1949-09-29

Mr. Daniel Mclvor (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, out of the goodness of his heart someone occasionally provides a treat for members of this house; and today we have on our desks these beautiful apples. We thank the donor, but so far as I am concerned the apples would taste far sweeter if the gift were shared by all those in the house, including the page boys and others.


Mr. G. A. Cruickshank (Fraser Valley):: May
I say a word in appreciation of these apples which have been given to us by an hon. member from Ontario-in lively anticipation of the British Columbia apples we shall be given later, which will be of a much greater size.


Mr. G. T. Fulford (Leeds):: These apples were presented to me on Monday, as I was leaving Brockville. They are McIntosh Reds, and were grown by a resident of the county of Leeds. I hope they prove that the apples of eastern Ontario will stand up against those grown anywhere else in Canada. As you know, Mr. Speaker, eastern Ontario is the home of the McIntosh Red.



EXCHEQUER COURT ACT


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice) moved: the first reading of Bill No. 8 (from the Senate) to amend the Exchequer Court Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ACT



AMENDMENT TO MAKE DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Stuart Sinclair Garson: the first reading of Bill No. 9 (from the Senate) to amend the Department of Justice Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. QUESTIONS
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)



S.S. &quot;NORTHUMBERLAND&quot;  DAMAGED BY FIRE

Mr. Church:: 1.	What has been done to replace the steamer Northumberland which was burnt at Port Dal-housie?
2.	Was an inquiry held into the burning of the Northumberland?
3.	If so, what was the nature of the inquiry?
4.	How long had this ship been in use and what inspection was made of it?
5.	Was this ship not already in commission when the accident happened?


Mr. Chevrier:: 1.	The Canadian National Railways advise that no plans are at present under consideration for the replacement of the steamer Northumberland.
2 and 3. The usual casualty report was made to the collector of customs as required by the Canada Shipping Act, 1934, and on the basis of this report it was considered that no further inquiry under the Canada Shipping Act was necessary.
4.	The S.S. Northumberland was built in 1891. She had undergone the regular inspection as required by the Canada Shipping Act, 1934.
5.	The S.S. Northumberland had not commenced her season's work when the fire occurred. Some of the crew were on board the ship, but her annual inspection had not yet been completed, and the inspection certificate which was necessary before she would be permitted to commence operation had not been issued.



IMPORTS OF POTATOES AND OTHER STARCHES

Mr. Haffield:: 1.	What was the value and quantity of potato starch imported into Canada in the year 1949 to date?
2.	What was the quantity of other starches, and value, imported into Canada during the same period?


Mr. Mcliraifh:: 1.	Imports, "potato starch and potato flour", January 1 to July 31, 1949-766,980 lbs., valued at $49,948.
2.	Imports, "starch, including corn starch, and all preparations having the quality of starch, n.o.p.", January 1 to July 31, 1949- 1,947,752 lbs., valued at $117,806.



INCOME TAX


Mr. Hansell:: Are ambulance services considered to be part of medical expenses for the purpose of income taxes, and if not, in what way does the government consider them not to be?


Mr. Mayhew:: Amounts paid for ambulance services are not included in the medical expenses set forth in subsection (b) of section 26 of the Income Tax Act.

Questions



LIFE-SAVING FACILITIES ON LAKES AND INLAND WATERWAYS

Mr. Church:: What has been done by the government since last session to provide a proper life-saving system for the lakes and inland waterways in the province of Ontario and all of Canada?


Mr. Chevrier:: An interdepartmental committee has been appointed under the chairmanship of the Canadian maritime commission for the purpose of co-ordinating the functions of all government departments concerned in search and rescue work on the east coast, west coast and the great lakes.



MARITIME COMMISSION FOR ST. LAWRENCE AND GREAT LAKES  AIDS TO NAVIGATION

Mr. Church:: 1.	What has been done since last session to establish a maritime commission in the province of Ontario, for the river St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes?
2.	What facilities and other aids to navigation have been considered by the government since last session and what action has been taken?


Mr. Chevrier:: 1.	The jurisdiction of the Canadian maritime commission extends to the great lakes and St. Lawrence river as well as to the east and west coasts.
2.	Since last session ten lighthouses and six fog alarms have been improved and twenty-four unlighted buoys have been placed. One improved combined light and fog alarm station is now under construction. A new lifeboat for the east coast is under construction. At Montreal, Toronto, and Midland, equipment has been installed to provide radiophone communication service for shipping on very high frequency to supplement the service now being provided on medium frequency. Action has been taken to provide duplex terminal equipment for stations at Midland and Port Burwell,' Ontario, and Father Point, Quebec, in order that persons on board radiophone-equipped ships may establish direct telephone contact with any telephone subscriber on shore; all other stations on the Great Lakes and at Montreal and Quebec already have been equipped for this service.
In addition the 1949 program involves the establishment of nine beacon lights, thirteen lighted buoys, and three radar reflectors and the installation of a radiophone at Parry Sound.
An answer furnished last year indicated the numerous aids to navigation already in operation and pointed out the requirements of the Canada Shipping Act with respect to the carrying of life-saving appliances and equipment on ships and the yearly inspection of hulls and equipment by steamship inspectors.
[Mr. Mayhew.l



STEEL CONTROL

Mr. Isnor:: 1.	Is steel subject to any form of control?
2.	If so (a) what form of control; (b) what was the date on which steel controls were brought into
effect?
3.	Is there any price control on steel scrap?
4.	If so, what type of control is still in effect?
5.	Does this apply to all provinces?


Mr. Belzile:: In so far as the wartime prices and trade board is concerned:
1.	Yes. There are price ceilings on all forms of basic mill steel products.
2.	(a) Controls over distribution and quantity, which are relaxed or expanded when advisable, as well as controls over the export and import from various countries.
(b)	June 24, 1940.
3.	Yes.
4.	Control over steel scrap remains mainly as a price control; there is also control as to grade and classification.
5.	Yes.



SHIPMENTS THROUGH CHURCHILL

Mr. Wright:: 1.	Has the wheat board set a date for the stoppage of all shipments of wheat to Churchill?
2.	If so, on what date and what are the reasons for stopping such shipments on this date?
3.	On what date were such shipments stopped in 1948?
4.	Has the wheat board established a price for wheat at Churchill under the world wheat agreement?
5.	If so, what is this price?
6.	Will the wheat board use the storage space at Churchill this season?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1.	Yes.
2.	September 8, 1949. Sufficient wheat in store Churchill or en route to meet requirements.
3.	September 16, 1948.
4.	No, but question was raised and matter is receiving attention.
5.	Answered by No. 4.
6.	For small quantities only.



LOAN TO U.S.S.R., 1942  REPAYMENT

Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: 1.	Did the U.S.S.R. on September 8, 1947, pay the last instalment due to Canada on the $5,000,000 lent under the authority of order in council P.C. 7822, dated September 1, 1942?
2.	If not, what valid reasons were given for nonpayment?


Mr. Belzile:: 1.	The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics paid on September 8, 1947, the last instalment due to Canada on a credit of $10 million authorized by P.C. 7822, dated September 1, 1942.
2.	Answered by No. 1.

Questions



SHIPMENTS THROUGH CHURCHILL

Mr. Diefenbaker:: 1.	How much wheat was in storage at the port of Churchill (a) at the opening of the shipping season, 1949; (b) in May, 1949?
2.	How much (a) wheat; (b) flax; (c) barley; (d) oats; was shipped to Churchill from each of the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta between the 1st of January and the 31st of July, 1949?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1.	(a) 1,476,385-40 bushels; (b) 100,431-20 bushels.
2.	(a) Wheat: Manitoba, nil; Saskatchewan, 1,105,014-30 bushels; Alberta, nil.
Cars en route as at July 31, 1949, estimated at 1,700 bushels per car: Manitoba, nil; Saskatchewan, 387 cars (657,900 bushels); Alberta, nil.
(b)	Flaxseed, nil.
(c)	Barley, nil.
(d)	Oats, nil.



RADIO RECEIVING LICENCES

Mr. Brown (Essex West):: How many radio licences have been sold in Canada each year in each province since 1940?


Lionel Chevrier: Statement showing the number of private receiving stations licences issued in Canada by provinces for the fiscal vears 1940-41 to 1949-50 to Aug. 31 inclusive
to
1940-41	1941-42	1942-43	1943-44	1944-45	1945-46	1946-47	1947-48	1948-49	Aug. 31P.E.I. . .	6,337	8,962	8,516	10,583	10,228	10,346	10,626	12,173	11,825	8,177N.S. . .	62,496	71,776	81,524	79,887	82,694	80,759	87,043	91,940	99,477	79,815N.B. . .	41,758	48,728	52,745	52,698	53,240	55,043	57,159	68,484	75,559	60,881Que. . .	346,328	400,902	436,288	455,053	456,825	479,852	491,823	534,797	567,257	514,369Ont. . . .	558,780	604,981	637,116	647,167	627,348	607,968	628,075	677,299	704,993	598,709Man. . .	94,357	104,384	108,435	110,249	106,144	107,343	108,985	118,823	126,586	108,174Sask. . .	109,713	122,304	127,529	128,754	129,298	126,002	129,447	135,095	155,177	130,710Alta. . .	108,649	122,489	126,525	128,950	130,209	121,295	125,289	131,849	134,666	115,664B.C. ..	125,714	138,191	149,481	157,060	162,655	165,281	168,950	173,097	181,821	157,572Yukon	and	N.W.T.	585	772	721	499	459	462	427	470	438	93Nfld. . .	4,549



AGRICULTURAL PRICES SUPPORT BOARD


Mr. Hatfield:: 1.	What quantity of potatoes was purchased by the agricultural prices support board in the province of New Brunswick in the season of 1948-49?
2.	What quantity of these potatoes was afterwards released and for what purpose?
3.	What was the value paid for these potatoes so purchased?
4.	What quantity of these potatoes was authorized to be dumped?
5.	What quantity of potatoes was purchased by the agricultural prices support board in the province of Prince Edward Island in the season of 1948-49?
6.	What quantity of these potatoes was afterwards released and for what purpose?
7.	What was the value paid for these potatoes so purchased?
8.	What quantity of these potatoes was authorized to be dumped?


Mr. Gardiner:: 1.	962,566 cwt.
2.	959,045 cwt. for growers use or disposal but not for sale. 3,521 cwt. resold to growers.
3.	$1,106,951.30 gross, or $1,102,902.06 after deducting value of potatoes resold to growers.
4.	Potatoes were not dumped but handled as indicated in answer to No. 2.
5.	481,395 cwt.
6.	469,369 cwt. for growers use or disposal but not for sale. 12,026 cwt. resold to growers.
7.	$553,604.78 gross, or $539,773.88 after deducting value of potatoes resold to growers.
8.	Potatoes were not dumped but handled as indicated in answer to No. 6.



STRAIT OF CANSO BRIDGE PROJECT

Mr. Isnor:: 1.	Have surveys been completed in respect to the strait of Canso bridge project?
2.	Have plans and specifications been prepared in connection with the construction of the Canso bridge?
3.	When will tenders be called?
4.	What is the firm name and address of the engineers conducting surveys and drawing plans?


Mr. Chevrier:: 1. No. Survey parties are still in the field. A contract let under tender to Foundation Maritime Limited on July 28, 1949, for boring to rock on the site of the proposed bridge piers, has just been completed. Marine cables at the bridge site have been moved to a new location.

Questions
2.	No. Preparation of plans for the bridge piers are under way. Final design for these structures could not be completed until rock boring results were obtained.
3.	Expected in 1950.
4.	P. L. Pratley, D. Eng., M. Inst., C.E., consulting engineer, 909 Drummond building, St. Catherine street west, Montreal, P.Q.



TRADE WITH SPAIN

Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: What was the value, in Canadian dollars, of our imports from Spain and our exports to that country for the year 1948?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: Imports from Spain,
$2,586,163; exports to Spain, $618,188.



TOBACCO EXPORTS TO UNITED KINGDOM

Mr. Coyle:: 1.	What was the value of our tobacco exports to the United Kingdom during each of the years 1946, 1947 and 1948?
2.	Has Canada a contract with the United Kingdom for tobacco this year? If so, what is the estimated value of it?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1.
1946	1947	1948Description	$	$	$Burley .... Bright flue	407,573	386,862	266,626cured ... Dark air fire	4,044,024	10,796,088	5,975,876cured ....	95,035	142,446	82,891Cigar leaf . Raw leaf	-	63,598	n.o.p. .. .	27,060	3,380	4,709Cigars ....	-	63	70Cigarettes .. Manufactured	2,241	-	-n.o.p	10	-	-Total . . $4,575,943	11,392,437 6,330,172
2. Canada does not have a contract with the United Kingdom for tobacco this year, nor, in fact, has she had a contract in the preceding years. This year, however, the United Kingdom has indicated that the quantity to be purchased will be somewhat larger than in 1948.



VETERANS AFFAIRS-VISITS TO GRAVES OVERSEAS

Mr. Hansell:: 1.	Has the government given any consideration to the granting of assistance to next of kin of deceased servicemen to enable them to visit graves overseas?
2.	What action, if any, is being taken?


Mr. Gregg:: 1.	No formal consideration.
2.	The department has information that certain veterans organizations have plans to organize, when shipping accommodation
[Mr. Chevrier.l
becomes available, a pilgrimage to Europe along lines somewhat similar to the Vimy pilgrimage organized in 1936 by the Canadian Legion.



SALE OF CANADIAN HORSES

Mr. Ross (Souris):: 1.	What was the number of horses sold from Canada under UNRRA during the year 1946?
2.	On what basis were they sold?
3.	If by contract, through whom and at what price per head, basis Montreal?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1.	Acting as purchasing agent of UNRRA the Canadian Commercial Corporation purchased from private sources in Canada 18,470 horses during the year 1946.
2.	Answered by No. 3 below.
3.	The horses were purchased under contracts with the firms in the numbers and at the average cost, basis Montreal, as follows:
Horse Co-operative Marketing Association, Swift Current, Sask	1091	$110.27Coulter Brothers, Toronto, Ont	1173	$114.43Alex. Picov, Pickering, Ont.	1590	$113.18Bodnoff Horse Exchange, Montreal, P.Q	7304	$114.48Stewart Brothers Horse Exchange, Montreal, P.Q.	7312	$114.50
Average over-all cost per head, basis Montreal, $114,006.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


Mr. Maclnnis:: 1.	What is the number of employees and the
classification of such employees employed in the following health and occupational centres:	(a)
Ridgewood, Saint John, New Brunswick; (b) Senne-ville, Montreal, Quebec; (c) Rideau, Ottawa, Ontario; (d) York, Toronto, Ontario; (e) Divadale, Toronto, Ontario; (f) Veterans Convalescent hospital, Calgary, Alberta; (g) George Derby health and occupational centre, Vancouver, British Columbia?
2.	What is the maximum number of jiatlents that can be accommodated at each of the health and occupational centres?
3.	What was the total cost of maintaining such centres for the last year for which a record is available?


Mr. Gregg:: Return as at September 23, 1949:
1.	See schedule "A".
2.	Ridgewood health and occupational
centre, Saint John, N.B.,	100; Veterans
health and occupational centre, Senneville, Que., 200; Rideau health and occupational centre, Ottawa, Ont., 175; York health and occupational centre, Toronto, Ont., 100; Diva-dale health and occupational centre, Toronto, Ont., 139; Veterans convalescent hospital, Calgary, Alta., 110; George Derby health and occupational centre, Vancouver, B.C., 200.
3.	$1,332,173.90.

Questions
Schedule "A"



DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
Number of Staff Employed in Health and Occupational Centres, by Classification
Classification	(a) Ridge- wood, Saint John, N.B.	(b) Senne- ville, Montreal, Que.	(c) Rideau, Ottawa, Ont.	(d) York, Toronto, Ont.	(e) Divadale, Toronto, Ont.	(f) Veterans Conva- lescent Hospital, Calgary, Alta.	(g) George Derby, Van- couver, B.C.
							i
				1			
			1		1		
	1		i			i	2
	i						1
i	3	1	2	i	i2	1	2	2	i	2	i1	1	2	1	i	i	i	3i	Typist, grade 2A	1	2	1	2Typist, grade 1	1	1	1	1	12	2	2	1	1	i	3Packer and helper	1	1	i	1Stationary engineer (heating or power),	i	1	1	1	1Stationary engineer (heating or power), grade 1	4	7	3	1	44	2	3	12	43	3i	13	2	4	1	3	3	1	i	1	1Hospital utility man, grade 1	4Gardener, grade 2	2	1	Gardener, grade 1	2	3	2	2	9	10	21	14	16	8	202	i	3	1i	1	Assistant technician, grade 2	11	i	2	2	1	11	2	12	1i	1	11	11	1	1	2Remedial physical training instructor, grade 2	1	i	1	1	1	1Remedial physical training instructor, grade 1	1	2	1	1	21	1	1	1	9	4	2	Hospital nursing orderly, grade 4	1	1	1	1	1	27	2	23	3	4	1i	1	i1	1	1	1	1	12	1	3	2	3	2	41	i	i	1	i1	1	4	1	2	5	2	6	25	6	5	1	4	5i	1	
45	47	103	40	68	52	85
							
* Clinical services to the health and occupation centres are supplied by such general practitioners and specialists employed on a half-day fee basis or medical officers in the district medical officers' pool as may be delegated by the district director of medicine. The two medical officers shown in Schedule "A" are employed as medical superintendents of York and George Derby, respectively; the medical superintendent of the other Centres is the superintendent of the general treatment hospital of the department in the locality, or the departmental district medical officer.
[Stage Direction]
Orders for Returns

Mr. Stanfield:: How much was the loss to the Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation on the 15,000,000 pounds of Denmark, Australian, and New Zealand butter that were brought into Canada last year by the Canadian Commercial Corporation?


Gleason Belzile: In so far as the wartime prices and trade board is concerned: Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation Limited, $857,337.50.



*CATTLE


Mr. Cardiff:: 1.	Has the government taken any action towards raising the compensation paid to farmers for cattle condemned under the T.B. testing program?
2.	If so, what action has been taken?
3.	Has compensation been raised?


Mr. Gardiner:: If I may answer this question oralty, a bill containing the answer which would be given to this question is now on its way to the house. Could this question either be withdrawn or allowed to stand until the bill is before the house? The answer is in the bill itself.


Mr. Speaker:: Stand.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


RADIO RECEIVING LICENCES


Mr. Shaw:: 1.	In 1948, how many individuals in Alberta were employed or authorized by the Department of Transport or any other department of government or any official thereof to engage in house to house canvassing in connection with the checking and/or sale of radio receiving set licences?
2.	What were the names and addresses of all such persons?
3.	What salaries, commissions, expenses and/or other payments were made to each canvasser?


Lionel Chevrier: Return tabled.



SHAUGHNESSY HOSPITAL


Mr. Maclnnis:: 1.	How many of the corps of commissionaires are employed at the Shaughnessy hospital, Vancouver?
2.	What is the monthly salary of each such employee?
3.	When did the existing salary rate come into effect?


Mr. Bradley:: Return tabled.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE

Mr. Beyerstein:: What trades or professions or other employment categories are considered to come within the Unemployment Insurance Act, and what are considered to be outside the act?


Mr. Cote (Verdun-La Salle):: Return tabled.



HOUSING


Mr. Thatcher:: What preference, if any, is given to British veterans who have married Canadian girls, in obtaining a wartime house under either the National Housing Act, the V.L.A., or the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation?
LEGAL SERVICES-MACKAY & MCAVOY


Mr. Ferguson:: What amount of money, if any, has been paid to the law firm of MacKay & McAvoy, Owen Sound, Ontario, or to individual members of the firm; namely, F. G. MacKay, K.C., and R. K. McAvoy, since 1945 to the present; and for what purpose were their services retained?
LEGAL SERVICES-ALBERY & BENNETT


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: What amount of money, if any, has been paid to the law firm of Albery & Bennett, Meaford, Ontario, or to individual members of the firm; namely, George G. Albery and Colin E. Bennett, since 1945 to the present, and for what purpose were their services retained?



LEGAL SERVICES

[Stage Direction]
TELFORD & MARRON
Julian Harcourt Ferguson: What amount of money, if any, has been paid to the law firm of Telford & Marron, Owen Sound, Ontario, or to individual members of the firm; namely, W. P. Telford and Arthur Marron, since 1945 to the present, and for what purpose were their services retained?



FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, 1948 AND 1949

Mr. Fraser:: 1.	How many men and women were employed in each department or agency of the government (i) in Ottawa; (ii) outside of Ottawa, on July 31, 1948, showing (a) number of men in each department or agency; (b) number of women in each department or agency; (c) number under civil service; (d) temporary basis?
2.	How many men and women were employed in each department or agency of the government (i) in Ottawa; (ii) outside of Ottawa, on July 31, 1949, showing (a) number of men in each department or agency; (b) number of women in each department or agency; (c) number under civil service; (d) temporary basis?



ASSISTANCE TO GOLD MINES

Mr. Thalcher:: 1.	What is the total amount of money which has been paid to gold mines to date, under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act?
2.	What gold mines in Canada, if any, have received more than $100,000?
3.	Of these, what amount of bonus has each mine received?



