1950-06-20

Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to table a copy of an order in council dated June 16, 1950, pursuant to the powers conferred by the Public Service Rearrangement and Transfer of Duties Act, transferring to the Minister of Resources and Development the powers, duties and functions vested in the Minister of Mines and Resources by the Northwest Territories Power Commission Act. It was thought that that was done automatically by the act establishing the Department of Mines and Resources, but the law officers felt there was some doubt about it, and it was preferable to remove that doubt by passing an order in council expressly vesting in the Minister of Resources and Development those powers which, under the terms of the statute, were given to the Minister of Mines and Resources.



RAILWAYS, CANALS AND TELEGRAPH LINES CHANGE IN PERSONNEL OF STANDING COMMITTEE

Mr. W. G. Weir (Portage-Neepawa) moved:: That the name of Mr. Hatfield be substituted for that of Mr. Smith (Calgary West); and that the name of Mr. McLure be substituted for that of Mr. Harkness on the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Rosetown-Biggar):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Has the minister received notification that McIntyre Porcupine Mines Limited has rejected the recommendations of the board of conciliation appointed by the government, recommendations which had been accepted by local 100 of the Porcupine Mine Workers Union, and that a decision to strike has been taken? In view of the substantial assistance, amounting to $22 million, given to this company under the Emergency 55946-2434
Gold Mining Assistance Act, will the government take all steps necessary in the public interest to persuade the company to accept the conciliation board's recommendations, and thus bring the dispute to an end?


Hon. Humphrey Mitchell (Minister of Labour):: My hon. friend no doubt knows that this dispute comes under provincial jurisdiction. I believe the majority report recommended an increase in pay, certain paid holidays, and some form of check-off. I have no jurisdiction. Under legislation in force now, neither the federal government nor the provinces can enforce the findings of a conciliation board. I have always held the opinion that the sun does not shine on only one side of the fence. I know that employees sometimes turn down the majority report of the board. I take the long view that both industry and labour would be well advised to accept the majority report of a conciliation board.
At the moment there are some major disputes under my jurisdiction in which the majority report of the board has been turned down by the employees. I am fearful that the whole system of conciliation could easily break down if some judgment is not used by both sides in connection with the machinery that has been built up over the years, whether it be provincial or federal.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, there is a question I should like to bring to the attention of the government, and it can be answered by either the Prime Minister or the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In announcing the business for today it was indicated that the first estimates to be dealt with would be those of the Department of Labour, after which the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare would be taken up. I am certain there will -be complete agreement on proceeding with the health estimates, but I should like the assurance that we shall not be proceeding with the welfare estimates. In view of the fact that a committee is sitting which has not yet reported, it would be impossible to discuss at the present time any of the welfare estimates.

Supply-Labour


Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: I think the suggestion of the hon. gentleman should commend itself to the house. When we reach the particular item he has in mind, which I take it would be the old age security item, we can let i stand. Would that be agreeable?


George Alexander Drew: Quite so. My point is that under the rules of the house we are no;, permitted to discuss a subject which is under consideration by a committee. It will be generally agreed that this subject is of the utmost importance, and that it would be unfortunate if discussion on the estimates were prevented by that rule. As long as the minister will agree to defer the item on which that discussion can take place, we can proceed without any misunderstanding.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is agreeable.



FLOOD CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. H. Goode (Burnaby-Richmond):: Stories coming out of the Fraser valley, reports coming to me from my constituency, and reports appearing in British Columbia newspapers on the Fraser valley flood situation, do not quite agree. Would the minister care to give a report at this time?
Righi Hon. C. D. Howe (Minisler of Trade
and Commerce): The only information I have was obtained by telephone from the representative of this government who had charge of the construction of the dikes. I am told that the dikes are standing firm in spite of the fadt that the peak of the flood this year is about equal to the peak of the 1948 flood. There has been some seepage through the dikes at Agassiz; the troops have been called out to handle the situation, and sand bags are being applied wherever seepage appears. If, as is now reported, the peak of the flood has been reached or nearly reached, I feel sure there will be no damage resulting from failure of the dikes.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Dion in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR General administration-
151.	To provide for expenses of the economics and research branch (formerly under departmental administration), $379,455.


Mr. Gillis:: Mr. Chairman-


Humphrey Mitchell: Perhaps my hon. friend will permit me to make an explanation in his

favour, and also a correction, or perhaps I should say a clarification. Last evening, speaking of unemployment figures, the hon. member for Cape Breton South mentioned 57,000, which I mistakenly understood to refer to Nova Scotia. Later I said the figure for Nova Scotia was 13,000, which was correct as of June 8. In reviewing Hansard this morning at page 3826 I discovered that my hon. friend was referring to the maritime provinces, which until recently we have considered as including Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. The total number of unemployed for those three provinces as of June 8, 1950, was 30,100. In addition there were 19,600 in Newfoundland as of that date. The total for Canada as of June 8. 1950 was 239,800, which is a drop of 193,000 from the peak which occurred last March. That is satisfactory, I hope.


Clarence Gillis: That is the very point I rose to bring to the minister's attention. My quarrel with the Department of Labour in listing the unemployed is that the figures now mentioned by the minister should have been given to hon. members at intervals of at least two weeks. That was done in the past; every two weeks the department would issue a statement on the unemployment situation in Canada. Those releases went to the two congresses of labour and to the press, as well as certain members of the house who were on the mailing list. That practice has been discontinued.
Last evening, when hon. members rose to discuss the unemployment situation, the only figures they had to work on were those issued about a month ago. I believe those figures came out about June 3, and gave the position as of about May 18. At that time the national picture as set out by the department showed some 306,000 unemployed. The figure for the maritimes was 41,000. Since then there has been a considerable drop, and personally I think it is unfair for the department to issue figures arid then, when there has been a substantial change in the right direction, to leave hon. members with figures a month old while the minister can rise in his place and fire back figures which are much later, and which we do not know about.
Recently there has been a great deal of controversy between the congress of labour and the department over the withholding of the actual unemployment situation as it is reported by the various offices across the country. I do not think the department is being smart in this. If there is a change in the right direction I believe the smart thing for the department to do is at least to keep the

congresses of labour and the members of this house advised of the changes that take place from time to time.
The figures just given by the minister show a substantial decrease in unemployment. Before the estimates are through I hope the minister will be able to give us, province by province, the job opportunities that were created and that brought about this drop of some 198,000 since the last release. This morning I happened to pick up a press release from the office in Glace Bay, my home town, and there has not been very much of a change there. This press clipping is dated June 16, and it states:
Unemployment figures released today by the local office of the national employment service show a slight drop over last week's total.
This week there are 129 females and 432 males listed as unemployed as against the 130 females and 467 males registered last week, a decline of 35 . . .
The important part of this is that 279 men and 68 women are claiming benefits through the local employment office.
The point I want to make for the minister's benefit, as I argued last night, is that special unemployment relief, or an extension of the supplementary benefits, should be given to those areas. This press release from the local employment office in that particular town shows that over fifty per cent of the total unemployed registered in that town are not receiving unemployment insurance. That is another indication of what I stated last night, namely, that the unemployment problem in the maritimes is largely a permanent one. It is a problem that the municipal authorities, who now have the responsibility of looking after the totally unemployed, are not able to handle.
I am suggesting that instead of accepting unemployment as it is on a national scale and deciding that it is seasonal and regional, the fair thing to do across Canada would be to make a regional survey, particularly in the maritimes, to ascertain the amount of permanent unemployment there. In that way you will get a fair picture of what is necessary in that part of the country, because this press release definitely shows that there is a permanent unemployment problem in the maritimes. I know that most of the towns and cities in the maritimes have such a heavy municipal burden that they are not in a position to carry unemployment relief. There is an act on the statute book, known as the Unemployment Relief and Assistance Act, which provides that when a certain percentage of a municipality, town or city is totally unemployed the act can be applied through the provincial government.
Supply-Labour
Something of that kind is necessary in some of the towns and cities in the maritime provinces.
What I really want to say is that if unemployment is declining in Canada we are glad to hear it. In future I would like the minister at least to keep hon. members informed as to that decline. We do not want to rise in our places in this house and misrepresent the picture. All we can do is to take the figures that are released publicly from time to time and make an analysis of them. From now on I should like to get the figures that the department has compiled.


Humphrey Mitchell: Let me make this 'clear. As long as I am the Minister of Labour, I will run my department. So far as I am concerned, let the sun shine in. I am one of the few people who never closes his office door. My door is always open, except when someone is in there talking to me. No official in my department is going to tell me what to do. They have said to me at times: "If I were you I would do this." But I have said: "You are not me; to be me you have to be elected" and that is not the easiest thing in the world.
My hon. friend can rest assured that these figures are in the Labour Gazette. They have been criticized as being handouts by departments. Let me be frank. Any member of this house, irrespective of what side he sits on, if he wants the information and asks me for it, he will get it. I have always maintained, as my hon. friend knows, that you cannot face a problem by running away from it.
As I said last night, it is sometimes not the wisest thing to do to quote figures from memory, especially in relation to a large department like the Department of Labour. I should like to impress upon my hon. friend the fact that employment is a dynamic thing; it is not static. There are changes from day to day; different people come and go, and so forth.
As I pointed out last night, 1,700,000 people passed through the employment service alone last year. Along with my hon. friend and other hon. members, I take pride in the efficiency of the labour department. I have been very fortunate in building that organization, to have a group of loyal civil servants-* exceptionally loyal, may I say.
I agree with my hon. friend that anything we can possibly do to meet the problems of my department will be done by my officials and myself. If he ever wants any information- it does not matter how uncomfortable it is

* from me, I will give it to him.

Supply

Labour


Mr. Smilh (Calgary West):: The minister said that "1,700,000 people passed through". What does he mean by that?


Humphrey Mitchell: There may be repeaters. That is why I say it is dynamic; it is not static. A person may pass through the office six or seven times a year. He may be through my office a dozen times, but in the collection of these figures they appear as different individuals. It is a gigantic problem. It is a big organization. So far as I am personally concerned, I am not greatly in love with figures. During the war I found that there was no such person as an unemployable person. Everybody .who wanted a job and who could work with his hands and stand on his feet could get a job; we had a job for him. But there are repeaters.


Arthur Leroy Smith: When the minister says that a certain number of people passed through, all he means is that they visited some branch of the department.


Humphrey Mitchell: I am talking about the
employment office now.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I mean the employment office.


Humphrey Mitchell: Take a firm like General Motors of Oshawa. Both the trade unions and General Motors use the employment service exclusively. Certain other big concerns and other organizations on both sides do the same thing. It has developed to a degree that they have faith in the employment service and they use it exclusively to get employees.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I realize that. But as I understood the minister a moment ago, the figure he gave was the number of persons who have visited his offices throughout the country.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is it.


Mr. Mclvor:: In order to speak on this subject we have to understand both sides. Any man taking part in debate who knows only one side is pretty sure of defeat. I think I know labour from all points of view: first from the point of view of the man who toils, and afterwards from the point of view of one who had the opportunity and responsibility of hiring labour. I know it from the contractor's point of view, too. I have found there are four types of people who have their rights. The man who puts up the money for an industry has his rights, whether that industry is a wholesale or a retail concern, a coal mine or a pipe line. The management of industry have their rights. They have the right to be protected. The workers, too, have their rights. I admit that I am a good deal biased toward the man who toils. Then the consumers have their rights.

We have to see this question of labour from all angles. My first word is that the former prime minister certainly understood labour and industry, as he wrote and as he practised it afterwards; otherwise he would not have put the name of Tom Moore, the former president of the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada, on the honour list of the king. No doubt his advice was that Tom Moore should receive the Order of the British Empire. I dare not say, Mr. Chairman, that there are others who should be in that honour list. I say my word now for the present Minister of Labour. He is not a graduate of a university; he is a graduate of labour. Had he been a graduate of a university he would not have said, as he did a moment ago, that the sun does not always shine on the one side of the fence. Had he graduated from a university he would have said that the sun shines down in all its majesty over all classes and distinctions of men, irrespective of class or creed. Which is the plainer?
In 1941 I sat over there and watched the proceedings. If the Department of Labour was ever in a mess, it was then. We had a labour board. Applications were piled high. The board was made up of experts, but they did not have the ability to handle their work quickly enough to keep the department out of trouble. Then our former prime minister came along and appointed the present Minister of Labour to the post he now holds. I met him first in Fort William, when we had difficulty in connection with unemployed as related to the relief camps. I cannot forget his statement to me then, that when a man does a day's work he should have a day's pay. He also said that if a man gets a day's pay he should do a day's work. That is what the minister has been saying ever since.
What happened? That labour board was changed. The deputy minister was appointed, and since then I do not think one would find a labour department in any country in the world that has done better work than the department presided over by the present minister. He showed good judgment when he did not allow his deputy minister to go. He gave him another year; and I hope he will give him another, and another and another, so that there will not be any loss to the country.
We have in Fort William business concerns paying salaries to their employees. In addition they pay commissions. Perhaps the hon. member for Calgary East would refer to that as profit sharing, but when a man goes into one of those stores he gets service and gets it immediately. I have gone into large places of business here in Ottawa-that is, large for

this city-and I have waited five or ten minutes before being served. The other day I could not wait any longer and had to go without being served. If those clerks were working on commission there would be a different story, because they would be anxious to earn their commissions.
I agree with those who have spoken that labour should have a share in profits. It would put pep into labourers, and it would be a good move for industry. The minister has said that a well-run labour union is a great asset to labour and to industry. We have that condition in Fort William, and, as has been happening in other places, we have been getting rid of the troublesome element. But a union run by someone who is narrow or selfish is a curse to labour, and such a leader does not earn his money. What we need is to have labour and management working together and, as the minister said, putting their feet under the table and talking across to each other on a fifty-fifty basis. When we have that we shall be making progress.
As another hon. member has pointed out, we have unemployment insurance and family allowances, both of which have helped us at the lakehead during our seasonal unemployment. That is one thing that stands out. I admired very much the way in which the national registration was carried out across this country. It was a difficult job, but they knew where the workers were, and whether or not they were working. I have taken, this opportunity this morning to pay my tribute to the minister and to make the request that when the next king's honour list is brought out, consideration be given to him and his administration of the department.


Mr. Browne (St. John's West):: I notice, Mr. Chairman, that the former item has been split and a new one created this year. The details are to be found at page 144. They disclose that the permanent positions have been increased from 18 to 41. We notice further that the cost of printing and stationery has gone up from $15,000 to $40,000.
The minister has referred to the Labour Gazette. I went to the library last night to look for unemployment figures, having been prompted to do so by the statement of the hon. member for Cape Breton South that there were 57,000 unemployed in the maritime provinces. The latest issue in the library was for the month of May, and the latest information about persons unplaced was that for March 30. As I recall it, there was published last year a weekly or bi-weekly bulletin, which appeared in mimeographed form and gave
Supply-Labour
information with respect to labour. Today the minister has given us the information up to June 8. Is it not possible to have copies of that information? We are all keenly interested in the employment situation in our ridings and throughout the country. Since the vote for printing is increased, and there is a special division dealing with economic research, I submit we ought to be able to get labour information earlier than we get it from the Labour Gazette. It is two months old when it reaches us.


Humphrey Mitchell: If the hon. member will look at the record he will see that while the permanent employees have been increased, there has been a decrease in the temporary staff. That is the reason for the change in those figures. I would assume, in connection with printing and stationery, that costs have gone up just as they have in other respects. I believe I have dealt with both matters mentioned by the hon. member.
The supplying of figures is receiving study at the present time by an interdepartmental committee. We have available figures issued by the Department of Labour, and also the spot check by the bureau of statistics. We are endeavouring to work out some formula which will give us as clear a picture of employment conditions in the dominion as is humanly possible. The hon. member may rest assured that when the time comes I shall be glad to supply that information.
As I have pointed out before, while I do not know what my hon. friend can do, I know if I read all the publications which come to my desk I would go blind. It is difficult to keep up with them. Perhaps hon. members may not realize that I did not leave this building until twelve o'clock last night, and I read until one o'clock this morning-and I am not saying that to draw attention to me personally.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The minister put himself to sleep that way.


Humphrey Mitchell: It put me to sleep; that is correct.


William Joseph Browne: What became of the bi-weekly sheet that was mimeographed and published last year? Was it abandoned?


Humphrey Mitchell: We publish every month in the Labour Gazette.


William Joseph Browne: But is there not another sheet?


Humphrey Mitchell: I was away when that
happened. I am responsible, and I am going to continue to be responsible for the information that goes out of my department. That sheet was sent out while I was away recently. I am going to see what is sent out. I want to give the best information I can to hon. members

Supply-Labour
and the country. My hon. friend may rest assured that if the interdepartmental committee succeeds in working out a formula I shall see to it that every member of the House of Commons gets a copy of the figures monthly, or whenever they are issued.


Mr. Adamson:: May I pay a compliment to the minister's department for the work it is doing in the town of New Toronto. The national employment service office at that point is doing an excellent job, and is to be commended for the efficiency and courtesy with which they are doing it. This area contains a great diversification of industry, and so far as I know there have been nothing but compliments for the officials of that office. Can the minister give the maximum number of unemployed in that area during the last year and the number at the present time?


Humphrey Mitchell: We do not have the figures
for the separate offices, but we have them for the greater Toronto area.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What is the figure for
Toronto?


Humphrey Mitchell: 13,750.


Agar Rodney Adamson: What was the maximum
figure?	.


Humphrey Mitchell: I have not that figure here,
but if my hon. friend wants it, I will get it.


Mr. Graydon:: In matters of this kind I
think that credit should be given where credit is due. About two weeks ago on a Sunday evening the employment service of the Department of Labour was broadcasting. My family and myself were greatly impressed by the broadcast, which had to do with some of the more intangible but essential details of how a person should approach a prospective employer. It was most constructive, and the facts were well marshalled. The broadcast was such as would compel the attention of the public, particularly those in the earlier years of life. It offered practical assistance to persons in their efforts to obtain employment. I cannot recall the name of the person making the broadcast, but I do want to tell the minister that I think that kind of information is really worth while to the young people who, having to learn in the hard school of experience, are at least given the opportunity of making a short cut.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I should like
to ask a question covering the next four items, all of which show small increases. Am I correct in assuming that those are the normal increases in cost such as would occur in any business of this kind?


Humphrey Mitchell: That is a correct assumption. Most of them are salary increases.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General administration-
152.	Annuities Act. $802,660.
Mr. Green:: Recently a case was brought to my attention which I think should receive the consideration of the minister and his staff. An application was made for an annuity by a husband and wife, the husband then being in poor health. Practically all their savings were put into a joint survivor annuity. The husband died shortly after, and within a year the wife died also leaving a son about twelve years of age. Legally the position is that nothing can be paid to that boy.
I believe the amount paid in was $22,108, and $3,500 was received by the wife before her death, leaving a difference of $18,608. The present position is that a married daughter must provide for this young boy. I realize that legally nothing can be done in a case of this kind, but I suggest that the department take some steps to help out in this case. I suggest also that the annuities officers across the country be warned to look into each application to determine whether children are involved. I cannot believe that this father and mother would have taken out this contract if they had realized that nothing would be left for the small boy.
As I say, the father was in poor health at the time the application was made. The married daughter says that her father and mother believed that provision was being made for the mother and for the boy. A warning should be placed on the application forms to indicate that children will not be protected by that type of contract. I understand that until 1945 it was possible to buy a contract with a guarantee that would provide for a certain number of annual payments even if the applicants died before they were completed, but for some reason that contract was discontinued.
I ask the minister to see if something cannot be done for this unfortunate lad, and I wish he would review the possibility of taking some steps to prevent a recurrence of a case of this kind. I think it could be done by giving adequate warning to applicants for annuities that their children will not be protected by a contract of this kind.


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall be glad to look into that case. It is the Stevens case, is it not?


Howard Charles Green: It is the case of Francis E. Stevens and Eva Helen Stevens, of Courtenay, British Columbia, the contract number being 123,217.


Humphrey Mitchell: This was a contract. My hon. friend is a lawyer, and I assume that he knows something about insurance. I shall be glad to tell the officials to warn married couples that protection is not guaranteed for the children.


Howard Charles Green: Apparently the government will not issue a guarantee contract of that type.


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall be glad to tell them that they should be very careful. You get the odd case. It is like life insurance. You have to die some time, although nobody wants to die. It is like fire insurance. Normal human beings, although they put fire insurance on their houses, do not want to see them destroyed. It is basic with all these things. I shall be glad to take a look at that and warn my people about the consequences.


Mr. Johnston:: I do not know whether we are on item 151 or 152. We can hardly hear.


The Chairman:: Item 152.


Charles Edward Johnston: I should like to ask the minister a question about annuities. How many annuity contracts were entered into last year compared with the number of contracts entered into the year prior to the reduction in the interest rate?


Humphrey Mitchell: There is a drop of about fifty per cent.


Charles Edward Johnston: Can the minister give us an explanation of that?


Humphrey Mitchell: I do not know that I could give any reason. People just did not buy them; that is all. This is a free country, and they went somewhere else to buy their annuities.


Charles Edward Johnston: The minister said there was a drop of about fifty per cent. Can he give us the actual figures?


Humphrey Mitchell: I have the information here, but it is rather long. I do not want to put it on the record, but if the hon. member wants to look at it he may do so.


Charles Edward Johnston: Will the minister have it put on the record?


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall be glad to do so, with the permission of the committee.


Joseph-Alfred Dion: Has the minister permission?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Supply-Labour


Humphrey Mitchell: The information is as follows:
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT ANNUITIES Until about ten years ago very little use was made of Canadian government annuities for the purpose of underwriting retirement annuity plans. Since that time the development has been as follows:
Group
contracts Employees
March 31	in force included
1940	
4	1,2401941	
30	7,7761942	
49	11,1801943	
70	15,3511944	
154	28,9191945	
270	38,8721946	
433	56,2271947	
612	86,6381948	
708	113,4011949	
809	143,2701950	
846	158,959
Of the 158,959 employees included up to March 31, 1950. 36,973 were no longer participating for reason of retirement, death or termination of service, leaving a net total of 121,986 active participants.
In addition to group annuity contracts, approximately 300 pension plans covering about 8,000 employees were underwritten by individual contracts.
Premiums paid under contracts entered into in connection with retirement annuity plans amounted to $32,537,083.54 in the fiscal year 1948-49, and $36,506,202.65 in the fiscal year 1949-50.
Retirement annuity plans are underwritten by entering into a group annuity contract where a large number of employees is involved, and individual contracts for the smaller organizations. The premium rates are the same in each method of underwriting and are similar to the rates applicable to persons purchasing annuities as individuals. The normal type of plan is contributory, the employee paying a fixed percentage of earnings and the employer paying a similar amount or such amount as may be necessary to complete the purchase of a fixed annuity. The employer generally makes additional payments in respect of prior services. When an employee's service is terminated prior to retirement, he cannot withdraw his money but is credited with a paid-up annuity purchased by his own contributions and such part of the employer contributions as the contract may prescribe. In the event of his death before retirement, the total of his own contributions with interest and such part of the company contributions as the contract may prescribe will be paid to his heirs. On retirement, the annuity purchased by all contributions made on his behalf will be paid to him for life and generally carrying a guarantee that payments will be made for a minimum of five years.
The following are statistics as of the end of the fiscal year 1949-50 with respect to annuity contracts:
Total number of contracts and certificates
issued since 1908 to end of 1949-50	 292,978
Cancelled by death, etc	 34,299
Contracts and certificates in force end of
1949-50	 258,679
Annuity contracts under payment	(vested) 51,759
Deferred individual contracts	 84,934
Registrations under group contracts		121,986
258,679
Group contracts in effect	 846
3852

Supply-Labour
Details re group contracts
Registrations in effect	 121,986
In receipt of retirement annuities	 6,975
Died before retirement	 2,280
Withdrawn following change of employment	 27,718
Total number of employees or members who have been registered under group
plans	 158,959
Average annuity under payment (vested) with respect to group retirement plans ..	408
Analysis of individual	annuity	contracts	under
payment			
			Cumu-
	No. of		lative
Amount of annuity contracts	Per cent	Per centLess than $300 	20,235	45-2	45-2$300 and less than $600..	11,206	250	70-2$600 and less than $900..	6,517	14-6	84-8$900 and less than $1,200	1,798	4-0	88-8Exactly $1,200 	4,876	10-9	99-7Over $1,200 	150	[DOT]3	100 0Totals	
44,782	100 0
Average vested annuity, $439
During the past fiscal year some 37 group retirement plans were adopted and 15,689 group annuity certificates issued. Some 5,389 individual annuity contracts were also issued during the fiscal year 1949-50. These figures are included in the tables shown above.
The net premium receipt during the fiscal year 1949-50 amounted to $63,133,242, and the total to the credit of the annuities fund as at the close of the fiscal year 1949-50 amounted to $563,182,111.


Charles Edward Johnston: Has the minister any information as to the increase in annuity contracts issued 'by insurance companies?


Humphrey Mitchell: I have no information. I have enough grief of my own without worrying about insurance companies.


Charles Edward Johnston: The minister says that he has no idea as to the cause of the decrease in the number of government annuities. The only thing he said was that this is a free country and people can do as they wish. Of course it was not the people who brought about the decrease in the interest rate. It may be a free country, but it was certainly the action of the government that was involved in that transaction. People are not buying government annuities-and the minister knows this as well as anyone else- because of the decrease in the interest rate from four to three per cent. There were a great many members of the house who complained at the time that action was taken, and who said that the natural outcome would be a diversion from government annuities to insurance company annuities. That is exactly what has taken place. Without question the insurance companies brought pressure to bear, either directly or indirectly, to have the interest rate on government annuities reduced.
I had occasion to talk to officials of two large insurance companies as to their annuity contracts, and they told me frankly that they were not selling them because of the opposition provided by government annuities. Of course pressure was brought to bear, and as a result the insurance companies secured the business. The ordinary man with an average income is deprived of the right to invest in a government annuity contract. He has no place to invest his money now with reasonable safety and with a return anywhere near four per cent. I think the government should take into consideration the advisability of raising the interest rate to four per cent so that the ordinary small businessman and other private citizens will have some place to invest their money in order to provide for their old age. They cannot do so in any other field. A man who is earning only $150 or $200 a month cannot afford to use any portion of his salary as risk capital. If the government is going to bar such people from investing their savings in government annuities, it will only mean that later on they will have to take care of them by means of old age pensions, which will be more costly to the government than if they would allow such people to invest in government annuities. I think the government should consider the advisability of reinstating the interest rate at four per cent in order to provide a field of investment for the ordinary man.


Humphrey Mitchell: I just want to say that to my knowledge I have never met an insurance company executive in my life.


Charles Edward Johnston: I did not say you personally.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is all right. I am not arguing with my hon. friend. I am just saying that. If he is trying to convince me to reverse the position that has been taken on this matter he is up against a stiff proposition. As I pointed out when the interest rate was reduced, my officials came to me and said that on the present business there would be a loss of $150 million in ten years. They said that if we did not bring about a balance as to the return on money invested that would happen, and that is quite a responsibility. Insurance is not the only thing in which people invest to provide for their old age or a rainy day. They buy government bonds, and some make risk capital investments. I hope my hon. friend is not going to suggest to me that he and I and the Canadian people generally should subsidize something for nothing. I have never taken that view. It may be an unsound view in the opinion of some people. I agree with everything the hon. member said about saving for old age, but let me say that since the inception of

this scheme it has cost the Canadian taxpayers around $34 million-$7 million for administration, and approximately $27 million to maintain the solvency of the fund. The Canadian taxpayer pays the whole cost of administration. I still think that the safest and cheapest investment, based on the character of the Canadian people, is government annuities.


Mr. McLure:: That is debatable.


Humphrey Mitchell: It is a matter of opinion, but for what it is worth that is my point of view. I have no axe to grind for any interest, and I still think that government annuities are the best and safest investment for people who wish to provide for their old age.


Charles Edward Johnston: Of course the minister claims that one of the reasons for the reduction in the interest rate is the tremendous amount that the government had to subsidize. That may be true. He spoke about administration charges of $7 million. I venture to say that that charge still remains the same because the fact that you reduced the interest rate from four per cent to three per cent would not lower the administration charge a great deal, if at all. The only place that there might be a saving to the government would be in the reduced number of contracts entered into. If that is the case, then the intention of the government in reducing the interest rate from four per cent to three per cent was definitely to reduce the number of contracts and not to reduce the administration charge. If the minister will give us the figures as to the administration charges, the committee will see that there has been no appreciable saving in that direction. Will the minister give us the administration cost for last year compared with the year prior to the reduction of the interest rate?


Humphrey Mitchell: The figures here are broken down into stationery and the different items. Roughly, the cost was about one and one-quarter per cent of the receipts.


Charles Edward Johnston: But what was the reduction in administration costs?


Humphrey Mitchell: No; that is the administration cost.


Charles Edward Johnston: But what does the minister mean by that?


Humphrey Mitchell: In talking about a business you say that it costs so much. This is the overhead, the cost to run it, which is about one and one-quarter per cent of the net receipts.


Charles Edward Johnston: I can quite see that there could be a figure arrived at in that way. If you are going to have a material reduction 55943-244}
Supply-Labour
in administration, obviously you have to discharge some of your employees or get rid of some of these overhead charges. I venture to say that as a result of this reduction in interest rate from four to three per cent you did not reduce your overhead charges to any appreciable degree. The net result would not be a saving in administration at all.


Humphrey Mitchell: I can give you the amount in round figures. In 1948-49 the commissions amounted to $260,000, and in 1949-50 they amounted to $244,000.


Charles Edward Johnston: That is not the information I want. The commissions of course would be less because the contracts were reduced, but that has nothing to do with administration.


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall give my hon. friend the total figures. The total for 1948-49 was $725,000, and for 1949-50 it was $758,000.


Charles Edward Johnston: Do I take it from that that the administration, costs were increased? I understood the minister to say the first figure was $725,000.


