1952-12-10

Mr. Bona Arsenault (Bonaventure):: Mr. Speaker, I wish first of all to congratulate the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) and the Royal Canadian Navy on having attributed the name Bonaventure to the new aircraft carrier to replace the Magnificent as the kingpin of Canada's fleet.
The morning press reports that there is a lonely island off the Gaspe coast bearing that name.


Mr. Langlois (Gaspe):: It was named after that island.


Bona Arsenault: I am certain it will not now be overlooked that there is a village and a county in the province of Quebec by the name of Bonaventure, the village in which I was born and the county I represent in the House of Commons. Indeed, sir, even the name Bona is merely an abbreviation of the word Bonaventure.
Therefore it is with great pride that the electors of Bonaventure county welcome this decision.


Mr. Graydon:: Greetings, admiral!



REPORTS AND PAPERS

Mr. Jean Lesage (Parliamentary Assistant to the Secretary of Slate for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) I beg leave to lay on the table the following:
The joint report of the international boundary commission dated November 26, 1951, concerning the survey and demarcation of the boundary between Canada and the United States from Tongass Passage to Mount St. Elias, together with a copy of the accompanying atlas.
And while I am on my feet I beg leave also to lay on the table certain diplomatic instruments, in English and French. The first group is one of multilateral agreements, and is as follows:
Final act of the second United Nations technical assistance conference, signed at Paris February 7, 1952.
Agreement for the settlement of disputes arising under article 15 (a) of the treaty of peace with Japan, signed at Washington June 13, 1952.
Protocol extending the period of the agreement on North Atlantic ocean weather stations of 12 May 1949, signed at Montreal 19 June, 1952.
And, in addition, may I lay on the table copies of the following group of bilateral agreements:
Exchange of notes reviving the application of the convention between His Majesty and the federal president of the Republic of Austria regarding legal proceedings in civil and commercial matters, signed at London March 31, 1931, signed at Vienna January 18, 1952;
Exchange of letters between Canada and The Netherlands constituting an agreement to safeguard the rights of bona fide holders of bonds of Canada that were looted from their Netherlands owners during world war II, signed at Ottawa, April 10, 1952;
Exchange of notes between Canada and New Zealand constituting an agreement modifying the agreement of August 16, 1950, between the two countries relating to air transport, signed at Wellington September 29, 1952;
Exchange of notes between Canada and Spain constituting an agreement on the settlement of commercial debts, signed at Madrid January 29, 1952;
Exchange of notes between Canada and the United Kingdom extending the double taxation agreement of June 5, 1946, with respect to income tax to the governments of British Guiana and St. Lucia, signed at Ottawa, May 9 and 22, 1952;
Exchange of notes between Canada and the United States of America constituting an agreement for the establishment of a gunnery range on Lake Erie, signed at Ottawa April 26, October 22 and November 15, 1951; and finally,
Exchange of notes between Canada and the United States of America regarding RCAF-USAF re supply of joint Arctic weather stations, signed at Ottawa October 9 and December 12, 1951, and February 7, 1952.

Questions



QUESTIONS


ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY


Mr. Balcom:: 1.	Have the operators doing gas free examinations for the Royal Canadian Navy, certificates from the American bureau of shipping or an equivalent certifying body?
2.	What are the qualifications of those presently doing this work?


Mr. Dickey:: 1.	No.
2.	Certification that tanks and compartments of R.C.N. ships are free from explosive or toxic gases is ithe responsibility of the naval research establishment. R.C.N. ships are exempt from the authority of the American bureau of shipping or equivalent certifying bodies. Nevertheless, employees of the naval research establishment who carry out gas free examinations at Halifax and Esquimalt are fully qualified individuals with science degrees. The employee at Halifax was given a special course at the Milton Hersey Company, analytical chemists, to qualify him to issue gas free certificates.



ALLEGED DUMPING OF WOMEN'S WEAR


Mr. Blair:: 1.	Has any action been taken by the government, since January 1 this year, to investigate charge of dumping of women's wear made in the United States on the Canadian market?
2.	If so, what action, if any, has been taken by the government to remedy the reported situation?


Mr. McCann:: 1.	Yes.
2.	The department has investigated cases of alleged dumping, through investigations at the offices of exporters and through correspondence. In cases of undervaluation, amendment of entries has been required, with the collection of special or dumping duty where applicable.



CURED FISH IMPORTS

Mr. Pearkes:: 1.	Has any frozen, canned or otherwise cured fish been imported into Canada from Japan, during 1951-52?
2.	If so, of what species and type, and in what quantities?


Mr. Mcllraiih:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Calendar	year 1951	Jan. 1 to Sept. 30,1952	Item	Lb.	Value	Lb.	Value$	$Fish, dried 	9,414	4,328	3,550	1,563Crabs, clams or shrimps, canned....	67,446	16,335	153,119	94,295Oysters, prepared or preserved, n.o.p.	13,908	8,775	38,767	29,356Tuna fish, canned 	518,718	174,369	132,276	46,315Fish, preserved in oil, n.o.p	**	3,010	**	645Fish, prepared or preserved, n.o.p...	**	16,989	**	14,961** Information not recorded by quantity but	by value.



NATIONAL DEFENCE HEADQUARTERS


Mr. White (Middlesex East):: 1.	How many staff cars are assigned to National Defence headquarters at Ottawa?
2.	How many of these, if any, have been equipped with radio receivers, and what was the total cost of same, including transmitting equipment?


Mr. Dickey:: 1.	29.
2.	(a) 14. (b) Total cost, including master transmitting station, $10,661.10.



WAR CRIMINALS


Mr. Hodgson:: 1.	How many war criminals were convicted and held in Canada's name since the end of the last war?
[Mr. Lesage.)
2.	How many of the above have had their sentence altered by authority of the Canadian government, and what was the change made in each case?
3.	Are any appeals pending for any other prisoners? If so, how many?


Mr. Dickey:: 1.	Seven.
2.	One: original sentence of fifteen years imprisonment; released by order in council in 1951 after serving six years.
3.	No.



PRODUCTION OF HARVARD TRAINER PLANES

Mr. While (Middlesex East):: 1.	How many Harvard trainer planes were produced at the Canadian Car plant at Fort William Ontario, since July 1, 1951 to date?
2.	How many of these planes were (a) assembled
from war surplus or shelf components:	(b)
assembled from new production?


Mr. Dickey:: 1.	219 Harvard aircraft produced by Canadian Car and Foundry to date. Most of the work on the first 40 was done at Canadian Car's St. Laurent plant but the balance of the aircraft were produced entirely at Fort William.
2.	(a) Surplus or shelf components were used in diminishing quantities after the first 20 aircraft were produced. The following percentages indicate the approximate amount of surplus used:
1 to 20, 60 per cent; 20 to 30, 60 per cent reducing to 30 per cent; 30 to 40, 30 per cent reducing to 15 per cent; 40 to 60, 15 per cent reducing to 5 per cent; after 60, practically nil.
(b) 159 aircraft produced from new production.



CIVIL DEFENCE


Mr. Coyle:: What federal government assistance has been given to municipalities in Canada towards the cost of building up civil defence against air raids, in the form of (a) cash contributions; (b) equipment?


Mr. McCusker:: The federal government has, since the re-activation of the civil defence organization in 1948, supplied a great deal of assistance to provincial and municipal civil defence organizations in the form of (a) training programs for key civil defence personnel; (b) consultation and help in organizing for civil defence on a local level; and (c) equipment. At the beginning of the current fiscal year, the federal government extended this aid to include financial assistance to support approved provincial and local civil defence projects on a matching basis with the provinces. For this purpose the sum of $1,400,000 is included in the estimates for the current fiscal year. In accordance with long established practice, the federal government does not, of course, deal directly with the municipalities, but with the provinces, and one of the requirements of the grant-in-aid program is that any municipal project receiving federal financial aid must be matched by provincial funds in an amount equal to the federal contribution. Any municipal civil defence project recommended by the province and approved by the federal authorities can qualify for financial aid, either in part or wholly, on the basis of equal contributions from provincial and federal governments. Up to the present time, every project submitted by a provincial civil defence authority under the grant-in-aid program has received
Questions
federal approval, with the exception of one project which is currently under consideration.
(a)	1,776 provincial and municipal civil defence workers-the great majority of whom are municipal-have to date been trained entirely at federal expense in federally sponsored and financed training courses.
(b)	The services of federal consultants in the various branches of civil defence activity are at all times available to assist municipal civil defence authorities, although it is ordinarily expected that requests for such help be channelled through the appropriate civil defence authorities.
(c)	Civil defence equipment and supplies distributed by the federal civil defence authorities to the provinces for use by provincial and municipal civil defence organizations total to date approximately $999,000 in value. This includes a wide variety of training equipment and some operational equipment. The great bulk of it is intended for use in municipal civil defence programs. Included in the above-mentioned total are such items as:
(1) air raid sirens for installation in municipal target areas, $112,000; (2) respirators, $444,000; (3) steel helmets, $133,000;	(4)
coveralls, $65,000; (5) triangular bandages, $42,000.
(d)	Under the grant-in-aid program, three provinces-Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia-have to date submitted 15 projects totalling in amount $318,274. These totals include both provincial and municipal civil defence projects. Federal approval has been given to all but one of these projects, and the total federal financial commitment in respect of these projects amounts to $159,137. The project which has not yet been approved is currently under consideration.
Federal financial assistance is available for the support of provincial and municipal civil defence undertakings in the other provinces on the same basis as in the three above-mentioned: and it is anticipated that other provinces will shortly be taking advantage of this arrangement.



RETIRED CIVIL SERVANTS AND WIDOWS


Mr. Knowles:: 1.	How many retired civil servants are receiving pensions of amounts within each of the following brackets; (a) less than $20 per month; (b) $20 to $29.99 per month; (c) $30 to $39.99 per month; (d) $40 to $49.99 per month; (e) $50 to $59.99 per month; (f) $60 to $69.99 per month; (g) $70 to $79.99 per month; (h) $80 to $89.99 per month; (i) $90 to $99.99 per month; (j) $100 per month or over?
2.	How many widows of retired civil servants are receiving pensions of amounts within each of the brackets indicated in the above question?

Questions
3.	What is the number of retired federal civil servants and also the number of widows of retired federal civil servants presently residing in each province?


Mr. Garson (for Mr. Abbott):: 1.	Retired civil servants, (a) 312; (b) 482; (c) 674; (d) 763; (e) 750; (f) 827; (g) 828; (h) 896; (i) 807; (j) 4,233; total, 10,572.
2.	Widows, (a) 942; (b) 970; (c) 854; (d) 742;
(e)	575; (f) 328; (g) 233; (h) 158; (i) 109; (j) 212; total, 5,123.
3. Province	Retired Civil Servants	WidowsNewfoundland ...	... 40	19Nova Scotia 	... 406	196Prince Edward Island 65	30New Brunswick .	... 246	155Quebec 	... 1,700	995Ontario 	. .. 4,802	2,461Manitoba 	... 472	220Saskatchewan 	... 243	102Alberta 	... 490	174British Columbia .	... 1,822	570Elsewhere 	... 286	20110,572	5,123NATO MUTUAL AID	SHIPMENTS OF	MILITARYEQUIPMENT, ETC.


Mr. Tuslin:: 1.	What is the total value, to date, of military stores, ammunition or armaments shipped to any country from Canada, under the mutual aid provision of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization?
2.	What amount to each country, and on what dates were shipments made?


Mr. Dickey:: 1.	$264,000,000 (Cdn. dollars).
2.	(In millions)	Deliveries
(Cdn. dollars) during the period
Netherlands	67-9	Dec. 1950 to Aug.	1952Belgium	70-6	Mar. 1951 to Sept.	1952Italy	85-1	June 1951 to Oct.	1952France	23-8	Feb. 1952 to Oct.	1952Portugal	8-4	Dec. 1951 to Oct.	1952Luxembourg	1-1	Mar. 1951 to Oct.	1952Denmark	3-6	Jan. 1952 to Sept.	1952Norway	2-3	Jan. 1952 to July	1952United	Kingdom	1-2	July 1952 to Oct.	1952Total	264-0	GLASLYN,	SASK.,	POLICE BARRACKS-



CONSTRUCTION COSTS- WILLIAM DIDULA

Mr. Knight:: 1. What was the complete cost of construction of the police barracks in Glaslyn, Saskatchewan, in 1951-1952?
[Mr. Knowles.)
2.	Was one, Wm. Didula appointed as overseer on this work?
3.	If so, how long was he employed in that capacity?
4.	What was the total amount of remuneration received by him in connection with this work?


Mr. Garson:: 1.	$34,780.65.
2.	Yes. Appointed clerk of works grade 2.
3.	From November 16, 1951, to May 15, 1952.
4.	$1,395.08.



