1950-06-16

[Stage Direction]
Second report of standing committee on public accounts.-Mr. Picard.


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. 313, to amend the statute law.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the bill is to provide that corporate crown agencies may sue and toe sued in provincial courts of competent jurisdiction without a flat.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


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


Some hon. Members:: Now.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: the second reading of the bill.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Beaudoin in the chair.
On section 1-Agent of His Majesty.
Mr. Ross (Souris):: What about the bill, Mr. Chairman?


Mr. Smith (Calgary West):: I know that you do not know what is in section 1, Mr. Chairman, and neither do I. May we have the bill?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: While I appreciate the magnificent co-operation of members in rushing my legislation through in this way, I do not think it would be fair to those members who are particularly interested in the terms of the bill to proceed without having copies before them. I therefore suggest that the committee rise and report progress.
Section stands.
Progress reported.



JUDGES ACT


Stuart Sinclair Garson: that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to present a measure to amend the Judges Act, 1946, by making provision for the salary of one additional judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia: the salary of one additional county and district court judge for the province of Ontario; the salaries of district court judges of the province of Newfoundland, and for increased travelling allowances to judges of a superior or county court or district judges in admiralty of the exchequer court attending at any place other than that at which or in the immediate vicinity of which they are by law obliged to reside.
He said: His Excellency the Governor General, having been made acquainted with the subject matter of this resolution, recommends it to the consideration of the house.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: I should like to ask whether the Minister of National Health and Welfare is correctly reported in a Canadian Press dispatch from Vancouver which states that in an interview at the coast he said he was "against any national health insurance plan for Canada."


Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: As I subsequently
stated to the same newspaper, that report is not accurate.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Good.



ATOMIC ENERGY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):: Press dispatches last evening indicated that Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States are about to make a wide release of
3708	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry atomic energy information for civilian purposes. Can the Minister of Trade and Commerce tell us whether or not that report is correct?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: The classification board on atomic energy has been meeting recently.
I have not seen the results of those meetings, but I think the most that would be done at this time would be some broadening of the classification regulations.


Howard Charles Green: Nothing as extensive as indicated in the reports?


Clarence Decatur Howe: No.



NORTH ATLANTIC COUNCIL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gordon Graydon (Peel):: May I ask the
Prime Minister if the Canadian appointment has yet been made to the permanent committee of the North Atlantic council?


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: No permanent appointment has yet been made.



QUESTION AS TO FLOOR PRICE FOR 1950 CROP YEAR

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James Arthur Ross: Has a decision been reached yet as to whether a floor price will be established for flax for the 1950 crop year? It is now past the seeding season.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No decision will be made until the end of the present crop year.



SUBSIDIES ON MOVEMENT INTO CENTRAL PROVINCES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Arthur Leroy Smith: I Should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Will he make a statement with respect to subsidies on coal moving into the central provinces? Only ten minutes ago I heard that it is contemplated that very shortly the present subsidies may be dropped, and I believe a delegation is here from Alberta now interviewing the coal board. Could we know the facts?


Clarence Decatur Howe: The present subsidy policy for western coal was established in 1932, and


there has been no change since. The purpose of the subsidy is to equalize the cost of Alberta coal with that of United States coal, up to a maximum subvention of $2.50 per ton. It is not contemplated that the subsidy provision will be changed. The delegation from Alberta are concerned with the advice they have received from the railroads that the special rail rate on coal is likely to be varied.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I realize that; and what is the situation there?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I do not know.


Arthur Leroy Smith: On what date are the railways returning to the old rate?


Clarence Decatur Howe: I believe it is July 1. The matter of freight rates is one over which the government has no control.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Gordon Graydon: May I ask
the Minister of Fisheries when he expects to be able to report to the house on the Sydney conference?


Hon. R. W. Mayhew (Minister of Fisheries):: I do not know when the house will have an hour and a half to spare to listen to my report. However, I shall try to condense it a little more, and give it when the external affairs estimates are under consideration.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 310, to authorize the provision of moneys to meet certain capital expenditures made and capital indebtedness incurred toy the Canadian National Railways system during the calendar year 1950, and to authorize the guarantee by His Majesty of certain securities to be issued by the Canadian National Railway Company.
He said: This is the standard bill which is brought in every year-


Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, the bill has not been printed yet; I am not sure whether the minister is aware of that fact. We have not seen it, and I suggest that this motion should be deferred.


Douglas Charles Abbott: If my hon. friend had not been in such a hurry with his question of

privilege I was going to say that I understand the bill is on the way from the printing bureau; but I have no desire to ask the house to consider it until it has been distributed.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister had such a purposeful look on his face that I thought I should get my point in first.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house that the motion stand until later this day?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will not be available later this day. I think it will have to go over until the next sitting.


Mr. Speaker:: Next sitting of the house.
Motion stands.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Beaudoin in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Indian Affairs branch-
54.	Branch administration, $242,050.


Mr. Harkness:: In view of the fact that the new Indian Act has been introduced and we shall be discussing it shortly, I do not propose to make any general remarks at this point. However, I think it might expedite the consideration of these items having to do with Indian affairs if the minister would give us a review of what has been accomplished in the improvement of welfare conditions on the reserves during the last year, what is proposed for the coming year, what has been done to increase school accommodation, and what other improvements are being made.


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: If the hon. member will permit I should like to make a short statement with respect to education and welfare, and perhaps we can leave any other subjects until the Indian Act amendment bill is up for second reading, or answer specific questions on the relevant items in the estimates.
Shortly before the Easter recess I tabled an annual report under section 113 of the Indian Act which showed that, during the fiscal year 1949-50, 310 Indians had been enfranchised. During the same period around 6,000 Indian babies were born. This indicates that the number of Indians accepting enfranchisement is much lower than the natural increase in Indian population, and this must be borne in mind in welfare planning and education.
In such planning the recommendations of the joint parliamentary committee on the
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Indian Act are of great value to the department. As many members know, this committee sat in 1946, 1947, and 1948, during which time it held 129 meetings. In addition, the committee visited most Indian reserves, in eastern Canada. The bill which I had the honour to present on Wednesday, June 7, is in many details the result of the good work of that committee.
Two government activities that are of primary importance to the welfare of Indians are those relating to health and education. Health now comes under the Department of National Health and Welfare, and the substantial increase in the amount now voted for Indian health services compared to that voted ten years ago is an indication of the importance attached to the problem by the government and parliament.
So far as education is concerned, I am glad to report substantial improvement. During the past four years, roughly the post-war period, total enrolment in Indian schools has risen from 19,622 to 23,409. Attendance has improved from a percentage of 79-91 to 88-23. In addition to those attending Indian schools, 1,180 Indian children were registered in provincial schools in elementary grades, and 465 in secondary grades, an over-all total of 25,054 Indian pupils in educational classes. Those attending school in grades above grade 8 number 834. To bring educational facilities to as many children as possible, the government approved a school-building program extending over a period of five years. This year, 1950, will be the third year of this construction plan. The number of schools erected can be illustrated by the fact that the government employed 285 day school teachers in 1946, and is now employing 450. The provision of over 100 new schoolrooms is planned for this year. When it is realized that each new schoolroom has to be equipped, staffed, and maintained, it will be appreciated that the cost of operation must increase, and that this year's estimates have been kept down.
In spite of an increasing teacher shortage, the standard of the teaching staff has been improved. The number of non-qualified teachers has been reduced in two years to one-fifth of the staff instead of one-third, and this change is continuing. During the same period the percentage of teachers with first-class certificates has risen from 27 to 40. Day school attendance has improved steadily as a result of family allowances, the higher calibre of the teachers employed, improvement of classroom techniques and equipment, and the awakening interest of Indian parents. In accordance with recommendations of the joint parliamentary committee, the department has
3710	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration been directing its efforts to having more Indian children admitted to provincial schools.
It is the policy of the department to alleviate hardship of those unable to provide for themselves, and to encourage Indians to be self-sufficient through the provision of occupational assistance. Approximately 2,000 Indian houses were repaired, and approximately 1,300 new houses erected during 1949-50, the extent of assistance in each case depending on the ability of the Indian to share in construction. Provision is made in the estimates for similar work in 1950-51, the number of new houses and other works and structures totalling 894.
Assistance is provided for Indian fishermen and farmers by the acquisition of stock, equipment and seed; for the blind; for the rehabilitation of tubercular Indians and their dependents following discharge from hospital, and for the indigent.
During the past fiscal year, provision was made for the employment of nine social workers. This is something of a new venture. It is the function of these workers to conduct surveys on reserves with reference to social conditions, particularly in matters of delinquency, destitution and the care of the aged. They will encourage the formation of homemakers clubs, and will assist in the establishment of young people leaving schools. An important phase of their duties will be liaison with municipal and provincial welfare agencies and local offices of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind.
In keeping with government policy of careful attention to the developing needs of the Indian population, I am pleased to inform the house that, effective July 1 of this year, the special allowance payable to aged Indians seventy years of age and over will be increased from $8 to $25 per month.
The present $8 monthly cash payment is supplemental to regular relief, and is intended to enable the aged to purchase extras. The additional cash allowance will, of course, supersede present relief issues. The increased payment represents a new departure in that many aged Indians will be entrusted with the management of these funds, and be responsible for their own needs. This development is therefore a significant step toward granting the Indian a greater measure of responsibility for the direction of his own affairs. To judge the amount of this payment in true perspective it is necessary to bear in mind that aged Indians enjoy certain special privileges, amongst which I would list complete medical care and residence on tax-free land.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am very glad, as I am sure other hon. members are, to hear this statement. I am particularly pleased to hear that the old age allowance for Indians is to be increased to $25 per month. The fact that those aged Indians have not enjoyed the right to the old age pension in common with other aged Canadians, has in the past been an anomaly. It certainly is good news that the situation has been corrected. The increase in the number of Indian children attending school is also satisfactory. I am glad to hear that the building program is going along so well.
I should like to ask the minister how many children are attending each of the grades from seven to twelve inclusive. One of the great deficiencies of Indian education in the past has been the fact that few Indians have gone into the higher grades. The result has been few of them have received the training which would enable them to secure jobs in competition with white people. I trust that situation is gradually being overcome. It is bound to be a slow process, but I believe that with the improvement in educational facilities that has taken place, and the further improvements which I understand are in prospect, there should be an increase in the number of Indian children attending the higher grades. This would equip them to compete with the white population for employment, and thus enable them to improve their standard of living.
The minister said that 310 Indians were enfranchised. Will he tell us whether those Indians were enfranchised voluntarily? In other words, did they ask for enfranchisement or were they enfranchised against their will? Were they just thrown out of the reserve and told they were citizens and had to look after themselves? Perhaps there are some in each class; can the minister tell us how many were voluntarily enfranchised and how many were involuntarily enfranchised?


Walter Edward Harris: All 310 were voluntarily enfranchised. The figures concerning school attendance in the various grades are set out in the annual report of the Indian affairs branch for the year ending March 31, 1949. I could give some tentative figures with respect to the present time, but I have not the figures for grades 4, 5, 6, and 7, which I shall secure and give to my friend.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It is just the ones fror* seven to twelve.


Walter Edward Harris: I have only grade 8, which is 692. In the statement I made a moment ago I said those attending schools in grades above grade 8 number 834.
JUNE IB, 1950	3711


Douglas Scott Harkness: But you have no break-down to show how many are in each grade?


Walter Edward Harris: No. I will let my hon. friend have that.


Mr. Gibson:: Is this money to be provided in the supplementary estimates? I notice that the welfare branch is $600,000 higher this year.


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, partly in the supplementary estimates.


Mr. Bryce:: I am delighted to hear from the minister that the Indians are going to get this $25 a month of their old age pension. It is the best news I have heard for a long time with regard to Indians. I have not had an opportunity to study it. I did not know that it was coming. I do not know whether there will be a means test attached to it or not, but I hope for the best. I am sure that the rest of the members who were on the Indian affairs committee and sat for three years will be pleased to see the results of their labours. Every member of the committee did his utmost to bring to the attention of the government-and that included those on the government side as well-the hardships suffered by and the treatment accorded to the Indians in the past. I am going to reserve what I have to say until the Indian Act is being considered, in order that I shall not be covering the same subjects twice, but there are one or two questions I want to ask in passing; they pertain to the administration of the department.
Has the minister given any further consideration to the setting up of a claims commission? Every Indian who comes to your office or to mine digs back into the past and produces some agreement that he obtained from the King of France, or perhaps the King of England or Queen Victoria; and he tells you that it has never been fulfilled. It is necessary that we clear up the thinking of the Indian. If he still teaches his grandson that we owe him something, then we should straighten that matter up. The only way that can be done is by a claims commission which will look into these matters. I am not going to refer to any province other than Manitoba, although I have travelled over the reserves in nine different provinces. The Indians immediately lay on my desk the agreement they got in 1871, or something else, and claim that it has not been fulfilled. I do not know how the minister can fulfil it unless he sets up a claims commission. We have a new minister and perhaps he has not had the opportunity of looking into it. I hope that he will see whether it is possible or feasible to do that sort of thing, sb that we may let the Indians know where they really stand.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
I had some Indians here this week to see me; they produced some documents that were supposed to be written in 1792. We have to get this thing straightened up. When it is, I know that the Canadian government will get credit for the way in which they have handled the Indians instead of the criticism there has been for a great many years.
I wonder if the minister can tell me whether any more houses have been built at Norway House-that is, houses for the old people. Some were built when I represented that part of the country, and they were a success so far as I could see when I visited them. Has the administration carried out its intention to build more houses at Cross lake and in other places in the north? Will the minister indicate also what the situation is with regard to the Indians in Newfoundland, because evidently they are not on reserves there as they are in other parts of Canada. Has the department taken further steps to see to it that the Indian agent is living nearer the reserve than he has been living in the past? I drew the attention of the minister's predecessor to the fact that sometimes the Indian agent was living 200 miles from the reserve. Has that situation been corrected? I think my other questions can wait until later.


Walter Edward Harris: With respect to the claims commission, perhaps we could discuss that matter on the bill. At Norway House I understand that we have a provision for twenty houses. With respect to Newfoundland Indians, the situation is this, as I think my hon. friend knows. They are not on reserves, and except perhaps for one minor matter they have the same rights as the whites. No decision has been reached yet as to whether we should take them under the jurisdiction of this department or rather leave them to be administered, if necessary, by the provincial government.


William Scottie Bryce: You do not recognize them as treaty Indians?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


Mr. Higgins:: Is not some definite provision made now by the government for health care for the Indians?


Walter Edward Harris: In Newfoundland?


Gordon Francis Higgins: Yes.


Walter Edward Harris: Perhaps my hon. friend could ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare that question.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Will the minister ask him?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, I will.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Mr. Cruickshank:: I am pleased that a member from this side of the house might be privileged to ask a question.


An hon. Member:: Oh, go on and talk.


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. When the hon. member rises, he should say "Mr. Chairman" to indicate that he wants to speak, and not simply stand up.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I stand corrected, Mr. Chairman; and I ask, Mr. Chairman, that I may be permitted to ask a question of the minister. But first of all, Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the minister on the statement that has been made today. But above all, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect to the minister, I think a great deal of the credit should go to the hon. member for Essex West, the most efficient chairman of the committee, who toured every part of Canada. I think that he should be accorded that credit. I am not small-minded, as are some other people. The hon. member for Selkirk himself contributed a great deal on behalf of the Indians. The question I want to ask, Mr. Chairman, and which I request the right to rise and ask as a Liberal member on this side of the house, is this. Will the Indians be allowed any preference as to the stores from which they wish to buy? My experience has been, in my own riding at least-I can speak only for my own riding- that with respect to the meagre supplies they were getting they were told that they had to buy from a certain store. I want to know whether they will be allowed to buy in the cheapest store in the freest manner.


Mr. Fraser:: That sounds like patronage.


Walter Edward Harris: I am not familiar with the condition that the hon. member for Fraser Valley has mentioned. So far as the allowance to aged Indians is concerned, I am quite sure that when they receive money they will be free to purchase goods in the same way as anyone else may purchase them.


Mr. Fullon:: No.


George Alexander Cruickshank: No.


John Lambert Gibson: Certainly.


Edmund Davie Fulton: From my experience in my own constituency I can confirm what the hon. member for Fraser Valley has said.


Walter Edward Harris: I said I was not familiar with conditions there. What I stated was with respect to the future of these allowance payments.
May I complete the answer to the hon. member for Calgary East? The break-down by grades is as follows:	Grade 8, 692;
grade 9, 447; grade 10, 139; grade 11, 99; grade 12, 46; grade 13, 5. There are 98 in special advanced courses.


George Alexander Cruickshank: May I follow up the point I have made? I congratulate the minister, and particularly the hon. member for Essex West, on the new legislation that has been brought down.
So far as my riding is concerned, Indians have been compelled to buy from certain stores, irrespective of cost. When they came to the Indian agent for the meagre allowance they were given they were compelled to buy from certain stores within my riding. The hon. member for Kamloops has borne me out in that. That is most unfair. They should be allowed to buy anywhere they please, as you and I do. I know it does not concern you, Mr. Chairman, as much as it does me, because of your responsible position, but I like to buy from the cheapest store I can find. The Indians should be given that same privilege. They should not be dictated to or directed by me as a member of parliament or anyone else as to where they should go to buy their goods. They should be able to buy at the cheapest store.


John Lambert Gibson: I think I have cashed far more of these relief cheques than any other member who has ever been in the House of Commons. The Indian has always been given a slip which listed the quantities of goods that he would be supplied with. The price was not designated. The store was usually the one which was closest to the Indian village. Therefore we received the business from the Indians on their own volition.
I have always found the Indian agents very efficient. If they found that an Indian was being charged too much for a 49-pound sack of flour, the Indian agent himself was the first one to step in, in the interest of the government, and say to the Indian: "Probably it would be advisable for you to take that slip to a store that does not overcharge"-not the Indian, but the Indian department; because after all it was always the quantity of goods that was given to him, not a specific amount for the goods.
I am quite sure now that when the $25 a month cheque is issued the Indians will purchase their supplies wherever they see fit. Certainly that has applied to these family allowance cheques. They have been able to take them wherever they please.


George Alexander Cruickshank: That may be the experience in the hon. member's riding, but I am speaking of my riding. It has not been the practice in my riding. The Indians have to buy from a certain store. I do not care about Comox-Alberni, but I am right about the Fraser Valley. The Indians had to go to a certain store, whether he liked it or not, or whether it was cheaper or not. He had to buy at that certain store.


John Lambert Gibson: He received a quantity of goods. If it was a pound of tea, he received a pound of tea.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I do not wish to argue with the hon. member for Comox-Alberni, but a pound of tea may cost 73 cents in one store and 74 cents in another. The hon. member for Comox-Alberni has forgotten that. So far as I am concerned, I am speaking only of my own riding. I demand that the Indian be given the right to buy at the store he himself chooses, not one that some other individual chooses.


Mr. Blue:: Mr. Chairman, I was pleased when this government saw fit to set up the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, and even more pleased when they appointed the hon. member for Grey-Bruce as its minister. I wish to express not only my own congratulations but the good wishes of the electors of my constituency as well. .The hon. minister is my neighbour and colleague, and I know that all problems confronting this department will be dealt with seriously and fairly.
The constituency which I represent is largely rural, with many progressive towns and villages, and they are truly happy people. Our farmers are second to none in Canada, or for that matter in the world; they are breeders of choice livestock as well as producers of excellent agricultural products.
Our towns and villages keep abreast of the times in modern manufacturing, and are producing commercial goods which find ready markets throughout the world. Labour relations are of the standard where employees and employers settle their differences, if any, in an amicable way.
In the constituency of Bruce we have two Indian reserves. These Indians are progressive. A large number are expanding in modern farming; many are employed in the industrial factories of our towns, and of course many more are engaged in fishing and trapping. I am pleased that this department is taking steps to improve the position of the Indian in the welfare of the country. We must not forget these people blazed many of the early trails in this country. The same sun shines on them, the same rain rains on them, as on the rest of us. Why should not the same rights be given them? When the call came for them to don the uniform in defence of our country, they did so in no small numbers, and I shall be glad to support any move that would raise their status.
May I add that I was pleased with the announcement the minister made this morning. I am sure it will improve the living conditions and educational opportunities of Indians throughout the country.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
The constituency of Bruce extends for 140 miles as a peninsula with a coast line of over 200 miles. Lake Huron borders its shores on the west and the Georgian bay on the eastern side of the peninsula.
The Depuiy Chairman: Order. The hon. member knows that he must relate his remarks to the item under discussion, namely Indian affairs.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Chairman, he is an auctioneer, and he is trying to do a good selling job for his county.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The minister mentioned the fact that an aged Indian had full health service. Is that whether he has an income or not? I believe the health service now hinges on whether an Indian is able to pay part of it. That applies to dental service.


Mr. Marlin:: No.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Oh, yes. If the Indian is able to pay part of his dental services he is compelled to pay part of them.


Murdo William Martin: Perhaps we can deal with that when we come to my estimates.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: When does full coverage start for the Indian? Does it start at seventy, or-


Walter Edward Harris: There are a few Indians seventy and over whose circumstances are such that they can afford to pay for this, and it is commonly known because of the nature of their income and their property. But generally the statement that I made is correct, with perhaps few exceptions.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: This would start at seventy years of age?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Is the $25 payment to
be made monthly, or will it be split up?


Walter Edward Harris: Monthly.


Mr. Mclvor:: As Chief Sky of the Chippewa band I express the appreciation of that band for the consideration that Indian affairs are being given this year. But there is one thing that troubles us in the Chippewa band, namely, the white man with his beer parties. The white man is the curse that we have.


Mr. Noseworlhy:: What provision is being made in the schools, in grades 9 to 12, for vocational and commercial education? About two years ago I visited an Indian school in which the pupils were anxious to take commercial work. The teacher was willing to teach it, but the department was not willing to provide even a typewriter.
Are there any Indians taking grade 13 work; if so, how many?

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
Perhaps the minister would prefer to answer my next question when we are discussing the bill. Is any provision being made for restoring parts of Indian reserves taken from them by the white people by devious means through the years, and now settled by those people?


Walter Edward Harris: I have some figures respecting the numbers in grade 13, which I shall give the hon. member in a moment.
We are making provision for commercial classes wherever we think there will be sufficient demand for them. Indeed, we would hope that pupils in schools would take that kind of training.
Perhaps I might answer the third question when we are discussing the bill.


William Scottie Bryce: Will the minister elaborate on the pension the Indians are to get at age seventy? Do I understand the condition is that they will not get it before that time? There are bound to be conditions; I have never seen anything yet from a government that did not have attached to it certain conditions. What are they?


Walter Edward Harris: The same conditions generally attach to the $25 payment as now attach to the $8 payment, namely that a single Indian has a permissible income of $120 and will receive $300, making a total of $420. The married Indian will have a permissible income of $600 and will receive a pension of $300, so that the total income will be $900. In respect of a married couple, the permissible income is $300, and the maximum pension will be $600.


Mr. McLure:: If the minister has a report in respect of Lennox Island, I should like to ask a few questions. Has he that information?


Walter Edward Harris: Generally, yes.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: How many Indians are now taken care of at Lennox Island? Has the new school there been fully completed, and if so, at what cost? Has the superintendent's house been fully completed, and at what cost? It was to be completed over a year ago, but I do not think it was. Is the pension the Indians get under the patronage system, as was pointed out by the hon. member for Fraser Valley?


George Alexander Cruickshank: No.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: At Lennox Island all the money handed out was under a patronage system.


George Alexander Cruickshank: On a point of order. I have handed no money out; it was the Tories who did that.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I am not saying what the hon. member did. The system they have is a patronage system, in that when the Indian comes in to get his supplies he must have a permit, and the permit states where he is to go to make his purchases.


George Alexander Cruickshank: No.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: That same provision should not apply in connection with this pension.


Walter Edward Harris: There are 210 Indians on Lennox island. The school has been completed. I have not the grand total of the cost, but I shall give the information to the hon. member. The rest of his statement was, shall I say, an opinion about something rather than a question of fact.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I should like to ask a question, but before doing so may I correct an impression left by one of my junior colleagues over here-that the Indians buy where they like. That is absolute nonsense so far as the lower part of British Columbia is concerned, and I think also so far as the interior is concerned. They have never yet been represented by people who will fight for their interests.
My question is this-and let me say that I can take it and I can give it back-that in my riding we have a reservation of about
5.000	acres at Seabird island. I believe about
2.000	acres are being used by the Indians. [Inaudible interruption.] Well, I may have another Indian in my riding, but thank God I haven't got the same class of Irishman there.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The kind who talks one way and votes the other.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Yes, talks one way and votes both ways. I did that by mistake once, but he did it deliberately. And now if you will leave me alone I will get on with my question.
I am referring to a section of Kent municipality, consisting of about 5,000 acres, of which only two or three thousand are being utilized by the Indians. We would like to transfer about 2,000 acres to another branch of government so that it may be utilized for a penitentiary site. Is there any reason why this could not be done? Does it require the unanimous vote of the band, or can it be done by the department?


Walter Edward Harris: It can be done by a majority vote of the Indians of the band, followed by the approval of the department. If the hon. member will submit the case we will consider it, and perhaps, after negotiation with him, have it submitted to the Indians.


John Lambert Gibson: The increase to $25 a month for Indians over seventy years is a tremendous step forward. Has any consideration been given to increasing the value of relief slips, which were formerly about $8 a month, to Indians from sixty-five to seventy years? They are still aged and destitute Indians.


Walter Edward Harris: The relief slip is designed to provide a certain standard of food, clothing and the like for those in need. I believe no consideration need be given to an increase, because we think the standard is now adequate for that purpose. Other needs of Indians may be met in another way.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister indicate the means test provision respecting the $8 for those seventy years and over? I have in mind the figures he has just given, $120 a year for single Indians and $300 for a married couple for the $25 pension. What were the comparable figures for the $8 allowance?


Walter Edward Harris: Just the same.


Stanley Howard Knowles: How many Indians over seventy were able to qualify for the $8 allowance, and what relation does that number bear to the total number of Indians seventy years of age and over?


Walter Edward Harris: Something over 400 Indians are receiving the $8 at the moment.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: In the whole of Canada?


Stanley Howard Knowles: How many Indians are there seventy years of age and over?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It is not as good as it sounds.


Walter Edward Harris: We shall have to look that up.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The point I am making is that we have to think twice before we applaud this increase if there is the same means test that was applied before and will result in only some 400 getting the increase.


Walter Edward Harris: It is my error; it is 4,300.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is a little better, but we would still like to see that figure set against the total number of Indians seventy years of age and over.


Walter Edward Harris: I will give the hon. member that information.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: When the minister is getting those figures will he let me have them for the two Indian reserves in the Peterborough riding?


Walter Edward Harris: I will.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
3715
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Indian Affairs branch-
55. Indian agencies, $2,657,990.
Mr.   Baler@: First of all I should like to concur in the remarks of other speakers this morning that after the statement made by the minister it now appears that our Indians are at last going to get a new deal. There are two questions I should like to have the privilege of asking the minister now, because I intend to leave in about ten minutes for a meeting. First, is there an appropriation in these estimates to replace the boarding school that was destroyed by fire at Delmas in the Indian agency of Battle-ford? Second, what is required of an agricultural society to qualify for a grant? I notice that the grants to agricultural societies range from $50 to $500. What have they to do to qualify, and how are grants awarded?


Walter Edward Harris: There is no appropriation for the school referred to, because, among other reasons, we are building all the schools that we possibly can handle at the moment. As to the inquiry about grants to agricultural societies, the requirements are roughly that there shall be a prize list and space allotment to Indians, and that the fair shall be of general interest to Indians in the matter of handicrafts and garden products. The amount is based on what the fair authorities are prepared to spend on Indian exhibits. It is usually greater than the amount of the grant.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister has indicated that additional work on education is being done. Under the heading of Indian agencies can he tell us what actual work is being carried out or is contemplated that accounts for an increase of $71,000 in travelling expenses, from 8141,180 to $212,325?


Walter Edward Harris: Is the hon. member referring to item 55?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Indian affairs branch, Indian agencies.


Walter Edward Harris: With an increase of $15,000?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No; on page 105 it appears that travelling expenses are up by $71,000. What additional work are the agencies undertaking that makes that necessary?


Walter Edward Harris: One of the complaints that has been made in the past about Indian agents is that they tended to stay in their offices and not visit the Indians. There has been a decided increase in the activity of the agents in the past year or so on account of the increased' building program and
3716	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration various other matters. We hope the agents will get out and we are providing the means whereby they can.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Have you given encouragement to them to get out and do so?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian Affairs branch-
62. Fur conservation, $339,680.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I should like to ask the
minister a question or two about the item for fur conservation. I suppose it refers to conservation in areas that have been taken over from the different provinces. I should like to know what is the amount of revenue from fur conservation, and what is meant by "assistance to provinces". I should like to know what provinces are enjoying the assistance amounting to $165,000. Then there is another item of $40,500 for trap lines and fur blocks. I should like the minister to favour the committee with a short statement on fur conservation.


Walter Edward Harris: The item of
$40,500 is for the provision of trap lines and the like for the individual Indian who is going to benefit therefrom. The other items relate to the fur conservation programs which are conducted in co-operation with the provincial governments. In fact they are conducted by them, but with our assistance. We have not taken them over from any province. They perform the administration, and there is the closest co-operation with the federal government through this department contributing sums of money for these purposes. The provinces with which we have agreements are Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Ontario. The contribution referred to represents our share of the respective agreements. As to revenue from these schemes, if the hon. member means revenue to this department or to the government of Canada, there is none. Revenue is received from the sale of the pelts, and after deducting certain costs with respect to the provincial governments concerned the net goes to the individual trapper or association of trappers who are a part of the scheme.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Have you any idea how many skins were taken last year? The report was current that there were over a million and a half. If there were, there should be substantial revenue for somebody.


Walter Edward Harris: I have not available the figure as to the total number of skins. I can give the details to my hon. friend.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Since this is the last item
in the minister's department, may we have
[Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce) .1

some understanding as to when we shall receive answers to the questions left unanswered? My question does not relate to fur, but to old age pensions.