Humphrey Mitchell: My hon. friend is aware of the fact that there was a revision of salaries last year, and the permanent staff received salary increases. My hon. friend received an increase a few years ago for being a member of this House of Commons.


Charles Edward Johnston: That revision in salaries, then, would have brought the administration charges higher?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes; I have just said so.


Charles Edward Johnston: I imagine that revision in salaries takes place every so often, and I am not complaining about the increase in salaries. I am pointing out to the minister that there was no saving in administration costs. More is being paid for administration than, there was before.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Are these annuities sold by salaried men or by commission agents?


Humphrey Mitchell: They are sold on commission.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: No salaries at all, but just a straight commission? What commission do the salesmen receive?


Humphrey Mitchell: The maximum amount on a policy is $75, but it depends on the terms. If my hon. friend wants a break-down of the amounts, I shall be glad to get it for him.


Mr. Nossworihy:: Mr. Chairman, I notice in the details for this item appearing on page 145 an amount of $290,000 estimated to be necessary for commissions to agents and postmasters. We were not able to hear the minister's answer to the question just asked. Could he tell us the rate of commission paid

Supply-Labour
to postmasters and agents? How many agents other than postmasters are employed by the annuities branch? Are any of those agents employed full time?


Humphrey Mitchell: I can answer the last question first, because you do not have to have any figures. I have always felt that most insurance agents worked rather long hours. I can get the other figures. There are about seventy-five agents.


Charles Edward Johnston: Can the minister tell us by what amount the staff has been reduced?


Humphrey Mitchell: It has not been reduced.


Charles Edward Johnston: Has it been increased?


Humphrey Mitchell: Not to any appreciable extent. There may have been a slight increase. My hon. friend is talking about these annuities, but it is amazing the pressure upon me to have people appointed as agents, even with the reduction in interest rates. Six new people have been appointed.


Charles Edward Johnston: There has not been a great saving effected in overhead; it has gone up rather than down. For 1950-51 there is a total of $802,060 in the estimates, as compared with $785,871 for 1949-50. The only place that I can see where any change has been brought about is that while overhead has gone up, the number of contracts sold is smaller. The net result has been that people have suffered a loss through not getting the benefit of the higher interest rate, and the expenses are going on just the same. My opinion is that we should go back to the old contract. Our costs would not be any more, and yet people would be getting the advantage of the increased rate.


Humphrey Mitchell: As my hon. friend knows, there is over half a billion dollars' worth of this insurance in force today. Even if we were to repeal this act and did not sell annuities, those contracts would still have to be serviced. I am not an insurance executive, but probably my hon. friend is.


Charles Edward Johnston: No; I just know how it works.


Humphrey Mitchell: I thought my hon. friend might have been an insurance executive.


William Joseph Browne: Will the minister give us the revenue and expenditures of the annuity fund to March 31 of last year?


Humphrey Mitchell: The receipts for last year were $63 million, and the expenses were $758,000.


William Joseph Browne: The minister is speaking of the administration item,

whereas I am speaking of the revenue and expenditures under the annuity contracts, including the premiums.


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall get that information.


Gordon Graydon: How does the cost of doing business compare with the ordinary insurance companies?


Humphrey Mitchell: Slightly less. The commissions are not so high.


Gordon Graydon: Of course you do not have to pay for office space.


Humphrey Mitchell: The government pays administration costs.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Chairman, at the time the government proposed to decrease the interest rate on these annuities there was a lot of objection in this house. The story today is not surprising. On a good many occasions the minister has declared that he is opposed to the government being in business. This is not a bad way to discredit government business. The reduction in interest has definitely caused a drop of fifty per cent in the value of the annuities issued; and in addition the minister has said that the staff has been increased. If the staff remained the same and there was a drop of fifty per cent in business, it would increase the overhead of the department by one hundred per cent.
My reaction to this is that it has been the result of pressure from the old line insurance companies, which could not compete with the annuities branch. I was quite proud of that branch; I have circulated a good deal of literature on government annuities. The point I make is that this is a very effective way of sabotaging a branch of this department which has been doing an excellent job in this field. Certainly we cannot expect people to promote a government enterprise when they definitely take the position that they are opposed to that kind of thing. This branch was doing excellent work, and I believe it could have been expanded. My feeling always has been that this is the branch that should be handling industrial pensions in this country on a national scale. It has the trained staff; and it should be handling old age pensions tied in with industrial pensions. Certainly we should continue to push this annuity policy right across the country. Prior to the reduction in the interest rate we heard very little about that branch in this house, because I believe all hon. members realized that it was doing an excellent job. I still suggest that the minister should consider putting the interest rate back where it was before this experiment was started.


Arthur Leroy Smith: If I may ask one
simple question, is it not true that prior to

the change in the interest rate, the more annuities you sold the more money you lost?


Humphrey Mitchell: Absolutely. As a boy I was taught many things that stuck in my memory. One of them was that you cannot get something for nothing; another was to always put a little away for a rainy day, because the sun does not always shine. As the hon. member for Calgary West said, I do not think it is proper to ask the people of Canada to subsidize this kind of insurance. If a business were run in that way it would not last twenty-four hours. At the present time we have a committee studying the whole broad question of old age security, and no doubt it will take a look at the matter brought up this morning by the hon. member for Cape Breton South. I am inclined to agree with the observations he made about old age pensions, but I want to be perfectly frank about this. I have said that governments sometimes do things in reverse, and that is what hon. members are trying to do this morning. This money has to come from the taxpayers of the country, and frankly I do not take the view that this should be done. I still do not believe you can get something for nothing, and if any government undertaking is run at a loss, that loss has to be paid by the taxpayers. We must remember also that those taxpayers may have annuities of their own with private companies, co-operative organizations or trade unions.


Mr. Ferrie:: Is it not a fact that the loss does not come about through administration but in selling the annuities?


Humphrey Mitchell: Absolutely.


Gladstone Mansfield Ferrie: In other words if the government can buy money more cheaply elsewhere, why should they buy it from the labour department at a higher cost?


Humphrey Mitchell: That is the point.


Mr. Bater:: Are all postmasters automatically agents for the sale of these annuities, and do they receive the standard commission?


Humphrey Mitchell: They receive the standard
commission.


Arthur James Bater: And all postmasters are automatically agents?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes.


Joseph William Noseworthy: I am quite sure the
country at large will be glad to hear the minister's declaration of faith in these annuities, because in practically every part of this country where the question of government annuities has come up I have sensed the feeling that the government is not interested in pushing government annuities; that the insurance companies are opposed to
Supply-Labour
the sale of this insurance, and that the officials responsible for this undertaking get no support or encouragement from the government because the government does not want these annuities sold in competition with the insurance companies. Therefore it is good to hear what the minister said this morning; but I have noticed something else. We are carrying on an insurance business. I know a little about that; for some years I have worked with an insurance company. I find here that notwithstanding the drop in business there has been an increase in the staff. I am not speaking of any increase in salaries; there is an actual increase in the staff. That is the inside office staff; not one of those 208 employees working in the annuities branch is working outside in order to get business. Apparently the only people who are getting business are the postmasters. There is just no drive behind this business.
I notice that $50,000 is being asked for publicity and advertising. Will the minister tell us just what advertising media are used and just what drive is being put into the sale of. annuities by his department?


Humphrey Mitchell: In the last month I have sent out 150,000 letters to employers in this country advocating the adoption of a group plan under the Government Annuities Act. We are advertising all the time. I believe the drop in sales last year occurred at least partly because people thought the interest rate was going to be increased again from three per cent to four per cent. However, as I say, we have seventy-five salesmen and forty officers, and goodness knows there are enough postmasters in this country, who are paid the same commission as the salesmen.
My hon. friend has mentioned the increase of six in the staff at the head office. It is big business when you have over half a billion dollars' worth of insurance which requires servicing. It is like building a ship. People think there are a great many men working in a shipyard, but actually more people are employed in planning a ship than in building it. You cannot service an enormous undertaking like this without some kind of organization. I can quite imagine the howls that would go up in this chamber if we reported a loss of $50 or $60 million on that half billion dollars' worth of business. I am the minister charged with the responsibility of seeing that this fund is kept liquid, and I am not going to take advice from any fly-by-night who wants to give away the country's money in an unsound undertaking. That is the position I take. It may be the wrong position politically, but that is the position I have always-taken.

Supply-Labour


Charles Edward Johnston: It seems to me that this thing is doomed to failure. The minister assumes that it is unsound business practice to have the government take any part in this annuity business.


Humphrey Mitchell: I never said that.


Charles Edward Johnston: In effect that is what the minister said.


Humphrey Mitchell: On a point of privilege, I never said that. I say to my hon. friend that this annuities branch will be running a long time after he is dead, and a long time after he ceases to be a member of this House of Commons, and a long time after I cease to be a member of it. I have absolute faith in this undertaking. Let us be frank and honest about it. I am not going to fool the Canadian people and run it at a loss, you understand, not while I am breathing.


Charles Edward Johnston: I think, Mr. Chairman, it may be assumed from what the minister has said that this annuities branch is still running at a loss. One of the reasons it is running at a loss is the unsound business practice carried on in its operation. The minister may be reducing that unsound position to some extent; but the fact is, he has no faith in it anyway, and will not-


Humphrey Mitchell: Mr. Chairman, on a point of privilege, I never said that I have no faith in it. I have absolute faith in it. I wish that every industrial undertaking in Canada would take out a group annuity policy for its employees. I wish my hon. friend would take out a government annuity.


Charles Edward Johnston: I have not enough money.


Humphrey Mitchell: There you are. The hon. member does not know what he is talking about.


Charles Edward Johnston: The minister says he has great faith in this thing. Just a moment ago he rose in his place and deplored the idea of the government having to subsidize this or any other business, and said that subsidies were unsound. He forgets that there are a great many industries in this country that are being subsidized. He forgets the extent to which the railways of this country are being subsidized, the banks are being subsidized, and everything else is being subsidized. The railways have been subsidized to the greatest extent in the Dominion of Canada. I did not hear anybody condemning the railways for taking subsidies. But when there is a subsidy paid to the annuities branch so that the ordinary citizen of this country may have some benefit from it, there is a great hullabaloo about it. Look at the way the gold mines have been subsidized. You do not hear hon. members complaining

about that, but you hear a lot of complaint about an industry from which the ordinary man, the small man, the man who is on a small salary, can get some benefit. If he is the recipient of any subsidy there is a -reat complaint. When I hear people complaining about the little bit of subsidy that goes to the annuities branch it gives me a pain in the ear. especially when we recognize that so many of the great companies in this country are being subsidized and no fuss is made about it. We cannot expect very much from the annuities department.
Item agreed to General administration-
156.	Labour Gazette and other publications authorized by Labour Department Act. $116,763.


William Joseph Browne: What other publications are there besides the Labour Gazette?


Humphrey Mitchell: "Labour Legislation in Canada," Labour Gazette, figures on the unemployment situation-various publications that we get out from time to time, and the broadcast my hon. friend was talking about that came over the air; that is issued, too.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General administration-
157.	To provide for the effective organization and use of agricultural manpower, including recruiting, transporting and placing workers on farms and related industries and assistance to the provinces pursuant to agreements that may be entered into by the Minister of Labour with the provinces and approved by the governor in council, $320,000.
Clarence Gillis: Can the minister tell us to what extent this vote was used last year, and what plans he has with regard to moving people from province to province to assist farmers? Is it in use now where there is a shortage of farmers? To what extent did the minister use the vote last year?


Humphrey Mitchell: At the moment we are moving people from western Canada to Ontario. We have agreements with all governments in Canada to move people backwards and forwards. I think it is a magnificent experiment. It worked well during the war. I hope we shall continue it. It is on a fifty-fifty basis with the provinces. At the moment we have a small movement from Newfoundland which is being used as a trial balloon. We have moved, as my hon. friend knows, people from his part of Canada to other parts of Canada.


Clarence Gillis: That also will continue?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, 1942-
159.	Training payments to the provinces, $3,333,000.
William Joseph Browne: On this vote I should like to compliment the minister on having introduced the vocational educational scheme in Newfoundland. We had a vocational school down there, and with the assistance of money from this vote we are carrying it on. Has he any idea of the amount that is allocated for Newfoundland?


Humphrey Mitchell: I will get that figure.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, 1942-*
160.	Payments to the provinces for capital expenditures for vocational schools, buildings and equipment, $2,250,000.
Joseph William Noseworthy: This is one field in which the Department of Labour has done an excellent job over the years. As one who has had some interest in the schools of Ontario, and to some extent of Canada, I want to compliment the minister and his department on the good work they have done in this field. However, the fact that they have been doing good work is no reason why they should begin to rest on their oars. What I had hoped to find was that once the government had been relieved of a large part of the expenditures which for some years they have been paying out to assist in the education of veterans who returned from the services, there would be a reasonable proportion of government money kept for use in education, and that it would be possible to retain some commensurate amount, once the education of veterans had been completed, for the general educational system, particularly vocational education in Canada.
I find that there has been no increase in the vocational grants of the Department of Labour. As a matter of fact there has been some reduction. Partly because the department is no longer training so many people for the armed forces, there is a reduction this year of close to half a million dollars in that one field where a year ago they were training men for the Department of National Defence, in which apparently there has been some change. Apart from that there has been practically no change whatever in the amount requested for vocational education under this item. Actually there is a reduction of $750,000.
The question I brought to the minister's attention last session I want to bring to his attention again, namely, the great need in the country today for further assistance in capital expenditures on vocational education. On a former occasion I called the minister's attention to an item in his annual report for 1948-49 on Canadian vocational training. I
Supply-Labour
have called the minister's attention to an item at page 7 which I should like to read into the record. It states:
At the meeting of the vocational training advisory council which was held on October 4, 1948, various members drew attention to the fact that increased costs for new buildings, and higher operational costs of vocational schools, have reduced the value of the grants which were provided under the vocational schools assistance agreement. The availability of dominion funds has given a notable impetus to vocational education in Canada and has been responsible for an active program of development in practically all provinces.
I am sure the minister realizes that and approves of it. He is wholeheartedly behind it. Educationists and school authorities across Canada appreciate the assistance that has been given under the act, and the help given by * the federal government to vocational education. Then it continues:
The council felt that it was in the interests of Canada that facilities for vocational education should be strengthened and developed as speedily as possible. It recommended that a further grant of $5 million be made by the dominion for capital expenditures, to be distributed on the same basis as the earlier capital grant, and that the annual grants be increased from $2 million to $4 million. At March 31 these recommendations were still under consideration.
That was the position as of March 31, 1949, well over a year ago. There is nothing in the estimates to indicate that those recommendations have been given favourable consideration, or that anything has been done to implement them.
I do not know whether the minister is aware of it or not, but before this report was made there were seventy-eight schools for vocational education being built across this country, for which no federal aid would be available. Those buildings had been planned after the date for application under this fund had passed. I live in an industrial community of from 80,000 to 100,000 people, where there is no vocational school as such. We have commercial branches in our collegiate; but in a working-class riding, with one of the largest percentages of industrial workers to be found anywhere in the province, there is not in that entire community of York township a single vocational school. The community is not in a position to build a vocational school that would be adequate, by its own resources, or with the percentage of assistance which could be received from the province.
They were planning to build a school, but unfortunately they did not get their plans down here in time to get under the wire so far as the grant is concerned. They have had to curtail extensively the facilities offered at the school because no longer is there any federal aid available. That picture applies

Supply-Labour
to possibly more than a hundred communities. There were close to that many in 1949 when this report was made.
Today there are scores of communities all across Canada where vocational education will be handicapped if there is no extension of this federal grant. If the minister and his department could secure for educational purposes, or for vocational education in Canada, a fraction of the money the government spent over the years for the training and education of returned men, it would be a splendid thing for vocational education across this country. The government is now relieved of the burden in respect of the returned men.
I should like to have a definite answer from the minister in this instance. I did not receive direct answers to my questions last night. Has consideration been given to this recommendation, and what has been the result of that consideration by treasury board, or whoever it is that decides whether the minister is to receive the money for which he asks? Has consideration been given to the report to which I have just referred, and if so, what has been the result of that consideration? What chance is there for vocational educational authorities to have an addition to the original grant?


Humphrey Mitchell: As the hon. member knows, this does not run out until 1952. The question he has raised is under consideration by treasury board. I cannot give the hon. member the direct answer he wants but it will be announced in due course as a matter of government policy. I join with him in commendation of the work of the municipalities, the provinces and the federal government in this regard. I think we quickened the pulse of technical and vocational education in this country, as well as that of apprenticeship education.
Replying to the hon. member for Cape Breton South, the school at North Sydney will not be closed down.
Replying also to the hon. member for St. John's West, the allotment last year for Newfoundland was $357,000.


Clarence Gillis: Would the minister give a provincial break-down for last year?:


Humphrey Mitchell: I shall be glad to do that. If we complete these estimates today I shall give the information to the hon. member tomorrow when the orders of the day are called.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Mr. Noseworthyd
Terminable services-
163. Vocational training for discharged members of Canada's armed forces, including undischarged commitments of previous years, $50,000.
Arthur Leroy Smith: Does the amount of the reduction here indicate the end of this vote? Will this be the last year?


Humphrey Mitchell: I think this year will be the last.


Gladstone Mansfield Ferrie: Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the minister and his department upon what has been done by them for the boys who came back from overseas in the matter of education they received. We first gained experience when the troops returned from the first war. In 1944 provision was made for those returning from the second world war. It dealt particularly with those who had joined the forces before completing their education. They were permitted to continue, with the government taking care of them to see that they were given an opportunity to complete their education. The experience gained should not be lost, it should continue to be used. There are many young fellows who have obtained an education up to a certain point but who find they cannot carry on. I agree that we must have hewers of wood and drawers of water, but they can do their work more efficiently if they have education and training.
The job that was done by the Department of Labour for the troops and veterans should be carried on for the benefit of the civilian population. When a youth has reached grade level and wants to go ahead, why not give him the same examination you gave the troops? If some are eliminated, as some of the veterans were, let them be eliminated; but let us carry on and give every boy or girl who wants an education but cannot go on because of financial reasons the right to climb the ladder. This educational scheme has been a wonderful thing for Canada, and the experience should be used.
Many young fellows came back to the farm after the last war but did not want to stay on the farm. Some of them had gone as far as grade ten or grade eleven and they were sent to the agricultural schools for further education. When they came out they were willing to go back to the farm to take care of the soil. They learned at the university that the soil had to be taken care of, that erosion must be stopped, that the soil must be nurtured if they want to make a living. In closing I want to say to the minister that I think the organization he has should be used to help the civilian population and not be destroyed.


Humphrey Mitchell: May I be permitted to put on the record the information asked for by the hon. member for Cape Breton South?


Joseph-Alfred Dion: Is it agreed?
Supply-Labour


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Humphrey Mitchell: This is the information asked for:
Table 9-Assistance to Vocational Schools-Special Allotment for Capital Expenditures
Province	Buildings	Equipment	Total Allotment	Claims paid during 1949-50	Claims paid during previous years	Total Allotment	Claims paid during 1949-50	Claims paid during previous years$	$	$	$	$	$Newfoundland	219,185	-	-	73,065	-	-Prince Edward Island	61.500	-	61,500.00	20,500	3,248.96	957.93Nova Scotia	378,225	209,409.59	58,388.64	126,075	-	-New Brunswick	324,750	324,750.00	-	108,250	30,119.79	-Quebec	2,354,550	29,795.30	2,152,749.41	784,850	149,951.34	518,501.95Ontario	2,273,625	320,017.92	239,894.58	757,875	24,242.83	35,654.37Manitoba	492,000	144,839.30	111,899.33	164,000	7,090.57	-Saskatchewan	643,650	149,855.00	312,959.01	214,550	31,435.05	16,795.80Alberta	525,150	206,485.24	223,401.12	175,050	31,063.27	94,951.38British Columbia	446,550	312,132.26	134,117.74	148,850	80,057.46	61,153.70Totals	7,719,185	1,697,284.61	3,294,909.83	2,573,065	357,209.27	728,015.13
Table 10-Assistance to Vocational Schools-Annual Allotment
Province	Annual allotment and grant*	Claims paid during previous years	Claims pa 1949-50 to For previous years	id during 30th April For 1949-50	Total of payments to 30th April, 1950$	$	$	$	sNewfoundland	65,800	-	-	-	-Prince Edward Island	25,700	93,492.33	-	16,000.00	109,492.33Nova Scotia	106,400	107,041.92	38,996.21	34,168.87	180,207.00New Brunswick	92,700	349,699.34	10,000.00	92,700.00	452,399.34Quebec	609,400	2,329,351.05	108,249.15	498,140.58	2,935,740.78Ontario	589,000	2,356,000.00	-	589,000.00	2,945,000.00Manitoba	135,300	64,845.28	8,050.49	29,791.69	102,687.46Saskatchewan	173,900	365,527.91	7,500.00	131,273.08	504,300.99Alberta	143,800	520,269.74	-	143,800.00	664,069.74British Columbia	123,800	374,718.03	83,710.79	47,272.36	505,701.18Totals	2,065,800	6,560,945.60	256,506.64	1,582,146.58	8,399,598.82
*$10,000.00 in each province is an unmatched grant. Item agreed to.

Supply-Labour Terminable services-
164. To provide the necessary financial requirements to complete activities for the relocation, maintenance and welfare of persons of the Japanese race in Canada, including provision for undischarged commitments under agreements with the provinces and to continue the appointment of necessary temporary assistance required for the administration thereof, $52,780.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Is this a disappearing item?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Does the minister expect that this will be the last year?


Humphrey Mitchell: We have one project at New Denver to take care of older people who have tuberculosis, and arrangements are being made to have that responsibility assumed elsewhere.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Terminable services-
166.	To provide for expenses that may be incurred in the arranging for and the movement of workers from outside Canada to work on farms and other essential industry in Canada when Canadian labour is not available to meet the need; including costs connected with the supervision and welfare of persons already immigrated to Canada under former authorized labour movements and administrative expenses connected therewith, $783,340.
Arthur Leroy Smith: Perhaps the question I want to ask here would be more appropriate under the immigration items. I notice there is a decrease of $112,335. Can the minister tell us if it is intended to have assisted immigration?


Humphrey Mitchell: Up to now we have brought in about 80,000 displaced persons from Europe. Their fares were paid from the ocean port to the places of employment, and we run the vocational schools. I have always expressed the opinion that you will have to fill up this country if you are going to hang on to it. I am a great believer in the efficacy of the melting pot. I think there has been a complete change in public opinion with regard to immigration. You cannot take the figure of 13 million people and think you can hold it indefinitely. While I am charged with this responsibility I am going to say who is going to come here and who is not. They are going to be screened. If they want to start a revolution, whether it be fascist or communist, they are not going to do it here if I can avoid it. We have a physical test for these people. When I first came to Canada over forty years ago-


Arthur Leroy Smith: I gather that the answer to my question is yes?


Humphrey Mitchell: I just wanted to point out these facts to let people know which way we are going. When I first came to this country if you could stand on your two feet you were in. I think we have the right to give a physical examination. When the Polish soldiers were brought in I think it is fair to say that the examination was not as strict as it is today, with the result that a number of them had to be sent to sanatoria. I do not think we should assume that responsibility if we are in position to avoid it.


Arthur Leroy Smith: How many of these displaced persons have bought out their contracts? I understand that some of them have not completed their year in employment, as arranged, but have paid back their passage money in order to have freedom of action in seeking other employment. Can the minister tell me how many there are of this type?


Humphrey Mitchell: About 365. There is one thing: we cannot prevent these girls from getting married. It is a natural thing to do and, God bless them, I like to see them get married so long as they marry decent fellows.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I attended a little wedding last winter and I was told that a king from one of the small European countries was there.


Agar Rodney Adamson: How many displaced persons have come into Canada since the inception of this plan?


Humphrey Mitchell: Eighty thousand.


Mr. Herridge:: I agree with the minister when he says that we have to have population in this country, but there should be careful planning as to where that new population is directed. I should like to bring two cases to the attention of the minister. I was out in the country last fall and found some work going on for the provincial government under a subcontractor. There were several displaced persons employed by that subcontractor at wages lower than the standard rates, while boys who had fought for this country and who had been born in that district and lived there all their lives were in need of work. That is a poor distribution of labour.
I happened to get on the train one day and saw a family in the tourist coach and asked who they were The answer was: "They are some of Dr. MacNamara's tourists". What happened was that the family was sent from

Ontario to a first-class farmer in my constituency who had an excellent home for these people to live in. The farmer made every provision for them in the way of a decent home, wages and good living conditions. These people found it lonely because the house was about a quarter of a mile away from their nearest neighbour. They did not like it. There were communications between my district and Ottawa officials, telephone calls, telegrams and so on, at the public expense. Finally these people were provided with transportation from Kaslo to Nelson, and then railway tourist transportation for the man, his wife and family of children, including dining car tickets on the train, back to Ontario.
I should like to know where the advisory boards come into the picture in the operations of the department. It seems to me that totally unnecessary expense was involved in the instance I have cited. We have already paid our share to bring these people to Canada, and then we transport them all the way back to Ontario. If it had been a good old Britisher he would have been told to rustle for his living. I should like the minister to explain what the procedure is in such cases, because in my opinion it is a waste of public funds.


Humphrey Mitchell: I can do it in two minutes. I suppose the hon. member wants an answer, although to be honest I know nothing about the case to which he has referred. I would say that on the average these people are just as good as any others. We could not have undertaken the power development on the Ottawa river if it had not been for such people. I am not concerned about voices in the street; I want facts.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am giving facts.


Humphrey Mitchell: Just because somebody writes a letter to you or me and puts it on paper does not mean that it is true.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: If the minister will check he will find what I have said is correct.


Humphrey Mitchell: I will check it. What I want to impress on the committee is that, like my hon. friend, I get thousands of letters,
Supply-Labour
but just because somebody picks up a pen and puts something on paper it does not necessarily follow that the facts are as they outline them.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, the farmer himself informed me.


Humphrey Mitchell: That may toe true. I do not know the farmer, but if my hon. friend would get in touch with me instead of spending $60 a minute discussing an individual case in this committee, I should be glad to have the matter investigated.


Arthur Leroy Smith: I think I can answer it quickly. It is merely an exemplification of the new slogan of the Liberal party: Join the Liberal party and see the world.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I gave that case as an illustration. I am not saying it happens on a large scale. I suggested that I thought it was a waste of public money. There should be some provision for locating such people without having to bring them back across Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-
167.	Administration, including expenditures incurred in connection with the activities of the national employment service as delegated by the Minister of Labour in accordance with section 88 of the act (including technical personnel division), $22,043,330.
Mrs. Fairclough:: Will the minister tell us the amount of the fund as of March 31, 1949, additions that were made thereto, contributions, amounts of payments made therefrom and the balance in the fund at March 31, 1950?


Humphrey Mitchell: I have a complete breakdown and with the permission of the committee I will have it put on the record.


Joseph-Alfred Dion: Has the minister permission?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Humphrey Mitchell: The breakdown is as follows:
(Table appears on following page.)
^Mr. Mitchell.]



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE FUND

[Stage Direction]
Statement of Receipts and Disbursements for the Period July 1, 1941 to April 30, 1950.
Fiscal Year Ended March 31	Receipts	Disbursements	BalanceContributions (Gross less refunds)	Fines	Interest on investments and profit on sale of securities	Total revenue	Benefit payments	Balance in fundStamps	Meter	Bulk	Total employer and employee	Government	1942	$ 22,436,001.56 30,408,651.15 31,565,232.54 32,784,177.12 34,964,786.96 41,042,425.28 38,768,926.38 46,686,689.27 52,434,153.88	S 7,209,058.48 13.645.258.63 13.205.897.37 11,926,369.85 10.816.365.63 11.500.028.37 11,508,638.62 14,363,308.41 14,189,075.34	$ 6,790,549.01 13,380,741.65 16,949,655.09 19.018.308.47 16,785,437.07 23,472,577.26 33.593.269.47 37,531,562.30 37,809,186.72	$ 36,435,609.05 57.434.651.43 61,720,785.00 63.728.855.44 62,566,589.66 76,015,030.91 83,870,834.47 98,581,559.98 104,432,415.94	$ 7,287,121.81 11,487,057.90 12,344,421.74 12,746,179.30 12,513,778.66 15,203,457.58 16.366.400.70 20.924.013.71 20,094,332.20	$	$ 269,268.74 1.840.448.56 3,972,047.14 6,195,926.42 6,116,768.84 7.529.985.56 9,560,776.12 12,113,317.56 14,391,257.71	$ 43,991,999.60 70,762,796.00 78,038,577.55 82,673,002.18 81,199,440.82 98,752,294.48 109,803,333.89 131,627,250.33 138,935,737.27	$ 27,752.92 716,012.75 1,721,666.29 4,966,483.51 31,993,240.34 43,114,329.18 34,947,020.32 49,826,752.16 85,824,202.13	$ 43,964,246.68 114,011,029.93 190,327,941.19 268,034,459.86 317,240,660.34 372,878,625.64 447,734,939.21 529,535,437.38 582,646,972.521943	638.11 1,323.67 2,041.02 2,303.66 3,820.43 5,322.60 8,359.08 17,731.42	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948	1949	1950	
4,138,402.34	1,247,128.59	3,627,083.86	9,012,614.79	1,799,207.99	1,675.00	1,207,873.23	12,021,371.01	14,340,068.84	580,328,274.69
										
	335,229,446.48	109,611,129.29	208,958,370.90	653,798,946.67	130,765,971.59	43,214.99	63,197,669.88	847,805,803.13	267,477,528.44	580,328,274.69
										
Armedservice (included in "bulk" column): To March 31, 1950	$ 47,859,038.64
April 1950	 773,696.09
48,632,734.73
Supplementary benefit (included in "Disbursements" column):
To March 31, 1950	$
April 1950	
818,065.89
2,487,558.22
3.305,624.11
3862	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Labour
William Joseph Browne: There are two or three matters to which I should like to direct the attention of the minister. As he is aware, owing to a combination of circumstances the unemployment situation is worse in Newfoundland at the present time. One reason is the failure of the steel plants in Great Britain to keep their contracts for the sale of iron ore, There are two other places where men are not able to avail themselves of the benefit of the unemployment insurance fund. Has the minister given consideration to working out a scheme whereby fishermen can receive some advantage from a system of unemployment insurance, possibly in the same way that farmers of the west, who do not catch any fish, receive aid? Those who work in the fish plants draw unemployment insurance when no fish come in, but the fishermen do not.