SEIZURES OF AMERICAN CIGARETTES

Mr. Coyle:: 1.	How many seizures of American cigarettes have been made from January 1, 1951, to date?
2.	How many cigarettes have been seized?
3.	How many people have been fined for this offence?
4.	What is the total amount collected in fines?


Mr. McCann:: 1.	5,803.
2.	30,387,648.
3.	1,035.
4.	Fines imposed amounted to $126,845.



CANNED PORK-PURCHASES, SALES, ETC.

Mr. Catherwood:: 1.	How many pounds of canned pork products are held by the government at the present time?
2.	How many pounds have been sold since the government began purchasing the pork?
3.	How many pounds of canned pork have been sold in (a) the United States; (b) Canada; (c) elsewhere?
4.	What was the total cost of the canned pork purchased by the government?
5.	What was the total selling price of the canned pork sold by the government?
6.	Has the government lost money on the deal? If so, how much?


Mr. McCubbin:: 1.	As at October 31, 1952, 49,011,858 pounds.
2.	As at October 31, 1952, 16,493,472 pounds.
3.	Final destination of all canned pork sold is not known because the original purchaser may export the product without the knowledge of the board. It is estimated that approximately 16,000,000 pounds have been distributed in the domestic market and the balance exported to the United States and other countries.
4.	As at October 31, 1952, $38,990,793.72.
5.	Net return as at October 31, 1952, $5,681,684.36.
6.	Net loss as at October 31, 1952, approximately $3,500,000.



PORT STANLEY HARBOUR-FEDERAL IMPROVEMENTS

Mr. Coyle:: 1.	Has the government made any Improvements in Port Stanley harbour, during the past year?
2.	If so, what is the nature of the improvements?
3.	If not, has the government any plans for improvements to the harbour?


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: 1.	Yes, maintenance repairs.
2.	Placing stone protection to the side of the public wharf and a new fender boom along the west pier.
3.	In addition to the above it is proposed to construct a rubble mound extension to the west breakwater.



PORT BRUCE HARBOUR-FEDERAL IMPROVEMENTS

Mr. Coyle:: 1.	Has the government made any improvements in Port Bruce harbour, during the past year?
2.	If so, what is the nature of the improvements?
3.	If not, has the government any plans for improvements to the harbour?


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: 1.	No.
2.	Answered by No. 1.
3.	Plans and specifications for harbour improvements have been approved, and tenders will be called before the end of the fiscal year.



IMPORTS AND EXPORTS OF PHOSPHATES

Mr. Laing:: 1.	What was the tonnage and value in the past year of Canadian imports of raw rock phosphate from the United States?
2.	In the same year, what was the tonnage and value of Canada's export to United States of superphosphates and ammonium phosphates?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1.	Canadian imports of phosphate rock from the United States during the calendar year 1951: 9,746,237 cwt., value $3,028,071.
2.	Canadian exports of phosphate fertilizers to the United States, calendar year 1951: 2,372,425 cwt., value $7,432,100.



IMPORTS OF PETROLEUM AND PETROLEUM PRODUCTS

Mr. Laing:: In the last year for which statistics are available what was the value of the imports of petroleum and petroleum products from (a) the United States; (b) all other countries?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: Canadian imports of petroleum products,
calendar year 1951:
United States	 $158,026,356
Other countries	 195,867,307
Total $353,893,663
Questions
BAUXITE AND ALUMINA IMPORTS Mr. Laing:
What was the tonnage and value in the past year of Canadian imports of bauxite and alumina for the manufacture of aluminum, and what were the sources of these imports?


George James McIlraith: Canadian imports year 1951:
Country Bauxite-
Gold Coast	
British Guiana ..
Trinidad	
Surinam	
United States ...
Totals
Alumina-
United Kingdom. United States___
Totals
by countries, calendar
Cwt.	Value
228,435	$ 63,738
35,650,136	9,419,892
6,292,795	1,599,632
3,071,569	1,140,516
2,792,244	3,149,235
48,035,179	$15,373,013
492	6,269
4,992	92,752
5,484 $	99,021



DRILL AND RIG EQUIPMENT IMPORTS

Mr. Laing:: 1.	What was the value in the past year of Canadian imports of drill and rig equipment used by the oil industry?
2.	What were the sources of import?


George James McIlraith: 1 and 2. Canadian imports by countries of well drilling machinery, calendar year 1951: United Kingdom, value $198,582; Australia, value $72,150; United States, value $37,104,690; total $37,375,422.



R.M.S. &quot;AORANGl&quot;  SUBSIDY    FREIGHT AND PASSENGERS CARRIED

Mr. Laing:: 1.	To date, how much subsidy has been paid by Canada to the Union Steamship Company of New Zealand on the current agreement for the operation of R.M.S. Aorangi?
2.	In the period of the present agreement, (a) what tonnage of freight; (b) how many passengers, has this vessel carried (i) westbound; (ii) east-bound?


Mr. Benidickson:: 1.	To date, since current agreement came into force on April 1, 1952, $83,333.32 has been paid to the Canadian-Australasian Line Limited with whom the agreement was made.
2.	For the period of the present agreement commencing on April 1, 1952 to September 30, 1952, date of last traffic returns:
(a)	(i) 3,969 tons; (a) (ii) 3,690 tons; (b) (i) 1,403 passengers; (b) (ii) 1,122 passengers.

Questions
English and citizenship classes-	Mr. Mcllrailh:



FEDERAL COSTS

Charles Delmar Coyle: What was the percentage of total costs, for English and citizenship classes for new Canadians in Canada, paid by the federal government in 1951?


Mr. Harris:: This information is not available, as provincial governments have jurisdiction over education.



ELECTRICAL POWER


Mr. Laing:: 1.	In the past year, what was the value of the export of electrical power to the United States?
2.	Was there any import of electrical power from the United States of America during the same period? If so, what was the value of same?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1.	Canadian exports to United States, calendar year 1951, $7,938,218.
2.	Canadian imports from United States, calendar year 1951, $155,815.



BRANDON INDIAN SCHOOL


Mr. Dinsdale:: When will work commence on the new barn for the Brandon Indian school, as provided for in the estimates at the last session of parliament?


Joseph Henry Harris: Before the end of the present fiscal year.



SHIPMENTS OF CUBAN REFINED SUGAR

Mr. Blackmore:: 1.	How much Cuban refined sugar has been
unloaded in Canadian ports since September 1, 1952?	.
2.	How much Cuban refined sugar is at present in Canadian ports in process of being unloaded, or waiting to be unloaded?
3.	Is any Cuban refined sugar reported to be in process of being loaded in Cuba in preparation for shipment to Canadian ports before April 1, 1953?
4.	H so, how much?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1.	Information not available.
Imports of refined sugar from Cuba entered for consumption: September, 1952, 24,850 cwt.; October, 1952, 90,000 cwt. (preliminary).
2.	Information not available.
3.	Information not available.
4.	Answered by No. 3.



CAR ACCIDENTS


Mr. Diefenbaker:: 1.	How many fatalities resulting from car accident or collisions have taken place, province by province, since the 1st of January, 1952?
2.	How many persons, by provinces, since said date, have been convicted of (a) motor manslaughter: (b) driving when intoxicated; (c) driving when impaired; (d) driving recklessly or dangerously?
[Mr. Benidickson.)
1.	Fatalities resulting from motor vehicle accidents:
January 1 to June 30 1952
Newfoundland	 1	(1)
Prince Edward Island	 3
Nova Scotia	 45
New Brunswick	 43
Quebec	 (2)
Ontario	 377
Manitoba	 33
Saskatchewan	 36
Alberta	 54
British Columbia	 62
Yukon and Northwest
Territories	 1
Total	 655
(1)	City of St. John's only. Reports for rest of province not available.
(2)	Not yet available.
2.	The number of prosecutions, by provinces, of persons charged with indictable offences is reported on the basis of "date of trial". Therefore, information for 1952 is not yet available.



SOUTH SASKATCHEWAN RIVER PROJECT


Mr. Diefenbaker:: How much money has been expended on the Saskatchewan river power and irrigation scheme, month by month, since the 1st of June, 1952?


Mr. McCubbin:: June $39,563.48; July $51,152.21; August $33,273.30; September $39,355.86; October $37,151.02.



FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE COMPENSATION   DECLARATION AS INCOME

John George Diefenbaker: Has consideration been given by the government to relieving the farmers in Saskatchewan from having to include, as current income, any payment received from the Department of Agriculture ini connection with cattle destroyed in the eradication of foot-and-mouth disease?


Mr. McCann:: The government has not given consideration to relieving farmers from including as income payments received from the Department of Agriculture in connection with the eradication of the foot-and-mouth disease in cattle where such payments properly constitute taxable receipts under the provisions of the Income Tax Act.



CHINESE ENTERING CANADA


Mr. Pearkes:: 1.	Are Chinese immigrants charged a head tax upon entering Canada? If so, how much?

2.	Are Canadian-born Chinese, and Chinese who have become Canadian citizens, charged a head tax on returning to Canada after visiting China?
3.	Is a woman, born in China, who marries a Canadian citizen of Chinese origin, entitled to enter Canada without paying head tax?


Mr. Harris:: 1.	No.
2.	No.
3.	A woman of Chinese origin, married to a Canadian citizen, is admissible subject to the provisions of the immigration act and
[DOT] regulations. See also answer to No. 1.



H.M.C.S. &quot;ST. STEPHEN''

Mr. Pearkes:: 1.	Was H.M.C.S. St. Stephen transferred to the Department of Transport? If so, when?
2.	Has H.M.C.S. St. Stephen been converted to a weather ship?
3.	If not, when is it expected that she will be ready to assume duties as a weather ship in the Pacific ocean?
4.	When did H.M.C.S. St. Stephen reach Esquimau, British Columbia?
5.	What is the strength of her present crew?
6.	When is it expected that the full crew will be taken on?
7.	Does the present crew of H.M.C.S. St. Stephen receive superannuation and sick benefits of a similar nature to those granted the crews of other weather ships?


Mr. Benidickson:: 1.	The H.M.C.S. St. Stephen is on loan to the Department of Transport since August 16, 1950.
2.	H.M.C.S. St. Stephen operated on the Atlantic as a weather ship.
3.	This vessel is only retained on loan during the pleasure of the navy. The ship has a considerable amount of weather observation equipment fitted on board and it was felt desirable to retain her in her present condition rather than convert her for use as a naval ship in order that the department would have another ship to fall back on in the event of accident to one of the operating vessels.
4.	The St. Stephen reached Esquimalt on the morning of August 15, 1950.
5.	No crew has ever been established for this vessel, but 9 persons are engaged in watching services.
6.	The department does not plan to operate this vessel.
7.	The people employed on the St. Stephen at the present time are temporary prevailing rate employees and come under the regulations for such labour. They do not receive superannuation nor sick mariners' benefits.



SAGUENAY RIVER-BUOYS

Mr. Gagnon:: 1. Who is in charge of placing and removing of buoys in the Saguenay river?
Questions
2. What amount is paid for this work, and what is the term of the contract?


Mr. Benidickson:: 1.	Mr. G. H. Lavoie.
2.	$2,100 per annum; 3 years from July 2, 1950.



BEEF AND OTHER MEAT PRODUCTS-PURCHASES, SALES, ETC.

Mr. Wright:: 1.	How much (a) beef; (b) other meat products, has the Canadian government purchased from New Zealand during 1952?
2.	What amounts of these beef or other meat products have been delivered to date?
3.	What amounts are now in storage in the United States of America?
4.	What amounts have been disposed of in the United States market?


Mr. McCubbin:: 1.	The government of Canada has not purchased beef or other meat products from New Zealand. Under the arrangements announced by the Minister of Agriculture in the House of Commons on May 9 surplus beef in Canada has been purchased by the agricultural prices support board and shipped to the United Kingdom ministry of food. The United Kingdom ministry of food have diverted an equivalent amount of beef purchased in New Zealand for sale in the United States in exchange for the beef shipped to the United Kingdom.
2.	As at November 20, 59,537,760 pounds.
3.	As at November 20, 53,621,003 pounds.
4.	As at November 20, 5,916,757 pounds.



ELEMENTAL SULPHUR


Mr. Laing:: 1.	What was the tonnage and value of Canadian imports from the United States of elemental sulphur, in each of the years 1945 to 1951?
2.	What is the capacity in tons of Canadian construction already completed or announced for the production of elemental sulphur?


Mr. Mcllrailh:: 1. Imports of sulphur from the United States:
	Tons	Value
1945	248,846	4,063,2151946	273,493	4,269,8641947	361,424	5,466,2011948	354,622	5,528,7401949	280,557	5,213,9211950	390,333	7,730,1261951	393,172	8,696,233
2. The plants now in operation in Alberta have a combined annual capacity of 20,000 tons. A recent announcement indicates that a plant to be built at Welland, Ontario, will recover about 9,000 tons per year initially, with possible expansion to 20,000 tons.