HOUSING


Mr. Caiherwood:: 1. Will the Department of National Defence provide homes for the accommodation of some of the

personnel and their families at the military depot at Hagersville, Ontario?
2. If so, how many and of what type?


Mr. Blanchette:: Return tabled.'



VETERANS AFFAIRS


Mr. Brooks:: 1.	What is the number of overseas active service veterans of world war I not in the civil service prior to enlistment but who subsequently joined and being permanent are entitled to count their war service for superannuation purposes by contributing twice the normal amount with interest at 4 per cent?
2.	How many of the above did not enter the civil service immediately following their war service?
3.	How many under paragraph (1) of this question have availed themselves of the special privileges under the Civil Service Superannuation Act?
4.	How many under paragraph (2) of this question have availed themselves of the special privileges under the Civil Service Superannuation Act?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. Stewart (Winnipeg North):: For a copy of all orders in council, correspondence, telegrams and other documents in the possession of the government, concerning Jacques de Bernonville and Michel Lucien Seigneur.


Mr. Gibson (Hamilton West):: At the last session of parliament a similar question was asked by the hon. member and an order for return was passed with reference to one of these men, Michel Lucien Seigneur. The return was tabled on April 29, and is quite voluminous. It should be understood that the documents to be tabled under this order would be a continuation of the documents already filed.


Mr. Speaker:: Carried, subject to the statement of the minister.



DOMINION ELECTION, 1949  REGINA CITY   SERVICE PERSONNEL

Mr. Knowles:: For a return showing the names and home addresses of all service personnel who voted as electors of the constituency of the electoral district of Regina city in the general election of June 27, 1949, under the provisions of the defence service voting regulations.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I should like to point out to the house that the names and home addresses of defence service electors whose votes were attributed to the electoral district of Regina City at the general election of June 27, pursuant to the provisions of the Canadian defence service voting regulations were recorded only on the back of the outer envelope as prescribed in the regulations. Paragraph 92 of the regulations provides that these outer envelopes are "election documents
Motions for Papers
or election papers" which cannot be inspected except under a rule or order of a court of justice issued under section 59(2) and 88(2) of the Dominion Elections Act, 1938.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I be permitted to ask the Secretary of State one question? Can he say whether those names and addresses are in existence?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I am unable to give any information as to what is in the possession of the chief electoral officer. I do not know.
Motion dropped.



NANTON, ALTA., POST OFFICE

Ernest George Hansell: For a copy of ail letters, telegrams and other communications exchanged between the government or any officials thereof and any other person or persons during the past three years, respecting the building or alteration or remodelling or renting of suitable premises for the post office at Nanton. Alberta.



DOMINION ELECTIONS


Stanley Howard Knowles: For a return showing the total amount of election expenses on behalf of every candidate in the general election of June 27, 1949. as indicated in the return respecting election expenses submitted by the official agent of each candidate, under the provisions of section 63 of the Dominion Elections Act, 1938.



AIR TRAFFIC AGREEMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Press dispatches today indicate that Canada has granted to the United States an extension of thirty days to show good faith, as the report states, in connection with the bilateral air agreement. Can the minister make a statement, either today or tomorrow, with regard to this extension? At the same time will he table the notes which are indicated in the report as having passed between the two governments?


Lionel Chevrier: The hon. member telephoned notice of his question to my office about fifteen minutes ago, and I have not had time to go into it as fully as I should like to. I can, however, tell him this. The notes exchanged between the United States government and the Secretary of State for External Affairs I presume are privileged documents, and I would doubt whether the Secretary of State for External Affairs would wish to table them. That is, however, a matter for him to decide.
344	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry
As to the agreement which has been signed between Canada and the United States covering air traffic rights, I can see no objection to its being tabled, and I shall ask my colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs to have that done.
As to the extension of thirty days, to which my hon. friend referred, of certain air traffic rights which lines of the United States have at Gander, these rights have been extended following discussions with the United States authorities, who have assured us that they are doing everything they can to implement the agreement signed between Canada and the United States.
With regard to the air traffic agreement between the two countries and the rights derived thereunder, as well as the agreement signed between Canada and the United Kingdom, I propose to make a statement during the consideration of my estimates.



TRANS-CANADA AIR LINES REMOVAL OF OPERATING HEADQUARTERS FROM WINNIPEG TO MONTREAL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade
and Commerce): The hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Bryce) on two occasions has asked me to make a statement on the plan for transferring the headquarters group of T.C.A. from Winnipeg to Montreal. I wish to do so now.
The plans for the transfer of headquarters group of the operations department of Trans-Canada Air Lines from Winnipeg to Montreal will have been fully implemented by Monday, October 3. Office accommodation has been completed on schedule in the international aviation building, Dorchester street, Montreal, even to. the installation of telephones, so that the move should involve little interruption to the work of the air line.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Roselown-Biggar):: few days ago the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) intimated to the house some changes in the regulations with regard to the importation of fruit and vegetables. That seems to be the proper procedure when the house is sitting. I noticed this morning that a press release was issued yesterday by the Department of Trade and Commerce, announcing important changes in various tariff items, and in foreign exchange regulations affecting the steel industry. I am wondering why the
[Mr. Chevrier.l

announcement was made by a statement to the press, when the house is sitting, rather than to the house in the first instance so that members might have an opportunity of asking questions if they wished to do so.


Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance):: I made a statement in the house with regard to fruit and vegetables. That was done because it is a matter in which there is wide public interest. As to changes in connection with the emergency exchange regulations, I may say that I do not make a statement in the house if they are of a more or less routine character. I felt, however, that the matter of fruit and vegetables was one of general interest.

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



INTERIM SUPPLY BILL

Douglas Charles Abbott: Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $114,516,603.83, being one-twelfth of the amount of each of the several items to be voted, except items 43, 419 and 452, as set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950, laid before the House of Commons at the present session of parliament; a sum not exceeding $2,613,651.00, being one-twelfth of the several items to be voted, as set out in the supplementary estimates (Newfoundland); a sum not exceeding $5,876,758.33, being one-twelfth of the several items to be voted as set out in the further supplementary estimates, and a sum not exceeding $468,750.00, being five-twelfths of item 907 to be voted as set out in the further supplementary estimates laid before the House of Commons at the present session of parliament, be granted to His Majesty on account for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950.
He said: Before you put the resolution, Mr. Chairman, perhaps I might give just a word of explanation as to the interim supply which I am asking for.
The bill which will be founded on this resolution will ask for an additional one-twelfth of all the items contained in the main estimates, one-twelfth of all the items in what are referred to as the Newfoundland supplementaries, one-twelfth of all the items in the further supplementaries which I tabled the day before yesterday, and five-twelfths of one item, item 907 in those other supplementaries, which relates to the additional work of the Fraser valley diking board. I am informed that the work is proceeding rapidly and that the amount asked for will be required.
Members of the committee who were here in the last parliament will recall that six months' interim supply was voted before parliament was dissolved in the latter part of April. Consequently that supply will run out on September 30, which is tomorrow. The form of the bill which will be placed

before the house is exactly the same as the other supply bills which have been passed by the house from time to time. The passing of the bill will not result in the passing of the full amount of any item, and will not prejudice the rights and privileges of members to criticize and discuss items in the estimates which will come up for consideration from time to time during the remainder of the session. Of course I give the usual undertaking that such rights and privileges will be respected, and will not be curtailed or restricted in any way as a result of the passing of the proposed measure.


Mr. Fraser:: In asking for only one-twelfth of the total amount, does the minister believe that all the estimates will be through by the end of next month?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Hope springs eternal. If we do not get them through by then, I shall have to come back before the end of October.


Thomas Langton Church: Mr. Chairman, the committee will be only conducting a post mortem on these expenditures, as we understand it. The time is coming when there should be some reduction. I speak on behalf of the businessmen of the country. The government made that promise in the last election campaign. I fail to see why the House of Commons is sanctioning this interim supply for a period which will extend practically to the end of October, with the House of Commons simply holding a post mortem on these expenditures. I think we are going too far. What is the House of Commons for if not to check up on expenditures? It was on that principle, taxation without representation, that the American colonies seceded from the mother country. Yet here we are, a long time afterwards, adopting the same principle. I wish to protest against it, as I have done on other occasions.


Mr. Fleming:: May I ask the Minister of Finance what is the total amount that is being voted?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The
amount is set forth in the resolution which the chairman will read in a moment. It is $114,516,603.83, plus $2,613,651, plus $5,876,758.33, plus $468,750.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What does that add up to?


Douglas Charles Abbott: The total of the item asked for by the hon. member for Eglinton is $123,475,763.16.


Mr. Graydon:: Included in the figure which is being asked for by the Minister of Finance are several items coming under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of State. Because the patent office of Canada comes under that department I want to raise a question which I could not very well raise on the orders of
Interim Supply
the day. I shall be brief, because the minister is new to the house.
First of all I wish to welcome the hon. gentleman-it is the first opportunity I have had to do so-and to wish him well in the work which lies ahead. At the same time I want to give him a word of caution. The question of the great arrears of work in the patent office is one of which he had better be made aware at the very first opportunity, and I think this is that opportunity.
As the Chairman knows, by a recommendation of a committee of this house the patent fees were raised from $15 to $25 on the original application and a similar amount when the patent is issued. That increase was decided on largely because the committee recommended that these patents be printed. I am told that for some considerable time the printing has been paid for with these additional fees, but the work is still far behind. In addition, the quarters, while more nearly adequate than they were before, still fall short of meeting the need which is evident all along the line.
Some few years ago it was said that there were some 30,000 patents still to be dealt with. I am informed that the patents are running somewhat behind, even in respect to current applications. The commissioner and his staff, inadequate as it is, are unable to handle the backlog because they cannot keep up with the current applications.
For the benefit of new members it ought to be said that the patent office is an open house for the public. In addition it has significance far beyond our domestic scene, because of international implications. From Canada's point of view it is not good business to have the patent office, which has international significance, so far behind in its work. As the minister will understand, I am not raising this question to criticize him or to criticize those who have been in charge of the patent office. I am merely indicating a concentrated drive ought to be made by the minister, backed by the government, to see to it that we get in line with the British patent office and with the United States patent office. Since the war quite a length of time has elapsed, and this country cannot afford to have anything but a good reputation when it is dealing with a matter of this kind.
The patent office of course has definitely a link with business generally in the countl'y. I am quite sure that business will expect that a government department will at least keep abreast of the times. I am throwing this out only as a suggestion; perhaps it will not bear close scrutiny. In any event, in the United States and in Britain one finds the patent office under the jurisdiction of the department of commerce. It is closely related

Interim Supply
to trade and commerce. In the United Kingdom I understand it is under the board of trade, because of the fact that it is related to business and commerce. When I say this I am not reflecting upon the minister. Perhaps the government might give consideration to relating patent work with the department with which it is most closely allied, and following the precedent which has been established in those other two countries.
I have not given the matter much consideration; perhaps there are good reasons why the patent office should not come under the Department of Trade and Commerce. In any event my main reason for raising the question now is to impress upon the new minister and upon the government the necessity of seeing to it that a concentrated drive is made to bring the patent office up to date and to provide the facilities and the staff which are so urgently needed to do the job.


Major James William Coldwell: On the orders of the day I asked a question about announcements of policy by press releases when parliament is sitting. The answer given by the Minister of Finance was quite satisfactory as far as it went. I think that matters of small import to a community can be dealt with in that way. The reason I ask the question is that a press statement issued yesterday involved an important government decision and was of wide public interest. There may be a good reason why, in order to conserve foreign exchange, the policy announced in the press release should be approved. Hon. members might be interested in the list of the materials involved. They comprise pig iron, ingots, blooms, billets, bars, rods, plates, sheets and forgings. All these items will now be imported under permit to be issued under the foreign exchange regulations. In regard to an important group of items such as this it would be well to have the announcement made in the house in order that hon. members might have an opportunity of knowing what was being done in such an important matter. Sometimes press releases are tucked away in the corner of a newspaper and we do not see them. That was my reason for asking the question. I was making the suggestion that when an announcement touching very important imports of this description is made, at a time when the house is sitting, perhaps it would be well to have it made hi the house rather than to have it made public by way of a press release.


Mr. Howe:: Mr. Chairman, I admit at once that the issuance of that statement was an error. It was a steel controller order made under wartime legislation, and it came to me for approval. It was not effective until October 1, and I fully intended to make the

announcement in the house. I was as much surprised as the hon. member to read it in the press. However, since the mistake had been made, I saw no purpose in making the announcement in the house.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Did the Minister of Finance indicate what proportion of the further supplementary estimates is included in the sum for which he is asking today?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am asking today for one-twelfth of the new supplementary estimates, along with the other items to which I referred.


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Chairman, as there are funds in this resolution which come under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Veterans Affairs, I should like to draw his attention to a question I raised in the house on September 20, when I asked him about the plight of certain imperial pensioners in Canada brought about by the devaluation of the pound.
At that time the minister did not know that the British government was giving consideration to the matter. Since then it has become obvious, through letters received by a number of members, and from comments in the press, that a large number of Canadian citizens are affected by the devaluation of the pound, and many people are taking an interest in it. Not only are those who are affected showing an interest, but it is obvious from press comments that a large number of their fellow Canadians are aware of the difficult circumstances faced by some people who have to exist in Canada today on imperial pensions.
Two general proposals have been made, the first being that the government should bring the plight of these people to the attention of the British government, explaining particularly the present circumstances, and the second, suggested by some veterans organizations, that the Canadian government should subsidize these imperial pensioners.
I am not going to discuss the soundness of this proposal, but I urge upon the minister that action be taken by the government at the earliest possible moment to bring to the attention of the British government the plight of certain imperial pensioners in Canada brought about by the recent devaluation of the nound.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, will the government move at this session to set up a special committee of the house on atomic energy? This suggestion has been made in different sessions, and I would point out to the ministry, particularly to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, that the subject is now of even greater importance than it was in earlier years.
Only this morning we read in the press that yesterday in the United States the atomic

energy commission held a joint meeting with a committee of congress. The announcement from that meeting was made by the chairman of the committee of congress. The same United States congressional committee sent two representatives to Canada only a few weeks ago to inspect our plant at Chalk River.
It seems to me perfectly clear that the house should set up a committee on atomic energy. This request has been supported in other years, not only by members of the official opposition but also by the leaders of the C.C.F. and Social Credit parties. I am sure they will support my suggestion today. This is now one of the most important questions to be faced by our nation and by the House of Commons. I would urge that the government move to set up such a special committee without further delay.


Major James William Coldwell: May I confirm what has been said by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, namely, that we have supported this suggestion in the past, and that we are happy to do so again today. This matter is one with which the House of Commons should be concerned. I do not suggest, of course, that any highly secret information should be imparted to such a committee, but I believe the house and country should know what Canada is doing in connection with the development and use of atomic energy.
In supporting a similar suggestion in past years I made the comment that this great scientific discovery could not be kept secret for any considerable length of time. The other afternoon the Prime Minister made the announcement that it was believed that the Soviet union had unlocked the secret of the atomic bomb. That had been anticipated by scientists, I believe, ever since the first bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in 1945,
In view of the necessity of having public opinion behind the government in its desire, as stated on more than one occasion before the United Nations, to bring atomic energy in all its phases under international control, I believe the time has now come when a committee should be established in order that parliament may be well informed and, in turn, in order that the people may have that information. Consequently I join with the hon. member in suggesting to the government that, in spite of all that has happened in the past, in view of the circumstances now surrounding this important discovery, and the dangers to the world flowing from it, if improperly used-and, on the other hand, the great benefits that might accrue to mankind if it is used properly and for the benefit of the human race-this house should know more about what Canada is doing, and the extent to which we are co-operating and have
Interim Supply
been permitted to co-operate with the United States, if I may put it that way. With reservations respecting highly secret matters, information should be given the house and the country on this important matter. In our opinion a committee on atomic matters should be set up by this house.	[DOT]


Mr. Low:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to indicate my support of the request by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra that a committee on atomic energy be set up at the earliest possible time. May I ask that the government give this matter its most earnest consideration at an early day.


Mr. Gibson (Comox-Alberni):: I should like to support the suggestion just offered by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra. I am sure hon. members could be most useful to the Minister of Trade and Commerce in connection with this matter of atomic energy. The entire administration of our share of what is being done in the matter of atomic energy is a heavy responsibility for one man to carry. I feel sure that hon. members could be helpful to him, particularly in the matter of exploration for atomic minerals.
The government has established a price of $2.75 a pound for uranium oxide. It would be interesting to know if that price is sufficiently high, and to know the quantities being exported. I suggest that if the minister can see his way clear he permit the setting up of this committee, because I believe it would be most helpful to him.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Perhaps I can shorten the debate. At the last session of the last parliament I stated that the government would have no objection to a committee on atomic energy. The government is still of the same opinion, and will be glad to co-operate with other parties in the house in the setting up of a committee at the proper time during this session.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I appreciate what the minister has just said. I hope this matter will be followed up and a committee set up at an early date.
I should like to broaden this discussion by urging upon the Prime Minister and the government the necessity for recasting the committee machinery of this house. The rules provide for about fifteen standing committees, which presumably will be appointed next week. Some of those committees will not meet for the duration of this session, while others will. The fact is that some committees have not met for years.
There are great areas of the public business that do not fall within the scope of any of the present standing committees. One has been mentioned this afternoon, this new sub-

Interim Supply
ject of atomic energy. There is another field that is completely omitted from the scope of the present standing committees, something of which I have spoken before. I refer to the whole subject of social security, welfare, health and housing, which I think should be embraced within the scope of a committee. When the government is giving consideration to amending or revising the present committee structure I hope we shall not be satisfied with a mere partial job. I submit that the time has come when someone must take the responsibility for going over the whole committee structure and recasting and modernizing it. If necessary, certain committees might be eliminated, because we do not wish to have too many. The duties of certain committees might be enlarged, but there should be committees to cover those fields of public business which are not covered at the present time. I urge again most strongly that provision be made in our committee structure for a committee on social security, welfare, health and housing.


Ernest George Hansell: Before we vote these several million dollars I should like to ask the minister a question. I had placed a question on the order paper which was answered today by the Minister of National Revenue, although only in part. My question was:
Are ambulance services considered to be part of medical expenses for the purposes of income tax and, if not, in what way does the government consider them not to be?
The answer given by the minister was as follows:
Amounts paid for ambulance services are not included in the medical expenses set forth in subsection (b) of section 26 of the Income Tax Act.
The last part of my question, which was not answered, reads as follows:
If not, in what way does the government consider them not to be?
The fact that that last part of the question was not answered would imply that the government have no answer to it. I do not believe they have. If a man becomes ill and has to call for an ambulance, that is certainly part of his medical expenses. The particular case that was drawn to my attention was that of a man who had to call an ambulance to take him two hundred miles. The expense was considerable, yet he could not include that as part of his medical expenses in making out his income tax return.
I appreciate the fact that there is a difference between the duties of the Minister of Finance and those of the Minister of National Revenue. The one imposes the taxes; the other collects them. The Minister of Finance hits the taxpayer on the head; the Minister of National Revenue drags him out. Some

of our citizens have to be dragged out anyway. I am going to ask the minister if he would care to express himself on this matter. He is asking for a lot of money which will have to come out of the taxpayer's pocket. I am quite sure we are willing to vote it, but it seems to me that consideration should be given to this particular phase of the Income Tax Act.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall be glad to bring my hon. friend's question to the attention of the Minister of National Revenue. The position is that the act specifies-I have not the act before me-that medical expenses are deductible for income tax purposes. What constitutes medical expenses is a question for the Minister of National Revenue or his officials to determine. If the taxpayer is not satisfied, he can go to the courts for relief. I think that is as far as I can go in answering my hon. friend's question.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: If the doctor included the charge for the ambulance in his bill, that could be deducted, could it not?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am not the Minister of National Revenue; nor do I want to give free legal advice.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I understand that where a physician administers insulin or penicillin and includes the costs of the drugs in his bill, that expense can be deducted.


Douglas Charles Abbott: For what it may be worth, my understanding is that if the cost of the medicines is included in the doctor's bill, they can be deducted, and if a hospital charged for the ambulance in its bill, it could be deducted. However, I do not think that that should be taken as a firm ruling. It is a matter for the administrative branch of the department to determine. If the taxpayer is dissatisfied, a remedy is provided in the act by way of appeal.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The trouble with the act is that there are different taxing officers across the country. A man in one section will give one ruling, and a man in another will give an entirely different ruling.
While I am on my feet I should like to bring something to the attention of the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply, who unfortunately is not in the house. There are thousands of people across Canada who are either renting or buying houses from Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. These people are greatly inconvenienced by the fact that the offices of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation are closed all day Saturday, although they are open from nine to five o'clock on week days. Many of the men who are renting or buying houses are working

from early morning until five or after five o'clock at night, and the only time they could go to the office would be at noon hour, at which time the officers of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation are home eating their own lunches. I suggest that their offices be kept open on Saturday morning, or at least every other Saturday, so that the man of the house can go there to transact his business instead of his wife having to do it. I have had many letters about this from my own riding and other parts of Canada. It is something that should be seriously considered.


