was not true. If it was true then the screening was most incompetent. What was even worse and more unbelievable was the suggestion that these men had been screened by officials of the department, and that therefore these officials were responsible for their entry into Canada by consenting to their coming here. That was entirely untrue because the officials of the department had recommended that these men be deported, and the government overruled their recommendations and accepted them into Canada. The then acting prime minister went even further. He spoke of hasty trials. When any hon. gentleman is acting as prime minister of a country he has to be rather judicious in the remarks he makes about the courts of a friendly nation. The Minister of Trade and Commerce has all the finesse of a bull in a china shop when it comes to diplomacy, and he made an extraordinary mistake when he said that these trials had been hasty. Very shortly afterwards he was called upon by the
Supply-Mines and Resources ambassador of France who, after consultation with the minister, issued a statement. The following is the statement issued by the French ambassador:
The ambassador pointed out that the persons in question, who have been condemned in absentia, were tried by French courts according to correct legal procedures and found guilty of major crimes. He further stressed that their concern for their honour should prompt these Frenchmen to go and appear before the courts of their country, where every opportunity of defending themselves would be given to them.
The acting prime minister, the Right Hon. C. D. Howe, issued the following statement:
X have seen the communique of his excellency the ambassador of France. I am able to confirm that at no time since the end of hostilities has the French government presented any request for extradition to the Canadian government, nor would I wish to question the ambassador's assurance that the trials in absentia were conducted according to correct legal procedure.
Of course that puts a rather different complexion on it because, as has been pointed out, justice, as it was meted out in France, has been lenient. There were 160,000 cases of collaboration reported, not many when one considers the four years of occupation. Some 820,000 French citizens were deported by the nazis. Some 222,000 were killed during deportation, and 30,636 were shot in France by the invaders. So far as French justice is concerned, of the 160,000 cases there were only 5,500 death sentences, and only 791 carried out. I do not think there can be any aspersions cast on French justice in that regard.
The Prime Minister also said, as one might expect in the light of cabinet loyalty, that he agreed with the regularizing of the entry of these nazi collaborators, and he said:
I am satisfied with that. In my judgment that should be final.
"Final" only in the judgment of the Prime Minister, Mr. Chairman. There are certain questions which I wish to ask the Minister of Mines and Resources. The first one is whether he can tell me the composition of the tribunal which has been appointed to consider the case of de Bernonville. Following upon that, I should like to know if the minister has any information about the trail of Michel Seigneur at Limoges in France.


David Arnold Croll: Mr. Chairman-


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I wonder if I might have my questions answered first.


David Arnold Croll: Mr. Chairman, I should like to commend the government for the job it has done in the field of immigration since the end of the war. In 1946 we were the first overseas nation to establish a mass immigration program from the displaced
3036	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Resources persons camps. We were pioneers in that field. We were the first from the new world to extend our hand to those unfortunates who were then rotting in the camps. We organized teams consisting of immigration, labour, medical and security officers who travelled from camp to camp recruiting, examining and processing. We procured transportation for displaced persons when it was very difficult to obtain. Two years later we were followed by the United States. To date we have welcomed 90,000 immigrants to Canada, and the United States with her vast population and resources has only taken in 120,000. In the light of these figures I think we can be very proud, and we can give credit where credit is due.
I want to say a word about the man who carried the administrative burden, the director, Mr. A. L. Jolliffe, who will have retired before we return for another session. He has been a great public servant who has spent thirty-seven years in the department during which time he has carried a very heavy load. It has not been an easy department because it deals with human beings. Many times it was an adjunct of some other department, and the immigration policy was not too clear. He has been an excellent administrator with a very penetrating mind, and has helped to carry out this country's achievements and objectives as to immigration. Many of his problems have been human problems, and he has brought consideration and understanding to them. He dealt with them in a fine warm-hearted manner as an honest man would. I think all members of the house will wish him well indeed.
I am happy to call the attention of the house to another matter, the attitude of the government with respect to those who have ventured across the Atlantic on their own.
I think this house knows that in August of last year a movement was commenced across the Atlantic from Sweden to Halifax, first by a motor vessel called the Astrid, carrying 29 Estonians, which was followed by nine other small vessels bringing a total of 987 persons, of whom only twelve have been refused admission to Canada. Recently another attempt was made by the S.S. Victory, which is now in Cork, Ireland, carrying 372 passengers, who are being inspected and cleared there. These refugees were people running away from oppression. They came to our shores seeking freedom and opportunity, and we generously admitted them. They were modern Vikings who demonstrated their desire for freedom in a way most of us are incapable of. The cost of this movement was considerable; we had to feed, transport and maintain them, and the government 

spent almost $150,000. In admitting them the government has placed humanity above regulations, and I think it should be praised for so doing. Canada has need for such bold and enterprising people, and the department has done the country a great service.
The news that a Department of Citizenship and Immigration is being set up is most welcome. I think it is a proper recognition of the relationship that exists between citizenship and immigration, and of the long-term importance of immigration to this country. It is also, I hope, an indication of a larger and more vigorous immigration policy in future. I am heartened by the words of the right hon. Prime Minister on Friday, December 2, at page 2596 of Hansard, when he said:
There is a probability that there will be an increasing number of persons admitted as immigrants into this country to share with us the advantages and responsibilities of developing the resources of Canada.
At another point on the same page, he said:
It is my view that our experience in that respect has demonstrated that, while it was principally on humanitarian grounds that these people were admitted to our country, they will ultimately prove that the bread we cast upon the waters is returning to us.
So, after a generation of inaction with an immigration policy which was tantamount to a non-immigration policy; after a generation in which the once important department of immigration dwindled almost to extinction; after a generation in which almost as many people left Canada as came to Canada; it has been heartening to see a new tide of immigrants coming to our shores. Those of us, and our number is increasing, who believe that large-scale immigration is the lifeblood of a young, vigorous nation, are gratified that the government has admitted more people to Canada in the last four years than it did in the whole preceding 14 years.
The latest figures indicate that Canadians are now staying at home. The border has lost its lure. We might ask what has suddenly happened in Canada? I wish to give this house five potent reasons that have fired the imagination of young and old in this country; they are the main reasons why Canadians are staying at home today. I remind this house, first, of Chalk River, with its scientific research; Polymer, with its great engineering advances; the western oil fields, with their liquid gold; Labrador, Ungava and Quebec, with their iron ore; and the Northwest Territories, which is an empire all its own. Truly, the twentieth century belongs to Canada. Those are frontiers that have, as yet, been unscratched. The natural resources are almost limitless.

The need for people is still with us. This great war has swelled the post-war wave of immigrants, but there is still plenty of room for more. Those who came to us have become part of the Canadian mosaic. They have enriched our economy and our culture, contrary to all predictions. As I have already stated, they have remained here. Is it any wonder that we should want more of them? When we look about, we find that the sources of immigration are drying up. With the exception of the countries on the western fringe of Europe, Russia has closed the continental door in our face. No one goes in, and no one comes out.
In Britain, the traditional source of much of our immigration, we find her economy so depleted she has taken in great numbers of them, too. Faced with that situation, we must revise our standards considerably if we want to retain our present healthy level of immigration. If the flow is dwindling, we must open the sluice wider. We have recently heard the news that immigration this year is falling far short of our figures for last year. The figure for 1949 is one-fifth less than for 1948; I think that is a serious situation, because that is one import upon which we cannot afford to cut down. People have always been our most valuable import. Unfortunately, many countries have had to establish a form of export control on people, and that is one reason for our falling immigration figures.
There are several solutions to this problem. The first is to extend the degree of relationship which renders immigrants admissible to this country. This is badly needed. At present, the regulations authorize the entry of certain categories of relatives, extending as far as unmarried nephews and nieces under the age of 21 years. Yet, the fact is that in four years we have drained that valuable field and also of mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, nephews and nieces; they have nearly all been spoken for. There are still many who want to come to Canada, and who would make good and useful citizens, but who fall outside the present categories of relationship. I do not believe there is one member in this house who has not had at least one heart-breaking case brought to his attention, and has been told that nothing can be done.
I ask this house, by what stretch of the imagination is a nephew 25 years old less desirable as an immigrant than his younger brother of eighteen? He is still excluded, however. Why should we admit a niece, but not a cousin? Why may a single man come in, yet we exclude married couples. I believe these categories are unrealistic. They should be abolished. If they cannot be abolished
Supply-Mines and Resources immediately, they ought to be abolished progressively. We could abolish them by gradually expanding the right, first to married nephews and nieces over 21 years of age; then to cousins, and then to any degree of relationship.
I think the test of admissibility to this country must be twofold. First, is the immigrant a useful citizen; and second, is there someone in Canada who will accept responsibility for him, who will guarantee accommodation and maintenance until he becomes self-supporting. Then, providing they are in good health, physically and ideologically, they should be encouraged to come to Canada to build new lives here. A second solution is to attract settlers from countries which, in the past, have sent us many fine Canadians. We want settlers from the British isles; of course we do.


An hon. Member:: Scotchmen.


David Arnold Croll: There are none better. Then, of course, we can look at Scandinavia, Holland and France. I was thinking particularly of Italy, a land which, to my personal knowledge, has supplied us with some of our best citizens. Today Italy is a great reservoir of manpower, yet the Department of Labour Year Book indicates we have only brought in 250 Italians since the end of the war. They were immigrant workers, such as terrazzo workers, and stonemasons. Italy is a country that has always been overcrowded, lacking resources. Her economy is reduced to a point where she must export people, if she wishes to achieve any kind of stability. This is a great opportunity for us, and we cannot afford to miss it.
Italian settlers have come to Canada since the turn of the century. They are sober, hardworking people who have made a worth-while contribution to this country. The Italian settler fits in any place. He is a farmer, artisan, merchant and worker. When he comes to Canada, he comes here to stay. Canada has never been his half-way house. He is a permanent acquisition, and a very good one indeed. Today there are thousands of skilled and unskilled prospective settlers in Italy, who seek nothing better than an opportunity of coming to Canada. We, in turn, need them as much as they need us. Our absorptive capacity in this country has not even been scratched.
I should like to see this government mount a full scale immigration scheme, designed to draw us the best type of settlers from Italy and other free European countries. Our immigration service in Europe is now functioning, and functioning very well. I think they can handle a much larger flow than is at present passing through their office. We have helped a great deal to reduce the dis-

Supply-Mines and Resources placed persons population in Europe. Now I think we should turn to that portion of Europe's people who are not displaced persons and give them an opportunity to qualify for entry into Canada. We can do that best by expanding the classes of people who are admissible and by vigorously going after the very best type of immigrant.
I think it is highly significant that in our history periods of national prosperity and high immigration have usually coincided. I am not trying to propound the theory that prosperity causes immigration or vice versa, but I do believe that immigration and prosperity stimulate each other. A glance at the last four years would affirm it, and a look at our past history would reaffirm it. Our postwar immigrants have brought to this country brains and skills. They have founded scores of industries and have given employment to thousands. If we are to continue to grow in this country, if our national income is to continue to increase, if our prosperity is to last, we must have more people; we must have more customers and we must have more consumers and we must have a larger internal market. I plead again with the government and with the department to continue to stimulate immigration in this country. It is my firm belief that we must have more Canadians. In order to have more Canadians we must have more immigrants.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: The minister has not answered my questions yet.


Hon. Colin Gibson (Minister of Mines and Resources):: The question the hon. member asked was first of all about the composition of the board that will consider the de Bernon-ville case. The board is arranged for. It consists of members of the department. It is not customary to give their names, as we do not want to have their names announced until the hearing actually takes place. Counsel has been appointed and the board hearing will be started as soon as the counsel is ready to proceed with the case.
My hon. friend also asked whether we had particulars of the trial of Michel Seigneur.
I would say that details of that kind do not come to my department; they go to the Department of Justice where any screening is arranged for, but we do not ourselves have the particulars of those files.


Mr. Siewarl (Winnipeg Norih):: Can the
minister tell me where we can get the information contained in the sessional paper I have here, 61-H. I presume this did not come entirely from his department but from other departments as well.
[Mr. Croll.l


Colin William George Gibson: That was before I was in the department. I understand that was an order for return, and papers for that are supplied by all departments.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: The reason I ask is that I have information that Seigneur was accused and condemned for having been an inspector general of the Wafifen S.S. I should like to remind the minister of this. In the last parliament seventy-nine days elapsed before this order for return, 61-H, came down. Seventy-nine days elapsed and I got it the day before the house dissolved. The government has beaten that record now. Since the notice of my question and the order for return was passed on de Bernonville over eighty days have elapsed and I do not have the information I should like to have. Nevertheless I was given certain information, certain transcriptions of evidence of the courts in France about these individuals. I have the transcript of the court of appeal about Seigneur. What I should like to know from the minister is whether the record of the trial at Limoges is in the possession of the department.


Colin William George Gibson: I do not know anything about it. The question has not been raised with me since I have been in the department. I have not looked into it. I do not know anything about the papers. If the government has any they are not in my department.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: This is a serious matter. Here are men whom I accuse of being nazi collaborators. The minister knew I was going to bring up this matter. I would have thought that he would have made himself fully conversant with it, and would correct me if I am wrong or agree with me if I am right. I cannot find out this information about Seigneur at the moment. Therefore I pass on the information which I have here. I say that this man, whose entry into Canada has perhaps by now been legalized, was sentenced to death for being an inspector general of the Waffen S.S. I am talking about Seigneur now. All these men came into Canada on false passports, on forged passports. I should like to know what sort of security existed to allow them to come here when obviously they could have had no background but names which were assumed. Were they smuggled in?