Questions



INDUSTRIAL AND OFFICE WORKERS- WEEKLY WORK PERIODS

Mr. Knowles:: 1.	Has the government any statistics, later than those given in Hansard of December 3, 1951, as to the number of (a) industrial workers; (b) office workers, now on (i) a five-day week; (ii) a five and a half-day week; (iii) a six-day week?
2.	If so, what are the numbers of each of the above groups of workers who are working for each of the periods indicated above?
3.	Do the figures given in answer to question 2 include bank employees and any others recently placed on the five-day week?


Mr. Cole (Verdun-La Salle):: 1.	Yes.
2.
Distribution of plant and office employees working a five-day and more than five-day week based on 1951
Department of Labour Survey
Industries	Plant Workers	Office Workers	Total Covered by Dept, of Labour Survey	Total Paid Workers in These Industries (Labour Force Survey, November 1951)5-day Week	Week of more than 5 days	5-day Week	Week of more than 5 days	10,000	77,000	87,000	93,000Mining	33,000	48,000	3,000	5,000	89,000	(a) 96,000Manufacturing	537,000	233,000	119,000	38,000	927,000	1,256,000Transportation, storage	and communication. (6)	44,000	52,000	12,000	8,000	116,000	175,000Public utilities	21,000	8,000	11,000	2,000	42,000	58,000Trade	47,000	95,000	28,000	31,000	201,000	595,000Services	17,000	67,000	5,000	6,000	95,000	814,000Total	709,000	580,000	178,000	90,000	1,557,000	3,087,000(a)	Employment and payroll statistics.(b)	Does NOT include steam railways.
Note: The Department of Labour survey is based on returns made by app oximately 16,000 establishments having 15 or more employees each.
The extent to which the five-day week applies to workers in the above industries not covered by this survey is not known.
Of the industries not included in the above table, the larger are: agriculture, finance and insurance, and steam railway transportation. They comprise 2,243,000 paid workers. The labour force in November, 1951, included a total of 3,800,000 paid workers and a grand total of 5,110,000 "paid" and "own account" workers.
The number of paid workers in agriculture varies between seasons and regions but few are on a five-day week. In November, 1951, there were 90,000 paid workers in a total of
875,000	in the industry.
In building construction, the five-day week is common among organized workers. Of 107 collective agreements covering the building trades examined recently in the larger cities, about 80 per cent provided for a five-day week.
[Mr. Mcllraith.1
No information is available concerning other types of construction. There are 299,000 paid workers in the industry and 367,000 altogether.
In finance and insurance, there were in November, 1951, 147,000 paid workers and
158,000	altogether.
Of the 190,000 employees of the steam railways, 143,000 non-operating employees are on the five-day week.
3.	No.



HAITI RAW SUGAR IMPORTS


Mr. Murphy:: What was the total amount rebated by the Canadian government to Canadian refiners on imports of Haiti raw sugar brought Into Canada under the Haiti-Canada agreement, and the poundage involved in such rebates, in (a) 1951; (b) 1952?


James Joseph McCann: (a)	1951, nil; (b) 1952, nil.

Questions
MANITOBA FARMERS UNION RESOLUTIONS	AWARDS OF BATTLE HONOURS


Mr. Dinsdale:: 1.	Did the Minister of Agriculture receive a copy of the resolutions submitted from the annual meeting of the Manitoba farmers union during December, 1951?
2.	If so, did the minister acknowledge receipt of these resolutions?
3.	What action, if any, has been taken in reference to the resolution submitted?


Mr. McCubbin:: 1.	There is no record of any resolutions passed by the annual meeting of the Manitoba farmers union during December, 1951, being received in the office of the Minister of Agriculture.
2 and 3. See answer to question No. 1.



MING SUNG INDUSTRIAL COMPANY

Mr. Blair:: 1.	Is the Ming Sung Industrial Company in default on any Canadian government-backed loans to any Canadian bank, and if so, for what amounts and from what date?
2.	If in default, how much has the Canadian government had to pay to date?
3.	What is the total amount of the loan, if any, guaranteed by the Canadian government?


Mr. Garson:: 1.	Yes, on amounts of principal and interest falling due on and after June 30, 1951, totalling $2,962,977.30.
2.	$2,962,977.30.
3.	The total outstanding principal amount of the loan guaranteed by the Canadian government is $10,200,000.



CUBAN RAW SUGAR IMPORTS


Joseph Warner Murphy: What was the total amount rebated by the Canadian government to Canadian refiners on imports of Cuban raw sugar brought into Canada under the Canada-Cuba agreement, and the poundage involved in such rebates, in (a) 1951; (b) 1952?


James Joseph McCann: (a) 1951: Total amount, nil; poundage, nil.
(b)	1952: Total amount, $53,265.83; poundage, 28,445,776.



DOMINICAN REPUBLIC RAW SUGAR IMPORTS


Joseph Warner Murphy: What was the total amount rebated by the Canadian government to Canadian refiners on imports of Dominican Republic raw sugar brought into Canada under the Dominican Republic-Canada agreement, and the poundage involved in such rebates, in (a) 1951; (b) 1952?


James Joseph McCann: (a) 1951, nil; (b) 1952, nil.
68108-33J


Mr. Pearkes:: 1.	What engagements during world war II are to be designated as battle honours?
2.	When will the award of battle honours be made to regiments in the Canadian army?
3.	How many honours will each regiment be allowed?


Mr. Dickey:: 1, 2 and 3.
The problem of which engagements during world war II are to be designated as battle honours is now being studied by the British Commonwealth "Battles Nomenclature Committee". The director of the army historical section is the Canadian representative. A final decision is not expected before late 1953 or early 1954.



NATIONAL PHYSICAL FITNESS ACT


Mr. Thatcher:: 1.	How many employees are there across Canada hired under the National Physical Fitness Act?
2.	What are the duties of each?
3.	What specific work is each of these employees presently engaged at?


Mr. McCusker:: 1. The 1952-53 estimates (see page 346) provide for eleven employees whose duties relate to the administration of the National Physical Fitness Act. Of these eleven positions, two are actually vacant now.
The seven provinces with which agreements are in effect under the National Physical Fitness Act employ their own staff in carrying out the physical fitness program within their respective provinces.
2 and 3. The duties of the eleven employees referred to above are as follows:
1 National director, vacant 1 Assistant director, (administrative officer grade 3)
1 Technical officer grade 3 1 Reference assistant, vacant 1 Principal clerk 1 Stenographer grade 3 1 Stenographer grade 2B 1 Typist grade 2B 1 Typist grade 2A 1 Typist grade 1 1 Clerk grade 2B
The assistant director is responsible for the administration of the division of physical fitness, acts as consultant in physical education and recreation and, in addition, serves as executive secretary of the national council on physical fitness. The technical officer Grade 3 is a specialist in the field of recreational drama who serves in a consultant capacity to the provinces in this specialized



S16 HOUSE OF COMMONS

[Stage Direction]
Questions
recreational field. The other staff members of the division carry the usual office clerical and stenographic duties.


Mr. Knowles:: With reference to the dominion bureau of statistics publication of 1952 entitled "National Accounts Income and Expenditure 1926-1950", what is the break-down of the twelve categories of expenditure listed under group VII on page 123, and referred to in items 23, 24, 25 and 26 in table 36 on pages 74 and 75 of the said publication?


George James McIlraith: The estimates of individual items in group VII, personal and medical care and death expenses, are not available at the fine level of detail mentioned at page 123 of national accounts, income and expenditure, 1926-1950. The reason for this is that the various groupings are projected from information gathered during the 1931 and 1941 census, and certain other basic information. The 1951 population census and the 1951 census of distribution will provide further information which will be incorporated when detailed tabulations are completed. In the meantime, the level of detail .at which reliable estimates can be provided within the category "personal and medical [DOT] care and death expenses" is that which is ^shown at page 74 of the above publication.



TORBAY-GANDER FLIGHT OF R.C.A.F. AIRCRAFT- MR. BROUN-WOGAN

Mr. Higgins:: 1.	Has the bill for the amount of $233.85, sent to the provincial treasurer of the province of Newfoundland on January 9, 1952, to cover the cost of a flight of a Royal Canadian Air Force Canso aircraft dispatched from Torbay airport, Newfoundland, to Gander airport on the night of November 22, 1951, and which carried a German national employed by the Department of Economic Development of Newfoundland named Broun-Wogan, been paid?
2.	If so, was the bill paid by the Newfoundland government?
3 If not, has any effort been made to obtain payment since the bill was submitted on January 9, 1952?


Mr. Dickey:: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	Not applicable.



CUSTOMS BUILDINGS, ST. LEONARD AND CLAIR, N.B.

Mr. Dube:: When will the work be started on the new customs buildings at St. Leonard, New Brunswick and Clair, New Brunswick, referred to in the estimates submitted at the last session of parliament?
IMr. McCusker.]


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: It is expected that construction will commence on the new customs buildings at St. Leonard and Clair, N.B., during the summer of 1953.



RAILWAY STATION, JACQUET RIVER, N.B.

Mr. Dube:: 1.	To what company was the contract awarded for the railway station at Jacquet River, New Brunswick?
2.	What is the area of the station?
3.	What will be the total cost of the station?
4.	Were tenders called?
5.	How many submitted tenders, and what are the amounts thereof?


Mr. Benidickson:: The Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	Mr. Louis Ouellon, Campbellton, N.B.
2.	79 feet by 26 feet 8 inches.
3.	It is not the policy of the company to make public the amounts tendered for work undertaken as the result of calling for tenders.
4.	Yes. By public announcement in papers at Moncton, Saint John and Campbellton, N.B.
5.	(a) Two; (b) See answer to No. 3.



FIVE-DAY WEEK  WINNIPEG

Mr. Knowles:: 1.	What is the source and date of information received by the treasury board with respect to the extent of the five-day week among private employers and employees in Winnipeg?
2.	To what extent is the five-day week in effect in Winnipeg according to such information?
3.	Is later information being sought?
4.	To what extent does the treasury board contend the five-day week must be in effect among private employers and employees in any city before the year-round five-day week can be extended to the federal civil service in that city?
5.	Is the situation in Winnipeg being reconsidered?
6.	Is the situation in other cities being reconsidered? If so, what cities?


Mr. Garson (for Mr. Abboll):: 1.	(a) "The normal work week in 29 Canadian cities, October, 1951".	(Source-The
Labour Gazette, September, 1952.)
(b)	Information from the local offices of the unemployment insurance commission through the civil service commission, September, 1952.
2.	(a) As per source indicated in 1 (a) 43-1 per cent of the total office employees reported and 64 [DOT] 5 per cent of the total plant employees reported were working a five-day week.
(b) As per source indicated in 1 (b) 50-8 per cent of office employees.
(This information has been supplemented and supported by information acquired in Winnipeg by treasury board staff.)
3.	Yes. (By the civil service commission).

4.	It is not expected that a rigid standard would be applied. Generally speaking, if it is clear that the preponderant local practice among business and industrial firms is to work a five-day week, then consideration would be given to allowing departments of government to put the five-day week into effect if no additional staff or funds were required and no reduction were made in service to the public. However, the decision with respect to any locality might also be influenced by other factors, such as difficulties encountered by the civil service commission in recruiting in that area.
5.	Yes. (By the civil service commission).
6.	Yes. The civil service commission in response to various requests and proposals has the following locations under consideration:
Ontario, Peterborough; Oshawa; Niagara Falls; St. Catharines-Welland; Hamilton; Brantford; Kitchener-Waterloo; Galt-Preston; London; Windsor; Sarnia; Sudbury; Sault Ste. Marie; Fort William-Port Arthur.
Saskatchewan, Regina.
Alberta, Edmonton.
Quebec, Quebec city.
Nova Scotia, Halifax; Sydney.
New Brunswick, Saint John; Moncton.
British Columbia, Vancouver; Victoria.
The complete answer to this question has been supplied by the civil service commission because the civil service commission receives requests for application of the five-day week from departments and submits them, after consideration, to the treasury board. The treasury board has before it for consideration when it has received a reply from the national joint council to the letter from the Minister of Finance, tabled in the House of Commons on November 28, 1952, the following cases only: Belleville; Brantford; Fort William-Port Arthur; Hamilton; Kitchener; London; Port Colborne; St. Catharines; Welland; Windsor.