Mr. Shaw:: There is a matter of extreme urgency which I think it is my duty to place before the government. I refer to the charges being made for medical services and hospitalization provided for the Indians in the Rocky Mountain House section of Alberta. I say this is a matter of urgency, because tomorrow is the deadline so far as the medical men and the hospital authorities of Rocky Mountain House are concerned. Since 1948 the medical and hospital authorities at Rocky Mountain House in Alberta have been at loggerheads with the Indian affairs branch in connection with medical and hospital services for Indians. In the past it has been the policy of the medical men of the town of Rocky Mountain House to charge the minimum amounts set by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons in connection with the various cases coming to their attention. Often the medical men have treated and hospitalized these Indians while having to postpone treatment of many of their regular patients because of lack of time and lack of hospital space.
These doctors have been submitting their bills to the Indian affairs branch at the minimum rates, and in almost every case those bills have been arbitrarily cut down by twenty to fifty per cent before being paid. The doctors urge that one of two things be done: either that they be paid a flat rate of $100 a month for treating the Indians-which incidentally was the amount recommended by the Alberta representative of the department-or that they work on the basis of the minimum rates established by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons.
Ten months have elapsed since they began negotiations with the department. So far nothing has been done to reach any sort of agreement. Now the doctors have served notice that as and from tomorrow they will refuse to attend the Indians at less than the regular rates charged all other patients. This has become a very serious matter. Health conditions among the Indians in that area have not been good. The net result of what
Interim Supply
will happen after tomorrow, unless the department takes much-needed action, will be that the Indians will not receive this most essential service. The result will be deterioration not only of their own health, but also of the health of the white persons among whom these Indians move.
I know the Minister of Mines and Resources is not here today, but I urge that some other member of the government bring this matter to his attention. There is great urgency. Something must be done by tomorrow.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to say a few words to the Minister of Finance about an item in his own estimates, namely that relating to the wartime prices and trade board. The minister may say this is a matter we can discuss more fully when we reach that item, but that may not be for some weeks yet; and the March 31, 1950, deadline is also drawing near. It seems to me, therefore, that a few facts should be drawn to the attention of the minister at this time.
As he knows, the step he was forced to take a few days ago in devaluing the Canadian dollar could result in upward pressure being exerted on the cost of living in this country. In fact many people feel that this is happening already, that the pressure to increase the cost of living is greater than the pressure coming from the devaluation of the pound which might have served to bring down that cost.
This whole question of the high cost of living was highlighted a few days ago by a publication prepared by the welfare council of greater Toronto, entitled "A guide to family spending in Toronto, Canada, 1949." Hon. members probably saw in the Globe and Mail of Monday, September 26, a good summary of the findings contained in that report, but I would recommend that in addition they write the welfare council of greater Toronto and send fifty cents for a copy of the report, in which an excellent job has been done. The report makes it clear that, for ordinary decent living at today's prices, in the city of Toronto a family of five must have $50 a week.
I have some other figures as well. I am referring now to the Labour Gazette for July, 1949, in which I find on page 920 a table showing the hours and earnings by industries in Canada up to as late as April of this year. According to this table the average weekly wage in the manufacturing industries reporting to the dominion bureau of statistics was only $42.08 in April of this year. That table includes some industries in which the workers would earn more than this average, but it also includes figures such as these: $30.86 a week for those working in leather products; $29.41 a week for those engaged in making garments and personal furnishings. Then as I go away

Interim, Supply
down I find that the average weekly wage in highway construction was $33.92, while the average for those working in hotels and restaurants was $26.99. In this long column some are higher than the average of $42.08, but, as I have indicated, there are a great many away below that figure.
I think we in this House of Commons, who are fairly well fed-and who were given some very good apples today-must face the fact that it is exceedingly difficult for a great many Canadians to make both ends meet. If we put these figures side by side, those of the welfare council of greater Toronto showing that at today's prices a family of five must have $50 a week, and those of the Labour Gazette showing that there are thousands of people earning only $30, $35 and $40 a week, we can see that this is a very real problem.
I bring this matter to the attention of the minister now, because we all know what government policy as to price control has been since the end of the war. We know where the legislation stands in regard to the wartime prices and trade board; unless something is brought in the whole set-up will vanish on March 31, 1950. For my part I should like to point out to the minister that he should start right now to do something to prevent the cost of living from going higher-indeed, to try to bring it down; but I know his view, and I know how long I would have to argue with him on that point. But I am going to appeal to him-and I hope he will consider this favourably-to have the administration of the wartime prices and trade board examined to see if he has a set-up there, with sufficient staff, which could do something about this job if even in his view -as it is in my view right now-it should become a problem demanding attention.
A moment ago I made reference to the devaluation of the dollar, and in that reference I admitted that it was a step the minister was forced to take. There are conditions in the world today that can have the effect of still further increasing the cost of living in this country; and bearing in mind what we have so often said from this corner of the house as to the excellent job in the field of price control done by the government during the war, it seems to me just as important to try to help the people of this country make both ends meet in time of peace. By the time we reach the appropriate item in the estimates, nothing may be left of the wartime prices and trade board. Certainly unless the government makes up its mind to do something about it before March 31, 1950, that organization will disappear. I urge upon the government, therefore, the importance of this whole question of keeping down the cost of

living, and I point out that it is something for which the government is responsible to the Canadian people.


Mr. Noseworihy:: I should like to take advantage of this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to direct the attention of the house, and particularly the Minister of Veterans Affairs, to a matter I referred to in a speech delivered on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. It is recorded in Hansard of September 21, page 141. In it there is a reference to what 1 consider to be one of these silly regulations affecting veterans who are attending our universities.
Last year, at the university of Toronto, eighty-three of these young veterans took second class honours in their final year. Of the eighty-three there were fifteen whose credits expired while they were writing the examinations after they had finished their academic year. Because of that regulation, those fifteen were deprived of the advantage of another year at the university on funds provided by the department. I suggest, as I did on a previous occasion, that the men who framed those regulations, as well as the minister, are just as anxious as I am to see that each of these veterans has an opportunity to complete his education.
As the minister knows, these boys left high school with their education half completed. Some of them left the university and gave to this country the best educational years of their lives. After years away from school they have returned to us to begin where they left off. It is unfair that, because of a regulation which must be applied mechanically, deserving young veterans who have shown that they have the ability and the desire to continue their education should be deprived of it. I suggest to the minister that that regulation be modified to this extent: that the student's academic year end not when he writes his last examination, but when he writes his first. I would urge upon the minister that he take this into consideration.
There is one other change I believe should be made. There should be a small committee -including the minister, if you like, and the senior officers who have charge of education in his department, and possibly someone from the university-charged with the responsibility of reviewing specific cases in which ability has been shown but the student is deprived of assistance because of this regulation. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that these regulations may be applied hard and fast in the mechanical field, but where human beings are concerned there should be some sort of committee or referee with discretionary powers.
I shall cite one example. A year ago a student graduated in the arts course in the

university of Toronto with an aggregate of approximately 800 marks on his final examinations. He was only two marks short of second-class honours. Because he was two marks short in an aggregate of 800, that student was deprived of any assistance during his post-graduate year at the college of education. He finally left college over $1,000 in debt because he had failed to secure another two marks. I marked examination papers for the department of education of Ontario for nearly twenty years. During his career I am sure the minister has marked enough examination papers to know that when you try to ascertain the difference in ability between a student who has 64 marks and one who has 66 marks, it is rather difficult. The marks received are largely determined by the attitude of the examiner at the time he marks the papers.
In cases of this kind I feel that these boys should be entitled to an appeal to some small committee with discretionary power to deal with the matter. I know the argument that will be raised against making any change in the regulations at this time. It is that some of those students who graduated during the past two or three years may want to take advantage of any change. I doubt whether many of them will. Most of those boys have secured jobs and are not likely to want to go back to the university. But suppose they do; suppose, as a result of this change, fifteen or twenty-five young veterans decide to return to university for post-graduate work. I would say, Mr. Chairman, and I am sure the minister is in agreement with me, that is in the best interests of this country. I am quite sure such a change would not be opposed on that ground. I realize that the minister cannot reply now, but I would ask him to give the matter his serious consideration.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.



WAYS AND MEANS


Hon. Douglas  Afcboii@Minister of Finance: that the house go into committee of ways and means.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Dion in the chair.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Resolved, that towards making good the supply granted to His Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service of the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1950, the following sums be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada, namely:
1.	The sum of $114,516,603.83, being one-twelfth of the amount of each of the items, except items 43, 419, and 452, as set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950;
Ways and Means
2.	The sum of $2,613,651.00, being one-twelfth of the amount of each of the items as set forth in the supplementary estimates (Newfoundland) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950;
3.	The sum of $5,876,758.33, being one-twelfth of the amount of each of the items as set forth in the further supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950; and
4.	The sum of $468,750.00, being five-twelfths of item 907 of the further supplementary estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950.
Resolutions reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Abbott thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 11 for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1950.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Douglas Charles Abbott: the second reading of the bill.


Gordon Graydon: Before the bill is read the second time, I desire to protect the position of all members of the house with respect to asking questions on the general estimates and of full discussion when the estimates, upon which this fraction is founded, are before the house again. It is the usual undertaking that is given by the government, that we pass this bill without prejudice to the rights we may have.
Mr. Abbot!: I gave that undertaking at the outset of this discussion.


Gordon Graydon: Not on the second reading.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: We want to make sure.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Dion in the chair.
Gordon Graydon: I know there are certain distinctions between this bill and previous ones that have been passed, having regard to the amounts. Perhaps some of the subject is well covered, but may I ask the minister if there is any difference between the general framework of this bill and the usual interim supply bills that have been passed previously.


Douglas Charles Abbott: No. Except for the amounts, the bill is identical in terms with the other four appropriation bills that have been passed.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.


Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following communication:
Ottawa, September 29, 1949
Sir;
I have the honour to inform you that the Right Hon. Thibaudeau Rinfret, Chief Justice of Canada, acting as Deputy of His Excellency the Governor

The Address-Mr. Pouliot
General, will proceed to the Senate chamber on Thursday, the 29th September, at six o'clock p.m., for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.
I have the honour to be, sir,
Your obedient servant,
J. F. Delaute,
Assistant Secretary to the Governor General.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Wednesday, September 28, consideration of the motion of Mr. Maurice Boisvert for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session.
Mr. Jean Francois Pouliot (Temiscouaia):: It is my pleasure, Mr. Speaker, to congratulate you upon your elevation to the chair. You were fully qualified for that high office because of your legal training, legal experience, and the fairness that you have shown in this house while you were the deputy speaker, and have shown since you have become the first commoner. I was particularly pleased to listen to you when you spoke in French. I note that you are a bilingual Speaker, a fact which is a great credit to you. I am sure that all members will appreciate your fairness and will feel that when you are in the chair they are safe in saying anything, within the rules.
It is also my great pleasure to congratulate the mover and the seconder of the address in reply. I have known the mover of the address for a long time. He is one of the brilliant members of the Quebec bar and has attained pre-eminence before the courts. He acquitted himself well. The seconder also spoke ably, and both of them deserve congratulations. As one of the senior members of this house, I am pleased to see all the good faces of the members who have been returned again and of those who have been elected here for the first time. The House of Commons is a gentlemen's club, and the new members should realize that the senior members will miss no opportunity to help them, whenever the occasion arises, so that they will fulfil their duties in the most pleasant atmosphere.
The last election was well run and it was very successful. If the Liberal party achieved such success, it is due in the first place to the personal campaign of the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), who crossed the country from Newfoundland to Victoria, addressing countless audiences, mixing with the people and shaking hands with countless friends. He did wonderfully well. I was not accustomed to that, but I remember that on one occasion, a year before his death, Mr. Lapointe had to conduct a campaign person-


ally. It was in the winter and he had to go across the country to preach the Liberal gospel. He did that successfully, but as a rule the people of Canada did not have the advantage of meeting the Prime Minister and the leader of the Liberal party personally. They had that privilege this year. What is to be admired in the Prime Minister is that he spoke the same language from coast to coast. Not only that, but he spoke without fear or favour. He spoke as a good Canadian. His language before English-speaking audiences was exactly the same as what he used in the province of Quebec: one language, one policy. The same things were said before audiences who spoke various languages. He was accompanied by his gracious wife, who also took pleasure in visiting all the constituencies of this country. The success of the election was to a large extent their personal reward. They took lots of trouble in campaigning all over the country and they were rewarded with the confidence of the people, who voted for the government after having heard the Prime Minister and after having met him and his wife.
In the elections previous to the last the general tenor of the speeches delivered by the Liberal speakers was that the other parties were worse than the Liberal party. This time the language used by Liberal speakers on the platform was entirely different. They did not say that other parties were worse than the Liberal party. They said that the Liberal party was better than opposition parties, and that it was the only party that could restore order in this country and bring welfare and prosperity from coast to coast-a great difference. It was of great importance and a great satisfaction to the Liberals who were denouncing only occasionally the Tories and the policies of the socialists and the Social Credit party. We told them what was going to be done for Canada by the Liberal party, for the welfare of Canada, for the future of our children, and the people liked it. They liked it so much that a tremendous number of people, who formerly were inclined to vote Conservative, socialist or Social Credit, decided to vote for the Liberal government headed by the present Prime Minister. They had real satisfaction when they voted. They knew that they were voting for a party that would fulfil its promises to them. If one travels anywhere in this country and says that he is a Liberal member of parliament he will be sure to have a good reception. That is why, sir, nobody should worry about the result of the eight by-elections which will take place next month. It is evident that the hurricane which has blown from Newfoundland to British Columbia inclusive will still carry the seats in the by-elections.

I have read the speech from the throne very carefully. There are many things in it, and most of them good. For instance, it is said that appeals to the privy council will be abolished-a very good thing. There are many other matters that I will not enumerate for the moment, but there is one of importance to which I draw the kind attention of the government and of all my fellow members. It is the amendment of the constitution. How can the parliament of Canada amend an imperial statute? Is it possible for the British parliament to delegate its power and authority to any other legislature in the commonwealth to amend its own statutes? I do not see how it could be done. Can we imagine that this parliament may amend any statute of the imperial parliament? It could not be done unless we made the statute of the imperial parliament, the British North America Act, our own by adopting exactly the same statute. If we did that, we might be able to amend the British North America Act after it had become an act of the parliament of Canada. But that would be very dangerous, and it would not work, because, when moving the second reading of the British North America Act in the House of Lords in 1867, Lord Carnarvon said:
To those resolutions-
He was referring to the Quebec resolutions. -all the British provinces in North America, were, as I have said, consenting parties and the measure founded upon them must be accepted as a treaty of union.
That was the language of Lord Carnarvon, who was then Secretary of State for the Colonies in the British government.
He spoke also of the appointment of a governor general. The present incumbent is one of the great men of the world, and so long as he occupies his office with dignity that is outstanding I do not see how we can make a suggestion for the appointment of anyone else. We should wait until his term of office is about to expire before we suggest the appointment of anyone else. However, that is not in the speech from the throne. All I have to say for the time being is that we are privileged to have as our governor general a man such as Lord Alexander, who is not only a distinguished soldier but also a great man.
I hold in my hand the text of the speech delivered at Westminster by Lord Carnarvon, where he went on to say:
Whilst the provisions regulating the constitution of the central parliament are in the nature of permanent enactments, those which govern the local legislatures will be subject to amendment by those bodies.
This deals with the question of amending the constitution. The provinces have the 45781-23
The Address-Mr. Pouliot right to amend their own constitutions, and Ottawa has not. That is quite strange. On the other hand, the legislation passed by the legislatures can be disallowed by this parliament, and the enactment of this parliament can be disallowed by the British government. That, too, is strange. How can we call Canada a sovereign nation so long as our laws are disallowed or may be disallowed by the British government? When His Majesty came here in 1939, and in the Senate chamber sanctioned some legislation, even those acts His Majesty had personally sanctioned were subject to disallowance by the British government within a period of two years.
So long as those provisions remain in the British North America Act can we call ourselves a free and sovereign nation? That cannot be. Let me read further from the words of Lord Carnarvon:
My lords, I now pass to that which is perhaps the most delicate and the most important part of this measure-the distribution of powers between the central parliament and the local authorities. In this is, I think, comprised the main theory and constitution of federal government; on this depends the practical working of the new system. And here we navigate a sea of difficulties. There are rocks on the right hand and on the left. If, on the one hand, the central government be too strong, then there is risk that it may absorb some of that local action, and that wholesome self-government by the provincial bodies, which it is a matter both of good faith and political expediency to maintain; if on the other hand, the central government is not strong enough, then arises a conflict of state rights and pretensions, cohesion is destroyed, and the effective vigour of the central authority is encroached upon. The real object which we have in view is to give the central government those high functions and almost sovereign powers by which general principles and uniformity of legislation may be secured in those questions that are of common import to all the provinces; and, at the same time, to retain for each province so ample a measure of municipal liberty and self-government as will allow and indeed compel them to exercise those local powers which they can exercise with great advantage to the community.
Then he goes on to say:
As I have said, it is proposed that the provinces shall surrender to the central parliament all powers of raising revenue, except by direct taxation. In return for this concession the central government will remit to the local legislatures certain fixed sums and proportionate capitation payments, in order to enable them more conveniently to defray the costs of local administration.
This happened at the time of confederation, and the amounts are mentioned in the British North America Act. Lord Carnarvon continues:
A legislative union is, under existing circumstances, impracticable.
I would suggest that my fellow colleagues read this speech by the then secretary for the colonies. I am sure they would find it illuminating, because it expresses the law-

The Address-Mr. Pouliot
makers' intent with respect to our constitution.
To summarize, it would be most delicate and dangerous to amend the constitution at the present time, because it was precisely drafted in such a way that it could not be amended. This is the source of the difficulties encountered by those who have thought of amending the constitution and who have not yet found a way to do it. We shall not ignore the fact that the imperial parliament and the Canadian parliament are two different bodies; and at the present time, owing to the fact that the constitution of Canada is an act of the imperial parliament, we have to go to them for any amendment requested by this country.
I should be greatly surprised if the British parliament surrendered to Canada the right to amend imperial legislation. It could be done in only one way, namely if the amendment were first granted by the British parliament. One or two amendments could be made at a time, the amendment having been passed first by the British parliament and then our having been given permission to repeat a similar procedure. We would on the second occasion do that which would have been done in the first place by the British parliament. If the British parliament did not first make the amendment, then I do not see how we could make it.
Therefore this presents a most difficult problem. It is not difficult from the legislative point of view but, as Lord Carnarvon has said, this constitution is a sort of treaty of union. This means that the consent of all interested parties should be called for; and I do not see how under such conditions anyone would surrender any right and give a blank cheque.
I urge the government to be careful in amending the constitution. Many people have referred to this as being an indication of progress, and it may be or not. I shall never say that the constitution does not need to be amended as there is much deadwood in the British North America Act after 82 years, but the manner of dealing with the respective jurisdictions should be thought over for a long time in order that the best possible results may be obtained. That is why it is not without a certain amount of concern that I have noticed that a change may be made in the respective and exclusive jurisdictions now provided by the British North America Act.
I do not say that it cannot be done, but it should be done with the utmost care in order to respect the rights of all those who were parties to the first "treaty of union", which is Lord Carnarvon's expression. I am not an imperialist, far from it, nor am I an
IMr. Pouliot.]
isolationist; I am a Canadian. I think that all those who have been born in this country and all those who have made Canada their true country of adoption should think of the future and should put sentiment aside in order to find the best way to govern this country.
There is some colonialism still prevailing in some parts of this country. What is colonialism? An hon. member across the floor asked that question yesterday. Colonialism is simply an inferiority complex with regard to the seat of the empire, something that exists in the minds of some who do not live in the United Kingdom. An Englishman who lives or is domiciled in the United Kingdom has the right to be an imperialist; it is natural that he would want his country to be extended as far as possible; but for one who claims he is a Canadian, for one who is domiciled in Canada, to be an imperialist is sheer nonsense.
There are some hon. members who are still imbued with the spirit of colonialism; they still live in the darkness of ignorance, in the shade of the tree of death like the barbarians of olden times. I have quoted a great English statesman to that effect. How can anyone in Canada claim that he is an imperialist and a good Canadian at the same time? That is impossible. It is like trying to square the circle, which is an absurdity. I do not say that because I have no English friends; I simply regret that some who should be proud of their country have a feeling of colonialism in the year 1949.
Because a vast majority of Canadian people did not have that feeling of colonialism, for the first time in many years a leader of a great party was applauded throughout the land because he extolled the virtues and merits of pure Canadianism. The reason I am so happy to give my full support to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) is that while he is the head of the government he is no despot. He takes hon. members into his confidence. He consults the members of parliament on every important issue and stands by them. It is only natural that hon. members stand by him and by the members of his cabinet.
My great grandfather voted for the resolution before the Act of Union. My grandfather voted for Blake and Alexander Mackenzie. My father was elected with Laurier in 1896. I am proud to support the Liberal government that we now have in this House of Commons.