Humphrey Mitchell: If I may interrupt my hon. friend, I think it would save him making a long speech.


William Joseph Browne: I was not
going to make a long speech.


Humphrey Mitchell: As a matter of fact the matter is being studied at this very moment. I gave instructions to my people to make a study.


William Joseph Browne: I am glad to know that the minister is studying that problem, because it is most important, and I think something should be done.
The next point concerns the workers at the United States bases. There are about three or four thousand men and women involved.


Humphrey Mitchell: Negotiations are being carried on at the moment with the United States government.


Mr, Browne (St. John's West):: Has any
progress been made?


Humphrey Mitchell: Yes, I would say that progress is being made.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-*
168.	Government's contribution to the unemployment insurance fund, $23,000,000.
Arthur Leroy Smith: I notice there is an increase of $4 million. I do not say this by way of complaint, but would the minister say a word as to the reason for it? The increase of $4 million is responsible for almost the total increase in the estimates of the department. Is there anything that the minister can say to us about that?


Humphrey Mitchell: I think I can. There is an increase in the proportion of contributions paid out of the treasury, and there has been
Supply-Labour
a substantial increase in the coverage, particularly in the lumber industry, in the last fiscal year.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The $4 million is in proportion to what other people are doing?


Humphrey Mitchell: Absolutely.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I want to mention something else to the minister. I apologize for bothering him so much.


Humphrey Mitchell: That is all right.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I want to say that your staffs in Nelson and Trail are doing a very good job, but at times they work under great difficulties. When anybody does. a good job, I say so. When seasonal unemployment occurs in our district, it happens all at once. The mills close down and logging ends because of weather conditions. Your staffs are swamped with applications for unemployment insurance. I quite understand that you cannot keep sufficient staff all year round to handle the work at that time. You cannot take on temporary employees to do the work, because they have not been trained. I suggest that a lot of misunderstanding is caused amongst the workers. They are irritated because their applications are not proceeded with quickly, and that is partly owing to the time involved in the mailing of applications. I suggest there should be some form of travelling service periodically to the smaller points to assist in filling out applications. I also suggest that it would be a good idea if the minister's officials were permitted to visit the national trade unions and other groups of workers to explain the workings of the act, because I find that in most cases the complaints I receive are the result of misunderstanding.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-
169.	To provide for the transfer of labour to and from places where employment is available in agriculture and industry and expenses incidental thereto, in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, $200,000.
Arthur James Bater: I should like to say a word in commendation of the minister and his department for the great work that has been done. I should also like to mention a problem facing many municipalities in the province, of Saskatchewan, with which I am more familiar. I refer to the question of the metis or half-breeds. We have had assistance in moving these people from one province to another or from one district to another; nevertheless I think the problem is one that will require investigation on the part of the Department of Labour, because it goes beyond

Supply-Health and Welfare the assistance that can be afforded by many municipalities in Saskatchewan. Instead of taking the time to read it, I should like to put on the record a table from a publication of the Department of Labour. I think the people of our country should know what is being done in this branch of the Department of Labour.


Mr. Cote (Verdun-La Salle):: Is that from the last report of the department?


Mr.   Baler@: Yes, I should like to have this table put on Hansard. It sets forth the movements that were carried out in 1948.


Mr. Cole (Verdun-La Salle):: On what page of the report does it appear?


Mr.   Baler@: Page 63.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr.   Baler@: The table is as follows:
Organized Movements of Farm Labour
Type of Movement	From	To	Number of Workers
			500
			2,100
			920
			200
			1,000
			800
			1,000
		Maine, U.S.A		5,900
		North Dakota, U.S.A		800
			450
			1,350
			200
			200


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at three o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
215. Departmental administration, $859,720.
Mr. Blair:: Is the minister going to make a statement?


Mr.   Marlin.@: No.


William Gourlay Blair: The administration item of the Department of National Health and Welfare provides the one opportunity during a session of parliament when the matter of the health of the people of Canada may be discussed. I have always felt that we devoted altogether too little time to the discussion of this important matter.
In previous debates in other sessions I have quoted statistics showing the health situation in this country, and those statistics have invariably indicated that while much has been accomplished in the way of prevention, cure and treatment in certain diseases, there is still a great work to be done. We still have diseases, such as cancer, which offer a challenge to all who are interested in the health of our people, "specially to those engaged in research. It
(Mr. Bater.]
is apparent that if research is to provide the answer to these questions, this house must consider the advisability of voting sums of money for that work.
When the estimates of this department were before the committee last session I drew attention to the fact that conditions were changing with respect to the types of diseases now being treated by physicians and encountered in hospitals. We have made marked progress in the protection of our population against communicable diseases. The advent of penicillin and the sulpha drugs has changed the whole picture in the treatment of infection. Maternal and infant mortality have fallen, and the span of life has been greatly lengthened by these new discoveries. It is true that we have not discovered how to treat and cure such diseases as cancer, disseminated sclerosis, leukemia or poliomyelitis, commonly known as infantile paralysis; and these are only a few of the great problems facing us at the present time. Though tuberculosis is still a menace, modern treatment and care have markedly reduced the incidence of that disease, and I think we can look forward with confidence to the time when it will be entirely eliminated. This may sound optimistic, but we have only to look at the reduced incidence of infections to see that this will be possible in the future.

While new scientific discoveries have been made and will be made, our policy should be directed toward making available to all our people the opportunity for treatment, and bringing to them all the advantages of new scientific discoveries to combat disease and misery. We must constantly strive to bring the standard of health of the people of Canada to the highest possible level. But in making progress in lengthening the span of life we must be prepared to deal with diseases of advancing age. Some of the results of the increase in the number of older people are now becoming apparent. During the last year there has been an increase in the number of mental cases; in fact, as I have said during the last two or three sessions of the house, the percentage of people suffering mental disease is greater than the percentage increase in our general population. Increasing the span of life is going to increase the percentage of people suffering from the mental disturbances which occur in aged people; and unless we find an answer to the problem of cancer it is to be expected that this disease will increase among the older group.
Heart disease is becoming more common, not only from the strain and stress of our modern life but from the increase in the number of older people. Our population is increasing; our towns and cities are growing with the establishment of industries. We must be prepared to deal with an increasing number of health and accident problems connected with our industries. As an example of these changed conditions, though it does not enter into what we are discussing today, we have only to look at the toll of accidents and injuries on our highways. So we must readjust our present and future health facilities to take care of the older age groups. This is going to entail provision for people suffering from mental diseases of the aged, and the treatment of chronic diseases of old people.
I again call attention, Mr. Chairman, to the necessity for research into the cause, prevention and treatment of the so-called degenerative diseases. It is important that the rising mortality rate in heart disease should receive attention. Coronary disease of the heart was formerly regarded as a disease of the older age groups, but it is becoming increasingly common in younger groups. The study of cardiovascular disease, in view of the high casualty rate, should receive the attention of our research workers, in order that the rapidly rising mortality rate may be cut down.
The programs of prevention of acute and communicable diseases carried on by the
Supply-Health and Welfare health departments of all the provinces have shown splendid results. This has been proved by the decreasing mortality rates. One might take as an example the lowered rate of infantile mortality. Preventive treatment has cut down the incidence and costs to the nation of acute diseases. The same form of program can also be highly effective in the control and prevention of chronic diseases, and this is a program which will be increasingly necessary in the future. Not only must we continue our program of prevention; we must pay particular attention to the education of our people in preventive measures. Further, the increase in the span of life makes it absolutely necessary that, along with other measures, old age pensions and assistance to the aged should be commensurate with a decent standard of living for our aged citizens, and any plans for the future must recognize this fact. I am not bringing into this debate the matter that is now before a committee of this house, but I am throwing out the suggestion that it is part of any medical program dealing with the diseases of our elderly citizens.
It is worthy of note that the percentage of venereal disease in Canada shows a marked decline. I was interested in the remarks of Dr. Theodore Rosenthal, director of the New York city bureau of adult hygiene, at the meeting of the Canadian and Ontario public health associations. Among other things Dr. Rosenthal stated that the social aspect, through better family relations, was important. He further said that public education has gone a long way toward bringing about the incidence of reduction, and, as quoted in the Globe and Mail of June 14, Dr. Rosenthal added a warning:
Venereal disease must be controlled in the future to the same extent as smallpox and diphtheria are today.
I again call your attention to the great need for research into the disease known as disseminated sclerosis. Some time ago I received three letters within the space of two weeks from comparatively young victims of this disease. It is a disease which not only incapacitates, but lasts for years, with attendant misery and suffering. I am glad to see that an organization has been set up to procure funds to stimulate research in the treatment of the disease, which is all too common. The Department of National Health and Welfare should give due consideration to the lending of all possible assistance to the prevention and treatment of disseminated sclerosis.
I now come to a subject which I have mentioned practically every year and at every session of parliament when the Department of National Health and Welfare estimates were being considered. I call your attention to the high cost of hospitalization, which is


Supply-Health and Welfare beyond the financial means of the average citizen. It is true that there has been increased tendency for people to seek hospital accommodation and treatment. It is very difficult at the present time to get help in the home; it is very difficult to get a trained nurse in order that the patient may receive the treatment that is necessary. There has been an increase in the building of hospitals and additions to hospitals, in order that more beds may be provided, but even with the grants given by the Department of National Health and Welfare, and also, in my own province of Ontario, the grants given by the provincial government for the building of hospitals and hospital beds, there is still a great shortage. Even with these grants it is difficult for cities, towns and municipalities to finance the building of hospitals and additions to existing hospitals.
Boards of hospitals have found it increasingly difficult to finance their institutions, even with these increased grants. It is necessary that we should have sufficient beds to meet the needs of our people. I am introducing a subject to which I hope the minister will give due consideration; the matter is very important. There should be sufficient hospital beds to meet the demand, in time of peace, and, which is more important, in time of war. Defence plans for the protection of our country must include adequate provision for our people in time of emergency. Modern warfare has shown the importance of making provision for civilians.
No review of the work of the Department of National Health and Welfare would be complete without mentioning the position of the so-called incurables. Many of these people are in the younger age groups. They are not able to earn their livelihood, owing to disease or accident suffered in earlier years. It is also possible that a percentage of this group could be helped in learning some form of gainful occupation. Many, because of their disability, find themselves unable to do any form of work. I am sure that the whole house will agree with me when I say that those people should receive assistance. It is only a short time since we had a group of them here. I am sure that every hon. member who saw them and interviewed them was impressed by the necessity of doing something for them, something that would give them a chance to lead- a normal life. As I looked at the group I felt that possibly some measures could be taken to train them in some work that they could carry on, even with their disability.
I draw attention, sir, to the remarkable work done in my own province of Ontario for the care of children or adults suffering from that dread disease poliomyelitis. All

cases in the province of Ontario are sent to selected centres for the period of isolation, which is only a matter of a week. Then they are sent to general hospitals for treatment after the infectious stage of the disease has passed, and it is possible to begin treatment of the affected muscles. Great work has been done in these centres toward the repair of and the bringing back to life of muscles which have been affected by the disease. This is all done at the expense of the provincial government. I wish to point out that it has paid rich dividends in preventing the crippling of many of these children. I have been impressed by the fact that children who have suffered from the disease, and who two or three years ago would have been left crippled for the rest of their lives, are now completely well, without any disability. Last summer one of my own patients, who was affected in both arms, back, and legs, received treatment at the Ottawa civic hospital, one of the selected hospitals for the treatment of this disease in Ontario. I am sure if it had not been for the modern methods of treatment which my patient received, she would have been a cripple for the rest of her life, on crutches or in a wheel chair. This patient is almost completely well, and in a few months time I am sure will recover from any form of disability.
So far as the disease itself is concerned, every effort should be made to foster research. The cause and the methods of prevention are not known, but much can be done by early measures of treatment to prevent crippling. I am well acquainted with the splendid results achieved in Ontario by a program of treatment of poliomyelitis victims, and I feel that the same type of program should be in effect in every province and every area in the Dominion of Canada. This program is so important that money from the dominion health grants should be allotted to the provinces for similar treatment. I hope that when I mention expenditures of that type no member on the government side will accuse me of advocating expenditures and at the same time advocating economy. There is no hon. member in this house who will quibble over the amount of money spent in the treatment or prevention or control of disease. The matter of economy rests in the administration of the department.
I now come to one of the most important matters under consideration this afternoon, namely, the expenditures of this department. It is the most expensive department of any in the government. The total amount required by the Department of National Health and Welfare is $455,253,570, with an increase of $44,557,114 as compared with the estimates of 1949-50. Some of these amounts are

authorized by statute. Large amounts are required for the payment of old age pensions and family allowances. It is not my purpose to criticize the amounts appropriated in any of these items; neither shall I criticize the amount spent on health services. Any government is justified in spending money on national health and welfare, and there is no department of the government that is as important as that which has to do with the care of the sick and the afflicted, or provision for the aged. Family allowances have done much for the younger aged group. The grants for the care of Indians and Eskimos of $11,694,839 have been necessary to preserve the health of the people who were the first inhabitants of this country. I could not under any circumstances criticize grants for such purposes as venereal disease control, mental health, blindness control and others, with the purpose of aiding the sick and afflicted. These grants are entirely necessary for the cure and prevention of disease, not only in the individual, but in the whole community. The individual and the whole community should be considered when we are dealing with sickness, particularly the treatment of a disease like tuberculosis.
But, sir, I have been amazed at the total amount of money required for travelling expenses in this department. I have made a summary of the travelling expenses in the various branches, and I am surprised to find that it reaches the grand total of $773,900, which is approaching the million mark. This bill for travelling expenses for the year 1950-51 in the various divisions is as follows:
Departmental administration	 $ 25,000
Departmental administration, allowance and other expenses of delegates to international conferences	 5 qoq
Health branch administration	 5 000
Food and drugs	50[600
Proprietary or patent medicines	'' i'ooo
Opium and narcotic drugs	 12^000
Quarantine and leprosy	 S^OOO
Laboratory of hygiene	 12^000
Immigration and medical inspection .'....	65,000
Child and maternal health	 loiooo
Public health engineering	 29,000
Treatment of sick mariners	 2,000
Industrial health	 9^500
Civil service health	 L000
Nutrition	 14^000
Venereal disease control	:	 4'sOO
Health insurance studies	 10^000
Dental health	 6,000
Hospital designs	 4,000
Mental health	 4,500
Blindness control	 4,000
Epidemiology	 6,000
Medical services-Eskimos and Indians ...	350,000
Civil aviation medicine	 22,800
Welfare branch	 3,000
Family allowances	 75,000
Old age pensions	 16,000
National fitness administration	 15,000

Supply-Health and Welfare It will be noted that the grand total is $773,900. The amount provided in the estimates last year was $623,000. So that this first amount I have mentioned for the year 1950-51 shows an additional amount of $150,900 over the amount required for last year. This would seem to be a tremendous bill, an unusual bill, for travelling expenses.
When I added up the bill I was reminded of a slogan of the American marines, "Join the marines and see the world." It would seem that officials in the Department of National Health and Welfare have almost an equal opportunity. I can remember as a schoolboy having to learn by memory a sonnet by the poet Keats, written about an entirely different subject; but it seems appropriate in view of the travelling expenses of the Department of National Health and Welfare. One could picture one of the travelling officials in the department saying:
Much have I travell'd in the realms of gold,
And many goodly states and kingdoms seen; Round many western islands have I been . . .
I can understand why travelling expenses in the administration of the medical services to Indians and Eskimos would reach a large amount, but there are other items which require a detailed examination and explanation by the department. I am pointing out to the minister that in view of this amount being so large, these expenses will be subjected to close examination and the production by the minister of all the details. I am fully aware of the fact that this is an age of conventions, but the calling of a convention in distant parts does not warrant a call of "All aboard!" to the travelling officials of the Department of National Health and Welfare. It would be better if a great deal of this money were saved to the taxpayer and actually spent for the relief of the afflicted within our own nation. An amount of $500 or $1,000 saved here and there from this enormous bill for travelling expenses, and spent for the aid of a crippled child or in research on such a disease as poliomyelitis, would bring relief and happiness to our population.	. f ,
Any government, whether prc&ificikl or dominion, is fully justified irsp^naihg': rrtpney on public health. There ik ho iqitiier.department within a government awhieji, JjoS; vitally affects the lives of the people a$ ''that ' <* the department of health. WhifedieaUh ejcnSndi-tures are a necessity for Ij^^belfar'qlof (a nation, and there will be ljj^^BBigre.|rient * -ith the amount of mo :	-p./nt if
objaativ, :	h	attaincJ^^^Kmis Insist
be sc,".' ' ' . ' :i behalf	. .aula
:	'	.	unii.~: -
ally large bill for v	V
3868	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare


Major James William Coldwell: Supply-Health and Welfare to the last two wars a sum vastly in excess of what we spend on national health and welfare.
Above all, I hope the government will see to it that the grants for the treatment and prevention of some of the diseases that have been mentioned this afternoon will not only be maintained but increased, and that in the years to come we may look forward to great advances in the treatment of diseases that incapacitate and cause so much misery to so many people. It is satisfying to note that in some of our provinces many advances have been made in providing hospitalization. Having regard to their financial resources, I think some of the provinces have gone almost as far as they can go in providing, from their own resources, hospitalization and other health care.
As I said a few minutes ago, the time has come when the house should be considering a national health plan as a part of the social security program. I hope that the old age security committee will recommend a great advance in old age pensions, and I hope the government will accept their recommendation. When we have made this great advance then I think the problem to which we should give the highest priority in the next few years is a national health plan to make available to our people, as freely as our primary schools now are to our children, all the health services that the people of Canada require. I hope that such a plan can be developed in co-operation with the medical and nursing professions and all others interested in the problem, so that we shall not have a conflict of interests preventing or delaying the coming into effect of a great national health plan.
I am not going to say more this afternoon. I wish to support warmly the suggestions put forward by the hon. member for Lanark, and to say that we will support every measure proposed for the improvement of the general health and welfare of the people of Canada.


Mr. Low:: Mr. Chairman, my first words must be words of commendation to the minister and the Department of National Health and Welfare for the fine things they are doing in the fields of health and welfare for the purpose of improving living conditions and the happiness of the Canadian people. I have watched the work with keen interest, and I must say that in the past few years I have noted a real change in the attitude of the government of Canada to health and welfare matters. I enjoy listening to the hon. member for Lanark when he makes his contribution each year on the estimates of this department. A great deal of practical
[Mr. Coldwell.l
and down-to-earth information is always
to be found in the speeches he makes. Being a medical practitioner, his pronouncements naturally carry much more weight than they would coming from members who are laymen.
The members in this corner of the house have felt for many years that the governments of Canada were not doing enough in the fields of health and welfare. Every time the matter has come before the house we have demonstrated our concern in the only way that we could. We have made our proposals, and in the only government for which we have responsibility in this great dominion we have tried to demonstrate in a practical manner how we feel about health measures and public welfare. I think I am being modest when I say that in no province of the Dominion of Canada do the people enjoy more services in the field of health and welfare than they do in Alberta. We have been conscious of the need of the extension of those services. Even during the time, Mr. Chairman, when it was difficult to get money, when our total revenues in that province were less than $20 million, we did begin a gradual extension of health and welfare services; that has continued step by step right up to the present day. These health grants, hospitalization grants, construction grants, survey grants, have' all been of inestimable value to the province. We want to acknowledge those things, and to thank the minister for the leadership he gave in providing grants to the provinces. Without them many of the provinces could not have made the progress they have made; without them a good many more people would be suffering from the lack of hospital and other facilities within the field of health.
I do not want to take too much time, but there are a few things I should like to mention in connection with the estimates that are before us today. For a good many years, having had something to do with it in the administration of the province of Alberta, I have been keenly interested in the question of nutritional service. I have wondered just .how far the health department here integrates its investigation into nutritional problems with the research work going on in the Department of Agriculture, and the research council, as well as other agencies of government. I would appeal to the minister to do two things when he takes part in this debate: let us know just what is being done in that field to integrate the investigational services, and indicate to what extent the people ot Canada are being made aware of the findings of agencies of government.

I have discovered out of my own experience as a member of the provincial government that many of our people are actually starving to death in the midst of abundance. I do not mean that they are not getting their stomachs full of food that might perhaps look good, might perhaps be clean, might perhaps be sufficient in quantity; I simply mean that they are having to use so many devitalized foods. The flour the people of this country are getting is devitalized material; the very virtue has been taken out of it in the process of milling. It may be argued that the millers are giving the people what they demand, and that the people are actually demanding white, light flour; that may be so. If they are, it is done in ignorance. I am satisfied that a great many of the diseases suffered by the people of Canada today are deficiency diseases, and result from slow starvation arising from the use of foods that are devitalized, from which tne very elements the people need have been taken.
I should like to know how far the health department, along with other agencies of this government, has carried on research in nutrition, to discover exactly what has been happening and how to overcome the difficulty. In certain areas in this country the soil is worn out. Ordinarily, people in the cities are not aware that this is so. They are receiving in the markets of the cities vegetables and food materials that are grown on worn-out soil. These food materials are deficient in minerals. When human beings consume them it is only natural that they too should be deficient in tlfe minerals which they require, because the food itself does not contain what the people need for health. As a result we have an increase in the incidence of cancer, and a great many other diseases which doubtless will in time prove to be deficiency diseases. In nutritional research it seems to me that one of the important things to do is to determine from what areas food materials are coming that are deficient in mineral content, and if those are discovered the people of Canada ought to be warned of the results of consuming that food.
I have seen the publicity work. We ought to lay emphasis on that sort of information. I know some of the things that are being done. I have watched the bulletins that have come out of this department, and a great many of them are splendid. The pictorial nutritional charts especially have an appeal to many people. I do not begrudge one dollar that is spent on this sort of thing. We could lay emphasis on nutrition and get the people of Canada conscious of the necessity of producing and consuming vital food. Then I am satisfied you would not have to talk about
Supply-Health and Welfare hospitalization and the care of people who are falling by the way as a result of deficiency diseases.


Mr. Warren:: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Solon Earl Low: Yes.


Ralph Melville Warren: As I listened to the hon.
member I wondered whether in the area in which he lives the housewives bake their own bread. Would he emphasize the importance of housewives learning to bake bread? Homemade bread is far superior to anything the baker makes.


Solon Earl Low: There are a good many things
I could say, but I would certainly say "amen" to that. My wife does make her own bread, and I do not care if the bakers know it.
I should like to add my voice to that of the leader of the C.C.F. party in his appeal to the minister and his colleagues to consider the plight of the incurables in this country. When the delegation representing the Canadian Association of Incurables visited Ottawa not long ago, they came to my office and spent some time in telling me their story. I must say, Mr. Chairman, that these people have a good case. I am satisfied that the minister knows that. They reported to me the sympathetic and fine reception the minister gave them. We all know that many of these incurables-no one knows how many hundreds of them there are-wish to be self-supporting. They constantly find themselves faced with this from employers: Now, we would like to give you work, but you would be an embarrassment or a danger around our institution. Their reflexes are not quick enough to handle mechanical operations, and sometimes it is difficult for them to move around. Amongst the delegation I found a number who expressed a desire to be independent. They told me their history- how they sought employment, and what their experience had been. My heart went out to them. I would say, sir, that their case is deserving of priority. I would think, in fact I will go so far as to say, that the needs of the incurables of this country are just as great as the needs of the old age pensioners or the blind; and while we are considering the extension of social services I say we should treat their requests on a par with those of the blind. It does seem, too, that it might be advisable not to put them under the Old Age Pensions Act, as we did the blind. I am of the opinion that we made a mistake in not drafting a special act for the blind, and I still believe that should be done at the earliest possible moment. I had something to do with the administration of old age and blind pensions in the province, and

Supply-Health and Welfare I concluded that we could have done a better job if there had been legislation specifically drafted covering the blind in this country. So I suggest that when we take up the question of the incurables-and we should do it immediately-we should draft an act particularly applying to them. One thing that surprised me about the whole situation was that thus far they have no way of determining exactly how many incurables there are in Canada, and for that reason it has been more difficult for them to lay emphasis upon their particular needs. I wonder if the minister, when he speaks, could tell us whether any move is being made by means of a survey across Canada to determine exactly how many incurables there are in need of financial assistance. If such information has not been gathered together thus far I think this should be done as soon as possible. Then we will be in a position to deal with the matter in terms of dollars and cents.
I should like to add my voice to the plea that has been made for further assistance, if it can possibly be made available, to the schools of social service. These schools are in need of assistance, and they are doing a good work. I believe they are deserving of much more help so that, as the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar said, they may be able to extend to prospective students bursaries or scholarships to encourage them to take up this work. It is of inestimable value to the Canadian people that trained social workers be available when they are needed; and today they are badly needed, if for nothing else than to help make our people conscious of the many things they could be doing for themselves. The true measure of the stability of a people and a nation lies in its ability to make use of the things that are at hand. Trained social workers are able to assist the>
people to learn exactly what is at hand and how to use it, and I think we should be laying some emphasis on that phase of our welfare work.
As the minister knows-and I do not intend to enter upon a long discussion of finance this afternoon-we in this group have tried to take a realistic position with respect to the expenditure of money. We have said that at the same time we are trying to extend health and social services we ought to be constantly mindful of the burden that has to be borne by the taxpayer, the ordinary consumer of this country. We have not retreated from that position by one inch. We say we will go along with the minister in everything he wants to do to improve the health conditions of our people and lessen the suffering of those who have been stricken. We urge him to go along just as 
quickly as he can, of course always being mindful of the taxpayers and the burden they have to bear. We have shown on numerous occasions, I think, that there is no lack of material wealth in this country. We have not begun to realize our productive capacity; and until we have realized our productive capacity we cannot say we have gone as far as possible in the extension of health and welfare services. It is out of our production that these things must come. If financial restrictions or a dearth of finances tend to interfere with the extension of these services, when at the same time we could produce more of the things that are needed, I say to the minister let us get out together and fight that sort of thing; let us remove the restrictions, get the materials into the hands of those who need them and the services to those for whom we are working now in connection with health and welfare.
We know what can be done because of the experience we have had in production. We know what this country is capable of doing. We urge the minister not to be too frightened by the size of the figures that may be presented to him by committees studying these matters. Let him rather take a look at the production end of it, the food, the clothing and shelter we could provide by all-out effort. Then let him govern himself accordingly, and we will back him to the limit.


Mr. Fleming:: Mr. Chairman, I believe the speeches that have been delivered in the house this afternoon have been characterized by a very constructive note, as well as by. a profound appreciation of the importance of the subject of national health and the kindred subject of national welfare. Since I agree with so much of what has been said, particularly by the hon. member for Lanark in his masterly speech, I believe I can shorten my remarks a good deal. The fact is that only last December, six months ago, the estimates of this department for last year were reviewed, and in addition during the present session the house has been afforded the opportunity of debating the subject of old age pensions on the motion to set up a special committee to go into that subject.
I should like to associate myself very heartily with what has been said on some aspects of the work of the department with which members of the committee on old age security have come directly in contact. I do not intend to discuss the subject referred to that committee, but I think tribute should be paid to the deputy minister, Dr. Davidson, to Miss Waters, Mr. Willard and other members of the staff who contributed so much to the material which was placed before that committee, comprehensive material which

reflected great credit upon those concerned in its preparation. I believe this tribute is well deserved.
Here we are dealing with a department whose proposed expenditures are the largest among all departments of government, with the exception of those coming under the Department of Finance. The hon. member for Lanark has drawn attention to the tremendous amounts proposed to be appropriated for travelling expenses in this department. I do not propose to discuss again that subject, with which he dealt so ably, but I do wish to draw attention to some other expenditures in this department which I think are worthy of note. In doing so I wish to make it quite clear that I have always been one of those who strongly supported the use of public moneys to meet national problems in relation to health and welfare, considering that when expenditures are directed to those purposes they are a valuable investment which will pay dividends in the national interest. But as members of this house it is our duty to be very sure that the taxpayer receives a dollar's value for every dollar spent, and that the moneys appropriated are voted consciously by parliament to assist in promoting the health and welfare of the nation.
Now, sir, I turn to a subject which has been discussed at previous sessions, but not always carried to the point of detail that it might well deserve. It is the subject of publicity. Anyone who examines this book of estimates must be impressed by the repeated appearances in the details in this book of that familiar title "Publicity", or under the more euphonious and impressive title which has been tagged onto it in recent years "Educational and Informational Publicity". That euphonious title deserves closer examination; the house should not be too greatly impressed by a resounding title. Let us go a little deeper, Mr. Chairman, and see exactly what is involved in these expenditures for this purpose.
First of all, as to the amount, I am sure it will surprise some to realize that in this department the items proposed to be spent on publicity during this present fiscal year total $524,970. How are they made up? Director of information services, $6,000; information officer, $4,080; and again under that same general heading we have $131,450 to be found under departmental administration. Then under the health branch, $66,000. We have an item under food and drugs. Chief of the advertising division-it may be that his salary should not be altogether charged to this subject, but I mention it in passing- $5,640.
Supply-Health and Welfare
Then we come to proprietary or patent *medicines, $7,000; opium and narcotic drugs, $2,000; child and maternal health, $44,500; public health engineering, $9,000; industrial health, $31,000; civil service health, $2,000; nutrition, $30,000; venereal disease control, $6,000; dental health, $13,500; mental health, $63,000; blindness control, $10,000; Indian medical service, $5,000; civil aviation medicine, $1,500. These are all under the health side of the department. Under the welfare side we have welfare branch, $2,500; family allowances, $56,500; and national physical fitness, $28,300. The total, as I have said, sir, is $524,970.
Let me make myself quite clear. I am not saying that there may not be good value in some of these expenditures. I am not making any general condemnation of expenditures on education, expenditures on certain forms of public information, which I think can properly be carried out through this department, but I think, sir, that in this very striking total there is money provided that ought to be very closely examined in this house. It is deplorable, sir, that this clumsy procedure we have available to us in this committee of supply does not enable hon. members to conduct that detailed examination which would be possible if we did take the intelligent course of setting up smaller committees to scrutinize estimates of this and other departments. But I do know, sir, that we have had occasion in the past to complain about some expenditures on these publicity items as being wasteful in their nature. We had an example the other day. It is true the minister's answer at page 3638 indicates that it is not a very large amount; but "Dietary Ditties" is not an isolated example, and as publicity it does not contribute very much to the public's awareness of health problems.