Walter Edward Harris: The hon. member will get the answers as soon as I can give them to him, but in any event before the supplementary estimates are called.


Stanley Howard Knowles: When the minister is getting the additional information with regard to old age pension allowances to Indians, will he also indicate how many of the 4,300 receive the full $8, and how many have that amount cut down by the application of the means test?


Walter Edward Harris: They are all
getting $8. That was the figure I gave my hon. friend.


John Lambert Gibson: When does this $25 start?


Walter Edward Harris: July 1.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
288. Departmental administration, $350,605.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I want to ask the minister a question about the elevators in this building. As he must know, they have been in operation for quite a long time, and I am wondering whether any reports have been made recently as to whether or not they should be replaced. Frequently we come to an elevator and find that it is not running. This morning I came upon two that were not running, and when I went to a third, the operator invited me to try to open and close that inner door which he pushes back and forth with his right hand. He also invited me to operate the lever which he controls with his left hand and which opens and closes the outer doors. He did not have me run the elevator; I have no licence to do that. Frankly the strength required to operate those doors made me realize that it would be a pretty tough job to have to do all day. Has there been any recent investigation into the question whether or not the elevators in this building should be replaced?


Hon. Alphonse Fournier (Minister of Public Works):: I must admit that there has been no investigation into the question of replacing the elevators. We all know they have been in operation a long time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And they get a great deal of use.


Alphonse Fournier: They have had a great deal of use, but we are told they are good for some years yet. The elevators are maintained and repaired by a company; in this case I believe it is the Otis Elevator Company, one of the largest in the country. They have

their men here all the time going over all the elevators. I could instruct my officials to have an investigation made to see whether we should go to the expense of replacing them at this time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Some time when the minister has a few minutes to spare I invite him to go on one of these elevators and try operating the doors I have mentioned. It does seem to me that in fairness to the operators something should be done to make it possible for them to carry out their duties with a little less physical effort than is presently required. I will make an appointment for the minister.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Since we are discussing matters having to do with this building I should like to mention a few points, though I had not intended to discuss them at all. Sitting in the public accounts committee and looking out over the library we can see trees about four feet high growing on the roof of that building. I believe there must be crevices containing dirt in which those trees have their roots. It would seem that the whole building needs to have the masonry pointed.
Some time ago the minister said he was going to get into his white overalls and fix all the clocks in the building. He may have done so, but they are all out of order again. Further, I believe the minister looks after the driveways outside the building. It is not fair to ask any truck driver to try to get to the back door of this building by the narrow driveway that leads to it. That situation should be remedied, because if the truck is of any size the driver has to run on the sidewalk for quite a distance, and then has a hard time turning.
I should like to know if the minister has anything to do with snow removal from these grounds.


Alphonse Fournier: No.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I want to ask the minister a question concerning a matter which has been brought up for some years by the hon. member for Macleod and myself. I understand we have a committee sitting now studying the national research council. I believe we have some great scientists in Canada, and certainly we have exported quite a few to our great neighbour to the south. A small province like British Columbia, a little country like Yugoslavia, can have proper acoustics in their parliaments, but we cannot. Each year we have asked Mr. Speaker to do something about it. Not long ago we sent the then Speaker, and his assistant, I believe, to Europe to study developments there. It cost this country a good deal of money to give those gentlemen a very pleasant trip, but 55946-2354
Supply-Public Works
nothing was accomplished by it. If British Columbia can have a loud speaker system; if the state of Washington can have it, and the state of California, why cannot something be done about it here? I think it is tommyrot for the government to say they cannot do anything about it. If that is so they should fire some of their officials and get some competent men such as we have in British Columbia, so that we may have proper acoustics in this chamber. It may be all right now for an hon. member who sits right in the centre of the chamber, but it is not all right for those who sit at the far end. Someone comes three thousand miles to sit in the gallery and listen to what is going on in parliament, but not a word can be heard with the exception of speeches by the leader of the opposition and the member for Fraser Valley. I am sorry to say they are the only two who can be heard.


John Lambert Gibson: And that gives a wrong
impression.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Quite so. But I am
serious about this. I believe it is utter nonsense to say we can do nothing about it. To my knowledge we have asked for more than ten years that something be done; the hon. member for Macleod has made the most effective speeches on this subject. If we can do it in the provinces, why can we not do it here, with all the money we have? We can build fool death traps like Confederation square, but we cannot afford a few thousand dollars to instal a proper amplification system in this chamber. In my opinion that is rot, and I should like to know why we are not doing anything about it.


An hon. Member:: Carried.


George Alexander Cruickshank: No, it is not carried. This business of calling "carried"-


Alphonse Fournier: Will the hon. member permit me to answer? Everything in this House of Commons comes under the jurisdiction of Mr. Speaker, and I am in the hands of the committee and Mr. Speaker as to what we should do in connection with any loud speaker system to be installed in the house. I am informed that about the most perfect system in the world is being installed in the new British house at Westminster, and before we do anything we would like to see how they get along over there. I do not think it is any secret that Mr. Speaker will be attending the opening of the new building in October, and in discussing the matter with him he expressed the thought that he would like to see how that system operates before we do anything here. It is true that for ten years some hon. members have been requesting the installation of such a system, but

Supply-Public Works
I have found opposition to the idea on the part of other hon. members. I think before we do instal a system we should have it as nearly perfect as possible, and consult as many people as possible. Last year we did consult with the firms interested in this type of work, but we still found opposition from some quarters to the system we proposed installing. I do not believe we are wasting time by delaying this matter in order to make sure that at least ninety per cent of the members of the house are in favour of the system adopted. In this particular case I think haste would mean waste. I believe I would rather have a report from Mr. Speaker after his trip overseas to see what he thinks of that system, because it will probably be one of the most up-to-date systems in the world.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Am I to understand that some electrical companies, such as the Canadian General Electric, have been asked if they could provide this service?


Alphonse Fournier: About ten companies have been asked, including Northern Electric and Westinghouse. I have not the full list, but there were many companies.


George Alexander Cruickshank: And they say they cannot provide it?


Alphonse Fournier: No, they did not say that. They all have special systems. If the hon. member were confronted with a report in which Westinghouse gave its ideas, and Northern Electric and these other firms gave their ideas, I believe he would be at a loss to know just what to do. There are not many experts in the house who could decide on this matter. Why not wait a little longer to see if we cannot find a better system.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Another ten years, I suppose! I shall be in the Senate by that time.


Howard Charles Green: I should like to have the minister explain the method that is used by his department in renting premises. The law of the country seems to be clear with regard to most transactions by departments of government, but I am afraid it is not quite as good as it should be as to the renting of premises. We find certain general provisions laid down for all departments, including the Department of Public Works, I assume, in the Public Works Act, section 36. This section reads as follows:
Whenever any works are to be executed under the direction of any department of the government, the minister having charge of such department shall invite tenders by public advertisement for the execution of such works, except in cases
(a)	of pressing emergency in which delay would be injurious to the public interest; or
[Mr. Fournier (Hull).)
(b)	in which from the nature of the work it can be more expeditiously and economically executed by the officers and servants of the department; or
(c)	where the estimated cost of the work is less than $5,000 and it appears to the minister, in view of the nature of the work, that it is not advisable to invite tenders.
Then there is this further provision in subsection 2 of the same section:
Whenever in case of any work tenders are required to be or are invited, the minister having charge of the department concerned shall submit all tenders received therefor to the governor in council-
That is, of course, to the cabinet.
-and the contract for the work shall be awarded under the direction of the governor in council.
I had something to say to the minister in the session last fall, and early in the present session, with regard to the government constructing buildings. I was referring to the Alvin building in Vancouver. I am not going into that matter any further today, but Mr. Chairman will recall there was a good deal of dispute about the way that work was handled. Today I want to go on to the question of the government renting buildings.
I find this provision in section 39 which reads:
Notwithstanding anything in this act, or in any other act contained, any public work not required for public purposes may be sold or leased, under the authority of the governor in council;-
The cabinet must approve the leasing by the government to someone else of one of these properties. The section continues:
. . . and the proceeds of such sale or lease shall be accounted for- as public moneys; Provided that such public works shall be so sold or leased by tender or at auction after public advertisement, unless it is otherwise authorized by the governor in council.


Alphonse Fournier: What are those last words?


Howard Charles Green: ". . . unless it is otherwise
authorized by the governor in council." In other words where the government has a building with which it is finished, and the decision is made to sell or lease that building, either tenders must be called or the building must be sold at auction after public advertisement.
We find this position in Vancouver. The Department of Public Works, acting for the government, has rented certain buildings as postal stations. Earlier in the session I received a return showing these different stations. There are about eight which could be called postal stations, and they are small stations scattered about the city, and separate of course from the main Vancouver post office. Five of those postal stations have been rented from firms which, it cannot be disputed, are firms owned or controlled by friends of the government, by active leading Liberals. In

some way these people are able to find out when there is to be a postal station rented. It is obvious that they have what might be described as the inside track. When there is to be renting to the government, it is comparatively easy to finance the construction of a building. The rentals are always ample. In these cases I believe it would be found that the rentals, to say the least, are not too small. In these deals there is not the proper protection for the public.
I cannot find anything in the statutes which provides that when the government is going to rent premises it shall call for tenders or go through some other procedure which would ensure that everyone had a fair chance. Perhaps more important, it would mean that the price of the rental to the government would be lower. There can be no question about what has happened in these cases. I have the street addresses here, and the amounts paid to the firms from which the buildings are leased. These men may have the land, or they go out and buy the land, and then put up a building. They secure a good lease from the government. That sort of thing should be stopped. It is not in accordance with the provisions I have read from the Public Works Act. It brings the whole business of the Canadian government into disrepute with the people who know of such deals, and it does not take long for news to get around the city that that sort of thing is going on. The real estate people all know it; the contractors soon get to know it, and the effect is bad. I am quite sure that the minister himself would admit that it is bad business from the point of view of the country. If under the present legislation he is unable to stop that sort of thing, he should ask for an amendment to the act. The Canadian people are entitled to some better method of doing business.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra is right with regard to section 36, as to asking for tenders for works not undertaken by my department, and the three exceptions he mentioned: an emergency or an urgent case; if the work can be done more properly by the officials of the crown, and particularly when the cost is under $5,000. In this last year and after all the questions that were put in this chamber, I have been looking into this act thoroughly to see if we have often derogated from that section. I can tell my hon. friend that there are very few cases that my officials could not justify under this section when they made the recommendation that I sign to council. I will not say that everything in that department is perfect, but I must rely to a great extent on the advice of my officials. If they make
Supply-Public Works
mistakes and I sign, then I have to give the explanation and I am responsible to parliament. I know that.
I do not know whether we could make a change in section 36. It is quite general. The principle is that, having prepared the plans and specifications, we call for tenders. I sign these calls for tenders every week, and all through the country. I think it is in the exceptional case-and I could give a few cases around here-that tenders were not called because my officials and my advisers told me that nobody would try to give a firm price on the work to be undertaken. As an example, I mention the east block. When we started off with the east block, we saw the old building but we did not know what was in the building.


Howard Charles Green: That is a repair job.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. But when we get through with it, it will be a new building. That is one of the jobs where we keep only the shell, I should say. No contractor would undertake a job like that on a firm price; and we did not call for tenders but came to an agreement on a fixed fee, a method which has the least objectionable features of any when getting other than a firm price. When it went over a certain amount the percentage was so small that I do not think anybody would criticize.
As to the second point, with regard to renting space, we do not rent space for ourselves except in a few cases-and I am speaking of the Department of Public Works -but every day there come into the office from all over the country requests from the other nineteen or twenty departments of government asking for space in this place and that. The first question we put to them is this: In what location do you need space? They will give us the kind of block in which they should have this post office, let us say. That is the first step that we take. When we have that information, our field men or resident architect in the town or district will send out people to make a survey of the properties. I have been thinking of the method of asking for tenders for renting space, but I cannot see how it would operate. When they say they need in that ward or in that part of Vancouver a postal station, even if we indicate the exact location of the post office or the postal station, there would be only one or two parties who could say: We will rent it to you at such a price. If I say: I want No. 50 Main street in my town for a postal station, I go to the owner of No. 50 Main street. I need not call for tenders, but I will try to negotiate with him to see at what price he will rent space.

Supply-Public Works
I cannot see the tender feature in renting space. What we do is this. We have here in Ottawa a branch of my department headed by Mr. Boucher, who has been in the service for years. He is the head of the leases branch of the department, and with his other officials has quite a wide experience. When we meet difficult cases and the cases cannot be settle ^ in the district, Mr. Boucher or one of his associates goes out to investigate. But we arrive at renting space by negotiation with the party. We have the current price and the unit price of space in that district and we base our offer on those prices. A mistake may be made in the price that we pay. It can happen every day. In transactions with regard to property or renting space, there is no definite figure that two people will agree on. In the first years I was in the department my experience was astounding. We would ask for tenders for a building which we estimated would cost $200,000. We would receive estimates that would go up to half a million dollars, and others which were $50,000 less. There is no absolute or definite figure.
The responsibility I have in this regarct is quite onerous. Nearly every day I have got to use my own judgment, to see whether, on all the information I receive from my officials, we are right or wrong. I cannot say definitely whether the cost will be $1.98 per square foot or $2.05; but I take all the material they bring before me and I say: What is this company paying? What are the provincial governments paying? We get an average as to the price. When I am requested to get space at such and such a number on such and such a street in such and such a city, if the hon. member could devise a system by which I should ask for tenders, I would not object to trying even to change the act; but I would not know how to make it operate. That is the advice my officials give me.
The other point the hon. gentleman raised was that we had acquired properties and then later on disposed of them. When they become surplus and we do not need to use them for years to come, we generally declare them surplus and they are handed over to the Crown Assets Disposal Corporation for disposal. Then we get rid of them and they are disposed of by this crown corporation. But still we hold on, in nearly every part of the country, to the properties that we own, because in the future we think we will need the sites or the buildings. When there are buildings on them we do rent them. But section 39 of the Public Works Act, which the hon. gentleman read, has this redeeming
TMr. Fournier (Hull).]
feature: "unless it is otherwise ordered by the governor in council." That is where I receive my power to rent.


Howard Charles Green: That is, to rent your own buildings.


Alphonse Fournier: To rent our old buildings. We have some of these properties in this city and in the country. We do receive requests from different people to rent. We do not ask tenders. We fix the rental price on the buildings we have to rent. During the war we were frozen, like everybody else, and we are still frozen, with people living in our buildings. When the controls disappear probably we shall follow the trend, make an assessment and value of these rentals and charge that price. The people renting these properties are not the roving kind. They stay put. We have far more difficulty in getting them out when we need the building than they have to pay the rent. I have an instance right here in Ottawa where I have been held up for four or five years because, on account of the shortage of housing in Ottawa we dare not tell these people to get out.
Even if we were to ask for tenders we would not ask these people to overbid the rentals for houses. Perhaps we would receive high rentals that would not be in line with the rentals the private owners had asked. With the controls I do not know whether I would be empowered to have people bidding on these properties.


Howard Charles Green: I was not complaining about government buildings which the minister no longer needs and is therefore renting. I merely cited section 39 to show that even in such cases there is provision made either for tender or rental by auction or sale by auction, and with public advertising. It was the tender, the auction and the advertising features of such transactions on which I wanted to place the emphasis. I am concerned with buildings the department rents from somebody else.
The minister said that a department such as the post office would come to him and say: "We want to rent No. 50 Main street."


Alphonse Fournier: It would not go out as definite as that.


Howard Charles Green: No, I should hope not. Surely the minister is given quite a large area within which he can find the building. He should not be restricted to one certain building or one certain block; he should be given an area. The bad feature of what is happening is that there is a leakage somewhere in the government service. It may be from the Post Office Department; it may be from the

minister's department. Somehow, the supporters of the government are finding out that there is a postal station required in a certain area and they have been able to get the lease.


Mr. Hosking:: No.


Howard Charles Green: It may happen in places other than in Vancouver too, but it did happen in Vancouver, and I have the proof here. I do not think the' minister is questioning that fact. That sort of thing has to be stopped. I am not in a position to know what the proper steps are to be taken to stop it. I believe the minister wants to stop it just as I do. I suggest to him that he look into the possibility, in the first place, of his department insisting it be given a large area in which to find a building and be given the power to call for tenders for such a building in that area. Let the public know what is going on.
In fact in cases of this kind the department would have been wiser to build its own buildings rather than let somebody chisel in by finding out that there was going to be a building and then picking up property and getting a loan from the bank to put up the building and ending up with a nice government lease without any competition. That is the thing to which we are objecting. I do hope that the minister will try to devise some way to stop that sort of business.


Alphonse Fournier: Starting with the last words the hon. member used, I am in complete agreement as to these leases. I would rather put up buildings for the government in every town where we go. Generally we put up better buildings than we can rent or lease from other people, and they meet the specifications of the departments that need them. I believe in that principle, and my officials have been instructed to that effect. But the hon. gentleman is going back to some years in which we could not get space or put up space. Unless there are some renewals that the hon. member has in mind I can tell him that right now in Vancouver they are insisting that we rent space from other people for the Post Office; and only yesterday I said: "I am going to put up a building there." Even in my sleep I dare not think of the site. Hon. members know what happens when a site is known. The information spreads out. There are very clever people in this world. When we get down to make a deal with businessmen we do not know who has been around the place. The property has changed hands-


Howard Charles Green: The minister has the power of expropriation.
Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: Yes, but before I expropriate I ask parliament for some estimate, although I could expropriate in advance with the authority of the governor in council. But if the hon. gentleman thinks we rent properties only from friends of the government, I say to him that I do not even know these people in Vancouver. I have rented on the advice of my officials. If he believes we rent properties only from our friends-


Howard Charles Green: You did in this instance.


Alphonse Fournier: -he is gravely mistaken. He should listen to what I hear from other members who blame me always for doing business with the opposition.


Mr. Casselman:: Don't look at me.


Alphonse Fournier: They just tell me that and they give me facts. They say ''You know this gentleman owns this property." I do not know his politics, but they give me information after the fact.


Howard Charles Green: Maybe the Liberals back here are not as smart as they are out in Vancouver.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know about that. I do not inquire into the race, religion, creed or politics of those who have the goods we need. In the future it will take more than pressure to try to get me into a deal to rent a building unless it is urgently needed and we have to have it. I do not believe in that policy. The excuse I had in the past -and it was a good one-was that I could not get space.


Howard Charles Green: That did not apply in this instance.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member is a friend of mine. I will ask him this question. He recalls that around 1945 and 1946 members were saying to me: "Please vacate the space you have in that building. Young veterans are coming back from the war looking for space to open their offices as professional men or as businessmen." The hon. member knows that is true. I am not inventing it. We did vacate the space, and then I fell into these things. Space was needed urgently for unemployment insurance, income tax, customs and every other department. I do not know whether we made mistakes; I do not think so, because if I had seen it in advance the hon. member can be sure that I would not let it go through. I am not going to preach here that we are perfect in everything that has been done.
As to the change in the department, I ask the hon. member to take his own district. We have a good staff here, perhaps not as

Supply-Public Works
many as we should have, but his province has grown by leaps and bounds, and the needs of the government departments in Vancouver are three or four times what they were before the war. That should be taken into account as indicating that we had to go quickly about it and find space in the building.
I am glad of the co-operation of the hon. gentleman. He knows that I listen to wise advice. I do not believe he is right when he speaks of my friends or the party's friends. Of course I could give him some instances in which his own friends are doing business with the department.


Howard Charles Green: None of my friends, I know.


Alphonse Fournier: You have friends and I have friends, and we are nearly all friends.
As to tenders, I have not seen contracts for buildings or wharves for quite a long time where they suggested that we should not ask tenders. That is the rule and it is the policy. Every submission that comes before me I read carefully, and we call for tenders. Those who know the system in public works could go every Wednesday of every week in the year to Mr. Harrell's office-he is the assistant deputy minister. With the secretary of the department, and a few other officials, they open those tenders. The tenders are opened publicly. The Canadian Construction Association of Canada have an office in Ottawa, and they always have a representative to assist in opening these tenders. They take down the tenders. A study is made of them, and a study is made in the department. Unless a guarantee has not been deposited, or unless they do not follow the specifications required, the lowest tenderer gets the contract. I never have attended myself, and I very seldom see contractors. They do come to deal with officials. During a session, of course, I would not have time to see them anyway.


Howard Charles Green: But the minister has not said whether he would do what I suggest, namely give consideration to having some provision written into the Public Works Act providing that where a government is renting property from someone else there shall be some type of protection against the sort of thing I have mentioned.


Alphonse Fournier: We will give consideration to it. But, if I may complete that story, let us say the Post Office Department wants an office in a certain area. What happens is that an official of my department and an official of the Post Office Department make a survey. We are pretty much guided by the advice we receive from the official in the Post Office Department-or perhaps an

official from the unemployment insurance branch, which has offices in every part of Canada-as to the location. There may be three or four places that would be suitable. But when it comes down to the renting of space, there is a difficulty. Let us suppose we do call for tenders, stating that we need 5,000 square feet of space for a post office in a certain area. We would have to look into the condition of the building offered, and see whether it could be put into suitable shape. We might have to take the responsibility of renovating it, and making certain expenditures. Does the hon. member think that would be a better procedure than one whereby, after these men have come to an understanding on the building, they proceed to negotiate? They do turn down offers. Many a time they are turned down, and we say it would not be reasonable. The man in the Post Office Department, or any other department, will try to get as good a deal as possible.


Howard Charles Green: To what extent does the minister use the method of having some recognized valuator, one who would be an authority in respect of values, obtain an option? Is that procedure used to any extent? There have been reports in connection with some of these matters-not these postal station sites, but in connection with, I believe it was, the site for a customs house. The suggestion did appear in the press that someone from the minister's department or from one of the other departments had obtained an option at a reasonable figure, and that then that option had been allowed to lapse, with the result that eventually someone else had come along -in that case too a friend of the government was involved-and the price had then become a great deal higher. Is there any attempt made to do business by getting options through independent valuators whose good faith could not be questioned? The minister's department will have to work out the best solution, because no private member of the house is in a position to do so. However there is this abuse, and I believe the minister himself wants to remove it, just as I do. I would urge upon him that he try to work out some method of stopping this racketeering.


Alphonse Fournier: I would not use a word like that, really; that is what harms my hon. friend's argument-when he uses words like that. I do not think humanity is that bad- even in Vancouver. There must be some good people there too. When I deal with them, or consult them, I find they are not bad. Generally, however, we work through our officials.


Howard Charles Green: If I might modify that I would say, "pettiness".


Alphonse Fournier: If I should right now explain what I think the situation is in Vancouver in respect to space, and the location of public buildings, not having the estimates before me, and the power of expropriation, I could see the price go up. I am thinking of that situation in Vancouver. I do not know that they are not clever enough there, and they imagine we want to put up more buildings. I am not authorized to say, but I have been studying that situation. I would not tell it to my hon. friend right now, because in Vancouver, which is one of the-


Howard Charles Green: The best in Canada.


Alphonse Fournier: Well, every time I
have been there I have thought so, until I have come to the central provinces. But in Vancouver, where the city is growing every day, departments need buildings.


Howard Charles Green: What about my question with
regard to obtaining options?


Alphonse Fournier: I am not trying to evade the hon. member's question. But does the hon. member think that my officials, who do this work year in and year out, and have experience in the renting of buildings and knowledge of values per unit and the kind of construction required, could not do that work? When difficulties arise I am told that they will get in touch with real estate firms in all parts of the country to act as advisers. They will consult them. Then they can go to the court house, the registrar or the city hall and get all the information they require. When they have that information they begin to negotiate.
We do ask the advice of outsiders. I could name a firm in Toronto, but I should not do so because it would be advertising that firm unduly. I have complete confidence in that firm, because in the last five or six years they have given me advice which I am sure saved the government a large amount of money. It has been good advice, sound advice. We have used outsiders for that kind of thing. But I would not want to say that I have not in my own department-


Howard Charles Green: But I asked whether the minister has used this optioning system.


Alphonse Fournier: No, I cannot recall that we have. If I sent out one of my men to get in touch with a real estate agent and ask him to try to get an option on a property-and I am not evading the point

if the option lapsed, how could I stop the leak? The minute we say something, then other people who know something about this business begin to think about what they will do. There may be leaks, but I do not think they are in my department.
Supply-Public Works


Mr. Adamson:: I think I know the firm in Toronto about which the minister has been speaking.


Alphonse Fournier: When we have in mind some property we call up this firm and we say, "Would you give us an idea about this property?" Hon. members would be surprised how they know the country, from Newfoundland to Victoria. They are friends of mine, but not political friends. I get their advice because I rely upon their judgment and their knowledge.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.


Mr. SI. Laurent:: I should like to move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again so that, with the Speaker in the chair, I may ask leave of the house to revert to motions in order to table certain documents relating to the disasters at Rimouski and Cabano.
Progress reported.



FIRE DAMAGE


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask leave of the house to revert to motions for the purpose of tabling the preliminary report we have received, and which has also been supplied to the government of Quebec, with respect to the damage caused by the disastrous fires at Rimouski and Cabano. May I take it I have leave of the house?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Beaudoin):: Has
the hon. member leave?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Hon. members will recall that a special commission was appointed, consisting of Brigadier A. Theriault and Mr. Edouard Laurent, to investigate the situation. They have prepared a report of their investigation, addressed to both governments, and I should like to table copies thereof. Following the production of the report I had discussions with the premier of Quebec. I should like to table a copy of a telegram I received from him late yesterday afternoon expressing the understanding reached with respect to relief to be extended in those two localities.
The report shows that at Rimouski the damage, exclusive of that incurred by Price Brothers and Company who operated a large mill at that place, amounted to $10,773,400, not including any damage to personal
3724	HOUSE OF
Rimouski and Cabano Fires property other than equipment of commercial firms used in the exploitation of their respective businesses. Against that there was fire insurance amounting to $2,120,400, leaving a loss of $8,653,000, of which the loss of individuals amounted to $3,715,000, partly covered by $1,250,000 of insurance, leaving a net for real property loss to individuals of $2,465,000.
The loss to institutions consisting of schools, hospitals, old people's home and the like amounted to $5,124,400 against which there was insurance of $775,400, leaving a net balance of $4,349,000. The loss incurred by utilities amounted to $204,000. In addition there was the value of a bridge completely destroyed, which is listed in the report as provincial property but which in fact was the property of the town of Rimouski. The commissioners were under the impression that the bridge had been taken over as part of a provincial highway, but such is not the case yet in the province of Quebec. Links between stretches of provincial highway which go through cities and towns are still the responsibility of the local authorities. Therefore the municipality and the utilities show a loss of $679,000.
These three net amounts total $7,493,000, practically seven and a half million dollars. In addition there was damage to federal property amounting to $260,000, according to the estimate, and to provincial property amounting to $930,000, according to the same estimate.
The situation in Cabano is that no special account was taken of the damage to the municipality, which was not very considerable. There was some damage to highways and sidewalks, but that was not brought into the calculation. There the damage suffered by individuals, excluding the Fraser Company Limited, amounted to $1,250,000, against which there was insurance amounting to $425,000, leaving a net of $825,000. The provincial government has appointed two local rehabilitation committees, both of them consisting of the commissioners who made the investigation, and in addition Mr. Paul Emile Gagnon in the case of Rimouski, and Mr. Emilien Morin, the mayor of Cabano, in the case of that town, to handle rehabilitation.
The telegram which I have filed covering the tentative understanding arrived at indicates that it is the intention of the provincial government to turn over to the Rimouski rehabilitation committee the sum of $2,500,000, and to turn over to the Cabano relief committee the sum of $300,000, to be applied to the rehabilitation of these localities. The tentative understanding is that the federal government will contribute equal amounts to (Mr. St. Laurent.]

both local committees. It is my understanding that the Minister of Finance will include an item in the supplementary estimates to provide the funds required.
In reading the telegram hon. members will see that there is a reservation made with respect to a marine technical school that had been erected in Rimouski at the joint expense of the provincial and federal governments for the training of seamen. They will see it is not to be taken into account in the allocation of the relief amounts provided by the sums I have mentioned, but that its reconstruction is to be the subject of further negotiations between the federal and provincial governments.


Mr. Jean Francois Poulioi (Temiscouata):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituents, who suffered such a calamity at Cabano, I wish to thank the Prime Minister, the members of the government and all my colleagues of the House of Commons for their generous sympathy in the terrible disaster. The Prime Minister took the trouble to go to Cabano. He saw the people there, and I am sure that he admired the dignity they displayed in their misfortune. We needed co-operation and action, and we have had both. I am most happy that there has been so much co-operation between the federal and provincial governments to help the people concerned in order that they may rebuild their houses before next fall.
I thank the gentlemen who were appointed by both governments to make a survey. I thank all those who have been generous enough to give a helping hand to so many people who suffered at Cabano and Rimouski. I thank the provincial government for having organized a trust fund, and the Star and La Presse for having given such wide publicity to it. I must not forget the hon. member for Papineau (Mr. Houde), his worship the mayor of Montreal, and the members of the municipal council of that city, who have made a generous donation and have organized a concert at the Forum in aid of those in such distress.
I could not possibly enumerate all those who have done something to show a real understanding of human suffering and a true spirit of fraternity. I thank the Prime Minister in the first place and all those who have shown themselves so generous and so truly Canadian in helping their fellow citizens who were the victims of such a calamity.
(Translation):


Mr. J. G. L. Langlois (Gaspe):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words about the statement just made by the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent).

On behalf of the member for Rimouski (Mr. Belzile) and the people of the city of Rimouski, I must say how glad we have been to learn that, through the co-operation of the federal and provincial governments, the people so sorely tried by the recent disaster will receive badly needed help and assistance.
I wish to thank the Prime Minister and the government for their promptness in the matter. This help will, I am sure, hasten the reconstruction of that city.
(Text):



FREIGHT RATES


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: Mr. Speaker, while we are still on motions may I have leave to table copy of a letter I have received from the premier of Alberta in reply to my letter of June 13 with respect to the recent freight rate increase authorized by the board of transport commissioners, and the answer I have sent today.