Colin William George Gibson: Mr. Chairman, the cases that have been referred to were considered some time ago, before I was in the department. I understand that they were carefully screened at that time and the decision was made that they would be permitted to remain in this country. Since

then I have not heard from the hon. member that he had any further evidence that he wished to have considered, and certainly since I have been in the department I have not even looked at their files because the matter had not come up.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I am not
quoting the evidence now. I want to know how these men with false passports were screened. How could they be screened? The minister must know because evidence has been read into the record that his department officials and security officials recommended against their staying in Canada. He knows that. If any decision was made it was purely a political one, I assume at cabinet level. The minister ought to know something about that. While I am not accusing him the government must assume the responsibility. How were these men cleared by security if they had false passports?


Colin William George Gibson: Mr. Chairman, the fact that a person had a false passport does not conclusively prove that he is not a desirable person to enter this country. For example, people have escaped from other countries and come here and landed without any passport at all. They have had to be examined and screened to find out what their background was. If they were approved, they were allowed to stay. If they were not approved they were of course deported.


Arthur Leroy Smith: By whom?


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Department officials and security officials recommended that they be sent back. They came into this country on false passports. We have been told that they were screened. How could they be screened? Yet I am told they were screened. They came in here with false passports, under false names. They could have no background at all. What sort of security is there? I know that there is security, and I have no objection to it. I think it is competent, but now I am told that these men were screened. I say they could not have been. Will the minister please be a little more specific and tell me how people with false passports and with false names could be screened. I want to know how that is done.


Colin William George Gibson: Mr. Chairman, the screening is done through the Department of Justice. We send to the Department of Justice any cases on which we require information. They have methods of securing reports on the individuals. If they are not satisfied and they do not give a clearance the individual is deported. If they are able to
Supply-Mines and Resources satisfy themselves and give a security clearance, then we are at liberty to admit them into this country.


Alan Carl Stewart: These men were screened by officials of the Department of Justice and they recommended against their entry into this country. A section of the immigration law says-I have not the exact quotation here-that they should not be allowed into Canada because they are not of good character. What was the reason for the decision to permit them to stay here? Were there extenuating circumstances? The government knows that they had been accused and convicted in France of certain crimes against our allies. What circumstances prompted the government to permit these men to stay here, knowing that they had come on false passports, knowing that they had deported seven Jewish people for exactly the same reason? What was the distinction between the seven Jews and these collaborators?


Colin William George Gibson: I understand the reason the Prime Minister gave when this matter was up in the house before was that all the circumstances had been considered, and thoroughly considered. That is, they had decided that some of the men who had been able to satisfy the authorities would be permitted to remain in this country, and those who had not would be deported.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: It is only right that we should know the circumstances, so that the names of these men can be cleared if they are not guilty. I have certain facts here which are damning. These are extracts from the trials appearing in sessional paper 61-H. The minister says there are extenuating circumstances, that there is something about the character of these men which I do not know, and which permits them to stay here. What were those circumstances, which were so important that they could override the provisions of the Immigration Act itself?


Colin William George Gibson: I cannot give the hon. member the information we have on confidential files. I can only say that the government at the time went over the material and decided that it would be justified in admitting certain ones and not admitting the others.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: All I am
saying is that the minister has information which may redound to the credit of these nazi collaborators. In fairness to them, even allowing for any confidential files, he should make it public. I have put on record the case against them. The minister says he has

Supply-Mines and Resources confidential information in their favour. I ask, in fairness to them: Why not present that evidence?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I would like to have an answer.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Just a word on this: I do not know the de Bernonvilles-


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I know what this silence means.


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: Oh, oh.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I notice great laughter over here to my immediate right over my mispronunciation of the French name. I am quite sure the honourable member-and I emphasize the word "honourable"-would not respect me much if occasionally I were to laugh at his English, something which I never have done in this House of Commons.


Pierre Gauthier: My hon. friend is mistaken. I did not laugh. He is absolutely out of order.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Then I accept what you say, and I was quite wrong-as I will accept the word of any other hon. member, particularly the minister. But I wish the minister to tell me this-


Pierre Gauthier: I would never do that.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Doctor, I have done everything I can. I wish to ask this: The hon. member for Winnipeg North tells this House of Commons that certain people were convicted of crimes in France against the allies and came to this country fraudulently -and that is the only word one can use. It was thoroughly fraudulent. Now someone in the government service, as he has said, against the advice of departmental officials has decided that these people convicted even of murder, if I heard him correctly, and I think I did-


Alistair McLeod Stewart: de Bernon-ville; the others are not accused of that.


Arthur Leroy Smith: In any event, they were in opposition to the allied cause.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: That is right.


Arthur Leroy Smith: We are now told by the minister that certain investigations have been made, and that after those investigations these persons have been admitted to Canada. So far as I am concerned, the minister's explanation is nothing at all. If the situation is that people can be admitted

to this country against our laws, and the minister speaking for the government can then say, "We made an investigation and they are entitled to be here; but we will not tell you what that investigation was"-well, that is exactly the minister's position, and I say there is something not only rotten but thoroughly rotten in the state of Denmark, and even in the state of Canada.


Colin William George Gibson: Following up what the hon. member has said, let me tell him that in the last few months we have had refugee ships coming to this country from Sweden. They have carried refugees with not a document on them. May I ask him if he would insist that, because they have no documents on them, we should require that they be returned to the country from which they came?


Arthur Leroy Smith: Oh, no.


Colin William George Gibson: You said that.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I agree with you entirely. I read all about those people. They came in ships supposed to hold fifteen people, but sixty-five or eighty-five were loaded into them. But the people the hon. member for Winnipeg North is talking about did not come that way. These people came and threw themselves on our mercy-the people you are talking about who came in the ships. But the other people came with forgeries to back their admission. That is a different situation altogether. I said "forgeries" and I mean it -forged passports.
You may be right-and I hope you are right, because I like you; I like everything about you-but on the other hand do not permit yourself, Mr. Minister, to get into a position of concealing facts which began with fraud. I do not know anything about those people. But I do know that when a man enters this country on a forged passport, even though he may have come in a suite on the Queen Mary, he has no right to be here. He may be able to do that, even though he may have an excellent name-and I have forgotten this particular name. He may have a splendid name, or may be even a count. In those circumstances I think the hon. member for Winnipeg North is entitled to know what the facts are which permit you, Mr. Minister-and I say this with the greatest respect in the world-to set aside the law and to admit this person or other persons.


Colin William George Gibson: In the first place it was not I who set aside the law, as the hon. member has said. There was no law set aside by anyone.


Arthur Leroy Smith: An order in
council.


Colin William George Gibson: I was not
here at the time, but-


Arthur Leroy Smith: Forgive me; I was not speaking of you as an, individual. I know you are far above the cabinet level, and that you would never break the law.


Colin William George Gibson: When it is suggested that because someone had a passport that is not in order, he must be a criminal, that does not follow. After the war, as is well known, European countries were pretty well upset and, in order to escape from the countries in which they were living, some people obtained any kind of document procurable. That circumstance did not condemn a man when he arrived in this country.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Agreed.


Colin William George Gibson: We then investigated their background. The result of the investigations was submitted to government authority, who decided that certain individuals should be allowed to remain in Canada, and others should be sent out. Naturally, the source of the information cannot be made public, and I cannot give the details of it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I do not want the source; I want to know what they found.


Mr. Gardiner:: They found they were all right.
Mr. Gibson (Hamilton West:) They found they were not collaborators who should be sent back.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: May I
take it that a person who comes to this country, having been accused and convicted of a criminal offence in another country, a friendly country, is perfectly in order in coming here to stay? Is that not in violation of the immigration law? Does that law not say, in part, that these individuals must be of good character; and does not the minister know that these men were convicted of criminal offences in France?


Colin William George Gibson: No, I do not
admit that they were convicted of crime. There were trials held in absentia. They had not a chance to defend themselves; and, although judgments may have been rendered against them, that does not prove they were guilty of crime or of the charges which had been laid against them.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I point out that they had every chance to defend themselves-even asked to go back to France to defend themselves.
Supply-Mines and Resources


James Garfield Gardiner: And you know what would happen to them if they went back, whether they were guilty or not.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: What
would happen? May I put it the minister meant that these men would be liquidated if they went back to France?


James Garfield Gardiner: One gets a bit tired sitting here listening to members who talk the way the hon. member is talking, and the way the hon. member for Calgary West was talking a few moments ago, suggesting that members of the government are not acting in accordance with the law. Anyone who has come from the old land, as my hon, friend has, knows that for ages the greatest refuge for political prisoners has been Great Britain. Great Britain never has sent anyone back to the country from which he came because of a political crime that might be charged against him and that might result in a sure sentence of death.
About the end of the war these men left Europe and came to this country. Every man who came to this country under those circumstances was properly screened. I have no hesitation in saying that as one of the members of the government I was responsible along with every other member of the government for the orders in council that were passed. Those orders in council took into consideration the fact that there had been a proper screening of these people in so far as we were able to screen them. We decided finally that some should remain here and that some should go back to where they had come from. I hope that all the decisions were made on exactly the same basis as British practice has made its decisions over the years, namely, that you do not send a man back to sure death at the end of a war because of political differences that may have existed in the country from which he came. If we made any mistakes, I hope we made them on the side of mercy.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I can assure the Minister of Agriculture that I am completely tired of his irrelevancies; when he attempts to answer a question he skates around it in every possible way.


James Garfield Gardiner: It is the only answer that could be made to the question and the only one which would agree with long-time practice in Britain or any other free democracy.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: The Minister of Agriculture has suggested that if these men go back to a friendly, democratic country which was and is an ally of ours and which will be an ally of ours again, they will be
3042

Supply-Mines and Resources liquidated. The French ambassador to this country has made it known quite amply and clearly that if these men go back to France they will get a fair and free trial. I have placed on the record tonight the number of death sentences which were carried out in France and which were less than one per cent of those convicted. I claim that these men had no right to come to this country, that they entered illegally and have been kept here illegally.


Howard Charles Green: I should like to ask a question with regard to the money collected from those people who came back on the exchange ship Gripsholm from the Orient during the war. I believe that comes under his department.


Colin William George Gibson: Would my hon. friend bring that up under the immigration item later on when the official will be here?


Howard Charles Green: The money was collected by the immigration branch?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special projects-
173. Director of special projects-administration, $29,235.
Percy Chapman Black: What is this vote for?


Colin William George Gibson: This branch looks after any special projects that require extra services which are not provided by other branches of the department. Under this vote would come the eastern Rocky mountain forest conservation board and the international boundary commission.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
803. To provide for investigations into the possibility of water storage on Mayo lake, Yukon Territory, and of hydro-electric developments on Mayo river, Yukon Territory, to serve the Mayo, Keno Hill, and Galena Hill districts, $50,000.
Percy Chapman Black: I think we should have some particulars on this item.


Colin William George Gibson: Investigations are being made as to the power possibilities in the Mayo area.


Percy Chapman Black: Is that in connection with mining operations?


Colin William George Gibson: There is a large silver lead mine up in the Mayo area.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch-
177. Mineral resources investigations, $1,598,850.
Mr. Hodgson:: I think the committee should be given some information in connection with this item.


Colin William George Gibson: This vote provides for office, laboratory and field investigations relating to metallic minerals, industrial minerals, fuels and mineral economics.


Percy Chapman Black: Is the department solely responsible for the mining operations in the Yellowknife district where there has been such development in the last three or four years?


Colin William George Gibson: Yellowknife is in the Northwest Territories which come under the dominion government. The department looks after that particular work.


Percy Chapman Black: Is there a special appropriation for that?


Colin William George Gibson: It comes under the general appropriation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Bureau of mines-
805. Maintenance of plant of Abasand Oils Limited, $85,000.
Percy Chapman Black: These oil sands have been discussed in the house year after year and I think we should have an up-to-date report from the minister as to what the developments have been in the last year.


Colin William George Gibson: Abasand Oils Limited was wound up and during the period before it was finally wound up the company had maintained equipment and property on the location at a cost of $85,000. When the government took over the property it was felt that the company should be compensated for the maintenance costs incurred during that period.


Percy Chapman Black: Have the tar sands operations been abandoned? On many occasions we have been told that these sands constitute one of the world's great oil reservoirs and it would be disappointing to know that these tremendous natural resources are being abandoned.


Colin William George Gibson: I would not say that the resources are being abandoned by any means, but the development has been suspended for the present. There has been such a tremendous development of cheaper oils that it is not considered advisable to go ahead with this development at the present time.


Percy Chapman Black: What has been the total expenditure in the last ten years, say, or the total to date in connection with the development of exploitation by Abasand?


Colin William George Gibson: It will be in the neighbourhood of a million and a half dollars.


George Matheson Murray: I would point out that the United States government is hard-surfacing that part of the Alaska highway that lies within the borders of Alaska, and the time might very well come when that portion within our own borders will be hard surfaced. In that case material from Aba-sand might be profitably used.


Douglas Scott Harkness: When the dominion government ceased to support any experimentation in connection with the McMurray oil sands, in which this Abasand company was engaged, I believe the Alberta government continued to work on that project. As a matter of fact I understand that last year they spent between a half and three-quarters of a million dollars on it. I should like to ask the minister if the dominion government turned over to the province of Alberta any of the plant that was built there, or any of the data it obtained as a result of the four or five years of work carried on with dominion government funds.


Colin William George Gibson: The work carried on by the Alberta government I understand is being done further north. They purchased their own equipment, and the Abasand plant was sold.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Was there any turnover to the Alberta government of information obtained as a result of the experiments carried on by the dominion government?


Colin William George Gibson: Of course our officials are in collaboration with the officials of the Alberta government on that work; but there was no turning over of equipment to them.


Douglas Scott Harkness: In this case I did not ask about the equipment; I asked about turning over data and information.