R. S. PITT-TRANSFER

Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: 1.	(a) How long was R. S. Pitt, former manager of the Fort Garry hotel in Winnipeg, in the service of the Canadian National Railway hotel system; (b) What had been his experience in hotel management before he was appointed to the Fort Garry hotel;
(c)	How long had he been at the Fort Garry hotel;
(d)	Had there been any complaint regarding his work there?
2.	(a) What was his salary as manager of the Fort Garry hotel; (b) Was there any reduction made in his salary when he was sent to the Prince Edward hotel in Brandon; (c) What was the salary of the former manager of the Prince Edward hotel?
3.	Was any complaint, verbal or written, regarding any incident at the Fort Garry hotel during the Prime Minister's visit on September 10 last, made
Questions
to the railway or hotel management or to the Department of Transport, or to any representative of any of the foregoing by or on behalf of the Prime Minister or of any one of those who were accompanying him at Winnipeg on September 10 last?


William Moore Benidickson: The Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	(a) Since May 22, 1928.
(b)	He was manager of the Nova Scotian at Halifax from December 8, 1931 to November 1, 1941. After returning from military service he was appointed manager of the Bessborough at Saskatoon on August 15, 1946.
(c)	Since July 12, 1951.
(d)	Yes.
2.	(a) The management of the Canadian National Railways has always taken the position that it would not be in the interest of the company or its personnel to make public information pertaining to the salary arrangements or remuneration paid to officers.
(b)	No.
(c)	See answer to No. 2 (a).
3.	No.
In so far as the Department of Transport is concerned:
3.	No.



ARMED FORCES


Mr. Thatcher:: How many public relations officers are at present members of, or attached to the (a) army; (b) navy; (c) air force?


John Horace Dickey: Canada (Commands and Headquarters)	Korea	Europe and United Kingdom	TotalsNavy	8 (including ships at sea)	1	0	9Army Air	9	3	4	16force	10	0	2	12 37



URANIUM


Mr. Hodgson:: 1.	Has the government of Canada or any department thereof been asked to permit the exportation to the United States of any uranium ore or concentrates?
2.	If so, by whom?
3.	Has uranium ore from the area in or around the county of Haliburton in Ontario been delivered to any department of the dominion government In Ottawa for research and assay?
4.	If so, by whom was such uranium ore delivered?

Questions
5.	What was the result of the researches made or assays taken, and was any report made to the party or parties making such ore deliveries?
6.	If not, for what reason?


Mr. Howe:: It is not in the public interest to answer this question as deliveries of uranium are top secret information of a type that cannot be given out.


Mr. Speaker:: Dropped.



CHARLOTTETOWN AIRPORT-EXTENSION OF RUNWAYS

Mr. McLure:: 1.	What is the length of the runways at Charlottetown airport?
2.	Has the Minister of Transport received any representations from (a) the city of Charlottetown; (b) the government of Prince Edward Island, asking that these runways be extended to accommodate larger airplanes?
3.	What action, if any, will be taken in reference to extending the accommodation at this airport?


Mr. Benidickson:: 1.	East-west (09-27), 2,993 feet long; Southeast-northwest (14-32), 2,496 feet long; North-south (18-36), 2,705 feet long.
2.	(a) Yes. (b) Yes.
3.	The inclusion of an item for the first stage development of a new runway 7,000 feet long is being considered for the departmental 1953-54 estimates.



WESTERN CANADIAN GREYHOUND LINES, LTD.   MAIL CONTRACT

Mr. Fulton:: 1.	How much is Canadian Greyhound (Western) Limited to receive for the carriage of mails to the main post offices from Ashcroft north on the Cariboo highway?
2.	What mails does this contract cover?
3.	When was the contract let?
4.	Were tenders called for?
5.	If so, from whom were bids received, and what was the amount of each bid?
6.	If tenders were not called, what was the reason?


Mr. Langlois (Gaspe):: 1.	$3,776 per annum.
2.	Letter mails only, to and from the post offices at Clinton, 70 Mile House, 100 Mile House, Lac La Hache, 150 Mile House, Williams Lake (at bus depot) and Quesnel (at bus depot).
3.	Authorized 8th July, 1952. Effective 15th September, 1952.
4.	No.
5.	See answer to No. 4.
6.	The offer of Western Canadian Greyhound Lines, Ltd., to perform the service at the rate of $3,776 per annum, equivalent to 2-77 cents per travelled mile, was most reasonable and possible only because of the scheduled bus operations of the company. Moreover, the company is known to be reli-

able and a dependable mail contractor. In the circumstances, it was considered that no purpose would be served by calling for public tenders and a contract was authorized in accordance with provisions of section 29 of the Post Office Act.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS, NFLD.- CONVERSION TO BROAD GAUGE

Mr. Higgins:: What is the estimated cost of converting the Canadian National Railways services in Newfoundland to broad gauge?


William Moore Benidickson: The Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
No detailed estimate has been made. A rough estimate, including the cost of new equipment, modification of facilities, etc., would be not less than $100,000,000.



IRON ORE AND STEEL


Mr. Higgins:: 1.	What is the total amount of iron ore mined in Canada in 1951, specifying the tonnage by provinces?
2.	What is the total amount of steel produced in Canada in 1951, specifying tonnage by provinces?
3.	What tonnage of iron ore was shipped from Canada to other countries in 1951, and what tonnage to each?
4.	How much steel was imported into Canada in 1951, and from what countries?


Mr. Mcllraith:: 1. Production (mine shipments) of iron ore 1951
Short tons
Newfoundland	 1,724,991
Ontario	 2,841,984
British Columbia	 113,535
4,680,510
2. Production of steel ingots and castings 1951
Short tons
Nova Scotia	 709,451
Quebec	 120,310
Ontario	 2,619,072
Manitoba	 78,666
Alberta	 1,037
British Columbia	 40,184
3,568,720
3. Exports of iron ore 1951
To	Short tons
United Kingdom	 775,832
Germany	 151,863
Japan	 113,364
United States	 2,184,708
3,225,767

4. Imports of primary iron and steel
From	Ingot tons*
United States	 1,410,000
United Kingdom	 378,000
Belgium	 233,000
France	 92,000
Germany	 72,000
Japan	   12,000
Sweden	 3,000
Other Countries	 4,000
2,204,000
* Tonnage of bars, rods, structural and other primary shapes converted to approximate equivalent tonnage in ingot form.



PORT AUX BASQUES AND NORTH SYDNEY


Mr. Higgins:: 1.	When will the new ferry between Port aux Basques and North Sydney be put into operation?
2.	When will the terminal facilities at North Sydney and Port aux Basques be completed?


William Moore Benidickson: 1 and 2. In the summer of 1954.



SHIRLEY AND SOUTHLAND CIGARETTES

Mr. Murray (Oxford):: 1.	Who was or is the importer of the Shirley and the Southland brands of American cigarettes?
2.	What is the source or origin of these brands of cigarettes?
3.	Are these cigarettes recognized as standard brands in the United States?
4.	Are these cigarettes being distributed or retailed in all provinces of Canada?
5.	What is the computed value of tobacco in a package of (a) Shirley cigarettes; (b) Southland cigarettes?


James Joseph McCann: 1 and 2. It is contrary to the practice of this department to furnish information which would disclose the private transactions of importers or exporters at customs.
3,	4 and 5. No information available.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES


Mr. Tustin:: 1.	How many persons employed by the government of Canada, as of February 1, 1952, were included under the Civil Service Superannuation Act and were making contributions to the superannuation account of the consolidated revenue fund?
2.	How many persons, as of February 1, 1952, were employed by the government of Canada and were making contributions to the retirement fund for temporary employees, but were not entitled to benefits under the Civil Service Superannuation Act?
Orders for Returns
3.	How many persons employed by the government of Canada, as of February 1, 1952, were not under any government employees retirement program?
4.	Of the above number of persons not included under any retirement program, how many have been steadily employed for periods of (a) one to three years; (b) three to five years; (c) five to ten years; (d) ten years or over?



PURCHASES OF BONELESS CANNED BEEF

Mr. Wrighl:: 1.	Has the government entered into any agreement or arrangement to purchase boneless canned beef from Canadian packers?
2.	If so, what are the terms and amounts covered by any such agreement?



FEDERAL CONTRACTS ON COST PLUS BASIS

Mr. Thatcher:: 1.	Since January 1, 1951, have any construction contracts (in excess of $100,000) been let by the Department of Defence Production or any other government department on a cost plus basis?
2.	If so, what was the nature of each such contract, and the amount of money involved?



LEGAL SERVICES TO GOVERNMENT


Mr. Gagnon:: 1.	What are the names of the lawyers and notaries residing in the county of Chicoutimi who have acted as agents for the different departments or boards of the federal government, during the years 1948, to date?
2.	What amount of fees has been paid to each of them, and in what case?



CHICOUTIMI RURAL MAIL SERVICE

Mr. Gagnon:: 1.	How many rural mail services are there in operation in the county of Chicoutimi, and how many contractors carry the mail from the point of arrival to the various post offices?
2.	What is the name of each one of them?
3.	What is his salary?
4.	What distance must he cover to perform his work?
5.	When does his contract expire?


J. G. Léopold Langlois: Return tabled.



GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS

Mr. Thatcher:: 1.	Since last June, has the government made any attempt to decrease the volume of pamphlets, periodicals, bulletins, or similar publications, published by the Queen's Printer?
2.	If so, what results have been attained?
3.	Since last June, what pamphlets, periodicals, bulletins, etc., if any, formerly put out by some government department have been discontinued?
4.	Has the government considered the recommendation of the Senate standing committee on finance made last June 23, that a fair charge should be made for necessary government publications, such as geological surveys, maps, scientific publications, etc?
5.	If so, have any specific steps been taken to implement the recommendation?

Orders for Returns



LEGAL SERVICES TO GOVERNMENT


Mr. Dube:: 1.	What are the names of the lawyers and notaries residing in the county of Restigouche-Madawaska who have acted as agent for the different departments or boards of the federal government from 1949 to 1952?
2.	What amount of fees has been paid to each of them and in connection with what services?



AGRICULTURAL AND GOLD MINING INDUSTRIES- SUBSIDIES AND OTHER AID

Mr. Fair:: 1.	During the past 13 years, what subsidies and other aid have been paid to farmers?
2.	On what particular products were the subsidies paid and what amount on each, each year?
3.	During the same period, what subsidies and other aids were paid to the gold mining industry?



GANDER, TORBAY, GOOSE BAY, HARMON AND DORVAL AIRPORTS

Mr. Higgins:: 1.	What is the cost of maintenance of (a) Gander airport; (b) Torbay airport; (c) Goose Bay airport?
2.	What is the cash return from each such airport?
3.	What is the average daily number of landings at (a) Gander; (b) Goose Bay; (c) Harmon; (d) Dorval, by commercial aircraft?
4.	What is the cost of operation of Dorval airport?
5.	What is the cash return from Dorval?



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between departments of the attorneys general of the provinces and/or law societies, and the Department of Justice, in which recommendations have been made for changes or alterations in the draft Criminal Code since the 1st of July, 1952.



ROBERT PITT


John George Diefenbaker: For a copy of all letters received by the Department of Transport in connection with the transfer of Robert Pitt from the Fort Garry hotel, Winnipeg, since the first day of September, 1952.


William Moore Benidickson: I now table this return.



GOVERNMENT INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING


Mr. Wright:: For a copy of all orders in council, regulations, and any directives, instructions or circulars issued by the government dealing with the floor price of beef, dated since January 1, 1952.



PURCHASES OF CUBAN RAW SUGAR

Joseph Warner Murphy: For a copy of the Canada-Cuba agreement, announced by the Minister of Trade and Commerce May 8, 1951, whereby Canada agreed to buy 75,000 tons of raw sugar in each of the years 1951-2-3.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I have been looking into this question and I may tell the hon. member that there are no formal agreements. There was an exchange of letters which we will be glad to table if that will be satisfactory.


Mr. Speaker:: Carried, according to the statement made by the Acting Prime Minister.



POST OFFICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Alcide Cote (Postmaster General):: Before the orders of the day are called I should like to answer a question which was asked yesterday by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon) regarding post office Christmas advertising in weekly newspapers. This question will be found on page 457 of Hansard of December 9 and reads:
Is the special pre-Christmas advertising of the Postmaster General's department going to all of the weekly newspapers across Canada? If not, what policy is followed in this respect?
If the Postmaster General answers this question perhaps he might include in his answer what policy is being followed with regard to year-round advertising of the same department.
My answer to the first part of his question, asking if the Post Office Department's pre-Christmas advertising is going to all the weekly newspapers across Canada, is no. The policy followed is that the department in its Christmas advertising uses daily newspapers in all centres which are served by letter carrier delivery, but if there is no daily newspaper then any available weekly newspapers published in the same centre are used. In addition, because of the need for maximum advertising impact in the Toronto and Montreal areas, some weeklies are used as well as dailies.
As to the last part of the question inquiring as to the department's year-round advertising policy, Your Honour will recall having ruled that it was not in order at the time. However, I am prepared to give the answer now if Your Honour will permit me to do so.