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



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

[Stage Direction]
288. Departmental administration, $350,605.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Can the minister say why there should be a difference of about $2.05 per ton in the cost of supplying coal to dredges at three points in the maritimes? That would be all Nova Scotia coal, would it not?


Alphonse Fournier: As was mentioned in the house some days ago, tenders are asked for the supply of coal at different places. I suppose the difference in the cost of transportation might have something to do with the difference in the price. In any case we have accepted the lowest price for each point where we require coal.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It would all go in by water from Sydney, would it not?


Alphonse Fournier: It might, but we ask
for public tenders. I do not say we are bound to accept the lowest tender, but that is the general practice.


Mr. Thatcher:: 
Alphonse Fournier: Did he give an
example?


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: No, he did not give a specific instance, but he is one of the principal officials of the treasury and I suppose must be considered reasonably responsible. I wonder if the minister could give some explanation of the difference between the statement he made this morning and the evidence of Mr. Bryce. If the lowest tender is not being accepted I think it is a dangerous practice which may cost the taxpayers of Canada a very large amount of money over the years. Therefore I should like the minister this afternoon, or as soon as possible, to state whether in the past year buildings have been constructed in connection with which the lowest tender was not accepted and, if that has been the case, to name those buildings.


Alphonse Fournier: I cannot recall an instance when we have not accepted the lowest tender if that tender covered the whole of the specifications attached to the plans. I cannot recall that we have refused the lowest tender which, having covered all the specifications, was accompanied by the ten per cent of the tender legally required. I cannot recall that we have not accepted the lowest tender when the company, having complied with all the other rules, had the required amount of equipment registered in Canada. If an hon. member would give me one case I would call for the file immediately to see whether we had not given the contract to the lowest tenderer when everything else was in order. If there is some exception I should like to know about it, because I would personally inquire into it.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I have no assurance beyond what Mr. Bryce said, and certainly he is a senior official.


Alphonse Fournier: Do you know why he said that? Perhaps we did rftjt give the contract to the lowest tenderer if his tender did not cover all the specifications.


Mr. Herridge:: I want to make a few remarks on the policy of the department,
3726	HOUSE OF
Supply-Public Works
and concerning the officials; I shall be quite brief. In the first place I want to congratulate the minister again on the work being done by his officials and their assistants in British Columbia. They have carried on under particularly difficult conditions during recent years. It is very hard to get materials and labour, together at a certain spot and at a certain time in order to construct a wharf, for instance, and I think they have done a fine job. Others in the district feel the same way. I suggest that from my personal observation there is a shortage of engineering staff in British Columbia. I notice that the engineers of the department are continuously on the go, and have very little time to stop anywhere. So I would like the minister to inquire into that point. I might add that the officials have excellent public relations with representative public bodies and with the public generally. I believe they have shown very good judgment in dealing with the situations that have arisen in connection with the work of the department in that province.
Before passing on to the main subject with which I want to deal let me say a word about dredging on the Arrow lakes. I want to express the appreciation of the people of the district for the excellent work done by the dredge on those lakes within the past year. There has been excellent cooperation between the captain of the dredge and the captain of those vessels operating on the lakes. While this year, as the minister will be able to judge from an examination of the report, the yardage does not appear to be as high as in former years, excellent work has been done in deepening the channel to make the navigation of the river easier for those who use it.
Mr. Chairman, I rose particularly to deal with the policy concerning riverbank erosion and river wall protection. Representing as I do, in common with the member for Kamloops, a constituency touching on the Columbia river, I am concerned about the possibility of flood damage at Trail which is imminent at the present time, and the damage from erosion that has occurred at certain spots throughout the year. This was brought forcibly to my attention, in the first place, through the 1948 flood when the city of Trail suffered heavy damage as a result of the overflowing of the Columbia river at various points. t An appeal was made to the minister by the city council. I have a copy of their petition presented here and it deals with the difficulties to be faced and what is required to remedy them. I discussed the matter with the minister, his deputy minister
[Mr. Herridge.l

and some of his engineers. I quite agree with the reply the minister made to that request. As I understand it, there is a constitutional angle to the question. The waters, so far as navigation is concerned, are the property of the federal government; so far as power production is concerned, they are the property of the province. It is the kinetic energy in the water that produces the power; it is the kinetic energy that erodes the banks of the river. Therefore it was the property of the province destroying the property of the province. The minister suggested the city should apply to the province, and the province should make application to the federal authorities for some assistance to build a river wall. I support that proposal. I think that is quite sound. We cannot have every village, city and municipality dealing with the dominion government. The proper chain of responsibility is from the municipality to the province, from the province to the federal government.
Unfortunately, the provincial government took no action in this matter. A resolution was brought before the provincial legislature, but it was withdrawn on the promise of the minister to deal with the situation. He said he would bring it unofficially to the attention of the federal minister. No purpose is served by bringing a matter unofficially to the attention of a representative of another government, so nothing has happened.
Erosion has been a problem on the Columbia river ever since British Columbia entered confederation. Upon examining the correspondence and documents of that time, I find that it first arose in 1890, and later in 1892 when a petition was presented to the federal government to have something done to prevent the erosion of the river bank near Revelstoke. Then the provincial legislature of British Columbia passed a resolution in 1894 urging the federal government to assist the province with the problem of the erosion of the Columbia river bank. In 1900 some $33,000 was spent as a result of this resolution and the federal government bore half of the cost.
It has been a problem throughout the years, although the dangerous possibilities were not brought to the attention of the people in recent years until the flood of 1948. In going through the correspondence it appears to me that the federal government has made certain grants to the provincial government for Columbia riverbank protection. I understand that today the federal government takes the stand it will do riverbank protection work in order to protect its own structures or in order to repair some

damage occasioned by a structure of the dominion government or some work of the dominion government or for navigation. I think I am correct in that. If the city of Trail, which is a vital city so far as Canada is concerned, is to be adequately protected it will require at least $1 million to extend the city river wall to the city limits. That is necessary work if Trail is to be properly protected.
In addition to that there are other minor works that should be undertaken along the river. I believe some extensive riverbank protection work is required at Revelstoke, but I believe the member for Kamloops will deal with that later. It is about time, Mr. Chairman, that we had a policy with respect to riverbank protection and erosion. It seems to me there is no defined policy, and the government continues to dawdle over the whole question. There is no policy or no plan laid down to meet this urgent situation facing the cities and communities lying along the banks of our great rivers. There is a job to be done in the protection of those communities. At the same time there will be men who will be unemployed next winter, and who will require employment. I am not going to take the time of the house, Mr. Chairman, to go into the full details. I could say much more.


An hon. Member:: Hear, hear.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Someone says, "hear, hear". I believe it is unbecoming for a member of the Progressive Conservative party to say "hear, hear".


Edmund Davie Fulton: It was a member of your own party.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: If it was a member of my own party it could only have been the member for Moose Jaw who thinks the biggest national problem we have is to remedy the sewage system of Moose Jaw.
I should like the minister, when he replies to requests, to make reply concerning the suggestions I have made. I think it is an urgent matter. He has been very co-operative, but I get the impression the provincial minister of public works and the federal Minister of Public Works react to this problem like the ancient maiden lady receiving a proposal from a young man; they are quite correct but neither of them shows much enthusiasm over the matter. I do urge again that the federal government is the one to take first action to seek co-operation with the provincial government in developing a policy covering riverbank protection and the protection of the communities lying along our rivers. Then both governments could plan to do a job that requires to be done at
Supply-Public Works
once in many places in Canada. At the same time the plan would provide employment for men who will be unemployed next winter, even under the best of conditions. Owing to a cessation of the work in the woods, many men capable of doing heavy work are unemployed. I think it would be a far better plan to do these necessary jobs, even if we spend a certain extra amount of money to provide very useful employment. I consider it a pressing problem, Mr. Chairman, and an opportunity for this government and the minister to implement some of the green book proposals of 194&.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say first that, because of our thirty or more elevators in Fort William, because of our four paper mills, because of our manufacturing, we turn in a large amount of taxes to the dominion government. I would also say that we receive consideration from the minister in the matter of public works, and the things that we need. We shall be back again to see that department soon because of our need. I am asking now, not for a need for Fort William but for all of Canada, and one that is long overdue. It is a need of this House of Commons, and that is for an up-to-date gymnasium. We have athletes from all over Canada in this house; men who played the roaring game of rugger, soccer, basketball, tennis and so on. These men have made the grade in public life, and been elected to the House of Commons. They come down here, and they sit, rest and grow fat, because we have not a gymnasium. Anyone knows, and the doctor over there will tell you, that carrying fat as a dead weight is a burden upon the heart. I will ask the minister and his staff, when they are beautifying Ottawa, not to forget the beautifying of the human bodies of the men and women of the House of Commons.


Mr. Sinnoit:: With regard to the question raised by the hon. member for Moose Jaw, as to the way contracts are handled, I must say at this time that I think possibly all members of the committee are fortunate to have the fine co-operation of the Minister of Public Works. But I have been reminded by several competent men that contracts are drifting into the hands of too few men because of the fact that they have to put up a 10 per cent deposit on the amount of construction. Is it possible that a bond put up by these men would be just as acceptable to the government as a 10 per cent cheque? In most cases a small contractor having to put up a 10 per cent cheque finds that it ties up a great deal of his money. If a bond company is willing to back him up, and if they will deliver to the government the 10 per

Supply-Public Works
cent on request, I think it would help many of these smaller men who tender on these jobs.
I should like to remind the hon. member for Kootenay West that the Columbia river is not the only one that is eroding in Canada. The Red river is causing considerable damage to market gardeners. As to many of the market gardens along that river, as much as 50 to 100 feet of land have drifted into the river during the last 15 to 20 years. The Winnipeg river is causing considerable damage at the present time. [DOT] I believe it is higher now than it has been at any time since 1916, and it extends possibly one and a half feet over the road which runs from Lac du Bonnet to Pine Falls, which is the main road. I have been asked by several of these people along the Red river, as well as by people along the Winnipeg river, if something can be done to curb this erosion which is taking place year after year. I will ask the minister and his department to see whether they can work out something definite to help those people.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I just want to support what the hon. member for Kootenay West has said with regard to erosion. I always let him take the lead in this matter because more of the Columbia river lies in his constituency than in mine, although in mine lies the most valuable and attractive part of the river. As a matter of fact, I had a telegram just today from Revelstoke on this very problem of erosion. I did not like to bother the minister personally because he is here with his estimates, but his departmental officials are looking into it.
I should like to support to the full what the hon. member for Kootenay West has said to the effect that there is no clear-cut policy. The localities, the municipalities and the individual areas affected do not know whether to look to their federal member or to the provincial member; and between the three divided authorities, we do not seem to get very far. In justice I should pause here to echo what the hon. member preceding me has said. I think that the federal government has gone quite far in discharging the responsibilities which are unquestionably its own. There is no complaint on that score. When it can be clearly shown that it is a federal responsibility, they have come in and have done considerable bank protection work at Revelstoke, which has been of great value in that area. But then again that was where it was the result of previous federal construction or was an interference with navigation. But in the great majority of cases where

there is no clear-cut division of responsibility, where it cannot be clearly shown that it is the result of some federal construction or threat to navigation but is on a navigable stream, no one quite knows to whom to look.
It is something which is obviously beyond the resources of the municipality to handle. The provincial authorities say that it is a navigable stream and that the federal government should co-operate, and the federal government take the position that it is not an interference with navigation and therefore it is not their responsibility. I feel that if, as a result of discussions, we could have a clear-cut policy on this whole question of erosion, which is of importance not only on the Columbia but on the Thompson and the north Thompson in the rest of my riding and further down the Fraser as well, then those areas affected might expect to have some progress. I believe that the proper basis would be a joint contribution by the municipalities, the province and the federal authorities to deal with this question of bank erosion.
In conclusion, I just want to impress upon the minister the fact that it is a matter of some urgency because every year acres of valuable land are falling prey to the encroachment of this constant erosion by the rivers in the flood seasons of the year.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I have just one brief
question to ask the minister. In the past year we had quite heavy unemployment in the winter months, and I suppose we shall have it again next winter. The Prime Minister and others have suggested that it is seasonal unemployment. I wonder if it would be feasible for the Department of Public Works to do more of their building in the winter months when the construction industry is slack. I know that, in my own city, hospitals have been built in that way. Once they got the outer shell up, the men worked inside. It seems to me that might be a tangible step which this department might take to alleviate seasonal unemployment in the winter. I should like to know whether the minister thinks it is feasible or not.


Alphonse Fournier: With regard to that
last question, the Public Works Act does not contemplate that we put up engineering or architectural works in order to relieve unemployment. You must admit that if you read the act. That is not the object of the Public Works Act. It is to put up these works to meet the needs of the different services in the country. We do our utmost to proceed the year round with buildings. In British Columbia we have work going on the year round. But you cannot do that in other provinces of the country. I do not think that I could give any other answer than that,

unless more authority were given to me, to try to relieve unemployment, and it were made one of the duties of my department that, regardless of the cost, I could undertake work just to relieve unemployment.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Of course, if you do not do
something like that in the winter, you are paying out unemployment insurance anyway. It does seem to me that even if it cost a little bit more to build in the winter, with regard to inside work at least it would be a way of alleviating seasonal unemployment in many parts of Canada.


Mr. Drew:: I wish to deal with the broad
question of how the Department of Public Works fits into the over-all picture of construction of government buildings and the way in which it would seem to me that this subject might well be examined before we are called upon once again to consider estimates. As to this year, I recognize that we are necessarily committed to the pattern of estimates that we have before us and to the general procedure that has been followed. This, however, seems to be the appropriate point at which to make certain observations which I should think might well be given careful consideration by the members of this committee in examining what is happening in connection with the construction of public buildings.
When the hon. member for Fort William expressed his concern about the increasing fat which he had noticed in some places-and he, with his usual politeness, did not indicate any particular place-I was conscious of the fact that there are also other places where there is a certain amount of fat appearing, and places other than on the human frame. One of the things about which all of us must think perhaps more than we have been called upon to think in the past is the extent to which the budgets for every requirement of government are becoming fatter and fatter and, in that very process, are imposing increasing tax burdens upon every taxpayer in Canada.
One of the difficulties of offering any suggestions as to places where savings can be made or otherwise is that in the very nature of things it is only those who are dealing with each of the problems who can possibly know whether or not there might have been certain economies which would have maintained efficiency and conceivably even increased efficiency. But one of the things that do strike one rather forcibly is this. In the year before the war the total figure called for in the estimates of the Department of Public Works was $14,560,749. The amount called for this year for the acquisition or construction of buildings, works and structures is $61,431,500. I am not prepared to say, nor
Supply-Public Works
am I in a position to say, that included in these figures are not figures that indicate inefficiency or otherwise. We are simply presented with the information as to the buildings that are to be erected, and what they will cost.
What I would point out, however, is that not all the buildings that are being constructed by the government are being built by the Department of Public Works; and that in addition to the buildings that are being acquired or constructed by the Department of Public Works are buildings that are being acquired or constructed by other departments as well.
In a recent summary of a total figure in the estimates for the acquisition or construction of buildings, works and structures, prepared by Mr. Bryce, we find that the total over-all figure for this year will be $168,575,705 as compared with $35,830,565 in the last year before the war. That is a very large increase; and again we see that buildings are being constructed by departments which were not assuming the responsibility for constructing buildings in the fiscal year 1938-39. For instance, in the present estimates we find that the Department of National Health and Welfare has items for buildings to the amount of $2,311,250; Resources and Development, $13,482,390; Veterans Affairs, $4,535,000; National Revenue, $427,000.
In these instances I have mentioned only departments which built nothing separately as departments in 1938-39, the last fiscal year before the war. There are other departments like National Defence which were carrying on construction in the year before the war. Let us take a comparison there. In the last year before the war the amount was $4,261,050. This year the amount estimated is $36,265,257. In the case of Transport it was $7,324,389 in the year before the war. This year the estimates call for $20,410,816. I have given these last figures only to show that in department after department, where construction is taking place, there is this very large proportionate increase. It seems to me that when we are confronted with the comparative figures for all acquisition or construction of buildings, works and structures, by different departments of government-and this of course is entirely exclusive of the crown corporations and different ventures of various kinds-we find that the comparative figures are $35,830,565 the year before the war, and $168,575,705 today. It does seem that we at least should consider whether it would not be wise that there should be some more effective over-all supervision of construction, and perhaps some uniform plan of construction

Supply-Public Works
which might effect economies which otherwise would be overlooked because of the fact that these things would be done separately.
I recall as an example only one item that came before us for construction and it was a school that was being built in northern Canada, where in one of the departments the plans were obtained for a school of certain value. The architect was paid the fee for that plan. Then it was decided that they did not want quite so large a school. New plans were drawn and the architect was paid fees for the second plan as well. I merely mention this as one item that came up for consideration in the accounts this year, to show that there are places where a careful examination and one uniform system of supervision might well disclose places where savings could be made in this very large figure.
Under the Department of Public Works there is a strict requirement in regard to the calling for tenders. The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra has referred to the situation that arose in Vancouver, and I do not intend to enlarge upon it beyond this. The device that was employed there could be one that would circumvent the intended restrictions in the act under which this department operates. The facts speak for themselves. The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra has put these facts forward. The minister has given his explanation, and I do not intend to extend the discussion which has been so fully covered. I would point out, however, that if it were intended to circumvent these restrictions, what was done in that particular case-and I refer to what has been known as the Alvin building-could be a method to avoid the ordinary requirements; because, where the government intended to buy, it could arrange to buy but nevertheless in advance to arrange a lease with a purchase option and in the process avoid the necessity of calling for tenders, and then subsequently take up the option, and by that means avoid the intended protection of the calling for tenders.
I am putting this forward only to indicate that a method of this kind could be abused if it became an extended practice.
Perhaps, however, what has happened in this case does suggest the very great desirability of an over-all review by competent, outside experts as to the way in which the whole program of construction is carried on, not only by this but by all government departments, so that every advancement in construction methods and every practical economy that has been discovered as a result of the great building developments of the past few years may be applied to the construction of government buildings of all kinds.

Without impropriety of any kind, and without hint or suggestion of impropriety it nevertheless must suggest itself to every hon. member that practices which go on year after year, without any independent examination, in the experience of every one of us do almost invariably lead to the acceptance of methods which might be improved if they were checked and examined from time to time.
What is happening here is only one of the reasons that I did urge an over-all examination of the whole business of government by an independent royal commission. That has been dealt with, and I shall not extend the discussion of that suggestion at this session. But I do most earnestly put before the minister for consideration the advisability of a thorough consideration of the whole procedure in connection with the construction of public buildings, not only in his own department, but in all departments of government which are now building to the extent of $168 million a year. Those figures are so large that they are almost beyond the understanding of many people. Sometimes figures become so large that we are inclined to become less careful in their examination than when they are in terms we understand in our daily contacts.
With the figures before us it is not possible for members of the House of Commons to say, "You could save $1,000 here", or "You could save $10,000 in this item" or "You might save $50,000 in that item". That is not possible. We do not examine these as architects or as building engineers. They are put before us as jobs that should be done-and let me say at once that in most, if not in all cases, they are jobs that do need to be done. Members want to have them done in a way that will impose the least possible burden of taxation upon the taxpayer.
My remarks have been general for the very reason I have indicated, namely that we cannot examine in detail. But I do suggest that the enormous increase in the cost of building which in the year before the war was $35 million to the present figure of $168 million, should be a warning, a signal, that the time has come to review the method by which these arrangements are made, and to see if there are not economies which could be practised, either in the matter of buying, different plans of construction, or otherwise.
May I point out in relation to the activities of this department that there is a clear indication of the way in which costs are rising when we look at the item for maintenance and repairs. In the year before the war the Department of Public Works was shown as

spending $3,664,294 on maintenance and repairs in the estimates for that year. This year under the same heading there is an amount of $33,551,248. In other words the figure for this year is almost ten times what it was the year before the war. May I add that the figures I have used in each case are those supplied by Mr. Bryce in what was described as a functional breakdown of the over-all estimates of the different departments, under the heading "acquisition or construction of buildings, works and structures."
I shall conclude with the repeated request that the minister take this into consideration and do what any ordinary business concern would do, namely bring in the best available advice to make sure that if there are any ways in which savings can be made they will be undertaken.


Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Chairman, it is not every day that I would be ready to compliment the leader of the opposition upon a speech; but today he has certainly impressed me with the study he has made of these figures concerning the Department of Public Works, and other departments.
May I in a few words place before him the little experience I have gained since I have been Minister of Public Works. In 1942-43 when I was first appointed, according to the figures given me by my officials we had an appropriation of $18,221,351. At that time we were at war, and it was found that the statute under which we operated was so restrictive that it took us a good deal of time to get results. In street parlance, one would say, "There is too much red tape in public works."
I have to admit that this is one of the oldest departments of government. It is built on experience, people having joined it when they were very young, and having grown up with it and received their training from older officials. I become impatient when I bring down my estimates and there are revotes. Well, it has been explained to me that they do not run; they just walk and go slowly to avoid mistakes.
So, during the war, instead of giving all the construction work to the Department of Public Works, other departments were set up. Some of the departments handed their work to this other department which, at the time, was the department of munitions and supply. For instance, the Department of Veterans Affairs, which had always had an engineering and architects branch, would have construction done by the Department of National Defence. It developed that people avoided the Department of Public Works, because we did not get results. We could not go fast enough-and I think their action was proper
Supply-Public Works
at the time. But to get those quick results one could not follow the statute exactly, and we operated under the statute.
This condition grew up during the war. There is no doubt about it that some departments were not always satisfied with the way we gave them space or the works they wanted. Departments were growing rapidly and we were confronted by a number of regulations under which priorities for materials and labour were given to other departments.
So you see our estimates during the war years were kept very low-$18,021,351, and then in the next year $21,464,304, and then going back to $20,346,734 in 1944-45, and then up to $23,178,041. But we have to admit that since the war I have been pressing the government to go ahead with works. In 1946 nearly everything that belonged to the government by way of public works was deteriorating to the extent that we were losing some of those works. So I insisted that I receive amounts sufficient at least to try to repair, maintain or rebuild. As to maintenance and repairs, I have received some votes, but in the last two years, when the situation eased as to materials and there was more labour on the market, I convinced them that we should undertake new projects and buildings. In that process I had to rebuild the staff of the Department of Public Works. When I became minister in 1942 it was around 4,000 and it now approximates 7,400.
There is a lot in the thought of the leader of the opposition that there might be a saving if we could concentrate all building for every department in the Department of Public Works. I do not say there would be, but we would have to increase the staff of the department to quite an extent to handle the surplus of $60 million worth of works that are done outside the Department of Public Works. I think the proper procedure is that when the need for works is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the officials of the department, the community, members of parliament and the government, then we should undertake those works, following the statute as closely as humanly possible. We have been trying to do that.
One case was cited where perhaps we may have deviated and tried to avoid the provisions of the law. I will tell you candidly that was never the intention. I am not going to give all the reasons that I have given in the house before. It was never the intention to avoid the law. The purpose was to try to get quickly something that was required by departments. That was the only reason that motivated me in that instance. I do not think we made a bad job of it, but I do not

Supply-Public Works
believe in the principle. If we are going to start abandoning the system of asking for tenders we do not know where a government would stop. We have examples all over the country. Although I do not pose as a model, I believe in the tender system because we are spending everybody's money, and everybody has a chance to tender to make money out of these contracts. While I am head of the department I would not want any change in the system, and I will try to see that does not take place.
As to the increase in the estimates, it is not only because of the number of works but also the cost of materials and labour. We just grew up with the other departments of government. In 1939 we only had 12,000 or 13,000 civil servants in the city of Ottawa, and today I believe we have over 40,000. It takes a lot of space to provide for that number of employees if you want them to have an average of 85 square feet per employee, although I think the normal should be 100. It takes a lot of space to provide conditions of work comparable to those in industry. Requests come in to provide better conditions of work in every city so that they will be on an1 equal footing with industry and business generally. If you do that the expenditure will be very large.
During the war, employees worked in 55 to 60 square feet of space per person. I think the average has gone up to around 80 or 85, but it really should be about 100 square feet. I know it is difficult to discuss the details of the public works estimates. If I meet someone I can give him the proceedings and details in conversation. In the house that would be quite a job although I would undertake to do so if the session lasted all year. In a session lasting only for some months of the year it would be quite difficult.
Although I do not know if I can carry it out, I will certainly consider seriously the proposal to have construction concentrated in my department. Circumstances may arise where my department might not be able to fill the bill at all unless we change the statute to give me more leeway, and really I would not want to be minister of the department unless we had the controls in the Public Works Act. I do not know what would happen to a man who would undertake to handle this business without having the straight principles laid1 down in the act, and I do not think I would be the proper man to administer the department under those circumstances.
Coming back to the officials of the department, I think I have about the best staff trained in different branches of the work

that could be had. I will not say they are perfect, but you would be surprised to know all the details that enter into their reports before they make a recommendation to the minister. I could mention the heads of the architectural and engineering divisions in the fifteen different districts, and every name I would give you would be that of an outstanding man in his field in that particular district. They have experience and they know the local situation. They are well trained. They were educated in universities all over Canada and outside this country.
When a community sends a delegation or makes a request for a building or works of some kind I try to meet their wishes as much as possible. My immediate contact is with members of parliament on every side of the house. I do not know of one member who has come to my office to see me to explain a situation that I have not given serious consideration to the matter. In any event, you can look at the estimates and you will see that I have tried not to play favourites as to public works. I do not believe in that. I do not believe it is a good thing for the country. I do not believe it is a good way to spend the people's money. If a member of parliament comes to me with a serious project I have a report made on it by my engineers or architects. I have the advice of the gentlemen seated in front of me today. Then I am ready to go before the government or treasury board and try to get an estimate through. The moment the money is voted it falls back on the department and its officials to prepare plans, specification, estimates and ask for tenders.
We do not generally ask for public tenders for small works under $5,000. We ask for tenders from known firms in the community. In all other cases we ask for public tenders. It has been said that contracts are not always awarded to the lowest tenderer. The explanation I gave a moment ago is the only reason for that that I can see. I have in mind the case where an accepted cheque does not accompany the tender, and the tender is thrown out and not considered. If a tender does not meet the specifications it is thrown out. In certain instances when we have had dealings with contractors who have fallen down on contracts which we have had to complete we look into the capabilities and organization of such firms whenever they tender again. We do not turn down the lowest tenders. They are accepted except under the circumstances I have outlined. If anybody thinks I have made a mistake in that statement and can produce a case I should like to see the file myself. I would be sorry to see that it had escaped

my attention because I look at all these tenders that come to my desk and try to give them all the attention I can.
Coming back to the subject that started this discussion, remedial works, there is no set policy, but I think the hon. member for Kamloops has grasped the situation as to what we do in cases of damage by erosion. When there has been a clear-cut responsibility on the part of the federal government I think we have met the emergency and have proceeded with the works. In other cases of flood conditions throughout the country we would not touch the damages caused by flood. The best example is the Fraser river catastrophe. When it happened the government undertook to pay not 100 per cent but 75 per cent of the cost of the dikes or protection works. Probably we will soon make an agreement with the province of Manitoba if they wish to construct dikes, but there are circumstances where we do not think that is our responsibility. Right across the river, in my own riding, there happens to be a river that nearly every year floods part of a village known as Gatineau Point. Each year a number of homes in that village will be flooded to the extent that the people will have to go out of the second storey windows and into their little rowboats in order to get to work; still they want to continue to live there. For ten years as a member of this house I tried to get the Minister of Public Works to put up some protection works in that area, but I did not succeed; nor have I been able to succeed in having that done since I have been the minister myself. There are still no protection works at that point.
I do not know what should be done. The idea has been expressed, and it has a good deal to it, that the province and the federal government might come to an understanding as to the proportion of the cost to be paid on such works. I believe that would be all to the good, but just think of the amount of money that would have to be spent for this purpose every year. As hon. members know, floods occur all over the country, and if we were to carry on this work certainly it would have to be done gradually, because I do not believe the budget of my department would be sufficient to meet the cost.


Edmund Davie Fulton: At the moment we were dealing mainly with erosion, which is not due to an unusual or catastrophic flood but which merely occurs at the high water season each year.


Alphonse Fournier: Quite so. We do
take steps when this damage is caused by some of our works, or to our works, or by navigation. In those cases we generally take action after the report is received, and we
Supply-Public Works
will continue to do that until agreements are made with the provinces concerning those works, if that should come about.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Has the government of British Columbia or any member of it approached the minister or his department concerning assistance in connection with the construction of protection walls on the Columbia river?


Alphonse Fournier: My official tells me that the hon. member who just spoke did approach us in connection with those works, but he has no knowledge of any other representation.


George Alexander Drew: I do not want to discuss this point further, beyond emphasizing something that has been brought out by the minister himself. He points out that he would not want to carry on a program of public works without the protection afforded by the act. It is protection for the public, for the minister and for his officials.


Alphonse Fournier: Don't try to make me blame someone else.


George Alexander Drew: I am not suggesting that at all. I am pointing out that in this particular case we have reached the point where the work done by the Department of Public Works, which in the mind of the public and really in the minds of members of this house is the great construction department, amounts to $31,431,500, while the building done by other departments, which in the ordinary course of events are not supposed to be great construction departments, amounts to $107,124,205. In those cases they are not subject to the same requirements and we know of many cases-though how many we are unable to say-in which these works have been done without calling for tenders.
Knowing that we cannot change the presentation of these estimates at this time I can only leave the matter by repeating the request that the minister give earnest consideration to the desirability of placing before the government the suggestion that, except in unusual cases, the general construction program be brought together and placed under the same requirements which protect both the government and the public.


Alphonse Fournier: I would not like to follow the leader of the opposition the whole way. Only yesterday we passed the Defence Supplies Act, which gives powers that are not contained in the Public Works Act; and they were put in that act for special reasons. In circumstances where the defence of my country would justify action without following this procedure, I would not want to be

Supply-Public Works
committed to that procedure; but I am talking of ordinary works, buildings and other facilities, that are to be constructed. I could not undertake even to do the work that is being done by the national harbours board. They have special authority to do that work. When I say I would not like to act as minister under an act that would not give the public and myself and my officials that protection, I am concerned with the buildings that come under our jurisdiction. I would like to have this protection in connection with anything we undertake.