Gordon Graydon: Poetry by Paul.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The author's name was
requested in the question placed on the order paper by the hon. member for Calgary West. In the answers tabled by the minister in this house on June 15 the name of the poet has not been disclosed.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Martin.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am inclined to the opinion, sir, that it was typical modesty on the part of the minister that he was not prepared to claim paternity in relation to this doggerel.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Don't you recognize Shelley?


Donald Methuen Fleming: When work piles so high you can't see
And you feel you've been shoved up a tree;
You won't lose your wit, or fly into a fit,
If you're eating your vitamin B.

Supply

Health and Welfare


Mr.   Marlin.@: May I interrupt and point out to my hon. friend that he and I were classmates. I am sure that he, as a good English student, will recognize there one of the great English poets of the nineteenth century.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I have not recognized any poet in that contribution. It may be that there is someone given to making rhymes who is responsible for perpetrating these lines, but I would not wish to hold anyone else in the department responsible for them but the minister himself.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I take all the blame.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It reminds one of some of the publicity we had to complain about in previous years. You will remember that we found that public moneys were being spent several years ago to tell people, as I recall the expression to, "Stand without sag, and sit without strain." You will remember the one which involved expenditure of public moneys on a filler in which the parents of the country, who were receiving family allowances for their children, were advised to spend part of their family allowance to "add zest to living". The expression has never been fully interpreted by the minister. I am sure it would be interesting to have the minister's conception of adding zest to living.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I will take you out sometime.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Then you will recall the
choice one, sir, about the packing of the lunch basket. Public moneys were being spent to instruct the housewives of this country what to put in a lunch basket. That was a sample of paternalism that I think public moneys ought not to be devoted to.


Major James William Coldwell: They have not enough to
put in lunch baskets.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I think housewives of this country do not need instruction from the department as to what ought to go into the lunch basket. They may not have what ought to go into it, but they are not going to get it by having moneys taken out of their pockets in the form of taxes to be made available to have someone in the Department of National Health and Welfare tell them what ought to go into the lunch basket.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That particular one was discontinued before my hon. friend was born.


Donald Methuen Fleming: My birth must have been in very recent times. I do not know whether my hon. friend is talking about my political birth or not, but the money I refer to was spent during my time in the House of Commons. I do not know whether my appearance here now-


Mr.   Marlin.@: I said before my hon. friend was born.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Well, I think the minister must be putting his own choice interpretation on the word "born". The fact of the matter is that the expenditure I am complaining about was made during my time in this House of Commons.


Mr.   Marlin.@: In 1945.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That is the sort of thing that has been unearthed in relation to these expenditures in times past, and it calls for something more in the way of investigation than is possible under this clumsy procedure in this committee of supply.
There is one other matter that, because of the profusion of items, cannot possibly be examined in the detail that the house should demand, having regard to the limited time here available. One will find scattered throughout the items of this department about twenty-five bearing the title, "sundries". These always sound like small items. One immediately thinks of overtime dinner allowances for employees in the department, carfare or other things of that kind. One thinks of petty cash; but when a look is taken at some of these sundries it is discovered that the total of sundries for this department aggregates the not unimpressive figure of $211,785. That is not bad for sundries! The hon. member for Lanark suggests to me that it may be of assistance to those in the department who are travelling. Well, one does not need to travel far to be persuaded that something more by way of information is required than is now available, if the department is to justify sundries totalling more than $200,000.
I should like to offer only a brief word on the subject of health insurance. I had more to say on the subject on December 9 last when the estimates of this department were being considered. At that time I drew the attention of hon. members to the lamentable failure of the present administration to carry out the platform adopted by the Liberal party at its 1948 Ottawa convention, in relation to the inclusion of health insurance in its program of social security. This is the program that was adopted:
The program will include health insurance, covering medical, dental, surgical and hospital health services on a contributory basis.
There were no qualifications to that. There was no statement about waiting for another fifteen or twenty years; no suggestion about *deferring it for another generation. No, the statement was straightforward, direct and to the point. I have no doubt that in the election that took place one year ago this month that plank in the platform of the Liberal party was heeded by the people, with the thought that those who subscribed to it must have meant what they said.	*


Major James William Coldwell: As they did in 1945.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Yes.


Mr.   Marlin.@: And as they mean today.


Donald Methuen Fleming: What has been done? We
have asked the government repeatedly what it is going to do in relation to a national health program. We are still in the dark as to what plans, if any, the government has. The minister goes off on those long perorations about national health grants, and about waiting until the nation has digested them before he can even begin to tax his brains to carry out this promise in the Liberal platform, and meet a need which has been recognized by all parties in the house, namely the need for a national health program which will assure services of the kind here described to the people of this country.
We are waiting. We become impatient while we listen to nothing but excuses from the government for its inaction. The time has come for action. The minister is asked again to be concrete and definite, and to show some indication that action is intended. This year he has a golden opportunity in the dominion-provincial conference to meet this fall. This is an opportunity such as has not been made available to him for some time. Let him seize that opportunity. We have not had any intimation yet from the government that the subject of a health program is even to be included in the agenda of the conference. This is to be an exceedingly important gathering, and I do hope this opportunity will not be lost. There will be many things to be discussed before the conference; but here is something of major importance. I hope the minister will grasp this opportunity.
Let me point out to him that if he has cause for complaint about being misquoted concerning the intentions of the government in this field, much of the responsibility is attributable to the fact that the government has not been doing anything in the field. The minister complained in the house the other day about being misquoted. He pointed out that he had been quoted as having said in Vancouver on June 13 that he was against any national health insurance plan for Canada, and that health insurance is and must remain a provincial problem. In his statement to the house several days ago he remarked that he had not been correctly quoted in that press dispatch, and said he had subsequently given a statement to that same newspaper correcting their erroneous report.
Such misinterpretations and erroneous reports are bound to keep on turning up until the minister goes further than just to talk about the subject. The opportunity for misinterpretation will quickly disappear if he 55946-245
Supply-Health and Weljare will substitute action for talk. The time has come for action, and I urge that the minister make this a year of action.
I should like to add my voice to those already heard today in the house about the problem of incurables, or those who are suffering from chronic diseases which incapacitate them from earning a living. All hon. members were impressed and touched by what we saw not only of the plight but of the courage of those who came to Ottawa a month ago representing the Canadian Association of Incurables. I take it that most hon. members have seen the brief which was submitted most competently on that occasion by Miss Eva Warden, and other spokesmen for the association of incurables. I know the minister has a heart-


Mr.   Marlin.@: Thank you.


Donald Methuen Fleming: -and I do hope he will address himself to this problem with a sense of responsibility. All hon. members are sympathetic to the problem and plight of these unfortunate people. We do not know how many people in Canada are suffering from crippling diseases, or how many are incurable or are prevented by their physical handicaps from earning a living. The fact of the matter is that this problem has received so little study in Canada that there are not available today any adequate statistics on the subject.	If one goes to the minister's
department and asks for information as to the number of persons in this unfortunate category, or what it would cost to provide some form of assistance to those who are in need of it and cannot help themselves, he will come away empty-handed, because there are no such statistics available in the Department of National Health and Welfare.
That points directly to the fact that this is a forgotten and neglected problem. I do urge that not a moment be lost in addressing ourselves through the department to this problem. The need is there; in many cases that need is most acute. We have recognized the problem of the blind who are unable to support themselves and are in need of assistance. We make provision for them on a needs basis. Why should we distinguish in principle between those who are prevented by blindness from earning a living, and are consequently in need, and those who are prevented by some crippling disease from earning a living and who are consequently in need? Many of us regret greatly that this problem was not included in the terms of reference to the committee on old age security. I am convinced that something must be done soon in the way of a comprehensive study of this problem so that intelligent minds can be put

Supply-Health and Welfare to work in the light of reliable information in seeking to meet a need that I submit we dare not close our eyes to.
In conclusion, and in the hope of saving the time of the committee, I make what is perhaps my time-honoured plea to the minister-


Mr.   Marlin.@: I am going to recognize it this year.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Really?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I respect the hon. member so much that I will do everything he wants.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Pardon.


Mr.   Marlin.@: My hon. friend has overcome me with his eloquence.


Mr. Knowles:: He has not made his plea yet.


Donald Methuen Fleming: My plea is that at the outset we should have a statement of last year's expenditures item by item so that we will know in advance what was expended last year and be able to compare this year's appropriation with the actual expenditure last year. I am overcome completely by the minister's change of heart.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, as another member of the special committee on old age security I should like to join with those who have paid tribute to the work done for us by Dr. Davidson and members of the staff of the Department of National Health and Welfare, with particular reference to those in the research division. I think it is safe to say that whatever may be accomplished by that committee would not have been accomplished had we not had the valuable assistance of these people. I am rather sorry that we have had to work them unreasonably long hours, as has been the case, but at least they have had the opportunity to see the hours that members of parliament work. In this connection perhaps I may be permitted to express regret that I was not able to be here when the estimates of the Department of Labour, in which I am deeply interested, were discussed, for my absence was due to the fact that we spent many hours yesterday afternoon, last evening and last night until nearly one o'clock, as well as this morning, in a subcommittee of the committee on old age security.
Before I take up the one subject about which I wish to speak I should like to support the particular plea that has been made by every hon. member who has spoken this afternoon, that something be done at an early date for incurables. I do hope that the increasing interest being shown in this problem by private members and the extent to which it is being drawn to the attention of the government will bear fruit. Those of us who have


Mr.   Marlin.@: Do not take too long to do it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: We had such a committee several years ago, and while it produced a draft bill and certain recommendations nothing followed therefrom. I will also admit that when he proposed the establishment of a special committee on old age security I opposed it on the ground that it was unnecessary, and that the government had all the required information. I contended that what we wanted was not a committee, but legislation. The time may come when I will say that the setting up of the committee was a good move, although not yet. I am waiting
3878	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare to see what report is actually brought in, and I am waiting to see how long it takes the government to implement whatever report is brought in.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am waiting for the report too.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If there are enough hours in the night one of these days the committee will get it through. I suggest if the report of the committee shows that the results of its work are as good as the actual work has been, then a good move in another session would be to set up a comparable committee on the whole question of health insurance. I say again that I think the matter should be settled before we return to the next session of parliament. I think a deal should be made at the dominion-provincial conference this fall, and that in the speech from the throne at the next session legislation for health insurance should be forecast. It is only if that advice is not taken that I suggest we should have such a committee at the next session as a means of prodding the government. Let us go into the whole matter thoroughly. I am sure if we receive the same kind of assistance, research material and advice in connection with this question as we have had from the minister's officials in the special committee on old age security, we will be able to bring to the house and to the government the kind of document that will strengthen our case for early implementation of health insurance.
Something has been said by others who have spoken concerning the amounts of money in the estimates of the department. What I shall say is in a slightly different vein, and again the minister probably knows what is coming. I want to complain, as I have in former years, not about the amounts voted, but about the department failing to spend all the money that we have voted in the field of health insurance studies.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Will my hon. friend permit me to say something? I do not want to object, but I am sure that a lot of this discussion should really take place under the specific item. It is difficult for me to reply to all these questions now. Could the question of health insurance studies not easily be left until we come to the item relating to it? We are discussing all of the items now, and I think it would be much easier if we waited until the specific item comes before the committee. I know I would find it more convenient, and if my hon. friend would meet my request I would be grateful.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, this morning the debate on this department was divided


into two fields. The debate on welfare is to be postponed, and the debate on health matters is to take place today. Most of the discussion so far has been on health, and indeed a good deal of it on health insurance specifically.


Paul Joseph James Martin: It is just a question of saving time.


Stanley Howard Knowles: If the minister's suggestion is agreed to, I shall have to make the same speech all over again on health insurance studies. I think he had better let me continue now. I should like to point out that for 1946 the house voted roughly $10,000 for health insurance studies, and the amount spent and charged to that item was roughly $2,000. For 1947 the amount voted was $43,000 and the amount charged to the item when the year was over was a little over $4,000. For 1948 we voted $27,000 and the amount charged was $6,000 odd. For 1949 we voted $43,000 and the amount charged was $40,000. For 1950 we voted $56,000 and up until January 31, 1950, the amount spent was only $43,000. In all cases I have given round figures. The details can be found at page 827 of Hansard for March 16, 1950.
I note an improvement. The department is gradually moving up and getting to the point where it is spending a larger proportion of the amount of money appropriated for health insurance studies, but I am still not satisfied that the department is taking the whole question of really getting somewhere with health insurance as seriously as some of us would like them to. One of the reasons I am not satisfied is that another type of question that I have been asking through the medium of the order paper relates to the whole matter of what is being done by the people who spend this money on health insurance studies.
A lengthy answer was placed on Hansard on March 16 of this year, covering a great many pages. There have been other answers since, but the gist of those answers is that many people are preparing various memoranda on this question of health insurance. But there is always the caveat entered to the effect that the work done by departmental people on the administration of health grants should be considered as part of the work in building up health insurance in Canada. The work done in the administration of health grants is all to the good, but I should like to see the minister direct the people in his department to spend a little more time, even if it means asking this house for more money, on the development of specific plans for health insurance in Canada.

On the other side, because I want to give credit where it is due, I will admit that the minister tabled, in response to a motion of mine some days ago, a lengthy document which lists the titles and dates of all memoranda of studies prepared by the directorate of health insurance studies on matters relating to health insurance from April 1, 1945, to March 16, 1950. This document is sessional paper No. 76E, and it was tabled on Monday, May 29, 1950. Amongst these documents are some which I should like very much to see, but I imagine if I moved to have them tabled the minister would say they are confidential. On the other hand if no action is taken on health insurance this fall, and at the next session we get the committee I have suggested, it might be possible for us to see some of those documents then.
I am not going to read the whole list, but I should like to give the minister credit for what has been done by pointing out there are some of these studies which show the government-or at least some of the people in the department-are thinking about this problem. For example on April 12, 1948, there was a memorandum entitled "Development of Health Insurance in Canada-Historical outline". Then there was one on May 4, 1948, which is the sort of document I should like to see if I could, entitled "Memorandum for Cabinet Consideration on Health Insurance (Preliminary Steps)". That looks as though it would be worth seeing. On September 7, 1949, there was a memorandum entitled "Health Insurance-An Informal Discussion"; October 17, 1949, another memorandum entitled "A National Health Service".
On November 18, 1949, there was a memorandum entitled "Proposed Redraft of Clause 16 (1) of the Draft for the National Health Bill". I do not know what that phrase "The National Health Bill" refers to, whether it refers to the draft bill we had back in 1944 or whether the government has the draft of another national health bill up its sleeve. Am I missing something?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I was just speaking to my parliamentary assistant.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is the member for Ottawa West your parliamentary assistant?


Paul Joseph James Martin: He helps me on occasion.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Since he is the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, I suppose that gives him wide latitude. On December 7, 1949, there was a memorandum entitled "Health Insurance Memorandum". Then on December 31, 1949, there was a memorandum entitled "Health
Supply-Health and Welfare Insurance -Redrafted Memorandum of December 7, 1949". Those are straws in the wind that look fairly good.
On January 23, 1950, there was a memorandum entitled "Health Insurance and General Practitioner Plan"; on January 24, 1950, "Proposals to Increase the Number of Physicians and Dental and Nursing Personnel in Canada". Also on January 24 there was another memorandum entitled "Report on Health Insurance"; on February 14, yet another one entitled "Report on Health Insurance". On that same date there was a "Supplementary Report on Health Insurance". There are a few more in the list, and finally on March 11, 1950, there was a memorandum entitled "Proposals to Increase the Number of Physicians, Dental and Nursing Personnel in Canada-Redraft of memorandum of January 24".
As I have said, that is just a list of titles and dates, but it does suggest that somewhere in the department someone is giving some thought to this question, and those thoughts are being put down in black and white. I admit that if the minister gave me one choice amongst those documents, the one I should like most of all to see is that "Memorandum for Cabinet Consideration on Health Insurance (Preliminary Steps)".


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member would have to change his party affiliation, and I suspect that is impossible.


Stanley Howard Knowles: For once the minister is right. My whole point in referring to this, Mr. Chairman, is to suggest that in asking for some step-up in this field of health insurance I am not asking the government or the department to start from scratch. They have done some thinking and have some documents. Surely the time has come to go ahead on that basis.
In the green book of 1945, on page 30, it was suggested that the estimated cost of health insurance was $256 million on the basis of the population in 1941. Sometime during the session I asked the minister, through a question on the order paper, whether that estimate was still considered a good one, and the answer was no, but consideration was being given to a revised estimate. I have no doubt that a revised estimate today would be higher than that, by reason both of the increase in our population and of the increased cost of medical services. However, it should be pointed out that when we ask for health insurance, unlike asking for better old age pensions, we are not asking for a new burden on the economy of the country as a whole. Most of this money is already being spent. The difficulty is that the incidence of it is bearing too heavily on the few whom ill health hits, rather than being spread over
3880	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare the population as a whole. What health insurance does is to rechannel the amount of money that is being spent on health in a more equitable manner, and in a way to make it possible for all the people to get the health services that they require.
Mr. Chairman, I said at the beginning I was going to confine myself to one subject, despite my interest in many in this branch of the department, so I leave it at that. I plead with the government that they do not wait until we have all the services before we have health insurance, but that they bring in at the earliest possible date legislation to establish health insurance for the people of this country.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is the minister going to give that information he promised?


The Deputy Chairman:: I understand that information will be given when item 216, which is the administration item for the national health branch, is called.


Donald Methuen Fleming: We have been given no information as yet.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am going to give it on that item.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Order. I understood when the member for Winnipeg North Centre was speaking that the work had been divided into the national health branch and the welfare branch. The discussion was to take place, then item 216 concerning the administration of the national health branch would be called, and the minister would make his reply.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I may have misunderstood
what was said this morning, but I thought only item 242 was to stand, not all the welfare items of the department.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is right. What I said this morning was that the item covering old age security would stand, and that was the only item, not the whole welfare branch. What I propose now is that this item be carried, and then I will deal with health administration and all the questions that have been asked.


Donald Methuen Fleming: What about the expenditures under this item?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I will give the whole thing
right away.


Mr. Major:: The hon. member for Peace
River mentioned a matter which to me seems important and vital. He mentioned that much of the food being consumed was deficient in minerals owing to soil deficiency, which perhaps was the reason for some of the diseases we are meeting today. I believe that is an


important point. I know that plants grown in deficient soil are stunted and sparse, and an animal fed on such plants has a hard time making progressive growth. It stands to reason that such an animal would not obtain sufficient minerals, and that would also be the case with the food product reaching the consumer.
Some time ago I mentioned in the house that farmers were very concerned about rebuilding their soil so that it would produce food containing the proper proportion of minerals. Today the farmers are not in the position to do that. They have been striving to produce cheap food, and in doing so have depleted their soil and allowed their buildings to get run down. They have produced cheap food, but it has been cheap not only in cost but in quality. Knowing that, and knowing that with the prices now being paid for agricultural products the farmers are not able to build up their soil, I believe we should seriously consider ways and means of placing the farmer in a position to replenish his soil so he will be able to produce food that will contain the minerals that are necessary if our people are to remain healthy.


Mr. Fulton:: There is just one subject on
which I would like to say a few words on this general item of departmental administration, and that is the question of publicity and information. I should like to make it perfectly clear that I am not suggesting there are not certain departments in which information both as to the activities of the department and the progress being made in its work is perfectly legitimate and should be made available to the public. But while I believe that is true, and have no criticism of that type of information service, I have a deep-rooted objection to the use of information facilities within departments in order to put out not only government propaganda but partisan propaganda. The great difficulty is that departments and ministers find it so hard to resist the temptation to believe that what they are doing and the policies they are advocating and the government they are serving are the best. So it seems they cannot help publicizing not only their genuine departmental activities and services, but the points of view they espouse of a political as well as of an administrative nature.
That being so it appears that this tendency results, as we see from a comparison of today's spending with the past, in a constant increase in the amount being spent for publicity and information. This year the total being spent by all departments of government on publicity and information, as disclosed in the estimates, amounts to some $6 million. I gave the

exact figures in the course of an earlier speech, and they can be found in the record. When we are considering ways and means of reducing taxes I suggest that if we could find a way to reduce this expenditure without actually impairing the efficiency of the work and without depriving the public of genuine information to which it is entitled, that would be a worthwhile effort. Certainly one way it could be done is by cutting out the propaganda aspect of government information and publicity services.
I am going to urge that serious consideration be given a suggestion which has been made previously by myself and others; that is, that in order to control this expenditure for publicity and information throughout government departments a central bureau of information be set up, in the same way the printing bureau and the bureau for translations were set up, in order to do away with the overlapping and competition as between departments in connection with those services. We are now spending some $6 million a year on publicity, as far as we can ascertain from the estimates; but there are a number of hidden items, so the actual expenditure would be found to exceed $6 million if we had an accurate break-down. At any rate, we are spending $6 million now, and I am certain we could set up a bureau of information, give it half that amount of money and still produce all the genuine governmental information required to keep the people informed on those subjects as to which information is vital and essential in the national interest. I cannot conceive that it would not be possible to give all the service necessary along these lines at an expenditure of only half the amount now being spent under that heading, and certainly nothing has been said to show the contrary.
In this department we find that this year, according to those items which actually appear in the estimates, $524,970 is being asked for publicity and information. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that you can tell an awful lot of people an awful lot of things with more than half a million dollars, and that a good many of the things they are told are not genuine departmental information but political propaganda. 1 believe the setting up of a bureau of information, whose job it would be to sort out the requests of the departments for information services and see that no propaganda was put out but only genuine information, would be a powerful tool to cut down both the amount of propaganda going out and the expenditure under this heading.
Not only do I suggest that there is a certain amount of unwarranted and unnecessary
Supply-Health and Welfare information in the nature of propaganda going out from this and other departments;
I also suggest that some of the purely informational work is a waste of money, and the amount of it is Increasing constantly. I hold in my hand the annual report of the Department of National Health and Welfare, for 1949. Starting at page 132 of the report, seven pages are devoted to the detail of "Information services." Here is an example of the way in which this thing is growing. On page 132 we find the following:
An- office manager was appointed to supervise the growing volume of documentation, accounting, recording, and other routine, permitting the director and editors to devote more time to creative work and to developing new projects.
Then we find at page 133-


Donald Methuen Fleming: More poetry.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Would my hon. friend recommend that that project be not carried out?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I know the minister always-


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is a simple question.


Edmund Davie Fulton: My recommendation is surely equally simple. It is that there should be set up a bureau which, as between departments, and as to work within- departments, will be an impartial referee, and will have the staff to say which project should be allowed and which projects are unnecessary and extravagant, and which are spending money on propaganda. Here are some which I think are unnecessary and extravagant. Under the heading "radio" at page 133, we find the following:
An increased amount of radio time was secured and new ways were found of telling the department's story on the air. Hon. Paul Martin broadcast frequently, going on the air over national and international hook-ups as well as regularly on a local station.
I suggest, Mr. Chairman, it would be extremely difficult for any minister to differentiate on a local station


Paul Joseph James Martin: On a point of privilege, I have never made one broadcast over a national hook-up, over a provincial hook-up, over a local hook-up, for which I personally have not had to pay myself.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I must say there is no point of privilege there.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, there is. My point of privilege is the hon. member said that I made a speech using departmental radio time and departmental funds. I have said to you that I never made such a radio speech.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister is anticipating; he must have a guilty conscience.
3882	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare


Mr. Gauthier (Portneuf):: He knew what was coming.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The report of the department states:
An increased amount of radio time was secured and new ways were found of telling the department's story on the air. Hon. Paul Martin broadcast frequently, going on the air over national and international hook-ups as well as regularly on a local station. The minister was featured on a radio farm forum program with a wide listening audience. Local radio talks under the title "Report from Parliament Hill," in which the minister explained all the department's services, were mimeographed and bound, and these informal reports provide excellent reference material.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Question.


Gladstone Mansfield Ferrie: What is wrong with that?


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is contained in the department's own report. We all know what the local report from parliament hill is. I suggest that it will be most difficult for any minister and for any listening public to differentiate between the minister's political point of view as advanced in the broadcast over that station, and the departmental work which he is describing.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I have that difficulty myself.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Exactly. We are told that departmental funds and departmental staff have been devoted not only to securing more time on the radio but also to binding the speeches, making them available and distributing them throughout the country. I do not think that is a necessary or justifiable expenditure of the departmental or public funds.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I have just said there were no departmental funds spent. I did not misunderstand my hon. friend. None of my speeches over the radio have cost the department anything. I want that clearly understood. I might agree with my hon. friend as to the value of those speeches, but that is another matter.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The report makes it perfectly clear, unless the language used is incorrect, what the meaning is. It says:
Local radio talks under the title "Report from Parliament Hill"-
Which we know does not cost a member or the department anything.
Local radio talks under the title "Report from Parliament Hill," in which the minister explained all the department's services, were mimeographed and bound, and these informal reports provide excellent reference material.
That surely takes the time of the staff of the department and costs money for the stationery involved in the printing, binding and distribution. It is made available as a report on the departmental activities; therefore we


can draw no other conclusion than that it was carried out on a departmental basis and with the expenditure of departmental funds, which are public funds.
On the same page of the report we find:
This year the division experimented with radio plays, first with amateurs, later employing professionals both for preparation and presentation.
That is an example of the growing amount of expenditure made in connection with these items of publicity and information. Some of us have seen the actual press releases and information releases put out by this department, and many of us wonder whether the expenditure involved in the preparation of these "dietary ditties" and so on are justified. Here is the attitude toward the periodical, as given on page 134: "It is reported that bright and informative supplements were published dealing with mental health, family allowances, old age pensions, nutrition, the new national health program and schools of social work". Once again I suggest that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to differentiate between genuine information as to what is being done in research which is being carried on and propaganda on behalf of the party which is putting out this work and spending the money on these things.
Then we have some interesting titles given as to the material put out. I suggest the very titles might raise the question, and do raise the question, as to whether the money is being well spent. Let me cite one sample from page 135:
Additional folders were produced in the child training series in collaboration with the mental health and child and maternal health divisions. These include sex, temper, fear, nervous habits, lying and stealing and thumb-sucking.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. member thinks we should not have these?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I wonder how valuable a contribution to the information on the work of this department publications entitled sex, temper, fear, nervous habits, lying and stealing and thumb-sucking may be, and how much money we are justified in spending on publications of that type. Certainly from some of the press fillers that we have seen, to which reference has been made in the house before, I should say that the expenditure is not well justified.
Then the final reference I want to make to the report is found at page 137:
Arrangements were made for general theatrical showing of a newsclip featuring Hon. Paul Martin-


Donald Methuen Fleming: Hear, hear.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I continue:
-speaking on significance of the national health program.

My colleague from Eglinton remarks, "and of Paul Martin". That is of course an inescapable companion piece to the fact that the newsclip made was devoted to the significance of the national health program; but I suggest it is not an unwelcome feature of that program in the mind of the minister that it also publicized him in the eyes of the public as a result of the expenditure of public funds.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is a good thing he is not ambitious.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I let that go by.