Colin William George Gibson: Oh, there is the closest co-operation between the mines branches of the province and the dominion on all information that is obtained.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The statement that there was the closest collaboration still does not answer the question. I asked definitely, was the information obtained as a result of these experiments at Abasand turned over to the Alberta government?


Colin William George Gibson: My officials tell me they know everything we have done up there and that we know what they are doing at the present time, because they do keep each other informed as to the progress of any work being carried on.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I think the minister knows something about experimental work. One of the most important features of scientific
45781-193i
Supply-Mines and Resources experiments and that kind of thing is the data that is obtained as those experiments are carried on from day to day. My definite question is, was the data obtained during the operation of this plant turned over to the Alberta government?


Colin William George Gibson: I understand the province got all the information we had as a result of the work carried on up there.


Douglas Scott Harkness: In other words all the records were turned over to them?


Colin William George Gibson: I do not say
the records were turned over, but I say all the information we obtained was made available to them.


Percy Chapman Black: Was this company which was exploiting or exploring the possibilities of these oil sands acting as the agent of the department? Is that the reason it was reimbursed for its expenditures?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, it was financed by the government.


Percy Chapman Black: Did it go there initially, in the first instance, as an agent of the government?


Colin William George Gibson: I understand not in the first instance, but the government did get behind it and helped finance it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
181. Forest research and Investigations, $762,990.
Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Items 181 and 182 are closely related, and I believe the minister should give some explanation.


Louis-René Beaudoin: These items relate to forest research investigations and forest products research; and supplementary item No. 683 relates to forest research investigation as well.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: These two items total well over a million dollars, and I think we should have some information about them.


Colin William George Gibson: This vote is for the advancement of forest conservation in Canada generally. It embodies essential research to obtain and disseminate basic data in silviculture, including growth, yield and cutting methods; fire protection and forest inventories, designed to produce the optimum use and development of our forest resources on the basis of continuous production.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Where is that work being carried on?


Colin William George Gibson: All over
Canada.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: There are not just one or two particular stations?
S044	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Resources


Colin William George Gibson: We have five forest experimental stations, and in addition we have forest products laboratories.


Mr. Low:: Would the minister tell the committee what if any investigations have been carried on with respect to the use of a thinner saw blade in forestry work? The reason I ask that question is this. I am told that under the methods that have been pursued up to this time from 25 per cent to 45 per cent of the potential lumber in this country is being wasted in the form of sawdust, because of the very wide and heavy steel blades that have been used. In the course of the work of this branch could the minister tell us what investigations have been carried on in respect to the use of that very thin blade-I believe they call it Scotch steel-that has been used successfully in the north country, particularly?


Colin William George Gibson: In the
coming year we are setting up in this branch a model sawmill to test and develop sawmill equipment, including blades and so on. During the past year we have had one of our officials over in Scandinavia looking at the equipment and methods in use over there, so he may be of assistance in that research work.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Could the minister tell us where these plants are set up?


Colin William George Gibson: The forest products laboratories are at Vancouver, Ottawa and Montreal. The forest experimental stations are in Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
183.	Grant to Canadian Forestry Association, $4,000.
George Matheson Murray: I should like to point out the valuable work being done by this association from coast to coast in Canada. I would also mention the work being done by Mr. James A. Vance of Woodstock, Ontario, who has given a great deal of time and much of his fortune to this particular phase of the conservation and improvement of our forests. We receive their publications in British Columbia from time to time, and the work they are doing is worthy of every consideration by this house and the various provinces.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Eastern Rockies forest conservation board-
184.	To provide for the salaries and expenses of dominion members of the board and their alternates and sundry expenses in connection with the maintenance and operation of the Ottawa office of the board, $23,000.
Douglas Scott Harkness: This particular project in connection with the conservation of the eastern slope of the Rockies I believe is one


of the most valuable undertakings the government has initiated, and I should like the minister to tell us in a general way briefly what has been accomplished so far with respect to restoring the forest cover on the eastern slope of the Rockies, thereby conserving moisture and the flow of the streams which lead down to all the prairie provinces.


Colin William George Gibson: As hon. members know, this board which looks after the eastern slope of the Rocky mountains was set up by act of parliament. It consists of two representatives of the dominion government and one of the province of Alberta. The board receives funds each year from the dominion government, in addition to certain capital advances running over a period of six years. It is taking steps to conserve the slopes of the Rockies by providing roads and fire stations in that area, so the forests may be protected; it has power to make recommendations, and is responsible for the work that is being carried out.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I know all that; I knew it when I asked the question. I asked what has been done, in other words what are the results? What roads have been built? What fire stations have been established? Just what has been accomplished in the year and a half or so this board has been in operation?


Colin William George Gibson: It is difficult to give all the details, but I can give a summary of some of them. For example, the contract work was confined to the main north and south road through the conservation board area, which with the exception of some thirty-one and a half miles has now been graded from Coleman, Alberta, to the southern boundary of the dominion forest experimental station in the Kananaskis river valley. The road is being built with a traffic surface twenty feet wide, the width of side ditches being additional. In high fills the road is being built twenty-two feet wide, to provide for sloughing and erosion. The New West Construction Company of Edmonton have completed 44-2 miles on their contract north from Coleman, at an average cost of $10,082 per mile. This figure only includes bridge work and bridge materials installed to the 14th November, and covers some thirty per cent of the bridge piers and abutments with no bridge superstructure being completed.
On the Kananaskis section, southerly over the Pocaterra summit the Assiniboia Engineering Company, contractors, have partly completed the grading of 31 -5 miles at an average cost per mile of $12,812, which includes the

cost of all concrete bridge abutments and the material therein. No superstructure costs are included.
It is the view of the board on analysing these costs that at least $3,000 per mile has been saved on these grading operations by the award of contracts on a unit price basis for various items of work, rather than on a cost plus fixed fee basis.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Do I understand from what the minister has said that all this board has accomplished so far is the construction of a certain amount of highway near Canmore, and the construction of a few bridges to the north, less superstructure?


Colin William George Gibson: No, I would not say that was the only work by any means.
I would be very glad to let the hon. member have a list of what has been done in connection with fire stations and other bits of work that have been undertaken or that are in progress. I have not all the details before me, but I should be glad to let him have the list if he so desires.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
186. Forest insects control board, $13,225.
Clayton Wesley Hodgson: In the details for this item it is indicated that this covers travelling expenses and temporary assistance. This would seem to represent expenses in connection with only one man. What is this item for?


Colin William George Gibson: It really covers the salary of an executive secretary and administrative expenses of the forest insects control board, including the salary of a stenographer and travelling expenses of members of the executive staff, as well as a per diem allowance to each member of the board except those who are employees of the dominion government.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Does the minister mean to say this is all that is being done in connection with forest insects control?


Colin William George Gibson: This is really an advisory body; the experimental work is done by the Department of Agriculture, in the entomological branch.


Gordon Graydon: They handle the termites there.


Colin William George Gibson: Yes. These expenses are met by our department.


George Matheson Murray: May I just refer to the voluntary work being done by a great number of men who are interested in this phase of forest protection. I should like
Supply-Mines and Resources to mention the name of Mr. A. W. A. Phair of Lillooet, British Columbia, an entomologist who has given generously of his services and has not charged the government one cent for the work he has done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Surveys and mapping bureau-
194. To provide for the payment of fees of the board of examiners for dominion land surveyors, of the secretary and of the sub-examiners and for travelling expenses, stationery, printing, rent, etc. (the fees of B. W. Waugh, J. E. R. Ross and J. L. Rannie, members of the board, and A. W. W. Cole, secretary, are to be paid out of this sum), $2,100.
Percy Chapman Black: What are the total expenditures in connection with all these surveys, including geological surveys, mapping, topographical, and so on? We are passing items here one of which amounts to nearly $3,500,000, another to $1,200,000 and another to $1,130,000. These appear to me to be very expensive undertakings.


Colin William George Gibson: These are expensive undertakings. We have been doing a great deal of survey work trying to catch up with the work we were unable to do during the war. These include all types of surveying, geodetic, topographical, hydrographic, geological, and so on in various parts of Canada. During the past year we have had more parties out than for a good many years, in an endeavour to get ahead with the mapping of this country.


Percy Chapman Black: When this surveying is done is it put on record and done forever, so it need not be pursued further?


Colin William George Gibson: It does not have to be done over again once it has been done in a certain area, unless it is a different type of survey. We are doing a great deal of air photography and mapping in the Northwest Territories over land that up to the present has never been properly mapped.


Clarence Gillis: I understand the minister's department has had a party in Nova Scotia for the past year or so making a technical survey of the coal resources of that province. I suppose that would come under this vote. I wonder if the minister is in a position to give us any information as to what progress is being made, and about how long it will take to complete that work. I am interested in this because it is rather important for our province, where coal is the basic industry and the old mines are running out. I am just wondering to what extent the department may have discovered new resources?


Colin William George Gibson: We have had two parties working in Nova Scotia, and we
3046	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Resources intend to have four parties down there in the coming year working in co-operation with the Nova Scotia department of mines, in making a detailed stratographical map of coal deposits in the Sydney area; a one-mile geological map of the coal area in Springhill- there are two parties doing that. There is a continuous systematic geological map of Wolf-ville; a one-mile geological map of industrial minerals. I have not got a report of the results that have been obtained, but I shall be glad to ascertain what we have, and let my friend know.


Clarence Gillis: Is the work continuing?


Colin William George Gibson: Yes.


Percy Chapman Black: What was the total expense for all these surveys?


Colin William George Gibson: I shall add that up.


George Matheson Murray: May I point out the valuable work done on the Alaska highway by these surveys. They established the location of lakes, and other points along the route, making it possible for the surveying of that country for settlement.


Colin William George Gibson: The member for Cumberland asked for the total amount spent for surveys. During the last year, it amounted to $7,525,000.


Percy Chapman Black: How many
students taking scientific courses at the different colleges are allowed in each of these survey parties during the summer?


Colin William George Gibson: It is difficult to tell because the parties vary in size, but the students apply through the civil service commission. Notices are being sent to the various universities now, as a matter of fact, so the students can apply for appointment to the various surveys for the coming summer.


Percy Chapman Black: Could the minister state the number of students that will be given an opportunity for employment during this coming season?


Colin William George Gibson: I understand it is in the neighbourhood of 1,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
197. To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $350,000.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: This item is to provide for surveys on the Columbia river watershed in Canada. Can the minister inform me how much has been spent to date on these surveys, and the reason for the $50,000 increase this year? When is it expected these surveys will be completed?


Colin William George Gibson: The increase is attributable to two main causes: (a) the urgency for a decision with respect to flood control measures on the Kootenay and Columbia rivers following the disastrous floods of 1948, and (b) the increase of approximately 100 per cent in the unit costs of drilling operations. The investigations of the Columbia river basin, comprising 39,000 square miles, are designed to provide basic Canadian information necessary to plan future development of the water resources on an international basis for purposes of navigation, flood control, power development, irrigation, reclamation, fisheries, and conservation of wildlife and other purposes. Up to the present time we have spent about $1 million.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Has the minister any idea as to when it is expected the surveys will be completed?


Colin William George Gibson: I understand a great deal of work has been done, but it will take about another couple of years to complete the work.
809. Geographical bureau-further amount required, $16,500.


Percy Chapman Black: In connection with these supplementary expenditures, are they due to poor estimating or to extravagance?


Colin William George Gibson: As a matter of fact, our construction work proceeded rather well this year. We found that we got ahead in many cases, and instead of having the equipment drawn out during the winter and going to the expense of returning it, we have asked for a supplementary grant and have gone ahead with the work. I believe we will save money by doing that. In so far as the geographical bureau is concerned, the additional funds are for salary adjustments and new positions. Extra funds for field parties are required to reimburse vote 100.


George Matheson Murray: Has the museum taken any steps with regard to further work in the Hope area-


Colin William George Gibson: That comes under the next item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
203. National Museum of Canada, $177,500.
George Matheson Murray: In that connection, I hope the minister may be able to have the appropriations increased so that further observations can be made in the Peace river pass and elsewhere, for material which will be of value in the industrial and mineral development of this country.


Percy Chapman Black: Has the minister any policy to announce to the committee with respect to the national museum of Canada?

All members recognize the importance of this museum. From time to time some information has been forthcoming concerning the necessity for expanding this building to allow for the display of exhibits which are stored there. I should like to hear what policy the minister has.


Colin William George Gibson: There is one policy we have adopted. During the war a lot of the museum space was occupied by offices. We found that it was quite difficult to display a great many of the specimens that had been brought in. We have now been able to move out some of the departments, and we hope to have more space available to display the many specimens that have been secured, but which, previously, we have had to hold in the crates.


George Matheson Murray: In the Peace river pass there are the footmarks of dinosaurs in the sandstone. I believe it would be proper for them to be recorded in casts, which could be displayed in the museum here. They would tell of the very early history of our country.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister explain the rather large increase in the amount requested under the heading "Printing, stationery, and office equipment" for the National Museum. The item we now have before us amounts to $20,700, and there is a supplementary item for $22,000, making a total of $42,700. The amount voted last year was $12,000.


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, the increase in the printing bill is to provide for the printing of about 7,500 copies of a bulletin in two volumes on totem poles, prepared by Dr. Marius Barbeau. I understand it is one of the best publications on this subject ever put out.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is not costing $30,000?


Colin William George Gibson: He is a former member of the staff of the national museum. Funds were not included in the main estimates, as it was not expected that the manuscript would be completed in time for publication this year. The manuscript is now ready, and publication is desired as soon as possible. It is proposed to set a price of $5 per copy, that is, $2.50 for each volume, and it is expected that the cost of the publication will be more than recovered in a short time, as a heavy demand has been foreseen.


Stanley Howard Knowles: How much of this is for the publication?