Mr. R. R. Knight (Saskatoon):: Mr. Speaker, my first words shall be of personal congratulation to the gentleman who has been named Speaker of this house. There seems to be a spirit of unanimity in at least that one thing.

I think almost everyone is agreed that the government should be congratulated upon its choice. Congratulations seem to be in order this session, congratulations to the new government, to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), to the mover (Mr. Boisvert) and the seconder (Mr. Laing) of the address, to the new appointees, to new members of the house generally, and perhaps in particular to the new members from that new province, the name of which has been so consistently and variously mispronounced.
I wonder if the hon. members from that new province of Newfoundland are all orators? I was greatly delighted with their first speeches, particularly with the speech of a gentleman who has become my friend, the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. Higgins). I envy him the purity of his language, the clarity of his enunciation, and his deep knowledge of the subject about which he spoke. May I at the outset join with other hon. members in their congratulations to all these gentlemen.
Perhaps I should reserve special congratulations for two of the new and younger members on the government side. May I say at once that I am sorry they were elected, because they replace two colleagues of my own party, two friends of mine who were formerly in this house. But since in a democracy the electors must be the final arbiters, and since these gentlemen have been elected, I wish them every success. I refer to the hon. member for Kindersley (Mr. Larson), whom I see not in his own but in someone else's seat, and the hon. member for Meadow Lake (Mr. Harrison), young men who for a short time were my pupils. Since the indoctrination of political views is not one of the functions of a teacher, I accept no responsibility for the error of their ways in matters political. Nevertheless, to me their success must be a matter of some personal gratification, for indeed already they may be said to have achieved success since they have been deemed worthy by their fellow men to represent them in this honourable house.
There seems to be an air of peace and quietness about the house this session to which we were not accustomed last session. I think that may be a change for the good. After the battle comes peace, at least temporarily. I believe I have observed a change in the attitude of certain of my hon. friends which may augur well for the speedy conduct of government business this session. The victory of the Liberal party at the polls was clear and decisive. No one has tried to deny that. It is to be hoped that the very greatness of that victory may not work against good government, that it may not result in an apathy bred of the consciousness 45781-231
The Address-Mr. Knight of power. The power of this government is indeed great; and just as noblesse oblige, so has greatness its obligations. No longer can this government plead a narrow majority as an excuse for inaction in connection with the things the country needs. I hope we shall not have an example of one-party government in this country. This house has an overwhelming majority of Liberal members, though I should point out that they represent only 49-54 per cent of the voters of this country, according to the information contained in a handy little book published by the Canadian Press containing the results of the recent election. According to that same source, there must be in the province of Quebec 600,000 voters-and that figure is conservative

who voted against the policies of the government, but they are represented in this house by only five members, two Progressive Conservatives and three Independents. To me that is an unfortunate situation; the representation of those people certainly is not adequate.
So much for the House of Commons. When we turn to the Senate we find that it has 102 members, of whom all but 15 were appointed by a Liberal government. While I do not grant that other place sufficient importance to become a danger, nevertheless its membership, considered from the point of view of political representation, is extremely disproportionate to the population of the country. The hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher) the other day went so far as to suggest that the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) might very well appoint to that body a gentleman who belongs to an opposition political party, mentioning him by name. I shall not go that far, but I would go sc far as to suggest to the Prime Minister that he might be sufficiently magnanimous to appoint, irrespective of their political views, men and women who deserve well of their country and who have served in spheres of life other than political, perhaps people prominent in business, agriculture, labour, professional life, literature or art. If the representation of the parties in the upper house were anywhere near equal, that might be too much to ask; but with the present enormous Liberal majority I think it is a reasonable request.
I have spoken of the House of Commons and of the other place. There remains the judiciary. In our province it is common talk that to become a judge one must first of all be a lawyer, next a Liberal, and third either a defeated candidate who ran in the interests of the Liberal party or at least a member and preferably the chairman of a Liberal party executive. An examination of appointments
35S

The Address-Mr. Knight in that province, both recent and otherwise, might throw some light on that point, though I have not the information before me at the moment. Then there are the civil servants throughout the country. I do not know how they are appointed, but if the recommendations of members of parliament are taken into account I would suggest that probably those appointments are heavily loaded, with the balance on the Liberal side.
This whole situation, as I see it, constitutes a danger not only to this country but to the government which is in charge of our affairs. They have indeed great power. Let them see to it that their power is not abused. As a member of this party, smaller indeed since the recent election, for reasons I shall not broach here, may I say that we shall continue to act as the conscience of this government. We shall continue to create in the public mind a demand for those reforms and changes needed by the people of this country, and shall continue to press upon the government the need to put those reforms and changes into effect.
Legislation to effect one of those changes is now before the house, and here I touch upon the matter which was the subject of the speech by my hon. and genial friend from Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot). At last we have reached the point where we are ready to show our maturity as a nation and take that final step, which we have not taken sooner for no other reason than timidity, perhaps natural in a nation making its independent debut in international affairs; one might say as a fledgling long nurtured and protected under its mother's wing. The abolition of appeals to the privy council is but a symbol of something which has long been an actual fact: that we are a great and independent nation. We can shake off that dependency perhaps more easily than we can shake off the inferiority complex of which the hon. member has spoken, a complex which has been engendered by that dependency, which carries over from the field of external affairs into other spheres. While we have a culture which is unique and worthy of perpetuation and preservation, we have been content to imitate. Particularly in the spheres of art and literature, I think, we have scoured foreign fields while neglecting the beauty and inspiration of our own. Consciousness of a new nationhood, it is to be hoped, will awaken us to a sufficient pride in the unique and piquant flavour of our own culture to ensure that we do not allow it to be watered down to a tasteless and insipid uniformity. To this end, we need certain conditions. I would say that the first condition we need is the assurance of a long period of peace. Living temporarily


upon the crater of an extinct volcano is not conducive to the production of creative art. It is when the mind is free from fear and the body is free from want that men's minds turn to those things which lift mere existence into the realm of worth-while living.
Peace is the greatest need of the world today. We have been apt to assess our progress in terms of ability to produce gadgets, but our application of our inventive genius in the field of science may destroy us all, nay, will destroy us unless we can accompany it with the development of a moral sense. The material assets of which we are so proud could be wiped out overnight by any maniac with an atomic bomb. Even more potent instruments of mass death and destruction are now in existence.
We need peace and we need enlightenment. We need education. When I speak of education I am not thinking of some quick training, some technical course or some vocational training to enable one to earn a living, some intensive course in physics or ballistics which enables a young man to operate a machine gun or an aeroplane. I am thinking of education as a thing of the mind and spirit, a development of the personality, an appreciation of the finer things in life, the development of sound judgment and the ability to analyse things. Were we, as a nation, in possession of these qualities then there might be some justification for our cheek in boasting about our way of life and suggesting that other countries might well adopt it.
This government at Ottawa has some responsibility in this matter. I was pleased when the Prime Minister recognized that fact in the session earlier this year, and announced the appointment of a royal commission on cultural matters. I am glad such a commission is now operating. For some years I tried to persuade the Prime Minister, in his capacity as Secretary of State for External Affairs, to set up in Canada a commission of the United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organization. He categorically refused to accede to my request. However, what's in a name? The important thing is that something is now being done. We hope that whatever advice is given to the government by that commission, it will be followed by the appropriate action. I remember that during- the debate in the last session the Prime Minister promised, and it is recorded in Hansard, that this would not be just a hope commission, but a commission of action.
During the recent election campaign, the Prime Minister was reported as stating that Canadian universities should be supported in their work, or at least that it would be a pity if their work were to fall off owing to lack
35?

of support. I believe the dominion government must accept some responsibility for the rather backward state of education in some sections of our country because it has persistently refused to aid the provinces in this connection. The universities are short of funds. Great numbers of the veteran students are now graduating into the life of our nation, having been rehabilitated through education provided by D.V.A. At this moment [ should like to congratulate the government on the success of that scheme. As I said, some universities are financially embarrassed, and some schools are indeed the poor relations of others.
Taxation for educational purposes must be put upon a broader base than a levy on real property. In that direction lies inequality of opportunity. At a later date, I hope to discuss this whole question; but at this time I point out that the idea that federal aid should be extended to education is becoming more and more generally accepted. It has been discovered by those who during the war accepted federal aid for technical and vocational education, and those who participated in dominion-provincial schemes of assistance to certain worthy students, that federal aid by no means involves federal interference. Many who witnessed the great educational venture of the dominion government in the rehabilitation of war veterans through education have reconsidered this question. My own view is that the fear of federal interference in the administration of education was largely due to a feeling of inferiority which had developed, and not only in the direction mentioned by the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot).
I believe the aid I advocate is one positive approach to the problem of preserving the unique qualities of our culture and the promotion of enlightenment which I have mentioned as a desirable thing; nay, which I think is fundamental. During the war, we subsidized this and put a floor under that, but we allowed education to become one of the first casualties.
In attempting to weed out of our national life those things which are detrimental to our ideals of culture there is, of course, the negative approach. In this, too, we have a responsibility. I do not wish to say anything against the culture of our friends to the south, but I would point out that we have in our own land something unique, something which is typically Canadian. It is my belief we should not make a practice of copying others but we should develop something of our own.
During the course of the summer, I stopped at a tourist camp in Canada and noticed the
The Address-Mr. Knight place was decorated with United States flags. I went to the lady who was in charge and asked the reason for the display of these flags. She said, "Well, sir, we want to make our American friends feel at home." I believe hon. members in this house will recognize the fallacy of that argument. What our United States friends wanted to feel was that they were in Canada, not at home. It was largely for that reason they came to visit us.
Our young people spend approximately five hours a day in educational institutions and the remainder of their waking hours in what we might call their ordinary environment, the home, the street, or the playing field. Surely, this parliament has an interest and responsibility in the quality of that environment. I note the increase in juvenile delinquency, the increase in the number of divorce cases, and I ponder over the fact that our penitentiaries are filled with young men.
Let us look at some of the negative agencies in this environment. High on the list comes the cheap vulgarity of many commercial radio programs, some moving pictures, the "slick" magazines, the so-called "comic" books, the red and yellow novels which flood the counters of our news stands.
That compels me to face the question of censorship. I am not sure that I favour the censorship of reading material, although it is a matter to which I have given some study. Such censorship as is exercised through the Department of National Revenue is, in my opinion, inefficient and ineffective. I admit that censorship is a tremendously difficult task; because of that fact competent people should be in charge of it. In an investigation which I made during the last session into the censorship of books, I made several startling discoveries. For example, I found that the men who had the final decision on the censorship of books were not fitted either by background, education, experience or training for the task they had to perform. Books denied entry at one customs port were being admitted at others. Entry was being denied books which in my opinion should have been admitted. Books were being allowed in which should have been kept out. I am referring, of course, to books written and published outside of this country. The censorship of foreign-language books is quite inefficient. I have a good deal of material on my files on that point but I shall not weary the house with it because it is not the main subject of my discussion today. I shall content myself by saying that the censorship of foreign-language books and domestic books was particularly inadequate. No great distinction seemed to be made between books which evidenced a necessary realism in the treatment of the subjects with which they

The Address-Mr. Knight dealt, and those which were purely and deliberately pornographic and were made filthy tor the sole purpose that they might become best sellers, with the resulting profit.
In this connection also there is the difficulty of protecting the young without restricting the liberties of the adult, the liberties of those whose character, such as it is, has already been formed. There is the difficulty of restricting the activities of some business people who will sell anything to anyone as long as there is money to be made, and unless there are definite protective laws against it.
The negative approach is admittedly difficult. The positive one is feasible, if inadequate. Tastes are formed through use. We must substitute the useful for the harmful, the good for the evil. In the matter of reading for young people, that procedure at the moment is difficult through lack of material. One does not travel far in other countries until one realizes that on this continent, and particularly in this country perhaps, there is a great dearth of suitable reading for boys and girls. We have for so long accepted the suggestion that the comic book is all that is necessary that we just say: Oh, he has the comics, hasn't he? For years we have accepted the suggestion that the comic book solves the problem. I would express the hope that perhaps with this new consciousness of nationhood, or this awakening of nationhood, we shall not so neglect our youth in the future.
I have, sir, made a plea for the preservation and encouragement of our Canadian culture as such. I have suggested that the government has some responsibility in that matter, and have put forward some suggestions as to how they might marshal that assistance. Finally, let me urge that we cast out this inferiority, that we cast out fear. Let us have confidence in ourselves and in our abilities. Let us beware of taking the shadow for the substance. Let us refuse the easy way, the temptation to adopt a juke-box civilization, all noise and glitter. Let us be originators, not imitators. In short, sir, let us be Canadians, strong in the faith that we too have something distinctive, something precious and unique, to contribute to the community of men.
We have a great country. We are the trustees of a great heritage. Let us keep alive the flame of Canadian culture. It may be dim at the moment but it may be brighter tomorrow. I am reminded of some words of John Buchan, a former governor general who, may I suggest in all humility, if he were to hear me today, would largely agree with what I have said. His words were these:
The spark, once transmitted, may smoulder for generations under ashes, but the appointed time will come, and it will flare up to warm the world.


Mr. D. S. Harkness (Calgary East):: I should like first to congratulate you, sir, on your appointment as Deputy Speaker and through you to offer my congratulations to the Speaker on his election as first commoner. I am sure, as I know are all other members of this chamber, that you will both discharge your high and important functions with dignity and justice.
I should like to compliment the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne, and all of the other new members of this house who have so far taken part in this debate. Their speeches have been excellent and indicate that they all have something of importance to contribute to this house.
Today there are several matters on which I should like to make brief comment, the first of which is the revision of the Indian Act. This act has not had any main revision for something over fifty years. As a result, it is greatly out of date, a fact which makes it difficult for the officials of the Indian affairs branch to administer that department in the best way possible for the Indians of this country and in a way which is in conformity with the general advance in ideas that has taken place over that period of time. This fact was recognized, and in 1946 the following resolution was passed in this house:
That a joint committee of the Senate and the House of Commons be appointed to examine and consider the Indian Act, chapter 98, R.S.C., 1927, and amendments thereto and to suggest such amendments as they deem advisable, with authority to investigate and report upon Indian administration in general and, in particular, the following matters:
And the matters are listed. As a result of that resolution a committee was set up. This committee held long sessions throughout 1946, 1947 and 1948. It received evidence from several hundred witnesses. A great deal of work on the part of departmental officials was devoted to the committee and to the securing of information for it. As a result of the sittings of that committee a series of recommendations were made to this house. They were adopted, and as a result I think a considerable improvement took place in the administration of the Indian affairs branch. For one thing, a large number of day schools have been and are being built at the present time, to improve the educational facilities for our Indians.
Hospital and medical care have also improved considerably. However, the main purpose for which the committee was set up, namely, to amend the Indian Act, has not been carried to fruition. In spite of
OWr. Knight.]

the urgings of myself and a considerable number of hon. members at the last session of the last parliament, the government did not see fit to introduce the suggested amendments to the act which had been made in previous years. Only a day or two ago the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Gibson) asked the government whether they intended to introduce at this session legislation to amend the Indian Act. The answer of the minister, as reported at page 232 of Hansard, was as follows:
A draft bill to amend the Indian Act is in the hands of the Department of Justice, but I am not able to say when it will be available for consideration by the house.
That was the situation in 1948. After the committee had spent this long period in debating the suggested amendments to the act the thing was put into the hands of the Department of Justice, and apparently it has remained there ever since. Surely the officials of the Department of Justice have had time to look into the matter and have it ready for presentation to the house. I strongly urge upon the government that a revised Indian Act be introduced into the house just as rapidly as possible. If the government is still not satisfied with the draft bill that was prepared by the committee and revised by the Justice department, then I would ask that the joint committee be reconstituted just as quickly as that can be done, so that the work can be gone on with. The Indians of the country, and a large number of other people lyho are interested in their welfare, hoped for great things from the setting up of the committee on Indian affairs and the revision of the act. The government has a moral duty to have this matter brought to completion just as soon as it can possibly do so.
I should now like to say something about a matter which was brought up by the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge), this afternoon, and earlier this week by the hon. member for Nanaimo (Mr. Pearkes), namely, the difficult situation in which imperial veterans now find themselves as the result of the devaluation of the British pound. I hold in my hand a resolution which was forwarded to me by the Calgary branch of the Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans Association, urging this action upon the government. The exact way in which this could be done I do not wish to suggest. One thing which would help considerably, as far as some of these men are concerned, is the extension of the war veterans allowance to them. Apart from that, some arrangement might be come to between this government and the British government in the matter of bringing these men's pensions back to the
The Address-Mr. Harkness level at which they were before the pound was devalued or when the pound was at the normal rate of exchange; or, as suggested in this resolution, this government might supplement the British pensions in order to bring them back up to what the normal rate would make them.
Another matter along that line which I should like to mention is the plight of the superannuated civil servants. I have had several pitiable letters from ex-dominion civil servants who have been superannuated on extremely small pensions. I should like to bring them to the attention of the government and request that something be done particularly for those men who have pensions smaller than the old age pension paid. Quite a number of these people, although they worked for many long years for the Dominion of Canada, have pensions considerably smaller than that to which they would be entitled if they were able to draw old age pensions. In most cases these men are in the age bracket of from 65 to 70. Since there has been a great deal of talk and, as I remember, quite a few promises by the government that the old age pension age would be brought down to 65, they could very well start to redeem these promises by giving to these superannuated civil servants allowances at least sufficiently large to bring them up to the scale of the old age pension.
So far in this debate we have heard considerable talk about irrigation. There is one phase of that matter that I should like to say something about. In western Canada we are beginning to use the sprinkler system of irrigation, in which a pump and a system of pipes, and so on, are used to put water on the land rather than levelling it off and putting it on by means of ditches. It possesses many advantages over the levelling and ditching system. It means that a great deal of land, which could not have been irrigated otherwise, can be brought under irrigation. One of the difficulties in connection with it is that the machinery needed-the pump, the pipes, and so forth-is subject to duty and tax. I know of two farmers in the area east of Calgary who, being desperate because of the drought conditions there in the past summer, imported this, machinery from the United States and they had to pay a tax of over $1,100. Their contention, which I think is perfectly justifiable, is that this type of equipment should be classed as farm machinery, and as such not subject to tariff and taxes. I would ask the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott), who fortunately, I see, is sitting across from me, to bear this fact in mind when he is making up his budget resolutions. I may say that I took this matter up with the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann)

The Address-Mr. Harkness and asked him whether it would be possible for his department to make a ruling that this type of machinery was indeed farm machinery, as it is, and thus not subject to duty and tax. His reply, however, was:
To permit of the duty free entry of such apparatus, a tariff change would be necessary. Amendments to the tariff do not come under my department, being rather the responsibility of the Department of Finance.
It seems to me this is a matter in which the Department of Finance could move immediately, and in doing so could bring aid in irrigation to considerable areas in western Canada where water is available and can be used by means of this sprinkler system.
I should now like to say something on the subject of defence. During past years we in the official opposition have made repeated efforts to secure information in regard to the state of the defences of this country. In many instances these efforts were far from successful. The information was denied to us. However, a general picture was always built up by the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton), both here and throughout the country at large, that our defence situation was excellent; that we had a small but mobile highly trained hard-hitting defence force, which was capable of dealing with any eventualities it was possible to foresee arising. It was well adapted to deal especially with the only thing that we could reasonably expect in this country, at the start of a war at any rate, namely, diversionary raids particularly on our northern airfields.
Well, during the past summer an exercise was held in the Peace river valley to test, apparently-at least that was what was given out in the newspapers-the ability of our defence forces to meet a diversionary raid of this nature. It was known as Exercise Eagle. The result has been rather unfortunate. The chief feature which strikes me in this connection is that the exercise showed a tragic lack of proper equipment on the part of our defence forces. This is the sort of thing which appeared in the newspapers all across this country-and I shall proceed to read a few extracts to show what these correspondents, most of whom were men who had seen service overseas, thought of the equipment of our defence forces.
The first of these is from the Vancouver Daily Province of August 8. This is an account by Ross Munro, stating-
The exercise clearly revealed some startling weaknesses in our defence picture.
The most alarming feature is the almost-complete inadequacy of the R.C.A.F. operational aircraft to meet attack. The combat planes are too old and too few.
Further on in the same article he speaks about the good performance put on by the
tMr. Harkness.]
P.P.C.L.I., an infantry regiment stationed at Calgary, which has now been trained as a parachutist regiment. Referring to that unit he says:
But even the P.F.C.L.I. need more equipment; for example, they had to borrow most of their parachutes from the joint air school at Rivers, Manitoba, for this scheme. They also borrowed 150 jump tunics.
And further on, referring to the aircraft used in the exercise, he states:
In regard to the types of planes, the most astonishing thing was that there wasn't a single jet fighter in the whole exercise.
They weren't put on "Eagle" because they had been worked hard during the two-week summer camp of the western reserve squadrons and maintenance problems were too tough for operating up here.
The most modern plane was the Mustang fighter and the R.C.A.F. even had to call on Rockcliffe and Trenton stations in Ontario to make up a nine-plane squadron.
But the bulk of the "fighters" were the old Harvard trainers. Then there were obsolete Mitchell bombers-six of them.
The majority of the pilots were civilian reserve officers and they showed they could do a job. But again they had so little to work with.
The air force staffs also executed their tasks of planning and directing extremely well.
The "tools" of war were lacking. The R.C.A.F. and exercise "Eagle" foundered on that point in its application to air force performance in an emergency at this time.
And here is an article by Paul St. Pierre which appeared in the Vancouver Sun of August 8:
Russia could play havoc in our northland today if she successfully launched an airborne .attack of sacrifice troops. H any Canadian officer disagrees with this he is not among the dozen with whom I spoke.
And later in the same article he says:
But it was a distressing sight to see a young, enthusiastic paratrooper trotting about the battle scene with an alder stick with a tin can nailed on top. "That's a trench mortar," an officer explained.
There were many other newspaper accounts along the same line. In one of them, I remember, there was a complaint that the heavy machine guns used by the P.P.C.L.I. in this exercise-or at least some of them-were not equipped with sights. They did not have the sights for them.
What all this leads us to is the fact that during the past three years we have voted large sums of money for the defence forces. We in the official opposition have tried to And out the purposes for which the money was being used, if it was being properly spent, and if we were getting the efficient and effective fighting force to which the expenditures entitle us. We were denied that information and told that everything was fine. When an exercise of this sort takes place we find everything is not fine.