Mr. Speaker:: With the approval of the house.


Alcide Côté: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I presume that the hon. member refers to the department's year-round advertising policy with respect to weekly newspapers. The department's policy with respect to the weeklies in its year-round advertising is the same as that followed at Christmas with the exception that the weeklies of Montreal and Toronto, as previously referred to, are not used. All

Inquiries of the Ministry told, about 140 Canadian weekly newspapers Mr. Coldwell: I rise on a question of regularly publish the advertisements of the privilege. I did not ask what advice the law department.	officers of the crown gave. I asked what
advice the minister was giving on this matter, unsealed Christmas cards	which I think is an entirely different question.
On the orders of the day:


Mr. E. G. Hansell (Macleod):: I should like to direct a question to the Postmaster General. I am sorry that I did not give him notice, but he might take it as such. Considering that there are only two weeks until Christmas and that a large volume of Christmas card mail is going out, will the government give consideration to a reduction of the postage rate for unsealed Christmas cards until after Christmas?


Hon. Alcide  Cole@Postmaster General: doubt very much if that can be done but I will be pleased to inquire into the matter and answer accordingly.



LEGISLATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Roselown-Biggar):: should like to address a question to the Minister of Justice. Has the minister advised the government to refer certain acts of the Quebec legislature to the Supreme Court of Canada, and particularly an act authorizing the seizure of vehicles transporting certain products, with a view to obtaining an opinion as to their constitutionality having regard to implications, among other matters, concerning interprovincial trade? If not, will he do so?


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: This question, of which I must thank my hon. friend for having given me notice, raises a question as to the advice which the law officers of the crown may have given to the government. I think it is a settled rule of the house that advice of that sort has always been treated as confidential. May, fourteenth edition, page 337, says:
A question cannot be asked "seeking . . . advice given to the crown by law officers".
Bourinot, page 250, says:
As a rule the opinions of the law officers of the crown are held to be "private communications" when given for the guidance of ministers and may be properly refused by the government.
May, page 256, says:
The opinions of the law officers of the crown given for the guidance of ministers in any question of diplomacy or stated policy being included in the class of confidential documents, have generally been withheld from parliament.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: No, with great deference, Mr. Speaker. If my hon. friend will examine the wording of his question he will see that it reads as follows:
Has the Minister of Justice advised the government to refer certain acts of the Quebec legislature to the Supreme Court of Canada . . .
That would be a piece of legal advice given which would have to be based upon an opinion to the effect that the Quebec legislation was properly referable in that a question arose as to its constitutionality.



CIVIL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to direct a question to th Minister of Justice. May I say, Mr. Speaker, that I have sent to the minister the resolution on which my question is based. It was passed the night before last by the federal civil servants of Winnipeg, petitioning the government to include Winnipeg's federal civil servants in the five-day week. Will this petition be considered? Will the minister accept the invitation suggested in the resolution to attend a mass meeting of federal civil servants in Winnipeg to discuss this matter?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: I know my hon. friend has not had an opportunity to examine the answer to question 71 on today's order paper which I tabled this afternoon. Item 5 of that question is in the following terms: "Is the situation in Winnipeg being reconsidered?" The answer to item 5 in the return to question 71 is: "Yes, by the civil service commission". I think that answers the first part of my hon. friend's question. As to the second part having to do with the invitation, if my hon. friend will examine the resolution he will see that it indicates that a mass meeting will be called in the event of the matter not being reconsidered and something being done. As I certainly have not received any such invitation, the question is purely hypothetical and I will be glad to answer it when it becomes an actual one.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, December 9, consideration of the motion of Mr. J. L.
522	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Drew Deslieres for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Drew, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Coldwell.
Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of ihe Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, in the short time I had been speaking before the house rose last night I had been discussing the subject of television which had been introduced the day before by the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) who is the minister responsible for that subject. I had expressed the hope that the minister would see fit to indicate to the house something of the nature of a program about which he had been questioned earlier and with regard to which he seemed to feel so little concern. Since the minister has not seen fit to place this subject before the house, I believe it is appropriate to indicate the nature of programs that are going over Canadian television stations and that are being permitted with the knowledge of the government at a time that the government is accepting full responsibility for the policy of expansion of television in this country.
May I repeat that the government has removed any uncertainty as to where the responsibility lies. The day before yesterday the Minister of National Revenue stated that after due consideration the government has decided as a matter of policy the course that is to be followed with respect to the extension of television broadcasting in Canada. I have indicated that the program in question is one of a particularly offensive nature. I am not suggesting for one moment that this is the only offensive program; on the contrary, there have been others. But I return again to a discussion of this program today because it has been referred to in the press, and a very condensed statement as to the nature of the program was carried in the newspapers across Canada which are subscribers to the Canadian Press service. This program, which was broadcast by the C.B.C. on November 29 for a period of an hour and a half, I am informed, was under the title of "Hilda Morgan". In last night's Ottawa Citizen there is a Canadian Press dispatch which contains the following statement, and I quote from that dispatch:
The play "Hilda Morgan", carried by the C.B.C. November 29 dealt with the problem of a Toronto school teacher who becomes pregnant and whose fiance is killed before the scheduled wedding day. She decides to have the baby and face whatever gossip and loss of reputation her action may bring.
Since this has gone across the country in the form of a Canadian Press dispatch I
[Mr. Garson.l

do not feel the same reluctance in bringing this matter up in the house and I think it should be further considered. According to the information I have received, the television broadcast was based on the broad general plan outlined in the Canadian Press dispatch but it went much further. It described the predicament of this unfortunate girl in the play who was being seen by the people who were tuned in on this television broadcast. There was a discussion in which her mother urged her to follow a course that might be very seriously open to objection by many people in this country, and by many parents who would be greatly concerned about the nature of a broadcast of this kind.
This girl, according to the play, then decided to discuss the matter with the man who had become her fiance and the discussion centred around an illegal operation, the cost of the operation, where the medical services could be obtained, how much the services would cost and what the additional expense would be. Following the tragic death of her fiance, in this play, the girl then goes through very natural mental debates with herself as to the course she should follow and that course was as outlined in the Canadian Press dispatch.
Mr. Speaker, this is different from ordinary radio broadcasting. Every human being who can see is more attracted by a picture of any kind than by words. There is an old Chinese maxim that one picture is worth 10,000 words. In its impact upon the mind of a young person this is particularly true. Young children might pay very little attention to words of that nature coming over the radio unaccompanied by any picture. Given dramatic emphasis by a picture on a screen, something of this kind becomes intensely real to anyone who sees it-particularly to young and imaginative minds.
This was the program to which I drew the attention of the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) on the very day that the government had stated that the expansion of television is a government policy, not a C.B.C. policy, and that the government is deciding where and how it is to be done. On that same day the minister indicated his lack of concern by leaving the impression that the report he had received indicated no cause for concern.
Mr. Speaker, I know what my feeling would be if I came into a room in my own house and found my twelve-year-old daughter looking at a picture of that kind. I know perfectly well what the feeling of any parent would be who found his daughter or his son of that age, or an older age, looking at a picture of this kind.

[Inaudible interruption.]


George Alexander Drew: I will pay no attention to the interjection because I am sure that there are not more than one or two in this house who would treat a subject of this kind lightly. I can imagine that there would be parents who would like to get their hands on the person responsible for projecting a broadcast of that kind into their own homes. I should think that most people would agree that it is a despicable thing to introduce a program of that nature into homes where the parents may have no opportunity to exercise supervision over what their children may be seeing at a particular time. At least they can exercise some discipline over their children as to whether they do or do not go to moving picture houses. Also we should recall that the moving pictures in every province are subject to censorship by some provincial agency.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the lack of concern expressed by the minister on this occasion I can only hope, if the dominion government, which now accepts full responsibility for the policy of the C.B.C., is unwilling to take any action in regard to matters of this kind, that the provincial governments right across Canada will take action to prevent filth of that kind going out over the television stations of this country.


James Joseph McCann: You did not ask me my opinion.


George Alexander Drew: If we cannot look for some standards of decency being imposed by the government, which now accepts responsibility, then I hope those governments which are responsible for property, civil rights, and the general welfare of people in their community, will seek a way to control things of this kind.
Now I wish to refer to certain of the technical aspects of television broadcasting. When this subject was under consideration the day before yesterday I referred to the fact that arrangements were being made to pipe in programs from the United States through a Buffalo outlet. I was referring to the microwave relay communication with Buffalo, and the minister interjected "C.B.C. has no relay". Now, Mr. Speaker, the C.B.C. has made arrangements for a relay.


James Joseph McCann: You are dealing with two different things.


George Alexander Drew: I am not.


James Joseph McCann: Mr. Speaker, as a matter of privilege-the other day the hon. gentleman indicated in his remarks that the C.B.C. was building a relay system. They are not. It is being built by the Bell Telephone Company 68108-34J
The Address-Mr. Drew and the C.B.C. in all likelihood will make arrangements with them to use it on a rental basis.


An hon. Member:: That Is one way of
dodging it.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, the minister is dodging it right now. This microwave relay was built with the absolute understanding with the government, or rather with the C.B.C., which of course would have to obtain permission from the government which accepts full responsibility for policy, that the government would pay an annual rental which was estimated in the press to be $235,000 a year. I will go no farther than to say that I would be very surprised, in view of the information I have received, if the minister would challenge the statement that there is an arrangement for rental to be paid to the Bell Telephone Company for the use of that microwave relay from Buffalo for the purpose of piping into the Canadian system these very American programs which we were told we were going to be protected against. Why this evasion, I do not know. This was built with the knowledge that it was going to be used. There was never any doubt about it. The fact is, there is no secrecy about it. It has been publicly discussed in the press, and great concern has been expressed by those associated with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation because they have not been able to arrange to bring in those programs which the C.B.C. was going to protect us against. When I say "protect us against", that is what they said. The C.B.C., of course, is now very anxious to bring in these programs.
Obviously, some of the people who produce these programs on the other side are not prepared to let them come in at bargain rates. So far as I know, the only one that has reached the point of causing any uncertainty, because of a decision being before the C.B.C., is the question as to whether the program by Bishop Sheen, which has wide acceptance in the United States, is to be permitted to be televised here in Canada. I certainly believe that it would be a very strange thing if a religious program were to be denied when programs such as that to which I have referred are going to be freely permitted and allowed to be broadcast into the homes.
There is a microwave relay. As a matter of fact, anyone driving between here and Toronto has seen the towers; or at least some of the towers are the C.B.C. microwave relay.


James Joseph McCann: It is the Bell Telephone relay system.


George Alexander Drew: It is a microwave relay constructed by the Bell Telephone on the understanding that it is to be used by the C.B.C.,

The Address-Mr. Drew on the assurance that commercial producers were being sought by the C.B.C. who would broadcast over these microwave relay stations. In fact, a contract would not be obtained unless they did give that assurance.
Let me come now to the broad question of policy stated by the government. The government has taken the position that it is going to preempt the large and most populous centres where it would have been easy to have obtained television broadcasting without any expenditure to the receiving public or to the taxpayer. They have preempted that, and they are leaving it to the private investor to go out to the distant points and give that service. As a result of this iron curtain which the government-and I underline the government-has placed upon television, it is a very interesting thing to note that almost anyone in the United States will be able to watch the coronation proceedings on television within twenty-four hours, while only a handful of Canadians who are fortunate enough to be able to receive the United States broadcasts will be able to have the same facilities. This is the result of the restrictive policy adopted by this government for the sake of preserving the holy cow, the C.B.C., which the government has set up as some sort of supermonster that is to be subjected to no restraint of any kind and is to compete on no ordinary terms of competition.
This is the government that describes itself as the liberal free enterprise government.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