Edmund Davie Fulton: It is sometimes difficult to speak of these things, without giving undue weight to the political or propaganda aspect of them. I have tried not to stress that unduly, and I have attempted-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Well, of course those hon. members who are laughing think that that is a perfectly legitimate expense, and that no criticism should be made of it from that aspect, but they would not expect us or really expect the public to share their view. I have admitted freely that there are certain legitimate departmental expenditures on information, so that for instance in the field of industrial health and in the field of research, where the government is providing public funds for that work, the results of such work should be made known to the public whose money pays for it. That type of information is perfectly legitimate.
However I come back again to the point that without some greater measure of control than we now have it is impossible to separate the legitimate informational work from the propaganda work of a political nature. When we find these large expenditures for publicity, with one department spending half a million
Supply-Health and Welfare dollars, then another department will almost inevitably say, "Our work is important, too. Look at the Department of National Health and Welfare, which is spending half a million dollars. Why do we not have more in our department to spend? Let us tell the people what we are doing". So in that way we find in this field a possibility of competition between departments. Indeed, the fact we are spending $6 million a year on publicity suggests it to be a reality. The setting up of a bureau of information or something along that line which would operate as a controlling factor before any information is put out would do much to eliminate the competitive aspect between departments and the improper spending of public money on political propaganda.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Chairman, for about two hours and a half I have listened to the debate, and I suppose hon. members would expect me to say something about some of the matters that have been raised. Unfortunately, under our procedure, this is sometimes difficult in a department such as mine, because the tendency is in a general debate to discuss items that might be discussed more specifically when the individual items are reached in the estimates. On that account it would be difficult-in fact, impossible, unless one were to take more time than the circumstances would warrant-to cover all the points that have been mentioned.
However I do wish to deal with one or two points, and when we come to the individual items I shall take that opportunity to make replies to some of the statements that have been made. First of all, however, may I place on record, as I promised the hon. member for Eglinton, a statement of expenditures for the Department of National Health and Welfare for the year 1949-50. It is as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE Statement of Expenditures-Summary
No. of Vote 1950-51	Services	Expenditure 1949-50	Unliquidated commitments 1949-50	Total commitments 1949-50*	$	$S	Minister's Salary and Motor Car Allowance	
12,000.00	12,000.00215	Departmental Administration	
787,075.69	19,222.66	806,298.35Health Services	216 217 218 219 220 221 222	National Health Branch Administration	
Food and Drugs	
Proprietary or Patent Medicines	
Opium and Narcotic Drugs	
Quarantine and Leprosy	
Laboratory of Hygiene	
Immigration Medical Inspection	
101,549.35 	
654,078.46 	
25,015.70 	
139,698.77 	
262,485.29 	
343,672.05 	
807,642.52	15,879.05 4,560.06 1.00 69.36 912.98 21,343.90 11,875.37	117,428.40 658,638.52 25,016.70 139,768.13 263,398.27 365,015.95 819,517.89
3884
No. of Vote 1950-51
224
226
228
230
232
234
236
238
241 S
242 S
244
246
248
250
252
254
256
258

Supply-Health and Welfare
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE Statement of Expenditures-Summary
Services	Expenditure 1949-50	Unliquidated commitments 1949-50	Total commitments 1949-50Health Services-Cone.	$	S	sChild and Maternal Health	
Public Health Engineering	
Treatment of Sick Mariners	
Industrial Health	
Civil Service Health	
Nutrition	
Venereal Disease Control	
Health Insurance Studies	
Dental Health	
Hospital Designs	
Mental Health	
Blindness Control	
Epidemiology	. 74,702.39 . 128,105.88 . 580,138.02 . 116,936.27 . 198,695.59 . 128,268.80 . 35,387.18 . 56,097.33 . 45,733.11 . 18,890.77 . 86,080.34 . 27,520.67 . 22,010.63 2,600.00	902.16 1,239.28 101.00 7,351.57 222.88 1,215.73 34.70 465.66 8,771.85 12.27 1,526.81 3,322.22 146.07	75,604.55 129,345.16 580,239.02 124,287.84 198,918.47 129,484.53 35.421.88 56,562.99 54,504.96 18,903.04 87,607.15 30.842.89 22,156.70 2,600.00 9,973,066.45 35,628.54Medical Services-Indians and Eskimos	
Civil Aviation Medicines	. 9,924,124.00 . 35,490.29	48,942.45 138.25	Total Health Services (Exclusive of Health Grants)	. 13,814,923.41	129,034.62	13,943,958.03Welfare Branch	Welfare Branch Administration	
Family Allowances Administration	
Family Allowances Payments	
Old Age Pensions-Administration	
Old Age Pensions-Payments	. 27,186.81 . 1,836,018.16 . 297,514,033.94 . 72,985.32 . 93,188,967.29 60,887.00	68.25 19,516.70 90.16	27,255.06 1,855,534.86 297,514,033.94 73,075.48 93,188,967.29 60.887.00 85.689.00 52.500.00 20,000.00National Physical Fitness-	. 85,689.00	Assistance to Schools of Social Work	
Appropriations not required for 1950-51	. 52,500.00 . 20,000.00	Total Welfare Branch	. 392,858,267.52	19,675.11	392,877,942.63Miscellaneous Grants	Grant to:- Canadian Welfare Council	
Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene... Health League of Canada	. 12,600.00 10,000.00	12,600.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 5.000.	00 45.000.	00 6.000.	00 4.050.00 4.050.00 20.250.00 13.100.00 4.050.00 10.000.	00 15,000.00. loiooo.oo 5,000.00	Canadian National Institute for the Blind	
L'Association Canadienne Francaise des Aveugles	
L'lnstitut Nazareth de Montreal	
Montreal Association for the Blind	
Canadian Tuberculosis Association	
Victorian Order of Nurses	
St. John Ambulance Association	
Canadian Red Cross	
Canadian Paraplegic Association	. 45|000.00 . 6,000.00 . 4,050.00 . 4,050.00 . 20,250.00 . 13,100.00 . 4,050.00 . 10,000.00 . 15,000.00	Total Miscellaneous Grants	. 159,100.00	159,100.00SUMMARY	Minister's Salary and Car Allowance	
Departmental Administration	
Health Branch (exclusive of Health Grants)	
Welfare Branch	
Miscellaneous Grants	. 12,000.00 . 787,075.69 . 13,814,923.41 . 392,858,267.52 . 159,100.00	19,222.66 129,034.62 19,675.11	12,000.00 806,298.35 13,943,958.03 392,877,942.63 159,100.00Grand Total (Exclusive of Health Grants)	. 407,631,366.62	167,932.39	407,819,299.01

May I, at the outset, thank those hon. members who spoke particularly of the personnel in this department. No minister is better served, and I do not think any country is better served in the matter of health and welfare, through its public service, than is this country or than I am as Minister of National Health and Welfare.
May I first pay tribute to the staff-to all of them, including those who occupy senior posts and those who occupy the lowliest posts in the department-for what they are doing for this country. One does not like to mention names particularly, but because of the unusual distinction that comes with the designation of winner of the professional institute medal, let me say on behalf of the department how proud we were that the professional institute medal was this year given to one of the greatest men in the public health work of our country, Dr. Fred Jackson, director of health insurance studies.
A number of items have been discussed. The hon. member for Kamloops has referred to one in particular. It is all very well to say that we are spending too much on health information. No one is more concerned than I am about unnecessary expenditures in this particular. No one has taken greater care to see that in the opinion of my officers, of myself and of the provincial governments whatever expenditures we make in the field of health information are those which, after careful consideration, are thought to be expenditures that we should undertake.
No one has pointed out that the expenditures for health information this year have been reduced by over $73,000. One could make a strong case in criticizing that reduction. The speech of the hon. member for Peace River- I believe perhaps the finest speech this afternoon-urged us not to hesitate to use public funds to disseminate knowledge about health and welfare among our people. I took that as a challenge, and I will say this, that if any hon. member can show me one pamphlet or one film or one project carried on the information branch that should not be carried on, then I should like to have that suggestion made.
It is all very well to say we are spending too much money. But are we spending too much money when we have films telling the people of this country the ways and means of attacking mental illness? With respect to some of the titles to which my hon. friend referred, I do not criticize him for taking part in the debate in the lyrical and satirical way he did; that is perfectly natural -but the titles I must say are suggested by those who know how to reach the people.
Supply-Health and Welfare There is not one pamphlet, not one film undertaken by the Department of National Health and Welfare that is not approved by all the provinces sitting in at the annual conference of the health educational divisions across this country.
Then, with regard to the other projects, apart from certain publications we have taken over from the national welfare council, it will be found that all the publications, all the films and other projects have been recommended by the dominion council of health. Twice each year all the provincial governments meet with us here in Ottawa, incidentally at our expense, to discuss ways and means of co-ordination in the field of health activities. They meet with us to discuss ways and means of avoiding duplication and overlapping.
Let me say that there is no sphere of government where co-operation between the provinces and the dominion is as effective and as continuous as in the fields represented by the dominion council of health. In addition to that, I have a committee in our department that goes over matters carefully, and reviews the technical aspects as well as the effectiveness of distribution.
I know what my hon. friend does not like. The fact is that in this Department of National Health and Welfare we are doing something for the people of Canada. The fact that we have taken ways and means to let the people know what we have done proves a little irritating to some hon. members -just as it would to me, if I were sitting over there.
The hon. member has referred to travelling expenses. The travelling expenses in this department are large, but they are not by any means the largest of any government department. I believe we would stand about sixth in the extent of our expenditures in this connection. But is there a department in which the obligation to travel is greater? I certainly do not feel, for one, that I am a good Minister of National Health and Welfare unless I get around this country and see for myself what should be done. That I propose to continue to do. I do not think, further, that my officials are doing their jobs unless they, too, carry on a program of visiting the centres, dealing with the provinces, dealing with the hospitals, dealing with our food and drug administration, dealing with our narcotics administration and the like.
Let us examine this travelling expenses vote to which reference has been made. Of the increase over last year, some $60,000 is due to the increased expenditures incurred in taking Indians from more remote areas of

Supply-Health and Welfare our country to hospitals for hospitalization and medical attention. Of the total, $208,000 -I am using round figures-is spent in the transportation of sick Indians to hospitals. Other expenditures are necessary for the travelling of the dominion council of health and the Canadian council of nutrition, bodies which are representative of the provinces; and also for the transportation of sick mariners to hospitals, a statutory obligation. Then there is the cost of delegates to the second assembly world health organization, which it was suggested was a wrong thing to approve.
Then there are the courses taken in connection with civil aviation, medicine and the travelling expenses of our food and drug inspectors. Last year only $34,000 was spent and there was criticism by the drug council that we were not keeping up with the situation. One reason was that we had not enough inspectors. However, the number is now up to around forty. There are also the travelling expenses of the narcotic inspectors and the quarantine medical officers who are engaged in the inspection of aircraft and vessels.
Then there are medical officers who are engaged in the inspection of prospective immigrants. There are also the field officers of the public health engineering branch. We are trying to do something to improve the quality of the drinking water consumed in this country and the water available in our trains, aeroplanes, stations and public buildings is inspected by these officers in co-operation with the provincial officers. I suggest that we should carry on that kind of work.
Then there are the officers of the family allowances division who make inspections to see that the money is not being misspent. We are spending $309 million this year and travelling expenses of around $39,000 is not an overestimate or overexpenditure. There are the travelling expenses of the old age pension auditors and the child and maternal health division officers, which is I submit a legitimate expense. We would not be doing our job in this department, as I have been told on previous occasions by hon. members opposite that we were not, if our officers were not travelling around in the performance of their duties.
Then there is the Indian health service which requires the transportation of the field staff of doctors and patients. Within five years our expenditures on Indian health have gone up six times. We have 21 hospitals all over the country, with nursing stations. Then there are the doctors on part time who are assisting us in this work. All this requires travelling, and I submit necessary travelling.


The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar in his excellent statement, which was supported by the hon. member for Glengarry, referred to the importance of nutrition. Incidentally the head of our nutrition branch is an Albertan which should give confidence to the hon. member for Peace River who has made some observations. We are making nutrition surveys continuously and at times the amount of travelling involved is very heavy. But it is necessary to carry on this important work.
Industrial health surveys are now being made in the province of Quebec and in the maritime provinces in connection with silicosis and the like. This entails travelling by the officers if the job is to be done. We are now making a dental health survey which involves travelling expenditures. Also a morbidity survey is being undertaken.
One can talk about the work of the regional directors of family allowances and the work of our senior departmental officers in connection with the health branch. There are officers who are continually in touch with the provinces, not only by letter but more particularly by telephone and personal contact. Dr. Jackson and his staff are repeatedly in contact with the provincial governments in connection with the national health program. It takes time and patience on the part of all concerned to set up such a program and there is need to have men all over the country, in some instances trying to persuade provincial officers to co-operate or trying to persuade provincial authorities as to the desirability of sending in projects. There is a need of personnel in many branches of health work and our officers try to supply that at all times.
I think the explanation that the increase in travelling expenditures is due mainly to the transportation of Indians from remote areas to the hospital centres is one that will commend itself to every hon. member of the committee. No reference was made to the decrease that has occurred in travelling expenditures by many divisions. There is a decrease in travelling estimates in national health branch administration, in the immigration medical service, in the child and maternal health division, in the public health engineering division, in the civil service health division, in the nutrition division, in the mental health division, in welfare branch administration and in departmental administration.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is that as compared with last year's expenditures or estimates?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar raised a matter of great interest -I cannot discuss all the matters that were

raised-which I think deserves further attention. He referred to disseminated sclerosis and the need to do something about that disease. I told him last year that we were giving consideration in our research grants to a project to deal with that very thing. There are now two research projects under way in the field, one at Queen's university and one by the Saskatchewan health department. The cost of both projects is being borne entirely by the federal government.


Major James William Coldwell: What amount is being
appropriated?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I have not the total amount, but the projects were sent in by the provinces.


Major James William Coldwell: What is the federal
contribution?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The total cost is being borne by us. I have not the figure right here but I shall get it. Then the hon. member referred to the Montreal Neurological Institute. I was able to tell this house two years ago of an annual grant that we were going to make toward the work of Dr. Penfield, a work which is of national and international significance. I am happy to say that this year we have supplemented that by an equipment grant of $173,000. I am happy to say that we are giving consideration to making a hospital construction grant to that particular institution. Anything that we can do to help that institution will not go undone.
Reference was made to sundries and the hon. member for Eglinton suggested that we were spending some $200,000 for sundries. Let us see what that represents. Of that expenditure, $130,000 or approximately 60 per cent is to cover laundry services for the Indian medical services where departmental laundries do not exist or would be impracticable. For instance, at Edmonton and Nanaimo laundry costs run about $30,000 a year. You cannot build hospital facilities and nursing centres unless these expenditures are made.


Donald Methuen Fleming: In a case like that why should it not be shown that the expenditure is for laundry services?


Paul Joseph James Martin: There is no primary item for that. Perhaps consideration will be given to giving that information in that way. I merely mention that to indicate the real story of the sundries item. Reference was made to the grant to schools of social work. This year we are making a grant of $52,500. Hon. members have written to me suggesting that this is not a large enough amount to cover the important work that the schools of social work are doing. I recognize the importance of the work because the personnel of
Supply-Health and Welfare my department to be efficient inevitably must be made up of people who have not only the training gained through experience but also the knowledge that comes from formal education. It was for that reason that this grant, which was started during the war, has been continued. Whether or not it will be increased will be a matter that will have to rest with the government as a whole, and our policy in that regard will have to be announced in due course.
As to the question of incurables, I saw the delegation to which the hon. member referred when it was here. I agree with the hon. member for Peace River that one could not help noticing their disabilities and recognizing the great and almost prior social claim that they have upon those of us in the government and outside because of the particular handicaps under which they are suffering. For personal reasons I feel very keenly about this matter, as hon. members well know. I take second place to no man in my desire to set in motion-and I cannot speak any more succinctly or finally on this subject-something that I trust and hope will, in the course of not too long a time, afford some relief to these people.
We have made a start. In the first place I do not recognize that the problem is solely our responsibility. I will not argue now as to whose responsibility it is. I think it is clear that in this country we do not want to overcentralize in the government at Ottawa, either in terms of policy or in terms of administration, matters having to do with either health or social welfare. Certainly that is my view. The provinces, the municipalities and voluntary bodies have a responsibility as to the handicapped, or incurables, as they are sometimes called.


Major James William Coldwell: Within their financial ability.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, and within ours too. I
do not feel I am doing my duty if I do not constantly emphasize that all these meritorious things in the field of health and social welfare have to be paid for, and there is only one way by which most of us recognize they can be paid for, out of the hard work of the people. Recognizing the importance of this matter, we have instituted a sickness survey that will begin shortly. It will be carried out by the provinces with the total expense to be borne by us. Its purpose is to ascertain (a) the number of incurables and (b) the number who are non-income earning, so that we can make an assessment of the problem and be able to know exactly what the problem is. Having made that assessment, we will be in a more intelligent

Supply-Health and Welfare position to formulate a policy alone or in collaboration with the other governments of the country.
In addition, as the house knows, at the instance of the Minister of Labour, the Minister of Veterans Affairs and the Minister of National Health and Welfare a conference on rehabilitation was called to meet on May 25 last. All provincial governments, certain voluntary bodies and certain organizations representing the incurables and the handicapped had agreed to come. Unfortunately the Manitoba flood caused the governments of Saskatchewan and Manitoba to request a postponement of the conference. Under the circumstances they could not allow their officials to attend such a conference at that time, important as it was. It was not because those provinces were not interested but because a prior obligation had suddenly seized them. I am hoping that the conference can take place at the earliest possible moment for the purpose of exploring the position that must be taken as to this most important problem, one which has, as I say, not only a great appeal but a great claim on our sympathy.
Reference was made to the question of health insurance, and my views on this subject are well known. There is the question of the burdensome cost of hospital care, drugs, and what I might call ancillaries of that character, together with medical expenses, and I have put them deservedly last, I think. Not recognizing the situation in specific instances, but recognizing the burden of these things, I have put medical expenses last, not in terms of importance but in terms of what it means by way of economic burden on the majority of the people of Canada. I believe, as I have always believed -and I am now speaking personally-that the problem of sharing the cost of health care can be met effectively by a system of health insurance. One has to recognize that in the pursuit of that objective there are certain important circumstances to consider.
I believe one of these is that nothing should ever be done to interfere with the doctor-patient relationship that has become a tradition in this country. I think anything that would interfere with the autonomy-and I mean that in the professional sense-of the doctor would be serious not only for the doctor but more particularly for the cause of good health in this country.
I feel I should say that because it is so often suggested that the intention is to make doctors simply servants or salaried officers of the state. I believe it is important to


maintain the doctor-patient relationship. It is also important to recognize, if we are going to develop a satisfactory plan, that under the constitution the primary responsibility for health rests with the provincial governments. Some may argue that the situation should be otherwise, but that is the constitutional fact. I respect it, and I think in terms of administration it is a good thing, as well as from the point of view of developing a sound policy. I believe all these things must be carefully considered. As we go forward step by step with our social security program, we will want to make sure that each step is taken responsibly and carefully in the light of all the circumstances in order to avoid retrenchment or abandonment of programs later on which might prove disastrous, as so many hon. members know.
The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre referred to the proposals made by the government in 1945 which involved the recognition of the collaborative possibilities of action between the provinces and the federal government. I made a statement in this house not so long ago which I repeat, that a national health plan, in the language of the former prime minister and repeated by his successor, is looked upon as a fundamental prerequisite to the establishment of a national system of health insurance. It is all very well to say that we can wait too long for our services to be built up. One hon. gentleman said that our services were being built up now, and in the next breath he complained that we were not building them up fast enough. The fact is that we have in the past two years, in collaboration with the provinces, built over 20,000 hospital beds. Our objective was 40,000 hospital beds in five years. In less than two and a half years we have exceeded half of our total objective. We are training personnel in all branches of health activity; in the field of mental health; in the field of tuberculosis control; in the field of crippling conditions in children. We have increased the number of health units. When I say "we have increased," the provinces have recommended to us projects which call for the increase of public health units, and we have paid the cost of those additional health units that are being built all over the country at the suggestion of the provinces and administered by them.
All of these public health units are a very important phase in the development of a program by which we will attempt, I hope in a responsible way, to meet what undoubtedly is a great economic burden on the masses of the people of this country. When you think

that at the moment we are training undei that plan over 1,500 individuals, giving them post-graduate training; training in particular phases of research, and in particular phases of public health administration, you will realize the tremendous transition that is taking place. I hope, and I believe, it is taking place along responsible lines towards the improvement of the health services, as a condition precedent to the next step. When one thinks that we have made it possible for the provincial governments alone to Increase their personnel by over 2,000 individuals, one will appreciate the great preparatory steps that are being taken in connection with this matter. One could go on reciting the achievements that are the result of the joint effort of provincial and federal governments in the execution of a national health program. I have only touched a few of the highlights but they are significant in more ways than one, not only on the research side but what is being done, for instance, in the province of Saskatchewan. In that province there is a project, signed only the other day, concerning the second phase of a dental health program in the schools. One could mention the assistance that we are giving to arthritic sufferers through the arthritic and rheumatism society in British Columbia. One could single out of all these things many examples of what is being done. In other words what I am seeking to establish, and to impress upon the house, is that we are building a whole series of medical services in this country that will place us in a very strong position once we have to deal with the broader problem in collaboration with the provinces, upon whom, under our constitution, rests the primary responsibility.
I repeat now what I said to the house. "This program would have the added advantage of being the fundamental prerequisite of a nation-wide system of health insurance. Indeed, this program represents the first stages. The new services being developed and the new hospitals being built with these federal grants are hastening the moment when in every province it will be possible to consider further action towards hospital and medical care insurance-for which, of course, the federal government stands ready to provide assistance, under satisfactory agreements for dominion-provincial co-operation." Then, I associated that with a statement made by the Prime Minister in a radio address in which he said:
It is up to the people and the government in each province to take the initiative in working out health insurance plans in line with their local conditions and their traditions.
Supply-Health and Welfare
Anyone who has had anything to do with provincial administration or with federal administration would recognize that that statement was nothing but an important one, particularly in the light of the present character of dominion-provincial relations in this country.
Mr. Chairman, there were many other matters to which reference was made by the various members. I may be overlooking quite a number of them. All I hoped to do in this initial statement was to generally deal with some of the problems that have been mentioned. The Department of National Health and Welfare has assumed increasing importance. Our total expenditure proposed for this year amounts to $455 million. The main part of that total is made up of uncontrollable items. Over ninety per cent of the expenditures of this department are for family allowances, old age pensions and certain statutory obligations such as food and drugs and narcotics control. This covers the work being done by the department in the various fields that are created either by statute or by provincial agreements, and leaves less than ten per cent of the departmental activities that one may consider in the controllable class.
When one examines that controllable class, one finds that in fact most of the expenditures are uncontrollable. There is first of all the money that is being spent on Indian health; there is the money that is being spent on a national health program. That leaves only four and one-half million dollars in the health branch that can again be regarded under the heading of "controllable." Out of that four and one-half million dollars the Department of National Health and Welfare is left with only $1,200,000 to engage in matters of health on a co-ordinating basis with the provinces. Instead of saying that we are spending too much in the field of health, I am forced-


Major James William Coldwell: No one has said that.


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, I said that instead of saying that, I am forced to affirm that I do not believe this represents by any means an undue expenditure in trying to bring about co-ordination in all the fields of health activities with the provinces. It is true that the national health program this year, which makes $34 million available to the provinces, does open up a channel of opportunity which I know commends itself to the house, just as I believe it commends itself to most people in this country.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
Private Bills AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILLS


Mr. H. W. Winkler (for Mr. Benidickson) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 312, to incorporate the Association of Kinsmen Clubs.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Gordon Graydon: In view of the fact that the Kinsmen clubs have done such magnificent work in connection with public welfare I wonder if the sponsor of the bill would care to comment upon that work. I think it is something the house would like to hear about.


Howard Waldemar Winkler: I am hardly in a position to say very much about the Kinsmen clubs. No doubt many hon. members here have been or are members, and they could speak of the work of that organization very much more effectively. The purpose of this bill is merely to incorporate the clubs, and after it has been given second reading the bill will go to the committee on miscellaneous private bills, where all the details will be given.


Clarence Gillis: This matter of the incorporation of an organization is not so simple. It throws a lot of legal responsibilities in their laps. I should like to ask if this bill has been approved by the Kinsmen clubs right across the country. Do they want this type of organization? I have read the bill, and it gives a great deal of power to a few people in the province of Ontario with respect to the regulation of that organization, the holding and disposing of property, and so on. I would like to be sure that the Kinsmen clubs across the country desire this incorporation.


Howard Waldemar Winkler: I cannot speak for the Kinsmen clubs, but all these details will be gone into before the committee, which will have to be satisfied before the bill can be sent back to the house for third reading.
Motion agreed to and bill read the second time.


Mr. Speaker:: This bill is referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private biUs.



CRIMINAL CODE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, June 6, consideration Of the motion of Mr. Thatcher for the second reading of Bill No. 2, to amend the Criminal Code (capital punishment).
[Mr. Martin.1
Mr. Thatcher:: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. If the hon. member
speaks now he will close the debate.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Mr. Speaker, I placed this bill on the order paper last February, and shortly thereafter it was given first reading. However, as hon. members know, under the rules of the house, private bills are given precedence, and this year parliament had before it the contentious pipe line bills which involved prolonged debate. As a result the bill now before us has been discussed for only two hours. I suppose I am biased, but I still do not feel the house has given it sufficient consideration to reach a vote. In view of what was said the other evening by the Solicitor General (Mr. Lapointe) it is perfectly obvious that if a vote should come now the bill has little chance of passing. Therefore I would ask permission to withdraw the bill. I will state now that whether or not I am given permission I should like to introduce the bill again next year.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Withdrawn.



DIVORCE JURISDICTION


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, June 13, consideration of the motion of Mr. Knowles for the second reading of Bill No. 13, to provide for the jurisdiction of the Exchequer Court of Canada in matters of divorce.
Clarence Gillis: Mr. Speaker, practically every member of this house you speak to privately is of the opinion that this matter of divorce should be taken out of the House of Commons and Senate. That is their private opinion. Some hon. members and a section of the press look upon this matter from a straight sectarian standpoint, and are of the opinion that this bill contains the principle of divorce as such. As far as I am concerned my religious persuasion places me in the position that I am unalterably opposed to divorce as such, but I do not see this bill in that category.
From time to time those in the other place have registered their disapproval of the method employed in the granting of divorce in the province of Quebec. From what you hear emanating in the other place they would like to be relieved of this responsibility. As I said before, this is not a question of deciding on the principle of divorce. That has

been decided already. Whether we like it or not we have divorce, and as far as I am concerned all this bill seeks to do is devise some other means more in keeping with our times than the way it has been done in the past. We have divorce now; so the argument that by passing this bill and shifting responsibility from the Senate and House of Commons to the exchequer court, in effect we would be deciding the principle of divorce and registering approval of it, in my opinion is quite wrong.
For several sessions I served on the committee on miscellaneous private bills, to which these bills are referred. During my years of service on that committee I opposed all these bills in cases where children were involved. Under the method now followed in the province of Quebec, if you have a legal separation there are institutions that will maintain the children if the parents are not prepared to do so. As soon as you go to the Senate, however, and obtain a divorce you are legally divorcing the children in that province from the maintenance now provided under the separation arrangements.
I do not think it is true to say that passing this responsibility over to the exchequer court would increase the number of divorces in Quebec. We handle some 300 divorces a year coming from that province, and if you will take the province of Ontario, which is most nearly comparable to Quebec, you will find that year by year the divorce ratio in Quebec is equal to that of Ontario.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, no.


Clarence Gillis: Oh, yes; so if they went to a court it would not affect the matter one way or the other. I want to have it understood- I have already voted for the bill-that I am still in favour of it. If the matter is handled by the exchequer court-the court is there now, and I do not think it is too busy-at least those seeking divorce would not receive the publicity that they do at the present time. While we stand up in the house and speak and vote against crime comics and obscene literature, the three hundred divorce bills that go through year after year and the published evidence that is circulated in the House of Commons and to some extent through the country are, in my opinion, much worse than any of the literature that you could pick up on the newsstands. By shifting from one government institution, or two government institutions, the problem of handling divorce to another government institution we are certainly not deciding on the principle of divorce, because we have divorce now. I think this bill proposes a better device and a better method of handling divorce, until such time as it is decided in some other way than it is handled at the present time.
Divorce Jurisdiction


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I do not intend to take very long, and I am not rising to talk this bill out, but to bring before the house certain facts that have not been alluded to in this debate though they were brought before the house on a former occasion when a similar bill was introduced.
There is no doubt that under the British North America Act parliament has jurisdiction with respect to divorce. That is one of the express provisions of the act. There is also no doubt that before confederation there were in force in the province of Quebec laws which by virtue of the British North America Act continue in force until they are amended or repealed by the jurisdiction having authority to deal with them. That is to be found in the explicit terms of section 129 of the British North America Act.
Among the laws which were in force in the province of Quebec, and which have not been dealt with by the legislature of Quebec or by this parliament up to the present time, and which continue to be in force, is section 185 of the Quebec civil code. That is in force in the province of Quebec, and it is not in force anywhere else, and any legislation to deal with it is legislation for the province of Quebec and for the province of Quebec alone.
That section of the code is very clear, and I think the shortest way to bring its content before hon. members is to read it. It is as follows:
Marriage can only be dissolved by the natural death of one of the parties: while both live, it is indissoluble.
Such is the Quebec law at the present time, and until that law is amended or repealed, the matter is not one of who will have jurisdiction to hear a divorce case; the matter to be dealt with consists of a fundamental declaration of the law and that is why the hon. member who introduced this bill took the precaution to declare that the exchequer court would have jurisdiction and would have the right to dissolve a marriage. That however would be legislating for the province of Quebec. It would be within the power of this parliament, but still it would be legislating on a matter which is extremely distasteful to the large majority of the people of that province. I can understand that it may not be agreeable for the houses of parliament to have to deal with these individual cases which are brought up from year to year. But parliament does deal with them, and the manner in which it deals with them does give satisfaction to those who believe that there should be a legal procedure for obtaining dissolution of a marriage. That is something which has been going on ever since confederation, and which has created no controversial issue

Divorce Jurisdiction
between the majority in my province and the majority in other provinces who may or may not believe that divorce is a good thing, or that divorce is an inevitable evil.
But this proposal to legislate contrarily to the terms of section 185 of the Quebec civil code will be strongly resented on religious grounds by the very large majority of the people of the province of Quebec.
We have made considerable progress in recent years toward national unity, and the matter now being debated is something which would be felt by a large number as being an imposition by a majority of a law that the people of the province of Quebec do not want. Why do it? Simply because it would relieve us here of the painful duty of having to consider these individual divorce bills, why create that controversy and disturb a situation with which I think most Canadians are satisfied, why disturb the good relations and tolerant attitude of each sector of the population toward the other sectors of the population?
I submit that we should continue, as our predecessors have done, to deal with the individual cases rather than have parliament exercise its jurisdiction, and pass an act which would bring an exception to the application of this general law and in one fell swoop take this general law out of the civil code of Quebec.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member speaks now he will close the debate.


Mr. G. K. Fraser (Peterborough West):: Mr. Speaker, since the Prime Minister has said something on this bill I should like to say a word regarding the other place handling divorce bills. In the Senate the members who are on the divorce committee have to sit whether the Senate is sitting or not. Since I came here in 1940 I have noticed that while the other place may be adjourned for a week or two weeks, still the senators who are members of the divorce committee have to sit and study these bills. In justice to these men who faithfully stay on the job I personally feel that some consideration should be given to them for the work they have done and1 are doing.
Just a short time ago I heard that one man has failed in health owing to the fact that he had been on the divorce committee so long. I think something should be done for them.