George Alexander Drew: Just to keep the arithmetic straight I would point out that the entire national defence estimate for construction for the current year is $36,265,257, which still leaves $70,858,948 of construction under other departments. This is substantially more than the total called for under the minister. I am going to leave the figures at that point, simply as part of my argument that this whole subject should be reviewed.


Alphonse Fournier: It is true, as the hon. member says, that the figure is quite large. The explanation I have here, which was given by Mr. Bryce though I had not seen it before, is that this amount includes provision for all expenditures on new construction of buildings, roads-we do not build roads-irrigation works, canals, airports, wharves-which we do build-bridges or other types of fixed assets. It includes major improvements and renovations involving changes of a structural nature, and also the installed cost of fixed equipment which is an essential part of the structure, such as elevators, heating and ventilating equipment. I do not think we would have the organization to undertake many of these things. Certainly I would not have the staff to look after these irrigation projects, which account for quite a large expenditure each year. As to anything that we ordinarily do in the department, however, I should like to see everyone follow the procedure that we have adopted.


Gordon Francis Higgins: A few moments ago the minister said he did not believe in playing favourites in connection with public works. With that I entirely agree, and I do not think he does play favourites. When we were discussing his estimates last year, however, I drew his attention to the rather peculiar circumstance that the ridings of Liberal members in Newfoundland apparently were getting a much greater expenditure on public works than were the other ridings, and at that time I believe the minister agreed that it was a rather peculiar coincidence. I do not know the position under the present estimates; I have asked for the information, but have not been given any details as yet. Would the

minister tell me briefly, riding by riding, what expenditures are to be made in Newfoundland this year? Then I may be in a better position to discuss the matter.
Before resuming my seat I have one or two other matters to mention. One rather important matter is the question of a public federal building. I understand one or two such buildings are scheduled for St. John's, and one of the sites suggested is the grounds of government house. I want to protest against that, in case any such decision should be made. I think that would be a very improper place for such a building, and certainly it would not be welcomed at all by the citizens of St. John's.


Mr. Siick:: I will take it over in my riding.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I think you are getting enough now. The other important matter is the question of the wharf at Portugal Cove. At first glance that may appear to toe a minor point, but it is the terminal for Bell island, where we have the ore mine which has been in operation for the past fifty years. The people of Bell island, numbering some ten thousand, depend upon that wharf for everything they need, including all their food and clothing. Everything must pass over it. Perhaps I may be pardoned for saying that it is possibly the busiest wharf on the island of Newfoundland, in the sense of daily use. The wharf is in very bad condition at the present time. There appears to be some difference between the provincial authorities and your own department about who is going to undertake the repairs. I believe you have been informed of that matter. I am told that the provincial minister has written to you concerning it, and your deputy minister is fully aware of the condition. It is a serious matter. If the wharf is allowed to continue to deteriorate it will not be usable, and those people in that thriving and important community which supplies a great deal of iron ore will be in a serious situation. I plead with the minister that, whoever is going to be responsible for the repairs, something be done immediately.
There is some difference over the fact that a ferry is using the wharf part of the time, and therefore it should be entirely a provincial matter. I know from my own knowledge, because the wharf is in my riding, that a number of fishermen and schooners use it as well, so it is hardly just a ferry wharf. Whoever is responsible for the repair should do the work as quickly as possible or there will be a lot of unfortunate people in that community.


Alphonse Fournier: I understand that Portugal Cove is a repair job, and that will be taken care of. The hon. member has

written to the department about the other information, and I understand we received the letter yesterday. The department is preparing an answer, and we will send it as soon as possible.


Mr. Browne (St. John's West):: Last year
in the supplementary estimates there were votes 704 to 709, and I wonder if the minister is in a position to say how much of those votes was spent in Newfoundland?


Alphonse Fournier: I have not the books
here, but would those votes be the ones concerning harbours or buildings?


William Joseph Browne: I shall read them out. Architectural branch-


Alphonse Fournier: On harbour works
the amount spent in Newfoundland was $374,104.36.


William Joseph Browne: There was a million dollars voted for that.


Alphonse Fournier: Correct.


William Joseph Browne: Has the
minister got the others?


Alphonse Fournier: We spent $211,655.31.


William Joseph Browne: There are six votes, and the first one concerns the maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa.


Alphonse Fournier: That is where we
spent the $370,000 in round figures.


William Joseph Browne: The next
vote concerns the construction, repair and improvement of public buildings.


Alphonse Fournier: We spent the $211,000 there.


William Joseph Browne: Then there
is an item for the dominion immigration buildings, repairs, $40,000.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not think that
amount was spent. There will be a revote this year.


William Joseph Browne: Then there
was a vote for the engineering branch, including the salaries of engineers, clerks, etc., $255,000.


Alphonse Fournier: Is that for the small
works?


William Joseph Browne: It is for the
salaries of clerks and engineers, and contained an item for new plant of $100,000; sundries, operation and maintenance of inspection boats.


Alphonse Fournier: When this vote came
up last year it was for the extension of the service throughout the country, including
Supply-Public Works
Newfoundland. I have given the amount we spent, except the salaries, because I have not that list here.


William Joseph Browne: The dredging of harbours and rivers: you have not given me that.


Alphonse Fournier: It is $122,618.24.


William Joseph Browne: How much was spent on harbours and rivers generally?


Alphonse Fournier: That was the $370,000, in round figures.


William Joseph Browne: Mr. Chairman, I do not think the minister really understands the question.


Alphonse Fournier: Last year when we had the million dollar vote for harbours and rivers, that estimate was prepared just as Newfoundland came into the union. We had no idea what staff would be needed there, so we had to have a round figure without knowing exactly what we would spend. Out of that estimate we did spend $370,000.


William Joseph Browne: I still do not think the minister understands the question I am asking. In the supplementary estimates up to March 31, 1950, there are six votes totalling $3,620,000. The minister has given me three figures, and that is all. Two of those votes are for a million dollars. On one of them I have received no information. If it is not convenient to get the information now, perhaps we can get it when we come to the particular item.


Alphonse Fournier: Or else I shall ask my officials to look at Hansard, and send you the details about these votes.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Is the minister responsible
for the air conditioning of this building? If so, he is responsible for a rotten condition. I might just as well say so here as to say it outside. Anyone who sits in here very long, with the direct draught blowing on him, will get the same kind of a cold as some of the rest of us have. I think it would be as well to die of bad air as to die of this new virus cold.
At this point I should like to refer to the number of people employed by the department. I always thought that many of these temporaries were put on during an election year. The Department of Public Works seems to employ about 7,000 people.


Alphonse Fournier: It is 6,600.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: There are 1,568 permanents,
5,277 temporaries, and then this new group is included of about 400 casuals or "casualties", I do not know which. In any event there are over 7,000.

Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: That is correct.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I want to compliment the minister, because this is the first year we have been able to find out how many temporaries there were. We ought to find out now what salaries are received by these temporaries. Are they all on the same rate, which would appear to run around $2,100, or what is the rate? The amount paid totals over $7 million, which would give these temporaries an average wage of $1,650. We would like to know how many of them have been temporary for a long time. Why are they still temporary? If they are all new people put on each year, surely there is some way of giving them some form of security? If you are employing these people year after year, why not give them the same sense of security that permanent civil servants have? I have said enough about those things before, but I wanted to bring them to your attention again.
There is another matter to which I wish to refer, and we may have something to say on it somewhere else, but it must be in the administration. In the last five, six or possibly seven years we have been promised a public building, known as the Dominion building, for Charlottetown. In the 1945 election I know it was a wonderful promise to dangle before the city, especially the labour people, and it was well dangled at that time.


An hon. Member:: It worked.


Alphonse Fournier: You were elected just the same.


An hon. Member:: Certainly; they said they did not want it.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I barely got in. Five years afterwards it comes up again. There is no building built. However, I made a little bit better impression that time because I promised the electors faithfully I would get after it and get it.


Alphonse Fournier: You are going to get it too.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: There is no use in one side having it all. My colleague knew that he was going to be elected anyhow; and when I was promising to get this, it certainly helped me along. But we are no further ahead now. Here we are today in the position that in a certain part of the town the site has been selected, consisting of 24 or 25 properties, but I do not think any of them have been purchased yet unless a couple have been purchased lately. Now they are all in that court-what do you call it?


Alphonse Fournier: The exchequer court.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: They are in the exchequer court, and they are having a real checker play

there. Properties in there belonging to some of the stalwarts of the party are valued as high as $100,000, which possibly cost in the beginning somewhere around $7,000 or $8,000 to build, and the land is extra. It will be amusing to see where these valuations are going to lead to. There is other property there, valued at $40,000, that I do not believe the minister would pay $8,000, $9,000 or $10,000 for it, any more than I would.


John Lambert Gibson: You could get the whole island for that.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: However, there are other properties that are being valued too low, but I suppose the court will decide on that. What I want to know is this. How long is it going to take before we get a valuation on them so that the properties can be purchased and the building started? I am afraid that it will not start this year. In fact, I did not go home at Easter and that was one of the reasons. Now I am afraid to go home at the end of June. I should like to be able to say to the people in my constituency that the minister stood up in the house and said:	You are
going to get that building and you are going to have it started inside of the next three or four weeks. There is one thing they could do. They could get all the properties, pull them down and give employment to the hundreds of men who are idle there at the present time. I should like to hear the minister make a really good statement on that matter so that I can take it back with me.


Alphonse Fournier: I will not be in a position to make as good a statement as the hon. member himself made.


Arthur Leroy Smith: You do not have to go home.


Alphonse Fournier: At any rate, I have not made the same promises that he made. It is true that we have had this estimate up for some years; it is going to be a fine building, and it will be a credit to the two hon. members for Charlottetown. Our difficulty is that, after the site was chosen-and it comprised about 22 properties-we saw that the people out in the island valued their property highly. Perhaps they were sentimental values, but at all events they had put a high price on their properties. As I explained earlier, I would hesitate to go into dealings with people who have such a high idea of the values of their properties.


John Lambert Gibson: Too much sentiment.


Alphonse Fournier: The only recourse we have is to go to the court we mentioned, namely the exchequer court, where experts will represent the government and will give

the values we think attach to these properties; and the owners will have their own experts there to give evidence. I am sure that the judge will give the proper decision, and that amount will be paid. That is the real cause of this delay with regard to the building. But I would not despair if I were the hon. member. I would go home next week just the same and repeat the promise, because the building is coming; when, I do not know.


John Lambert Gibson: I wonder if the minister could give me an estimate of how much money is involved, in round figures, in this building he is discussing now? What I should like to do is to see how much it costs to buy a vote in Prince Edward Island.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I gather that
the properties are being expropriated and that is the reason you are in the exchequer court.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Having expropriated, there is nothing to stop you from going ahead and doing your building, surely.


Alphonse Fournier: Quite so. But on the other hand, when I am forcefully taking property from people, I do not like to just throw them out. We have tried to deal with some of these people. When I was not satisfied with the other valuations, I have even sent people from Montreal in order to get a third valuation. I do not think we can come to an agreement. We shall have to get a judgment and pay the amount awarded by the court. There are businesses located in these buildings. I think one or two of the banks are located there. Just to go there without having a judgment and to say, "Get out" is something that I do not like to do. That is what makes me delay and try to get a judgment as soon as possible.


Mr. Kickham:: I want first to commend the Minister of Public Works and his department for the vote of money which he has given us for the renovation of the warehouse on the railway wharf at Souris and also for the appropriation for the dredging of the Montague river which is most necessary. It is necessary work and it had to be done to permit vessels to go up the Montague river and to load produce for Newfoundland, St. Pierre and other points.
In my riding of Kings county we have been asking the minister and his department for a considerably large vote of money for the renovation and extension of our wharf at Souris. I want to point out to the minister and his department that this is necessary work. I would hope that the minister would accept the plan proposed by Mr. H. E. Miller,
Supply-Public Works
our district engineer at Charlottetown. This plan provides for the extension of the present railway wharf-that is, the government wharf-and would provide room for a railway spur line that will enable smaller vessels to load at the wharf. At the present time we are unable to accommodate the smaller vessels because of the fact that in the heavy shipping season, which is in the fall and early spring, the large warehouse accommodates the larger vessels to be loaded for Bermuda and southern United States points, and we are unable to accommodate the smaller boats loading for Newfoundland, St. Pierre, Miquelon and Magdalen islands. If the department approves of that project and the railway wharf at Souris which we all believe is necessary, it would be a fine thing for the county of Kings, and unless we have that wharf extended and the wharf that was approved by the plan of the district engineer, it will be difficult for us to accommodate the shipping that would otherwise use that port of Souris. The port of Georgetown is also very important to the county of Kings. My people tell me that it is necessary to have the Queens wharf repaired and also the government railway wharf to accommodate the boats.


Alphonse Fournier: We have two items in the estimates for these works.


Thomas Joseph Kickham: The Queens wharf and the Georgetown wharf?


Alphonse Fournier: For Souris.


Thomas Joseph Kickham: Yes, but I was wondering whether or not the minister approved in full the plan of the district engineer, Mr. Miller.


Alphonse Fournier: It is quite a big plan.


Thomas Joseph Kickham: Have you approved the plan or not?


Alphonse Fournier: We are considering it right now.


Thomas Joseph Kickham: I do hope that you will approve Mr. Miller's plan.


Alphonse Fournier: Hope springs eternal.


Thomas Joseph Kickham: Before taking my seat I wish to point out to the department-


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Thomas Joseph Kickham: I have not taken up much of the time of the house during this session. I hear some members say "carried". I think I am entitled to a few words. In Kings county we have a large fishing industry. Many of our harbours are too shallow to give free access to the motorboats that fish for lobster, hake and cod. I should like to take

Supply-Public Works
this opportunity to impress upon the department the necessity of dredging harbour services for the north and south of my county.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Earlier this afternoon the Minister of Public Works, in answering a question of the hon. member for Moose Jaw, said, if I understood him correctly, that his department did not take into consideration the employment or unemployment situation when it came to public works.


Alphonse Fournier: No.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You tell me what you did say.


Alphonse Fournier: I did not say that we did not take it into consideration. I said it was not the duty of public works to have estimates before the house to provide relief for unemployment. The estimates we have before parliament are for public works' needed by the public services of the country.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Yes. The hon. member for Moose Jaw did not, today at any rate, suggest that money should be appropriated by public works just to provide work, but he was suggesting that the timing of public works might be made with a view to the unemployment situation.
May I remind the Minister of Public Works that in a sessional paper tabled on Wednesday, May 10, 1950, by his colleague the Minister of Resources and Development, this question was dealt with. To identify it, it is sessional paper No. 67J. It dealt with this question of mine:
What federal public works projects have been undertaken In order to relieve unemployment since September 1, 1949?
This was the answer of the minister's colleague, the Minister of Resources and Development:
The federal government's program of public investment, including public works, consists of worthwhile projects which will contribute toward the development of the country, and which can be implemented at such times as they will contribute to the maintenance of a high level of employment. In line with this policy, projects undertaken by all government departments since September 1, 1949, had full regard to the employment situation.
In that same connection, may I remind the Minister of Public Works that his department has contributed to another sessional paper No. 88D, tabled on Friday, June 2, 1950, in which information is given as to the money voted for public works over a period of a number of years, and not expended in each case during the year in which it was voted. I find that according to page 13 of this sessional paper the amount of money voted for public works projects for the Department of
[Mr. Kickham.j
Public Works which was not expended during the year seems to have been growing. In the year 1945-46 the amount voted but not expended during that year was $2,379,759.07; in the year 1946-47 it was $14 million odd; in the year 1947-48 it was $17 million odd; in the year 1948-49 it was $24 million odd; and for the fiscal year 1949-50 up until February 28, 1950, there was still $37,939,441.55 which had not been'expended.
I realize that these amounts are not sufficient to take care of the unemployment situation when it gets serious, but it does seem to me that there is. a possibility of dealing in part with unemployment problems if there was a little more co-ordination between what the Minister of Resources and Development says and what the Minister of Public Works does by way of making full use of the money that is voted for public works, and timing it to meet the needs of the unemployment situation.
I am not complaining about the large amounts of money being voted for public works projects; I am complaining of the fact that year by year the amount that is voted but not expended seems to be increasing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural branch-
289. Branch administration, $437,290.
Howard Charles Green: I have one question on this item. Can the minister give us the total figure paid for the Alvin building in Vancouver? I believe that under the final terms of the option the price was to be $1,063,105; but in addition to that there were certain amounts paid as rental before this option was exercised, which by the way is a very unusual way to do business in Vancouver. Ordinarily the amount paid as rental would be applied on the purchase price when the option was exercised. I should like to get these two figures: First of all, the purchase price, and second the amount that was paid by way of rental, and which of course was lost to the government.


Alphonse Fournier: The cheque that was issued for that building amounted to $1,066,614.90. That is the amount paid to the Alvin estate.


Howard Charles Green: In addition to that there were sums paid by way of rental before the option was exercised. I would like to get the aggregate of such payments.


Alphonse Fournier: I see that the rent was $183,995.


Howard Charles Green: Per year?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. The order in council authorizing this was dated February 8, 1949, and the order in council with respect to the purchase of the building was dated March 15, 1950. That was just before the expiry date of the option. So that we must have paid rental for about a year or a little over a year on the property.


Howard Charles Green: Perhaps the minister's officials could get that information and let me have it later.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes; I shall send it to the hon. member.


Howard Charles Green: Because parts of the building were occupied before the whole building was completed, and the rent was payable on a pro rata basis.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes, I understand.


Howard Charles Green: So one could not reach the proper figure by simply taking the amount of the rental set out in the order in council.


Alphonse Fournier: I shall have the figure prepared for the hon. member.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Architectural branch- .
291.	Maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $500,000, $12,686,315.
Mr. Black (Cumberland):: What progress is being made in connection with the renovation and repair of the public building at Springhill in my constituency? This is a growing town, and one of the best maintained mining communities in all Canada. What progress is being made?


Alphonse Fournier: This is not new
construction?


Percy Chapman Black: Renovation and repairing of a public building which has been there a good many years.


Alphonse Fournier: It would come out of our general vote.


Percy Chapman Black: It would come under item 291, would it not?


Alphonse Fournier: But I have not the details of it here.


Percy Chapman Black: This vote involves an expenditure of more than $12 million.


Alphonse Fournier: My officials tell me they have not before them the details of the contract for decorating. However, we can send for a report on it and let the hon. member have it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Public Works
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
292.	Newfoundland, $455,000.
Gordon Francis Higgins: Is this for new buildings?


Alphonse Fournier: Gander is the only point where there is an addition to an existing building. I am told the others are new.


Gordon Francis Higgins: What is the public building at Bishop's Falls to be?


Alphonse Fournier: This is to provide for the construction of a public building for postal purposes. The post office at the present time is located in a privately-owned building which is old, small and poorly located. The Post Office Department requests the construction of a new building in category A. The Anglo-Newfoundland Development Company pulp mill has offered to donate a suitable site. Plans and specifications have not yet been completed.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Is it to be of wooden construction?


Alphonse Fournier: No, it will be a fireproof building.


Gordon Francis Higgins: It will not be a very large one for that amount.


Alphonse Fournier: So that the hon. member will understand, this amount which goes in the estimates for the first year is only for site, preparation of plans, asking for tenders and beginning works. I am sure we will never get through this building by March 31.


Gordon Francis Higgins: This is not intended to be the full amount?
* Mr. Fournier (Hull): No.


Gordon Francis Higgins: What is the value of it?


Alphonse Fournier: I cannot say before the plans and specifications are prepared.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Plans and specifications are not ready?


Alphonse Fournier: No.


Gordon Francis Higgins: What about the building at Corner Brook?


Alphonse Fournier: This is to provide for the construction of a public building for post office, customs, transport, trade and commerce, labour, agriculture, R.C.M.P. and unemployment insurance.


Gordon Francis Higgins: And can the minister tell me where the postal terminal in St. John's is to be erected?


Alphonse Fournier: Along the railway siding, I am told.


Gordon Francis Higgins: And the other building there?

Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: We have not yet
chosen the site. One of our difficulties is to have agreement as to the site.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
293.	Nova Scotia, $1,350,000.
Percy Chapman Black: A building for post office accommodation, at Pugwash, was suggested to the minister before, and he gave some encouragement. According to revenue received, it is one of the buildings in Nova Scotia most greatly needed. I notice that under this heading the appropriation for Nova Scotia is only $1,350,000. That is less per capita than in any other of the provinces of eastern Canada, with the exception of Newfoundland. I am not objecting to the larger appropriation for Prince Edward Island; but New Brunswick with only four-fifths of the population of Nova Scotia has an appropriation about a million dollars greater. What progress is the minister's department making in connection with the. public building at Pugwash?


Alphonse Fournier: We are studying the situation there to see if we can do something about it.


Mr. Gillis:: A few moments ago the hon.
member for Winnipeg North Centre, and others, referred to the relationship of the minister's department toward relieving unemployment conditions in Canada. I am particularly interested in the subject because it affects my constituency. The minister stated his department did not anticipate that there would be any projects designed for that particular purpose.
The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre pointed out that the Minister of Resources and Development took a different view. I was here when he made his statement, and I took some encouragement from it, because the department he represents is one which fluctuates. This department is a permanent department that works on public works projects year in and year out.


Alphonse Fournier: Under a statute.


Clarence Gillis: Under a statute, but definitely they can create and promote necessary public works projects in sections that need them. So far as it is practical, I think they should design their activities to take care of sections where there is a bad permanent unemployment problem. The point I am getting at is that, in the return which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre just quoted to the minister concerning the appropriations made year by year to his department for certain works projects,

it shows that a lot of money has been voted to the minister's department for public works projects in Nova Scotia and has not been spent. The return sets it out year by year. It goes back to 1945-46, and runs all the way from $243,000 for Nova Scotia in 1945-46 to over $3 million in 1948-49.
In the final break-down of the return it shows that at February 28, 1950, the total amount was $4,200,469.99. That is quite a lot of money in a province that size. The money was appropriated and involved considerable work in the minister's department. Surveys had to be made for the purposes for which the money was voted. Taking a quick look at the estimates for 1949 it appears that some $7 million or $8 million was voted to the minister's department for works projects in the province of Nova Scotia, but at February 5, 1950, half of that money was still unspent.


Alphonse Fournier: When was it voted, what date?


Clarence Gillis: It was voted all the way from 1945 to 1949 and not spent. It accumulated to the figure I have given. The return shows that you owe the province of Nova Scotia over $4 million.


Alphonse Fournier: Oh no. Do not confuse that. On the 10th of December, 1949, we voted the whole amount of the estimates. From the 10th of December, 1949, to the 31st March, 1950, we did not spend the amount voted. There was $3 million that we could not spend during the wintertime on these works. You know that we cannot work on wharves and breakwaters in Nova Scotia during the wintertime.


Clarence Gillis: I still contend that you owe us $4 million.


Alphonse Fournier: If we owe you something we will pay it.


Clarence Gillis: Your department made surveys as to projects which are badly needed in that province. After all the work of putting the appropriations through and arguing about them, then you do not spend the money because winter comes along and you let the work lapse. What is your intention with regard to-


Alphonse Fournier: They are good.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It was ever thus.


Clarence Gillis: What is the intention with regard to carrying on the works projects involved in the amount of $4 million that has not been spent? Is it your intention to go ahead with these projects and spend the money?


Alphonse Fournier: If you do not stop me we will go ahead.


Clarence Gillis: The estimates this year are pretty skimpy so far as public works projects in the province of Nova Scotia are concerned. I took a look at the Sydney end. There is $100,000 for a new public building in Sydney, and provision for a breakwater at Glace Bay. There does not seem to be anything else in the whole area, and you have a bad unemployment problem there. I still want to find out if you can explain what you are going to do with the $4 million that you owe us.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: They are going to build the Canso bridge.


Clarence Gillis: There is a special appropriation for that.


Alphonse Fournier: My hon. friend understands that on the 31st of March every year unexpended money reverts to the consolidated revenue fund. We have to vote new estimates every year because they lapse on the 31st of March. When such amounts lapse they are taken care of by revotes, and you can see them all through the estimates. We do not drop a project. We keep on working, and when the plans are ready and the season is proper we proceed with those works. The money will be spent.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The minister spoke of his good intentions. I have heard that the road to Hull is paved with good intentions.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As to the vote for public buildings in Nova Scotia, I note from the details on page 222 that there is $86,000 included for a public building at Barrington Passage of which $25,000 is a revote. If my memory serves me correctly, we voted the $25,000 on the 10th of December last year. I should like to ask the minister two questions. Was anything done after December 10, 1949, with respect to proceeding with the public building at Barrington Passage? I should also like to know what else is covered by the $86,000 in addition to whatever was covered by the $25,000 voted last December.


Alphonse Fournier: Remember that last year's main estimates were prepared in November, 1948. Then we had a session in the spring of 1949.


Stanley Howard Knowles: And an election.


Alphonse Fournier: We got three-quarters of the estimates through. Then we had an election and lost a good many friends. When we came back in the fall we had another session, and all we did was to vote the amounts that had been prepared in the fall of 1948.
Supply-Public Works


Stanley Howard Knowles: The $25,000 was a supplementary estimate.


Alphonse Fournier: Then my argument is still stronger. From that time up to the 31st of March we thought we would acquire a site and retain architects to prepare plans. We started off in headquarters and estimates were prepared as to what it was thought could be spent on that building during the fiscal year 1950-51. I am told now that the estimated cost of the building, to be spent in 1950-51, is $86,000. That is why we ask for this vote.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What does it include?


Alphonse Fournier: That is the estimate of the total cost of the building.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What was the $25,000 for? Was that just to acquire a site? Surely not.


Alphonse Fournier: That was the amount we thought we would spend during the last fiscal year, and it was not spent.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is it not possible to break down the $86,000 into what the original $25,000 was for and what the additional $61,000 is for?


Alphonse Fournier: I cannot do that now because I do not know the price we will pay for the site. I do not know the exact amount we will have to pay to the architects. We have not asked for tenders yet, and I do not know the amount of the contract. In preparing the estimates I take the advice of the architects in my department. They say they need a building containing so much space. It will be fireproof, it will be on a site of these dimensions, and it will be this and that. They say that should reasonably cost around $86,000. When my estimates come up next year I will give you all the details because the project will be advanced.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
294.	Prince Edward Island, $900,000.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Is item 294 for the new building that is going to be built some time-


Alphonse Fournier: At Charlottetown.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: -or for some other public work?


Alphonse Fournier: The amount of
$500,000?


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Yes.


Alphonse Fournier: That is $500,000 for your constituency. Then there is $375,000

Supply-Public Works
for Summerside and $25,000 for Kensington. That covers your province, and you are getting the lion's share.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
295.	New Brunswick, $2,200,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to call the minister's attention to some answers he gave a short time ago in response to questions. I placed upon the order paper having to do with the erection of a public building at Woodstock, New Brunswick.


Alphonse Fournier: Did you ask those questions for the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Well, he is not here at the moment, so I cannot get the information from him. At any rate, as appears at page 3466 and 3467 of Hansard for June 12, 1950, I asked the minister:
1.	Did Mr. T. S. Hunter, district architect of the Department of Public Works, recently (between May 1 and May 18, 1950) visit Woodstock, New Brunswick, for the purpose of investigating possible sites for a new post office building in the town of Woodstock?
2.	Did Mr. Hunter confer with Mr. D. R. Bishop?
3.	If so, did such conference relate to the possible site for a new post office building in Woodstock?
The answers to those first three questions were yes. So far so good. Question No. 4 was:
4.	Who is Mr. D. R. Bishop and what official position, if any, does he hold in relation to federal government matters?
There are several more questions-


Alphonse Fournier: What was the answer?


Stanley Howard Knowles: The answer to questions 4, 5, 6 and 7 was "Not known".


Alphonse Fournier: That is true. I do not know this Bishop; I do not know who he is.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Let me carry on and I may tell you.


Alphonse Fournier: Oh, you know? Then you do not need information from me; you are giving me information.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Well, if I give the minister some information he may be able to go on from there and answer some further questions. In reply to the question as to who this Mr. Bishop is, the minister says that is not known. He knows Mr. T. S. Hunter conferred with him, but he does not know who Mr. Bishop is.
My next question was:
5.	Has Mr. D. R. Bishop been a candidate in any federal election campaign for the electoral district of Victoria-Carleton? If so, for what party?

Again the answer is "Not known." I should have thought the Minister of Public Works would be a better party man than that.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know all our supporters.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He will find from the records that Mr. D. R. Bishop was the Liberal candidate in Victoria-Carleton last June and polled a certain number of votes, but lost the election. Now we have the answer to that question; Mr. D. R. Bishop is the defeated Liberal candidate in Victoria-Carleton. That is the man with whom Mr. T. S. Hunter conferred with regard to a site for this post office, a man whom the Minister of Public Works does not know.
Next question:
6.	Does he have anything to do with federal government patronage in or for the electoral district of Victoria-Carleton?
Again the answer is "Not known." The minister did not say "No"; he just said "Not known."


Alphonse Fournier: I have never seen the man; he has never spoken to me, and I do not recall ever having received a letter from him. What would you want me to answer?


Stanley Howard Knowles: The next question was:
7.	If so, is the patronage he handles restricted to matters relating to the Post Office Department and the selecting of sites for post office and customs buildings, etc., or does he handle patronage for other federal government departments, and if so what departments?


Alphonse Fournier: I am a bad witness; I don't know.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Yes, that is the answer; the minister does not know. Well, the inference from the answer to that question is that it could be that Mr. D. R. Bishop is handling the patronage for the federal government down in Victoria-Carleton.


Mr. Richard (Ottawa East):: Where is the patronage you are talking about? You are suggesting there is some.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Certainly it is not denied by the minister in replying to that question.