Colin William George Gibson: 


Stanley Howard Knowles: What is the status of the national museum building; is it holding up or otherwise?
Supply-Mines and Resources


Colin William George Gibson: I understand it is holding up all right. It will require some repairs. That of course is handled through the Department of Public Works, but we have had no difficulties down there up to the present time.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Lands and development services branch-
209.	Roads, $197,000.
Percy Chapman Black: I should like some information on this item of roads. Where are these roads, in Prince Edward Island or in the arctic?


George Matheson Murray: On the subject of roads, very valuable work is being done in extending roads north toward the source of the atomic bomb, to Hay river and so forth from Grimshaw, Alberta. It is very necessary work which will ultimately bring the development of that country into a Pacific outlet by way of Vancouver and the Pacific Great Eastern Railway.


Colin William George Gibson: In regard to the question, the vote is to provide funds for the construction of streets and roads in the Yellowknife administrative district, extension of small roads within the settlements and leading to airports in the Mackenzie district, also their maintenance and that of the Northwest Territories section of the Grimshaw-Great Slave lake road; repairs and upkeep of road equipment.


Solon Earl Low: What work is being done on the Grimshaw-Slave lake highway? What are the plans?


Colin William George Gibson: To maintain them from the Alberta border northward?


Solon Earl Low: No; I understand that there needs to be a certain amount of repair work done particularly on the northern part of that road where it was originally built over very sandy territory. I am just wondering whether any rebuilding is contemplated by this vote.


Colin William George Gibson: We have been discussing it with Alberta. The road south from the Alberta boundary was very bad; it was on muskeg and was very difficult to maintain; from the Alberta boundary up to Great Slave lake it has held up very well. It was well built, and is holding up quite well.
210.	Buildings (revote $51,100), $681,128.


Percy Chapman Black: This item has to do with buildings. The minister has just told us that his department has no responsibility for buildings, that it is the responsibility of the Department of Public Works. Here is an item of $681,128.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Colin William George Gibson: This is to meet essential needs for housing and office accommodation brought about by increased mining activities and administrative responsibilities. The building program was commenced in 1945 in the Mackenzie district, the construction being carried out by the Department of Public Works. A considerable amount of the materials required was salvaged from buildings left by the United States army at Waterways, Alberta, and Fort Smith, Northwest Territories. The program has now been extended to include public day schools and accommodation for the teaching staffs in keeping with the minimum educational requirements.


Percy Chapman Black: This sum of $681,000 is money provided by the minister's department but expended by the Department of Public Works.


Colin William George Gibson: Yes, that is correct.


Percy Chapman Black: The Department of Mines and Resources pays the Department of Public Works out of moneys voted by this parliament through the minister's department. The Department of Public Works expends the money but is not responsible to this parliament for these expenditures.


Colin William George Gibson: Not for this item, no.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
211.	Water and sewages, $367,383.
Edmund Davie Fulton: Will the minister explain this item of water and sewages?


Colin William George Gibson: That is in the Yellowknife district. We have put a pumping plant and a sewage disposal plant in that area. The dominion government does that because they have no municipal works in there at the present time.


Edmund Davie Fulton: For whom was it put in and by whom and in what particular place?


Colin William George Gibson: In the Yellowknife townsite. There is quite a settlement at Yellowknife. They now have a school and a hospital. Since it is not an organized territory the dominion government has to do that.


George Matheson Murray: May I point out at this time that an eleventh province in Canada is about to be brought forward. The department has been working in the Northwest Territories handling these new settlements, new mining towns, and these new developments and doing a very good job in preparing the


way for the day when in the Northwest Territories another province will have been carved out in that area.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Yukon division-
214. Administration, $166,500.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, there is one question I have been wanting to ask on this item for several years now and have not got around to it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: You are not
usually that slow.


Douglas Scott Harkness: What is the matter?


Stanley Howard Knowles: These items sometimes come along when we are in a bit of a squeeze. I take it this is an item having to do with administration of the Yukon territory so far as it comes under this government. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that bon. members will not think that I am trying to drag something in here. I think it is related to old age pensions paid in the Yukon, and the same would apply to the Northwest Territories. Who pays the 25 per cent of it corresponding to the 25 per cent paid by the ten provinces in Canada?


Colin William George Gibson: That comes under health and welfare. We do not pay it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, this is serious.
I am not trying to drag old age pensions-


Douglas Scott Harkness: If you wanted an answer you should have started three years ago when you first thought of it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Under the Old Age Pensions Act the federal government pays 75 per cent of the pension and the provincial government pays 25 per cent. It is done in this way. The provincial government pays the pension in full and the federal government reimburses the province to the extent of 75 per cent. My hon. friend is telling me that there is no provincial government up in the Yukon or in the Northwest Territories. In some instances these people get the full pension. I can pro- . duce figures to show that. Who pays it? Is it a case where at least some Canadians are drawing old age pensions 100 per cent from the federal government?


Colin William George Gibson: If the hon. member does not mind I would ask him to let the question stand and I shall get an official down here who has definite knowledge of how it is handled. I am not familiar with how the payment is made.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Let the item stand.


Colin William George Gibson: Would the hon. member mind if we carried the item? I shall get the information before we adjourn tonight.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall item 214 carry?


An hon. Member:: No.


Colin William George Gibson: Would the hon. member mind if we permitted* it to carry, on my undertaking that I will get the information for him before we adjourn tonight?


Percy Chapman Black: Does the minister's department make expenditures for roads? We have passed one item of $197,000, and here is another one for $1,460,000. Who actually constructs these roads, or assumes the responsibility for seeing that the country gets fair value for the money expended?


Colin William George Gibson: The main roads are paid for by the government and the small crossroads paid for by the Yukon council.


Percy Chapman Black: Who lets the contracts?


Colin William George Gibson: For the main roads the department here lets them.


Percy Chapman Black: Not the Department of Public Works?


Colin William George Gibson: No, this department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Yukon division-
815. Roads, further amount required, $650,000.
Mr, Black (Cumberland):: Here is another item. We started out with about $200,000 in the main estimates; then we jumped to $1,460,000, and now we have this supplementary expenditure of $650,000. When did the department learn that it required this additional $650,000?


Colin William George Gibson: That was an additional expense for a road we had undertaken in the first place. It is for carrying on additional work during the year. We found the contractor was getting along well with the work for which he had contracted. This is on the Mayo-Minto road in the Yukon. Therefore we arranged for him to continue with the work so that we could get more done and have the work completed at an earlier date.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Who was the
contractor?


Colin William George Gibson: Mannix Construction Company.
Supply-Mines and Resources


James Garfield Gardiner: A good resident of Calgary.


Arthur Leroy Smith: You're telling me.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Yukon division-
217. Coal development, $90,000.
Percy Chapman Black: Coming from
Nova Scotia I should like to know where this $90,000 was expended.


Colin William George Gibson: This expenditure is made in the Yukon.


George Matheson Murray: Mr. George Black, former member for the Yukon, was a native of New Brunswick. I am sure if he were here he would be glad to know this government is developing the very fine coal deposits in that area, so as to make coal available to settlers in the Yukon Territory which Mr. Black served so well for many years.


Arthur Leroy Smith: That stops me! Where is the coal, and what is the development? You have a little bit of a mine up there, part of this Keeno Hill outfit. But cordwood is still $25 a cord around that country.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National park services-
219.	National parks and historic sites services, $10,062,324.
Edmund Davie Fulton: There is an increase under this item of $2,164,596 in the main estimates, and we are voting a further $1,255,000 in the further supplementary estimates. What is this for? I would hope it is for the construction of adequate roads in our national parks in order that we may have a system connecting the trans-Canada highway.


Colin William George Gibson: With a great influx of tourist traffic we have been making a great effort to improve our national parks, and this increase in the estimates is due principally to a construction program for the improvement of roads, bridges, camping grounds and administrative buildings. Further development is proposed for a new national park in New Brunswick.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Has any decision been made as to whether through trucking will be allowed in the national parks which may be on the route of the trans-Canada highway?


Colin William George Gibson: No decision has been made because we do not know where the trans-Canada highway will go. We do not encourage through trucking on the roads in the parks.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Edmund Davie Fulton: Surely a decision could be made as a matter of principle. The trans-Canada highway is practically bound to go through one of the national parks, if not more. It has been decided to assist in the development and building of the trans-Canada highway. Surely as a matter of principle it should have been decided whether or not through trucking is to be permitted in the parks- whether it be Yellowstone park, Jasper, Banff or the one on the southern route between Alberta and British Columbia. One of them will be involved. Have we not yet any decision as to whether through trucking will be allowed, and whether adequate roads will be provided?


Colin William George Gibson: I do not think that question has been taken up with the national parks service.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Why?


Colin William George Gibson: I have no doubt some decision will be reached, but I have not heard of the matter having been brought up.


Howard Charles Green: I would suggest that the minister make inquiry about it, because I know the government of British Columbia is much concerned about this question as it affects the trans-Canada highway. They have not yet been able to get any assurance from the dominion government that there will be adequate facilities for trucking through the national parks. This is an important question in British Columbia, and I am surprised the minister has not had any word of this difficulty. As a matter of fact it has already restricted trade between British Columbia and Alberta to a large extent, and I think without reason.


Colin William George Gibson: The negotiations have been carried on with the Department of Reconstruction and Supply. Certainly we have had nothing passed on to us-at least, so far as I know-as to any negotiations in regard to trucking through the parks.


Heber Harold Hatfield: How much of the money was spent in New Brunswick on a national park? Has that national park been completed? Was the work done by contract? If so, who was the contractor? What was the cost in the national park?


Colin William George Gibson: We are working on Fundy national park at the present time, but it is not by any means completed. A certain amount of roadbuilding must be done.


Heber Harold Hatfield: How much has been spent thus far?


Colin William George Gibson: About $500,-
000.


Heber Harold Hatfield: How much did the golf course cost?


Colin William George Gibson: That is, $500,000 in the previous year and another $700,000 this year. The golf course cost about $100,000.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Was the work done by contract?


Colin William George Gibson: Largely.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Who was the contractor?


Colin William George Gibson: The Caldwell Construction Company was one of the main contractors.


Mr. McCusker:: Is that the M. J. Caldwell Construction Company?


Major James William Coldwell: I can assure you it was not.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I should like to bring to the attention of the minister a highway in a national park leading from Cavendish down to Dalvay. There is also the building of a bridge across Rustico harbour to Robinsons island. Early in the summer the engineers were working on that and I should like to know if this work will be continued.


Colin William George Gibson: I understand that work is being continued.


Edmund Davie Fulton: There is an increase of
$3,500,000 over what was voted last year in the main and supplementary estimates. I think it is important to the people of British Columbia and Alberta to know whether or not through trucking will be permitted over the trans-Canada highway route. The minister has said that a large part of this money will be devoted toward the building of adequate roads in our national parks and I think we might almost be justified in asking that this item stand until we get a full explanation. However, I am not going to do that. All I am going to ask the minister is to have a decision made in the immediate future and announce it to the house and the country so that we shall know the situation in regard to the trans-Canada highway which is bound to go through one or other of the national parks.


Colin William George Gibson: I think it is quite reasonable to say that if the trans-Canada highway is to go through the parks the people are entitled to know that. I only said that the matter had not been brought to my attention. I shall look into it.


Percy Chapman Black: Are any steps being taken to develop the national park in Nova Scotia?


Colin William George Gibson: Discussions are going on in that regard and one of our officials has been down with the provincial

authorities looking over the area. No decision has yet been reached as I do not think the report has come in.


Heber Harold Hatfield: What amount was paid to the Caldwell Construction Company in connection with work in the national park in New Brunswick?


Colin William George Gibson: I have not that information here but I shall obtain it for my hon. friend.


Arthur Leroy Smith: There is a substantial increase in this item and I should like to know how much of that increase will be spent on the Banff national park and how much on the Jasper national park? 1 should like to know also how many visitors entered each of those parks in the last period of time for which you have a record?
There is another simple matter I should like to refer to and I think I need only mention it in order to have it corrected. For example, if a coal dealer in Banff takes his truck to Canmore, fourteen miles away, for a load of coal, he must pay fifty cents when he brings that load back to Banff. If the minister wants more details about this I can give them, but I think this is something in administration which has just been overlooked but which should be corrected immediately. I cannot see any justification for charging a coal dealer, or any other dealer, this fee every time he goes to get a load. The revenue would be nothing, but it is rather tough on the fellow who is selling coal. I am not asking the minister to say tonight that it will be stopped, but I wish he would look into it. I have no doubt that it is something that has been inherited in the administration.
The minister's predecessor was a great personal friend of mine and I do not know just how to refer to him. He has gone to another place and I hope no one will regard that as meaning that he has gone to the bourne from whence no traveller returns-he has gone to the Senate. During the last two or three years Jasper park has received twice as much as Banff and, as far as visitors are concerned, ten visit Banff for every one that visits Jasper. The explanation for this greater expenditure has been that roads are being built, but I do not think that has anything to do with it. Now we have a new minister and I do not know whether he has been out to look at these parks.


Colin William George Gibson: I was there last summer.


Arthur Leroy Smith: If I get an
answer to the questions I have asked it will shorten greatly what I have to say about the national parks. However, there is one
45781-194J
Supply-Mines and Resources more thing I should like to take up and this has to do with the land in Banff national park which is available for lease. I should like to know how much land the government is prepared to lease under the usual ninety-nine year leases to persons who are ready to sign such leases. The simple fact is that the withholding of the right to lease lands controlled by the government has caused prices to rise to almost astronomical figures. I know the government has made an arrangement with the Canadian Pacific Railway Company whereby they have taken over a considerable piece of land which is well suited to residential purposes. That was done at least two years ago, and yet nothing has been done to relieve the housing shortage. I notice the assistant to the minister is taking careful notes of what I say. I should also like very much to know why the civic centre which was planned for Banff is now being built in Jasper. That is a matter of history within the last three years.