Mr. Ralph Maybank (Winnipeg South Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have always been opposed to the present method of handling divorce cases; I am still opposed to it. I think we ought to get away from the granting
(Mr. St. Laurent.)
of divorces by a special law in each case. I cannot see that there is any good reason why a woman who has had a certain amount of trouble with her husband should come to parliament and ask to have a law passed for her special benefit; or that a man who has had trouble with his wife-the trouble in each case getting to the point of one of them committing adultery-should expect parliament to pass a law for his benefit. I do not think it should be expected by either of them. Parliament should not pass for them individually a law saying they are no longer married, and that they may marry again. More especially is this so perhaps when our law cannot say anything about children or about property.
While I am opposed to the method we are following, I certainly cannot follow the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) in the proposal he has put before the house. I agree with what the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) has said, that we should not do anything that would tend in a way to destroy or to injure the unity of this country.
What the bill proposes is to force divorce as a general law upon the province of Quebec, something which is anathema to the people of that province. I cannot see any wisdom, I cannot see any fairness or any fair play in saying to the people of Quebec, "You do not like divorce? Well, you will have it. We are giving it to you. We are now passing a law against what we know to be your wishes, whereby you will have divorce. You will all have it, and you will get it in a court". But the bill does not say merely that the exchequer court may grant some divorces; that it may pick and choose, as we do in the House of Commons and in the Senate. Here we let an individual come forward and we pass a law for her or, if it is a man, we pass a special law for him. What this bill says is that all who would may come to the exchequer court, and that it will grant divorce. "We will force it-that is what we will do; we will force it upon the people of Quebec". That is where I part company with the sponsor of this legislation. I do not believe in the method we are following. I think that ought to stop. I do not see any reason whatever for passing a special law for John Doe in the province of Quebec or in the province of Newfoundland. It he did not check about divorce laws before he went to live in Quebec, that is his lookout. If he wishes to live in a place where there is divorce, then let him move to that place and establish domicile. But I do not see that he ought to have any right to come here and have a special law passed for him.

But if anybody else agrees with that, then the only thing to do is to stop passing these laws, and not to say that in order to get away from passing these laws we are going to arrange it so that anyone who wishes and if the grounds exist may go to the courts and get a divorce-to the exchequer court if he lives in the province of Quebec. Surely that is not the way to cure my objection to the legislation.
The way to cure the objection I have is simply to stop. And I would point out to the hon. member for Cape Breton South that if he and two or three of his friends wished to do so, they could stop every one of these divorce bills going through the House of Commons. There is no doubt about that. After the experience the house had with the pipe line bills, everyone must agree that the C.C.F. party, for example, if it wished to stop every one of these divorce bills-unless, of course, the house were to change its rules- could do so. I am in that position myself, although I am opposed to it and do not see fit to follow that course because so many others are in disagreement with me. But if there are others who feel as strongly about it as the hon. member for Cape Breton South appears to feel, he and they have it pretty well in their own hands to stop these divorces.
While I do not expect there will ever be a majority who will hold my point of view, that we should simply stop, I do hope there will always be a very large majority who will say that they will not force upon Quebec this legislation which is, as I have said, anathema to the people of that province.


Arthur Leroy Smith: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that if the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) were to speak now he would close the debate, I should like to say a word at this time.
I am opposed to the bill for the reasons given by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), but certainly not for the illogical reasons just given by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Maybank). Every argument he advanced against the exchequer court's having jurisdiction could be applied with equal force in other ways. He said, in effect, in the words of the old hymn, "Whosoever will may come." That is the situation now, and giving jurisdiction to the exchequer court does not change that one iota. Anyone can come here just as easily as and perhaps more easily than he can go to the exchequer court.
I am opposed to the change for this reason: I believe the people of the province of
Divorce Jurisdiction
Quebec are overwhelmingly against divorce as such, but they have expressed themselves by the majority of their members here as being content, to some extent in any event, with the procedure we now have. I am still one of those peacemakers who are really hopeful of unity in this country of which all of us are very proud. I say to the people who are advocating this change: let us get over this idea that there must be a law to cover everything on which we disagree. Laws are general things; they are big things. There are special acts; but why anyone now, to use the language of the street, would want to throw a monkey wrench into the machinery is beyond my understanding.
I have my own ideas with respect to these matters. I am one of those people who believe in divorce. I am not going to give my reasons, because we have all heard them so often. But, for the sake of Canadian unity, let us not deliberately stir up a nest of hornets, which we could easily do by passing this legislation and, in effect, say to the people of those two provinces, "We are doing this, knowing that the majority of your people are opposed to it." I would go that far if it were a matter of great principle of general application. That would not disturb me at all, if the people of one province took a course which, we will say, might be detrimental to the interests of the other provinces. But for the sake of that Canadian unity to which we all aspire let us not bring in something which may do it harm and which will not do one bit of good for those individuals who are seeking divorce. Therefore I am opposed to the bill as presented.


Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I want to make one comment only. I could not do other than follow the advice given tonight by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) but at the same time I have great sympathy with the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) who has described the unpleasant incidents that occur owing to the publicity arising from these matters. I hope it will be possible for those who have jurisdiction and who understand the legal requirements to remove what I think is an undoubted evil in connection with these proceedings.


Arthur Leroy Smith: The News of the World built its circulation on reports of the proceedings in the divorce courts.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: If the hon. member speaks now he will close the debate.

Divorce Jurisdiction


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I well recall a few years ago after there had been quite a few speeches by members of the house objecting to parliament having to deal with divorce, the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), who was then minister of justice, made the suggestion that those who were complaining about the present practice should suggest an alternative. As a matter of fact, he did outline a possible modification himself although he made it quite clear that he was not necessarily advocating it. It was because of the challenge given by the Prime Minister when he was minister of justice that I had this bill drafted. It was not drafted this year or last year, it was drafted several years ago. I kept it in my files for some years before placing it on the order paper. I placed it on the order paper with the sincere desire, for which some hon. members have given me credit, of dealing with this matter which is obnoxious to all of us in this parliament, no matter where we sit.
As the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) has said, hon. members on all sides of the house, privately as well as publicly, have complained because we have this practice here. I think it is true to say that hon. members generally wish that there was some other way to deal with this matter. I think I am justified in paraphrasing what the Prime Minister said when he was minister of justice by saying to those who are opposed to this bill, "All right, suggest some other alternative to the present practice. You do not like my bill, you do not like what we are doing; surely then there must be some other solution to the problem you can suggest."
When I introduced the bill I indicated that it was not the kind of bill that we in this corner usually introduce, that it was not a bill containing some basic and fundamental principle of social philosophy to which we were firmly attached and from which we would not budge. I indicated that it was merely an attempt to solve a problem of parliament and I said also that I would be quite happy if someone were to move an amendment that the bill be not now read a second time, but that the subject matter thereof be referred to a special committee of the house. I knew that if that course were followed it would mean the killing of my bill so far as this session was concerned but it would make possible a discussion in a committee of the subject matter, indeed of the whole problem of what should be done to relieve parliament of this obnoxious practice.
It may be that I did not get my suggestion about an amendment across to hon. members; at any rate it was not taken up. It is in my

own mind at the moment that at the next session it might be worh while to introduce the bill again and make sure that such an amendment is moved. That again would have the effect of killing the bill for that session but it would make possible a discussion of the whole problem in a special committee of the house.
I am sure that my speaking in this fashion makes it crystal clear, although it did not need to be made clear, that my purpose is not to stir up any disunity, that my purpose is not to jam something down the throat of anyone in this country who does not want what he thinks is involved in this bill; my purpose is simply to solve a problem that faces parliament, the solution of which we have the right to seek.
Since some arguments have been put forward I feel I should answer them. I was interested in hearing the Prime Minister give us the terms of section 185 of the Quebec civil code. He suggested that if this bill were to pass it would be an attempt by parliament to override the provisions of that section. Every time we pass a divorce bill we do just that, and no effective opposition is put forth. I know hon. members make a fine distinction between each and every divorce bill as it comes along as being a special case as contrasted to a general act, but I submit that what happens in this parliament is that two hundred or three hundred times a year we override section 185 of the Quebec civil code when we dissolve a marriage, despite the fact that that section says that a marriage shall not be dissolved so far as Quebec persons are concerned except by the death of one of the parties.
The same argument has been put forward by the hon. member for Beauce (Mr. Poulin), by the hon. member for Portneuf (Mr. Gauthier) and by other hon. members who have spoken in this debate. They admit that this bill does not provide any facility for divorce not now available to the people of Quebec or Newfoundland, but they have pointed out publicly and they have pointed out privately to me-and I appreciate the manner in which these members have discussed this matter with me-that in their view there is a difference between providing for divorces in the exchequer court and having divorces granted by parliament. They point out that every divorce act is a special case, a sort of emergency. When we grant three hundred divorces a year, surely it is not a special case every time. Indeed, we are becoming a mill. We are more of a divorce court than the divorce court itself.

I suggest that to transfer the handling of these matters from the Senate and the House of Commons, where they are out of place and where neither the Senators nor we like them, to a court where they can be dealt with more properly is a sensible and intelligent course to follow. It would not make divorce easier; it would not change the basis for divorce. As a matter of fact, it might make the obtaining of a divorce a little more difficult. Some of the applicants to the exchequer court might not find it as easy to get a divorce there as they would by going through the routine before the Senate committee. Any who have taken the trouble to read some of the salacious documents you get from there know how routine the proposition is.
I felt that I should say something to make it clear that this bill in no way imposes upon the sensibilities or the feelings of the people of Quebec. The fact is that three hundred times a year we override the Quebec civil code, and I think the procedure outlined in the bill would be much more sensible.
In listening to the various arguments that have been put forward, I felt there was one advanced by the hon. member for Humber-St. George's (Mr. Kent) on May 26 which should be considered. He pointed out something of which I was aware and which I realize my bill does not fully take care of. He pointed out that the exchequer court can sit anywhere in Canada and as a matter of fact does sit in various parts of the country. He pointed out that it was a circuit court, and that there was nothing in the bill to prevent the exchequer court from actually sitting within the boundaries of the province of Quebec for the purpose of dealing with divorce cases. I recognize that could be offensive. I would say that if my proposal were carried out there should either be an understanding or, better still, it should be written into the bill that the exchequer court would sit only in Ottawa to deal with divorce cases from the two provinces concerned.
I feel that the other arguments advanced are matters of opinion. I think that some consideration should be given to the sensibilities of members of parliament. I do not think we should be asked to go on and on through the years pursuing a practice which is obnoxious to us. After all, if I may use the language that appears in the title of every divorce bill, the bill now before the house really is an act for the relief of parliament.
I do not intend to proceed further. I want to say quite clearly, in case there should be any thought that the bill has the effect of creating disunity, that it is not my purpose to force a recorded vote on the measure when I conclude what I have to say. If you hear
Divorce Jurisdiction
more yeas than nays, Mr. Speaker, I shall be quite happy. If you hear too many nays and declare the motion lost that will be the end of the bill so far as this session is concerned, but I hope we will not go on forever following a practice which all of us find offensive, and which all of us feel is out of keeping with the purposes of parliament.
I say again that the purpose of the bill was certainly quite clear, that it was not to impose upon any group of people in Canada anything that is not now available to them. It is already there-shall I say, it is already here. In this building there is what amounts to a permanent divorce court for the people of the provinces of Quebec and Newfoundland. As the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) said to the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Maybank), everyone in those two provinces who wants to can come to this supreme court of divorce, this parliament building, and get a divorce. I think some day the practice should be changed. If perchance my accepting the challenge of the Prime Minister some years ago to those of us who did not like the practice to devise some means of getting around it leads to a challenge to others to find some better means than I have proposed, I shall be quite happy, but I hope we will not just go on year in and year out putting up with something that none of us like. Failing something better, I think that the house should support this measure for the relief of parliament from this business which should not be our business at all.
Motion (Mr. Knowles) negatived on division.


Mr. Speaker:: There being no further business for the hour reserved for private and public bills, the house will resume the business which was interrupted at six o'clock.

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



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE

[Stage Direction]
215. Departmental administration, $859,720.
Mr. Fair:: Before the discussion gets too far away from what we were talking about this afternoon, I should like to add my plea to those made by the hon. member for Lanark, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar, the hon. member for Peace River and several others that something should be done for incurables. Many of us, myself included, have enjoyed excellent health all our lives. I think the plight of the incurables was never brought home to us as forcibly as when their delegation came here a few weeks ago. Many of us did not realize the helplessness of these people and the financial straits through which

Supply-Health and Welfare many of them are passing. The Minister of Trade and Commerce told us that we can expect a national production in 1950 of something like $16,300 million. Therefore I feel that it is quite possible to pay a pension comparable to that received by the old age pensioners to our incurables. I hope that no time will be lost in seeing that something along that line is done.
I was glad to hear the minister state that a survey of incurables in Canada has already been undertaken. Only a week or ten days ago I asked for information in that respect, and I am happy to see that the minister is making a start in that direction. Therefore I hope, together with the minister, that in the not too distant future the incurables of Canada will receive some assistance worthy of Canada's productive capacity.


William Gourlay Blair: When the house rose at six o'clock we were considering the first item and the minister had made some reply. There were some things in the minister's reply to the speeches made this afternoon to which I take marked exception. During the last session of the house I pointed out that, so far as hospitals in the Dominion of Canada and especially in the province of Ontario were concerned, grants had been given by the province of Ontario-I am not acquainted with the situation in the other provinces- two years before health grants were instituted in this house. When the minister said that we expected so many thousand beds at a certain time owing to these health grants, and that we had achieved so many, I want to call his attention to the fact that a grant of $1,000 per bed is not a solution to the problem of building hospitals even in the province of Ontario where another $1,000 is added to the federal contribution for beds for new cases.
I have in mind a town with which I am well acquainted. It is struggling with the problem of trying to build a hospital at the present time. Let us suppose that the cost of a hospital is approximately $9,000 per bed. Even with the combined grant made by the province of Ontario and the Dominion of Canada that would still leave an amount of $7,000 per bed to be provided by the municipality concerned. It is not so many years ago that the cost of hospital construction was approximately $5,000 per bed. We did not get hospital beds in those days, and I do not think the minister or his department can take all the credit for the fact that we are getting hospital beds now when the cost is really $7,000 or $7,500. In the municipality to which I refer they are raising money by public subscription, and they have had a great deal of difficulty in collecting sufficient money to build a hospital. Across the whole country the need for hospitalization has become a matter of some urgency. I said


this afternoon that it was difficult to obtain help in the home. Trained nurses are not available, so in view of those circumstances we do need hospital beds. While this grant is praiseworthy, and any grant for a purpose like that is praiseworthy, I again call the minister's attention to the fact that the responsibility for the whole scheme of hospitalization in Canada does not rest on his shoulders. The building of hospital beds is not due to the fact that, almost two years ago, this government brought in a program in connection with it.
So far as the health grants are concerned I well recall when they were introduced in May of 1948 by the prime minister. I think every member of this house was glad to see those grants introduced. I never voted for anything with quite as good spirit as I voted for those grants. Ever since that time, when a grant has been made it has been the cause of a rush of publicity. I was amazed last winter when I read in the newspapers that a grant of $1,000 had been made to Kingston penitentiary for the purchase of a machine for the purpose of taking encephalograms. I thought that was taking the thing pretty far. While these matters of health grants and health insurance may be tied together somewhat, we must go back into history so far as health insurance is concerned. I want to point out to the minister that when the former prime minister took charge of the Liberal party in 1919 he promised health insurance at that time. It took thirty years to implement any promise that was made at that time. Nothing was done until these health grants were introduced.
I hope that in the future these health grants will not be used as a means of publicity. I point out that last year the province of Ontario gave $10 million for hospitalization and came forward with another grant a short time ago. The provinces are doing their share. They have always done their job. This work was carried out long before the present Minister of National Health and Welfare took office. So far as travelling expenses are concerned, that is probably another argument for items of this type being brought before the public accounts committee. Certainly when we are faced with this amazing bill for travelling expenses, I think it is the duty of the opposition to examine those travelling accounts. It may be that the $30,000 additional that was required by way of travelling expenses in order to take care of sick Indians and Eskimos-


Paul Joseph James Martin: It was $80,000.


William Gourlay Blair: 
Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I should like to say a word on one matter mentioned by the member for Lanark, and that is the federal grant for hospital construction.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Would my hon. friend mind
raising that under the hospital construction grant?


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I was going to wait, but
since it has been raised-


Paul Joseph James Martin: That was just in general
discussion.


Donald Methuen Fleming: There is some information
that is required on this item. I should like to ask the minister if the cost of printing the annual report of his department is charged to the department?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Under this item?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Under printing and stationery.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is it not under this item, departmental administration?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, under this item, but under printing and stationery.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It seemed to me that when the hon. member for Kamloops this afternoon was citing some passages from this report, the minister took exception to the accuracy of some of the statements contained in the annual report. The member for Kamloops was reading from the annual report for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1949. In view of the way the minister took issue with the member for Kamloops, I should like to ascertain whether or not the statements are correct. If they are not correct, I should like to know how it happened that the money of the taxpayers is being expended to print a report that is not accurate.
The passage about which the minister became rather upset is found on page 133 and reads as follows:
An increased amount of radio time was secured and new ways were found of telling the depart-
Supply-Health and Welfare
ment's story on the air. Hon. Paul Martin broadcast frequently, going on the air over national and international hook-ups as well as regularly on a local station. The minister was featured on a Radio Farm Forum program with a wide listening audience.
Local radio talks under the title "Report from Parliament Hill," in which the minister explained all the department's services, were mimeographed and bound, and these informal reports provide excellent reference material.
Is that paragraph from the report correct?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The objection I raised was to the suggestion by implication, and I see the statement does not say what I thought it did, that the radio time had been purchased by the department. It is that to which I was objecting, because of course it was not. I used the parliament hill report quite frequently to make speeches of a non-political character. I referred to what we were doing in this department, but the department certainly does not pay for that radio time.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I gather that the statement is correct. Of course all members of parliament are assigned certain free time on private radio stations for the purpose of the report from parliament hill, but did the minister, as is stated here, broadcast frequently, going on the air over national and international hook-ups as well as regularly on a local station; is that correct?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I do not recall ever having made a national broadcast, except on the free political time, in which I may have discussed departmental matters or government policy. But I certainly do not recall ever making a broadcast over an international hook-up. It is true I did take part, with my hon. friend and the member for Winnipeg North Centre, in the farm forum. My hon. friend was one of the participants in that debate, as I recall, as was the member for Winnipeg North Centre, and he knows the department did not pay for his time nor for the time of the member for Winnipeg North Centre, nor for my time. All three of them were not bad speeohes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It sounds to me as though this report is not correct. It is grossly exaggerated, to say the least, and I think ought to be examined more carefully the next time an annual report is written.
The other question I have on this aspect, Mr. Chairman, is that reference is made in this paragraph to the fact that the minister's speeches were mimeographed and bound. Now, there must have been some expense in connection with that. Those things are not done for nothing.


Paul Joseph James Martin: They were just stitched, they were not bound.


Gordon Graydon: A stitch in time saves nine.

Supply-Health and Welfare


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister is not going to say that does not cost anything.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Obviously the reports of a minister of a department should be kept in an orderly way. There were clips put in it by Bostitch machine. Does my hon. friend object to that? I would be very glad to do the same thing for him.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister is very kind. What I object to is his statement to the effect that what is referred to here did not cost anything. Obviously there must have been some expenditure in connection with mimeographing and binding the copies, and there is no sense in trying to disguise that fact.
I think the minister ought to say something on this next subject, because the point was raised in the house on May 16. I do not know whether the minister was present at the time, but I was surprised that no reply came from him. I should like to know the explanation as to the reprinting, referred to on that occasion, at page 2535 of Hansard, of the minister's speech in this house on March 10 on the appointment of a joint committee of both houses on old age security. As was pointed out on that occasion, a great many copies of that speech were printed, but not as the speeches of members of parliament are printed by the king's printer. It is true that they were printed by the king's printer, but not as ours are printed; and they were backed in a way that the speeches of members of this house are not backed when they purchase reprints. I believe the minister should take the committee into his confidence in reference to that matter, to which he made no reply when it was raised by the hon. member for Vancouver East.
Mr Marlin: We were receiving demands from all over the country for copies of that speech. Chambers of commerce asked for a thousand copies, I think. Since then they have asked for more, but we have none to give them. Manufacturers' associations, one of the congresses, the province of Manitoba, the province of New Brunswick, all asked for copies of that speech. My hon. friend will remember that it was an objective statement in respect to a very important matter. Does my hon. friend suggest that I should have borne that expense myself? By the way, no distribution was made in my own constituency.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I should like to know the cost of distributing the minister's speech, and how many copies were printed at the public expense.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I do not know, but I will find out.
[Mr. Graydon.l


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Was it not
good enough to send to your own riding?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I did not send it. It was good enough, though.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I trust the minister will get that information before he asks the committee to pass this item.


Mr. Richard (Ottawa East):: It is very important.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is important. Other members of the house do not have their speeches circulated at the public expense; and this speech was delivered in the house. The minister calls it an objective speech, but it did not sound very objective in some of its passages to some of us on this side of the house.


Mr. Richard (Ottawa Easl):: Who is the best judge of that?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Well, apparently it comes to this; that when you are head of a department and have money available for publicity, you are the judge and you can use public money to disseminate your own speeches. But if you do not happen to be the head1 of a department you have not that privilege.


Joseph-Adolphe Richard: You do not
speak with any authority either.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am speaking of the disclosures that have been made, in which my hon. friend apparently is not interested.


Jean-Thomas Richard: I know more about it than you do.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I gather that it is perfectly satisfactory to my hon. friend to have ministers of the crown making speeches in the house and not having to pay for reprint-s of those speeches, as other members of the house must, but having them printed by their own decision at the public expense. If that is his idea of a proper use of the funds of the taxpayers, all right; we will let him be judged by his own standards. For my part, I think that in all matters concerning the reprinting of speeches made in the house, all hon. members should be on an equal footing. The moneys of the people of this country ought not to be used to reprint and circulate, apparently in considerable numbers, speeches made from one side of the house.


Mr. Murray (Cariboo):: Public health.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Public health nothing. It was a speech on the subject of whether the house should join with the Senate in the appointment of a committee on old age security. What has that to do with public

health? Other speeches were made in different parts of the house on that occasion. How do you draw the line? The minister draws the line because he has money available for publicity. So you arrive at the point about which the hon. member for Kamloops was speaking this afternoon. What is the publicity for? Is it to publicize the minister and advance his political career?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Anyone who has any comment to make will have the opportunity to do so. To anyone gifted with a sense of fair play I think it is quite apparent that it should not rest in the hands of one man, simply because he happens to be the head of a department, to decide that his speech is so much more important than any of the other speeches made in the house on a particular occasion, and that therefore it should be reprinted and circulated at the expense of the taxpayers. If any other hon. member who took part in the same debate wished to have his speech reprinted, he jolly well paid the full cost. If that sort of thing commends itself to the sense of fair play of hon. members, I am sorry.


Mr. Hetland:: If the people want his speech, who should pay for it?


Donald Methuen Fleming: The people who want it; not the taxpayers.


Joseph Ingolph Hetland: They all wanted it.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Isn't that wonderful! We have from the hon. member opposite the statement, no doubt made with profound authority, that all the people of Canada wanted copies of the minister's speech. Surely that must have been an extraordinary speech.
Has the minister the information I asked for on this point, before I go on to something else?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Not yet.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Then I shall go on to the next point. I am referring now to the details which are to be found at page 175, and I should like a little information, if the minister will be good enough to supply it, in respect to three items toward the bottom of the page. Those items are travelling expenses, educational and informational publicity, and sundries. As to travelling expenses, will the minister first give the actual expenditures last year, and what travelling it is estimated will be required in comparison during the present fiscal year.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Including the overseas travel of our immigration doctors and so on, it amounts to roughly $679,000.
Supply-Health and Welfare


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister has not been following me; he must have been reading another of his speeches. I was referring to page 175-


Mr.   Marlin.@: You mean under departmental administration?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am referring to the details of this item toward the bottom of page 175. I drew the minister's attention to three items: travelling expenses, educational and informational publicity, and sundries. For travelling expenses the sum of $25,000 is provided this year, and I asked the minister for the actual expenditures during the fiscal year ending March 31, 1950. In the second place I asked what travelling is contemplated this year in comparison with that of the previous fiscal year.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Under the administration,
sundries amounted to $5,300-


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am asking about travelling expenses.


Mr.   Marlin.@: You have asked about three items, sundries, education and travelling. The figures are: travelling, $18,900; education, $116,400; sundries, $5,300.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the minister kindly try to follow me on this. I am asking with regard to the amount of $25,000 which is about the seventh item from the bottom of page 175. On that item and in relation to the item alongside it, $30,750, the estimate for last year, I asked first what was-


Mr.   Marlin.@: What page?


Donald Methuen Fleming: Page 175.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Don't get cross.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I am just trying to make the minister hear me. This is the fourth time I have given him the reference.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is departmental administration.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Page 175 of the details, about the seventh item from the bottom of the page. I am asking with reference to the item-


Mr.   Marlin.@: Our estimate this year is $25,000. Our expenditure last year was $18,900.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Your expenditure last year was $18,900. What is it that requires an increase of $7,000 this year for travel as compared with $18,000 last year? What is going to occasion that increase?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Last year when that estimate was made it was partly with regard to travel by senior officers in connection with the health branch, and was for nine provinces.
3900	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare We expect that Newfoundland will raise the expenditure. It is an estimate. I believe it will be an accurate one, but it can be no more than an estimate.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister talks about the estimate of last year. The estimate was $30,000 and more, but the actual expenditure was $18,000. The only thing we have heard from the minister to justify an increase of $7,000 in the expenditure last year of $18,000 for travelling expenses is that we have another province to deal with. Well, Mr. Chairman, we had ten provinces all of last fiscal year and there was considerable travelling done down there prior to the opening of the fiscal year 1949-50 and in the early months of it in making preparation for the extension of the services of this department to the new province. For the life of me I cannot follow the minister's argument. Has he a better argument than that to justify the increase of $7,000 over the expenditure of $18,000 on this one item of travelling expenses?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have given my hon. friend the only answer I can give him. I cannot estimate accurately.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Hear, hear.


Joseph-Alfred Dion: Shall the item carry?


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I wish to ask the minister a question. I had a return tabled in my name on June 7, which had to do with travelling expenses. The question was:
What was the total travelling expense for all employees of the Department of National Health and Welfare in the year 1949?
The answer was: "$385,958.84". There must be something wrong.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That was only for employees of the department. That did not include the expenses of carrying sick Indians, sick mariners, et cetera. We have part-time doctors all over the country who are not employees of the government. The figure I gave my hon. friend was the figure for the actual employees of the department.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: These are actual employees.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is correct. I just answered the question that I was asked.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I just want to say that it was a great pleasure to be here this afternoon to listen to the wonderful speeches that were made on health. I know that after listening to them my health improved a little. I had not been feeling so well on account of the Minister of Public Works. Now that the Minister of National Health and Welfare has come along I am feeling somewhat better.


However, in all the discussion I was disappointed. There was one matter that I had waited patiently to hear the minister say something about, and he knows what I have in mind. Away back in 1945 I brought the matter to his attention and to the attention of the house. I refer to incapacitated people. These are different from the incurables he has spoken about and all the other diseases that have been mentioned.
No action was taken on it that session. In. the following session I brought the matter up again, and several hon. members spoke very strongly on it. If the minister turns up his correspondence he will find that several letters were exchanged between, us and he gave me to understand that these incapacitated people would be taken care of. Since that time we have had considerable correspondence. On several occasions he has intimated by letter that the matter was being taken up with the health minister in each of the provinces, and that a policy with reference to these incapacitated people would be in progress quite soon. I should like to know from the minister tonight just what they are doing for this most unfortunate class of people that we have in our midst.


Paul Joseph James Martin: As my hon. friend will recall, when I wrote to him, or if I did not write to him I told him that I had written, as he says, to all the provinces. All of the provinces to which I. wrote but one took the position that under the circumstances it was not desirable to meet for that particular purpose. Perhaps my hon. friend was not in the house this afternoon when I explained the circumstances in connection with the rehabilitation conference which, at the request of three provinces, was postponed in view of the Manitoba flood situation.


William Gourlay Blair: Will the minister give us a breakdown of the $25,000 travelling expenses item?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I shall be glad to. This amount will be required to meet the expenses of the minister and senior officers of the department, and of a parliamentary assistant, if there is one, and of a senior personnel division staff in connection with necessary travelling to field establishments and in respect of examination boards held outside Ottawa; of senior research division staff in connection with field survey studies, and investigations into medical care and other projects being carried on in various places; of senior legal division staff in connection with narcotic and food and drug prosecutions; of a senior member of the purchasing and supply division in necessary visits to Indian health service establishments; and of

senior staff of the information services division in manning exhibits at conventions, in connection with liaison trips across the country to confer with provincial health educators, radio station executives, newspaper and magazine publishers and the like; all in connection with matters having to do with education in the field of health and welfare, of course.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the minister the information now on the cost of reprinting his speech of March 10?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes; the approximate cost was around $500. I may say that the account is not complete. I think one of the provincial governments paid or has offered to pay something on it. We could not yet give full particulars, but it already has cost around $500.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That will be the net cost?


Mr.   Marlin.@: That is the amount that has been paid.


Donald Methuen Fleming: That will be charged to this item?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Does the minister know how many copies were printed?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Around 12,000 or 14,000-I am
not sure of the exact figure.


Stanley Howard Knowles: They soaked you. I had 12,000 copies of mine printed for $96.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes, but yours was not as good a speech.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It was a lot better.