Jean-Thomas Richard: Ask him the
question.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the hon. member for Ottawa East wants the information, I have it here. If the minister and the hon. member would like to know I can tell them that this Mr. D. R. Bishop not long ago published a paid advertisement in the Hartland Observer, a paper published down in the constituency of Victoria-Carleton, pointing out that he had documents to prove that he. not the sitting

member, was the person responsible lor contracts, the choosing of sites and various other things that are being done by the federal government in Victoria-Carleton.


Alphonse Fournier: Could I stop him from doing that?


Stanley Howard Knowles: My point is that I am amazed to discover that a defeated Liberal candidate seems to have the say which this Mr. D. R. Bishop claims to have with respect to various matters in that constituency. I hear members on this side of the house say they know who handles the patronage in their own constituencies, particularly some of the members coming from eastern Canada. I do not know who handles it in Winnipeg North Centre, nor do I want to know, though it may be some hon. members on the Liberal side will know. I am complaining as strongly as I can against this whole business of patronage. We had it here the other day, when the hon. member for Temiscouata wanted all the Tories, C.C.F.'ers and Social Crediters fired from the Canadian Commercial Corporation.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Stanley Howard Knowles: There it is, Mr. Chairman; those Liberals seem to want to run everything on a party basis.


Mr. Ferrie:: What happened in Saskatchewan when the C.C.F. government got in?


Alphonse Fournier: Please; we are on the estimates of the Department of Public Works.


Gladstone Mansfield Ferrie: What did Douglas say?


Louis-René Beaudoin: Order. It seems to me we are discussing item No. 295, which refers to expenditures for the province of New Brunswick.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That's right. Item 295 provides $2,200,000 for public buildings in the province of New Brunswick. If we turn to page 223 we find included in that amount $100,000 for a public building at Woodstock, New Brunswick, and I am talking about that public building.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Perhaps the hon. member was not talking about that public building when I called him to order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Well, I was not too far away from it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I do not think the hon. member should continue to use expressions such as "I was amazed that defeated Liberal candidates should have the patronage in these ridings". We all know they have; it is not amazing to anyone. Let the hon. member be accurate.
Supply-Public Works


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is not often that I am in this position, but I am very happy to accept the correction made by the hon. member for Calgary West.
I may say that I put that series of questions on the order paper in the first instance because I had seen this paid advertisement by Mr. D. R. Bishop in which he claimed that he had documents to prove-


Alphonse Fournier: Who gave you that clipping?


Stanley Howard Knowles: The hon. member for Victoria-Carleton.


Alphonse Fournier: I thought so.


Stanley Howard Knowles: After all, I have asked a
number of questions in this house concerning patronage. Hon. members know that. Those questions may have been a bit embarrassing at times. It is not surprising to me that some hon. members in various parts of the house, whenever they have these items that confirm that there is patronage, have drawn them to my attention. The member for Victoria-Carleton also gave me a copy of the Sentinel Press from Woodstock, New Brunswick, dated Thursday, May 18, 1950. It was in this copy of the Sentinel Press that there appeared the story of the visit to Woodstock by Mr. T. S. Hunter. The article contained this sentence:
While in Woodstock Mr. Hunter conferred with Mr. D. R. Bishop . . .


Alphonse Fournier: And others.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Oh, no. The article does
not say "and others". I presume he did, but so far as the Sentinel Press is concerned Mr. Hunter conferred only with Mr. D. R. Bishop. I suggest that this business of patronage is difficult to uproot by a single speech, or even by a dozen questions during the course of the session. But I did hope to draw it to public notice in this way, and that by having it drawn to public attention so well as it was done yesterday by the member for Temiscouata we may see the last of it. I like the Minister of Public Works, and I hate to find signs of it in his department. He is the last minister in the government I would expect to condone it in any way at all.


Alphonse Fournier: I am still a live politician, just the same.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I still like the minister. I
hope the minister will be careful when he gets his advice, not only in the constituency of Victoria-Carleton but in all other constituencies, to get it from other than defeated Liberal candidates or even sitting Liberal members. He should get advice from experts in the field.


Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Chairman, I cannot let this pass without a few sentences in

Supply-Public Works
reply. When this item was put in my estimates, it was upon the representations of people in whom I have confidence. We looked into the request, and got reports that the need was there. I believe the actual building in Woodstock was erected in 1883. I did not look at the riding in which it was located.
As I explained earlier this afternoon, the first thing we do is to look for a site. We send the resident architect, who happens to be Mr. Hunter, to look over the situation. I am told he saw six or seven people. The report is that amongst the people he saw was one Mr. Bishop. I did not even know that he was the defeated candidate, but that is not against him. Perhaps he knows the place well. You say that he handles the patronage, and he brags about it. That is not within my knowledge. I speak to every member of parliament, defeated candidates, and everyone, and you cannot imagine what advice they give me. I do not always rely on that. I get the officials to go to the place and make a report on the site. If that official goes into Mr. So-and-So's home, I hope you do not blame me for that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I did not think the minister knew anything about it, and that is the reason I brought it up.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know that gentleman living at Woodstock. The only member of the party I know in that riding is my friend the sitting member. I am not going to stop putting up a building in Woodstock because Mr. Bishop received a visit from an official of my department. I do not think it would be reasonable to refrain from erecting the building because Mr. Bishop brags about patronage.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Just one sentence and I am through on this item. I was not objecting to the erection of the building.


Alphonse Fournier: If you speak that way, you discredit the building.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I was objecting to the
government taking advice from the defeated Liberal candidate as to the choice of the site for the building.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
297. Ontario, $10,000,000.
Mrs. Fairclough:: Mr. Chairman, I trust the applause is an indication of approval. With reference to this item, and the details which appear on page 225 which indicate an office building for Hamilton, and the appropriation listed in the amount of $300,000, does it refer to the proposed building at the corner of Caroline and Main streets in Hamilton?


Alphonse Fournier: This amount is required towards the erection of an office building in Hamilton, Ontario, to provide accommodation for the following departments: veterans affairs, unemployment insurance commission, trade and commerce, national defence, labour, transport, agriculture, national revenue, health and welfare, customs and immigration. Strong representations have been made by the Minister of Veterans Affairs and the Minister of Labour regarding the necessity for immediate action.
Plans and specifications have not yet been prepared. However, preparation of them is being undertaken by Mr. Hugh D. Robertson, architect, of Hamilton, Ontario. The tentative estimated cost is $1,250,000. The expenditure for 1949-50 was $116,051.63. A new vote will be requested for 1950-51 of $165,000. The total vote requested for 195051 is $300,000. The hon. member will understand that this is the amount we expect to spend during that year.
The site to be acquired for the proposed building is the Caroline street school property being the block-end bounded by George, Caroline and Main streets. The property has a frontage of 194 feet 5 inches on Caroline street, and depths of 241 feet 3 inches and 235 feet 11 inches on George and Main streets respectively. The property is owned by the Hamilton board of education. Notice of expropriation was filed on this property March 4, 1948. The Hamilton board of education originally forwarded an asking price in the amount of $234,415. However, as a result of negotiations, this offer has been reduced to $215,000, and the department proposes to acquire the property at that reduced figure.
An order in council dated February 24, 1949, authorized an advance payment of $99,000 to the Hamilton board of education from 1948-49 funds. An order in council dated May 17, 1949, authorized the payment of the sum of $215,000 to the Hamilton board of education in full and final settlement of the above-mentioned property at Hamilton, Ontario, such amount to include the advance payment of $99,000.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I noticed the $99,000 payment in last year's estimates. This $300,000 then will not do more than pay the purchase price of the property.


Alphonse Fournier: And pay for the plans and specifications.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Can the minister tell me at what stage the negotiations are at the present time, and how soon work might commence on this project? I know that is a difficult question to answer, because one never

knows how long it is going to take to draw plans. As a matter of fact, this property has been standing idle for some time. I believe negotiations were started about two years ago. Just prior to the election of 1949 the old building was demolished and the land was levelled. In the meantime a few signboards have been erected on the property, and the rumour is abroad that the property is to be resold. I take it the minister's remarks would effectively deny that rumour. I am glad, because the building is vitally needed in Hamilton where the government departments, some of which the minister has mentioned, are housed in various buildings in different sections of the city. When given up by the government departments, the space in these buildings could easily be rented.
At one stage in the proceedings a member made the remark to the Hamilton city council that it was hoped the erection of this building would be commenced this year, so that when the autumn of the year came along and construction trades were in need of work this particular project might ease the local situation. From the minister's remarks I would think that is a rather remote hope. Does the minister expect the work to commence this year?


Alphonse Fournier: I have given the list of departments requesting space in that building. We are getting the architect to allot space for veterans affairs and these departments, and he will then draw the plans and specifications according to those requests. I am told that the plans themselves, when these requests are looked after, will take at least six months to prepare. For a building of $1,500,000, my experience has generally been that the plans and specifications take a year to prepare. Then time has to be allowed for the calling of tenders, because the moment we receive those plans we advertise for tenders. The amount we have today in this estimate is the amount we think we will spend during the current fiscal year.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: In that event, there could be no hope at all of proceeding this year at least.


Alphonse Fournier: I would not want to say that. I have been greatly disappointed myself many times by delays in the preparations of plans and specifications. Remember my good friend the hon. member for Queens. He has been waiting a long time but he is not despairing yet.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I may say I am pleased that the architect is in Hamilton. Maybe I can do something from that end.
Supply-Public Works


Jean-François Pouliot: I should like to quote the example of the hon. member for Hamilton West to the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. The hon. member for Hamilton West has been practical in supporting a justified expenditure for her constituency. If the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton had been here,
I wonder if he would have spoken as did the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. He probably did so because he did not represent the constituency. As an old politician, I will tell him never to oppose the construction of any public building in any province in Canada.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is that how you got your railroad?


Percy Chapman Black: I should like to inquire from the minister if the continuity of plans is going to be followed with respect to the public buildings in Ottawa and in central Canada, having regard to their design and the building materials to be used. I notice a large number of appropriations, including one in Hamilton for a substantial public building. The most important public buildings in Ottawa, including the parliament buildings, are trimmed with stone from Wallace, Nova Scotia. This building, including the peace tower, has Wallace sandstone which is recognized as the equal of the best in the world, if not the best. The fact that it is being used in buildings such as this, in the national museum building, in the Confederation building, in the customs building, in the national research and a number of other buildings in the city shows that it has been recognized as being of the highest quality. Few materials the product of the maritime provinces come to central Canada. I should like to ask the minister what public buildings are under construction at this time, or are being designed, that call for the use of Wallace sandstone.


Alphonse Fournier: I understand that in the specifications we cannot say that it has-to be Wallace sandstone. We probably have the word "sandstone" if it is to be that kind of stone.


Percy Chapman Black: I think it is usually specified as Wallace sandstone.


Alphonse Fournier: I am told that we do not do that. That would cut out competition if we just put in this particular stone.


Percy Chapman Black: I think that the contractor is required to know what kind of stone is going to be used.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. He bids on sandstone, and he generally specifies the-quarry from which that stone will come.

Supply-Public Works


Percy Chapman Black: I understand that the architects specify the quarry from which the sandstone is to be procured. There is some extremely inferior sandstone, and some inferior sandstone has been used in this building. It came from the United States, and is Ohio sandstone. It was used at the rear of the building and is now sanding off quite badly, but it was recovered from the old parliament buildings which were destroyed by fire. I presume the Department of Public Works of that day thought that they were saving some money by using stone that had already been utilized in the original parliament buildings.


Alphonse Fournier: We do specify sandstone of such and such a quality. But we cannot say that it has to come from one quarry or the other quarry. I think that would not be according to the act and that it would not be fair. We have got to give to the owner of every quarry a chance to try to sell his wares. If the quality is there and the price is the lowest, he generally gets the contract.


Percy Chapman Black: May I ask the
minister if the stone that is specified will be specified as Canadian sandstone, or as sandstone from Nova Scotia or from the maritime provinces rather than imported sandstone?


Alphonse Fournier: It is mentioned in the contract, I think. It is Canadian stone. That is what I am told.


Mr. Cardiff:: I notice that in this item there is an appropriation of $10 million for Ontario. In going down through the various items I find that for the city of Ottawa the items listed here come to $5 million, which is half the appropriation. That may be perfectly in order, but Ontario is quite a sizeable place; and if that amount of money is going to be spent in Ottawa, then of course there is not going to be much left for any other one particular place. I should like to ask about .the item of $200,000 for the east block; it was $400,000 last year and it is $200,000 this year. Does the minister know whether that is going to be all that is required to complete that work?


Alphonse Fournier: No. I am sure that it will not be all but at the moment I cannot give you any further information. I mentioned this morning that this is done on a fixed fee contract because we could not get specifications prepared or get anybody to give a firm price on the alterations to be made. We had to go step by step before we found out exactly what should have been done. When we started off on it we were told, after some inspection, that the roof would last a few more years. While we were doing the other

work, we found out that we had to replace that roof immediately. That is what we found in a building that we put up some eighty years ago. I cannot see any other way of proceeding if we want to keep that building. You could argue perhaps that it should have disappeared; but if we had had it torn down, you would have found much objection on the score of interfering with the symmetry of the grounds. These are things that even my department do not like. They are just tricky jobs where you hardly know what they are going to cost. Even contractors do not like them. They will not bid.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I am not complaining about it because I realize that it is long past the time when it should have been taken care of.


Alphonse Fournier: During the war they would not give me any estimate for repairs to buildings.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: That is quite true. However, I have another question I should like to ask the minister and that is in regard to the sound reinforcement system for the House of Commons.


Alphonse Fournier: I spoke of that this morning.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: If it was dealt with then, I shall not pursue the matter.


Percy Chapman Black: There is one question the minister did not answer. What departmental buildings are now being projected or are under construction in Ottawa following out the general architectural design of the major buildings now here?


Alphonse Fournier: We are putting up the veterans affairs building. The contract for the east part of the veterans building was awarded some five or six weeks ago. Then there is the statistics building on Tunney's pasture. The contract was awarded some time ago. We propose to put up a fireproof building for the 1951 census, which afterwards will become a storage building. It will be on Tunney's pasture. It is a building which we urgently need to take the records from office space buildings which are occupied now, and they have no more space for them. We are also putting up vaults for the film board, because they have become so dangerous that we dare not keep them unless they are put in a fireproof building.


Agar Rodney Adamson: They are so subversive, are they?


Percy Chapman Black: In these major departmental buildings is the general architectural design being followed? What are the contract prices for these buildings that have already been let to which the minister has referred?


Alphonse Fournier: Speaking from memory, the veterans building was $5,170,000, or around there. That was the lowest bid. The highest bid was $5,850,000. The contract was given to the lowest tenderer.


Percy Chapman Black: Who was the
lowest tenderer?


Alphonse Fournier: A. W. Robertson Limited. I think there were eight or nine tenderers who tendered on that building. The Foundation Company of Canada have a contract for the statistics building.


Percy Chapman Black: What is the contract price, there?


Alphonse Fournier: The contract price is $185,000 for the excavation and foundations.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
298. Manitoba, $1,400,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: What is the situation now with respect to the new post office building in Winnipeg? I realize that when the minister makes these forecasts he is no doubt out on a limb a bit. I could remind him, however, that on December 10 last year he indicated that the department would be able to call for tenders for this building in June or July of this year.


Alphonse Fournier: I was wrong. I admit that, because the other day I had on my desk some papers concerning the site.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Can he give us a new forecast?


Alphonse Fournier: I am no prophet in these matters. I am told that the architects preparing these plans have been working on them for nine months now; but this is one of the buildings where the estimate was more than the building in Hamilton, and I would not be surprised if it should take some more months before they are ready with the plans and specifications. But I really hope that some day this year I will be able to ask for tenders on that building. Is that definite enough for my hon. friend?


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is clear then that if there is any hold-up it is due to the delay in getting the plans completed?


Alphonse Fournier: We are just waiting for the plans. We are ready the moment we get the plans.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The property has been expropriated?


Alphonse Fournier: Oh, yes, it has been expropriated; if we had the plans tomorrow we would have them approved by the offir cials and ask for tenders.
5594C-237
Supply-Public Works


Stanley Howard Knowles: Therefore I may not have to ask these questions in the next session of parliament?


Alphonse Fournier: I hope there will be no more questions on this building.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is up to you.


Percy Chapman Black: Who are the
architects for these buildings? Are they departmental architects, or are they selected in the different localities where the construction work is being undertaken? For instance, who are the architects for the buildings proposed in the city of Ottawa?


Alphonse Fournier: The architect for the big building, the veterans building, is Allward and Gouinlock from Toronto; for the statistics building it is Ross and Patterson of Montreal; for the Winnipeg building it is Green, Blank-stein, Russell Associates of Winnipeg.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
300. Alberta, $2,600,000.
Arthur Leroy Smith: The details of this item appear on page 228. Since everybody is complimenting everybody else I want to compliment the Liberal members from Edmonton on getting from the pot $1,100,000, while the city from which I come gets $20,000. I do not say this by way of complaint at all. I am sure the building will grace the city of Edmonton and will reap its reward in the high esteem in which these members are already held there, together with a certain Liberal, a late member of this house, who is now a Senator in the other place. I wish them all well.
There is, however, one item I wish to ask about, namely, the public building at Brooks in the province of Alberta, for which $100,000 is being appropriated. My first question is, is that a post office?


Alphonse Fournier: This amount is
required for the purchase of a site and erection thereon of a public building to provide accommodation for the Post Office Department. The deputy postmaster general states that the present rented quarters do not provide adequate accommodation. Plans and specifications have not yet been prepared. However, a suitable building and site are tentatively estimated to cost $100,000. The deputy postmaster general writes to us and insists that we give priority A to this project. That is all I have on my file.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I want to agree with the Postmaster General. There never was a place which needed better facilities
3748	HOUSE OF
Supply-Public Works
more than does the town of Brooks, which is perhaps the fastest growing town in western Canada, and is becoming one of the wealthiest towns in western Canada. I had hoped that, the matter had: advanced a little further-I think perhaps it has, as a matter of fact. I am merely commending those who made this possible. I hope it is the hon. member for Medicine Hat, although I have some doubt about it. He is not the defeated candidate, of course. But we are very happy to know- that this much-needed work is being proceeded with. Since it is a small building,
I gather there is no doubt that work will commence during the present year.


Alphonse Fournier: I will do my best.


Arthur Leroy Smith: It is only
$100,000; it is a small project. I think the minister has his eye on a corner there. I think it is a very good corner, too.


Alphonse Fournier: We shall do our best to proceed.


Arthur Leroy Smith: If you do your best it will be finished by winter.


Mr. Decore:: Are any of these public buildings listed under Alberta to be used for police barracks or not?


Alphonse Fournier: No; I am told not; they are office buildings.


John Decore: Would police barracks come under the Department of Public Works or not?


Alphonse Fournier: No; there is no amount here for barracks. What we do is this: When they do have an amount, they transfer the funds over to us, and we proceed with the work.


Arthur Leroy Smith: They do not own any of their detachment offices out through the country. I happen to know they are all rented from some local people. I know of no contemplated major expense by way of large barracks.


Alphonse Fournier: They own their own barracks, but they have not the staff to proceed with plans and contracts.


Mr. Macdonald (Edmonton East):: I should like to thank the hon. member for Calgary West for drawing to the attention of the minister the need- for a public building in Edmonton. Edmonton is a rapidly expanding city. For many years they have had a beautiful public building in Calgary, and a federal office building is sorely needed in the city I have the honour to represent. I hope that in view of the expanding economy of Edmonton the department will continue to review the situation with regard to giving adequate office space.


Arthur Leroy Smith: They write seven or eight letters out there now.


Douglas Scott Harkness: As the hon. member for Calgary West pointed out, the only vote here for Calgary is for an addition and alteration to the weights and measures building amounting to $20,000. What happened to the vote for about $200,000 which used to be revoted at every session for a building to be erected not far from the courthouse in Calgary? Why has it been dropped?


Alphonse Fournier: When did we have that item?


Douglas Scott Harkness: It was always there, up to the time of the election; but since the election it seems to have been dropped.


Alphonse Fournier: We will call another election soon.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I remember having a discussion with the minister about two years ago with respect to this building?


Alphonse Fournier: Perhaps we discussed too much.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I remember the minister assuring me that work would begin in a few months. Nothing has been done, and now even the vote has disappeared.


Alphonse Fournier: Is the hon. member sure we did not put that huilding up?


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am sure you did not. I am certain the building was to be put up, and that that has not been done. Would the minister find out what has happened to it?


Alphonse Fournier: I shall look into it and let the hon. member know later.


Mr. Beyerstein:: I should like to ask a question regarding the proposed post office at Stettler, Alberta. I wrote to the minister some time ago and his answer at that time was satisfactory. Have there been any further developments?


Alphonse Fournier: Has the Post Office Department requested the building?


Hilliard Harris William Beyerstein: Yes.


Alphonse Fournier: Then, it is on its way, and I shall be looking into it.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister will probably recall that for the last three years I have been asking about a customs and immigration building at Coutts. There has been a vote in for it every year since I have been here. Has any actual work been done? The building which has been there is a disgrace to the - country, in that it creates a bad impression among the large numbers of American tourists who visit Banff national

park and the Calgary stampede. The vote has been, there for a long time, but so far as I know the work has not been done.


Alphonse Fournier: I have good news this time. Order in council P.C. 480 of February 3, 1950, granted authority to accept the lower of two tenders submitted, that of the Bird Construction Company Limited of Lethbridge, Alberta, for $440,752 for the construction of a customs and immigration building at Coutts, Alberta. The second tenderer was the General Construction Company of Alberta Limited, at $567,962. They must be working at it now.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I hope they are.


Hilliard Harris William Beyerstein: I did write regarding the post office at Stettler, and he said he would probably submit a supplementary estimate at this session.


Alphonse Fournier: I cannot announce that in advance. I could not give a list of the supplementary estimates, before they have been approved by treasury board.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
301. British Columbia, $3,150,000.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Has the site for the proposed new public building at Trail been chosen, and who are the architects in connection with the alteration and extension of the public building at Nelson?


Alphonse Fournier: We are not as
advanced as that in Trail. I see we have not yet bought the site. I would hesitate to appoint architects without having the site.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am speaking more particularly about Nelson. There are improvements there to cost $75,000.


Alphonse Fournier: This is the first time that has appeared in the estimates. I have to get the money before I give instructions. This is the first time this vote has been up.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock. PRIVATE BILLS


Mr. R. E. Anderson (for Mr. Winkler) moved: that the following bills be read the second time:
Bill No. 304, for the relief of David Allan Ferguson.-Mr. Winkler.
55946-237J
Private Bills
Bill No. 305, for the relief of Ann Louise Fuller Brais.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 306, for the relief of Helen Leola Davidson Hunter.-Mr. Winkler.
Motion agreed to and bills read the second time.


Mr. Speaker:: These bills are referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills.



PIPE LINES ACT


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: the second reading of Bill No. 132, to amend the Pipe Lines Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of my introducing Bill No. 132, an act to amend the Pipe Lines Act passed in 1949, was to insert in section 12 of chapter 20 of the statutes of 1949 in the fourth line of the section the following words:
Whereof the main line shall be located entirely within Canada.
You will recall, Mr. Speaker, that in 1949 a charter was granted to the Westcoast Transmission Company, and at that time information was given to the house that the intention of the company was to build a line from the Alberta oil fields to the western coast of British Columbia, and from there down the west coast to Bellingham, Everett, Seattle and Portland.	Shortly after the
charter was granted to the Westcoast Transmission Company Limited they made application for another route, namely, down through the Crowsnest pass into the United States, and proposed to build a feeder line back to Vancouver and into the smelter plant at Trail.
You will recall, Mr. Speaker, a speech made by myself in the house on April 3, 1950. As recorded at page 1481 of Hansard I said at that time:
All that parliament is being asked to do is to give these companies now applying for a charter the same opportunity and the same privilege as was given to the Westcoast Transmission Company.
That was the purpose of my introducing this bill.
We on this side of the house do not believe in monopolies and. therefore, would like to see some competition. In view of the facts that I have stated will anyone suggest that the Sunray Oil Corporation of Tulsa and Los Angeles or the Pacific Western Oil Corporation of Los Angeles or the Tidewater Associated Oil Company of San Francisco are interested in developing Canada first? The answer is. "Certainly not." If the Westcoast Transmission Company are sincere they will make application immediately to withdraw their application to build outside Canada and state clearly that they will follow an all-Canadian route.

Pipe Lines Act
I understand that shortly after I made that speech in the House of Commons on April 3 the Westcoast Transmission Company showed their sincerity, for which I thank them very much, and made an application to withdraw the proposed construction of a pipe line along the route I formerly mentioned. As you will recall, on April 3 I introduced a bill to amend the act granting a charter to the Westcoast Transmission Company in order that they should be compelled to follow an all-Canadian route. Since that time I have withdrawn that bill because of the fact that the company has now demonstrated its willingness to follow an all-Canadian route.
Since the applications for charters of Prairie Transmission Lines Limited and the Alberta Natural Gas Company were granted by parliament after a long debate in the house and in the committee stage, much information has been obtained which we did not possess before. I am not alarmed at the present time that there will be built outside Canada any pipe line that can reasonably be constructed within Canada itself following an all-Canadian route to the west coast. I have great faith in our Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), the leader of the Liberal party. I should like to refer to a statement which he made on May 5, as recorded at page 2229 of Hansard:
I am not going to suggest that the protracted debates in this parliament about the desirability of an all-Canadian pipe line for the gas and oil of Alberta has been a waste of time. It has aroused public opinion as to the desirability of doing that if it is possible. I would expect that that would not be lost from the point of view of the members of the board of transport commissioners and that they would not lightly disregard the unanimous desires of Canadians that their own territory be used to the' greatest possible advantage. I would expect that when they got an application and before they approved anything, they would want to be shown that there is or there is not a practicable way of doing it without going out of Canada. I would expect that they will require the applicants to satisfy them that surveys of the various routes mentioned in this discussion have been made.
I do not claim to know enough about the topographical conditions, about the mountain passes, to be able to formulate an opinion as to whether or not they present insuperable difficulties. But if I were a member of the board charged by parliament with the responsibility of making that kind of a decision and were called upon to exercise my judgment, I would want pretty full evidence that it could not be done in Canada before I would put my signature to a plan or project that was not going to be carried out in Canada.
As has been pointed out by many members of the house, owing to the fact that these other applications are before the board of transport commissioners, I cannot see any reason why the board would grant a charter outside Canada if it were possible to build the line within Canada. I am not one of
IMr. Sinnott.l
those who believe in boards or commissions.
I think the more power that is left within parliament itself the better the interests of the people of Canada, or of any other country, will be safeguarded.
In view of the fact that there are enough companies now granted charters to compete in building these pipe lines, and having the assurance of the Prime Minister that the line itself will be constructed in Canada if at all possible, I am led to believe that at the present time I should drop this amendment and leave it to the board of transport commissioners to carry out the views expressed in the remarks of the Prime Minister which I have just quoted. I therefore ask, Mr. Speaker, to have permission to drop the bill at this time, and if necessary introduce it again at a later date.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, before the hon. member receives permission to drop the bill I should like to say a few words because of the debates we had on this important question. I was one of the group who were most insistent on the necessity for an all-Canadian route. First of all I must congratulate the hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Sinnott) on his versatility, . shall I say, in the drafting of the bill. I do not know of a farmer in Canada who could do a better job. Nevertheless I am rather surprised, after his strong statement on the introduction of the bill, that he has now decided to drop it. I was rather surprised when I heard him ask permission of the house to drop it. The purpose of this bill is to amend the Pipe Lines Act, and the principal amendment is the insertion of the words underlined, "whereof the main line shall be located entirely within Canada." With other hon. members who have taken part in previous debates, I strongly support this amendment to the general act. Since we had those lengthy debates, Mr. Speaker, there have been certain developments in connection with the competition to build a pipe line from Alberta to the Pacific coast region, and I want to read just a couple of short paragraphs from the June 20 issue of Saturday Night in that connection. Then I should like to put the viewpoint of the group to which I belong with respect to this whole pipe line situation. On page 8 of Saturday Night I find an article headed "Pipe Vancouver the gas-but how?" The subheading is, "Powerful financial interests are locked in a hard fight over the route of a gas pipe line to the west coast." The article is by Michael Barkway, a very bright and intelligent young man whom, we sometimes see flitting around the press gallery.


John Lambert Gibson: Does he agree with you?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I said he was a bright and intelligent young man-


John Lambert Gibson: I thought you said he agreed with you.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Hen. members will be able to judge for themselves as I proceed with my remarks. The article goes on to say:
There's gold in them thar pipe lines. There must be. The biggest investment houses in the United States as well as in Canada are falling over each other to get money into them. Alberta's gas boom is making the oil boom seem a staid and peaceable affair.
Cost of any of the projected lines to pipe Alberta's gas to market runs near $100 million outside the province, with at least another $25 million inside the province. Nobody expects a high rate of return on the money: government regulations will see to that. But the financiers figure on a safe and constant dividend. That's why the promoters are so busy-in Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa-propagandizing, dickering, arguing, lobbying.
Powerful financial interests are joined in a hard fight.
Then it goes on:
The cost of construction and maintenance and the size of the total market will all be reflected in the price of gas to the consumer. This is one of Dixon's main arguments. Both companies have given estimates of the cost of their proposed routes, but this reporter has not been able to satisfy himself that they are computed on a basis which permits fair comparison. They are just as likely to be misleading, and are therefore omitted.
Then in conclusion:
The gas line would supplement and strengthen other projects for road and rail extensions. It would encourage industry by providing cheap power.
The lines are now drawn. Dixon won't admit that he prefers the route through the U.S.; he won't put himself in the position of opposing an "AllCanadian route." But the choice is between the cheapest and quickest road to the biggest markets, and the pioneering route which gives Canada's present and future needs absolute priority and puts the U.S. at the overflow end.


Mr. Mitchell:: If the hon. member will permit a question, that article contains some mention of lobbying. Has he been lobbied?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am not aware of that.