The accounts sent out by the correspondents who were there indicate that the men were all right. The P.P.C.L.I. put up a magnificent performance. Fighter pilots and other air crew did excellent work. The staff work was all right. The thing that was wrong and which caused the exercise to fail was the fact that proper equipment was not there. We did not have it in this country.
We have maintained right along that a defence committee of the House of Commons should be set up to which full information could be given respecting the state of our defence forces. The situation brought to light by Exercise Eagle reinforces that contention, and points up strongly the fact that the house needs a committee of that kind which could get more information about defence.
It is our duty to see that the moneys voted for defence purposes are properly spent. From what we can make out, they may have been properly spent, and they may not. At any rate we have not got what we paid for. We have not an effective fighting force. In theory we are supposed to have an airborne [DOT] brigade which could stop any diversionary raid on this country. We are supposed to have an air force which would transport them to the place where they would be needed. This exercise demonstrated that we have not those things. We have not the equipment which would make it possible for our men to do the job.
In my view the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) should, in fact must, make a full explanation to the house as to exactly what did happen, what the situation was in this exercise, and just what the situation is at the present time, so far as defence preparations are concerned. In particular we should be told the situation from the standpoint of equipment, one feature in connection with which we appear to be especially weak.
There is one other phase of defence matters upon which I should like to touch briefly, namely passive defence measures against atomic warfare. I discussed this matter last February in the debate in reply to the speech from the throne, and at that time requested the minister to make a statement as to what passive defence measures this country had taken. I have not yet received an answer to that question.
I know that over a year ago the government appointed General Worthington, a most capable officer, to survey this situation. Whether his survey has been completed or not, or what he has recommended, has never been made public so far as I am aware. As for this country's being protected in the event of another war, I think perhaps it is
The Address-Mr. Harkness more necessary to take proper measures of passive defence than to do anything else, including the building up of our actual defence forces.
The news which came last week, that the Russians now apparently have atomic bombs, makes this more urgent. It brings the matter into sharp focus and makes it imperative that steps be taken to protect the civilian population in the event of war breaking out. That is not so very unlikely, although we hope, trust and pray that it will not take place. In my opinion there is no question that long before this we should have been taking a considerable number of measures to protect the general public in the event of the dropping of atomic bombs. These would be measures planning for the evacuation of people from our larger centres of population.
I suggested last February that in considering its housing plans and various schemes to aid the construction of houses the government should make it possible for those who wanted to build houses in the smaller centres to obtain the same assistance given to those who were building in the more densely populated areas. It would seem that a reverse policy has been adopted. From what I can make out it is much easier to obtain help under the National Housing Act for the building of houses in the larger centres of population than it is for the building of houses in the smaller centres.
At that time I pointed out, and I still am strongly of the same opinion, that efforts should be made through the industrial development bank to bring about a dispersion of industry which would carry with it a dispersion of population because people will go where they can get work.
I shall come back to both aspects of this matter of defence to which I have referred when the estimates are before us, but in the meantime I ask the minister to be prepared, either during this debate or when his estimates are before us, to make a full statement and answer the questions which have been posed here.



THE ROYAL ASSENT

[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, the house went up to the Senate.
And being returned:
Mr. Speaker informed the house that the Deputy Governor General had been pleased
362	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Beyerstein to give in His Majesty's name the royal assent to the following bills:
An act to amend the Criminal Code.
An act for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1950.
At 6.15 p.m. the house took recess.

AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Hilliard Harris William Beyerstein: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the people of my constituency would want me to pay a tribute to my predecessor, Mr. James A. Marshall, who has so ably represented Cam-rose in this house over thg past fourteen years. By keeping close contact with the people of the constituency he has won the esteem of all. It was with deep regret that they received his decision to resign.
I should also like to say a few words with regard to the wonderful agricultural constituency which I now have the honour to represent. In Camrose we have one of the finest mixed farming districts in Canada. We are proud to say that we have a greater number of registered seed growers than are to be found in any other part of Alberta. We cannot claim the honour of having the world's wheat king. He happens to live in the nearby constituency of Red Deer. We can, however, claim the honour of having the world's rye king. In addition, we have several other farmers who have won recognition in the field of agriculture. In the matter of purebred livestock, our herds are comparable to the best in Canada. In this field also it is not uncommon for one of our farmers to produce a champion.
In addition to a well-balanced mixed farming district we have several coal mines in the constituency. From those mines we export a considerable amount of coal each year. The oil industry in the Camrose constituency is as yet in its infancy. So far we have only one well; it is located at Stettler. We hope, however, that this is only the forerunner of a more prosperous field.
Generally speaking, the Camrose constituency is well blessed, but we have a few problems which I would bring to the attention of the government at this time. Those problems are not peculiar to this constituency alone. They would affect most other parts of Canada. In order to make a good agricultural district better we would suggest that the government should provide: rMr. Speaker.]

1.	Low cost credit facilities through agencies especially acquainted with agricultural and marketing conditions.
2.	Fair prices sufficient to cover the average production costs and to give primary producers a fair net return for their services based on parity.
3.	The Canadian wheat board should be revised so that the board becomes an agency operating primarily for the benefit of the producer.
4.	Stability of our basic industry through long-term international wheat agreements.
5.	Permanent agricultural prices support legislation.
6.	Producer representation on all boards and agencies having control over farm products.
If the government would consider these measures, it would tend to make farming, not only in our constituency but in the rest of Canada, much better for all concerned.
At this time I would also mention the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. Farmers who have for many years been paying into this fund at the rate of one per cent on all grain sold suddenly find that in time of need they are unable to derive any benefit under the act simply because their farms happen to be on the wrong side of the township line. Surely there must be a more equitable manner in which this act could be administered. I understand that it is coming up for revision this session, and I would urge the government to consider this matter.
In our constituency, as in other parts of Canada, there are a number of senior citizens who are commonly known as old age pensioners. They were pleased to receive a $10 increase in their pension just before the last federal election. They would be more pleased, however, if the government could see fit also to raise the ceiling of their earning power. Many of our old age pensioners are bedridden. They are not considered to be bad enough to be hospitalized, but at the same time they are unable to care for themselves. In these cases the pension paid is not sufficient to take care of their needs. I think that is a matter which should be considered. Another nice gesture would be for the government to issue to each old age pensioner a radio licence which would be valid for the rest of his life.
I should also like to say a few words with regard to freight rates. Many rumours have been circulating with regard to a proposed increase in freight rates. At this moment I should like to say that the people of my constituency would be absolutely opposed to any change in the freight structure, especially the Crowsnest pass agreement, unless the change were in a downward direction.

Those are some of the problems which confront the people of my constituency. It might be argued that these proposals would take a considerable amount of financing. In reply,
I would refer to Hansard of Tuesday, March 22, 1949. On page 5 of the appendix to the budget presented by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) will be found a chart. This chart shows the gross national income and the gross national product for a period of eleven years, beginning with 1938 and going up to 1948. The interesting thing about this chart is that in every year, as will be noticed, the column which represents the gross national production is always greater than the column representing the gross national income.
In other words, the flow of prices is always greater than the flow of purchasing power. That is to say, at any given time we are never able to buy back the goods of our producers. Carrying this argument a little bit further, I refer to the Canada Year Book. At page 1089 of the 1948-49 edition it will be found that the net national income in 1947 was $10,981 million and that the net national production in 1947 was $13,375 million. In other words, in that year there was a shortage of $2,394 million; we were that much short of being able to buy back our production.
We could trade some of that surplus with other nations to our mutual advantage, and if we did so we would still have the same amount left on our shelves. Therefore, taking 1947 as an example, we would have $2,394 million worth of goods lying on the shelves. These goods represent real wealth. I suggest that the government should create a commission, which would be responsible to the people through parliament, to take these goods on the shelves and use them as a backing for the creation of new credit, and in this way we would be able to finance the proposals I have outlined today.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Normally, sir, I would hesitate before participating in the debate, especially when all indications are that we are rapidly approaching a vote. While certainly not desirous of prolonging discussion and thus deferring that vote, I do find it necessary to deal with some matters which have recently been injected into this debate. My participation at this time therefore might be regarded as a product of circumstances rather than a product of deliberate design.
Before proceeding to refer to some of these matters which I consider it necessary to deal with, I desire to extend to Mr. Speaker my very sincere congratulations upon his elevation to the high office which he now occupies. It is not done, sir, through any feeling that it is the right thing to do. It is done because of my sincere belief that I would not be fair 45781-24i
The Address-Mr. Shaw to myself were I not to express to Mr. Speaker the warm feeling which I hold toward him and the hope which is within me that he shall enjoy all success in that high and responsible office. I can assure him that he will at all times have our wholehearted co-operation.
May I also, sir, join with previous participants in this debate to congratulate the mover (Mr. Boisvert) and the seconder (Mr. Laing) on the excellence of the addresses which they delivered in this house. In passing I might say that one need not necessarily agree with all that they said in order to be quite sincere in offering congratulations to the hon. members.
It is rather a pleasant experience for one to come into a new parliament and meet the many new members who have joined us as a consequence of the election. We wish them well in the arduous duties which we know that they will have to bear. We might at times have to differ with them on the floor of this house, but nevertheless we possess warm personal feelings toward them.
In the course of this debate last night reference was made by the hon. member for Vegreville (Mr. Decore) to a number of matters with which I shall have to deal upon this occasion. In some instances the story was left quite incomplete. In my estimation, an incomplete story can oftentimes be much worse than a story which is wholly false. I find it a duty, therefore, to complete and correct certain of these assertions. I should like to refer to Hansard of yesterday. At page 320 I find this:
The Liberal popular vote in that province- Referring to the province of Alberta.
-was approximately 117,000 as compared with 131,000 for the Social Credit candidates. How is it that the Liberals have only five members from Alberta, whereas the Social Credit party have twice as many?
In passing I would say that that is not a section with which I wish to deal particularly, but I would say to the hon. member for Vegreville that obviously it is a problem of distribution, a problem which the federal government, both in this instance and more particularly as far as the economic angle is concerned, have found it impossible to solve. It is not surprising, therefore, that this should continue to constitute a serious problem as far as they are concerned. Let me continue with the next section of the statement. The hon. member illustrated what he meant by referring to the Peace River constituency, the constituency which my leader has represented well ever since 1945. He said:
The illustration I want to bring out now is an example of what happened in many constituencies. For instance in the Peace River constituency the
364	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Shaw
hon. member from that area received in 1945 a majority of over 3,200 votes.


Solon Earl Low: How many votes?


Mr. Decore:: I do not know how many votes, but the majority is over 3,200 votes.


Solon Earl Low: Give the number of votes.
The hon. member did not have the information available. Since a wholly wrong impression was created there, I should like to refer to the results in Peace River. In 1945 the Social Credit candidate received 7,319 votes. In 1949 he increased that number of votes by 408, which puts quite a different complexion upon the hon. gentleman's statement. I emphasize it: the hon. member for Peace River increased his vote in the Peace River riding. It is true that the Liberal candidate also increased his vote, but the inference that he did it at the expense of the hon. member for Peace River is wholly incorrect. On the other hand, my friend of the C.C.F. lost 460; the Conservatives lost 1,184; and there were 2,062 new voters. I do not want to take any credit away, from the Liberal candidate in that constituency, but certainly to leave the impression that the hon. member for Peace River suffered, as it was suggested he suffered, is wholly incorrect; it is a wholly erroneous conclusion to draw, and a false impression results.


John Decore: The hon. member did not know the results until four days after the election.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I am surprised that in giving the illustration the hon. member for Vegre-ville did not use his own constituency. I am going to do that. In Vegreville in 1945 the Liberal candidate received 4,806; the Social Credit candidate received 7,146; the Communist candidate received 3,272; and the C.C.F. candidate received 1,668.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I anticipated that; I am pleased to have received that applause. The Social Credit candidate in 1949 received 7,115, or 31 votes less than he did in 1945. May I say to the hon. member for Vegreville that my story will be complete, if he will only listen.
In 1949 the Liberal candidate gained 4,066 votes.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I had indicated applause in my notes at this point, because I knew there would be applause. This increase of 4,066 votes may be cause for great rejoicing on the part of the Liberal party, and particularly the Liberal member from Vegreville.
But I ask them this question: Can the 4,066 votes be called Liberal votes? The answer is no, definitely no. Do those 4,066 votes represent an increase in Liberal strength in that constituency or in Alberta? The answer is definitely no.


So that we may better understand the former member for Vegreville, it is necessary to go back a bit. Between 1940 and 1949, the Vegreville constituency was efficiently and effectively represented in the House of Commons by Mr. Hlynka. Mr. Hlynka was an ardent supporter of the British commonwealth -and I am sure all those who are here will agree with that statement. Mr. Hlynka was an outstanding champion of Canada, of a free Canada and of free Canadians. He believed in democracy-the best form of democracy- and in democracy all the time.


Solon Earl Low: That is why the communists turned against him and joined the Liberals.


Frederick Davis Shaw: He was a staunch supporter of the Canadian people. And he supported in all his fervour the implementation of policies designed in the first place to make Canada stronger, policies which would provide a much greater opportunity for security for Canadians, a policy which would guarantee a higher degree of individual freedom for all Canadians.
He was an arch foe of communism; he was an arch foe of totalitarianism, and of regimentation in any and all forms. Hon. members who were in the house during those years will know that he exposed and opposed communism both in the house and out of it at every opportunity. Two years ago it became obvious to us that the communists would stop at nothing to put him out of his seat, to remove him from the Canadian House of Commons where his voice could be heard, as it had been heard during those nine and a half years.


Solon Earl Low: They went the limit this time.


Frederick Davis Shaw: What occurred? Prior to the election of June last it was agreed by the communists that they would not run a candidate in the Vegreville constituency where they had polled 3,272 votes in 1945. For some reason or another they were able to persuade the C.C.F. to refrain from nominating-


Mr. Bryce:: No, they did not.


Frederick Davis Shaw: That may have been a false deduction on my part, and I apologize. The C.C.F. were persuaded by someone-[DOT]


Mr, Low:: That is right.


Frederick Davis Shaw: -to refrain from putting a candidate in the field.


An hon. Member:: What about the Progressive Conservatives?


Frederick Davis Shaw: There may be a few there, but I have not heard of them. They did not have a candidate in 1945-at least I do not think they did; and they did not have one in 1949.

It was concluded by the communists in that riding that the most effective method to be employed in removing Mr. Hlynka from his seat was to vote Liberal. They were influenced in making that decision by the reported assertion of the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) when, either at or nearing Regina, he said that Liberalism was nothing but C.C.F.-ism in a hurry, and the communists-


An hon. Member:: The other way around.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Point of order.


Frederick Davis Shaw: It occurred, and after all, that is the important thing. Nomination day came and passed, and there were but two candidates in the field. Then came forth that tirade of printed abuse which only the communists seem capable of concocting, or low enough to concoct. Their policy was: Get rid of Hlynka at any price and at any cost. They called him a fascist tool, a nazi- and when I say that, I wonder how long we in Canada are going to permit the dissemination through the mails of material of that kind. All hon. members know that Mr. Hlynka was as bitterly opposed to fascism and communism as anyone who sits in this House of Commons.
They also attacked him because he had arranged to bring from Europe certain displaced persons who had suffered agonies as a consequence of war. They claimed that he had brought the scum of Europe. That, of course, is a charge against the government, and it is not true. He brought to this country many of the finest people ever brought here from any country. They said, "Do not vote for him; vote for anyone else when you go to the polls. But do not vote for him"-which, of course, could lead to only one conclusion, namely that they were to vote Liberal.
And so we find this very interesting situation, that while the Liberal candidates did pick up 4,066 votes, there were among those 3,272 communist votes-if one can be proud of them-and I presume a portion of the C.C.F. votes. It certainly cannot be argued that the thirty some odd votes lost by the former member for Vegreville caused his defeat; because, if he had polled the same vote that he polled before, these communist votes would still have made possible the election of a Liberal.
I am not in the habit of issuing challenges in the House of Commons, but on this occasion I do challenge the present member for Vegreville to take the same stand with the same vigour against communism on the floor of the House of Commons as did the former member for Vegreville. In order to equal his predecessor's record that
The Address-Mr. Shaw fight will have to be made effectively, vigorously and certainly continuously. That is all I wish to say about that matter. It is unfortunate that one has even to refer to it but, on occasion, some things do become necessary.
I should like to make one more reference to Hansard, probably to make a correction, and quote the concluding paragraph of the speech made by the hon. member for Edmonton East (Mr. Macdonald), whom I have met and who I think is a very fine gentleman. But I thiftk he stuck out his neck when he said this, as reported on page 334 of Hansard:
We in Edmonton-
I would be the first to agree that Edmonton is a wonderful city.
*-are conscious that the residents are in complete accord with the policy of this government and its administration, and that they will at the first opportunity express through their democratic ballot a desire to select for Alberta a government in step provincially with the national administration.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I had an indication of applause at that point. It can hardly be said that the residents-the word is used in an all-inclusive sense-are in accord with the policy of the gbvernment when the two government candidates received 25,255 votes against opposing votes totalling 36,548. They represent considerably less than half the residents of that fair city. In fact, in Edmonton East there were enough Social Credit votes cast to win the seat, but of course it was a divided vote and we lost. The latter part of the remarks of the hon. member indicates a rather forlorn hope when he says that before long Alberta will elect a government in step provincially with the national administration. That is about as remote a possibility as to sell bathing suits in wholesale quantity to the Eskimos. There are two reasons for my making that statement. The first is that the great majority of the people of Alberta have not forgotten that dismal, that bleak period we are all constantly trying to forget in the province of Alberta, the period from 1905 to 1921 when we had a Liberal administration in the province.
I have in my hand a Bank of Canada report for 1937 which contains the result of a survey made by the Bank of Canada into the finances and related matters in connection with Alberta. After reading this today I assume I shall have a nightmare tonight. Referring to that period it states that the roots of most of the problems that existed in Alberta in 1937 were attributable to the period 1905-21. They characterize that period by using such words and phrases as waste, loose administration and the incur-

The Address-Mr. Shaw rence of debt which could not be justified even by the optimistic spirit of the times.


Mr. Fair:: That was those awful Liberals.


Frederick Davis Shaw: It goes on to point out the threat to our cash position in Alberta, that our solvency was likely to be questioned. We are told in the report that the policies pursued resulted in the accumulation of a deadweight debt burden and that no effort had been made by the government to put the province on a self-supporting basis in spite of the opportunity provided by the favourable conditions of the times.


Mr. Blackmore:: That was the Liberal government.


Frederick Davis Shaw: That was the Liberal government of Alberta, the only one we ever had. Is it any wonder that we do not want any more? Then there is a second reason, a mighty good reason, a reason which has been referred to by some Liberals from Alberta who have spoken already. This is the wonderful position in which our good province finds itself today. I realize that we have passed through times that have been somewhat different from those that existed during the early depression years, but other provinces passed through similar times.
The great majority of the people of our province know that we have an administration that is efficient and honest. Through the pursuance of wise policies that government has brought that province to the forefront of the Canadian provinces.


An hon. Member:: I suppose you put the oil there?


Frederick Davis Shaw: Some hon. member interjects to ask if we put the oil there. I can remember how the Liberals sat on that oil for a long time without doing anything about it. The Social Credit government has encouraged the development of resources in the province when there was no comparable development over the border.


Solon Earl Low: The Liberals frightened all the capital away.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Some people even tried putting traps at the border in order to keep capital in, but under the Liberal administration it still got out. As I said, the great majority of the people of our province know that through the determined application and pursuance of policies that were wise and progressive we are in such a sound financial position in the province today that if it were admitted it would be said that we are the envy of all Canada. Through similarly wise policies we have made outstanding progress in the fields of agriculture, education, public health and


so forth right down the line. I can back up what I say by a simple reference to what has been said already during this session. When the legislature assembles in Alberta, if you look long enough and close enough you will find two Liberals. They are both from urban centres where they got in by mistake because we have a peculiar system of voting in the cities and they could not be kept out even if they were not wanted.