Donald Methuen Fleming: If you will both be frank, you might say that it was the taxpayer who was being soaked.
I have asked the minister certain questions about one item of details on page 175. I now come to the next one, educational and informational publicity. I ask the minister a similar question: what was the actual expenditure on this item for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1950, and how do the services to be covered by the present estimate for the year 1950-51 compare with the services actually rendered and paid for in the last fiscal year?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The expenditure for last year was $116,000. There were publications at $80,000, including $50,000 for Canada's Health and Welfare which was so generously praised today by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. There is the revision of the Canadian welfare council publications, $10,000; reprints of existing publications, including ones on
Supply-Health and Welfare arthritis, tuberculosis, nursing, old age pensions, social work and the like. There is a series of fifty-two recorded programs by persons outside the department, non-political individuals, not including the minister or the parliamentary assistant. Then there are displays and press services which consist of photographs and map services dealing with health suggestions which appear particularly in our weekly newspapers and which, as my hon. friend knows from what was said last session, were well received. In fact, we cannot meet the demand.
Then there are columns in certain weekly newspapers, both French and English, dealing with certain phases of health. There is a film on nurse recruitment, $20,000; newsclips at $3,000; a film library, $3,000; the revision of certain Canadian welfare council publications, and the re-issue of certain existing publications such as the one on cancer, and another one, "Prophylaxie des maladies con-tagieuses". Then there are displays, $7,000, on such subjects as pure food and safe drugs. There is a reprint of the publication Canadian Mother and Child, at $34,500. There is the reprint of a publication dealing with rural waters.


Donald Methuen Fleming: But what are the ones which represent what is new as compared with last year? The item is $15,000 in excess of last year's expenditure. What is that for?


Paul Joseph James Martin: There is $6,000 more that has to do with the re-issue of existing publications. These are the standard publications of the department and are in great demand from provincial officials and others who, in the main, are the distributing agencies.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Then we come to the item of sundries. What were the expenditures on sundries last year?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The amount is $5,300.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister is this year
asking for $6,000. Of what is it made up, and what is the reason for the increase?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Of course, as my hon. friend
knows, when we make up our estimates we do not know what our year-end expenditures will be. This is an estimate of what it is thought we will spend in the ensuing year, in the light of increasing obligations. The sundries required in this instance are required to purchase subscriptions to serial and technical publications, and the like. Then there is the matter of garage space for some departmental vehicles.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Health and Welfare National health branch-
217. Food and drugs. $704,450.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Mr. Sellar mentions this in his report, and points out that it is for administration. Should not the item be changed in the estimate?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend is right. It
is for the administration of the Food and Drugs Act.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: It is misleading in the estimates.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I quite agree with my hon. friend.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I would draw the minister's attention to the details at page 177, and particularly the item educational and informational publicity. How much was spent on this last year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The sum of $33,385.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Then I notice an item of $12,720 for sundries. How was the item spent last year? What was the amount?


Paul Joseph James Martin: It was $12,504.95.


Donald Methuen Fleming: What was spent on travelling expenses?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The sum of $33,837.65.


Donald Methuen Fleming: This year the minister is asking for $50,600. On what grounds does he justify the increase of about $16,000?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Several of the vacant positions were not filled until late in the fiscal year, and the provision made for those positions was not required.


Donald Methuen Fleming: This is for travelling expenses, not salaries.


Paul Joseph James Martin: New inspectorates which were created in the field were filled only after October 1, 1949.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I do not understand. What has the filling of vacancies to do with travelling expenses?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We did not spend the amount originally estimated to cover the travel cost of those additional inspectors for that reason.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Because there are four more inspectors this year the minister justifies an increase of about $17,000. Does that mean that these men are going to spend over $4,000 each this year for travelling expenses?


Mr.   Marlin.@: We have thirteen new inspectors now. We intend to do all we can to accelerate the work of inspection in the food and drug administration-and I believe my hon. friend would be the first to applaud that.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is there any possibility of decentralization, with a view to saving money?


Mr.   Marlin.@: We have five regional offices, and we do maintain a policy of decentralization.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National health branch-
219. Opium and narcotic drugs, $138,295.
George Matheson Murray: Would the minister outline some of the anti-narcotic work carried on by his department, which is so very valuable to the country and particularly to the Pacific coast?


Mr.   Marlin.@: This division is one of the oldest in the department, in fact it was one of those that were set up under the original department of pensions and soldiers civil reestablishment. It is not only a problem that concentrates in British Columbia, although the natural propinquity of that province to one of the sources of supply does lend itself, in imagination and in reality in part, to the view that the traffic as well as the policing is particularly active in that part of the country. I may say that it is active all over the country.
We have as head of the division a former mounted police officer who is assisted by some others who have had similar experience. In conjunction with the personnel of the department, the doctors and technical men, they carry out the policy, but the actual enforcement and detection is assisted by the very able work of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. My hon. friend knows that prosecutions take place fairly frequently and indicate the firm desirability of making enforcement effective. From the observations and commendations that have been made by the opium committee of the United Nations I think I can say that the enforcement of this particular division is one that comes up to the expectations of those who were signatories to the opium agreement of the United Nations.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the attorneys general of the various provinces for the co-operation of their legal departments in the enforcement of this matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
220. Quarantine and leprosy, $290,618.
Mr. Pearkes:: How many lepers are there at Bentinck island and Tracadie?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Seven.


George Randolph Pearkes: Between the two?


Paul Joseph James Martin: There are two at Bentinck island.


George Randolph Pearkes: And seven at Tracadie?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes.


George Randolph Pearkes: That is a decrease of two, is it not?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I hope there will be more of a decrease.


George Randolph Pearkes: It is expected that a little increase will bring about a decrease in the number.


Mr.   Marlin.@: My hon. friend raised the question last year about having a quarantine station at both ends of the country, but we believe that public health demands that that be done.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
222. Immigration medical inspection, $899,228.
Mr.   Baler@: Does this medical inspection take place after the immigrant arrives in this country or in the country of origin?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The medical examination
takes place in the country of origin and at the port of entry. I may say that the policy which was announced last year of having X-rays produced by the proposed immigrant in the country of origin is a policy which we feel has been justified.


Donald Methuen Fleming: According to the figures tabled by the minister this afternoon a total of $819,517 was spent under this item last year, so this vote would represent an increase of $80,000 over last year's requirements. Will the minister indicate just why that is required, particularly in the light of the fact that immigration into the country is being reduced rather than augmented and also that the work of the international refugee organization is about to end?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I would have hoped that my learned friend would have been as vigorous in his praise of this reduction as he has been sometimes-


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is an increase of $80,000.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I wish my hon. friend would have been as generous-he is pretty generous, allowing for any limitations that attend his fine personality-but the fact is that it is difficult to estimate the number of immigrants that are going to be examined in any one area by these officers. The explanation of the balances are, first of all, that an appropriate adjustment has been made in the living allowances to medical officers serving overseas following the devaluation of the pound and other foreign currencies on October 1, 1949. This had the effect of reducing the amount of funds needed by approximately
Supply-Health and Welfare one-third. The travelling expenses of moving medical officers on the continent of Europe was considerably less than anticipated as the medical stations became more stabilized. There was also less travelling in connection with the seasonal inspection of immigrants at Canadian ports, and the same applies to the item covering printing and materials and supplies and the acquisition of equipment.


Donald Methuen Fleming: In effect the minister is asking the committee to provide him under this item with ten per cent more than was found to be necessary last year. Let us be fair to the minister. These estimates were prepared toward the end of the calendar year 1949 and it may be that the abatement in the flow of immigration to this country that is to be seen today was not as apparent at that time. But does the minister not think that, in the light of the statement made within the past week by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and in the light of this reduction in the flow of immigrants to this country, he will not need $80,000 more than he actually spent last year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have not any comment to make.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I think the minister ought to have a comment to make.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I just do not believe that my hon. friend is asking me to comment on policy. The minister of immigration has stated the situation and we will be governed accordingly. If he asks us to examine immigrants, we will certainly do it.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The minister has not seized the point I am raising and I will do my best to deserve his attention. I was asking the minister whether in the light of the statement made by his colleague and in the light of the figures now available, which may not have been available when the estimates were prepared, showing a reduction in immigration, he thinks that he will require $80,000 more this year under this item than was actually expended last year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: My hon. friend knows that we have the Rockhead hospital on the Atlantic coast, which involves a considerable expenditure. Two years ago we found ourselves in a difficult position because of an underestimate. If this money ought not to be spent, my hon. friend may rest assured that it will not be spent.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It is quite obvious that the minister is making sure that he is not going to be caught short in connection with any of these items. Unless there is a big upsurge in the immigration into this country this

Supply-Health and Welfare year I cannot for the life of me see how the minister is going to need $80,000 more than he needed last year.
According to the details on page 180 the amount voted last year for sundries was $18,560. May I ask how much was spent?


Mr.   Marlin.@: 


Donald Methuen Fleming: Why does the minister require $8,000 more this year than was spent last year?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Those are sundry expenses in connection with the Rockhead hospital.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is the difference all in connection with Rockhead?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes, all the extras.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
224.	Public health engineering, $147,410.
William Gourlay Blair: What were the travelling expenses under this item?


Mr.   Marlin.@: 


William Gourlay Blair: That is not the figure I have. I have public health engineering, $29,000.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I am sorry.


William Gourlay Blair: I want to know the amount of the expenditure and the details.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I am sorry, $19,848.


William Gourlay Blair: You are asking for $29,000.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes. We expected to spend $39,000 last year and the reason we did not was that most of the officials of the public health engineering division were engaged with the international joint commission. They were engaged with it for practically the whole time, and of course their expenses were paid by the commission.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I take it to be under this item that expenditures were incurred for travelling such as are referred1 to on pages 135 and 136 of the annual report of the department. Reference is made there to exhibits conducted by the department at home and abroad publicizing Canada's progress in the health and welfare fields. We see that there was an exhibit held at Atlantic City, for instance, in September, 1948. I am drawing attention to those held outside Canada.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That was at the American public health association meeting.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Another at Boston in November, another at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in January, 1949.


Mr.   Marlin.@: That was at the U.A.W.-C.I.O. convention.


Donald Methuen Fleming: The statement follows that officers of this division were on duty whenever and wherever the department set up such exhibits in Canada or in the United States. I should like to ask the minister if it is necessary to send officers of the department abroad to Atlantic City, for instance. No doubt it is very pleasant there in September. Is it necessary to send them to Boston or Milwaukee, Wisconsin, with these exhibits? It is one thing to send an exhibit. How many officers accompany these exhibits and what is their status?


Mr.   Marlin.@: It is not necessary but I think it is desirable. The American public health association and we ourselves have a cooperative arrangement whereby we exchange information in the fields of health and welfare. Perhaps my hon. friend has seen the joint effort made by the United States public health service and ourselves in connection with the cancer film and several publications. It is a reciprocal arrangement which the technical officers of the department believe to be of mutual advantage. At the last dominion-provincial meeting on health education a resolution was passed urging that we expand this service to cover certain regions in the western part of the United States to meet an arrangement that was made by the United States public health service in the western section of Canada.


Gordon Graydon: Mr. Chairman, I was interested in the minister's answer to a question asked about public health engineering. He said that some of the public health engineers had been seconded, shall I say, to the international joint commission.


Paul Joseph James Martin: In connection with the pollution of waters.


Gordon Graydon: Having in mind that a part of the discussion this evening has centred around radio broadcasting by the minister in certain areas, I should like to point out that in the estimates for the international joint commission under the Department of External Affairs there is a vote for the commission, to which these engineers were attached, reading:
To provide for Canada's share of an investigation on the matter of air pollution in the vicinity of Detroit and Windsor.
I do not know whether that has any relation, but I thought it should go on the record.


Mr.   Marlin.@: I think my hon. friend will realize that the region of Detroit and Windsor is one of the most important locations on the great lakes. I am sure that my hon. friend who resides in Brampton, and who lives near a small pool, will not be jealous of my interest in the five lakes.


Gordon Graydon: I do not want any air pollution in Windsor.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National health branch-
225.	Treatment of sick mariners, $676,771.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Will the minister give us the revenue offsetting this item and the comparison with the previous year?


Mr.   Marlin.@: The revenue is $238,797.46 and the expenditure is $581,156.39.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Have you the comparison with the previous year?


Mr.   Marlin.@: In the previous year the revenue was $226,638 and the expenditure was $474,291.60.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National health branch-
226.	Industrial health, $139,915.
Clarence Gillis: Will the minister tell us what this branch of his department does? Does it carry on research in industrial diseases to supplement the work of the provincial governments in that field?


Mr.   Marlin.@: One would expect my hon. friend to ask that very important question. The functions of this division are to try to bring about a co-ordination of efforts in the industrial health field both federal and provincial, particularly in connection with coal mines, factories, and the like. We seek to carry out educational and investigational work in conjunction with the provinces in matters relative to the maintenance and improvement of the health of Canada's working population. We provide technical services by the industrial health laboratory in relation to the above. We also have a consulting service that makes contributions not only directly to provincial governments in this field but also to private industries. In other words, we seek on our level to bring about co-ordination of those activities which the industrial divisions of the departments of health in the provinces seek to carry out to improve the working conditions of men and women in our large urban centres, coal mines and the like.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National health branch-
228. Nutrition, $132,275.
Stanley Howard Knowles: As the hon. member for Peace River, the hon. member for Glengarry and one or two others pointed out this afternoon, this is a rather important subject. I hope that the fact that there is a slight reduction in the amount does not mean that the work of the department in the field
Supply-Health and Welfare of nutrition is being handicapped in any way. Perhaps the minister would explain the reduction.


Mr.   Marlin.@: My hon. friend is quite right. The decrease in the vote does not mean a decreasing interest. The decrease is due to the fact that we intend to spend less money this year on educational information in that particular division.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Why?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Because the director has not thought it capable of carrying out as many educational projects this year. We are engaged now in a whole series of surveys requiring the use of our full personnel. Dr. Pett, the nutritionist, and an eminent man in that field, feels that this amount represents the best plans he can muster for this year. I may say we collaborate closely with the Department of Agriculture and the Canadian council on nutrition in connection with the plans we have in mind this year.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I do not think anybody needs to be alarmed about the reduction. If you compare this year's estimate with last year's expenditure you will see the reduction is less than $2,800. It is not nearly as large as it appears in the blue book of estimates.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
230. Health insurance studies, $68,241.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, as I indicated earlier it is not my intention to repeat the speech I made on the first item, but I should like to say enough to get the minister to say something about this whole question of health insurance studies. As the minister knows, I have been asking questions about this item for a good many years. I hope that the questions I have been asking have been helpful, and that they have prodded the department into trying to do a little more in this field. I have yet to be convinced, if I may put it that way, that the department is doing all it should do in what this heading implies, namely, actually studying health insurance for Canada. I wonder whether the name of this vote should not be changed to make it clear that it is being used mainly for the administration of the health grants, which is a later item in the estimates.
As I indicated this afternoon I put some questions on the order paper this year concerning this matter of health insurance studies. One set of questions was answered on March 16, 1950. I gave the information this afternoon as to the failure of the department to spend all of the money voted for that

Supply-Health and Welfare purpose, but in addition to that I asked the following questions appearing on page 827 of Hansard of March 16, 1950:
How much of the time of the persons indicated in the answer to question 3 has been spent on health insurance studies, and what other tasks have these persons performed?
To paraphrase the answer briefly, I was told that no apportionment of the work of the people paid under this vote could be made accurately; that these people were engaged both in health insurance studies and in the administration of the health grants. That information was given on page 832 of Hansard for March 16, 1950, as well as a statement by the former prime minister, Mr. Mackenzie King, to the effect that work on health grants should be considered as work preparatory to health insurance.
Another question which I asked on that occasion was this:
Is there available any report summarizing the results of health insurance studies made under the items noted above?
"The items noted above" were the votes for health insurance studies spread over a period of four or five years. The answer referred me to the annual reports of the department for various years, and at various pages. I noted particularly a reference to the last annual report for the year ending March 31, 1949, pages 77 to 88. I had looked at this report before and missed that reference, but I was encouraged to look again because pages 77 to 88 inclusive meant a total of 12 pages in which I could read about the work done under health insurance studies. I went back to the annual report for the year ending March 31, 1949, and turned to pages 77 to 88. The main heading on that page in large twenty-four or thirty point type is "Health insurance studies". But when I read the twelve pages I found that the only reference to health insurance studies is set out at the bottom of page 78. I almost missed it but by reading closely I found it. It reads as follows:
Considerable expansion of the health insurance studies directorate occurred following announcement of the national health program. Its activities have been connected mainly with administration of the grant program, although fundamental studies on health insurance and related matters have not been neglected.
That is all there is in those twelve pages to which I was referred that deals directly with health insurance studies. The remainder of that chapter deals with federal health grants.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Will my hon. friend permit just one interruption? When I suggested this afternoon that he might want to make his speech on this subject on this item, he thought he had better give it on the general item. I


do not want to quarrel with him for doing it. Let me assure him of this. We are making most careful studies of this whole problem. We are waiting now for the results of the important surveys that are being conducted by every one of the provincial governments. The cost figures that will come out of those surveys are an integral part of anything that might be done. I want to assure my friend that we are making most serious studies. As he knows, we have brought into the department a number of individuals, one of whom has had previous experience in the matter of health insurance with one of the provinces. We are constantly encouraging, through that division and through our research division, a most careful study of this matter.
While my hon. friend may refer to that question and the answer given in the way he has, I am not criticizing that, but in order to expedite this matter I want him to know, and I believe he will accept this, that we are giving this matter the fullest, most scientific consideration any group of people engaged in the public service of this country can give. We are doing that not only on our own but in collaboration with certain provincial bodies, provincial governments, and with some of the personnel of those provincial governments who have had experience. Two officials of the department have gone to the United Kingdom to make careful spot studies for us in connection with certain phases of the problem. I want my hon. friend to know that we are not neglecting this matter. I hope that this intervention will save him much of the energy which he otherwise might have expended.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is exceedingly difficult to do otherwise than accept the assurance the minister gives, especially when he gives it in that inimitable tone of voice which he has just used. I do say that the kind of assurance he has sought to give me now sounds to me to have a little more substance in it than the assurance given me in previous years. The trouble is I have felt that way every year. There is something in the minister's tone of voice that makes me change my mind. Every year I rise determined to blast the daylights out of the minister for doing nothing about this matter, but then he gets up and tells me in this tone of voice about what is being done and I decide to give him another year. Then, the next year the tone of voice is stepped up a bit, but he tells me-


Donald Methuen Fleming: The same old thing.


Stanley Howard Knowles: He tells me the same thing that is in the report. It is buried somewhere in the twelve pages that are supposed to be

devoted to this question of health insurance studies. He said the matter is not being neglected, and that is all his department said in its annual report, that fundamental studies on health insurance and related matters have not been neglected. I have to associate with this the fact that the minister said this afternoon, if I understood him correctly, that he is more concerned about getting health services started than he is about health insurance. I want the health services developed too, but I feel that greater priority than has yet been, given should be shown this business of health insurance. No purpose is served by having the finest hospitals and doctors available to our people if our people cannot afford to make use of those services. That is the purpose of health insurance, to distribute the incidence of the cost so that the people who are ill or who need a preventive health service can get it regardless of their financial position.
I do not quite know whether to take the minister's assurance as having more substance than it has had in former years. I suppose I shall have to give him another chance. But I remind him that it took a good many pages in Hansard for the minister to answer the questions that I put on the order paper; six pages, in fact. It took all that space to answer a small question that occupied about two inches in one column. Later on another question produced another long answer, all of which suggests to me that the people who drafted these replies for the minister felt their job was to make it look good, to make it look as though they were doing something in the field of health insurance studies, whether they were or not. As a matter of fact most of the time of the people paid under this grant is being given to an important job, but that job is the administration of the health grants and not to studying health insurance.
I want to see this country reach the point where we have the finest medical and hospital services available, but I want them to be available to our people. I want our people to be able to afford them, and the only way that can be done is by a health insurance program which would cover all the people of the country. One of the advantages of old age pensions being before a committee and therefore not debatable here at the moment, if I may say so, is that the committee is forced to discuss this other question. I think that is good. It means we are giving some priority tonight to the question of health, and I urge the minister to realize that in this field of health it is not just the provision of services that matters but that health insurance is equally important. I am glad we are voting
Supply-Health and Welfare more money for this purpose. I hope when I put questions on the order paper next year or ask questions on the estimates the minister will not have to fall back on the assurance that the matter is not being neglected, but will be able to tell me in concrete terms what has been done.


William Gourlay Blair: Could I have the information I
asked for?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The figure is $10,200.


Donald Methuen Fleming: This afternoon when this
subject of health insurance was being discussed the minister very properly made reference to two sound principles. The first was that, the matter of public health services being within the provincial field, anything done in this connection will have to be done in full co-operation with the provinces. The second was that nothing should be done to interfere with the relationship between doctor and patient, which has something very intimate and confidential about it. In view of the fact that the dominion-provincial conference is to be held in September, may I ask the minister if he has taken any steps as yet to see that the matter of a public health program is placed upon the agenda of that conference?


Paul Joseph James Martin: As my hon. friend knows from the statement made by the Prime Minister, the provinces were invited to suggest the items to be discussed. So far at least one province has included this item among its suggestions, and I expect that other provinces will do the same. So far as I know there has been no suggestion along that line as yet from the province of Ontario, but the suggestion has been made by at least one province, if not two, so the item certainly will be on the agenda.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
234. Blindness control, $35,320.
Gordon Knapman Fraser: Would the minister say exactly what his department is doing in regard to blindness control? I notice that only $6,000 is being provided for professional and special services, and I believe much more work should be done in this connection in Canada.


Mr.   Marlin.@: My hon. friend is touching a point that interests me very greatly. He will remember when I had the privilege of announcing that we would commence paying pensions to the blind at age 21, and we believe every endeavour should be made to see that those in receipt of pensions as well as those who are potential beneficiaries of pensions to the blind are so treated as to remove the necessity for pensions. We have a program

Supply-Health and Welfare with three provinces, and are prepared to enter into arrangements with all provinces, for dealing with people who are blind or going blind, in order to give them the necessary surgical and medical attention to prevent blindness. We have had some results. I know of one case which was brought to me by an hon. gentleman, the late Maurice Hartt. We were able to provide the necessary surgical treatment for this person, who was in receipt of a blind pension, as a result of which his eyesight was restored and he is no longer on the pension rolls.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Do I understand that the only people who can be helped under this item are those in receipt of blind pensions?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is right.	.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: What is done for the other people, who are not in receipt of pensions?


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is a provincial responsibility, and some of the provinces are doing great work in that regard. This item has to do with people who are in receipt of blind pensions. It does not mean they must be totally blind, but they must have the degree of blindness which entitles them to a pension.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I do not want to hold up the item, but I am interested in this matter. I wonder if some campaign could not be put on to help these people. For instance, a person with too much sugar in his system will go blind. They are the people who get cataracts on their eyes, but that is not widely known. I believe matters like that could be put into the department's monthly bulletins.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Under the health grants we have two projects dealing with this very matter. We have under consideration now a pamphlet that we hope will receive wide circulation and which I know the Canadian National Institute for the Blind will be very interested in seeing.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Then I am just going to pass on a little advice. In the Senate we have Dr. Veniot, who I think knows more about blindness and its cure than almost anyone else in the country.


Paul Joseph James Martin: He is a very good man.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: If the minister would have a conference with him and get his suggestions-


Paul Joseph James Martin: We have talked about it many times.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: Then I hope you accept his suggestions.


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

Health services-
235. Epidemiology, $35,780.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should like to feel that I understood something about this item. Will the minister tell us in a word or two what is being done about this? I know what it means now.


Paul Joseph James Martin: If my hon. friend had consulted me instead of the dictionary I might have been able to give him the right answer and save his eyesight. This division was recommended first of all by the dominion council of health, which proposed the setting up of an organization in our department with regard to epidemics and the whole question of epidemiology. We acted upon that suggestion and made arrangements with the Rockefeller foundation, who made a survey of the health department organizations in the country in respect of this matter and then recommended the present set-up, which is essentially one of co-ordination in connection with similar efforts being made in some of the provinces. The functions of the division are to plan, co-ordinate and execute a national epidemiological program in conjunction with divisions or departments of governments, universities and certain organized groups in the dominion. It seeks to study the incidence and spread of disease in order to achieve adequate control methods throughout Canada. It conducts investigations info the control of those diseases which involve more than one province, or which by mutual agreement with the provinces are considered federal rather than provincial, such as plague, shellfish poisoning, and the like.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Does that mean there is a separate scientific department set up and working here in Ottawa doing that sort of thing? While I am on my feet, is any use made of the scientific set-up at the various universities?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Oh, a great deal. As a matter of fact Dr. Peart, the head of the division, is doing some work at Harvard now in connection with a study that was initiated at one of our Canadian universities. He is following up some work there because they have some special equipment.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Does the minister happen to know of any 'tangible result that can be expected, although not overnight? Is there any special tangible result to date?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I cannot say there have been any tangible results. This is a new division. At first we had difficulty getting personnel, but in conjunction with our laboratory of

hygiene they are engaged with the universities and our own laboratory in a series of studies, all of which adds to the totality of knowledge, and results in achievement. But to say that we have there concrete things, no; to say they are exercising supervisory interest and continuing interest in all these matters, certainly yes, and very definitely.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: How many -of the provinces are at work on this?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We have relations with eight of the provinces. We have theoretical relations with all ten in this field. There are two provinces that are not themselves sufficiently organized to make collaboration completely effective with them at the moment, but that collaboration will be made effective before too many months.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: How old is
this division?


Paul Joseph James Martin: This particular division goes back about three and a half years in its present form.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: How many provinces had special divisions of this kind before?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I cannot say the exact number. I think there were about three. Dr. Jackson says four. I knew it was about that number.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister considered it necessary to have this additional organization in addition to what the provinces were doing?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The provinces themselves were the ones who asked for it. As 1 explained this afternoon, we have a dominion council of health that meets twice a year. The dominion council of health is a body made up of all provincial departments of health and the federal government. They meet in Ottawa. We bring them here and we discuss common matters, namely, those matters on which they can do a better job; those matters where we need not have duplication of effort; those matters where there should be coordination and the like.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National health branch-
Health services-
237.	Medical services-Indians and Eskimos, $11,694,839.
Mr.   Baler@: I notice that this item is for Indians and Eskimos. Are they on a par to qualify for this assistance? Or am I correct in understanding that a full-blooded Indian to qualify must be a treaty Indian and reside within the boundaries of a reserve?
Supply-Health and Welfare


Mr.   Marlin.@: The answer is the latter. But I may say that while we have to realize the obligation under our financial commitments there are many areas where it is impossible to distinguish between the two groups.


Mr. Harkness:: It would be helpful to the committee if the minister at the start of our consideration of the medical services for Indians and Eskimos would give us an outline as to what has been accomplished during the past year, particularly in the matter of extension of hospital services, and the reaching out, if I might call it that, of medical services to the Indians in the outlying areas; also what number of Indians have now been X-rayed for tuberculosis, and what was the result of that survey, and what steps have been taken to deal with the Indians who were found to be suffering from that disease.


Mr.   Marlin.@: As my hon. friend knows, the expenditures in this particular division have increased sixfold in the last six years. The total budget now for Indian medical services is about $11,700,000. Five years ago it was about $2 million. Eight years ago it was under $800,000. With these expenditures we are building up a whole network of hospital institutions across this country for the main purpose of doing our best to stamp out tuberculosis among the Indian and Eskimo population of this country. These hospitals are strategically located all over the country. To them must be added the number of nursing stations which are being built, the number of nurses who are being added to attend these institutions and the number of permanent and part-time doctors all over the country. I may say that the results are certainly most encouraging. To discharge on behalf of the people of this country the accepted responsibility for the health of 130,000 Indians and
8,000	Eskimos, we have a trained staff now of 1,150 in Indian health services. We have several hundred dentists who give part-time service, as well as some who give full-time service, although I must admit that our dental service program in this particular is not as complete as I should like to see it. The reason for that is largely the difficulty of getting dental personnel.
The results of this program of hospitalization enable me to say tonight that our statistics since 1944 show a 40 per cent decline in the tuberculosis mortality rate among Indians. I think that is an achievement of which this whole country should be proud, not an achievement that I am not responsible for; I am not putting it forward on that basis, but one that the director and those under him have to their credit in trying to stamp out this dread disease.
3910	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare
There are many areas yet where the job is colossal, but one of the things that I said in this house when I took over this portfolio on the first presentation of my estimates was that one of our objectives was to stamp out this dread disease. I said that we were doing our best to create the services by which this disease could be stamped out. With that in mind we have undertaken an X-ray program, which enables me to say tonight that in 1949, 75 per cent of Canada's entire native population was given a chest X-ray. That is no mean achievment. As a result of these X-rays, not only have we learned the incidence of t.b. but incidentally we have learned the prevalence of other diseases, and of other illnesses in Indians which, but for these X-rays, would not have been detected.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I am glad to hear of the improvement which has taken place as far as t.b. is concerned. I wonder whether the minister can tell us what the t.b. rate is at the present time amongst the Indians and what it is amongst the white population?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, I have that. Tubercular deaths per 100,000 population of Indians-I am giving the figures now for 1948-were 480-1 and 32-4 for the whites. My hon. friend has the figures that I gave last year which show the tremendous improvement. For instance, in 1947 it was 549 for the Indians and 38-2 for the whites.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The last figures the minister has are the rates for 1948? He has not the rates for 1949?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I have some figures, but they are not official yet.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I trust that this improvement between 1947-48 has continued. This rate is still extraordinarily high. I think the minister realizes that, but there is still considerable improvement to take place. There is still a great deal of work to be done along that line.


Paul Joseph James Martin: There is no doubt about that.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I know the director and the people in the Indian health services branch know that, and are working on these problems. To come back to the matter of hospital construction, nursing stations and the like, can the minister tell us what hospitals were constructed or finished last year, and what nursing stations were put up?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The only hospital actually opened last year was at Sioux Lookout, besides about eleven nursing stations.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Do I understand from that that this entire amount of $2,800,000 was spent on the Sioux Lookout hospital and the eleven nursing stations, or was a considerable amount of that on buildings to be completed in the coming year-or what is the situation?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: What does "yes" mean?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Completed this year.