George Alexander Drew: It is not even prepared to stand by public ownership. It is only prepared to stand by public ownership in television where the very easy pickings lie; but as for the areas in which difficulty presents itself-and these are the areas the C.B.C. was set up to reach-it is going to be left to the private investor to give service to the public. This is indeed a complete reversal of the policy that was laid down.
Now, there is going to be a further barrier. The impression had been left that once the holy cow was established, then it might be possible for some other less important member of the same breed to invade the same area. Now, they have decided against that. As a matter of fact, they have found how tough free enterprise competition is, and they are not going to permit it. They have found, for instance, in the Toronto area, in which there is competition between the free enterprise station at Buffalo and the C.B.C., only a small percentage of the audience looks at the C.B.C. presentations. Perhaps that is the one saving grace in connection with the filthy program that was broadcast by the C.B.C.; probably there were not enough people

attracted to the program and it did not do as much harm as otherwise would have been the case. Now, confronted with all kinds of competition, they are not going to permit it. They are going to obtain an absolute monopoly. Then, when the Grey Cup football game goes off the air for one-third of the game and people's blood pressure rises as they wonder what is happening in the interim period, there is going to be no competition to show up this protected monopoly which the government, by its policy, is establishing.
There is another very interesting development in this connection and which is pointed out by something that appeared today in the Montreal Gazette. It is entitled "On and off the record". The article reads:
Shape of TV pattern: When Burlington, Vermont, gets a television station, probably next October, watch for a repetition of the situation presently existing in Buffalo, New York, where liberal chunks of program time are taken by advertisers directing their message to Canadians in the Niagara-Hamil-ton-Toronto area, rather than to residents of the United States. As a result of this situation, TV station WBEN in Buffalo has just received permission to increase its power to 50,000 watts, and increase the height of its masts to 1,100 feet, the second tallest in North America. These improvements will enable it to give virtually local-station reception and clarity as far away as Toronto. Backers of the proposed station at Burlington anticipate the same situation as with the New York outlet. With 80 per cent of the available Canadian TV sets tuned to WBEN, it is expected the percentage will not differ radically here.
When I was out in Vancouver not long ago, I read that an application was to be made for a television broadcasting station just south of the United States border for the one purpose of broadcasting commercial television programs to Canada. The Canadian service is to be limited to this one monopoly station in Vancouver. What this means is simply this. Some Canadians who live near the border are going to be able to hear the free voice from beyond the iron curtain. They are actually going to be able to hear broadcasts that are being prepared by those whose competition forces them to establish some standards of attractiveness in order to gain the commercial time on those stations.
By all means let the government recognize that there is a place for publicly-owned television. Since this was only a preliminary announcement, or rather a second stage announcement of government policy, I would hope we would have a third stage announcement of government policy before the legislation is introduced. This announcement would inform us that the government has discovered that they went at this thing backwards; that they have decided that the stations in the large centres will be private stations; that they will carry out the original intention of

the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; and that they will provide the television stations in those distant areas which cannot possibly be served by the ordinary private investment because of the sparse population in those areas. That was the reason for the existence of publicly-owned broadcasting and would appear to be the reason for its continuity with a publicly-owned television system.
To remove any suggestion that criticism of this restrictive attitude toward television is in any way a partisan approach to this subject, may I read from a paper that has been a consistent supporter of this government, namely the Vancouver Sun. The heading is "Ingrained Despotism", and the article reads as follows:
Canada's broadcasting industry is sick . . .
Refusal of the right to compete keeps private radio puny and makes C.B.C. sluggish. The condition will be even worse with the advent of television . . . C.B.C. is to hold TV monopoly in the large and lucrative cities. Private TV is confined to smaller centres which C.B.C. doesn't want.
Obviously private TV is bound to do a poor job because it won't be able to afford to pay for good programs. And C.B.C. won't need to bother about trying to please the big city public because its viewers can't dial to another local station.
This scheme doesn't make sense. It would be completely reversed if C.B.C.'s only aim is to give the people the best possible TV.
Mr. Speaker, the last words that I read describe exactly the proposition I have been putting before the house. I repeat them:
This scheme doesn't make sense. It would be completely reversed if C.B.C.'s only aim is to give the people the best possible TV.
Mr. Speaker, it is useless for the government to suggest that it has at no time recognized this policy. It recognizes this policy in connection with telephone communications. For instance, just a few days ago in this house a question was addressed to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) by the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton), when he asked what the situation was with regard to certain government-owned telephone lines in the province of British Columbia.
In British Columbia-and I am offering this only as an example-the government has recognized the fact that there are occasions when it is necessary for the government to step in and to provide facilities which ordinary private investment is not likely to be able to provide. Therefore the government of Canada did step in and provide government telephone communications with distant points in British Columbia. In fact, we had that subject up for discussion on another occasion, in the consideration of certain news that had been restrained in Vancouver island; and we found that the
The Address-Mr. Drew dominion government is actively interested in the operation of telephone lines. So that at distant points where private investment, in the normal course of events, would not be able to provide these facilities, government financing will step in.
Since that procedure has been accepted as a policy in connection with telephones, and since it was the policy which was the basis of the whole concept of the C.B.C., in order not to leave these remarks as offering criticism only, in all earnestness I urge the government to reconsider its stated policy before it presents the legislation and to remember that the basic concept of the C.B.C. was to provide facilities in those distant areas where, in the ordinary course of events, private investment could not be expected to offer facilities. May I also, in all earnestness, ask the government to reconsider its rather casual approach to some of these broadcasts which are now being permitted to go out over the stations for which it accepts full policy responsibility.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to refer to something that was said just after I spoke and which has been said on different occasions since that time during the debate that has been proceeding. On various occasions it has been suggested that the opportunity to examine national defence expenditures was fully covered by the committee on defence expenditures set up last year. I have no intention of extending discussion here, but I just want to point out one or two salient facts which I hope will be borne in mind by some of those who have been misled by a completely unfounded explanation which was given to this house by the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton) and by others with regard to some of the fantastic orders which have been placed for military non-essentials.
It was shown yesterday by the hon. member for Calgary East (Mr. Harkness) that when the largest item of defence expenditures came before the committee last year, namely an item of $668,962,842 which is simply a bulk figure in the statement, it was pointed out that any inquiry into the details of the items which made up that huge total would not be permitted on this farcical ground of national security. What a farce it is to suggest that national security should deny to us an opportunity to find out how a figure of that kind is made up! After all, I think most sensible people recognize that on this continent the core of our defence rests in the armed forces of the United States. I propose to wait, Mr. Speaker, until the second debate has concluded.
526	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Drew


An hon. Member:: Go ahead.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that in the United States every one of the items of this kind has been before committees of congress and that it has been possible to examine them there. Yet here, in cases where we are frequently making precisely the same type of equipment, we are told that we must not have the details in this country. I mention that point particularly for this reason. When other items were mentioned, some emphasis was placed on the fact that a million and a half pair of boots, over a million ties, 29,000 teapots and a number of things of that type were simply stockpiling for a possible emergency. May I say that there is not a single member of this house who does not know that if there is to be stockpiling, that stockpiling must be related to some over-all figure. If this were, in fact, stockpiling it would be for a force of something in the nature of 500,000 instead of a force which is, in fact, at the moment more of the nature of 50,000. As was pointed out yesterday, there is no stockpiling for a large force of that kind. There are no guns, tanks, machine guns and other weapons being stockpiled for any large force of that nature.


Mr. Ferguson:: They will throw teapots at them.


George Alexander Drew: Yes; that would appear to be the concept of defence presented by the -explanation that these are for stockpiling. In *other words, I have no doubt that if we got into an emergency and someone asked where the weapons were for the force which would be raised to meet that emergency, the answer of the government would be, "Oh, don't worry; all is well. We have not the guns or the tanks, but we have plenty of ties and teapots."
That is the measure of the real sincerity of the answer given in regard to these huge orders which were placed before the house.


Mr. Mutch:: And it is not a bad measure of the criticism, either.


Mr. Rowe:: There is a pretty remark!


George Alexander Drew: Yes, I should think that that remark measures in most exact terms the seriousness of the approach by members on the other side of the house to this extremely serious problem.
I wish now to deal with a subject brought before the house yesterday by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis)-and that brings me to the subamendment moved to the motion now before the house.


John Horace Dickey: At last.


George Alexander Drew: I know I share the feeling of all members in the house when I express my
IMr. Drew.]

pleasure that, once again, we have heard the hon. member for Vancouver East speaking with his customary vigour and in a resonant voice. I am inclined to think that most hon. members who consider these subjects seriously would agree with most of the statements made yesterday by the hon. member for Vancouver East when he was referring to the need for something being done to meet this situation. As to the way in which it is to be done there is disagreement-very sincere disagreement. There is disagreement as to the method which would best produce results.
It was pointed out yesterday that it has been emphasized over and over again that, living as we do in this very prosperous land, we are a fortunate people.


Mr. Dupuis:: Good government.


George Alexander Drew: And the remarks to which I have referred called to the attention of the house the fact that there are people throughout Canada who are in great need of assistance and support at this time. The need for some system that will assure to every Canadian adequate, prompt and efficient diagnostic, preventive, surgical and medical treatment should be the desire of every member in the house; and I hope it is. There are many people in this country today who are not getting early diagnosis of serious diseases, because of the fear of the expense of the services which might be needed in the event of an unfavourable diagnosis. That fear should be removed; and that fear is something that is in the minds of those who are really concerned about this subject-


Hector Dupuis: Like you.


George Alexander Drew: -even if it is not in the mind of the hon. member who keeps interrupting. Perhaps, with the sound system we now have in the house, those interruptions will not be oh the record.


Hector Dupuis: I said, "Like you".


George Alexander Drew: Oh, there need be no attention paid to that comment. I suggest that most hon. members are interested in this subject; and even if one or two members do show a lack of concern for the needy people who are requiring medical treatment and assistance of this kind, that should not divert the attention of the remaining members in the house from the subject we have under consideration.


George James McIlraith: No one made any such interjection.


Leslie Alexander Mutch: You are getting some support, and you did not expect it.


Hector Dupuis: I approve.


George Alexander Drew: The subject is one which has been under consideration for a considerable number of years. I can certainly understand the exasperation expressed by some members who say that the time is long overdue for some effective method of dealing with this problem. The time is long overdue; and the full responsibility for that fact rests with this government.
This matter was brought forward for consideration at a dominion-provincial conference in August of 1945. Certain proposals were placed before the representatives of the dominion and provincial governments of that time. All governments agreed-I say all governments agreed-that a great deal of additional information was necessary in order to tackle this problem of health insurance. But, Mr. Speaker, every government there-and I repeat, "every government there"-approved of the principle of health insurance. There was never any doubt on that score. What the governments sought was an opportunity to lay the foundation for a plan which would work, with this essential, that the various governments as well as the health authorities might all be able to cooperate in some integrated program which would work effectively in tackling this great problem.
The hon. member for Vancouver East pointed out that he and other members of his party would support anything that would bring this matter to a head, and lay the foundation for some effective plan being put into effect. That, Mr. Speaker, is exactly the purpose of the amendment now before the house. We all know that in these amendments we cannot spell out in exact detail any program of this kind. Attention is drawn to it by suggesting the need for dealing with the subject under broad and general terms.
I hope therefore that the members of the party to which the hon. member for Vancouver East belongs will support our amendment when it comes to a vote. The hon. member went further and said that the situation is perfectly clear, and that he hopes legislation will be introduced at this session. He said-and I believe I am repeating his words correctly-that legislation of this kind is legislation by consent.
Mr. Speaker, if legislation of this kind is to be effective, the consent and agreement must be obtained in advance. If legislation of this kind is to do the job that we all want it to do, then it must be known in advance that the provincial governments and the municipalities will be able to carry it out.
There are a number of considerations which must be fully examined before it is
The Address-Mr. Drew possible to lay down any rigid form in a legislative measure that would carry out the wishes of those who do want health insurance put into effect. A few days ago the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. McCusker) tabled copies of further reports which had been presented by the provinces. I do not intend to comment upon his wholly unnecessary remark about the fact that if I had had more time to read these I would not have made the remarks I did. I recognize that it is quite in the order of debates of this nature that there should be facetious and unconsidered remarks.
I know that the hon. member has reason to be aware that I was associated rather closely with some of these activities at the time that the preliminary discussions took place as to the way in which these reports would be prepared. I know what the reports contain. In fact I would even raise the question as to whether I might not know more about some of them than the parliamentary assistant to the minister. But the fact remains that there are some reports there which it would be well for hon. members to consider.
For instance, I have before me one of the volumes of the report made by the Ontario government on their health survey. There are equally interesting reports by nine of the ten provincial governments of this country dealing with a similar subject. With the reports that were tabled a few days ago from the provinces of Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba we now have reports from nine provinces. The province which has not tabled a report is the province of Newfoundland. I am sure that in the case of that province it is due to the fact that they have not been as long associated with the statistical services that have been established on an increasingly uniform basis by the different provinces, but I do feel sure that steps will be taken there to complete their report.
I would point out that on page 9 of chapter 3 of the third volume of the Ontario report on health there is reference to the various types of plans which are in effect for the purpose of providing some type of health insurance. Some extremely interesting figures are given which go to point out how far many people in this country are covered already by insurance of one kind or another. Just to show the complexity of this problem, may I point out the findings in this report in so far as Ontario is concerned. The people in the province of Ontario now have protection of
528	HOUSE OF COMMONS
The Address-Mr. Drew
one kind and another in regard to hospital and medical services under the following plans:
Blue Cross plan for hospital care Co-operative medical plans Physicians' Services, Inc.
Associated Medical Services, Inc.
Windsor Medical Services Inc.
Hollinger employees medical services Porcupine employees medical services Ross & Young-Davidson Mines Fraternal and mutual benefit associations Accident and sickness insurance companies Group contracts from life insurance companies Workmen's compensation board Industrial camps
Ontario department of welfare recipients
Under these combined forms of coverage there are 4,325,000 estimated coverages. Obviously there are duplications because the total population of Ontario is something like 4,700,000. I should like to read a paragraph at the top of page 5 of volume 3 which reads as follows:
Nearly half (approximately 46 per cent) of this total comprised participants in nonprofit plans; another 21 per cent was made up of insurance with commercial companies; and the remainder was eligible for some form of provincial government assistance in the event of medical need. On the strength of these estimates, and making some allowance for duplication, one authority has hazarded that close to two-thirds of the total population of Ontario have some measure of protection against the financial loss attendant upon illness or accidental injury. It was, however, impossible to support this or any other guess with the facts available at the time of this survey.
May I repeat the last words:
It was, however, impossible to support this or any other guess with the facts available at the time of this survey.
If hon. members will examine the reports which have been submitted by nine of the ten provinces they will find that although there is reference to different plans of this nature, as yet there is nothing but a guess as to the exact coverage of the various plans. Yet that is the key to the solution of this extremely difficult problem. Unless we are to embark on a plan of state insurance in which the whole medical service is taken over by the state under some uniform plan of coverage, that is the only alternative.
I do not think it should be necessary to emphasize the fact that nearly every member of this house has had occasion to be associated with hospital and medical services in one way or another. Most members, either as members of this house, as members of provincial legislatures, as members of municipal councils, as members of hospital boards or in some other capacity, have had contacts of this kind and know the mental agony of people who find themselves suddenly confronted with the possibility of serious and dangerous illness without knowing where to