An hon. Member:: Eleven o'clock.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Don't stop me. I may not be able to continue tomorrow. If the minister will answer these questions then I will help him in every way 1 can to get his estimates through.


Colin William George Gibson: First of all the
number of visitors at Jasper and Banff during the past year-that is up to October 31- was Banff, 405,436, and Jasper, 81,831.


Arthur Leroy Smith: That is about five to one.


Colin William George Gibson: The expenditures for this year are Banff, $1,529,000, and Jasper, $2,740,000. I may say that while the expenditure at Jasper is higher of course Banff had a great lead by having an earlier start, and a considerably greater sum of money has previously been spent on Banff.


Arthur Leroy Smith: And why not?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Eleven o'clock.


Colin William George Gibson: As to the
question of the traffic of coal into the parks, this is the first time I have heard of it, and I shall be glad to look into it. With regard to the question of land surveys for residents at Banff, I understand surveys are being made to provide further residential facilities.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Eleven o'clock.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Will you forgive me? I did not hear the last thing you said about surveys.


Colin William George Gibson: I said that surveys are being made at Banff to find suitable ground for residential purposes.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Arthur Leroy Smith: After three years they should find one lot anyway, should they not?


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall the item carry?


Douglas Scott Harkness: No, Mr. Chairman.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Eleven o'clock.


Major James William Coldwell: It is past eleven o'clock. We sat until half-past six, and I do not think we are going to get anywhere tonight by sitting until half-past eleven or midnight.


Alphonse Fournier: Will my hon. friend not consent to our finishing even this department? There are about ten more items.


Edmund Davie Fulton: You have got both Indian affairs and immigration. I doubt if you will finish.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Let us try
anyway.


Douglas Scott Harkness: If this little procedural wrangle is over, I notice that $7 million odd of the main item of $10 million is for the acquisition or construction of buildings, works and structures, and practically all of the further supplementary item of $1,250,000 odd is for the same purpose. Where are all these buildings and structures being constructed?


Colin William George Gibson: It is chiefly roads. It is all under one item, but the chief expenditure is on road work.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to know what parks these roads are being constructed in.


Colin William George Gibson: The biggest expenditures are in Banff and Jasper, and the road connecting the two.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The total of these two items comes to about eight and a half million dollars. It seems to me we should have a little more information than just the minister's statement that it is mostly for roads. Having been in Banff national park several times during the past summer, I do not know where all this expenditure for roads is being made except for the improving and building of a partly new road between Banff and Radium Hot Springs.


Major James William Coldwell: Before the item is carried, the hon. member for Calgary West raised a point about tolls through national parks. Some time ago I got in touch with the former minister concerning tolls through Prince Albert park, and I was given to understand that some reconsideration would be given to these matters. Have these park tolls been reconsidered? The situation at Prince Albert park is somewhat the same as in the case mentioned by the hon. member for Calgary West, only there is not a town in the park. People have to pass through the park to reach the highway beyond.


Colin William George Gibson: I have not had that question brought before me, and I certainly have not given it consideration.


Major James William Coldwell: I had some correspondence with the former minister, and I was wondering whether reconsideration had been given to it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: No, with the former minister everything went to Edmonton.


Major James William Coldwell: This is last year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Has the minister found where the $8 million worth of roads are being constructed?


Colin William George Gibson: We can give you every dollar as to where it is expended if you wish to go through the entire list. Would you like to have it by parks?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to know where the main expenditure is.


Colin William George Gibson: The main expenditures are in Jasper park, Kootenay park and Banff park. There is $1,454,000 at Banff, $2,420,000 at Jasper, $1,621,000 at Kootenay, and then there are various smaller amounts. I will just give round figures. There is $724,000 at New Brunswick park, $527,000 at Prince Edward Island park.


Percy Chapman Black: How much at the Nova Scotia national park?


Colin William George Gibson: Cape Breton highlands park, $590,000.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Would the minister explain why, as indicated on page 185, there has been an increase in the salary of the controller of the national parks services in the amount of $375, and a decrease in the salary of the assistant controller by $315? It looks like a case of taking from those who have not and giving it to those who have.


Colin William George Gibson: The assistant controller retired, and he was not there for the whole year.


Mr. Fulford:: I should like to commend the minister and the department for the work that has been done in the last year on the St. Lawrence river national parks. These parks extend from Morrisburg on the east to Kingston on the west. I know of no facilities supplied by any department of the government that give more pleasure to people both on the United States side and the Canadian side. I would ask the minister to see that the work is continued, and also that further islands are taken over. I think the hon. member for Grenville-Dundas will agree with me that one site that should be taken over is Windmill point just below Prescott. That is one community in the district which is not adequately served by these national parks.

I would also recommend to the minister that serious consideration be given to taking over certain islands in the Rideau lake chain for the same purpose, and that further consideration be given to taking over Hill island, over which a stretch of highway runs connecting the Canadian side of the Thousand Islands bridge with the United States side. This matter has been brought up before, and I do not think anything has been done. How much has been spent on the St. Lawrence islands national park?


Colin William George Gibson: $57,695 this year.
220.	Grant to the Jack Miner migratory bird foundation, $5,000.


Gordon Graydon: I do not rise primarily to commend this vote to the Jack Miner migratory bird foundation, but when I am on my feet I should like to pay a tribute to the work of a great Canadian, whose enterprise has been carried on during his lifetime and since his death in a very effective and very satisfactory manner in the interests of Canada generally.
I am rising at this time to say a word with respect to another county undertaking in my own part of the country, which we regard as of great importance also. I am not going to detail thait work tonight; I only want to mention it, but on another occasion, next session, I should like to lay before hon. members full information as to the work being done by the Peel county game and fish protective association. This is the only undertaking of its kind in the province of Ontario and for that reason stands out as an important development in connection with wildlife conservation. The association was formed about two years ago and has been an immense success. It is largely concerned with the raising of pheasants, of which more than eight thousand were released this year. One of the important features of the work of the association is that we have not asked this or any other government for a grant of any kind. I thought it ought to be mentioned because of that fact, since I am afraid we must be an island in a sea of similar requests that have been sent to the minister.


Colin William George Gibson: I was very glad to help them get a hut from Mount Hope.


Gordon Graydon: I thank the minister for that, though I must tell him the association paid for it. It was nevertheless a great help to us to get the war assets building the minister and others were so instrumental in helping us obtain. I only want to mention
Supply-Mines and Resources the matter at this stage preliminary to another address I hope to make to this house with respect to what I believe is a very important work being done in connection with wildlife conservation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
221.	Grant to aid in the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $15,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I just want to say that this item is very welcome.
litem agreed to.
Dominion wildlife service-
222.	Wildlife resources conservation and development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, $259,520.


William Gourlay Blair: I understand the migratory birds act officials have jurisdiction over the setting of the season for ducks in the fall. This year it was set back from September 15 to October 15. I happen to be a duck shooter myself. I was out the first morning, and that was the first time I ever failed to get ducks. Sportsmen in our part of the country got absolutely none throughout the season, which was the worst we have ever had. I want to draw this to the attention of the minister in the hope that next year we might at least split the difference and have the season open October 1. By October 15 all the local ducks have departed for the south and the northern ducks have not yet come in. We feel that we are simply raising ducks and somebody to the south is shooting them.


Colin William George Gibson: These dates are set as the result of a conference held with all the provinces, and the provinces were unanimous on the dates set this year.


William Gourlay Blair: Then the provinces were absolutely astray as far as eastern Ontario was concerned.


Ralph Melville Warren: In spite of all the scowls coming my way I am going to say a word on this item, even though it is late. There is an increase in this item of $38,020. I believe it is most important that we do everything possible to conserve wildlife, as well as to conserve the top soil, our forest resources, and such things as those. Down in Renfrew county we have an opportunity to do something in the way of conserving wildlife. We have a farmer named Harry Berry, who lives some ten miles west of Carleton Place on highway 17. Some twenty-five years ago seventeen wild geese landed on his farm and stayed for about six weeks. He did not disturb them but protected them, and they have been returning in greatly increased numbers

Supply-Mines and Resources each year since that time. Last spring some eight thousand wild geese landed on his farm.
It is now getting too much for one farmer to feed these increasing numbers of geese. Eight thousand wild geese can pull a lot of young clover out of the fine soil on Harry Berry's farm, and now he is asking for some assistance. When so many millions of dollars can be spent in our parks to attract tourists, why not spend at least something to help this man feed these geese? They have not only been eating his clover; he has been feeding them grain out of his granary all these years, and I believe he deserves some kind of help. I am asking the minister now to give consideration to some assistance for this man, and also to consider setting aside this territory along Muskrat lake as a bird sanctuary.
I have taken up this matter with the minister personally, and I think he knows the situation there. Muskrat lake is perhaps ten miles long and does not average more than a mile in width; it is really an extension of the Muskrat river. Ninety-eight per cent of the farmers owning land along Muskrat lake have signed a petition asking the minister to have this property set aside as a bird sanctuary, and that petition is supported by at least five reeves of the district. We feel that this is important, and we would like the matter settled before the geese come back next spring, when there will be probably ten thousand. So I am placing the matter before the minister tonight in the hope that he will not overlook it in the interval.


Colin William George Gibson: It has not
been the policy of the federal government to establish bird sanctuaries under the Migratory Birds Convention Act without prior consent from the provincial government concerned. The matter of this proposed sanctuary was taken up promptly with the provincial department of lands and forests, but that department wished to further study the situation. At the moment an investigation is being carried out by the dominion wildlife officer for Ontario and an officer of the Ontario department of lands and forests.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
224. Cranberry Portage road-to provide for the 1949-50 dominion contribution to the cost of section B, Cranberry Portage to Cuprus mines, of the proposed road between The Pas and Flin Flon in Manitoba in accordance with the terms of an agreement between the dominion and the province of Manitoba dated September 30, 1948, $305,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister give us some details of the agreement between the federal government and the province of

Manitoba in regard to this road from The Pas to Flin Flon? What was to be the total cost, and how much was paid?


Colin William George Gibson: The purpose of this vote is to provide for the dominion contribution to the cost of section B Cranberry Portage to Cuprus mines, of the proposed road between The Pas and Flin Flon in Manitoba, in accordance with the terms of the agreement between the dominion and the province of Manitoba dated September 30, 1948.
The increase in the dominion contribution is in accordance with the terms of the agreement, wherein it was proposed to expend $100,000 in 1948-49; $305,000 in 1949-50; and the balance in 1950-51.
The agreement provided for the work on the road to be started not later than April 1, 1948, and completed on or before September 30, 1950. The road is to be an all-weather standard gravel surface with sufficient width for two-way traffic. Work commenced early in 1948 and at the end of the calendar year, approximately 17 miles of clearing, 10 miles of grading, and 10 miles of gravelling were completed. The Pas-Flin Flon highway will be approximately 95 miles in length, of which 27 miles between Cuprus mines and Cranberry Portage are in a potential mineral belt. The total dominion contribution will be $437,000.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is it on a dollar for dollar
basis?


Colin William George Gibson: I understand it is supposed to be about fifty-fifty, but the maximum cost to the dominion has been set.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian Affairs branch-
225. Branch administration, $138,790.
Mr. Charlton:: I should like to ask the minister when the new Indian Act will be brought forward?


Colin William George Gibson: I would say the next session of parliament.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I had a few remarks I wanted to make in that connection.


Mr. Lennard:: Make them tomorrow
morning.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I would rather make them right now. The minister will remember that there was a joint committee of this house which sat for three years revising this Indian Act. After the completion of the draft revision, it was sent to the Department of Justice so that the officers of that department could look it over. During the spring session of this

parliament, several members asked when the revised Indian Act would be introduced. Invariably, the answer has been that it was still in the hands of the Department of Justice officers. That excuse got so thin that I think the minister himself was ashamed to put it forward.
In answer to the member for Brant-Went-worth, the minister has suggested that the act will be introduced next year. Have the Department of Justice officials completed their lengthy consideration of this act? It has been in their hands since June, 1948. Will the act, as revised by the committee and with all the changes made by the Department of Justice, be the act introduced, or will the joint committee on Indian affairs be reconstituted for further work in this connection?


Colin William George Gibson: As a matter of fact, the Prime Minister spoke on this subject the other day. He pointed out that the Indian Act would not be introduced in this session, but would be left over until the next session. The report of the Indian affairs committee was a good report. My department worked to incorporate certain proposals for amendments to the act, and they were all sent down to the Department of Justice. When the act arrived at the Department of Justice, it was found it was a long time since it was overhauled, and that department felt there were other amendments which should be put in, quite apart from those recommended by the committee. Under those circumstances, the bill has not come back from justice yet. I understand it will not be ready until the next session.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Really, that is complete nonsense. This committee sat for three years considering the matter, and had the benefit of advice from solicitors from the Department of Justice as to what should be in the act, and what should not be in the act; what would work, and what would not work. This story that the Department of Justice found out the act had not been revised for many years is ridiculous, because the reason for setting up the committee in 1946 was that the act had not been revised since the nineties. Everybody knew that. The minister now says that the Department of Justice found out it had not been revised for many years, and yet the chief reason the committee was set up was to revise the act.
As I say, we spent three years in revising the act, and in addition a royal commission was appointed which spent considerable time travelling through the eastern portion of this country. After all this work was done, and after all this advice had been received from
Supply-Mines and Resources the Department of Justice officials, the minister now gets up and says that the Department of Justice found out the act had not been revised for a long time, and has, therefore, been holding it for this length of time.