Humphrey Mitchell: I have not been lobbied; I thought I would clear that up.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am simply reading an article; I have no personal knowledge of any lobbying. I support this bill because I want to make certain that Canadian interests are given priority over United States interests.
What conclusions can we come to from this article and from the evidence that has been and will be presented to the Alberta conservation board? In the first place it is obvious, as members of this group indicated in previous debates, that there is a mad scramble for profits to be made out of Canadian
Pipe Lines Act ,
natural resources. There is plenty of United Stales capital seeking investment in this country in gas and oil lines for that purpose. Again, I think it is indicated from the article and from the evidence that there is no check on the claims of cost made by any of these companies. We have had to accept the word of various companies and their engineers, and there has been no check by the officials of this government, who are quite capable of giving this house reliable figures. While Mr. Dixon was very careful not to appear to favour the United States route, I think anyone who read the evidence given before the Alberta board would see that he obviously presented that evidence to influence the board in favour of the United States route. Another point mentioned in this article I think it well worth considering; that is, that the development of the gas pipe line by an all-Canadian route will supplement and strengthen road and rail development in Canada. I believe that is a sound point of view.
I have made these few points, Mr. Speaker, to indicate our attitude toward the United States and Canadian routes, but fundamentally this group believe that public ownership is the only solution to this question. I should think other hon. members would join us in that view, after noting what is happening at the present time, with the mad scramble for profits on the part of United States interests and no regard whatever for Canadian interests. From our point of view this whole gas and oil pipe line business presents an opportunity for the Canadian National Railways to get into a form of transportation that will make sure profits on the capital invested and do something towdrd rescuing the railway from its present unsatisfactory financial position. Without a doubt this will be the cream of transportation in Canada, and why should we leave it to United States interests'? Because we believe that cream should be retained for the Canadian people through public ownership, we support that principle. What would public ownership mean as far as the ownership of gas and oil pipe lines is concerned? First of all it would assure an all-Canadian route in the construction of such a pipe line. It would assure the dividends and profits for the Canadian people. It would assure the development of Canadian natural resources and Canadian industries first before this great power was exported from the country. It would assure employment for thousands now here and thousands yet to come.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I say emphatically that this group believes that the only proper solution to this question in the interests of

Pipe Lines Act
the Canadian.. people is the public ownership of this form of. transportation. In the meantime we support the amendments contained in this bill because to some extent at least they will protect the interests of this country.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am
surprised and disappointed that the hon. member who introduced this bill should now ask permission to withdraw it, and I should hope that this permission would not be given. The last thing [DOT] I would want to do is delay the passage of this bill by making a long speech, so I shall make one of the shortest orations ever delivered in the house and merely say I am strongly in favour of these amendments.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Speaker, I waited for a long time, with a great deal of interest, for the introduction of this bill. As the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) said, it was very well drafted, and at the time it was put on the order paper I thought it was tricky and well timed.


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: You do not mean that, do you?


Clarence Gillis: Yes, I thought it was directly in line with the discussion going on in the house at that time. Now the hon. member wants to withdraw it. He cannot do that; the bill is now the property of the house, and I am going to take a few minutes on it.
I believe the subject matter of this bill should be supported by every hon. member. The very long discussion that took place on this particular subject has proven conclusively to the members of this house that an allCanadian route for this pipe line should be adopted. I think the most important reason for adopting that route is the fact that we are building a pipe line largely through the United States to siphon off the resources of this country. The main control as to how those resources will be used rests in the United States. Such a practice is all too common today throughout the whole economy of this country. Practically all of our raw materials are siphoned off to the United States, processed and returned to Canada with a high tariff on the finished product. I think it is time we stopped that sort of thing.
I did not take part in the discussion on the pipe line bills with the exception of the first five that came in through the back door a couple of hours before prorogation. I did my best to hold up those bills at that time because the important bill that was going through was the master bill supported by the Imperial Oil, a subsidiary of the Standard Oil of the United States. The other six pipe
[Mr. Herridge.l
line companies to which we have granted a charter are, in my opinion, merely stock promotion schemes. I never became anxious about the last two pipe line bills, because apart from the granting to certain people in this country of a certain amount of stock, they do not amount to very much. There will never be any pipe lines built by them.
I was interested when the member for Springfield put this bill on the order paper, because during the prolonged discussions on the private bills with government support it was brought out time and again that most hon. members had no objection to amending these pipe line bills. If hon. members felt that should be done, then most of the speakers said they could see no reason why it should not be done. I believe the member for Springfield found the solution when he brought in this bill, an act to amend the Pipe Lines Act. I have been looking forward with a great deal of pleasure to this particular discussion. I thought my hon. friend was going to get up tonight, and with all his vigour support this legislation. If we -passed this bill, it would have a retroactive effect, and would give us the right to amend the pipe line bills that have been passed.


Gordon Graydon: He fizzled out.


Clarence Gillis: I thought the hon. member was going to follow through with a strong argument for half an hour, but he only lit the fuse and then let it go out. As I say, that oil in Alberta is one of our richest resources, apart altogether from the building of a pipe line. I believe every Canadian member of this House of Commons should support the building of the pipe line in Canada. It is the only logical place. It would put the steel mills to work in rolling the pipe. It would create employment right along the line. The most important feature of it in my opinion is that the control of our natural resources will be in Canada, and we shall have the right to say where the oil is to go. I do not believe we should give an unrestricted right to another country to have control of the valve that supplies a very important material, without having regard to our own requirements first.
From the time the first bills came in through the back door, as I say, I have been of the opinion that these pipe lines should be in the hands of the Canadian government. My opinion was that the logical firm to develop these pipe lines as public carriers was the Canadian National Railways. In the future this will be a very lucrative field. The Canadian National Railways is a government enterprise; is well set up with a capable management; and has experience in crossing

this country from coast to coast with steel. It has the method of financing through the government by passing a special act, which would enable the Canadian National Railways to obtain the necessary funds from the Canadian government to develop the resources of this country. In the future this will mean millions and millions of dollars of income, because if it were not a lucrative field we would not find the Standard Oil and Imperial Oil putting money into it. The others are merely going into it as a stock promotion venture. With the overshadowing clouds of war hanging over us, the importance of oil to any country can hardly be calculated. I think that we at this time, more than at any time in the past, should have been clinging to that very vital resource. It should have been managed by the body I have just mentioned. I think the time is opportune, now that the bill presented by the member for Springfield is before this house, for us to say to the government, by a vote of this house, that this bill should pass, and the Pipe Lines Act should be amended, at least to ensure that when we are building these lines they shall be built by the all-Canadian route.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the hon. member leave to withdraw the bill?


Stanley Howard Knowles: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, standing order 53 is quite clear. It reads as follows:
A member who has made a motion may withdraw the same by leave of the house, such leave being granted without any negative voice.
That standing order is immediately followed in Beauchesne's second edition by citation 454, which reads:
The member who has proposed a motion can only withdraw it by leave of the house, granted without any negative voice. This leave is signified, not upon question, as is sometimes erroneously supposed, but by the Speaker taking the pleasure of the house. He asks "Is it your pleasure that the motion be withdrawn?" If no one dissents, he says: "The motion is withdrawn;" but if any dissentient voice be heard, he proceeds to put the question.
There are several of us, Mr. Speaker, who feel that this bill should not be withdrawn, but rather that Your Honour should put the question.


Mr. Speaker:: I did not hear any dissentient voice when I asked if the member had leave :o withdraw the bill.


Stanley Howard Knowles: No.


Mr. Speaker:: I asked that previously, and heard no dissenting voice.


Gordon Graydon: For what reason does he want to withdraw it?
Pipe Lines Act


Clarence Decatur Howe: I move that this bill be not now read a second time, but be read a second time six months hence.


Mr. Speaker:: Before the motion is put, may I point out that it is usual for the house to accede to the request of an hon. member, who has introduced a bill, to have it withdrawn. I think it is only in very unusual circumstances that that courtesy is not extended to the hon. member who has introduced a bill. I do not recall any incident in the last fifteen years when the request of any hon. member to withdraw a bill has been refused. Before the house refuses the request of the hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Sinnott) to withdraw the bill, I think it might consider whether or not the courtesy should be extended to him.


Douglas Scott Harkness: No.


Gordon Graydon: I think, Mr. Speaker, that the house is entitled to a clear answer on this point. Why is the hon. member withdrawing the bill?


Mr. Tremblay:: He has explained that already.


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: In view of the Prime Minister's statement that it would be an all-Canadian route if at all possible.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If I may avail myself of the right to speak to the amendment moved by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe), I may say that I fully appreciate the force of what Your Honour has said as to the practice of the house for the past number of years. I noted in particular, however, that Your Honour suggested that the request to withdraw the bill should not be refused unless the circumstances were unusual. There are quite a number of us who feel that the circumstances in relation to this bill are unusual. We accepted-


Mr. Dewar:: Politics.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Do I hear the hon. member for Qu'Appelle saying "politics"?


Austin Edwin Dewar: That is right. That is what I said.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is the hon. member for Qu'Appelle referring to what I am saying or to the action of the hon. member for Springfield in bringing in this bill in the first place?


Austin Edwin Dewar: To you.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We took it as part of a sincere gesture on the part of the hon. member for Springfield to deal with a problem that was agitating and concerning this parliament.

Pipe Lines Act
As has been said by others who have spoken, we welcomed this bill when it was brought in. The other night the hon. member for Springfield, without moving second reading of another one of his bills, asked that it be dropped and no one objected. But tonight he moved the second reading of this bill, obtained a seconder, made a speech and put the whole proposition into the possession of the house. There were three speeches ahead of mine in support of the bill. I, too, am in support of it and I believe that there are others.
I think that under the circumstances permission to withdraw should not be granted. It is not just a case of one dissenting voice, as the standing order and citation 454 indicates; it is a case of a number of dissenting voices. However, in the meantime the Minister of Trade and Commerce has moved as an amendment that the bill be not now read a second time but that it be given the six months' hoist. That is clear enough. That would kill the bill so far as this session is concerned, if that amendment carries. But I for one am opposed to that amendment and I think we should have a vote on it.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Mr. Speaker, I have never taken up much time of the house on pipe lines. I know little about pipe lines, although I am the only member that holds and controls one; I have a map of it in my office. I am sorry I was not in the chamber at eight o'clock. I will be quite honest about it, Mr. Speaker; the reason that I was not here was that I was going to go to Montreal tonight, and had made a reservation.


An hon. Member:: Good-bye.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I have a new car, and my wife and I are going down to Montreal.


An hon. Member:: How are chances?


An hon. Member:: Do you want company?


George Alexander Cruickshank: I do not know just exactly who is making this speech, but I am in this extremely fortunate position with regard to my seat in this House of Commons. From it I am looking across at the most charming part of the House of Commons. As I said, I have never taken much of the time of this house on pipe lines. Probably the reason I have not taken up as much time as I should have taken up on pipe lines is that the matter concerns my riding and my province so greatly. I cannot quite understand the attitude of some of my colleagues from my own province in the matter, and I do not think that their constituents can quite understand it either. I was just down to see a couple of the ministers about a wire I

just received. That' was the reason that I had to cancel my trip to Montreal. I had five long distance calls today and two wires.


An hon. Member:: That is too many.


George Alexander Cruickshank: And I put two through myself.


An hon. Member:: Collect?


George Alexander Cruickshank: The unfortunate part
about those wires is that we are afraid of another flood in the Fraser valley. The last one I received just five minutes ago from my personal representative out there. We had a flood in 1948, Mr. Speaker-


An hon. Member:: Why talk about that?


George Alexander Cruickshank: You asked me what these are about.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Would you like this pipe line to take the water out?


Mr. Mutch:: To take some of the gas out.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I do not know that we need the pipe line to take the water out. I understand that the people in some parts of the prairies, Mr. Speaker, would like some of that water that we unfortunately are afraid we are going to get in the Fraser valley within the next 48 hours. They would like some of that water.


An hon. Member:: Carried.


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am getting a good deal of advice from some of these people around here, Mr. Speaker, and I should like them to get to their feet and make their own speeches, not mine. The hon. member for Springfield, in all sincerity, introduced a bill which I believe would be in the best interests of the country. In the past I have had something to say about piping gas from Alberta to my own province and to my own riding in particular. Incidentally, Mr. Speaker, I know that some of these other members have in mind the broad view of the development of Canada, in the interests of Canada. So have I. But like the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew), I have the interests of my own riding at heart first, and I make no bones about it. He may take exception to that remark, but he has not the riding that I have.
I believe that the gas from Alberta should be piped entirely within Canada. One hon. member mentioned the fact that some $50,000 -I think that was the figure; or maybe it was $150,000-would be spent in his riding in building pipe, through the Dominion Bridge Company. I am one of those unfortunate persons who do not know the Dominion Bridge Company. I do not know whether or not they are going to assist me at the

time of the next general election; I hope they are, but I do not know that. If we built the whole line within Canada, I would just point out, through you, to the members of the house, the amount of pipe that would be purchased and built within Canada as compared with the amount that would be required if we built only three or four hundred miles of the line in Canada. As I understand this bill, it is to provide that all pipe lines are to be within Canada.


An hon. Member:: Main lines.


George Alexander Cruickshank: Yes, main lines.


An hon. Member:: The three mile limit.


George Alexander Cruickshank: There is no filibuster about this because I entered it late in the discussion. This afternoon I listened to the estimates of the Department of Public Works being discussed in committee. This is Bill No. 132, an act to amend the Pipe Lines Act. I do not know whether it has been read into the record or not.


John Lambert Gibson: It should be on the record.


George Alexander Cruickshank: His Majesty, by and with the advice and consent-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Some hon. Members:: Question!


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am getting a lot of advice here and I enjoy it, Mr. Speaker. You know, Mr. Speaker, when you are talking about a bill that affects your province you must stop and consider every section. That is the reason why I am trying to put it on the record. I continue:
1. Subsection one of section twelve of the Pipe Lines Act. chapter twenty of the statutes of 1949, is repealed and the following substituted therefor:
12. (1) -


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I do not think the hon. member should read the bill. The bill is before hon. members at the present time. I would ask him not to read the bill at this time.


George Alexander Cruickshank: No? Mr. Speaker, I think the people of Canada, and particularly of my province, would be interested. The unfortunate part is that so few people of Canada get copies of these bills. Admitted, a certain number get copies of Hansard-possibly too many. The reason I want to put the bill on the record is that the people of Canada, and particularly of my province and riding, would appreciate what the hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Sinnott) is endeavouring to do. As I understand it-he can correct me if I am wrong-he is endeavouring to keep our resources within Canada. Even the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Pipe Lines Act
Knowles) pointed out-I do not agree with him very often because he is seldom right in his judgment.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You have to be right once in a while.


George Alexander Cruickshank: If I remember the words correctly he stated a few minutes ago that the resources of Canada should be developed in Canada and for Canadians, or words to that effect. If it was not the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre who said that, it was one of his group. I hate to admit that two of his group can be right on the same day.
In British Columbia, and in particular in the Fraser valley, we have every natural resource.


An hon. Member:: Except oil.


George Alexander Cruickshank: One of my colleagues says "a good member". I am too modest to say that myself, but I entirely agree with what he says. In order to develop our great province and my great riding we want to bring in gas.
To our east is the sister province of Alberta. When you are going west either by plane or by train the first thing that inspires you as a Canadian and to be a great Canadian is that when you are in the province of Alberta you approach the great mountains of British Columbia. That is one thing that does inspire you. This has all to do with the gas pipe line. When you get out there you see the sign "the great divide" and it is a great divide. You who come from eastern Canada, the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, when you are on your way to the great land of the west, you see that sign leading into the finest-


An hon. Member:: Margarine.


George Alexander Cruickshank: There is no margarine out there.


John Lambert Gibson: Will the hon. member permit a question? This bill deals directly with the problem of keeping the main line of this gas pipe line within Canada. He and I both realize the very difficult terrain that Canada sometimes presents. In this instance will he describe in some detail the route that this line might follow through British Columbia, because I am sure he is able to do that.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: How would you get over the divide?


George Alexander Cruickshank: I am glad to have had a fellow member from the province of British Columbia ask me that question, but he does not come from the Fraser valley; yet he has the great privilege of living within our province.

Pipe Lines Act
One of the reasons we want this gas line to go through an all-Canadian route, Mr. Speaker, is this. I have in my pocket a picture; I am sorry I cannot show it to every hon. member. It is a picture of one tree, a Douglas fir of British Columbia, which contains 41,950 feet of lumber, which will build approximately five houses. That is the reason we want this pipe line to go by an all-Canadian route. I was a little discouraged in my argument in this connection. But then later on-I do not know whether it was through my eloquence or through my good judgment-I was able to win over the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Gibson).
Incidentally, the hon. member for Comox-Alberni represents a very fine riding. The best thing about the riding is that my wife comes from there. In answer to his question -I have forgotten what the question was-


John Lambert Gibson: The details of the terrain.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: How do you get over the divide?


George Alexander Cruickshank: How do you get over it?


John Lambert Gibson: Yes.


George Alexander Cruickshank: You know, Mr. Speaker, I was driving home one year, across the American continent-including the United States, because up to that time we had not, in our poor judgment, seen fit to build a trans-Canada highway. In my travels I went through the city of Denver, where they have a wonderful museum. I know the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon) has been there. I do not mean of course that he was part of the exhibit in the museum, but rather that he has been in Denver. Among other things they have several parts of the first covered wagon that went across the continent in the days of '49.


Gordon Graydon: Did it follow an all-Canadian route?


George Alexander Cruickshank: No, unfortunately it went through the United States. But when the hon. member for Comox-Alberni asked me how we were going to cross the mountains, when he knows about the great pioneers with their covered wagons and their oxen, with the hostile Indians of those days, and when he asks me how we are going to cross the great divide to build a pipe line, it is just the sort of question I would expect from him.
We have built two great trans-Canada railways, and we are now building a highway across the country. I believe it is entirely possible, feasible and economically sound that an all-Canadian pipe line should be built so

as to retain our resources within our own dominion, and particularly in my own province and riding.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: Mr. Speaker, I believe this is the first time during this session at any rate that I have intervened in these and kindred debates. Perhaps I should begin by saying that while I listened to most of the other debates, in many respects this I believe is the most unique to which I have listened for a long time. Part of that uniqueness arises from a situation which, I suggest, does no credit to the House of Commons, and particularly to some members of it. I refer to the denial of the privilege being extended to an hon. member to withdraw a motion he had proposed.
Whether this has been done facetiously, or with a deliberate intent to embarrass the hon. member, or for whatever reason it may have been, it is, sir, a discourtesy which has been unusual in my experience here; and I should not like to let it pass without drawing attention to it.
Further than that, as a member of the House of Commons I resent the suggestion that if a member desires to withdraw a motion, or anything he has said or done in the house, having changed his mind, he has done something discreditable-because that was the implication which was made deliberately, apparently. There are not many who have sat in the House of Commons longer than I have, and I say that if we were to banish from the membership of the house not only those who have changed their minds, but some who have boxed the compass on almost every question that has come up, we would be a badly discredited lot. There were at least two members in the last parliament who, if they never spoiled their ballot, certainly did everything with it that a man could do-and I suppose we have some runners-up for that record.
As a member from Manitoba I resent the suggestion that there is anything discreditable in a member wishing to withdraw his motion. As I heard him giving his reasons for changing his mind, it seemed to me that they were more reasonable and cogent than any of the reasons I have heard thus far for refusing the withdrawal of his motion.
The whole question of pipe lines legislation has been debated in the House of Commons during two sessions of parliament. The house has given its decision on four separate occasions this year, and it seems to me that any attempt to revive a discussion of matters which were settled by the house on those four occasions smacks either of facetiousness or of insincerity.

The hon. member who introduced the bill, realizing that the house had made its decision this session, was prepared to let the matter drop and, in those circumstances, it seems to me a bit unusual-and perhaps not; hon. members may use this occasion to get in a parting shot on the subject-to attempt to make it appear as though there was something unreasonable, improper or insincere in his attitude. There is a great deal more that one could say, but I shall not speak at greater length, when this is my first intervention in the debate.


Clarence Gillis: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Leslie Alexander Mutch: Yes.


Clarence Gillis: Can the hon. member tell me why it was the hon. member for Springfield (Mr. Sinnott) introduced his bill, made his speech on it and then asked to withdraw it? If he did not want it to go before the house, he should have let it drop earlier.


John Sylvester Aloysius Sinnott: If the hon. member had been here he would have heard.


Clarence Gillis: I did not hear it. The hon. member moved it and made a speech on it, and then he asked to withdraw it.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: I am not going to interpret other men's minds. I do not know why he followed the procedure he did follow. I do not know why he introduced the bill in the first place, if it comes down to that. I have not inquired from him, any more than I have inquired from other hon. members who introduce bills for a variety of reasons. I had better not say much about that because I may be tempted some day to bring one in- although in seventeen years I have not yet done so.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order:	nine o'clock.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: I move the adjournment of the debate.	.


Mr. Speaker:: Before the debate is adjourned, does the house wish to grant the hon. member leave to withdraw his bill?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: Then I move the adjournment of the debate.


Mr. Speaker:: It being nine o'clock, the house will resume the business which was interrupted at six o'clock.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Beaudoin in the chair.
55946-238^
Supply-Public Works
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
301. British Columbia, $3,150,000.


Mr, Jones:: Mr. Chairman, I notice there is a sum of $200,000 for customs and immigration buildings at Osoyoos. Last year there was the sum of $100,000. I made inquiries last year and was informed that the work would be proceeded with immediately. Nothing has happened since, but the port is increasing in importance, and the need for the building is greater than ever. I have no doubt that the increased amount of the estimate indicates that the minister is aware of that fact. Can he tell me when work will be started on the building?


Alphonse Fournier: Where is that?


Mr. Jones:: Osoyoos.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It starts with an "O".


Alphonse Fournier: This amount is required for the purchase of an addition to the site and for the erection thereon of highway buildings, a warehouse and bus terminal to provide more adequate facilities for customs service at Osoyoos. We voted that estimate on the 10th of December last. We have looked into the matter, and we believe the total cost for the building and the purchase of the site will amount to $200,000. We have not completed the acquisition of the property. The moment we have the site we will proceed with the plans, and we hope to call for tenders before the end of this fiscal year.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister give the committee the present situation with regard to a new customs building for Vancouver and also a new post office building?


Alphonse Fournier: This is an amount of $400,000. The site of the proposed customs building is located at the eastern end of the block bordered by Burrard, Pender and Hastings streets. We have appointed an architect, Mr. C. B. K. Van Norman, to prepare plans. He was appointed nearly a year ago. I understand the plans are well under way, if not near completion. The moment we receive the plans and specifications we will ask for tenders.


Howard Charles Green: When will construction begin?


Alphonse Fournier: My deputy is more optimistic than I am. He says we will probably start the building before the end of this year.


Howard Charles Green: What about the post office building?


Alphonse Fournier: In this case we have a site appropriated, and architects were

Supply-Public Works
appointed in February of this year. The architects are McCarter and Nairn. They say that plans are not yet far enough advanced to have an accurate description of the building. However, it will measure approximately 500 feet by 280 feet and will be five storeys high.


Howard Charles Green: The building will not be commenced for some time yet?


Alphonse Fournier: I am told they do not expect construction to get under way before next spring.


Percy Chapman Black: What remuneration is paid to these architects who design the buildings?


Alphonse Fournier: They are paid according to the tariff in each province. They have their associations and tariffs that the government follows as does any individual employing architects.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
304. Newfoundland (commitment authority $100,000), $300,000.
William Joseph Browne: Will the minister explain what this item is for? I notice that $750,000 was voted last year. I do not know if all of that was spent. There is $300,000 for this year with no particulars.


Alphonse Fournier: This vote of $300,000 is required for improvements, repairs and renewals in connection with dominion public buildings in the province of Newfoundland. It is not known in advance what repairs will be required to the various buildings, but it is essential to maintain them in good condition. The number of buildings and premises in the province of Newfoundland that have to be maintained from this appropriation is thirty-six made up of eighteen government-owned structures and eighteen rented premises. Last year we had an estimate of $750,000 and we spent $211,655.31. This year we expect to spend approximately the amount asked for, $300,000.


Howard Charles Green: Will the minister explain how these items are made up? The description reads:
Dominion public buildings-improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the total amount of $800,000 . . .
I should like to know what the expression "commitments against future years" means.


Alphonse Fournier: Here is the explanation given to me by my officials. The purpose of the commitment authority is merely to avoid increasing the general vote beyond the actual cash required for this fiscal year.

Should the vote be fully encumbered before the end of the fiscal year, emergency repairs may be authorized under the commitment authority permitting a contract to be awarded. If when we get to the last months of the year we have spent the whole amount, then this is authority to award contracts that would run over into the next year. We would not pay that money but we would be authorized to commit the government for this amount. We thought this was the better method in order to keep our estimates down to a point where we would not have revotes next year. We wanted to keep our estimates lower, but we will probably make mistakes, and if some emergency occurs we are authorized to commit the government and ask for a vote next year out of this commitment. It is to complete jobs that may be under way after we have expended the amount of $300,000.


Howard Charles Green: Is this the first year that a provision of this kind has been placed in the estimates?


Alphonse Fournier: We have had it for three or four years. It was during my time this was brought into being on the advice of the treasury board. If we did not have this commitment authority probably the officials would have recommended a vote of $400,000 for this year. In their minds they think they need $300,000, but they would not want to be caught in an emergency without the authority to complete contracts that have been commenced, or even undertake pressing works.


Howard Charles Green: The idea is that we vote $300,000 under this item, and also vote authority to spend an additional $100,000 if necessary.


Alphonse Fournier: It would not be spent. We would be committed to it by contract but the payment would be made in the next year. It is only authority to commit for the next year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
311. British Columbia (commitment authority $50,000), $525,000.
Howard Charles Green: Can the minister tell us to what particular buildings this item is allocated?


Alphonse Fournier: The number of buildings and premises in the province of British Columbia which have to be maintained from this appropriation is 153. It is made up of seventy-four government-owned structures and seventy-nine rented premises. There is commitment authority in the amount of

$50,000. I cannot tell you exactly what buildings we will redecorate or fix up during the year, but this is the amount that is spent to keep them in a good state of repair.


Howard Charles Green: To cover all of them.


Alphonse Fournier: All buildings we
occupy.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Will the minister explain
why the commitment authority varies from province to province?


Alphonse Fournier: It varies according to the number of buildings that we have. I have just explained what the commitment authority is. It is not the expenditure of money. We might have works under way, and if the amount of $525,000 was all encumbered then we could commit the government to further expenditures but we would have to come back to parliament to get them voted.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-
313. Branch administration, $352,885.
Agar Rodney Adamson: On this engineering item I want to ask for the details, but first I am going to offer a suggestion. This spring we have had brought very vividly to our attention the hazard of fire; not fire in an individual plant or an individual house, but fire that can devastate a whole community. Obviously many other communities in Canada are just as great fire hazards as were Rimouski and Cabano, and I suggest that some consideration should be given to the drafting of a municipal fire code so that in communities so vulnerable as were these two in Quebec, proper precautions may be taken to prevent similar occurrences. I realize that this may be a little beyond anything now being done by the department. I also appreciate the splendid work being done by the underwriters' association in this connection. But, Mr. Chairman, I am afraid there will be other great fires in Canada unless steps are taken to prevent them.
Here we have the engineering branch of a federal department, and insurance is a federal matter. When we have a holocaust such as we had at Rimouski it becomes a federal responsibility to furnish relief. I am merely suggesting that an ounce of prevention be applied by the department in drawing up a code. Many communities built in the last half century are fire hazards of the worst type, and it was only due to merciful Providence that the loss of life in those two great fires was not very large. I believe the federal authority should at least consider the possibility of drawing up some statutory regulations which over a period of
Supply-Public Works
years would eradicate these fire hazards. I know it cannot be done all at once. I know this may be something new, and perhaps outside the jurisdiction of this department; but we know that when we have a great fire the federal authorities have to provide relief, and rightly so. I suggest that this is the time to exercise some measure of prevention, so I leave that suggestion with the minister.
Then I should like to know exactly what this item includes, if the minister will give that to me in as great detail as possible.


Alphonse Fournier: I thank the hon. gentleman for his suggestion. My only embarrassment is that even if we did work on a code as he suggests we would not have authority to implement it in the municipalities. Our authority with respect to the municipalities does not exist; they are provincial creatures. We could suggest it to them, but they would not have to follow our advice, and I am pretty sure they would not if it involved any great expense.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Of course I realize the difficulty with respect to the municipalities, which are provincial creatures.


Alphonse Fournier: No doubt any suggestions would be taken into consideration, and might be adopted in certain parts of the country. I think the suggestion is good, but as the department is organized now I do not know how we could proceed with it. However, we shall give it some thought.
This item covers, engineering branch administration, and the details appear at page 230. The branch consists of a chief engineer, an assistant chief engineer, three superintending engineers, and so on; the hon. member can see the list of employees, of whom 52 are permanent and 56 are temporary. Salaries account for $301,885, and the balance is for printing, stationery and office equipment, travelling expenses, testing laboratories for engineering investigations, and sundries. The increase is due mainly to statutory increases, revised rates of pay and reclassifications. There is a net increase of two in the number of employees and an increase under the printing and stationery item, less a decrease of about $2,500 in the amount provided for the testing laboratories.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What work is done in the testing laboratories?


Alphonse Fournier: All materials that go into the construction of the various works we undertake.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Would that be just with regard to the strength of materials, or would it be as to their fire-resistant qualities?

Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: Both physical and chemical.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What I had in mind, though I did not elaborate upon it, was something perhaps in the nature of a federal grant for fire protection bureaux, supplemented by grants from the provinces.


Alphonse Fournier: That is another field.


Agar Rodney Adamson: That might result in a fire protection code. That might be of interest to the federal government in connection with civil defence, which of course will involve questions of fire protection.


Alphonse Fournier: Actually there is a dominion fire prevention officer, but he does not come under this department. If I am not mistaken he comes under the Department of Finance.