An hon. Member:: If it were not for that they would not be in.


John Horne Blackmore: They are a splinter group.


Frederick Davis Shaw: IE the hon. member for Vegre-ville (Mr. Decore) would put some of that wisdom in his speech instead of interjecting into mine what he thinks is wisdom he would make some headway.


An hon. Member:: Yours needs it.


Frederick Davis Shaw: That is quite conceivable. I realize that it is hard to squarely face the facts and still say, "No". As I say, I have two reasons for knowing that the hope expressed by the hon. member for Edmonton East is a futile, forlorn hope. For the benefit of the hon. member from Vegreville, let me say that in the last election on June 27 we increased our popular vote in the province by over 17,000. If that vote had been properly distributed it might have kept the hon. member at home.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I should like to depart from that branch of my remarks. I hear someone say, "Good." I have more; I can expand it even further, but I should like to refer to other matters. One of them has been referred to already by my colleague from Camrose (Mr. Beyerstein) whose name, incidentally, I have heard mispronounced several times in the house, and I have noticed spelled incorrectly on the seating plan. He referred to the P.F.A.A. His constituency is very similar to mine except that, as he pointed out, in my constituency I have the world wheat king. I need say nothing more to indicate the nature of the fine agricultural constituency I have the honour to represent. The farmers of Red Deer, together with those of Camrose and other constituencies, have been making a forced contribution of one per cent under the P.F.A.A. With the exception of a very small part of my riding, out near the constituency of Acadia, we have not had to think in terms of P.F.A.A. benefits, but that is not the case this year. I do not know whether it was due to the presence of so many Liberal politicians in the province-


Mr.   Johnsion@: We certainly had a lot of hot air.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Yes, which dried out a good part of my constituency. We had the driest year we have known for forty-five years.


Mr. Mitchell:: That may account for the dry speech.


Frederick Davis Shaw: I hear the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) make some reference to a dry speech. Perhaps he will get up and give us his definition of money again.


Humphrey Mitchell: I was going to ask my hon. friend when he was going to switch to phony money.


Frederick Davis Shaw: Since the minister has been a member of the Liberal government for so long, and has been associated during that time with the financial policies pursued by the Liberal government, I can tell him nothing about phony money. To return to the subject of the P.F.A.A., however, some sections of my constituency should be permitted to claim benefits under that legislation this year. We hope this may be the one and only time that will be necessary; as I said a moment ago, it was the driest summer in the last forty-five years. But under the terms of the P.F.A.A. as presently constituted I fear that the farmers in my constituency who require assistance because of this calamity will not be able to qualify. That seems most unfair, in view of all the money they have put into that scheme since its inception. As the hon. member for Camrose has said already, I believe that when the P.F.A.A. is under revision we should see that the regulations permit farmers such as those in my constituency who now require assistance to qualify.
I wish to say a word about the matter of proof of age under the Old Age Pensions Act. In my constituency, as elsewhere, there are many pioneer citizens who have made a great contribution toward the development of Canada. Many have spent from forty to fifty years within the borders of our country. Now they are reaching the age of seventy or over, and unfortunately many cannot provide any acceptable evidence at all as proof of age. In many cases their births were never registered, and there may be no entries in the family bibles. Owing to the fact that many of them lived in sparsely populated sections of the country, sometimes in our country and in other cases in the United States, they are not even listed in the census records. Today those people, many of them from seventy to eighty years of age, are suffering severe hardship. I understand, and here I am expressing an opinion based on something I have been told, that there are ways by which medical men can ascertain the approximate age of a person. One such way, I believe, is by examination of the skin tex-
The Address-Mr. Prudham ture. I may be wrong; that may be entirely out of the question, but there may be other methods. In many of these cases all you have to do is look at the man. In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, some leniency should and must be shown in this connection. No less than four such cases have been brought to my attention during the past summer. There may not be so many, but let us remember that one case is enough to warrant action.
I repeat that I had not anticipated participating in this debate. However, I am rather pleased that the opportunity to do so presented itself.


Mr. George Prudham (Edmonion West):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to speak for the first time in this house in this debate on the speech from the throne, I should like first to compliment you upon your election to the high office you hold, and on the fair and equitable way in which you discharge your duties. I should like also to add my commendations to those already extended by previous speakers to the mover and seconder of the speech from the throne, who made excellent addresses.
I am from Edmonton West, which was so ably represented for many years by Senator James A. MacKinnon. If I should ever attain the dignity and the respect and confidence of my constituents and of the people of Canada at large that he has, my presence in this house will have been well justified. Edmonton West is both rural and urban. It extends westward from the city limits for about seven miles and northward for about twenty miles. Within the boundaries of the constituency the oil drillers are busy. The riding is bounded on the south by the Leduc oil field, on the west by the Woodbend oil field and on the north by the Redwater oil field. My colleagues from Vegreville (Mr. Decore) and Edmonton East (Mr. Macdonald) have already made reference to the phenomenal growth of the oil industry in the Edmonton area.
Edmonton is built on a large coal field and has large resources of natural gas, with more being discovered almost daily. Fuel is abundant and cheap. For the ordinary-sized house, it requires from $5.00 to $12.00 per month for heating. Power is cheap. Edmonton has one of the most modern steam power plants on the continent. An interchange agreement with the Calgary Power Company ensures an ample supply of power for peak loads. Many industrialists are beginning to realize the potentialities of the district. One of the latest announcements concerns the development of a large pulp and paper industry. A large agricultural area contributes to Edmonton. The commerce of the vast Peace river area and the Northwest Territories are

The Address-Mr. Prudham all channelled through Edmonton by northern waterways, railways, highways and by air.
It is our hope that the trans-Canada highway will pass through Edmonton. There are many reasons why it should. The northern route would serve the largest number of people and it would be cheaper to build. A caravan of about fifty motor vehicles recently travelled from Edmonton to Vancouver through the Yellowhead pass, demonstrating that even over the unimproved terrain of the mountains motor travel is possible. By following the route of the Canadian National Railways it is found that snow is not a problem except for a stretch of about ten miles. This portion could easily be kept open for year-round traffic. The hon. member for Mackenzie (Mr. Ferrie) raised an important point in the house yesterday concerning the use of this highway for national defence. If the announcement the Prime Minister made last week means anything, it means we should look to our defences. We are preparing our defences in the Atlantic; what about the north?
In the event of war, the Edmonton area which is producing oil, the vital necessity of war, would be very vulnerable to attack. I fully realize, Mr. Speaker, that the highways are within the jurisdiction of the provinces. Nevertheless, I would suggest that the urgency of national defence considerations alone warrant the setting up of a fact-finding commission to gather all the data as to cost of construction, economy of maintenance and military value of the various mountain routes proposed for the trans-Canada highway. Let those facts be made available to all the provinces concerned before the location of the highway is finally determined.
The Alaska highway extends north to Alaska, but has no southern outlet and so does not connect with Edmonton. The Alberta government does not seem to have the money or, for some reason, has never linked up this highway with the highways in the south. The discovery of oil has not been an unmixed blessing. Since Edmonton has become the oil capital of Canada-I am saying this for the benefit of my friends from Calgary-


Mr. Smith (Calgary West):: I can take a joke; I can go along with a gag.


George Prudham: -there has been a tremendous influx of people. At the present time it has been estimated there are at least a thousand people moving into the city of Edmonton every month. The population has increased from approximately 90,000 before the war to nearly 140,000 today. This tremendous influx is taxing the facilities of the city such as transportation, schools, office

space apd especially housing. I have been told of oil executives who conduct their business in Edmonton during the week and commute to Calgary to live with their families over the week ends.


Arthur Leroy Smith: That is a good idea, too.


George Prudham: Immediately following the war, the government spent a great deal of money providing emergency shelter for the returned veterans. Army barracks and anything else that would provide shelter were converted into temporary housing units. The wartime housing scheme has been extended to over 1,200 units. Much of the so-called temporary housing accommodation has become permanent because it has been occupied for four or five years now.
Before the war Edmonton was known for its wide open spaces. Today there is scarcely a lot that is undeveloped. The city has been forced to extend utilities to areas which were previously agricultural. The city has done a good job under difficult conditions. From two to three thousand houses have been built per year since the end of the war but this does not even keep up with the increase and certainly does not replace the temporary shelters. So far as housing is concerned, I would say Edmonton was at the explosive point.
I was pleased with the proposals made by the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Winters) last week. In the first place his proposals would reduce the down payment required which should make eventual home ownership possible for a large number of young people. There is also a proposal for federal government assistance to the provinces and municipalities in providing serviced land. If our province acts, and the city provides the necessary serviced land, it will remove one of the chief obstacles in our housing program.
Since the war, the city of Edmonton has made commitments by way of land subsidies and tax subsidies to the wartime housing amounting to over $2 million. The new scheme provides for government-sponsored housing schemes, whether for sale or rent, paying full municipal taxes. This remedies an injustice and removes a heavy financial burden which has been placed on many cities across Canada. The minister is to be highly commended for his very constructive proposals. I was pleased to hear his statement that the government does not propose to enter the construction field directly. The conditions I have described as pertaining to Edmonton could be duplicated to a greater or lesser degree in practically every city in Canada.

During the depression of the thirties, the house-building industry practically went out of existence. There were many technical advances during that time such as insulation, modern plumbing fixtures and improved heating equipment. Many new techniques were developed; but, because of depressed economic conditions, it made little difference so far as the general public was concerned. The introduction of the National Housing Act brought about a general improvement in many provinces. The reduction in the interest rate at that time was a big help. The difference between 4J per cent and 7 per cent, which was formerly the prevailing rate, on a $6,000 house means a saving of over $2,600 within a twenty-five year period.
Upon the outbreak of war the entire building industry was mobilized for war purposes. Barracks and emergency housing for war workers were built. These were produced at a speed which was thought impossible. There were, however, few private homes built until about 1944. The manufacturing and lumbering industries were still geared for war production and therefore many bottlenecks developed in the supply of building materials. Many of these scarcities have been with us until recently. It is only within the last few months that an adequate supply of building materials has been available. A high level of prosperity caused by the war and by wise government policy, contrary to the prophets of gloom, has been continued since the end of the war. It is without precedent and our economy still shows little sign of a recession. Our country is more prosperous than ever before in its history. More people are gainfully employed than at any time in our history. Our national income has more than doubled. The result is that the marriage rate is at an all-time high. Our housing industry has made a marvellous recovery since the war. We in Canada have produced more housing units, on a per capita basis, than has Great Britain or the United States. Nevertheless we have been barely keeping up with new family formations. There has been a vast improvement in the quality of housing during the last twenty years. The house of today is insulated, and is fully equipped with modern kitchen, bathroom and efficient heating equipment. In the short period of five years there has been a tremendous technical improvement both in materials and in contractors' equipment, and also in the planning of homes. The home of today is planned for use rather than for appearances. Costs are high, but I do not think anyone can successfully refute the statement that the general public today are better able to pay for housing than they ever before have been.
The Address-Mr. Prudham The minister's proposal should remove to a large extent the financial difficulties that have beset the house-building industry, and the emphasis is placed on home ownership.
I do not believe that the average person in this country wants subsidies. All that the young people want is a chance to help themselves. Shelter is one of the necessities of life. We cannot escape it. We pay for the landlord's house or we pay for our own. The monthly carrying charges for a home under the National Housing Act, including principal, interest and taxes, is in most cases less than the rent for similar accommodatioii. Every payment adds to the purchaser's estate and in a few years he has become a home owner with all the advantages of a more satisfactory family life, which is reflected in the community life. I believe the new legislation will provide a solution to most of the problems besetting the industry, recognizing of course the fact that public subsidies may be necessary for those who, because of age, infirmity or extreme misfortune, are unable to help themselves. I am confident that if we are to accomplish the maximum production of housing necessary to provide decent shelter for all of the Canadian people, it can only be accomplished through the co-operation of the industry in all its branches, with all the governments, municipal, provincial and federal, participating.
Having regard to the greatly improved material and labour supply, I am confident that the industry, with the co-operation of the various governments, will during the next building season produce houses on a scale that was heretofore impossible. I hope to have a chance to speak on this housing bill when it is introduced, and I shall not take up more time at the present moment.
Before closing, I should like to say just a word about national unity. I am happy to be a member in this twenty-first parliament of Canada. During this parliament Canada will assume the full status of nationhood. With the inclusion of Newfoundland our family is complete. We have been greatly enriched, both materially and culturally. The spirit of true Canadianism which is personified in our esteemed Prime Minister is evident everywhere in Canada. Under his leadership I am confident that we are going forward to true national unity such as we have never before known. It is a privilege indeed to be here and to participate in the conduct of the national affairs of this country.


Mr. Paul E. Gagnon (Chicoutimi):: 
The agreement with Argentina provided Great Britain with corn, meat and lard. Following negotiations initiated in December 1947, England obtained, in September 1948,
500,000	tons of coarse grains from Russia.
I have summed up Great Britain's standard way of doing business.
During the war, when we supplied the United Kingdom with the foodstuffs and other products mentioned above or when we made gifts amounting to billions of dollars to enable the British to purchase those products, they did import them from Canada. Now that they have to pay for them, they buy them elsewhere. Our country has to find new customers.
The pattern of our trade relations has been upset, bringing about as an immediate result the devaluation of our dollar. Canada's great and only source of real prosperity lies, as we all know, in the exportation of our excess production. Apart from paper and aluminum, goods such as canned meat, woollens, dairy and agricultural products, as well as certain building materials, are in great demand in South American countries.
What, I ask the government, is preventing us from trading with the Latin-American countries?
I am in favour of signing air agreements with the different nations of the world and with any scheme designed to assist in the building of houses for our workers, as outlined in the speech from the throne. Above all else, however, I want jobs for our working classes and bread on the family table. That is the primary condition on which depends the happiness of our citizens. At present, there are thousands of unemployed in our district. People are worried.
In view of the fantastically high cost of living, they have every reason to fear winter's hardships. Since the dominion government moved to inaugurate a scheme of unemployment insurance, it must look after the jobless. That is a government responsibility. My constituents know it and will insist that the authorities provide them with the financial help they need to maintain their usual standard of living. During the last decade, we lived through a dreadful period of unemployment; we do not want that to recur. In order to prevent a recurrence of this calamity, in order to guarantee the stability of our industries, it is imperative that the government should find markets for our aluminum and our newsprint immediately. Unemployment insurance is all good and fine, but it is hardly a cure. On the other hand, the various government departments are aware that post offices and customs houses are lacking in Chicoutimi.

They are aware, too, of the repairs to be made to some wharves as well as to airports.
I urge them to carry out these various public works in order to alleviate the present unemployment situation.
The people must not be led to believe that war is a national blessing, that it brings with it prosperity and abundance and that full employment is otherwise impossible. War is a calamity which must unfortunately be reckoned with at times, but whose occurrence should be viewed with the greatest misgivings.
Prosperity should prevail in peacetime, otherwise there is something wrong with our economic system.
If, in order to maintain our capitalist system, we are compelled every twenty-five years to witness periods of war bringing in their wake waves of temporary and artificial prosperity, then, indeed, the time has come to change our system or at least to amend it in its broader aspects.
When economic theories and doctrines are no longer able to fulfill the wishes and essential needs of the people, they must be laid aside. I am an exponent of private enterprise. I have faith in the initiative, the skill and the intelligence of our businessmen. I know that we owe part of the goods which we enjoy to the improvement of methods of production and distribution created and brought into general use by men of initiative, courage and willpower.
Nevertheless I fear that mechanism will bring unemployment, while reducing the income of the working classes.
Mr. Speaker, I have tried to acquaint the government with the present economic situation in my constituency. I hope that my remarks will command the attention deserved by the people of the kingdom of the Saguenay. (Text):


Mr. A. Earl Calherwood (Haldimand):: Mr. Speaker, in opening my remarks tonight I wish to say to you how greatly awed and overwhelmed most of us new members were when we came into this great chamber of the House of Commons. Because of that I would ask your indulgence for a few moments, and trust you will overlook any shortcomings that you may see in the remarks that I shall make. Naturally we are bewildered at the maze of rules and regulations that we have to apply in this house. I know that you will bear with us when I say to you that we hope soon to be able to distinguish between standing orders and orders in council, orders of the day and orders for returns. These things were almost impossible of understanding when we first came into the house but we are gradually beginning to
The Address-Mr. Catherwood see the light of day and in a few more weeks we hope to be able to take our places with you.
We are grateful too, Mr. Speaker, for the fact that so many of the older members have given us such a warm welcome on coming here. It has helped us a great deal to get our feet on the ground and we appreciate it very greatly indeed.
I should like to add my word of congratulations to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), who is not in his seat tonight. I congratulate him on the magnificent victory which he achieved in the June 27 election. It was a great personal triumph. In saying that, I should not like to go as far as the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) went in eulogizing his leader, but I do wish him the best of health so that he may continue to lead the great party which he heads in this parliament.
I should also like to say a word about the new members of our party who have come into this house. The four hon. members who have already addressed this house have brought credit to our party. We have heard the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. Higgins), the hon. member for St. John's West (Mr. Browne), and the two new members from Quebec, the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) and the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Balcer). These four gentlemen are members of the great legal profession. I, in common with many other people, have a great deal of respect for the legal profession. However, the constituency of Haldimand in the province of Ontario decided to send a new member from the agricultural community to represent them in this house. I am very happy as a farmer to represent that constituency.
I should like to say a word or two about the section of the country from which I come, the great garden spot of Canada. I make no apologies to the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Cruickshank) when I say this, because in the house the other day he commented on the wonderful peaches that we had in this house and said that they were on a par with those that come from British Columbia. Therefore I am happy to have the honour to represent that section in the province of Ontario.
In passing, I should like to make some reference to the constituency which I represent, Haldimand. It is mostly a rural constituency, but we have a number of towns in that county. We have the town of Dunnville, which has two large textile mills, and if the hon. member for Brant-Wentworth (Mr. Charlton) were not here tonight I would say that at Caledonia and Hagersville we have the two largest gypsum