Douglas Scott Harkness: What Indian hospitals did this vote cover? What ones are now under construction; and how many, if any, will be completed this year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Norway House, Moose Factory and Hobbema.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Are those hospitals or nursing stations?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Of course additional to this are some hospital residences in remote areas where we have to have hospital residences in order to attract medical personnel. In one place we have a nurses' residence, and two laundry buildings.


Douglas Scott Harkness: As I understand it, there are two hospitals covered in this vote. They may be completed this year. Then there are residences for medical personnel. Is that the general situation?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Three hospitals.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Are there any more nursing stations to be built this year, or is the program for nursing stations now complete?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, there are eighteen new ones.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Eighteen more included in this vote?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Are they pretty well scattered over the entire dominion?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, all across the dominion.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Then my next question concerns personnel. Looking at page 186 of the estimates there would seem to be 88 permanent employees and 1,094 temporary employees. In addition to this there are casual and other assistants amounting to $40,000 last year and $75,000 this year. What is the explanation for this proportion of about twelve to one of temporary as compared with permanent employees? Are a large number of these 1,094 temporaries part-time doctors? If so, how many are part-time doctors, and what are the others who come under that classification?


Paul Joseph James Martin: In the first place, our quota in the Indian health division is 30 per cent. The hon. member will understand that we have to maintain a balance between permanent and temporary employees.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Quota of what?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Our quota of permanent employees is 30 per cent. The large number

of temporaries is, first of all, due to that circumstance, and to the fact that we have engaged throughout the country a shifting personnel including orderlies, ward aides, men to look after furnaces, men to drive trucks and, as the Minister of Public Works says, charwomen. Then there are a large percentage of Indian personnel whom we seek to encourage.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The minister says the quota of permanent employees is 30 per cent. However, the present quota is down to 8 per cent. That seems to be an extremely small number of people in permanent positions-and I suggest that in most instances having permanent employees tends to give a more efficient service.


Paul Joseph James Martin: We are working up to it. However, this branch, in the form in which it is, was established only in 1945. There has been a very great acceleration of the Indian health service work. As quickly as we can get it up to permanent status my hon. friend may be sure we will do so.


Douglas Scott Harkness: To what extent are the Indians in the outlying areas now receiving medical assistance? I am thinking particularly of a group of Indians at Nordegg who have recently signed a treaty in Alber.a. Of course there are numbers of bands of Indians all across the country who live in fairly remote areas and who, until fairly recently, received no medical attention whatsoever. What has been done to extend medical facilities to tfiose people?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I believe I have covered that already by pointing out that 75 per cent of the native population have received chest 'X-rays. Then there has been the building of these nursing stations in the most remote areas. However, just as quickly as we can get personnel and get authorization we will reach the others with medical and hospital assistance. My hon. friend will see at once from the program of expansion that we are seeking to reach these numbers at an accelerated rate.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Does the minister mean-


Louis-René Beaudoin: The hon. member for Red Deer.


Mr. Shaw:: Mr. Chairman, last December and again in March of this year I found it necessary to direct some rather severe criticism against the Indian health services branch for its failure to take appropriate action in the matter of a very serious health problem among two bands of Indians in my constituency.
Supply-Health and Welfare
Tonight I rise to discuss the same subject, but not this time by way of criticism. In March, and during the weeks immediately following, certain very definite action was taken by the Indian health services branch to deal with the problem I had indicated, and which I had brought before the house. The reports I have received from that territory and the information I have procured as a result of personal investigation lead me to be extremely optimistic at the moment.
When speaking before I did not overestimate, nor did I underestimate the nature of the problem in that district. I also pointed out that I realized it would be an extremely difficult task for the department to deal effectively with that situation. I was not looking for results overnight. So long as I can feel convinced, as I am at the moment, that the branch is prepared to adopt the right attitude, and that it is prepared to deal with the problem in the most effective manner, it will have my support.
I wish to commend the minister and the director of health services as well as others in the department who have taken action in the matter, and who are now I believe facing up squarely to what was a rather sordid picture among the Indians.
The hon. member for Calgary East referred to. one band that had recently accepted treaty. I was delighted when that occurred. No doubt it will be much easier for the department to render service to those Chippewa Indians now than it would have been if they had failed to accept the treaty. I have no hesitation in commending the activities which are now going on in that part of my constituency.


Douglas Scott Harkness: There is one item of educational and informational publicity, for which $8,000 was voted last year and $5,000 this year. How is that put out to the Indians and what does it consist of?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We have some diet sheets and we have some still pictures and lantern slides. Then we have calendars and posters in the Indian language which have been prepared by people who have great experience. These are put out in an effort to bring home to the Indian the importance of diet, good medical care and hygiene, and they set out particulars of family allowances and so on.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That sounds like a sensible
program. I was afraid it might consist of reading material and I know that many of these people cannot read and it would not be of much use to them. There is a considerable increase in travelling expenses from $270,000 to $350,000. I have urged consistently that the medical personnel should get around to

Supply-Health and Welfare more bands and people and if that is to be accomplished by this increase in travelling expenses it is all to the good. Is a great deal of this made up by people travelling to different parts of Canada on administrative duties?


Paul Joseph James Martin: There would be about $8,000 in the latter category. The director does a great deal of travelling, as he must and should do. As my hon. friend knows, the organization of the Indian health branch is pretty well on a regional and provincial basis. The increase in expenditures is largely due to the fact that new and larger hospitals have been built and Indians are being transported by different means from the remote regions to these hospital centres. They are transported by air when necessary. Survey teams are being sent into different areas where there are no hospitals. I was sorry my hon. friend was not here this afternoon when this matter was dealt with.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health services-
238.	Civil aviation medicine, $54,880.
William Gourlay Blair: Of this amount of $54,880 a total of $22,800 is for travelling expenses, and there are six temporary assistants totalling $18,930. What work is done by this branch?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We bring private practitioners from all over Canada to give them special courses in civil aviation medicine, which work is carried on in conjunction with the Department of Transport.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General health grants-
239.	To authorize and provide for health grants to the provinces upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates in accordance with regulations prescribed by the governor in council including authority, notwithstanding section 29 of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $34,482,926, $25,900,000.
Wilbert Ross Thatcher: This is the item under which federal grants for hospital construction are made. I should like to detain the house for a few minutes to discuss this matter, as it is most important to my constituents who are trying to build a new hospital wing. These federal grants have gone a long way toward alleviating the shortage of hospital beds in the nation but we have still a considerable distance to go. In my own home city for instance, some nights there are as many as 150 people who cannot get hospital beds. At times the doctors have to send patients to hotel rooms.
As I say, these federal grants are all to the good and I congratulate the minister on having introduced them. However, there are certain weaknesses in the legislation which

makes it impossible for some municipalities and cities to properly utilize it. We in Moose Jaw want to take advantage of these grants but so far we have not been able to, and there are many other municipalities in the same position. The Auditor General's report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1949, shows that of the $13 million voted by this parliament for hospital construction a total of more than $10 million was allowed to lapse. This must be evidence of some weaknesses in the legislation.
I have had considerable correspondence with hospital authorities, with doctors, and with city councillors in Moose Jaw, and I have been asked to propose to the minister a few changes in the legislation so that more municipalities may take advantage of it.
The first weakness, as I see it, is that these grants are made only for the purpose of providing new beds. They are apparently based on the premise that other facilities are not needed. The shortcomings of this formula are obvious. With modern advances in hospital care, the need for extended facilities and up-to-date equipment has increased enormously.
Today in Canada there are dozens of hospitals which have enough beds but which lack X-ray rooms, operating rooms, diet kitchens and things like that. Unless the federal government is concerned more with quantity than with quality, surely the formula should be revised to take care of the need for these central services. To say that our hospitals can be improved only by the addition of beds, is like saying that improvements in our railroad system should be measured only by the number of box cars we add to it.
Many hospital authorities have asked for such a change. For instance, the Canadian* Hospital Council, which met recently in convention, passed the following resolution:
Be it resolved that the Canadian Hospital Council request the Minister oi National Health and Welfare to extend the scope of hospital construction grants, to cover part of the costs of construction of . . . essential and supporting services, and further be it resolved that construction grants apply to all new constructions . . . where it can be shown that an existent structure is obsolete for efficient patient care.
I ask the minister to consider changing these grants so that these central facilities may be provided as well as new beds.
A second weakness in the legislation, as I understand it, is that it does not include assistance for the construction of nurses' residences. Obviously there is not much use in providing a lot of beds, if you do not have nurses to look after the patients. They might as well stay at home. There have been many requests from responsible authorities to have

assistance for this kind of construction provided. For instance, the Canadian Hospital Council at its last annual meeting asked that the grants cover part of the cost of constructing nurses' residences. The Ontario Hospital Association made the same request, as did the Alberta Hospital Association.
The third weakness of the legislation I believe is the rigidity of the financial clause in order in council P.C. 2060. This reads:
That the estimates provide that the distribution of the amount each province may become entitled to receive shall be on the basis of $1,000 for each active treatment bed or bed equivalent and $1,500 per chronic or convalescent bed as hereinafter defined.
The order in council provides that payment shall be made of the balance required to provide:
an amount up to one-third of the total cost of construction or to provide an amount calculated on the basis set forth in paragraph (a) of this section ($1,000 per active treatment bed or $1,500 per chronic or invalid bed), whichever is the lesser.
Theoretically the present legislation provides that the federal government will grant up to one-third the cost of building a hospital but the experience in most provinces over the past several years is that the federal grant never exceeds 20 per cent; and, as far as university hospitals are concerned, it is sometimes only 10 per cent. Premier Duplessis of Quebec made the following statement on October 15, 1949, as reported in the Quebec Chronicle-Telegram:
The federal contribution represents about one-tenth of the cost of each new hospital bed in this province with the other nine-tenths being paid by cheque and by the institutions interested.
As I see it, this is the result of a formula which is based on a net gain in beds, which certainly is no gauge of the hospital's usefulness or of its cost. It seems to me that the formula would be much more useful if it were to provide that the federal government would match the provincial contribution, whatever the amount might be, for each hospital project.
I think it is obvious, and I think the minister will admit, that while a lot of good has been accomplished, there are nevertheless certain weaknesses to the order in council. I suggest to the minister that while the legislation is before us he should consider amending it. I do not feel it would cost the taxpayers any more money, and it would make the act much more effective.
I have then four recommendations to make to the minister. First of all, I suggest that he permit the grants to be used at least in part for extending laboratories, X-ray, operating room, dietary and other administration facilities. Second, I suggest that he permit the grants to be used when necessary
Supply-Health and Welfare for the establishment of nurses' residences. Third, I suggest that he permit the federal government to pay one-third of the costs of construction, whatever the amount might be, for each hospital project as long as the provincial government recommends it. Fourth, I suggest that the federal government should make loans available to the municipalities at low interest rates to help them finance their share of the cost, and allow them to repay the loans over a period of years.
These are suggestions which would help us in Moose Jaw. I think they would help in many parts of Canada. I wish the minister would tell parliament and the people what he can do in this connection.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I cannot do anything at the moment on that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In the course of his remarks the hon. member for Moose Jaw referred to the possibility of the legislative provisions being amended. I suggest that one of the difficulties is that as yet we have no legislation respecting these grants. They have been in effect now since 1948 but each year they have simply appeared as items in the estimates.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I hope we can correct that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Here again is the persuasive voice of the minister expressing the hope that it can be corrected. That is a hope we have had for a number of years. As a matter of fact I recall sitting in the gallery of the Manitoba provincial legislature at Easter this year and hearing the provincial minister of health, the Hon. Ivan Schultz, answer a question on this very point. Lloyd Stinson, one of the members for Winnipeg South, asked when this matter was going to be put on a statutory basis so that the provinces and others interested would know what the provisions actually were. Mr. Schultz assured Mr. Stinson that he had been assured by Mr. Martin that it would not be long before this would be done. When is it going to take place? When are we going to have it put on a statutory basis? If I may remind the minister, this is another of the items referred to in the memorandum of the Auditor General as an item in the estimates that legislates which the Auditor General is prepared to condone on a temporary basis but not as a permanent practice. The minister is moving his head a lot. Has he no comment to make?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Not at the moment, no.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I would still like the minister to tell me why it would not be feasible to allow these grants to be used for the other facilities which accompany the extra beds?
3914	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare


Paul Joseph James Martin: It is a question of fund's. If I had unlimited money I could do more than I am doing. I will give consideration to the representations made by my hon. friend.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I suppose the minister will tell me this is government policy, but would it not be possible to make low interest loans to the municipalities so that they could take advantage of the legislation?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Anything is possible but
whether it is desirable is another matter.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister talks about what he would do if he had unlimited funds. May I remind him when the policy was first instituted in 1948 the figure then was about $30 million a year, and we pointed out that was only one-fifth of the $150 million set out in the green book of 1945. We were assured then that the amount would increase over the years. Nevertheless the actual cash to be voted this year is down to only $25 million.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is simply the estimate for this year, but in our discussions with the provinces it was estimated that it would reach $34 million, and if we reach that figure we are prepared to meet it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But the additional amount will be paid next year; this is only a commitment authority.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I do not wish to be persistent but the minister said that these extra facilities could not be provided because of the cost.


Paul Joseph James Martin: If the hon. member will allow me, I have to leave in the morning and I am trying to get as much through as I can. I cannot say any more than I have said. There is only so much money available. Our purpose is to provide hospital beds, and in co-operation with the provinces we have been successful to the extent of over 21,000 beds. If we built nurses' homes and provided all these other things there would not be enough money at our disposal. There are some matters that we regard as within the financial responsibility of the provinces. There are some things we must leave to them. I am sorry that at the moment I cannot meet my hon. friend's request.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Last year parliament voted $13 million and more than $10 million lapsed. Therefore I do not see how the minister can say that it is a question of finance. If you add 100 beds to a hospital and still have no extra operating space what good will it do? You cannot handle any more patients. It does not seem to me to be the proper way to do it.


Clarence Gillis: The minister said that he would give consideration to the recommendations made by the hon. member for Moose Jaw, and at least he might think that the hon. member is expressing the opinion of the people in his own riding. Before coming here for this session I travelled over a considerable part of Nova Scotia and discussed these matters with some of the people who are handling the grants. The reaction I got in that province was almost the same word for word as what the hon. member for Moose Jaw has said. I will not repeat it, but I trust the minister will give serious consideration to the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare branch-
241. Family allowances-administration, $1,960,952.
Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, I have taken the suggestion the minister made this afternoon that we should speak to specific items rather than discuss everything on the administration item.


Paul Joseph James Martin: You will be giving the house a great example.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Thank you. As a member of the opposition I must confess to some resentment at the statement made by the minister this afternoon to the effect that members of the opposition are irritated by the accomplishments of his department. I trust that the minister was not entirely serious in making that statement. In so far as I am concerned, I may say that, because of the benefit to the people of Canada as a whole, I would be delighted to acknowledge a brilliant success in the minister's department, but I would want that success to be one of efficiency as well as brilliancy. I would want the department to use every dollar expended to its fullest extent. I think that is the purpose for which we are examining these estimates in detail. We are all gravely concerned about this department. So far as my own riding is concerned, I like to know where this money is being spent, and what results are being obtained. Everything that is spent in the department of welfare reflects itself in municipal costs. Municipal costs in turn reflect themselves in the tax rates which are struck in the municipalities, which in turn become a burden upon the small home owner. After several years' experience in municipal work I have become keenly conscious of the increasing burden which is borne by the small home owners of this country by reason of welfare costs which are paid by municipalities, and which I have always maintained and still maintain should be assumed by some higher levels of government.

Mr. Chairman, I take up the challenge which the minister threw out this afternoon. I should like to make a definite suggestion in connection with this item. I notice that in the details on page 189, at the foot of the page, there is the note "educational and informational publicity", and the amount of the estimate is reduced from $95,000 for last year to $56,500 for this year. From that I would presume that the activities of this department are to be curtailed. I should like to suggest that some of this money be spent in giving advice to at least some of the recipients of family allowances. The suggestion which I have to make is that the department should consider enclosing with the family allowance cheques dietary advice.
I realize there are many people in this country who probably do not need such advice, and who are well informed. But there are a great many others who do need it. Today there are families living in two and three rooms in many municipalities in this country. Under the conditions which prevail in housing, they are living in quarters in which there is no adequate provision for food storage so it is necessary for them to live from hand to mouth. The children come home from school at noon, and the mother sends them out to the corner grocery store. They return with small quantities of food, such as a few slices of cooked meat and even a quarter pound of butter because they cannot store larger quantities. Owing to this situation the money which is going into those homes, ostensibly for the care of those children, for nutrition and so on, is being spent on the most expensive type of food that the homemaker can buy. It is being spent on that food because, in many instances, the mother of the
Supply-Health and Welfare family does not realize there is a better way in which to spend that money.
I believe that the department could serve a useful purpose in ensuring the more efficient use of the moneys which are expended on family allowances if a careful study of this question were made, and if this information were given to the mothers in simple form. There should not be too many suggestions on one sheet, but a simple enclosure with each family allowance cheque suggesting inexpensive meals, and various domestic economies in the purchase of foods and the storage of food which would be practicable in those restricted quarters. As I said before, Mr. Chairman, I am throwing out this suggestion to the minister. I do not want to take up too much time on this particular point, but I think it is worth while for the department to consider some manner, after the exchanges which have taken place here today, of getting the publicity of the department to serve a more useful purpose.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I wonder if the minister
would put on the record the tables which he usually puts on the record at this point, giving in tabular form the information in relation to payments.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes, I shall table family allowance statistics based on May, 1950, family allowance payments, and the family allowance payments for November, 1949, to May 1950. I should also like to congratulate the hon. member who has just spoken.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Has the minister
permission to put these tables on Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr.   Marlin.@: The tables follow:
FAMILY ALLOWANCES DIVISION Statistics Based on May, 1950, Family Allowances Payments
Province	Number of families in pay	Number of children in pay	Average allowance per child	Average allowance per family	Total amount50,808	140,345 33,854 214,806	$5.99	$16.55	$ 840,769 204,372 1,296,429 1,137,061 8,184,606 7,297,592 1,338,132 1,592,075 1.698,823 1,798,704 51,56713|234 91,168 72,668 510,457 607,515 106,284 117,438 131,769 156,887 3,890	6.04	15.44	6.03	14.22	189'617	6.00	15.65	1,362,700 1,214,358 222,597 262,869 282,065 301,571 8,337	6.01	16.03	6.01	12.01	6.01	12.59	6.06	13.56	6.02	12.89	5.96	11.46	6.18	13.26	
1,862,118	4,233,119	$6.01	$13.66	$25,440,130
					
Note.-Corresponding table for last year appears at page 3017 of Hansard, dated December 9, 1949. 55946-248

Supply-Health and Welfare



[Stage Direction]
Family Allowances Payments November 1949 to May 1950
Province	November	December	January	February	March	April	MayNewfoundland	$ 820,778	$ 827,236	$ 828,949	$ 833,535	$ 835,534	$ 833,866	$ 840.769Prince Edward Island..	201,818	202,499	201,899	202,546	202,853	203,630	204,372Nova Scotia	1,282,626	1,282,783	1,286,776	1,287,263	1,291,026	1,293,028	1,296,429New Brunswick	1,118,844	1,123,581	1,127,572	1,219,309	1,130,338	1,134,336	l'137,061Quebec	8,060,789	8,052,284	8,118,084	8,127,586	8,124,539	8,166,550	8,184,606Ontario	7,133,872	7,168,296	7,194,800	7,218,728	7,252,071	7,275,486	7,297,592Manitoba	1,311,964	1,317,268	1,319,564	1,325,092	1,328,884	1,334,381	1,338,132Saskatchewan	1,584,948	1.581,192	1,580,987	1,582,619	1,585,299	1,587,076	1,592!075Alberta	1,664,852	1,671,338	1,677,599	1,679.183	1,685,215	1,691,449	1,698,823British Columbia	
Northwest Territories	1,756,939	1,762,705	1,772,897	1,782,979	1,788.233	1,793.373	1,798,704and Yukon	52,133	51,554	50,669	54,510	51,804	50,719	51,567National	$24,989,563	$25,040,736	$25,159,796	$25,223,350	$25,275,796	$25,363,894	$ 25,440,130
Note.-Corresponding table for last year appears at page 3,018 of Hansard, dated December 9, 1949
George Alexander Drew: I assume the minister will adhere to his undertaking to let the item in regard to old age pensions stand?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Definitely.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall the item carry?


George Alexander Drew: No, item 241 is family allowances, but it is shown as a combined item with 242.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Item 242 is the administration item. Item 241 deals with family allowance administration, and item 242 deals with the administration of old age pensions.


George Alexander Drew: As long as there is no confusion about it. The page in my book shows old age pensions as coming under item 241. So long as we are quite clear that the old age pension item stands, that is all I am asking.


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the minister the information as to the administrative costs with respect to family allowances for the other two departments concerned besides his own?


Mr.   Marlin.@: Yes, the cost of administration of family allowances for the fiscal year ending March 31 amounts to $4 million. The cost to the treasury department was $2,207,851.56. The cost to the Department of National Health and Welfare was $1,833,387.29. The cost to the Public Works Department was approximately $200,000. It is therefore indicated that the total costs amount to 1-43 per cent of the family allowances paid during the fiscal year, which is considerably less than is found under similar programs administered elsewhere.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Welfare branch-
242.	Old age pensions (including pensions to the blind)-administration, $86,320.
Item stands.
Welfare branch-
243. National physical	fitness-administration, $74,868.
Donald Methuen Fleming: In connection with item 243, a Canadian Press dispatch of May 5 reports the resignation from the National Council on Physical Fitness of Dr. J. B. Kirkpatrick of McGill university. The article reads as follows:
In a letter of resignation, the director of physical education at McGill protested against the lack of parliamentary interest in the council's work.
Dr. Kirkpatrick said a bill for revision of the National Physical Fitness Act has not been introduced in the House of Commons.
"In terms of federal financial support for the fitness program, we are no further ahead than we were seven years ago," he said in the letter.
Dr. Kirkpatrick represented Saskatchewan on the council. Has the minister any statement to make on this subject, in so far as the bill which was apparently to have been introduced is concerned?


Mr.   Marlin.@: I cannot say anything about that. It is true that Dr- Kirkpatrick resigned, feeling that more money should be appropriated for physical fitness, and I cannot say that in theory there was not a good deal to his point of view. There again, however, there are priorities of obligation. This matter is continually under review and discussion with the National Council on Physical Fitness, and is continuously being studied.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mr.   Marlin.@: The Minister of Public Works calls my attention to the fact that items 246 to 258 inclusive cover miscellaneous grants, and I wonder if we could pass those.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As long as you leave items 242 and 245.
Welfare branch-
National physical fitness-
244. Assistance to provinces, $150,288.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: What provinces are getting this assistance, and how much to each province?


Paul Joseph James Martin: All provinces but Quebec. Perhaps I could table the list of expenditures.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Paul Joseph James Martin: The amount of assistance by provinces was as follows:
National Physical Fitness-Assistance to Provinces
Newfoundland	
Prince Edward Island	 $ 1,858.50
Nova Scotia	 11,426.92
New Brunswick	 8,943.75
Quebec	'	
Ontario	
Manitoba	 7,237.93
Saskatchewan,	 17,520.75
Alberta	 16,463.71
British Columbia	 15,993.00
Northwest Territories	 234.00

Item agreed to.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Could we not call item 245?


Donald Methuen Fleming: If you will let us discuss it for a moment.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Could we not sit for a few minutes to discuss this question?


Stanley Howard Knowles: An hon. member who is not here at the moment wanted to say something about this item. It is after eleven o'clock.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I should be very glad to give consideration to what he would say.


Stanley Howard Knowles: No; items 242 and 245 should stand.
Progress reported.



BANKING AND COMMERCE

Mr. Hughes Cleaver (Halton):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask for permission to revert to the presenting of reports of committees, and to present the sixth report of the standing committee on banking and commerce, in English and French, with copies of evidence attached.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Fournier (Hull):: Tomorrow we will take up the following bills: Bill No. 307, to amend the Trust Companies Act; Bill No. 308, to amend the Loan Companies Act. These bills have come back from the banking and commerce committee. Bill No. 313, to amend the 55946-2481
Supply-Labour
statute law; the resolution preceding the measure to amend the Judges Act, 1946; Bill No. 267, respecting Indians. Then we will go into supply and call finance, secretary of state and post office.


[Stage Direction]
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]:

[Stage Direction]
151.	To provide for expenses of the economics and research branch-(formerly under departmental administration), $379,455.
152.	Annuities Act, $802,660.
153.	Fair wages, conciliation, industrial relations, industrial disputes investigations, including the administration of legislation relating thereto, and for activities re promotion of co-operation in industry between labour and management, $330,255.
154.	Canada labour relations board, $11,500.
155.	International labour conferences, $63,745.
156.	Labour Gazette and other publications authorized by Labour Department Act, $116,763.
157.	To provide for the effective organization and use of agricultural manpower, including recruiting, transporting and placing workers on farms and related industries and assistance to the provinces pursuant to agreements that may be entered into by the Minister of Labour with the provinces and approved by the governor in council, $320,000.
Vocational Training Co-operative Act, 1942-
158.	Administration, $37,930.
Expenditures for vocational training under the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, 1942, and agreements between the dominion and provinces approved by the governor in council, including vocational school assistance, projects for training of persons to fit them for gainful employment, youth training, apprenticeship training, vocational training at secondary school level, foremanship and supervisory training and for training of members of His Majesty's forces and other persons to fit them for skilled armed service occupations and to authorize the Minister of Labour to enter into an agreement with any province on terms approved by the governor in council for such expenditures, as well as to provide for undischarged commitments of previous years-
159.	Training payments to the provinces, $3,333,000.
160.	Payments to the provinces for capital expenditures for vocational schools, buildings and equipment, $2,250,000.
Government employees compensation-
161.	Administration of the Government Employees Compensation Act. $61,510.
Terminable services-
162.	To provide for expenses, including authority to continue the regional boards known as "advisory boards labour department" to act in an advisory capacity to the Minister of Labour for the coordination of the work of the various divisions of the Department of Labour and the immigration branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, $45,915.
163.	Vocational training for discharged members of Canada's armed forces, including undischarged commitments of previous years, $50,000.
3918	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare
164.	To provide the necessary financial requirements to complete activities for the reclocation, maintenance and welfare of persons of the Japanese race in Canada, including provision for undischarged commitments under agreements with the provinces and to continue the appointment of necessary temporary assistance required for the administration thereof, $52,780.
165.	To provide for payment to the national film board for educational films for exhibition, $24,000.
166.	To provide for expenses that may be incurred in the arranging for and the movement of workers from outside Canada to work on farms and other essential industry in Canada when Canadian labour is not available to meet the need; including costs connected with the supervision and welfare of persons already immigrated to Canada under former authorized labour movements and administrative expenses connected therewith, $783,340.
B-Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940-
167.	Administration, including expenditures incurred in connection with the activities of the national employment service as delegated by the Minister of Labour in accordance with section 88 of the act (including technical personnel division), $22,043,330.
168.	Government's contribution to the unemployment insurance fund, $23,000,000.
169.	To provide for the transfer of labour to and from places where employment is available in agriculture and industry and expenses incidental thereto, in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, $200,000.
170.	To provide for the payment of unemployment assistance to certain residents of Newfoundland to give effect to the terms of union of Newfoundland with Canada, in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, and such assistance shall be deemed to be a benefit or payment within the meaning of sections 33 and 67 of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940, $1,500,000.

[Stage Direction]
215.	Departmental administration, $359,720.
Health services-
216.	National health branch-administration, $128,725.
217.	Food and drugs, $704,450.
218.	Proprietary or patent medicines, $27,335.
219.	Opium and narcotic drugs, $138,295.
220.	Quarantine and leprosy, $290,618.
221.	Laboratory of hygiene, $559,205.
222.	Immigration medical inspection, $899,228.
223.	Child and maternal health, $80,030.
224.	Public health engineering, $147,410.
[Stage Direction]
225.	Treatment of sick mariners, $676,771.
226.	Industrial health, $139,915.
227.	Civil service health, $221,745.
228.	Nutrition, $132,275.
229.	Venereal disease control, $39,620.
230.	Health insurance studies, $68,241.
231.	Dental health, $42,515.
232.	Hospital designs, $26,840.
233.	Mental health, $86,420.
234.	Blindness control, $35,320.
235.	Epidemiology, $35,780.
236.	Grants to institutions-assisting sailors, in the amounts detailed in the estimates, $2,600.
237.	Medical services-Indians and Eskimos, $11,694,839.
238.	Civil aviation medicine, $54,880.
General health grants-
239.	To authorize and provide for health grants to the provinces upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates in accordance with regulations prescribed by the governor in council including authority, notwithstanding section 29 of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $34,482,926, $25,000,000.
Welfare branch-
240.	Welfare branch administration, $32,815.
Family allowances-
241.	Administration, $1,960,952.
National physical fitness-
243.	Administration, $74,868.
244.	Assistance to provinces, $150,288.
Miscellaneous grants-
246.	Canadian welfare council, $12,600.
247.	Canadian national committee for mental hygiene, $10,000.
248.	Health League of Canada, $10,000.
249.	Canadian Public Health Association, $5,000.
250.	Canadian National Institute for the Blind, $45,000.
251.	L'Association Canadienne Francaise des Aveugles, $6,000.
252.	L'lnstitut Nazareth de Montreal, $4,050.
253.	Montreal Association for the Blind, $4,050.
254.	Canadian Tuberculosis Association, $20,250.
255.	Victorian Order of Nurses, $13,100.
256.	St. John Ambulance Association, $10,000.
257.	Canadian Red Cross, $10,000.
258.	Canadian Paraplegic Association, $15,000.
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, June 21, 1950