Colin William George Gibson: I just want to correct my hon. friend in one respect. There was no representative from the Department of Justice on that committee. I understand there were solicitors from the Department of Mines and Resources, but not from the Department of Justice.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Naturally, the Department of Justice did not have representation on the committee, because the committee was composed of members of the House of Commons and the Senate. The Department of Justice did send representatives over to advise the committee, including Mr. Varcoe. The point I am getting at is that the government has been absolutely negligent in the matter of looking after this promised revision of the Indian Act. I do not think they can put forward excuses any longer for not taking action on the matter.
There are one or two other specific matters to which I should like to refer. The first is concerned with the fishing rights of Indians in the province of Alberta. The Indians were granted fishing rights in the various lakes in that province by treaty. The fish constituted one of their main items of food. Last year an order in council was passed by this government, apparently as a result of representations made by the government of Alberta, which prevented the Indians from doing any fishing in those lakes, except on Wednesdays or Thursdays, I think; it was one day a week. I suppose it was Thursday the idea being that the Indians could then have fish for Friday.
Often there were storms on Thursdays, or the fish were running on the opposite sides of the lake to that on which the Indian was fishing, or something of that nature happened, which meant the Indian had no fish. I should like to ask the minister what steps have been taken by his department to get this order in council rescinded, or to make some agreement with the Alberta government which will allow these Indians their treaty rights. I have made representations to the department about this matter.


Colin William George Gibson: When the natural resources were turned over to the province in 1930, under the agreement it left the Indians with ordinary rights for fishing and trapping in the province. There has been no change in that situation.

Supply-Mines and Resources


Douglas Scott Harkness: That is absolutely wrong. Nothing affected these fishing rights until last year, when an order in council was passed by this government limiting the right of the Indians to fish in these lakes to one day a week.


Colin William George Gibson: I understand that the Indians are subject to the laws of the province. I do not know of the order in council to which my hon. friend is referring that took away any rights that they had up to last year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: If the minister does not know he had better consult the officials in the Indian affairs branch and find out.


Colin William George Gibson: They do not know either.


Douglas Scott Harkness: They know about it. I have had correspondence with them on the matter. The order in council was passed in the last year. It is very recent and was passed as a result of representations from the Alberta government, again I think because of representations made to them by the fish and wildlife association of Alberta. The actual effect of this order in council is that the Indians bordering on these lakes have been deprived of their treaty rights which were guaranteed to them by the treaties which were signed when this territory was taken over from them. In addition to that, they have been deprived of their means of livelihood. The result of their being prevented from fishing is that the taxpayer of Canada has to provide them with welfare funds, food and so forth.


Colin William George Gibson: The special fishery regulation to which my hon. friend is referring is, I understand, one that was passed by the province of Alberta. As I said before, when the natural resources were taken over by the provinces it left the provinces with the right to regulate the use of the natural resources of the provinces. That I think must be the regulation to which my hon. friend is referring.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I think the minister will find that an order in council was passed by his own government, which is the one to which I am referring. I have had correspondence-


Colin William George Gibson: An order in council was passed approving the fishery regulation of the province of Alberta.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Yes.


Colin William George Gibson: I find that was passed, but that is only approving of the regulation that had been passed by the province of Alberta.
[Mr. Gibson (Hamilton West) .1


Douglas Scott Harkness: That is one of the things that I complained about. The minister is supposed to be the guardian of the Indians and is supposed to look after their rights. Instead of safeguarding their fishing rights in these lakes, as a matter of fact, the government passes an order in council giving away the rights. That is the very thing I am complaining about.


Major James William Coldwell: I want to support the hon. member in his request that a new Indian Act be brought down. Members of the parliamentary committee worked three years on the proposed act. As he has already said, they were turned into a royal commission and toured a part of this country. The proposed act they brought down was probably one of the most progressive pieces of legislation offered to this house on behalf of a group of people in this country. Because the Indian Act is obsolete the record of our own country regarding Indian affairs has been far from satisfactory and far from a credit to Canada. When the proposed act was recommended by the committee in the report to this house we all hoped that it would be something of a charter for the Indians in order that they might be encouraged to find a place in the life of Canada. I think the committee did an excellent job and produced an equally excellent report. We had the makings of a very good Indian Act.
Like the hon. member, I do not see why it takes a year and a half to refer this matter to the Department of Justice for other suggestions and amendments. Because the act has not been revised for a good many years, surely the Department of Justice should have been interested in the act at the same time as the committee was sitting and discussing Indian affairs. I think it is a shame that after three years of work, and the approval of the proposed act which had the makings of something good for the Indians and for Canada herself, nothing had been done with it.
The criticisms made by the hon. member are fully justified. I was not a member of the committee, but I followed it very closely. Several members of our party were on the committee. I saw the work they did; I saw the work that was done by members of other parties, including hon. members on the government side of the house in the last parliament. They worked effectively; they worked well; they worked conscientiously to do something for the Indians of this country. The least that could be done would be to bring legislation before the house early in the next session and not allow anyone anywhere to interfere with or circumvent the wishes of the committee which made such an excellent report to the house.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I have one more question in connection with welfare payments paid to aged Indians. Indians are the only people in this country who are not eligible for old age pensions. The welfare payments made to aged and other indigent Indians are now at the rate of $7.80 per month. The Indian association of Alberta has made representations to the Indian affairs branch to raise this amount to at least $15 a month. This afternoon in discussing medical matters as far as the Indians were concerned, the Minister of National Health and Welfare agreed that one of the reasons why tuberculosis and other diseases are so much more evident among the Indians than in the rest of the population is dietary deficiencies. I suggested to him that perhaps one of the best things he could do in order to improve the health of the Indians would be to recommend to the government that they increase the scale of these welfare payments so as to provide at least something reasonable in the way of money or payments in kind with which Indians could feed themselves decently. I urge the minister, who is directly responsible for this, that these welfare payments be increased. I think everyone will agree that the present scale is ridiculously low.


Colin William George Gibson: I think I should point out that in addition to the $8 that they get for welfare they also get subsistence in the form of fuel, clothes, food and medical attention in addition to the cash payments that they receive. Therefore it is not just the money alone.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Treaty or non-treaty Indians?


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister says that they get these things in addition. If he will look into it he will find that the amount of food they get in addition to the welfare payments is very small. It amounts to a certain quantity of meat, in many instances meat that could not otherwise be sold, cast-off meat, and flour and a few other items along that line. It does not amount to very much. I have forgotten the money value of it. I think it is a very small amount.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Mr. Chairman, this afternoon I had occasion to refer to conditions of health among the Indians in the Rocky Mountain House district of Alberta. I was greatly pleased witih the response that came from the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Tonight for just one brief moment I should like to point out that in order to solve the problem which I brought up this afternoon it will be extremely necessary for officials of the Indian affairs branch to give serious and thoughtful consideration to the responsibilities
Supply-Mines and Resources that rest upon them in connection with this problem. We have approximately 200 Chippewa Indians who have not come under the treaty. A tremendous amount of ground work was done in that district by old-timers in the district. I mentioned one this afternoon, Mr. Henry Stelfox. The Indians were practically at the point where they were prepared to accept treaty, and then the Indian affairs department sent a man in to negotiate with them. I believe that my ten-year-old boy would have been just as competent to deal with these Indians-I will not mention any names-as this gentleman. He was not even civil with the Indians, with the result that this advance party which had come down to discuss treaty turned and went back in disgust. It is not beyond the realm of possibility to get these Chippewa Indians into treaty. But some care must be exercised in the type of man who goes in there to negotiate with them.
I would stress one or two points in connection with this. Whether it happens to be the agent or someone else located at Rocky Mountain House, this person must be essentially of a very humane character. He must be one who has the interests of those Indians at heart. He must know something of the history of those Indians. He must know something about the nature of the country in which they live.
I have not met the agent or the officials at the agency at Rocky Mountain House. I am not going to register any complaint about them, but I am going to stress upon the minister that he be certain above all else that he has the right man in there, if he ever expects to get those 200 Chippewa Indians into the treaty. I suggest the attention of his officers should be focused upon that situation to determine whether or not the right man is in charge at that agency.
With respect to the Crees who are on the reservation at that point, let me say that on that reservation there is a large quantity of timber-sufficient, if properly dealt with, to provide a great deal of security for those Indians over a long period of time. On the basis of the information I have received I am fearful that situation is not being dealt with properly. For example, these Indians should be allowed to go in there and establish their own small mill. It does not cost much money. Let it be all Indian labour, and let them take out their own timber under supervision.
Today the policy seems to be to let the white man go in there and establish his own mills, with the result that the poor Indian gets nothing but the wages paid to him-and sometimes those wages are not very high.
3058	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Resources In my opinion that timber belongs to those Indians, and they should be helped to bring it out.
I do not wish to take more time, but I do believe this economic angle is very important from the standpoint of the health problem I set before the minister this afternoon. That condition is simply appalling in this district.


Heber Harold Hatfield: Will the minister consider increasing the old age pension from the $8 at which it now stands. An Indian cannot live on $8 a month. I have a letter here from an Indian on a reservation in my constituency. This man says he is eighty years of age.


Colin William George Gibson: I would say that this matter is receiving consideration at the present time.


Major James William Coldwell: What is the incidence of tuberculosis among the Indians?


Colin William George Gibson: That comes under the Department of National Health and Welfare.


Major James William Coldwell: I know.


Colin William George Gibson: We do not
touch it.


Major James William Coldwell: But surely the Indians branch, which is supposed to look after the welfare of the Indians, should know something about their health. Does the minister know anything about the health of the people in his custody?


Colin William George Gibson: The Minister of National Health and Welfare gave a very full report on the subject today.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not think he did.


Colin William George Gibson: He gave the percentage that had been covered by the X-ray surveys.


Major James William Coldwell: That is all he did.


Colin William George Gibson: I believe he said 62 per cent had been covered.


Major James William Coldwell: What were the results?


Colin William George Gibson: He is the
one who would have to give that. I have not that information.


Major James William Coldwell: If the Indian affairs branch is charged, with custody of the Indians, and we appropriate money for the welfare of those Indians, why is it that that branch of government does not know anything about the health of the Indians in its custody? Perhaps this is one reason why the Indian population is in such an unsatisfactory condition today, and why our Indians have not


been raised to the level of the white population, as the natives of some other countries have been raised to the level of the white population there.
Because of the division of power, if we may so describe it, among the various branches of government it would seem that this condition has arisen. The same applies to education. What are the educational levels among the Indians? How is that education looked after? What kind of schools have they? To what extent are they educated? I have been to some of these Indian schools, and I will say that in the junior grades I found that the level was about the same as that of white children. I know something about this, because at that time I was supervising schools and knew something about educational levels.
But a little later on there seemed to be no provision for higher grades in the schools, no provision for higher education among them. We know perfectly well that, given the opportunity, the Indian has the same mentality as other people, and can be raised to the level of the whites.
That is one of the reasons I want to see this Indian Act brought down. That is one of the reasons I want to see a complete revision of the provisions for education, health and everything else in the Indian affairs branch. This thing is a public scandal in Canada, and it is a scandal that the government has not brought down the act for revision, so that we may do something about it.


Colin William George Gibson: May I say
that we are just as anxious to have the act brought down as other members of the house. With regard to the health of Indians, I am informed that the health has been improving. Certainly the birth rate is the highest of any group in this country. They are increasing rapidly.


Major James William Coldwell: But what is the infant mortality rate?


Colin William George Gibson: Expenditures on Indian education in the last fiscal year amounted to $5,403,012.24. At this time there are in operation 309 day schools, 72 Indian residential schools and 5 combined schools. The number of Indian pupils stands at 12,511 in the day schools, 9,368 in the residential schools and 104 in the combined schools, in addition 1,302 attended provincial and private schools, making a total of Indians enrolled in educational classes of 23,285, an increase of 2,015 over the preceding year


Major James William Coldwell: Those figures are meaningless. I know there are Indians enrolled in schools. But what kind of education do they get in those schools, and how is the money being spent in connection with that education?

[s it going toward the education of the [ndians? To what extent is this money being spent properly for educational purposes?
And the same questions could be asked in connection with health. To what extent is the noney for the health of Indians being spent for the health of Indians? What is the overlead in connection with education on Indian reserves? I will say again that I have found from personal observation that the Indian children in the lower grades measure up pretty well with the white children; but ifterwards they seem to evaporate, and we lave nothing to show for these vast sums of noney we are spending on education. I say he number of Indian children in schools neans nothing. What kind of education are hey getting? That is the point.


Louis-René Beaudoin: I would point out hat we are now discussing item 225.


Heber Harold Hatfield: I would draw the attention )f the minister to the water service at the ndian reservation at Tobique Point in my constituency. They were promised a water cervice two years ago when the committee vas down there investigating. This water uns into puncheons or large casks which are :et out on the different streets of the Indian eservation and the Indians go and dip their jails in to get their water instead of having t available from a faucet. An Indian from t.b. home will go there and dip in his pail dong with an Indian from a healthy home. Ve were promised that this unhealthy situa-ion would be corrected by the putting in of i water system.


Colin William George Gibson: If the water ystem is not already completed it will be ompleted quite shortly.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
/elfare-
228. Welfare of Indians, $3,002,528.
Major James William Coldwell: What is the total amount rovided in the main, the supplementary and he further supplementary estimates for ndian welfare?


Colin William George Gibson: The total is 3,103,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
ducation-
230. Indian education, and to authorize commit-lents against future years in the amount of COO,000, $4,157,433.
George Matheson Murray: There are 3,000 ndians in my riding and naturally I am iterested in their welfare. I should like to nfer to the splendid work being done by the epartment under the superintendency of lajor Donald Morrison MacKay, who is a
Supply-Mines and Resources son of Cariboo and is active in the department. I want to refer especially to the setting up of day schools throughout the Cariboo district which makes it possible for the young Indian people to have the same educational opportunities as those available to the whites. I am looking forward to the bringing down of the new Indian Act and I hope that the time will come when these people will have the same status in the nation as the white people.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister explain what is meant by, "and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $200,000"? Is that included in the amount of $4,157,433?