Agar Rodney Adamson: After all, fire protection is primarily an engineering problem. You have your engineering staff, and in the light of what has happened recently we should not just coast along until another disaster strikes us. All I am asking at the moment is that the matter be given consideration.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Under this item I am going to seek some information from the minister. I have been endeavouring to get it from another department, without success. All these surveys, I understand, come under the Department of Public Works. In May and June of 1949 a survey was made in Rustico harbour in connection with improvements to the harbour and a hridge to connect with Robinson's island in the national park. I have not been able to get very much information with reference to whether this survey was reported to the Department of Public Works or to the national resources department.


Alphonse Fournier: Perhaps it was
Resources and Development?


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I asked the resources and development department about it the other day, and from what I was told I assumed it came under public works. I believe the Minister of Public Works knows about the survey that was made by those engineers during the months of May and June in 1949. Possibly a report was made about the building of this bridge, and also for the protection of the harbour. I am sure the Prime Minister knows about it, because during the election campaign the people of that community gave him a dinner of the finest lobsters that were ever drawn out of the sea. I hope he would know something about it. Has the minister anything to say with regard to that?


Alphonse Fournier: The only engineer from headquarters that was sent down to the Island last year was Mr. Goodspeed, the assistant chief engineer. He did not go down there to survey the park situation, but to see what could be done with harbour development. If there were other surveys they were not made by engineers from the Department of Public Works.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dredging-
316. Newfoundland, $764,200.
Gordon Francis Higgins: Mr. Chairman, I believe the details of that item appear on page 231. Will the minister give me a breakdown of the amount for plant which is given as about $500,000?


Alphonse Fournier: The breakdown of this is: wages, $19,200; maintenance, operations and rental of plant, $200,000; new plant, $495,000; contract and day labour works, inspection and sundries and contingencies, $50,000. Now the hon. member wanted to know about the new plant. This amount covers the construction of a new dredge to replace the old dredge that the province handed over to the federal government on the date of union. It was found that this old dredge could not help us very much, so the government decided to build a new dredge. The order in council was dated April 4, 1950. I believe this dredge is being built by Vickers, under a contract given out by the Canadian Commercial Corporation.


Gordon Francis Higgins: When is it expected the dredge will be built?


Alphonse Fournier: I am told it will be in operation this fall.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Does that mean that until it is built there will be no dredging done?


Alphonse Fournier: We have rented a dredge or have contracted for one to do the work this summer.


Gordon Francis Higgins: In that case, can the minister tell me what is proposed to be done this year in the way of dredging?


Alphonse Fournier: The moment we are
sure of the date that we can get the dredge we will have a schedule for this work; so many days or so many hours at certain places. That has not been finalized yet.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Has anything been planned
at all?


Alphonse Fournier: We are receiving
reports from our engineers.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I asked whether there was
any dredging planned in the district of St. John's East, and if so, where?


Alphonse Fournier: Up to date, the plan
covering these projects has not been finalized, and I would not want to give a definite answer.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Will the minister bear in
mind this particular district?


Alphonse Fournier: I shall not forget it.


William Joseph Browne: I should
like to know two things. First, how much was spent under this vote last year?


Alphonse Fournier: The total was


William Joseph Browne: Second, I
should like to point out that Renews harbour is badly in need of dredging. It is a wide harbour that fills up with silt rather quickly. It is several years now since a dredge has. been there, and we were promised the dredge would go there the first thing this year. Now we learn that the dredge has been condemned, so I hope the minister will put that place near the top of the list because the fishermen are not able to bring their boats into the harbour at low tide. They can only bring them in and out at high tide. These fishermen are an industrious group, and it is quite a large harbour.


Alphonse Fournier: What is the name of that place?


William Joseph Browne: Renews. I trust the minister will consider the urgent need there, and the fact that the dredge has been promised. I hope it will be one of the first places to be considered.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dredging-
317. Maritime provinces, $1,694,000.
Percy Chapman Black: I should like to
ask the minister at what places in the maritime provinces it is expected dredging will be done this season.


Alphonse Fournier: Dredge No. 4 during
this season will be dredging at Bathurst, in the constituency of Gloucester. Dredge No. 5-since this has been prepared I understand that dredge No. 4 is out of order. We are having it repaired right now. Dredge No. 5 will be at Yarmouth, Nova Scotia. Dredge No. 9 will be at Wood Island, P.E.I.; South River, P.E.I.; Montague, P.E.I. The dredge Pownal, No. 2 will be at Victoria, P.E.I. Dredge No. 12 will be at Egmont Bay, P.E.I.; Cape Traverse, P.E.I. Dredge No. 14 will be at Wood Islands, P.E.I., Little Sands, P.E.I.; Launching, P.E.I.; Sturgeon, P.E.I.; Graham's Pond, P.E.I. Dredge No. 15 will be at Blue Rock, N.S.; Stonehurst, N.S.; and North West Cove, Lunenburg, N.S.; Blandford, N.S.; Goat
Supply-Public Works
Lake, N.S., Chester, N.S., front harbour; Chester, N.S., back harbour; Young's Landing, N.S.; Saw Pit, N.S.; La Have, N.S.; Mahone Bay, N.S. Dredge No. 16 will be at Shelburne, N.S.; Wedge Point, N.S.; Cape St. Mary's, N.S.; Little Harbour, N.S. Dredge No. 17 will be at Anglo Rustico, P.E.I.; Rustico-Gauthier's Creek, P.E.I.; Bentinck Cove, P.E.I.; Naufrage, P.E.I.; Red Head, P.E.I.; Morell River, P.E.I.; Souris, P.E.I. Dredge No. 18 will be at Little Lorraine, N.S.. Dredge No. 19 will be . at Cape Auget, N.S.; Babin's Cove, N.S.; Petite de Grat, N.S.; Rockdale, N.S.; Rabbit Island, N.S. Dredge No. 115 will be at Glace Bay, N.S.; Montague, P.E.I.


Percy Chapman Black: That is quite a
list of dredging to be done. I see that the minister has omitted Pugwash harbour, the best natural harbour in the maritime provinces. I have received information privately about that. I was disappointed that the dredging at Pugwash had been delayed so long, but I shall not press for it this year in view of the considerable work that is being done in renewing and extending the wharf. The figures I have indicate that it would take $800,000 to dredge the outer harbour to a depth of 27 feet. There is a passage there now of 22 feet.


Alphonse Fournier: Twenty-four feet.


Percy Chapman Black: The estimate to dredge the channel is $400,000. I should like to ask the minister where he got those figures and who made up those estimates. They are greatly in excess of any estimates we have ever had before. Of course there is no limit in the estimates as to what extent the dredging will amount to. The cost will be up according to the volume of the dredging to be done. But the dredging of the channel, taking out two or three narrow projecting crooks in the harbour, would not amount to nearly this sum. I should like to ask the minister as to estimates that have been given for this work the department proposes for Pugwash harbour, where the calculations were made, and if actual surveys have been made of the harbour.


Alphonse Fournier: We have spent quite a bit of money at Pugwash. I think the last contract given there on the wharf was $400,000. You have actually a channel of 24 feet. That is the report of my engineers. If they are wrong, we shall have to find some other engineers and go into it. But that is the information that I get. During the war that port certainly did a huge business and it had only that 24-foot channel. To dredge it out to 27 feet would cost $800,000 and we have just spent $400,000. That would make $1,200,000. My report comes from my district

Supply-Public Works
engineer who is quite an experienced man. The hon. member for Cumberland knows him. I refer to Mr. Cox. He knows that district quite well and he is hardly convinced that the commercial value to Pugwash would justify this expenditure of another $800,000. My mind is open, but before I take another decision I would have to receive some very convincing arguments.


Percy Chapman Black: I think the
steamers they take in there draw a maximum depth of about 22 feet. As I say, I am not at this time going to press for further expenditure on Pugwash channel or Pugwash harbour this season. I should like to hear from the minister as to what is proposed for the import-tant harbour on the western part of the bay of Fundy at Parrsboro. The department made some surveys and calculations a few years ago and improvements were to be made at Parrsboro harbour so that these ordinary lumber shipping steamers could be taken into the harbour. Will the minister make a statement with respect to what is eventually proposed in Parrsboro? Is any work to be done at the present time?


Alphonse Fournier: I am sorry, but I am told that there is no estimate this year for Parrsboro harbour. I am pleased that the hon. gentleman draws this matter to my attention. I will certainly get a report from my officials. Actually I would not be in a position to make a statement, but I will certainly look into the matter.


Percy Chapman Black: I wish to thank the minister. There is another small construction that is required on the Northumberland strait. That is a wharf and protection for the smaller boats, particularly the lobster boats, along the shore line of about 30 miles between Pugwash harbour and Wallace harbour. It is only about a third of that distance directly between those points but following the shore line I understand it is about thirty miles. It is the very centre of the lobster industry of the world, I suppose, and the boats that are used there have no protection. They require some protection on the shore between Pugwash and Wallace. I would ask the minister if he has any estimates for this work at the present time; and if not, if he would give special attention to the needs of the fishermen in this locality. I understand there is no other place in the northern part of Nova Scotia or Cape Breton Island where there is so much need and where there is so little protection as there is at this point. Down in the county of Pictou there is a wharf of this kind and there is protection every few miles. At the point to which I referred it is badly needed and I should like some statement from the minister.
EMr. Fournier (Hull).]


Alphonse Fournier: I will call the attention of my engineers to the remarks made this evening by the hon. gentleman; and they will prepare for me or get a report from the local engineers. We will give serious consideration to these remarks.


Percy Chapman Black: There is one other item in the details about which I should like to ask; that is a new plant for dredging, $545,000. Last year under this heading there was an appropriation of $560,000. Can the minister give the committee some particulars as to that?


Alphonse Fournier: New plant, to replace dredge No. 5, total estimated cost, $400,000, required 1950-51	$300,000 to complete,
replacing nine pontoons for dredge No. 5, such pontoons beyond repair. To replace dredge No. 13, contract was given for $365,000. There is a balance to be paid of $200,000 on that new dredge; one 125 cubic yard dump scow for dredge 15, to replace old one beyond repair; and quarter yard steel dredge for New Brunswick-no, that was taken out. I have a note of it.


Percy Chapman Black: Where is the construction being carried on?


Alphonse Fournier: Saint John dry dock and one at Pictou.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I just want to ask one question under item 317. I thought I heard the minister say that dredging would be done at Wood Island. I did not hear what amount of work was to be done. I just wish to impress upon him that during last season, during the busy part of it, the dredging was left until it was quite late and it interfered a good deal, in the busiest part of the season. If it were possible, as to whatever dredging is to be done there, it would be in the interests of good shipping and good transportation of the Northumberland ferries route to have this dredging done early in the season. Last year one of the boats, the Charles A. Dunning, was unable to make her regular trips because of the fact that the dredging was not done at an early date. I just mention this matter so that the minister will have it in mind to see to it that the dredging at Wood Island is done as early in the season as possible.


Alphonse Fournier: It is the first one in the program.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dredging-
320. British Columbia and Yukon, $722,800.
Edmund Davie Fulton: I rise not to make any complaint in respect of the dredging in British Columbia because I find, as I think most hon.

members from British Columbia do, that we get the best of co-operation from the officials of the department out there who are, as a matter of fact, handicapped only by lack of equipment. But I am interested in two items here. The first is the salary paid to the permanent officer of the dredging branch in British Columbia. I find that he is described as a senior inspector of dredges whereas those in the other districts are described as district superintendents of dredges. I think he has more men under his control than any other district, except the maritime district, and yet his salary is about $900 less than any of the others? Why is that?


Alphonse Fournier: These salaries are rated by the civil service commission. The only thing we do is to pay the salary that the commission has fixed, with the approval of the treasury board.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It seems to me, from the description we have here of his office, that it is somehow of a lower grading than the others. Would that be a matter under the control of this department? At least I think this department might make recommendations, because from the appearance of the estimates this official is given as much responsibility as the others.


Alphonse Fournier: I understand that we do make recommendations as to classifications or increases, but they are not always approved by the civil service commission or the treasury board. I will look into this case to see exactly what it is.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Can the minister tell us what new plant is being acquired or constructed this year?


Alphonse Fournier: There is a new scow and booster pump for dredge No. 305, $75,000.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Can the minister tell me which one is dredge No. 305?


Alphonse Fournier: The suction dredge.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Where is it stationed?


Alphonse Fournier: New Westminster.


Agar Rodney Adamson: No item on dredging would be complete without some mention of Ripple Rock. I suppose that has ceased to be an item.


Alphonse Fournier: This year I could not bring in an item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maintenance and operation of roads and bridges-
321. Burlington channel bridge, $93,950.
Mr. Catherwood:: The detail of this item would indicate that the increase is made
Supply-Public Works
up mainly of supplies, $36,980. I am very glad to see this increase because this particular bridge gives access to an important highway. Can the minister indicate what work is being done and what is the nature of the work?


Alphonse Fournier: The increase of $36,980 is due principally to provision being made for the installation of an auxiliary power supply for emergency use in the event of hydroelectric power failure. Installation of this emergency generating equipment was recommended by the coroner's jury following an inquest into the circumstances of a drowning last year when an automobile went through the open bridge into the water during an interruption in the hydro-supplied power.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-construction, acquisition, repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-
333. Newfoundland, $1,100,000.
Gordon Francis Higgins: I should like to ask the minister a question on this item. I see all the districts represented in these two figures except the district of St. John's East. There may be some forgetfulness about it; I am sure it is not intentional.


Stanley Howard Knowles: How did they vote there?


Gordon Francis Higgins: We have one very important project; I believe the minister is familiar with it. It was requested some time ago. It is in connection with Flatrock, the building of a canal from the open sea into a pond to shelter the boats. I think a formal request was made to the resident engineer in St. John's. I believe it has been transferred here. I am not certain whether that is so or not.


Alphonse Fournier: At what place?


Gordon Francis Higgins: Flatrock. I do not blame the minister for not recognizing the name immediately. It is in St. John's East.


Alphonse Fournier: We will look into it. My officials cannot recall having received the report from the resident engineer in regard to the project. Perhaps it is in the office.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Will the minister take it from me that the request is very urgent. I do not know that it is possible to include it in the main estimates, but a supplementary estimate could be brought down. I am not asking for very much. It is the only part of the district that I am asking-

Supply-Public Works


Alphonse Fournier: What would it cost?


Gordon Francis Higgins: It will not cost very much; less than the item that is in the estimates for Bonavista.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member is being facetious.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I think it is a fair request.


Alphonse Fournier: I will certainly look into it and see if there is a report.


William Joseph Browne: I wonder whether the minister is familiar with last year's expenditure on this item.


Alphonse Fournier: It was $374,154.03.


William Joseph Browne: There is one matter I wish to bring to the attention of the minister. I have already passed over to him several petitions which I have received not from my constituency but from the constituency of my hon. friend who represents Burin-Burgeo. They wish to have a wharf at Arnold's Cove. These people reside on. islands in Placentia Bay, and Arnold's Cove has connection with the highroad into St. John's and also with the railway. It would be a great convenience for people going to the hospital, for passengers travelling on the railroad, going to St. John's and going elsewhere for that matter. They want a wharf constructed at Arnold's Cove, Placentia Bay. I have passed over several petitions from the people of Tack's Beach, Bar Haven and Merasheen and other parts of Placentia Bay. Evidently, from the zeal and the rapidity with which they signed the petition, they are very anxious to get the wharf. It would be a great public service if a wharf were built at Arnold's Cove.


Alphonse Fournier: I will call the attention of the engineers to this, and we shall ask for a report from the resident engineer.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
33i. Nova Scotia, $3,500,000.
Percy Chapman Black: Before this item carries I should like to point out to the committee that the appropriation for the current year under this heading, "construction, repairs and improvements, harbours and rivers, Nova Scotia", is $3,500,000. Last year it was $5,320,000, or a decrease of $1,820,000 this year as compared with last year. I should like to know from the minister why the current year differs from the previous year to this enormous extent of $1,820,000.


Alphonse Fournier: The reason is that even with that large estimate of the last

fiscal year we expended only $2,836,277.91. With the plans that are ready to proceed we do not expect that we can spend more this year than the amount of the estimate. It would be useless to put in any larger amount if our plans are not ready for more work.


Percy Chapman Black: Unfortunately, in the circumstances the expectation of so many people in so many places which was raised by this large figure last year of $5 million will not be realized. I accept the explanation of the minister for the present.


Alphonse Fournier: Every other province has been decreased as well.


Percy Chapman Black: The details of this appropriation show dredging at Dingwall to the extent of $130,000. I should like to know from the minister why it is put under this heading when the special heading we have just passed covered dredging. Why is Dingwall dredging to the extent of $130,000 classified under this heading?


Alphonse Fournier: It is a contract, or rather it is an agreement we have with National Gypsum Company that we undertake to keep a channel open for their boats and for the public. They are paying 25 per cent of the amount because they use this channel, and the public use it. But we entered into an agreement whereby they would pay 25 per cent of this expenditure inasmuch as they are heavy users of it. That is why it forms a special item. A contract has been given to the Porter company. We pay 75 per cent of it.


Percy Chapman Black: That is a reliable concern, and it deserves the support of the department. Is this appropriation of $130,000 to remove material that fills in each year, or is it to enlarge or to expand the channel to that extent?


Alphonse Fournier: It is for maintenance of the channel.


Percy Chapman Black: Purely maintenance?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes.


Percy Chapman Black: To cover filling in from year to year?


Alphonse Fournier: That is right.


Percy Chapman Black: And it will go on continuously. There is another item in which I am interested, and that is the wharf extension at Malagash, amounting to $38,000. What has been done in connection with this appropriation?


Alphonse Fournier: This revote is required for the construction of an ell on the westerly

side of the outer end of the wharf at Mala-gash. The construction of the proposed ell is required for the three-fold purpose of providing more adequate berthing for large steamers loading, for providing working space for the handling of fishing gear for lobsters, and providing shelter for small craft from southwesterly and southeasterly winds and seas. The newly constructed lobster factory located near the head of this wharf employs twenty-five large motor boats in the lobster fishing industry.


Percy Chapman Black: How is the work being done? Is it under contract?


Alphonse Fournier: The contract has not yet been let.


Percy Chapman Black: Have tenders
been called?


Alphonse Fournier: Not yet, I am told.


Percy Chapman Black: Before the item carries I should like to refer to the expenditure at Pugwash, where they are renewing the wharf and extending it. This is a heavy expenditure, and is under contract to a reputable firm. May I express my appreciation on behalf of the people of Pugwash, and the shippers who use the wharf for large shipments of lumber each year. I would express their appreciation, and my own, to the minister and the department for what has been undertaken at that point.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
335. Prince Edward Island, $1,300,000.
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I notice under this item a number of things granted to my constituency, and I am thankful for them. However, there is one item in the county of Prince, known as the West Point ferry, to which I should like to draw attention. I received a letter yesterday in connection with it. As the minister knows, the West Point-Buctouche ferry system was quite an issue about a year and a half ago. I know if the hon. member for Prince were here this evening he would be interested in it.
During the election campaign of 1949 this ferry was an issue, and both parties were committed to it. If there are any people who have not had any proper service it is the people of West Point, which is in one of the finest farming sections of the whole province. If the ferry across to Buctouche were in operation it would be one of the finest things for the farming community of western Prince Edward Island that it would be possible for them to have.
So much interest has been taken in it that an offer was made to the government, or
Supply-Public Works
to the parties who were going to run the private ferry, whereby they could have the use of a wharf on the Buctouche side. Only a small rental was to be paid for it. However, I see nothing in the estimates for this expenditure, and there has been no mention of it in the house. In response to a question I have had I am bringing the matter to the minister's attention so that it shall not die a natural death- or until another campaign comes along. If there is one place in Prince Edward Island that requires better transportation facilities, it is the West Point ferry district.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
339. Manitoba, $398,000.
William Scottie Bryce: Mr. Chairman, I notice an item here for $94,000 for diking and cut-off in the Assiniboine river. Hon. members in districts adjacent to mine have discussed this matter with me thoroughly. Two ministers of the government have agreed that the people I represent would be better served if this $94,000 were taken from the public works estimates and added to the expenditures under P.F.R.A. My only reason for asking for this is that the people would be better served if it were done in that way.
Land will have to be expropriated in connection with these cut-offs, and it would be necessary that the crown hold title to the land. It will be possible to rent it for certain purposes, and derive some benefits therefrom. All the money spent may not be got back, but there certainly would be some returns. I believe both ministers are willing to agree to the suggestion made, and I would ask the Minister of Public Works to express his views in the matter. The Minister of Agriculture does not happen to be in the house this evening, but after talking with him I have learned that he is quite agreeable to taking it over. He maintains he has the necessary facilities, and the men who are engaged in that kind of work.
This is something that must be done, or we will lose one of our highways in Manitoba. The water is getting so close that these cut-offs will have to be made. The question is whether the vote should be turned over to P.F.R.A.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member for Selkirk and the hon. member for Portage la Prairie discussed this matter with me some time ago. They were so convincing that I said if an official request were sent to the Department of Public Works I would submit that suggestion to my colleagues. I have not had time to do so, and I do not know if I can have a transfer of funds from my department

Supply-Public Works to P.F.R.A. However, the matter will certainly be considered by the cabinet at the first opportunity.


William Scottie Bryce: If it goes to P.F.R.A. I hope the minister will see that that extra $90,000 goes on every year for that purpose.


Alphonse Fournier: I would not commit the government on that right now.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: If I might revert to the last item-


Alphonse Fournier: Certainly.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I see there has been $230,000 spent on the harbour at Goderich. While we are very thankful for the money that has been spent, there is another project that the people of Goderich are interested in. They have a very short beach and they have no other way to get down to the other side of the harbour except across the C.N.R. tracks. Of course they have to have permission to do that. Will the government engineers look that over some time and give favourable consideration to putting a road across the C.N.R. tracks down to the beach on the other side of the harbour? As you know, Goderich is a very pretty town. I think perhaps it is by far the prettiest town in western Ontario. It attracts many tourists from the United States, and the money would be well spent on such a project because the government would get it back in tourist traffic. Every dollar you spent there would be repaid. We would like to have some consideration given to that.


Alphonse Fournier: The suggestion is to put a bridge over the tracks at the head of the harbour?


Lewis Elston Cardiff: I do not know how they would go over the tracks.


Alphonse Fournier: At all events, I will ask the resident engineer to look into the matter.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: They cannot get there without going over the tracks, and there is no road down to the beach on that side of the harbour. The only way they can get down there is to cross the tracks or build a bridge.


Alphonse Fournier: I will ask the resident engineer to make a survey and report.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
341. British Columbia and Yukon, $4,200,000.
Howard Charles Green: Does this vote include any money for a fishermen's wharf in False creek at Vancouver? I believe representations have been made to the department by vari-


ous bodies, and I should like to know whether this vote includes any money for that particular project.


Alphonse Fournier: When the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra spoke to me about this False creek float-


Howard Charles Green: Fishermen's wharf.


Alphonse Fournier: -we were expecting a copy of the report of Mr. Cousins of the national harbours board to the city of Vancouver. We received that report in an interim form within the last few days. My officials are of the opinion 'that we should build this wharf or float out of this general vote. I think the estimate for this year will be around $100,000.


Howard Charles Green: Then it is to be built out of this vote?


Alphonse Fournier: Right.


Howard Charles Green: About when will construction begin?


Mr, Fournier (Hull):: I understand our plans will have to be tied in with those of the city. They are working in co-operation, and we will probably be guided by their timetable. We will go ahead with the work.


Howard Charles Green: There is one other project, the completion of the seawall around Stanley park. That work was commenced a good many years ago and has never been completed. It is of great importance to Stanley park in which I think the dominion government has an interest, by the way. It is some sort of an admiralty reserve. The seawall is most essential for the proper protection of the park. I believe the minister has had favourable recommendations from his engineer at the coast. Can he tell us whether any money is included in this vote for that work?


Alphonse Fournier: Not in this vote, but after I received the petitions and representations of nearly every member from British Columbia concerning the condition of this wall I certainly had a thorough study made of the situation. Personally I would recommend an expenditure this year to cover a part of it, not the whole of it, but I do not know what treasury board will decide.


Howard Charles Green: The minister hopes it will be possible to go on with this work this fall?


Alphonse Fournier: Personally I would recommend an expenditure to continue this work but I would not commit myself. I am like others who are in the hands of treasury board. They will decide.


Percy Chapman Black: The minister is a member of the treasury board.


Alphonse Fournier: Yes, but I am only one member.


Howard Charles Green: You had better get that vote through.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
342. Newfoundland (commitment authority $100,000), $400,000.
Gordon Francis Higgins: Will the minister make a statement as to what this item comprises? It is fairly large. Is it a lot of small amounts?


Alphonse Fournier: This general appropriation is required-and this applies to every province except for variations in the amounts-for the maintenance and repair of existing harbour and river facilities in the province of Newfoundland under the jurisdiction of this department to maintain essential traffic in navigable waters. Newfoundland entered confederation on the 1st April, 1949, and until a district office was set up a bulk appropriation of $1 million was granted to this province for the fiscal year 1949-50 reading as follows: "Harbours and rivers generally, construction, repairs and improvements". To conform with appropriations for the other provinces during the fiscal year 1950-51 it now reads the same as all other provinces, "harbours and rivers generally". As to the commitment authority, I have mentioned the purpose of that before. Out of this vote we spent $374,154.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Last year.


Alphonse Fournier: Last year. This year we have an amount of $400,000 with commitment authority for another $100,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, I want to understand this business of commitments better. There are a whole lot more commitments, and I have a desire to know more about them. I have a feeling that they provide nice featherbeds for people to lie on, but I am willing to be convinced that I am wrong.


Alphonse Fournier: I explained this while the hon. member was out.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: No, I was
here. I listened to you before but I could not understand it.


Alphonse Fournier: My goodness, I thought my explanation was crystal clear. At all events, when this was decided upon some years ago the reasoning was along this line. Instead of having $400,000, as in this instance, for maintenance and repairs of these public works, let us say we had $500,000. We found that we did not expend the $500,000.
Supply-Public Works
Treasury board said: "Why can you not give us a figure closer to the expenditure you expect to make?" They suggested that if in the last months of the fiscal year we had pressing and urgent repairs or works to be done we could sign a contract or give out the work, and it would become payable in the next year on commitment authority. This commitment authority is to be voted in the following year if we expend more than $400,000. I wonder if that is clear.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Let us go
back for a moment. I noticed a little while ago that there was an expenditure of $122,000 on an item of $575,000. I wonder if this cushion does not mean that nobody has to work very hard to find out what is going to be needed, that you can take it by and large and always have something as a cushion to fall back on. That is what bothers me. How can there be an expenditure of only $122,000 on an estimate of $575,000 as in item 316? Can there be any real economy when you have such a tremendous amount of leeway?


Alphonse Fournier: You are speaking of
Newfoundland, which came into confederation on April 1. We did not have any staff there; we just put in a figure and worked on that. After April 1 we sent our engineer down there. Your neighbour from Newfoundland understands the situation. We sent an engineer from headquarters to receive requests and make surveys of the repair and maintenance work that had to be done. When we put in this estimate we did not know what it would mean. This year we have that information, and the estimate has been reduced in accordance with the expenditure made last year and what was expected to be required this year. We are not playing with this. We have officials working on it the year round, to try to get our estimates as close as possible.
For many years my problem has been that hon. members come and ask "Why this revote? Why does this go on for three or four years?" That could be explained in two ways; either we were slow in getting the work done and could not spend the money voted, or we asked treasury board and this house for too much. We are trying to keep the proper balance, and we think it is best to keep an estimate down to what we think we will spend. If there should be an emergency, however, we ask for authority not to spend money but to commit the government and then come back to parliament and put through the vote. This is the result of years of study by people who have had a great deal of experience. Perhaps they may be wrong and just the two of us may be right; I do not know.

Supply-Public Works


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister is so persuasive it is very difficult to ask any further questions. However, I would like one or two instances, if he has them handy, to show exactly what has happened in past years when he has had these further commitments.


Alphonse Fournier: This is how they
explain it. Suppose I have $400,000. Hon. members know how we proceed; we must have authority from the comptroller of the treasury to encumber these estimates as we give out contracts. When the amount of $400,000 has been completely encumbered the comptroller of the treasury will not grant us another nickel even to undertake pressing or urgent works. Under the Consolidated Kevenue and Audit Act he is not empowered to do so. He will place a limit on the department, and we will not be able to have pressing work done which may be required by a storm or any other unforeseen event. This commitment power, however, gives us the authority to go ahead and give out a contract without paying for it during this fiscal year, voting the estimate next year. The officials of finance, treasury board and comptroller of the treasury developed this method so the government would not be left without authority if something unforeseen should happen.


Howard Charles Green: When a building is to be constructed that is to cost a million dollars, all of which is not to be spent in the current fiscal year, an item of say $500,000 is put in the estimates, but the contract is let for the full $1 million. What is the difference between a vote like that and these votes? Is it that these would cover entirely new contracts?


Alphonse Fournier: Yes. In the case the hon. member mentions we have a special vote for the job, the building or wharf or whatever it is. It is known; the house approves the principle, and we go ahead. Once we decide to build the float we were discussing a moment ago I bring in a vote to cover it and the house gives me authority to proceed. These maintenance and repair items, however, arise as time goes on. Our offices report that this building needs paint, or that building must be repartitioned, or something must be done somewhere else to keep the building in good condition. Under these votes we are not authorizing the department to go out and let contracts; we are giving the department authority to keep these buildings in a good state of repair. That is the difference. If we were to say this $400,000 should go for a building in St. John's we would go ahead and buy the site, prepare the plans, ask for tenders, and give the contract, because parliament would have authorized the construction of that building. The amount we would put in
TMr. Fournier (Hull).]
the estimates would be the amount we expected to spend during the current fiscal year. This is not the same thing at all; it is a general authority for the maintenance of these buildings.


Howard Charles Green: Is this system used in any
other department?


Alphonse Fournier: I believe it is, and if it
is not I would recommend it.


Howard Charles Green: What other departments
vote commitments as distinguished from appropriations?


Alphonse Fournier: National defence has followed our example. As I understand it, this was suggested to cover the cases I have mentioned. I see the Department of Justice has item 148, under which there is a commitment, and I think transport and other departments also follow that practice. I believe the system was first recommended to public works in order to meet this situation.