The Address-Mr. Catherwood lime and alabastine plants in the Dominion of Canada. We are also very proud of the magnificent war effort of the constituency from which I come. During the war we had four airfields which graduated many thousands of our young men who served in the various ranks of the air force throughout the war on the different fronts of the world. Next year we celebrate our one-hundredth anniversary. May I extend an invitation to every member of the house to visit us at that time. We have already invited the governor general, and if any hon. members would care to come we would like to show them the hospitality we can extend from our constituency.
May I at this point make reference to Mr. Mark C. Senn, the gentleman who formerly represented the constituency of Haldimand. I wish hon. members to know that we in the constituency of Haldimand have a great deal of respect and esteem for Mr. Senn, who represented that riding for almost three decades. We have every reason to be proud of the representation he gave us in the House of Commons during those thirty years.
With the exception of the former Prime Minister, and I believe the hon. member for Danforth (Mr. Harris), who came to the house about the same time, I believe Mr. Senn was the senior member. I am pleased to have many inquiries concerning his health. These inquiries come from every part of the house, and they are deeply appreciated. I shall convey your good wishes to him, and I know they will make him very happy indeed. I am pleased to report that his health is slightly improved and that he continues to watch with keen interest the proceedings of the House of Commons.
This evening I intend to say a few words with respect to the question of markets, in which farming people throughout the country are keenly interested. I have received many communications from farmers across Canada concerning this vital subject. Therefore with Your Honour's permission I shall take a few moments of the time of the house to discuss the matter.
We have read in the press and heard over the air in the past few months a great deal of comment about future markets for our agricultural products. We hope to hear from the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) before this debate is concluded just what our primary producers may expect in the way of markets in 1950.
During the ten-year period from 1939, our agricultural production in Canada was greatly accelerated. This was directly due to world war conditions, and as such it is only reason-

able to expect some reduction in demand as European countries come back into production.
As the hon. member for Frontenac-Adding-ton (Mr. Aylesworth) so ably brought to the attention of the house on April 27 of this year, the future outlook for Canadian agricultural markets appears to have receded beyond what many consider to be in the best interests of this country, and this very basic Canadian industry. During the ten-year period from 1939, we negotiated with the United Kingdom over 140 agreements for the purchase of various agricultural products. Today there are only four in existence, namely, wheat, bacon, cheese, eggs; and, with the exception of wheat, these are for very considerably reduced amounts.
While these agreements were in force, the price was in many instances below the prevailing world price, if such could accurately be determined, and at any rate was certainly competitive with what the same products could be purchased for elsewhere. During those years, little objection was expressed to the policy of selling to the United Kingdom below what was considered a world price, because it was hoped that by so doing we would retain these markets for our Canadian farmers after the war was over and when competition would become more keen.
These contracts also served as the support for farm prices in this country. Today that prop is rapidly disappearing. No indication has been given as yet whether or not the three remaining- agreements, in addition to the wheat agreement, will be renewed after this year.
The Financial Post, in a dispatch by their own special correspondent who reported the Washington conference, stated in a story published on September 17 last:
It is considered unlikely that Britain will renew her 1949 contracts for Canadian eggs, bacon and cheese.
While this may not mean that the United Kingdom will discontinue buying any or all of these items from Canada, it very clearly indicates that we can expect substantially reduced United Kingdom markets in 1950. Should such a situation actually materialize, it would be very serious for our Canadian farmers.
Our bacon contract for 1949 was for 160 million pounds, representing a very considerable reduction from the contract year 1945-46, when we shipped in excess of a billion pounds to the United Kingdom market.
This bacon market which Canadian farmers hoped to retain after the war has been reduced from year to year, until today it is a matter of question how much of this

market Canada will retain. Some months ago, Britain's food minister stated that the United Kingdom intended to purchase all the bacon, eggs, et cetera, that countries such as Denmark, Poland and Hungary could sell to them. This announced change of policy was followed by agreements for bacon with a number of countries including Denmark, Poland and Hungary, over periods of four and five years, extending up to 1953.
Since these agreements have been negotiated, giving these European countries a good portion of the British bacon market, other factors have arisen which may result in reduced sales of Canadian bacon in the United Kingdom market.
Similar uncertainty exists in connection with our United Kingdom market for cheese, our present contracts for 50 million pounds representing an amount lower than our shipments to this market in any one of the last fifty years.
Today, United Kingdom markets, formerly supplied by Canada, are being filled elsewhere under agreements negotiated within the past year. Australia and New Zealand now supply cheese under a contract which extends to 1955. Denmark, Holland, Switzerland and France have also in the last year become substantial suppliers of this commodity in the British market. Our present market for eggs expires this coming January. Last year this contract was reduced by 38 per cent from the adjusted 1948 figure. Since that time, under the bilateral trade agreements which the United Kingdom negotiated with European and other countries, Poland, Denmark, Holland, Eire, and Australia have all become suppliers in this market under contracts, one of which, with Poland, extends until 1954.
Is it any wonder that our farmers are concerned about future United Kingdom markets for these and other agricultural products? This concern, which is very widely felt, arises not alone from what has happened to these contracts in the past few years, but largely from indications of what the future may hold.
Some months ago the United Kingdom announced its intention to cut purchases from the dollar area by one quarter. Has the Minister of Agriculture yet been able to ascertain whether or not this announced policy to reduce imports by one quarter will apply to the few remaining or existing food contracts?
Just recently, I noticed a press report to the effect that the United Kingdom officials had informed the continuing committee on Anglo-Canadian trade that the recent devaluation of sterling will have little immediate bearing on previous intentions to cut purchases in the dollar area by one-quarter.
The Address-Mr. Catherwood
Since the United Kingdom announced its intention to cut imports from the dollar area, a five-year trade pact with Czechoslovakia has been signed, amounting to $340 million, including foodstuffs and other goods that in the past came chiefly from Canada and the United States.
It is also reported that the United Kingdom is at present negotiating trade agreements with Yugoslavia, Hungary and Russia, all of which involves goods, chiefly primary products, formerly purchased from Canada.
These new trade agreements, along with bilateral deals now in existence with Poland, Denmark, Hungary, Russia and other countries, constitute a threat, and a very serious threat, to the future markets, particularly of the primary producers of this country.
During the past ten years our food contracts with Britain have, with the exception of wheat, been largely for periods of one year. Contracts with other countries such as Poland, Denmark, Holland, Czechoslovakia and other countries, have been for periods of up to five years. While there may have been some advantage in annual negotiation of these contracts, the fact remains that we now find ourselves with a very materially reduced number of contracts, all but one of which expire at the end of this crop year.
Today we enter into the question of new contracts, at a time when the United Kingdom has negotiated bilateral deals with several countries for the supply of primary products formerly purchased from Canada. In addition to this there is the question of price. Many of these countries which today have long-term bilateral agreements with the United Kingdom have devaluated their currency in close relationship to the devaluation of the British pound. As a result, our ability to sell in the United Kingdom markets will have to meet competition not only from the many bilateral deals now in existence, but as well from the question of price and any advantage which may accrue to these European countries as a result of devaluation.
I bring this matter to the attention of the house at this time in the hope that the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) will at the earliest opportunity make a statement to parliament and to the country as to the future outlook for agricultural markets.
I make this suggestion because I believe it to be in the interest of the farmers of this country who today face a crisis on the question of future markets, notwithstanding the fact that no cabinet minister has to date participated in this debate.
At the present time the situation is not as serious perhaps as the facts would indicate,
374	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Welbourn but this in no way lessens the potential dangers ahead. The production of agricultural products is not something that can be turned off and on again like an electric switch. Our farmers require to know well in advance what possible markets exist in order that they may plan their year's production. Up to the present we have been able to sell much of our surplus production in the United States of America and this has served to defer the crisis which otherwise would have arisen as a result of markets lost in the United Kingdom.
Today we can no longer ignore the fact that we have a similarity of production with the United States and indicated surpluses in that country no longer provide our farmers with any assurance of markets in that direction.
In the past our food contracts with the United Kingdom have been a prop for prices in Canada. The question now is: Will the existing contracts be renewed, and at what price? Is there any prospect or possibility of regaining for the farmers of this country markets in the United Kingdom for those goods which we supplied in such large quantities during the past ten years?
The speech from the throne indicates:
The government is seeking by all appropriate neans to co-operate in measures to restore economic equilibrium. The achievement of a pattern of world trade in which the trading nations can operate together within one single multilateral system continues to be the ultimate aim of my government.
I hope that the minister will take these facts into consideration, because these things are of vital concern to our farming people, and I hope also that the minister will be in position to advise this house and the people of Canada at the earliest possible date so that the farmers of Canada may know just what to expect in the future in regard to markets.


Mr. J. W. Welbourn (Jasper-Edson):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in this debate may I be allowed to congratulate the Deputy Speaker upon his elevation to that office, and furthermore I should like to compliment you upon the very able and dignified manner in which you are fulfilling your duties. I should like to join with other hon. members in complimenting the hon. member for Nicolet-Yamaska (Mr. Boisvert) upon the fluent and capable manner in which he moved the acceptance of the speech from the throne and also the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Laing) who so very ably seconded the motion. I must say that some of us, particularly those of us who are new, find our positions complicated further by the realization of the fact that we are following two such outstanding speakers as the two hon. gentlemen I have just mentioned.


At this point I should like to take it upon myself to reply to a statement made by the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Shaw).
I do this because I object to the inference that has been left with the house in connection with my colleague, the hon. member for Vegreville (Mr. Decore). I have known the hon. member for Vegreville for many years and I have no hesitation whatever in stating that there is no greater opponent of communism in this house than he.
Some hon. members have taken advantage of this debate to give the house some information regarding the constituencies that they represent, and I am going to follow that practice. The constituency of Jasper-Edson, which I have the honour to represent, is in my opinion the finest constituency in Canada. Situated as it is in the west central part of Alberta, it extends from just outside the outskirts of the city of Edmonton for a distance of 275 miles west to the boundary of British Columbia. Jasper-Edson is bounded on the south by the Saskatchewan river and it extends north to Chisholm Mills on the Athabasca river.
In the east and northeastern parts of the constituency we have some of the finest agricultural land in western Canada, admirably suited to mixed farming and the growing of grass, clover and alfalfa seed. I speak from personal knowledge of this area as my father homesteaded a few miles west of Edmonton in the year 1892, and in that particular area there has never to this date been a crop failure. Also in the constituency immediately west of Edmonton is located the Wood-bend oil fields with the now world famous Schoepp No. 1 well which has the greatest depth of oil-bearing strata ever found in an oil well. This is just seven miles from my old farm. Crude oil from this field is flowing by pipe line, truck and tank cars to the various refineries in western Canada.
In the central part of the riding there are vast areas of timber where millions of feet of lumber and many hundreds of thousands of ties are cut every year. In this area as well are deposits of coal that are apparently inexhaustible and on the coal branch the very finest grades of steam and domestic coal are produced. I read in a recent Ottawa paper that coal, advertised as American coal, is being sold here in Ottawa at $24 to $25 per ton and yet a few months ago one of the old established mines at Mountain Park closed down because of lack of orders for their products. I would urge the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) to give serious consideration to the problem of devising ways and means of placing western coal in the bins of the consumers in this part of the dominion.

There are several well developed summer resorts in Jasper-Edson. The Seba and Kapasiwin beaches on lake Wabamun and Alberta beach on lac Ste. Anne are all within easy driving range of Edmonton and are patronized very extensively by the residents of that city. In the two lakes I have just mentioned, as well as in other lakes in that area, commercial fishing is an industry that brings a very substantial revenue to the residents of the constituency. The whitefish that are taken from the waters of lake Wabamun are recognized as the finest in Canada.
We all know and appreciate the value of tourist traffic to the economy of this country. In fact it has developed into one of the greatest industries in Canada, and in Jasper national park we have an attraction for tourists that is second to none in the dominion.
The town of Jasper is situated in a valley surrounded by towering snow-covered mountains, with many lakes and streams, well stocked with trout. It forms a setting that many tourists return to year after year. Adequate accommodation is provided both at Jasper Park lodge, the modern hotels in the town of Jasper and many attractive bungalow cabins. The dominion government maintains a large and up-to-date fish hatchery in Jasper for the purpose of restocking the lakes and streams to provide sport for the tourists. The number of tourists visiting Jasper park has been increasing steadily each year, and nearly twice as many visited there in 1949 as in the previous year. The number of tourists will be very greatly increased if and when there is a suitable surfaced road leading to and Erom Jasper park. The residents of Jasper-Edson, particularly those of Jasper town, are vitally interested in the proposed trans-Canada highway. We of Jasper-Edson feel that the first trans-Canada highway should be constructed through Edmonton, Jasper and the Yellowhead pass, and although I realize that the choice of the route has been left to the provincial governments, I believe that, in view of the very large sum of money involved, the possible importance of this road from a military and defence standpoint, and the economy of construction and maintenance, an effort should be made to have the various provincial governments agree to the setting ap of a fact-finding board and that they, the provincial governments, will agree to the recommendations of such a board, and furthermore, that at least one member of that board should be a qualified military engineer.
I have tried to give you a brief description af the great constituency I represent. I am very happy and very proud that on the 27th of June the electors of Jasper-Edson did repudiate the theories and doctrines advan-
Meat Packing Industry ced by the Social Credit party and voted in favour of the policies of the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) and the great party he so ably leads.
Motion (Mr. Boisvert) agreed to, on division.
Kon. Alphonse Fournier (Minister of Public Works) moved:
That the address be engrossed and presented to His Excellency the Governor General by such members of this house as are of the honourable the privy council.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: the second reading of Bill No. 5, to declare the meat packing industry works for the general advantage of Canada.
He said: Mr. Speaker, a bill identical to this was introduced two sessions ago, in the last parliament, and was adopted. It had to do with the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company, which carries on operations in Manitoba and Saskatchewan; and for very obvious reasons the house saw fit to adopt that legislation.
The purpose of this bill is quite simple. As I said when introducing the legislation, the purpose is to bring the meat packing industry under the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act so that if a dispute should occur with respect to any matter of collective bargaining, the federal Department of Labour will have power to step in and try to conciliate the dispute. The department has done this in the past; it has been very successful in its endeavours, and deserves much credit for what it has achieved.
The meat packing industry is of importance to all Canadians; it is important to the workers in industry, to the producers who supply the livestock, and of course to all of us as consumers. I suppose most hon. members remember the last strike that took place in the industry, in 1947. On that occasion two groups suffered most: the workers, through loss of income, and the producers who also suffered a loss of income because they were unable to market their livestock. That dispute began with Swift Canadian Limited, and it continued for two weeks. Had the federal department had the power to intervene, I am quite sure this dispute could have been settled. As it was, it lingered on for two weeks and then spread throughout the industry. In no small measure, settlement was delayed by the refusal of Swift Canadian to arbitrate the dispute, in spite of their being requested to do so by the Canadian Federation of Agricul-

Meat Packing Industry ture and various provincial governments. While I have said the workers and producers suffered during that strike, according to the evidence submitted to the prices committee it would appear that the companies did not do so badly in the long run, for they made more money in the two months following the strike than they made in the previous eight months. The reason for that is fairly obvious; there was a glut of livestock on the market, and we had a population which to a certain extent was meat starved.
There are three major meat packing companies in Canada: Canada Packers, Burns and Swift Canadian. The policies of these three companies are directed from their head offices. I have no quarrel at all with that; but that being so, of course the union had to constitute itself in such a way that it could deal efficiently with the employers; so the bargaining powers of the union also are concentrated. Bargaining on a national basis was first accepted in 1944, when there was a dispute in the meat packing industry. At that time the federal Department of Labour stepped into the picture under the War Measures Act and appointed a conciliation commissioner, who assisted in no small measure in the settlement of the dispute. The same thing happened in 1945 and in 1946, when the federal department was able to bring about an amicable settlement. In 1947 jurisdiction over most labour matters was returned to the provinces, and we had a different situation. While the united packing-house workers were continuing to deal with the employers on a national scale, because of provincial jurisdiction there was no national authority to which they could apply for help in arriving at a settlement. The union, therefore, was compelled to go to eight different provinces with the inevitable result. - It would be almost as logical to expect the railway brotherhoods to go to the eight provinces to find some amicable settlement in one of their disputes. I am certain that this unworkable situation was in no small way a cause of the 1947 strike and of the undue delay in settlement.
If negotiations on a national scale fail to resolve differences, there is no provision for conciliation at the top level today. As I say, conciliation has to take place through the various provincial governments if any settlement is to be reached, The consequences are as obvious as they are serious. Today, in its agreement with two of the major companies, Canada Packers and Burns, the union has a clause containing a provision for the mediation of disputes before a strike vote is taken. Thus, we see the industry recognizes the need for national collective bargaining, and believes it to be the most effective

way of bargaining. Past experience has shown that peaceful settlements can be reached on a national scale, whereas on a provincial scale there has been conflict, with eventual strikes. No one, of course, wants to see that. The differences between the union and the companies in 1944-45 were much greater than those which exist today. If the federal Department of Labour could bring about a peaceful settlement of these differences, then I am convinced it could do so now if workable machinery could be made available for use in the event of a breakdown of negotiations. Agreements would then be reached quickly and efficiently. If that happens, then Canada will be spared the expense as well as the annoyance of a strike in this important industry. It is for that reason I am anxious to see this industry placed under the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act. I am certain the results would be of benefit and to the general advantage of Canada as a whole. (Translation):


Mr. Maurice Bourgei (Levis):: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the bill introduced by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Stewart), as stated in the explanatory note, is to make that part of the meat packing industry which carries on operations in two or more provinces subject to paragraph (g) of section 53 of the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act. This means that if this bill is approved by the house, the federal Department of Labour shall have complete jurisdiction in future collective bargainings concerning the employees of those industries as well as in labour disputes which may arise.
May I be allowed to point out at this time that the hon. member for Winnipeg North, who is the sponsor of this bill, wanted to show his appreciation-undoubtedly without realizing it-to the Liberal government, to the distinguished Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell) and his departmental officials for the efficient and unprejudiced manner in which they all discharged their responsibilities during and after the war.
We of the Liberal party accept with pleasure that compliment, but that is all we can accept under the circumstances.
The hon. member for Winnipeg North said a while ago that the bill in question is very simple. He was probably referring to the fact that it is short and plainly worded. It is however fraught with far-reaching consequences, especially in so far as provincial autonomy is concerned.
Since confederation, the provinces have always exercised their jurisdiction in the industries mentioned in Bill No. 5, although that jurisdiction is not specifically assigned
SEPTEMBER 29, 1949	[DOT]
Meat Packing Industry
to the provincial legislatures, under section 92 of the British North America Act. As for myself although I am not an expert in constitutional law, nor even a lawyer, I understand that, by tacit consent, the right has been granted the provinces to legislate on and to intervene in collective bargaining and labour disputes that might arise in the meat packing industry.
If the house were to pass this bill dealing with the industries I have referred to, we would, by that very fact, admit the principle that any industry or business operating in two or in several provinces, could, at the request of a member of this house and following its approval, come under the jurisdiction of the federal government.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Liberal party, having always upheld the rights and autonomy of the provinces, cannot accept the bill presented by the hon. member for Winnipeg North. As I said a few moments ago, that bill would encroach upon powers which the provinces have always exercised themselves, except in especially serious circumstances such as war, when the security of the state might be jeopardized. It is true that in certain quarters we of the Liberal party have been accused of having violated on various occasions that often-mentioned autonomy. For my part, Mr. Speaker, I still have to hear in this house or outside a single orator prove, with evidence in support of his allegations, that the Liberal party has taken away from any province a single power guaranteed to it under the constitution. Efforts were made, even during the last election, to bring the people to believe that provincial autonomy would be in danger if the Liberal party were returned to power. But, as was seen, the great majority of the people did not believe those false prophets and showed by a nearly unanimous vote, that they had full and complete confidence, on this point, in the honesty of our distinguished leader, the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) and of his candidates.
Besides, without giving any thought to the political advantage which he could have derived thereby, the Prime Minister said himself when, on September 16, he tabled the letter he had written to the provincial premiers:
Before the recent election I stated on several occasions that it was the view of the government that a method should be worked out to amend our constitution in Canada, and that any such method should include the fullest safeguards of provincial rights and jurisdiction, and of the use of the two official languages and of those other rights which are the sacred trust of our national partnership.
This goes to prove that the electors were right in trusting the man whom they have chosen as their leader.
Moreover, as regards the bill which is now before us, the provinces can, if they so desire, come to an understanding with the dominion Department of Labour, with a view to reaching an agreement whereby the officials of that department could assume the administration of the provincial legislation.
In practice, this means that the provinces may, whenever they wish, ask for the cooperation of federal civil servants. This agreement is made possible by virtue of section 62 of the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act:
Where legislation enacted by the legislature of a province and part I of the act are substantially uniform, the Minister of Labour may, on behalf of the government of Canada, with the approval of the governor in council, enter into an agreement with the government of the province to provide for the administration by officers and employees of Canada of the provincial legislation.
It is obvious, then, that the provinces, whenever they so require, may at any time, pursuant to an agreement, have the cooperation of the employees of the federal Department of Labour.
Under the circumstances, Mr. Speaker, for the reasons I have given and more especially in order to protect the rights of the provinces,
I am unable to agree to the bill introduced by the member for Winnipeg North and I shall accordingly vote against it.
(Text):


Mr. J. H. Dickey (Halifax):: The objections, Mr. Speaker, to the bill which has been proposed by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Stewart) are extremely simple and obvious, and they have an importance which has nothing to do with the question of the relationship between employers and employees in the meat packing industry in Canada or in any other industry. The bill proposed by the hon. member is to amend section 53 of the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act, an act to provide for the investigation, conciliation and settlement of industrial disputes, assented to on June 30, 1948, and which is chapter 54 of the Statutes of Canada, 1948.
When we read the section which it is proposed to amend, we see the real objection to the amendment proposed. Section 53 is the section which deals with the application of the act, and it reads as follows:
Part I of this act shall apply in respect of employees who are employed upon or in connection with the operation of any work, undertaking or business that is within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada including, but not so as to restrict the generality of the foregoing-
And then are set out certain subsections which delineate certain of the undertakings or businesses within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada to which the

Meat Packing Industry act applies. The purpose of the amendment is to add, by declaration of this parliament, a certain business or undertaking as a work for the general advantage of Canada or for the advantage of two or more provinces.
As this country is a federal state, there are certain limitations upon the legislative authority of this parliament, and they are those set out in our constitution, the British North America Act, which lays down a division of authority between this parliament and the legislatures of the various provinces. When we say that there is a limitation upon the power of this parliament, that does not mean that this parliament is not free to pass any sort of legislation which it may see fit to pass; but there is a limitation on the effectiveness of that legislation by reason of the fact that if this parliament sees fit to pass an act which infringes upon, or tries to take away any of the authority which, by the constitution, is given to the provinces, that act is ineffective in spite of the fact that it is passed by this parliament because it will be declared ultra vires when submitted to the courts. We are therefore free to pass an amendment of this kind if we see fit to do so; but by so doing we cannot make it effective. Therefore, in reviewing any legislation which comes before it, it is one of the responsibilities of this parliament to see that such legislation is within its competence. Otherwise, in passing it we are doing an empty act, something which will in the end be found to be completely ineffective.
In the field of relationships between employers and employees in this country, the parliament of Canada is competent to deal with matters for which no better description exists than that which is contained in the preamble of section 53, which I have already read, namely, matters within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada. If a matter is not within our legislative authority, Mr. Speaker, we cannot effectively pass any legislation dealing with it.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Will the hon. member permit a question?


John Horace Dickey: Certainly.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Is the hon. member arguing that the legislation passed by this house concerning the Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company Limited, and which is precisely similar, is also ultra vires?


John Horace Dickey: That is a question which, if there is any doubt about it, should be referred to the courts. I am not a court and I do not propose to make any decision in that regard.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister brought in that legislation.