Colin William George Gibson: That is not included in the total.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We are authorizing the
department to make commitments of $200,000 in future years?


Colin William George Gibson: Over and above what will be spent next year.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will those expenditures
appear in future estimates?


Colin William George Gibson: In the estimates of next year, yes.


Heber Harold Hatfield: What is the difference between a treaty and a non-treaty Indian?


Colin William George Gibson: Treaties have been entered into with Indians in Ontario and the western provinces under which annuities are paid.


Heber Harold Hatfield: What about the Indians in eastern Canada? Treaties were entered into with them long before they were entered into with the Indians in western Canada.


Colin William George Gibson: The treaties I have referred to are as follows:
Treaty No. 1. Southern Manitoba centering Portage la Prairie and Winnipeg districts.
Treaty No. 2. Central Manitoba, south-eastern Saskatchewan and south-western Manitoba.
Treaty No. 3. Extreme south-west of Ontario lying west of the great lakes and small portion of south-eastern Manitoba.
Treaty No. 4. Mainly southern Saskatchewan.
Treaty No. 5. Northern Manitoba and part of extreme western Ontario, north of treaty No. 3.
Treaty No. 6. Central Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Treaty No. 7. Southern Alberta.
Treaty No. 8. Northern Alberta, the Northwest Territories, south of Great Slave lake and northeastern British Columbia.
Treaty No. 9. That part of Ontario drained into the Hudson bay.
Treaty No. 10. Northern Saskatchewan.
Treaty No. 11. The Northwest Territories north of Great Slave lake.
There are no such treaties with Indians in the maritimes.
3060	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Resources


Heber Harold Hatfield: Treaties were made with Indians in Ontario, Quebec and the maritimes but the department told me three or four years ago that they had been lost.


Colin William George Gibson: I am sure there are no such treaties in the maritimes and Quebec.


Heber Harold Hatfield: There were because I have copies of them.
Item stands.


Louis-René Beaudoin: There are two items that were carried but kept in abeyance.
I understand the minister has the information now. A question was asked by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre about item 214.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It will keep until tomorrow morning.


Alphonse Fournier: That was passed.


Louis-René Beaudoin: I believe they were carried, but I kept them here in case they were needed for further discussion.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Alphonse Fournier: Unless I am mistaken there are three departments that have not been discussed; at all, the Prime Minister's office, public works and finance. There are two departments that were discussed for some time but items were not passed. They are the departments of trade and commerce and justice. We have balances in agriculture, veterans affairs, and a few items in mines and resources. Tomorrow morning at eleven o'clock we shall proceed with the remainder of the items in agriculture. Then we will take up trade and commerce, public works and the Prime Minister's office. During the day some time I shall have to bring in four or five items in veterans affairs and mines and resources, but we will try to follow this order: Agriculture, trade and commerce, public works, Prime Minister's office, finance and justice.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And legislation.


Alphonse Fournier: And legislation.
It being 12.05 a.m., the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
fMr. Gibson (Hamilton West).]

[The following items were passed in committee oi supply]:



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE

[Stage Direction]
252.	Departmental administration, $794,605.
National health branch-health services-
253.	National health branch-administration, $126, 015.
254.	Food and drugs, $682,015.
255.	Proprietary or patent medicines, $26,585.
256.	Opium and narcotic drugs, $139,860.
257.	Quarantine and leprosy, $272,797.
258.	Laboratory of hygiene, $340,014.
259.	Immigration medical inspection, $842,773.
260.	Child and maternal health, $96,005.
261.	Public health engineering, $158,640.
262.	Treatment of sick mariners, $524,610.
263.	Industrial health, $125,180.
264.	Civil service health, $202,709.
265.	Nutrition, $143,635.
266.	Venereal disease control, $42,164.
267.	Health insurance studies, $56,451.
268.	Dental health, $52,748.
269.	Hospital designs, $24,810.
270.	Mental health, $90,725.
271.	Blindness control, $46,120.
272.	Epidemiology, $25,880.
273.	Grants to institutions assisting sailors, in thi amounts detailed in the estimates, $2,600.
274.	Medical services-Indians and Eskimos, $10, 713,316.
275.	Civil aviation medicine, $44,015.
Health grants-
276.	General health grants-to provide for the fol lowing grants to the provinces, under terms and con ditions approved by the governor in council-
Health survey grant to assist the provinces ii surveying present health services and facilitie including hospitals, and in studying ways am means of improving and extending the same; to b distributed on the basis of a flat amount to $5,00 to each province and the balance according to popu lation but the total payment available to any prov ince in no case to be less than $15,000, $150,000.
Hospital construction grant to assist the province in the provision of adequate accommodation for hos pital and health services; to be distributed on th basis of $1,000 per bed for active treatment bed! $1,500 per bed for chronic or convalescent beds, o in the case of other health facilities on an equivaler basis; provinces to match or exceed dominion con tribution which shall in no case exceed one-third c total cost, $13,000,000.
General public health grant to assist the province in strengthening general public health services; t be distributed on the basis of 40 cents per capita c population, to provinces which maintain at leas their standard and extent of service in this field « at March 31, 1948, $5,143,600.
Tuberculosis control grant to assist the province in an accelerated and intensified effort toward th eradication of tuberculosis and to extend progrei sively the provision of free treatment; to be dii tributed on the basis of a flat amount of $25,000 t each province and; the balance to be divided 50 pe cent on the basis of population and 50 per cer on the basis of the average number of death from tuberculosis in each province over the previoi five years, $3,000,000.
Mental health grant to assist the provinces in th prevention of mental illness, and in extending prc gressively the provision of free treatment; to t distributed on the basis of a fiat amount of $25,0( to each province and the balance according to popv lation, $4,000,000.

Venereal disease control grant to assist the prov-tices in extending and intensifying their present [DOT]fforts toward the control of venereal disease; to be listributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to :ach province and the balance according to popula-ion, $500,000.
Crippled children grant to assist the provinces in m intensive program for the prevention and correc-ion of crippling conditions in children; rehabilitation md training; to be distributed on the basis of a lat amount of $4,000 to each province the balance iccording to population, $500,000.
Professional training grant to assist the provinces n the training of personnel for public health and lospital staffs; to be distributed on the basis of a lat amount of $4,000 to each province and the >alance according to population, $500,000.
Public health research grant to assist the provinces n stimulating and developing public health research, 200,000.
Cancer control grant to assist the provinces in >rograms for the control of cancer; to be distributed iccording to population, with any such programs for :ancer control to be approved and the cost thereof to >e divided equally between the dominion and the >rovince concerned, $3,500,000.
Velfare branch-
277.	Welfare branch administration, $36,155.
Tamily allowances-
278.	Administration, $1,808,198.
Did age pensions (including pensions to the blind) -
279.	Administration, $65,610.
National physical fitness-
280.	Administration, $60,887.
281.	Assistance to provinces, $85,689.
282.	Assistance to schools of social work, $50,000.
Miscellaneous grants-grant to-
283.	Canadian welfare council, $12,600.
284.	Canadian national committee for mental lygiene, $10,000.
285.	Health League of Canada, $10,000.
286.	Canadian Public Health Association, $5,000.
287.	Canadian National Institute for the Blind, ;45,000.
288.	L'Association Canadienne Francaise des Yveugles, $6,000.
289.	L'Institut Nazareth de Montreal, $4,050.
290.	Montreal Association for the Blind, $4,050.
291.	Canadian Tuberculosis Association, $20,250.
292.	Victorian Order of Nurses, $13,100.
293.	St. John Ambulance Association, $4,050.
294.	Canadian Red Cross Society, $10,000.
295.	Canadian Paraplegic Association, $15,000.
National health branch-health services-
691. Quarantine and leprosy-further	amount equired, $10,600.
692.	Immigration medical inspection - further imount required, $18,960.
693.	Treatment of sick mariners-further amount required, $150,000.
lealth grants-General health grants-
694.	To provide for the following grants to the Drovinces, under terms and conditions approved jy the governor in council-Health survey grant to issist the provinces in surveying present health tervices and facilities, including hospitals, and in itudying ways and means of improving and jxtending the same; to be distributed on the basis >f a flat amount of $5,000 to each province and the balance according to population but the total pay-nent available to any province in no case to be ess than $15,000-further amount required, $19,779.
Hospital construction grant to assist the provinces n the provision of adequate accommodation for
Supply-National Health and Welfare
hospital and health services; to be distributed on the basis of $1,000 per bed for active treatment beds, $1,500 per bed for chronic or convalescent beds, or in the case of other health facilities on an equivalent basis; provinces to match or exceed dominion contribution which shall in no case exceed one-third of total cost-further amount required, $334,629.
General public health grant to assist the provinces in strengthening general public health services; to be distributed on the basis of 40 cents per capita of population, to provinces which maintain at least their standard and extent of service in this field as at March 31, 1948-further amount required, $132,400.
Tuberculosis control grant to assist the provinces in an accelerated and intensified effort toward the eradication of tuberculosis and to extend progressively the provision of free treatment; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $25,000 to each province and the balance to be divided 50 per cent on the basis of population and 50 per cent on the basis of the average number of deaths from tuberculosis in each province over the previous five years-further amount required, $176,614.
Mental health grant to assist the provinces in the prevention of mental illness and in extending progressively the provision of free treatment; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $25,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $122,171.
Venereal disease control grant to assist the provinces in extending and intensifying their present efforts toward the control of venereal disease; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $15,944.
Crippled children grant to assist the provinces in an intensive program for the prevention and correction of crippling conditions in children, rehabilitation and training; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $15,944.
Professional training grant to assist the provinces in the training of personnel for public health and hospital staffs; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population-further amount required, $15,944.
Public health research grant to assist the provinces in stimulating and developing public health research-further amount required, $5,148.
Cancer control grant to assist the provinces in programs for the control of cancer; to be distributed according to population, with any such programs for cancer control to be approved and the cost thereof to be divided equally between the dominion and the province concerned-further amount required, $90,093.
Welfare branch-family allowances-
695. Administration-further	amount required, $78,180.
Old age pensions (including pensions to the blind) -
696.	Administration - further amount required, $3,000.
832.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $20,000.
National health branch-health services-
833.	Laboratory of hygiene and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $115,000-further amount required, $58,000.
834. Immigration medical	inspection-further amount required, $92,178.
835.	Industrial health-further amount required, $5,550.
836. Dental health-further amount required,

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Mines and Resources
837. Epidemiology-further	amount required. $2,400.
838.	Civil aviation medicine-further amount required, $5,000.
Health grants-general health grants-
839.	To revote the following amounts in respect of grants to the provinces set out below and to be paid under terms and conditions to be approved by the governor in council-Health survey grant- To hereby amend the terms of vote 276, main estimates, 1949-50, to read "Health survey grant- revote to continue scheme of allocation of grant under vote 797 of the supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1949"-further amount required, $100,000.
Hospital construction grant	(revote)-further
amount required, $1,000,000.
Venereal disease control grant-To hereby amend the terms of vote 276, main estimates, 1949-50, to read "Venereal disease control grant to assist the provinces in the control of venereal disease; to be distributed on the basis of a flat amount of $4,000 to each province and the balance according to population with any programs for venereal disease control to be approved and the cost thereof to be divided equally between the dominion and the province concerned" and to revote an additional amount for the equipment ordered before March 31, 1949, but not delivered within time for payment out of unexpended amounts authorized by vote 797 of the supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1949-further amount required, $1,600.
Revotes for equipment ordered before March 31, 1949, but not delivered within time for payment out of unexpended amounts authorized by vote 797 of the supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1949, in respect of the following grants: General public health grant-further amount required, $132,085; tuberculosis control grant- further amount required, $212,847; mental health grant-further amount required, $326,829; crippled children grant-further amount required, $4,350; public health research grant-further amount required, $500.
Welfare branch-
840. Family	allowances-administration-further amount required, $45,000.
841.	Old age pensions (including pensions to the blind)-administration-further amount required, $7,000.
842.	Assistance to schools of social work-further amount required, $2,500.
843.	Grant to British Empire Games Association of Canada, $20,000.