turn for the financial resources with which to meet the heavy expenses of the services required.
Fortunately the doctors and medical services of this country have gone a long way toward meeting this need. In fact I doubt if there is a single case that has been brought to the attention of doctors or nurses where treatment has not been given. In many cases the real trouble has been that people have been fearful of going to doctors or to hospitals because of their knowledge of the expense that might be incurred. Our objective therefore should be to find as soon as possible a plan which will ensure that in this most fortunate land of ours with its very great wealth there will not be a single Canadian who will be deprived of proper diagnostic, preventive, medical or surgical care which will meet their personal needs and at the same time maintain that person as a healthy member of our society. However we achieve that objective, I feel sure there can be agreement on that common purpose. I do not question the sincerity of those who seek to attain this objective by different methods. I do not question the sincerity of those who say: "Let us go ahead, never mind about technicalities, let us have legislation."
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, there are constitutional requirements, and this present government is of course fully conscious of that fact, because they asserted the constitutional position in upsetting a number of social services provided by the Conservative government before the Liberals came into power in 1935. That of course was their right, and it is also one reason why they should respect the views of those who have some concern about the very constitution that they put forward as a reason for not carrying forward social services introduced by the Conservative government of those days.


An hon. Member:: Oh, oh.


George Alexander Drew: Of course the kind of laughter that I hear on the other side bespeaks an empty mind.


Gordon Graydon: You may benefit by health insurance over there.


George Alexander Drew: Those members who have followed the history of this parliament are well aware of the facts to which I am referring. I repeat that it was certainly the right of this government to carry constitutional appeals against those social services which sometime later they did introduce. It was their right. What I am pointing out is that, in view of the fact that this government has asserted the importance of the constitution, we should not get into a snarl by going ahead without full regard to the position this

government is likely to take at any time if it suits their convenience. So far as this situation is concerned, there is another reason why the constitutional position should not be disregarded. The provinces of this country under our-


An hon. Member:: Oh, oh.


George Alexander Drew: I hear "Oh, oh" from the same intelligent source. I hear "Oh, oh" from a member who obviously does not think that the provinces should have any rights at all. As a matter of fact the "Oh, oh" that was interjected from across the aisle represents the attitude of the government toward the authority of our provinces under the constitution. Let no one be in any doubt about that fact.


An hon. Member:: Very comical.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Get on with the speech.


George Alexander Drew: There has been no uncertainty at any time in the determination of the government to grab power by concentrating the tax resources more and more in their hands.


An hon. Member:: You are just wasting time.


John Horace Dickey: The branch offices.


Mr. Hodgson:: They will say "Oh, oh" after the next election.


Clarence Decatur Howe: You are entering on the third hour now.


Mr. Stuart (Charlotte):: The branch offices.


George Alexander Drew: The interjections being made at this time are interjections which I hope will thoroughly impress, upon those who still believe that this is a federal system and that the federal system should be respected, the very noticeable fact that the government is impatient even with the discussion of provincial rights under the constitution which should guide the combined governmental activities of this country.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have accepted the first two hours. The third hour is more difficult.


George Alexander Drew: If anyone were to pay attention to the amount of time that the minister who has just interjected spends in announcing government policies outside the house, then no speech ever made here could possibly be regarded as a long speech. The fact is that the minister in question does not even believe in parliament, let alone the constitution. He believes in announcing government policy in New York, in Detroit, in any place except here in parliament.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: And "Howe"!


An hon. Member:: Don't lose your temper.
The Address-Mr. Drew


John Horace Dickey: Don't lose your place.


George Alexander Drew: This subject is one which has been under consideration for some considerable time, and the very fact that it has is a reason why we should now be perfectly sure where we are headed in dealing with this most important question. It was fully under discussion at the time that the dominion and provincial governments met in 1945. It will be remembered by those who attended that conference that the dominion government put forward certain health proposals, but they proposed a special tax for those measures and so far we have not yet had any clear statement of the alternative. I can remember what I said on behalf of the province of Ontario as recorded in the record of the discussions at page 236. I said:
The dominion government proposes that the provinces finance their share of the cost of health insurance by "a registration fee to be paid by or on behalf of every person who has attained his sixteenth birthday and whose normal place of residence is in the province or area where benefits are provided ..." But anyone who has had experience with the collection of a poll tax will understand the difficulty of collecting a registration fee which is not related to earning capacity, or whether the registrant is employed, an old age pensioner, or a student without personal earning power.
The dominion minister of health and welfare, as well as certain dominion officials, have also stated that the dominion government intends to finance its share of the cost of health insurance or old age pensions by a social security tax levied on all incomes, without exemption. While the amount to be levied in this way was not definitely stated, nor was this special tax in fact mentioned in the printed "Proposals", the figure which has been mentioned in discussion is 5 per cent. This would be in addition to present income taxes and the registration fee or poll tax to be levied by the provinces. This would mean that if the provinces relinquished their personal income and corporation taxes and succession duties, the tax field left to them would be further crowded and confused by the dominion government introducing its special income levy.
That point was made at that time, and ever since has been before the members who attended that conference. Therefore I would recall this to those who now say, "Let us go ahead with the 1945 proposals". Before we go ahead with the 1945 proposals, we must know how they will operate. We must know how they are to be financed and we must know whether the provinces and the municipalities are able to carry out their share. At the moment that information is simply not available.
So far as the subject of health insurance is concerned, there were statements over and over again that there was agreement in principle and that the necessary course was to find out the way that it was to be done. The whole problem is one which necessarily brings

The Address-Mr. Drew the municipalities, hospital boards and provincial governments into the question. I should like to read the closing paragraphs of a very thoughtful and thought-provoking article in the October issue of the McGill Medical Journal by Dr. R. P. Vivian, Strath-cona professor and chairman of the department of health and social medicine at McGill university. After examining this whole question of the problem of the costs of medical care and the various ways in which this service can be assured to everyone, Dr. Vivian closes his article with these words:
There can be no real solution to the complex problem of costs of medical care until the matter is approached jointly by representatives with authority from the professions, hospital boards and governments. Compulsory health insurance does not provide the solution to the matters represented here. The amount of money required would raise the present level of taxes significantly with no assurance of adequate control or acceptable service. It is doubted if the public would appreciate another increase in the tax load.
It would seem that the responsibility for initiating a full exploration of the problem lies with the dominion government. To achieve an improvement in the method of meeting costs of medical care it will require the full co-operation of the professions and the hospitals and the general public. It is hoped that this may occur in the reasonably near future so that the problem may be simplified if not solved.
Mr. Speaker, that statement by an eminent doctor, whose services have been sought by the governments of a number of other countries to consider this very subject, puts its finger right on the problem before us, as do the medical reports which were tabled in the house by the Department of National Health and Welfare. Those reports make it perfectly clear that it is not yet possible for any arbitrary plan to be laid down and that it would, in fact, set back the whole course of improved medical service in this country if a rigid pattern were established by legislation before there was agreement about how provincial authorities, municipal councils, boards of health and other official organizations would play their part in carrying it into effect.
I can understand the sense of urgency in the minds of those who call for action of some kind no matter what the constitutional provisions may be. I can understand the sense of urgency with which that demand is made by those who have themselves felt the full impact of the present cost of treatment of this kind. I think every hon. member in this house shares the desire to provide a system which will assure every Canadian af the very highest level of diagnostic, preventative, medical and surgical treatment, as

well as hospital and other curative treatment that may go with it.
Mr. Speaker, let us not, however, disregard the position of the provinces. Let us not for a moment disregard the fact that it would be impossible to carry this plan out until there is an over-all agreement on the financial position of the provinces. One province as yet has not signed an agreement in regard to taxation. That province has a perfect right to take the position it has taken. The province of Quebec, in its judgment, has decided that it will not sign the agreement that has been offered. How can any plan be put forward while that situation exists? But, Mr. Speaker, I hope no hon. member will suggest that it is the province of Quebec which is preventing this being carried out. No other province can carry it out under the agreement which now exists. It is not the province of Quebec that is holding this up in any way, and do not let anyone suggest it.
The provinces that have signed have made agreements which provide them with certain financial resources to meet present demands. At the time Ontario recently signed an agreement, the prime minister of Ontario made it perfectly clear that this was only a stopgap arrangement and that it did not meet their present requirements. The premier of Nova Scotia has made the same statement, and so have the premiers of other provinces.
It is perfectly clear, therefore, that the provinces are not in a position to carry out their part in any plan of this kind which might be imposed upon them by legislation. Also it is perfectly clear, and it was made abundantly clear by the mayors who met here in Ottawa last week, that the municipalities cannot carry any added burden. In fact they find it difficult to carry their present burdens without some arrangements being made so they will have still further resources. It is the municipalities that must accept the -major share of responsibility for administration in any plan of this kind. You cannot ask them to accept that responsibility under existing arrangements.
It was for that reason, Mr. Speaker, that we introduced the amendment we did, expressing our regret that the government has failed-
(d) To conduct Inquiries in consultation with the provincial governments, so that necessary information may be available for the dominion and provincial governments to consider jointly a national health insurance program.
For the very reasons I have pointed out- the statements that have been made in reports of the provincial governments, the statements that have been made by the dominion government itself at the time these subjects were

The Address-Mr. Johnston
under consideration-I submit that the first requirement is discussion between the dominion and provincial governments in consultation with the municipal councils and the recognized representatives of the medical profession and the hospital boards across this country.
To those who express urgency in meeting this need may I say that we have reiterated over and over again our request that this government act to initiate steps that will bring into effect a health insurance program that will fully recognize the various services that are now available in various forms across this country. That has been our request and it is our request now. We present that request with the utmost urgency. We do so, however, with emphasis on the fact that any short cuts, any by-passing of the constitution, will only confuse the whole issue and further delay the time when Canadians who need assistance of this nature will get the assistance to which they are entitled.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, and because the amendment to the amendment seeks to convey the impression that this government can act without consultation of this nature, without in any way questioning the sincerity of their motive or the objective which they seek to attain it is not our purpose to support the subamendment. May I express the hope, in view of the words of the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis) yesterday, that when the main amendment comes up they will support it as an expression to this government, which has been holding up these dominion-provincial conferences, that we do want action; that we do want a health insurance program that will be worked out with the provinces and that will give the people of this country who need health services of this kind the very kind of services that a country of this kind should offer.