Humphrey Mitchell: By consent of the province.


John Horace Dickey: If it was by consent, then the provinces withdrew. That is a different situation. I do not think there has been any suggestion that any consent had been given by the provinces to the amendment that has been proposed by my hon. friend.
But, Mr. Speaker, that is the situation in the field of labour relations. The preamble of this section is the operative part of it. Hon. members who were members of the industrial relations committee of the last parliament which considered the clauses of this bill will recall that when this particular section was before the committee it was in a slightly different form from that in which it now appears in the bill. The preamble was shorter, and the provision with respect to the limitation "within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada" appeared as one of the subsections of the suggested section.
The section as it then stood was thoroughly discussed in the committee and on the motion of the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) it was amended. The amendment was agreed to by the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell), and the section was redrafted in the form in which it now stands. As the result of the present form of the section, the operative words "within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada" affect the whole meaning of the following subsections of the section, and these subsections are merely in the act to indicate the various activities which are within the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada, either by direct legislative authority in the constitution or as a result of judicial decision in constitutional cases where the provisions of the constitution, the British North America Act, have been interpreted. The various matters are there set out. The proposal is to add to these matters the particular industry of meat packing.
The situation is this, Mr. Speaker. Whether or not this house sees fit to pass the proposed amendment, it will not in itself put the meat packing industry, or any other industry, within the legislative capacity of the parliament of Canada. I personally do not think it can reasonably be argued that the meat packing industry is an industry which should come under the legislative authority of the parliament of Canada as opposed to the provinces, any more than a half dozen other industries that one could name, for example, the creamery industry or the farming industry, or any industry that is carried on in the majority of the provinces of this country.
I submit that in passing this amendment we would be doing an act which would be

found in the result to be completely ineffective, and we would be found to have attempted to legislate in a field which is closed to us by the constitution. I think that is the most important aspect of this question.
The relationships between the central government and the provinces are matters which have to be dealt with with great care, and this parliament should not knowingly and intentionally infringe upon any of the legislative fields which have been assigned to the provinces, without the consent of the provinces affected. We have heard a great deal, not only in this session but during the last session, about provincial rights and consultation with the provinces. This is clearly a case where the passage of this amendment would be an infringement of provincial rights, the invasion by this parliament of a field which has always been clearly understood to be within provincial jurisdiction
The arguments which were made by the hon. member in introducing his bill may well be arguments which should be considered by a body which is representative of all the parties concerned and is dealing with the question of amendment of the constitution or of assigning to the central government, the federal parliament, certain powers, which under modern conditions it needs. But the fact is that the federal parliament has not now the authority to invade this field, and without the consent of those who have the field I submit that we have no right to invade it.
Perhaps the hon. member will have an opportunity to make his submissions to a body which will consider the arguments he has put forward, apart from their connotation in this instance. I submit, however, that this parliament has to consider its position as a legislative body with restricted powers and the responsibility, greater perhaps than it might have had even in the immediate past, of seeing that we do nothing which might be interpreted as an intentional and complete invasion of a field which has been dealt with by the provinces in the past. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I submit that we should vote against the bill to amend the act which has been proposed by the hon. member.
(Translation):


Mr. Philippe Valois (Argenieuil-Two Mountains):: Mr. Speaker, this is the first time I have the honour to make a speech in this house. I do so in order to carry out my mandate. I hope you will allow me to depart somewhat from parliamentary procedure. I wish to offer you, in my turn, my most respectful congratulations upon your appointment to the speakership of this house. I feel sure it has been a happy choice, one that
Meat Packing Industry does you honour and will ensure the house a worthy Speaker under whom parliament can work for the good of the nation.
Mr. Speaker, we are now considering a bill introduced by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Stewart) to amend section 53 of the act appearing in statute 1112 George VI, chapter 54, and entitled "The Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act". That title is so clear that it speaks for itself.
Section 53, which the bill would amend, contains the very provisions designed to determine the administration of the act.
The proposed amendment would broaden the scope of the act to include certain packing houses and related industries which would then come under the sole authority of the federal government in matters of industrial relations and disputes.
Mr. Speaker, if I may use a familiar phrase, everyone should stick to his trade. I do not propose to question, at this stage, the advisability of the bill under review. I know that the matter of the strike in the packing industry will be brought up. If, however, I were to venture upon this ground I would only be heading for disaster. In my humble opinion, at first glance, this legislation may appear restricted in its scope, but it could establish a precedent whose full implications I am at the moment unable to foresee.
The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that this section 53, which it is proposed to amend, is worth reading. It will be found to be an almost textual reproduction of the terms of the constitution, that is the British North America Act, 1867, especially paragraph (g) of section 53, which reads as follows:
(g) such works or undertakings as, although wholly within a province, are before or after their execution declared by the parliament of Canada to be for the general advantage of Canada or for the advantage of two or more of the provinces',
That should be compared with the following paragraph (c) of subsection 10 of section 92 of the B.N A. Act. But first, so that we may have a better understanding of the text, I quote the heading of subsection 10, as follows:
10. Local works and undertakings other than such as are of the following classes:
And paragraph (c):
(c) Such works as, although wholly situate within the province, are before or after their execution declared by the parliament of Canada to be for the general advantage of Canada or for the advantage of two or more of the provinces.
We must therefore conclude that the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act is couched in such terms, the very terms of the constitution, that it is intra vires in that it scrupulously respects the rights of the provinces in matters of this nature. I
380	HOUSE OF
Meat Packing Industry submit, humbly but with the utmost conviction, that the separation of legislative powers is one of the keystones of our constitution. To me it would be rash to invade this field unless every precaution which human wisdom can foresee had been taken.
I admit that paragraph (c) of subsection 10 of section 92 of the British North America Act which I have just quoted could, after summary consideration, provide an easy and expeditious solution. I feel, however, that the remedy suggested by the hon. member for Winnipeg North is worse than the evil he is trying to cure.
This is a rather strange fact, but I believe I can vouch for its absolute veracity: the provisions of paragraph (c) of subsection 10 of section 92 were never resorted to when our country was faced with the many problems which the conduct of the war brought to our attention with an impatience that would tolerate no delay. If the federal government invaded legislative fields belonging to the provinces, it did so when faced by the imminent danger of war by referring to section 91 of the constitution. I am prepared to admit, for the sake of discussion, that it may be that the federal authority is better prepared than are the provincial governments to deal, for instance, with certain labour disputes. However, it would be necessary to investigate the devices to be sought in an agreement with the provinces. But deliberately, in one fell swoop, might I say, to assume a legislative power hitherto exercised by the provinces would not only be high-handed but, to my mind, at a time when precisely there are disputes regarding the separation of legislative powers between the federal government and the various provincial governments, it would be provocative. Nay, it would be setting fire to the powder kegs.
Not for a moment, Mr. Speaker, do I wish to impugn the good faith of the member from Winnipeg North; not for a moment would I gainsay the commendability of his intentions. However, being a Liberal, I attach great importance to provincial autonomy and I therefore feel it to be my duty to warn the house against this bill whose surest and almost inevitable effect would be to create a dangerous precedent which, in time to come, would provide the federal government with a convenient means to gather unto itself legislative powers which the constitution has reserved exclusively to the provinces.
Mr. Speaker, I am wondering why, with the inadequate means at my disposal, I have made so bold as to take part in this debate.
I have found the means to do so in my conviction that the Liberal creed has as a basic tenet a claim to total autonomy for the


national government in its own field and, at the same time, a claim to complete autonomy for the provinces. That is why I wish to warn the house against adopting this amendment which would create a precedent through which, I believe, the autonomy of the provinces would be forever threatened. I feel sure that in wishing to improve a certain state of affairs, the member for Winnipeg North has not considered all the consequences of his amendment. I would therefore ask him not to give up the object which he has in view, but to choose some other method whereby, while achieving it, he will not be creating the precedent which would otherwise follow its approval by this house.
(Text):


Mr. Angus Maclnnis (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, it was not my intention to speak on this bill until I heard, the junior member for Halifax (Mr. Dickey) lay down the law on the question of the jurisdiction of this parliament. I do not know what effect that hon. member had on members of the house who -understand the law,' or perhaps I should say who are trained in the law; but certainly his argument that this parliament cannot, if it wishes, pass the bill now being debated cannot be accepted as valid.
Then, the point he made in conjunction with the Minister of Labour (Mr. Mitchell), that in the Hudson Bay mining case the province had given its consent, is surely not good law.


Humphrey Mitchell: I should have said "at the request of the province".


Angus MacInnis: Even "at the request of the province". It would be no more legal at the request of the province than if the province had not requested it. If it is a matter within the jurisdiction of a province, as I understand the British North America Act, the province cannot delegate its powers; otherwise a case could be taken into court at any time by any other government, because the government of Manitoba today may not be the government of Manitoba tomorrow. Consent of that kind by the province does not vary the provisions of the British North America Act.
The dominion government does do things not authorized under the British North America Act; but there are such things as assistance with old age pensions and payment of family allowances, matters concerning which no province nor any person within a province is going to raise an objection. When we had an issue such as unemployment insurance it was not only necessary to get the consent of the provinces; it was necessary to have an amendment to the British

North America Act to confer upon the dominion government the right to establish unemployment insurance.


Humphrey Mitchell: May I say this to my hon. friend-


Angus MacInnis: The minister knows, if anything, less about the law than I do; and he may demonstrate his ignorance to the house in the time available to him, because I am sure it is the intention to talk the measure out. So will the minister kindly not interfere with me at the present time.
The point I am making is that while this may not be good legislation, yet it is legislation which it is certainly within the competence of the House of Commons to pass. Section 92, subsection 10, was quoted by the hon. member who preceded me. I could understand what he was quoting, but I could not understand what the arguments were which he based on it. Section 92 of the British North America Act sets out the exclusive powers of provincial legislatures and subsection 10 reads:
Local works and undertakings other than such as are of the following classes:-
(c) Such works as, although wholly situate within the province, are before or after their execution declared by the parliament of Canada to be for the general advantage of Canada or for the advantage of two or more of the provinces.
It is competent for this parliament to pass legislation stating that any work is for the general advantage of Canada, and that is what the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Stewart) is asking this house to do. If this house does not wish to pass it, that is one thing; but it is sheer poppycock to say that this parliament has no right to pass it.


Mr. W. F. Carroll (Inverness-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I did not have the pleasure of hearing the remarks of the hon. member who introduced this bill, but I think I can agree that the reasons for its introduction are perfectly legitimate and proper, that is, if the hon. member wants the labour laws of this country to be uniform as far as they affect those great industries which employ large numbers of work people. If that is his object, and I think it is, then I am in hearty agreement with him. The time has come, as a matter of fact it has long passed, when something should be done, either by amending the British North America Act or through other legislation, to give the Department of Labour at Ottawa jurisdiction in connection with labour difficulties and other labour matters affecting the large industries in this country, especially those which operate in more than one province.
I remember when I was chairman of a committee of this house which sat some years
Meat Packing Industry ago. Another member of that committee was a gentleman who has since passed away. He was a gentleman for whom I had the highest regard and I think he had some regard for me after we became acquainted. For years the provincial governments of our provinces -I refer to both Liberal and Conservative governments-had taken the stand, when a labour union or a group of men went to them to ask for the passage of laws with regard to the hours of labour in a particular industry, that that was a matter for the dominion parliament. Then when they would come to the dominion parliament they would be told that hours of labour and that sort of thing were matters over which the provincial legislatures had jurisdiction. Both governments were right, but the unfortunate thing was that the labour people of this country were led around for years in connection with the eight-hour day.
The late Mr. Woodsworth brought these facts to the attention of our committee and one of the recommendations of that committee was that a case be presented to the Supreme Court of Canada. Anyone who knew anything about the law knew what the law was, but there was a need to define the jurisdiction of the dominion and the provinces in connection with hours of labour. Unfortunately the minister of labour of that time combined with that reference a reference concerning matters which were under consultation at the Geneva conference. There was never any doubt that jurisdiction rested with the provincial legislatures concerning local matters and with this parliament concerning dominion matters such as railroads and so on.
I do not know whether the hon. gentleman who spoke last is a lawyer, but I am in agreement with him. I submit that this parliament has the jurisdiction to pass the bill introduced by the hon. member for Winnipeg North. That power is given to this parliament by section 92, subsection 10, paragraph (c) of the British North America Act, which the hon. gentleman quoted. But even though this legislation is enacted I doubt if it would meet the intentions of the hon. member who has introduced it.
Section 92 outlines the exclusive powers of the legislatures of the provinces. The subsection quoted by the hon. gentleman gives this parliament the power to pass this legislation, but this parliament would have no right to hand over any civil rights. That cannot be done when it is purely a question of civil rights. There is another section in the British North America Act which I have often thought should be more widely used. I refer to section 94, which reads:

Meat Packing Industry
Notwithstanding anything in this act, the parliament of Canada may make provision for the uniformity of all or any of the laws relative to property and civil rights in Ontario, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick, and of the procedure of all or any of the courts in those three provinces, and from and after the passing of any act in that behalf the power of the parliament of Canada to make laws in relation to any matter comprised in any such act shall, notwithstanding anything in this act, be unrestricted; but any act of the parliament of Canada making provision for such uniformity shall not have effect in any province unless and until it is adopted and enacted as law by the legislature thereof.
After this act was passed there were four provinces; but the province of Quebec is not included under the act. In other words the province of Quebec was not given power even to adopt the laws on property and civil rights that might be passed and handed on by the parliament of Canada. There was very good reason for that. The civil law of the province of Quebec was not the same as the civil law of the other provinces, at least at that time.
When I was in this house previously, so many years ago that if I were to tell you how long you would think I was a decrepit old man, I had hopes of getting this parliament to pass legislation on civil rights as far as they concern labour, which would afford the provinces an opportunity of accepting and adopting those laws. In other words, I would have had parliament pass the law and let the provinces adopt it if they wished. It was always pointed out that after all this would not be such legislation as the creators of the British North America Act had in view, though I do not agree with that contention. Today, however, I believe it is still open to the parliament of Canada to pass a general labour law and let the provinces adopt that law if they wish to do so. Of course Quebec could not do that, because under the British North America Act it was not given power to adopt such legislation.
I am not opposing the principle of this bill, but I think the time must come when legislation will have to be passed to make the labour laws of this country uniform, not only with regard to the meat packing industry or any other special industry but with regard to all large industries that have their location in more than one province. That would be fair to labour and fairer still, I think, to industry if only they would look at it in the right way, though of course I do not know how they would look at legislation of this kind. But even if this parliament passed this bill tonight, I do not think we would achieve the purpose the hon. member has in mind. We have the jurisdictional power to pass such legislation. That is given in the very labour code which has been adopted by this house.
Paragraph (g) of section 53 cites verbatim the very words quoted by my hon. friend from the British North America Act. So I do not think there can be any doubt that parliament has the power, as far as legislative jurisdiction is concerned, to pass a bill of this kind tonight or any other time.
As I say, however, I do not believe the adoption of such legislation would meet the purpose-and it is a very good purpose-of the hon. gentleman who introduced the legislation. I do not think that would produce what he wants to produce. If the time comes when this government will undertake to consult the provinces in regard to matters over which the legislatures have jurisdiction in order to bring about some compromise, and if I am in this house, I shall be one hundred per cent behind the hon. member and others who may support such legislation. At the proper time I shall certainly be in favour of legislation that will bring all large industries doing business in more than one province under the jurisdiction of our labour code.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am sure we have all followed the argument of the hon. member with interest, and before he sits down I should like to ask one question. If as he contends the property and civil rights references in the British North America Act would prevent my colleague's amendment from becoming effective in the various provinces, why is it that the property and civil rights clauses do not prevent the labour code from applying to such an industry as our railways?


William F. Carroll: Because the British North America Act gives this parliament jurisdiction over the railways of this country.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The same section?


William F. Carroll: The same section.
Lines of steam or other ships, railways, canals, telegraphs, and other works and undertakings connecting the province with any other or others of the provinces, or extending beyond the limits of the province.


Angus MacInnis: If the hon. gentleman will permit another question, he has said that paragraphs (a) and (c) confer that right on this parliament-


Humphrey Mitchell: I rise to a point of order. The hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis), whose deep knowledge of the law equals my own, has already spoken this evening. This is not cross-examination; this is a debate.


Angus MacInnis: An hon. member can agree to answer questions.


Humphrey Mitchell: Wait until we are in committee. My hon. friend has been here long; enough to know the rules.


Angus MacInnis: I know the rules, but you do not. You should be sitting down.


Humphrey Mitchell: Well, wait a minute. I am
raising a point of order.


Angus MacInnis: What is the point of order?


Humphrey Mitchell: My hon. friend did not want me to ask a question. We are not in committee.


Angus MacInnis: What is your point of order?


Humphrey Mitchell: My point of order is that you are out of order.


William F. Carroll: I have no objection to answering what I could understand of the hon. gentleman's question. The difference is that the British North America Act did make provision concerning lines of steamships, telegraph companies, and so on, and in paragraph (c) gives this parliament power to make laws concerning other works.


Mr. Arthur Laing (Vancouver South):: desire to say a few words in connection with this bill because in my riding of Vancouver South there are a number of packing plants, lone of which are connected with what are commonly known as the big three. We have i number of small packing plants capable of producing perhaps twenty per cent of the neat consumed within the province of British Columbia. That being so I must say a word, because the amendment proposed would apply mly to those plants operating in more than me province. The plants in my riding oper-ite entirely within British Columbia, and I :an envisage a situation where industrial *elations and disputes may come under two ;eparate authorities and two sets of rules, vith at least two different kinds of trouble is a result.
I believe the inevitable tendency of this amendment would be to give the aura and panoply of a public utility to the meat packing ndustry.	In the province of British
Columbia we have recently had some experience with public utilities and we are going to have more in the future. My friends an the other side of the house may have a great deal of confidence in public utilities, aut I am not as sure that I have as much ;oday as I used to have. Public utilities can go before a commission-I know this is the attitude in the province of British Columbia -and say they have spent the money and *an prove it; therefore, they require higher [DOT]ates. I doubt very much if that attitude s in the public interest because they are, n sum and substance, providing a cost-plus ;ervice to the people who are in a wholly competitive business.
Meat Packing Industry
In this particular instance I can say that I doubt very much if the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Stewart) is endeavouring to make more money for the packing plants. Probably he is thinking of labour. I can foresee a situation arising in which this bill would prove to be against the interests of labour. 1 doubt if you can apply labour relations on a nation-wide basis. One can easily envision circumstances where a particular-


An hon. Member:: Railroads.


Arthur Laing: Yes, I know, railroads-where a particular packing plant in the province of British Columbia would be in a position to offer its men higher wages than a packing plant in another section of Canada. Owing to the inability of the plant where profits are not so high to meet this demand, that plant would hold out against the payment of higher wages and thus prevent the payment of higher wages in the plant prepared to grant them. I believe there is a good deal of advantage in leaving the packing plants on a basis of locality.
In the future, I believe we shall have to provide a new formula for public utilities because I doubt very much if the attitude of many public utilities today is in the public interest when they operate on a cost plus basis and say to the public, "We require more money because we can prove we have spent that money". This bill would probably harm those people it is intended to assist. I believe it would lead to a tremendous amount of confusion in a province where, in the plants which I have enumerated in my riding, they would still be subject to provincial regulations in industrial relations. The plants involved account for a considerable portion of our supply. We shall be wise indeed, particularly in respect to food, if we permit the widest possible play of economic and competitive forces. I doubt very much if this bill is designed to ensure that in the future.


Paul-Émile Côté: In participating in this debate, I cannot help recalling a somewhat similar bill, which was introduced in another legislature in this country in the early part of the year. It did not prove to be very popular. It gave rise to the objections of organized labour as well as a good many other groups across the province of Quebec, as a result of which the bill had to be withdrawn. There is a certain amount of similarity between these two bills.
The bill to which I have just referred had for its purpose the taking away from organized labour of important rights and privileges which they had fought persistently

Meat Packing Industry throughout the years to acquire. The purpose of the bill was to vest in the provincial government those rights and privileges which were the property of organized labour. In Bill No. 5, which we are discussing now, there is a definite attempt to take from the provinces certain rights and prerogatives which the provinces have enjoyed since we have had a written constitution in this country. I believe this is a very dangerous bill, because if it passes it will set a precedent for similar bills. These would be presented on behalf of industries in this country as important as the meat packing industry.
I share the fear voiced by certain speakers who preceded me that the whole matter would wind up in the courts. If this measure submitted by the member for Winnipeg North
were placed on our statute books I believe i would be declared ultra vires.
On motion of Mr. Cote (Verdun-La Salle the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Fournier (Hull):: Tomorrow we wil take up the resolution in the name of th< Minister of Transport, No. 12 on today's orde: paper; Bills Nos. 8 and 9, an act to amem the Exchequer [DOT] Court Act and an act t< amend the Department of Justice Act. Somi time during the day we will go into suppl; and take up the estimates, commencing wit] the estimates of the Department of Agri culture.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standin, order.
[Stage Direction]
September 30, 1949