Howard Charles Green: We are getting a new system here, which is gradually expanding?


Alphonse Fournier: No; it has been in effect for three years now.


Howard Charles Green: But it is spreading to other departments. What is the statutory authority for these commitment votes, as distinct from the appropriation of money?


Alphonse Fournier: If I were the Minister of Finance I would have more data on the whole system. As hon. members know, finance has a good deal of authority over the preparation of estimates and the expenditure of money, and they are the advisers of the other departments. If they find that our estimates are not closely related to the actual expenditures they try to find a way to overcome that difficulty. I have given the example of urgent work. Our money is encumbered; the whole amount will be used for different projects. If something unforeseen happened, even the comptroller of the treasury could not give me authority to put in a pane of glass.


Arthur Leroy Smith: You are arguing that you need a cushion for everything.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know whether that would be the right expression. I am not a financial wizard, and we closely follow what finance and the comptroller of the treasury tell us to do. I cannot see the real argument with respect to this cushion.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Surely your whole argument is that you have an idea of what you will spend. Then you ask for $10 or $100,000, it does not matter, in addition for unforeseen expenses, emergencies if you want to use that word.


Alphonse Fournier: If I did not have this probably my officials would tell me we needed $500,000.


Arthur Leroy Smith: All right; let them say so. At the end of the year you would tell them they were crazy, if you did not need it. Is that not common sense?


Alphonse Fournier: I would not, but perhaps treasury board or the comptroller of the treasury would; that is probably what would take place when they saw we did not spend the money. This is not a case of padding the estimates; it is a matter of making provision for emergencies.


George Alexander Drew: In simple terms, does it not mean this? Under each one of these items starting with 342 and running down to 350, there is an estimate of an amount upon which parliament passes, in this particular case making a total of $2,795,000, and then under each one of those items there is in addition an amount which is termed a commitment authority. Taking item 342, merely as an example, it is represented that in each case, with each amount, you have a commitment authority of $100,000. The total of those commitment authorities is $610,000. As I understand it, what this does is to vote $2,795,000 as an amount which has been estimated and is passed by parliament. Parliament also authorizes a further $610,000 for these items 342 to 350, in the event that they go over to that extent.


Alphonse Fournier: Well, yes, you have it in a way. This commitment will never be spent during this fiscal year. It will have to be voted next year. We will not make any payments of these amounts during the year. What we will do is this. At the end of the year, if we have encumbered the whole of the $2,795,000 and we still have to maintain our works, we will make out the contracts probably because the execution of it we know will go over into the next fiscal year, and we will come back and ask a vote for it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: How do you
guess at your commitments? It is nothing but a guess.


Alphonse Fournier: Absolutely. I cannot give an exact figure for what will take place on all of those works during the year. I have not before me in advance the reports from those district architects or engineers; they are coming in every day. We have an idea, because we own so many buildings and so many works in each province. We know we will have to maintain them during the year, but nobody can give a definite figure.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Can the minister tell us what the total commitment
Supply-Public Works
amount was last year, and to what extent it was used? In other words, the amount of commitments that were made out of the total authorized during the year would give us an idea of the size and significance of this.


Alphonse Fournier: I am told that to get that we would have to have the report prepared by the comptroller of the treasury, because his office encumbers the amounts on the votes which parliament passes. I have at my disposal $400,000 in this case. As time goes on I spend that money and have to go to the comptroller of the treasury with the details of the amounts, if it is contract or day labour or whatever it is. When he authorizes the expenditure of that money it is encumbered on the amount of $400,000. Every month we receive a report of the free balance. When we reach the end of the year if this free balance is fully encumbered, and we still receive from the different parts of the country, from our regional offices, requests for the expenditure of money, that is when we ask the comptroller of the treasury to let us do the work under this commitment. We cannot proceed otherwise.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am going to make a suggestion in order to save time this evening. You might have a caucus witlj the Minister of Finance, and then we can get this figure, for which I have asked and which I think might be interesting, on the finance estimates. Will the minister do that?


Alphonse Fournier: My official tells me that if we ask the comptroller of the treasury for a report of these encumbrances, he will prepare a report and send it to the department. I shall give it to the house.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Would the minister be agreeable to having it left over until then?


Alphonse Fournier: My estimates?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: To have this matter dealt with on the finance estimates.


Alphonse Fournier: Oh, certainly.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Chairman, I do want to clear up one point because I think it is extremely important. The Minister of Public Works has said that this practice is similar to that which has been adopted by the Department of National Defence. Is that right?


Alphonse Fournier: No.


George Alexander Drew: I understood him to say so.


Alphonse Fournier: No. If my recollection is correct, three years ago there was a discussion with the treasury board about the preparation of these estimates. Finding that the estimates and expenditures did not

Supply-Public Works
compare favourably, they said that we should bring down our estimates so that they would be about equal to the expenditures. The resistance came from my officials, engineers and architects, and treasury board suggested this way of dealing with these items so they were prepared according to that system.


Arthur Leroy Smith: It is still a cushion and nothing else, is it not?


Alphonse Fournier: It may be a cushion.


William Joseph Browne: I have the estimates for 1949-50, and there are no commitment authorities given under the Department of Public Works, so that method could not have been in vogue last year. It looks like something that has been introduced this year. Here are the estimates, and there is no indication of its being contained in them.
Perhaps I did not understand the minister correctly, but he said there was a million dollars estimated for this item last year under votes No. 333 and 342 combined. There was nothing spent from this particular vote, though; the whole $374,000 was spent out of the two votes. Is that correct?


Alphonse Fournier: We did not have it under your vote last year. It was a bulk vote. As I said to the committee a moment ago, we did not know exactly what to expect in Newfoundland.


William Joseph Browne: But the
money was spent out of the two votes, No. 333 and 342.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Chairman, there is a point here that has not been made clear. I think we all should know exactly what it is we are doing. There is no necessity whatever for an additional amount being included in this way unless there is some possibility of an additional expenditure this year. If there is no intention of having additional expenditure this year, the practice has been long established to settle the amount that will be spent this year, and then next year include the further amount that will be required for the continuation of the same contract. This practice continues, whether it takes one, two or three years.	.
Now, let me give a simple example. I can think of one case where a hospital has been under construction for three years.


Alphonse Fournier: May I interrupt? If the hon. member reads the heading on this vote he will see that it is for maintenance service, no new work to be undertaken. It is just to keep our existing works in a good state of repair. It is not for new work. What we have we try to keep in good condition.


George Alexander Drew: Perhaps I was using an unsatisfactory illustration because of the nature of

the item, but what I was trying to illustrate was this. No matter what the heading is, if there is an additional commitment amount placed at the side in this way, I feel sure that the passing of these estimates in this form has the effect of approving the expenditure of the amount contained in the main column, that is $2,795,000, and also a commitment for a further amount.
The reason I did conceive what I understood was a reference by the minister to the similarity between this procedure and one that had grown up in the Department of National Defence is that there is a similar procedure there, though it is worded in a different way. The indication is contained in item 202, which is the large all-embracing item of the Department of National Defence, and it says this:
To provide for the defence forces of the navy, army and air services, and to authorize total commitments for this purpose of $579,301,670 including authority, notwithstanding section 29 of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, to make commitments for the current year of $438,178,000 and commitments for future years of $141,123,670 . . .
Is this the same kind of commitment that is contemplated in item 202 in the Department of National Defence?


Alphonse Fournier: My official tells me that this amount of $100,000 in vote 342, commitment authority, and the amount of $141,123,670 would compare. The balance would not be the same thing.


George Alexander Drew: No. Quite apart from the purpose and quite apart from the size, what I am trying to understand is whether these are commitments of a similar nature in their effect as we deal with them in this vote.


Alphonse Fournier: I would not know that. I know what the commitment in my department is. It is used for emergency or when we lack the funds in the last part of the fiscal year. It is never committed unless the need arises, and the need is this. As to these buildings or wharves, you may have an instance where a storm will destroy one of our works which is needed for the local people. If I have encumbered the amount of $400,000, that work will stay there, in Newfoundland, until the next spring or summer. I do not think that these gentlemen would think that this was proper administration, not to take means to repair this damage to these wharves for the poor people they represent in certain parts of the country. We are trying to act like a paterfamilias, and to be as kind as possible to everybody representing these people. That is perhaps only talk; but the idea is not to be caught by something unforeseen that nobody can tell me in advance that I will be called on to

spend money for. What I am told right here now is this. Suppose we did not have this commitment. The officials would have been before treasury board and they would have asked for $500,000. We know we would not have spent it because the $100,000 commitment will be paid only in the next fiscal year.


William Joseph Browne: I just want to apologize to the minister. I do find that, as the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra points out, there is a commitment last year, but it is concealed. It is not easy to see. It says:
For maintenance of services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $65,000.
That is in one item and the same thing applies in another. But it is not as clear as it is this year.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I understand that the minister will be good enough to indicate to his colleague that when we come to the finance estimates we want the full amount of the commitments authorized last year and the extent to which they were availed of. It is on that understanding that I am saying no more under this item.


Alphonse Fournier: The attention of
Finance will be called to the remarks made by the hon. gentleman.


George Alexander Drew: That may or may not produce results; but I do not think that this item should be passed over without at least our understanding quite clearly what the effect of it is. The minister has just said that if this device were not employed, then instead of an item showing $400,000 in the main column, with a commitment authority in brackets at the side of $100,000 and with similar entries for other items under this general heading, the total figures would be the ones we would have in the main column. If that is so, then all this means is that this is a device to show a lower figure than would be in the estimates in the ordinary course of events.


Alphonse Fournier: No; we would not commit ourselves. If we did not have the $500,000, we would not commit ourselves; and the comptroller of the treasury would not give us authority to commit ourselves to this expenditure if we did not have the $500,000. But we know that the contract will be completed after the end of the fiscal year and the money will not be actually spent during this fiscal year. Therefore why should we have a vote of $500,000 when we know the expenditure this year will be $400,000? But we will be committed by contract for works
Supply-Public Works
not completed, to be paid for. But if I have not got the $500,000, I would not be able to give out this work. The comptroller of the treasury would say, "You have no more money at your disposal", and we would have to stop. But with this commitment, it will go on right until the end of the fiscal year, although it will not be paid; and I will be authorized to let this work. I do not know if I have made myself clear enough, but it took me a little while to know what I was talking about.


George Alexander Drew: To find the explanation.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It seems to me that this device-and it has been called that-is one that we on this side of the house should welcome.


Alphonse Fournier: It is closer to the facts.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It looks to me as though it is something that has been forced upon the department by the treasury board.


Alphonse Fournier: It was suggested, anyway, by the treasury board.


Stanley Howard Knowles: All right; it was suggested to the department by the treasury board; and the treasury board's power of suggestion is usually fairly effective. If this device were not being used, I take it that the minister and his department would play safe and would ask for all the money they think they might need. Treasury board comes along and says-and you can get this by looking at the estimates of previous years; there have been so many revotes-"Do you really need all that $500,000 in cash this year?" They persuade the officials of his department that they might get along with $400,000. The officials of the department say: "Well, we will try, provided that you give us the right to make contracts that we cannot pay until the next year in case we get in a jam." It seems to me that instead of being a cushion, it is actually putting a brake on the department. We are actually voting them in cash this year an amount of only $400,000 instead of the $500,000 that the department would have asked for.
As the hon. member for St. John's West has done, I have checked into the estimates of last year and I note two differences with regard to the items in connection with "construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers." On the one hand there were a great many more details; that is, for each individual province there is a breakdown by projects. The other difference is that all those items are full of revotes. There are no revotes in this section at all.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Why have estimates if they do not mean anything?

Supply-Public Works


Howard Charles Green: The minister has said that anything that is used from these commitments must be voted next year. It seems to me that that practice offends against the cardinal principle of our whole parliamentary system, which is that parliament controls the money that is spent and that until parliament votes the money, it cannot be spent.


Alphonse Fournier: You are right. It will not be spent before you authorize it.


Howard Charles Green: No; but here parliament is voting the money afterwards instead of before. I think that is the principle that is being departed from, and it does not seem right to me. Surely some other method can be worked out which would meet the difficulty.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should like to say a word on this matter. I do not entirely agree with my colleague. As the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has said, it seems to me that there may be an element of good in this. I am not suggesting, for example, that it would be better to put $500,000 into the estimates.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That would be a cushion.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Yes, that would be a cushion. On the other hand, I think there is a danger there. My point is that the device seems to me to have an element of usefulness in it. But the question is whether it is being used in the right way by having a large sum against each of these estimates, with total commitments of $600,000. That is why I should like to see the total figure showing what the commitments have been, let us say, in two or three years, and what has been spent, to see whether perhaps there may not be a more effective way of using the device which has a certain element of good in it.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I do not like delaying the matter. The item has caused enough comment. Can the minister possibly bring down a figure to show where the money has been spent?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
343.	Nova Scotia (commitment authority $100,000) $600,000.
Percy Chapman Black: How much of the $775,000 that was appropriated last year was actually expended? Did the work which was done, not the expenditures which were made, increase it above the $775,000?


Alphonse Fournier: The amount expended last year was $515,004.13;


Percy Chapman Black: There was no portion of this commitment authority of $100,000 this year utilized in Nova Scotia last year.


Alphonse Fournier: No.


Percy Chapman Black: Is that correct?


Alphonse Fournier: That is correct.


Percy Chapman Black: I have another request I wish to make of the minister. He has told us that there are no commitments made with respect to this vote this year. I presume they will be made on the recommendation of the engineer and the staff in the province. In Nova Scotia, for instance, we have very capable and experienced men and I have a great deal of confidence in them. I have a duty to my constituents, and I have some rights in the province. I am going to ask the minister whether I may be advised whenever a commitment is made under this expenditure in my constituency, which represents about one-tenth of the province. Whenever a commitment is made by his department I ask that I as the member be advised.


Alphonse Fournier: The hon. member does not expect me to give an assurance to 262 members that any act of administration under this vote be communicated to them. I could not do that unless you told me to increase my staff by a few hundred more people.


Percy Chapman Black: I am not asking it for all members; I am asking it for myself. I am going to exercise my full right-


Alphonse Fournier: That would be a bad example for the others.


Percy Chapman Black: I am not speaking for them; I am speaking for myself.


Alphonse Fournier: I do not know. I am ready to meet any fair and reasonable request, but I could not tie my hands in that way. These encumbrances may be made while I am away. I do not have before me every-


Percy Chapman Black: The minister can leave instructions.


Alphonse Fournier: -expenditure for $10 or $15 that is made. I would not sleep well at nights if I were committed to do a thing like that, knowing that I could not do it.


Percy Chapman Black: I do not think that I as a member of House of Commons could sleep well either if I felt that this money was being expended wrongly. I think I have a right to know when a commitment is made.


Alphonse Fournier: Anything you will
ask the department we will give to you here

or by letter. I cannot give the assurance that every time an expenditure is made in the Department of Public Works during the year I will look at the file and say:	"I am not
going to forget my good friend from Cumberland." Really I would not be able to bear that load all the time. My officials can do it. We have a staff that is efficient, but do not try to get this information from me personally. I could not give you that assurance.
Supply-Public Works
remember whether a copy of the preliminary report was sent to the hon. member for Van-couver-Quadra.


Howard Charles Green: Yes, I think it was.


Alphonse Fournier: This seems to be the
starting of a development.


Howard Charles Green: It is a very worth-while work. Item agreed to.


George Alexander Drew: There seems to be the question of which kind of demand is the more comfortable.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Generally-
351. Fraser river-Fifty per cent of cost of investigations to be carried out by the dominion-provincial board Fraser river basin (revote $45,000), $72,500.
Howard Charles Green: The hon. member for Kamloops is very much interested in this item. He has been called out of the chamber. Can the minister give us any statement with regard to the vote? It covers the work of the dominion-provincial board of the Fraser river basin.


Alphonse Fournier: This amount of
$72,500 is required to pay the dominion government's share of the cost of investigation proposed to be carried out during 1950-51 by the dominion-provincial board, Fraser river basin. The board was established by authority of order in council P. C. 247/288 dated January 22, 1949, for the purpose of conducting an investigation to determine the improvements which might be undertaken to develop the water resources of the Fraser valley, British Columbia, in the interest of fish, wildlife, water power, flood control, irrigation, reclamation of wet lands and other beneficial purposes.
The board consists of officials of the provincial government of British Columbia and the dominion government. The dominion and the province will share the cost of the said survey and report equally. The amount asked for in 1950-51 is $72,500. This amount is to cover the dominion government's share, 50 per cent of the cost of the following work proposed to be carried out in 1950-51: basin surveys, $46,000; dominion water and power bureau gauging stations, $50,000; dominion public works, bathymetric survey, $36,500; office expenses, $10,000; miscellaneous surveys, $12,500; total $155,000. The share of the government is $72,500. They are working on a report and making these surveys covering the fields that I have just mentioned. Their work has not reached the stage where implementation would be in order. I do not
General-
353.	National Gallery of Canada, $260,770.


Mr. Fair:: I should like to say just a few words on this item. Last January one of my constituents, Allen Ronaghan, wrote me a letter which reads as follows:
I am enclosing a picture which I have cut from the Edmonton Journal. I feel that it speaks loudly enough itself without too many comments from me!
I wish that I could say I was as proud of the national gallery building as I am of the services that it renders to all Canada.
Whenever you get a chance in the house tell them that there are some "out west" who would like to see more money spent on the national gallery. Perhaps it'll humour them into taking some action!
I am.
Yours truly,
Allen Ronaghan
He sent along the picture which he had taken from the Edmonton Journal, and which I am going to send over to the minister in a moment. It is headed: "National gallery forced into corridor". Below the picture we have these words:
Officials of the national gallery of Canada say their work is hampered seriously by an acute shortage of space in the gallery building-one wing of the national museum at Ottawa, H. O. McCurry left, gallery director, and Dr. R. H. Hubbard, curator of Canadian art, kneel in a crowded corridor to examine a still-life by Canadian artist Goodridge Roberts.
He added a footnote as follows:
This picture published in other countries would be marvellous advertising for us, wouldn't it?
I do not feel that hon members, or the minister in particular, want to have pictures of this kind circulated. With Mr. Ronaghan I would like to add my word that something be done. I am of course aware that we have had a commission sitting dealing with art, literature and so forth, and they may possibly have a recommendation to make in connection with this national gallery building. I am sending this picture over to the minister for his examination.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to say a word in connection with this vote. I am glad to note that there is a slight increase in it. It still is a very small amount for us to be spending out of our national budget on this phase of culture. I note that we have gone up from $186,000 last year to $260,000 this year. I am glad to note that included in this vote

Supply-Public Works
for this year is an item of $15,000 for preliminary investigations regarding a proposed new national gallery building. I wonder if the minister has any statement as to any plans in connection with those investigations? What is in mind? How is it intended to spend this $15,000?


Alphonse Fournier: I understand this will be spent to send an expert to the United States to see how they are conducting their work in that field of endeavour.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I would mention the fact that as it now stands we have both the national museum and the national gallery in the same building, and I believe some branches of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys are in there as well. It seems to me urgent that we get along with this, and I hope the investigations that will be made will include consideration as to ways and means of making the advantages of the national gallery available in some way in other parts of Canada as well as Ottawa.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should like to add a word to endorse what has just been said by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. I hope serious consideration will be given to making the advantages available far and wide throughout Canada.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I should like to endorse that also. I see there was $60,000 last year for the purchase of works of art and $75,000 to be voted this year. I am thoroughly in agreement with the increase. Would the minister tell us how many pictures were purchased last year, and how many were by Canadian artists?


Alphonse Fournier: I have here the note respecting additions to the collection. Additions to the national gallery collection during the year include an important early Flemish painting, the "Pieta" by Quentin Massys; an outstanding example of the work of Auguste Renoir, "Claude et Renee"; "Family Group" by Johann Zoffany, and a bronze bust of Bernard Shaw by Jacob Epstein. Notable additions were also made to the collection of master drawings and prints. The following Canadian works have been purchased:
B. C. Binning, "Ships in Classical Calm."
Paul Emile Borduas, "Parachutes Vegetaux."
Charles F. Comfort, "Major W. A. Ogilvie, M.B.E."
Stanley Cosgrove, "Still Life with Milk Jug."
Stanley Cosgrove, "Landscape."
Maurice G. Cullen, R.C.A., "St. John's Harbour, Newfoundland."
Sylvia Daoust, A.R.C.A., "Jeune Huronne" (bronze).


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister need not read the whole list. 1 would be content if he would tell me the proportion of the vote spent on Canadian paintings.


Alphonse Fournier: I shall get that information for the hon. member.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Including
commitments.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General
[Stage Direction]
354.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for, not more than $7,000 to be expended upon any one work, $300,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: This again introduces the interesting subject of commitments or cushions. I draw the minister's attention to the fact that here we have $300,000, and again in item 356 we have $300,000. Will the minister say a word as to how that fits in? This is a kind of over-all vote, in case the other is not sufficient.


Alphonse Fournier: There is no commitment in that.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I described it as a cushion. I thought it was related to the commitments we have been talking about, which were also described as cushions. We have here, in the two items, $600,000.


Alphonse Fournier: These are for small works. Every year there are a great many small works urgently pressed for such as engine hoists to assist fishermen and things of that kind which in former years were charged to a general vote; but now, owing to the restricted wording of the vote in new works to be undertaken, that is impossible. The amounts are too small to merit a special vote for each item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
355.	National capital planning service, $117,910.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: I- should like
to have a word on this item-where we stand on it, and what obligations are being incurred, if any, and what the general status of the project is-because, after all, this a very big and far-reaching project.


Alphonse Fournier: The details of this
expenditure are as follows:
Salaries	 $67,910
Topographic model of national capital area
(National Film Board)	 2,500
Subscriptions to technical publications and
purchase of technical books	 150
Transportation of staff and technical officers within the region for reconnaissance and establishing necessary contacts	 500


James MacKerras Macdonnell: May I interrupt the minister? I did not wish to have all that detail. I was wondering however if this would not be the appropriate place to hear from the minister a brief resume as to the

status of the whole plan. What is this obligation, which is running into many millions of dollars? As I understand it, there is a whole over-all plan and, while I am not suggesting the minister should go back to describe what has happened from the beginning, I should like to know whether anything has taken place within the last year which directly or indirectly adds to our obligation. Have certain things been done, and are there certain things to be done?


Alphonse Fournier: This staff is preparing a master plan on the national capital area. They have filed a preliminary report, and are working on their final report. The report, when it comes in, will cover a very wide field of changes all through the area.
I have no authority in respect of the staff; they are paid out of the estimates of the Department of Public Works, but the federal district commission comes under the president of the council, who happens to be the Prime Minister.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Does that mean that the information as to the national planning commission will come from the Prime Minister's department?


Alphonse Fournier: That is right.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-*
356.	To supplement, on approval of treasury board except where less than $500 is required, any of the appropriations of the Department of Public Works, $300,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, this would seem to be exactly the kind of thing I understood the minister was describing as a cushion for other commitments. Is this just put in for good measure?


Alphonse Fournier: Well, I did not invent this. Here is the explanation given: Unforeseen conditions are"1 met with frequently, particularly in reconstruction and dredging works-


James MacKerras Macdonnell: You told us that before.


Alphonse Fournier: -which increase the cost of work beyond the estimated amount and consequently the appropriation voted therefor falls short. Before we had this vote, on such occasions, it was necessary to curtail the work in hand irrespective of the urgency, unless the work was under contract and the contractor agreed to complete the work and await payment "until further funds were voted in the following fiscal year.
This appropriation, commenced 1938-39, is intended to supplement any appropriation of
Supply-Public Works
the department including special supplementary estimates, if any, and regular supplementary estimates as required, on approval of treasury board.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I think the minister read that before. We know that.


Alphonse Fournier: Well, I am trying to give the hon. member what I have, and what I know.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall I report
progress?


Howard Charles Green: Has the minister the figures yet for the amounts paid in respect of the Alvin building before the option was exercised? He promised this afternoon he would get them.


Alphonse Fournier: I gave the amount this afternoon of $1,066,000.


Howard Charles Green: In addition to that the minister was to get the amounts that were paid before the option was exercised.


Alphonse Fournier: As to the rent. My officials have not been back to the office. I have not that information now but we will try to have it on Monday.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Speaker, on
Monday we will take up the following bills: Bill No. 268, an act to amend the Foreign Insurance Companies Act, 1932; Bill No. 269, an act to amend the Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act, 1932; Bill No. 310, an act to authorize the provision of moneys for the C.N.R.; Bill No. 303, an act to amend the Canada Shipping Act, to be referred to a committee; Bill No. 311, an act to amend the Dominion Elections Act, 1938. Then we will go into supply and call one item of the Prime Minister's estimates to stand. Then we will take up the estimates of labour, and national health and welfare.
It being five minutes after eleven o'clock, the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:



DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
Indian Affairs branch-
54.	Branch administration, $242,050.
55.	Indian agencies, $2,657,990.
Reserves and trusts-
56.	Administration, $98,565.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Public Works
Welfare-
57.	Welfare of Indians, $3,'772,419.
58.	Grants to agricultural exhibitions and Indian fairs, $7,325.
Education-
59.	Indian education, $4,966,98!).
60.	Grants to residential schools, $2,488,130.
61.	Grant to provide additional services to Indians of British Columbia, $100,000.
62.	Fur conservation, $339,680.

[Stage Direction]
288.	Departmental administration, $350,605. Architectural branch-
289.	Branch administration, $437,290.
290. Ottawa-Maintenance	and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $500,000, $8,617,000.
291.	Maintenance and operation of dominion public buildings and grounds, other than at Ottawa, including rents, repairs, furniture, heating, etc., and to authorize commitments against future years in the amount of $500,000, $12,686,315.
Construction, repairs and improvements of public buildings-
Construction, acquisition repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-
292.	Newfoundland, $455,000.
293.	Nova Scotia, $1,350,000.
294.	Prince Edward Island, $900,000.
295.	New Brunswick, $2,200,000.
296.	Quebec, $8,500,000.
297.	Ontario, $10,000,000.
298.	Manitoba, $1,400,000.
299.	Saskatchewan, $1,700,000.
300.	Alberta, $2,600,000.
301.	British Columbia, $3,150,000.
302.	Yukon and Northwest Territories, $150,000.
303.	Generally, $2,000,000.
Dominion public buildings-
Improvements and repairs and to authorize commitments against future years in the total amount of $800,000, as follows-
304.	Newfoundland (commitment authority $100,000), $300,000.
305.	Maritime	provinces generally (commitment
authority $100,000), $600,000.
306.	Quebec	(commitment	authority	$100,000),
[Stage Direction]
307.	Ontario	(commitment	authority	$100,000),
[Stage Direction]
308.	Manitoba (commitment authority $50,000), $225,000.
309.	Saskatchewan (commitment authority $50,000), $295,000.
310.	Alberta	(commitment authority	$50,000),
[Stage Direction]
311.	British Columbia (commitment authority $50,000), $525,000.
312.	Public buildings generally (commitment authority $200,000), $300,000.
Engineering branch-
313.	Branch administration, $352,885.
314.	Engineering, including salaries of engineers, clerks, etc., $1,743,094.
Dredging-
315.	General superintendence, $16,635.
316.	Newfoundland, $764,200.
317.	Maritime provinces, $1,694,000.
318.	Ontario and Quebec, $1,679,264.
319.	Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest Territories, $389,000.
320.	British Columbia and Yukon* $722,800.
Maintenance and operation of graving docks, locks and dams, etc.-
321.	Champlain graving dock, $168,510.
322.	Esquimalt graving dock, $131,170.
323.	Esquimau old dry dock, $9,000.
324.	Lome graving dock, $179,345.
325.	Selkirk-repair slip, $6,000.
326.	Locks and dams, $312,115.
327.	Snagboats, $106,270.
Maintenance and operation of roads and bridges-
328.	Burlington channel bridge, $93,950.
329.	Kingston, La Salle causeway, $50,275.
330.	New Westminster bridge, $65,620.
331.	Towards international bridge over the St. Croix river between St. Stephen, N.B., and Calais, Me., the state of Maine to pay a like amount (revote), $10,000.
332.	Generally, $97,498.
Construction, repairs and improvements-harbours and rivers-
Construction, acquisition, repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-
333.	Newfoundland, $1,100,000.
334.	Nova Scotia, $3,500,000.
335.	Prince Edward Island, $1,300,000.
336.	New Brunswick, $3,250,000.
337.	Quebec, $7,000,000.
338.	Ontario, $5,000,000.
339.	Manitoba, $398,000.
340.	Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest Territories, $228,500.
341.	British Columbia and Yukon, $4,200,000. Harbours and rivers generally-for maintenance of
services, no new works to be undertaken, and to authorize commitments against future years in the total amount of $610,000, as follows:
342.	Newfoundland (commitment authority $100,000), $400,000.
343.	Nova Scotia (commitment authority $100,000), $600,000.
344.	Prince Edward Island (commitment authority $35,000), $135,000.
345.	New Brunswick (commitment authority $65,000), $200,000.
346.	Quebec (commitment authority $125,000), $600,000.
347.	Ontario (commitment authority $75,000), $350,000.
348.	Manitoba (commitment authority $25,000), $60,000.

349.	Saskatchewan, Alberta and Northwest Territories (commitment authority $10,000), $25,000.
350.	British Columbia and Yukon (commitment authority $75,000), $425,000.
Generally-
351.	Fraser river-50 per cent of cost of investigations to be carried out by the dominion-provincial board Fraser river basin (revote $45,000), $72,500.
352.	Protection works generally-to provide for remedial works where damages are caused by, or endanger, navigation or federal government structures, $750,000.
Supply-Public Works
General-
353.	National Gallery of Canada, $260,770.
354.	Miscellaneous works not otherwise provided for, not more than $7,000 to be expended upon any one work, $300,000.
355.	National capital planning service, $117,910.
356.	To supplement, on approval of treasury board except where less than $500 is required, any of the appropriations of the Department of Public Works, $300,000.
357.	To provide for balances required to complete any projects undertaken in previous fiscal years and for which no specific provision is made in the fiscal year 1950-51, $150,000.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, June 19, 1950