[Stage Direction]
172.	Departmental administration, $365,500.
Special projects-
173.	Director of special projects-administration, $29,235.
174.	International boundary commission, $47,397. Mines, Forests and Scientific Services Branch-
175.	Branch administration, $100,670.
Bureau of Mines-
176.	Bureau of Mines administration, $43,500.
177.	Mineral resources investigations, $1,598,850.
178.	Explosives Act administration, $65,900.
179.	Investigations of radioactive ores, $268,130.
Dominion forest service-
180.	Dominion forest service administration, $59,280.
181.	Forest research and investigations, $762,990.
182.	Forest products research, $535,030.
183.	Grant to Canadian forestry association, $4,000
Eastern Rockies forest conservation board-
184.	To provide for the salaries and expenses oi dominion members of the board and their alternates and sundry expenses in connection with the maintenance and operation of the Ottawa office of the board, $23,000.
185.	Dominion contribution towards annual maintenance, including staff and expenses, $175,000.
186.	Forest insects control board, $13,225.
Geological survey of Canada-
187.	Geological survey administration and miscellaneous services, $128,625.
188.	Geological surveys, $1,130,365.
Surveys and mapping bureau-
189.	Surveys and mapping bureau administration, $31,640.
190.	Topographical surveys, including expenses oi the Canadian board on geographical names, $1,196,240.
191.	Canadian hydrographic service, $3,478,314.
192.	Geodetic survey of Canada, $662,775.
193.	Legal surveys, including grant of $350 to assist in printing the publication of the Canadian Institute of Surveying, $499,136.
194.	To provide for the payment of fees of the board of examiners for dominion land surveyors, of the secretary and of the sub-examiners and foi travelling expenses, stationery, printing, rent, etc, (the fees of B. W. Waugh, J. E. R. Ross and J. L, Rannie, members of the board, and A. W. W. Cole, secretary, are to be paid out of this sum), $2,100.
195.	Map compilation and reproduction, $399,510, Dominion water and power bureau-
196.	Dominion water and power bureau, including the administration of the Dominion Water Powei and Irrigation Acts, and including grant of $350 to the international executive council, world powei conference, $513,700.
197.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $350,000.
198.	Lake of the Woods control board, $11,880.
199.	To provide for the expenses incurred undei the agreement between the dominion, Ontario and Manitoba, confirmed by the Lac Seul Conservation Act, 1928, moneys expended to be largely reimbursed, $17,750.
200.	To provide for acquiring flowage easements and discharging claims of owners of riparian lands in Ontario below the outlets of the Lake of the Woods affected by regulation under the Lake of the Woods Control Board Act (revote), $500.
201.	To provide for excavation of a flood channel at Dalles rapids in Winnipeg river in Ontario to reduce flooding of riparian property affected by the regulation under the Lake of the Woods Control Board Act, $170,000.
202.	Geographical bureau, $136,200.
203.	National Museum of Canada, $177,500.
Dominion observatories-
204.	Dominion observatory, Ottawa, $312,630.
205.	Dominion astrophysical observatory, Victoria, B.C., $63,859.
Lands and development services branch-
206.	Branch administration, $82,800.
Northwest Territories and Yukon services-Mackenzie division-
207.	General administration, operation and maintenance of services, including Wood Buffalo park, $745,414.

208.	Forest conservation, including Wood Buffalo park, $336,395.
Roads, buildings and water systems-construction and improvements-
209.	Roads, $197,000.
210.	Buildings (revote), $51,100), $681,128.
211.	Water and sewages, $367,383.
Arctic division-
212.	Administration, $177,160.
213.	Buildings, $104,000.
Yukon division-
214.	Administration, $166,500.
215.	Roads, $1,460,000.
216.	Buildings, $171,000.
217.	Coal development, $90,000.
218.	Lands division-administration of dominion, ordnance and admiralty, and public lands; seed grain collections, $254,335.
National parks services-
219.	National parks and historic sites services, $10,062,324.
220.	Grant to the Jack Miner migratory bird foundation, $5,000.
221.	Grant in aid in development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, $15,000.
Dominion wildlife service-
222.	Wildlife resources conservation and development. including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act, $259,520.
Engineering and construction division-
223.	Engineering and construction services, $399,319.
224.	Cranberry portage road-to provide for the 1949-50 dominion contribution to the cost of section B. Cranberry Portage to Cuprus Mines, of the proposed road between The Pas and Flin Flon in Manitoba in accordance with the terms of an agreement between the dominion and the province of Manitoba dated September 30, 1948, $305,000.
Indian Affairs branch-
225.	Branch administration, $138,790.
226.	Indian agencies, $2,451,709.
Reserves and trusts-
227.	Administration, $261,615.
Welfare-
228.	Welfare of Indians, $3,002,528.
229.	Grants to agricultural exhibitions and Indian fairs. $7,200.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch- bureau of mines-
682. Explosives Act	administration-further amount required, $5,700.
Dominion forest service-
683.	Forest research and investigations-further amount required, $40,000.
Geological survey of Canada-
684.	Geological surveys-further amount required, $65,000.
Surveys and mapping bureau-
685.	Topographical surveys, including expenses of Canadian board on geographical names-further amount required, $50,000.
Supply-Mines and Resources
Dominion water and power bureau-
686.	Dominion water and power bureau, including the administration of the Dominion Water Power and Irrigation Acts-further amount required, $32,200.
Lands and development services branch-lands division-
687.	Administration of dominion, ordnance and admiralty, and public lands; seed grain collections -further amount required, $11,360.
Dominion wildlife service-
688.	Wildlife resources conservation and development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act-further amount required. $12,320.
Special projects-
803.	To provide for investigations into the possibility of water storage on Mayo lake, Yukon Territory, and of hydro-electric developments on Mayo river, Yukon Territory, to serve the Mayo, Keno Hill and Galena Hill districts, $50,000.
Mines, forests and scientific services branch-
804.	Branch administration-further amount le-quired, $1,000.
Bureau of mines-
805.	Maintenance of plant of Abasand Oils Limited, $85,000.
Dominion forest service-
806.	Dominion forest service administration-further amount required, $2,500.
807.	Forest products research-further amount required, $15,000.
Geological survey of Canada-
808.	Geological survey administration and miscellaneous services-further amount required, $6,500.
809.	Geographical bureau-further amount required, $16,500.
810.	National Museum of Canada-further amount required, $28,000.
Dominion observatories-*
811.	Dominion astrophysical observatory, Victoria, B.C.-further amount required, $9,000.
Lands and development services branch-Northwest Territories and Yukon services-Mackenzie division-Roads, buildings and water systems- construction and improvements-
812.	Roads-further amount required, $89,316.
813.	Buildings-further amount required, $68,100. Yukon division-
814. Administration-further amount required, $10,500.
815.	Roads-further amount required, $650,000.
National parks services-
816.	National parks and historic sites services- further amount required, $1,255,434.
Engineering and construction division-
817.	Engineering and construction services-further amount required, $17,500.
3064	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Health and Welfare
818.	Dominion contribution to the cost of a ten-mile section of the Tide lake road between Big Missouri mine and Summit lake in British Columbia in accordance with the terms of an agreement to be entered into between the dominion and the province of British Columbia, $35,000.
819.	Dominion contribution to the cost of construction of a mining road between the Stony rapids and Black lake in Saskatchewan in accordance with the terms of an agreement to be entered into
[Stage Direction]
between the dominion and the province of Saskatchewan, $12,500.
Indian Affairs branch-
820.	Branch administration-further amount required, $1,500.
821.	Indian agencies-further amount required, $190,400.
Welfare-
822.	Welfare of Indians-further amount required,

[Stage Direction]
Fredericton, November 25, 1949 Hon. D. C. Abbott, K.C.,
Minister of Finance,
Ottawa, Canada.
Dear Mr. Abbott:
I received in due course your letter of the ninth instant, which has reference to rental controls, but have delayed replying thereto until I had an opportunity to discuss these questions in cabinet.
They have been under consideration during our current meeting and are still receiving study. Under these circumstances, I am not in a position to indicate our attitude thereon but will be in further communication with you shortly.
Yours sincerely,
John B. McNair
THE PREMIER Nova Scotia
Halifax, December 1, 1949
My dear Minister,
Let me thank you for your letter of November 9 on the subject of rental control.
I note that the constitutional aspect of the question is being referred to the Supreme Court of Canada, and I shall await with interest the decision of that court. Undoubtedly it is well to have this matter settled.
At the moment the province's views on rent control remain the same as expressed in my letter to you under date of February 21, 1949.
Yours sincerely,
Angus L. Macdonald
Hon. D. C. Abbott, P.C., K.C., M.P.,
Minister of Finance,
Ottawa, Canada.

[Stage Direction]
Ottawa, December 7, 1949 Hon. Angus L. Macdonald, P.C., K.C.,
Premier of Nova Scotia,
Halifax, Nova Scotia.
My dear Premier:
Thank you very much for your letter of December 1 in reply to mine of November 9, on the subject of rental control.
I note that the views of the province of Nova Scotia remain the same as expressed in your letter of February 21, 1949.
Yours very truly,
D. C. Abbott


[Stage Direction]
Regina, December 6, 1949
Hon. Douglas C. Abbott,
Minister of Finance,
Ottawa, Ontario.
Dear Mr. Abbott:
Re rent control
I wish to thank you for your letter of December 2.
My letter to you of November 16 set out the position of the Saskatchewan government, namely:
(1)	That the order permitting rent increases on December 15 should be made inoperative in this province.
(2)	That Saskatchewan was prepared to enter the rent control field.
(3)	That we desired an assurance that you had jurisdiction to place Saskatchewan in the field while it was still occupied by the dominion. We requested a supreme court reference to determine your jurisdiction in this respect.
Your last letter, we take it, is a definite refusal to refer the question to the supreme court. We regret this, and cannot agree with you that such a reference is "undesirable" or that it "might confuse the main issue". With respect, we doubt if the learned members of the supreme court would be confused by submitting a second question arising out of the same subject matter as the first.
We also find it difficult to agree that "all that can be asked is a hypothetical question" because there is no provincial legislation to be referred. The question we desire answered is not one of provincial but of dominion jurisdiction.
You have been informing the provinces for a year that if they or any of them expressed a willingness to take over rent control you would put them in the field, tomorrow, I believe was the expression used. It is to obtain a ruling placing beyond doubt your power to carry out your undertaking and put a single province in the field that we requested a reference to the supreme court.
Your argument that a reference to determine the legal position of landlords and tenants of Saskatchewan might delay a decision on the main issue comes strangely from yourself, as you are already on record as holding the opinion that the question can be answered only in one way as there is no reasonable doubt of the legal position. Surely if you are correct in your view the supreme court justices will be able to reach that decision as quickly as your law officers did.
Your refusal, however, to have the point passed on must be accepted as law; we cannot change it.
In the opinion of our government the recent order permitting heavy increases in rents, straight across the board, without consideration of the merits of individual cases is so inequitable and iniquitous that we must submit to your terms to have it annulled in Saskatchewan no matter how arbitrary we think those terms are.
Saskatchewan will therefore consent to the two orders being passed; one making the recent rent increases inoperative in Saskatchewan and the other making all federal rental regulations inoperative in Saskatchewan from and after April 1, 1950.
This consent is given because of the assurance of your law officers that the second order will be so drawn as to enable Saskatchewan to pass valid legislation respecting rent control.
The consent is conditional, however, on your assurance that if your law officers are at a later date proven wrong and it is held by the courts that we cannot enter the field you will take the necessary steps to put Saskatchewan back under federal controls. Inadequate as we think your regulations are we cannot permit a situation to arise where Saskatchewan will have no rental controls at all.
We agree that an amendment to the Continuation of Transitional Measures Act is advisable but do not think the amendment proposed in your letter is the appropriate one. We desire an amendment that will, inasmuch as dominion legislation can do it, put beyond question the power of the governor in council by executive action to confer legislative jurisdiction respecting rent control on one province or on any number less than all. We do not wish to confuse the main issue, however, and think the
[Stage Direction]
Appendix
form of the amendment can be worked out later. We believe It should follow the general lines of the suggestions made in the house the other night by your colleague, Mr. Garson.
At a later date we intend to request you to renew your oifer to pay the cost of provincial rent control. This would appear to be only fair and reasonable, if, for instance, Saskatchewan alone undertakes the work and relieves you of an item of expense you are incurring in the other provinces where rent control is left with the dominion.
It will therefore be in order for you to proceed with the two orders, on giving us the assurance that in the event of the courts finding that Saskatchewan control legislation is beyond our jurisdiction you will put Saskatchewan back under federal controls if any are in force at that time.
Yours sincerely,
T. C. Douglas

[Stage Direction]
Ottawa, December 8, 1949
Hon. T. C. Douglas,
Premier of Saskatchewan,
Regina, Saskatchewan.
My dear Premier:
Thank you for your letter of December 6, which I have discussed today with my colleagues in the government.
Pursuant to your request and in accordance with the announced policy of the government, the wartime prices and trade board is today issuing an order which makes orders 813 and 814 of the board inoperative in Saskatchewan and revokes the wartime leasehold regulations in their entirety as they apply to Saskatchewan as from April 1, 1950.
If it is conclusively determined by the courts that legislation enacted by the legislature of Saskatchewan, with respect to landlord and tenant relationships, is invalid because and only because regulations of the federal government remain in effect elsewhere in Canada, the federal government will take the necessary steps to put Saskatchewan back under then existing rental controls.
We shall be prepared to consider a request that the federal government pay the cost of administering provincial rent control in Saskatchewan for a period not exceeding one year. You will understand, of course, that any agreement would be subject to approval by parliament.
Yours very truly,

[Stage Direction]
Quebec, December 7. 1949
Hon. D. C. Abbott,
Minister of Finance,
Ottawa.
Mr. Minister of Finance:
Today, at our first meeting held since Wednesday last, the members of the executive council of the province took cognizance of your letter dated December 2, delivered at my office on the 5th of the same month, concerning federal rent control.
We reiterate each and every one of the statements contained in the letters which we wrote to you on the subject, particularly the two following paragraphs of our letter of November 30 last:
"Far from offering to the province the full exercise of its rights in this field, the federal government continues to render the full exercise thereof practically impossible.
"We respectfully suggest to the federal government that it should modify its attitude and make it consistent with the rights of the provinces and with the rights of the people concerned. By removing, as you could easily do, the further and grave difficulties which you have added to the difficulties inherent in the problem, you would help solve the question rather than make it more complicated and more difficult. As to the present government of the province of Quebec, it is always ready to assume its responsibilities, but it desires that the federal government assume its own without any further delay."
Yours sincerely,
M. L. Duplessis
MINISTER OF FINANCE Canada
Ottawa, December 8, 1949
Hon. Maurice L. Duplessis,
Premier of Quebec,
Quebec.
My dear Premier:
I acknowledge and thank you for your letter of December 7 on the subject of rent control.
Kindest personal regards.
Yours sincerely.
D. C. Abbott
D. C. Abbott
[Stage Direction]
Saturday, December 10, 1949