Mr. C. E. Johnston (Bow River):: Before the vote on the subamendment is taken I too wish to say a few words regarding health insurance. However, I have one or two other things which I first wish to put before the house.
I noticed that when the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) was speaking in the house the other day, particularly in reply to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew), he laid great stress on the progress which has been made in Canada during the last number of years. He pointed out that the prosperity of Canada had reached an all-time height; that the national product of this country had reached something like $22 billion; but at the same time, and this was somewhat significant, 10
per cent of our national product had to go for defence. Let me state immediately that Social Credit policy has never been niggardly in respect to the money which was required for national defence. If you go back even to 1935, when we first came into this house,
I believe the record will show that we have been among those who were always advocating that there was nothing too good for our servicemen, particularly those men who were facing the enemy over in Korea or anywhere else. We believed that they should have the best of equipment, the best of clothing and the best of everything it was possible to give them.
We join with others in that regard; and we want to indicate also that we are proud of the fact that Canada has prospered as it has. We must not be confused, however; and this is the point that was raised by the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Prudham) the other day, when he stated that this prosperity was in great part the result of the efforts of the federal government. Of course I dealt with that once before in this house, and I do not intend to reiterate what I said on that occasion. I was impressed with a magazine which I received yesterday, and which is published in Alberta. It is entitled Within our Borders. I should like to give a quotation from the issue of December 1, 1952, as an indication of the progress that has been made through other efforts than those of the federal government. The heading on this article is "Alberta industrial employment doubles in 13 years". It reads:
Alberta's manufacturing industry is estimated to have a gross value of production of $510 million this year. This compares to a gross production value of $87 million in 1939.
You will note that it was in the fall of 1935 that the Social Credit government took over the reins in Alberta. You will notice also the tremendous results since then.
Between 1939 and 1952, employment in Alberta's manufacturing industry has increased from 13,000 to 29,000 while the number of establishments has grown from 1,000 to 1,900. More than 11 per cent of Alberta's labour force is employed in the manufacturing industry while 25 per cent are employed in other industries. Agriculture absorbs 38 per cent of the working force and other primary industries 9 per cent.
New investment in Alberta's manufacturing industries has soared since 1947. In this year, new investment amounted to $10,700,000; in 1950, $16 million; in 1951, $24,400,000 and 1952 will see an estimated $77,400,000 invested in industry. Investment in manufacturing has increased 623 per cent from 1947 to 1952 or 390 per cent when allowances are made to offset inflationary values. Profits of Alberta companies increased slightly more than 100 per cent between 1946 and 1950.
That will give hon. members some indication of the progress that can be made in this country under proper provincial supervision.

The Address-Mr. Johnston The big trouble is that at the same time there has been an increase in municipal debt. Let me give you an example. The mayor of Calgary, one of those municipalities that has gone head over heels in debt, was the Liberal candidate in the last federal election. There you have a good example of the policy of Liberal administration. If you want to correct these evils, and correct them quickly, the only answer is to get rid of those Liberals and get a Social Credit regime. Then you will find, as I have indicated, that you will have prosperity.
A moment ago I mentioned that the Prime Minister had indicated that 10 per cent of our national product had to go for defence. In other words, the budget amounted to something over $4 billion and about half of that goes to national defence. This gives us the basis for the belief that it is the national defence spending which is maintaining prosperity in Canada today. It gives a stimulus to business which would not otherwise be there. It is a sad state of affairs, Mr. Speaker, when the prosperity of our country must be dependent upon preparation for war. If you removed that factor from our economy today you would find we would be facing another depression.
One of the signs which indicate that times are not as good as they might be, when you consider our national product is as high as it is-and this was indicated the other day by the member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch)-is the fact that so many people in Canada are now forced to buy on credit. It i:s quite evident that if the people of this country had sufficient purchasing power they would not be using their credit to buy these things which are necessary. You only have to pick up a newspaper to see that refrigerators and washing machines are advertised at greatly reduced prices. If you go to a store to buy a washing machine they will give you $75 or $100 for your old machine without even looking at it. They are trying to force people who have not the money to buy these things into credit buying. Conditions would be a great deal worse if it were not for the fact that we are spending $2 billion and more each year for war production, and this money is spread out among the people so they have that amount available as purchasing power to buy consumer goods. Otherwise we would be in a very poor position.
It is tragic when one realizes that we have to depend on this type of an economy in order to maintain any sign of prosperity. This morning I was in the railway committee room and heard Mr. Dymond speak at the meeting of the advisory council on labour. He made some outstanding statements about the subject I was discussing. Mr. Dymond 
told us, and I took a note of it, that defence is the underlying support of our economy. It struck me as rather important, because that was the thing I intended to deal with this afternoon. This statement was made by one of the government officials in the Department of Labour, that the underlying support of our economy is our defence effort.
What would happen if our war effort were to fold up? What would happen if peace were declared in this world? I am not suggesting for a moment that everyone would not be very happy to have that happen, but what would be the disastrous results to our economy? Mr. Dymond went on to point out that one of the reasons for fuller employment was that the war industries had now reached the point where they were going into quantity production. Even despite that fact, in the figures which were tabled at that meeting this morning it was pointed out that although we have what is generally called a period of high employment, nevertheless there are over 100,000 employable unemployed who cannot find jobs. That is the situation in a period of our peak prosperity.
Those are some of the warnings, Mr. Speaker, which we must take into consideration. There are, as well, other warnings to show that in our economy all is not quite as well as it could be. The other day I was looking through some of the clippings I had in my desk, and I found one from the Calgary Herald of Thursday, October 9, 1952. It is entitled "Production up During July". It is a reprint from Ottawa, Canadian Press, and reads as follows:
The pace of production and business quickened during July, spurred by higher wholesale and retail sales and by heavier output of some metals, electric power, newsprint and automobiles.
As a result, the industrial production index, based on 1935-39 equals 100, increased to 210-8 in July over 208-0 a year ago, the bureau of statistics reported Tuesday. However, for the first seven months this year, production was down about 1-6 per cent from output in the same period in 1951.
The pace of the decline was cut from 2-8 per cent in the first quarter to 9-7 per cent in the second. A drop in manufacturing was the main cause of the slip.
During July, however, gold production increased to 375,000 fine ounces from 344,000 in July, last year; steel climbed to 293,000 tons from 275,000; newsprint, 486,000 tons from 452,000.
The point I should like you to note, Mr. Speaker, is this. Had it not been for the increase in the production of gold, steel and newsprint, that index would have fallen to a greater extent than it did; and the place where the greatest downward trend was shown was in the manufacturing industry. That fact shows quite clearly that our manufacturing industries are not in what one would call a healthy condition; and when

you find that we have something like
100,000	employable unemployed, then the situation needs some looking into.
In this house on many occasions we have heard from members who have indicated a falling off in the production of industries within their constituencies. The one who comes to my mind at the moment is the hon. member for Lanark (Mr. Blair) who this year was talking about the way the production of the woollen mills in his constituency had fallen off. These are some of the things we must keep in mind. There are as well other indications that we must watch if we are to have a prosperous Canada. Agriculture is one industry which is in need of some attention. In Canada agriculture has been the basic industry ever since the country first came into existence.


An hon. Member:: It always will be.


Charles Edward Johnston: Today we find that those engaged in agriculture are becoming greatly concerned as to how they are going to be able to market their products and yet be able to show a decent profit. It is true that last year the agricultural industry had a fairly good crop but it was of poor grade. Low grades and damp grain made marketing difficult. The wheat board did an excellent job in that respect. This year-that is 1952 -we have had another good crop, but we have also had difficulties in marketing it. Some of the farmers are finding themselves in need of cash because the delivery quotas are so- low.
Agriculture is one industry which must have the greatest amount of attention paid to it lest it too begin to slip back as it did during the hungry thirties. The farmers are conscious of this fact. When they find that the support price of hogs will drop from 26 cents to 23 cents, it causes them a great deal of concern. When they find that their markets for beef have been lost, that fact also gives them a great deal of concern. It is true that the foot-and-mouth disease had something to do with that situation. However, that embargo will be lifted on March 1 and it is to be hoped there will be some relief in that regard. Nevertheless we will still find difficulty in marketing our beef products.
The farmer also finds that he is suffering a loss on the sale of eggs. The same thing is true with regard to dairy products. We cannot have a healthy agricultural industry if we are going to allow prices to drop to the point where farmers cannot make a profit on the things they produce. Particularly is
The Address-Mr. Johnston that true, Mr. Speaker, when we understand that the things which the farmers have to buy are continually rising in price. Even the interest rates are going up on the money which they must borrow in order to carry on their seasonal operations. The price of farm machinery is soaring ever upward. The industries which produce the secondary goods are in such a position that they can control their production in order to maintain prices. But as the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch) pointed out the other day, what position would this country be in and what position would the world be in if the farmers throughout the nations decided to curtail production in order to maintain prices?
There is throughout Canada a good deal of concern over this problem. Some of the leading papers are taking note of it. The other day I cut out an article which appeared in the Ottawa Journal of Thursday, December
4.	It is an editorial which is headed "The Farmers' Case" and it reads as follows:
Forecasts read at the dominion-provincial agricultural conference in Ottawa indicated that the Canadian farmer faces the 1933 prospect of reduced returns for his products with an increase in the cost of services and supplies he has to buy.
This should extinguish for good the suggestion that all farmers are making easy fortunes, although it may be true that the prairie wheat growers, with a record crop and solid prices, have an unusual degree of prosperity.
Delegates who heard the forecasts prepared by government economists make it plain they considered them over-optimistic. The root of the problem they face is found in uncertainty about markets, the United States' embargoes or quotas on dairy imports, and the United Kingdom inability to maintain her traditional purchases of such items as Canadian cheese being two important factors.
In this situation the farmer must look to the dominion government, the central authority in a position to assist in negotiating better trade arrangements and fighting currency difficulties which hamper exports of surpluses.
The farmer with surpluses piling on his farm at a time when millions need more food will feel betrayed if Ottawa fails in the vigorous and effective action they have the right to expect.
When you have a forecast of lower agricultural prices and loss of markets coming from government authorities, Mr. Speaker, it is even more significant that it otherwise would be. In the Ottawa Journal of Monday, December 1, while the dominion-provincial conference was sitting here in Ottawa, there appeared an article headed "Farm Incomes Likely Down Next Year. Federal-Provincial Conference Looks to '53 Program", which reads in part as follows:
Dominion government economists today told the dominion-provincial agricultural conference that farm incomes probably will be somewhat lower in 1953 although the demand for food products will continue high.

The Address-Mr. Johnston
Then Mr. C. V. Parker director of the agricultural division, dominion bureau of statistics, said:
Present prospects gave little indication of a major change in 1953 from the generally prosperous conditions of 1952 in the domestic field.
Export prospects were more uncertain. Due largely to exchange difficulties, sales to some overseas countries were not likely to be maintained at the high levels of 1952.
The exchange difficulties are something for which the federal government is directly responsible. Then Mr. Parker goes on in this way:
Farm net income in 1953 also was expected to be somewhat lower, being calculated by adding income in kind to cash income, deducting farm expenses and depreciation, and adding or subtracting the value of changes in physical inventories of livestock and grains held on farms at the end of the year.
There appeared little prospect of any significant change in total farm operating expenses in 1953, while taxes and interest rates might average higher.
The indication is clear that unless we have some change in the agricultural policy of this country we will be heading for difficulty, bearing in mind always that the greatest factor bolstering our so-called present prosperity is our defence effort. Each one of us hopes, of course, that the defence effort soon will not be needed. But in what condition will our economy be when that comes about?
The government has some responsibility in the matter. It is about to negotiate a new international wheat agreement. The farm unions in the three prairie provinces are asking that a change be made in the price. In some instances they are asking a ceiling of $2.35 with a floor of $1.85. Some organizations in the United States are asking for a price of $2.50. I am not going to suggest what the price should be, but I will say without hesitation that the price set in the international wheat agreement should be considerably higher than it is today. I know the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) will be the one responsible for negotiating the agreement. He has said on other occasions that he will be a little tough to deal with; I hope that is true. He is a tough trader, and it is hoped that when the government negotiates the new agreement there will be a considerable increase in price, both in the ceiling and in the floor.
One factor which has been of great benefit to agriculture in the last few years is the fact that we have had a wheat board. But the wheat board is being attacked from every angle. I am sure I speak for the farmers of western Canada when I say that they do not want to do. away with the board. They want to have orderly marketing of the products

they have to offer. We know only too well, through past experience, that the farmers of western Canada particularly have had to sell their grain when prices were at the lowest. That was entirely due to the fact that they were at the mercy of the grain, exchange. All the notes the farmer had given during the year to finance his operations became due immediately after threshing. That was usually the period when prices were low. The grain exchange was able to buy that grain at greatly reduced prices, and made a handsome profit on it. So those people who are lamenting over their loss of revenue because the grain exchange has, to a great extent, been put out of operation, are doing everything within their power to see that the grain exchange comes back into force, and that the wheat board is done away with.
I was interested the other day in reading an article in the Manitoba Co-operator which, it seemed to me, summed up the situation pretty well. Under the heading "Averages", it states:
Stanley Jones, president of the Winnipeg grain exchange, says that the final wheat board payment averaging about 25 cents a bushel on deliveries from the 1951 crop was below the market average. That payment brought the price of wheat to $1.83% basis No. 1 Northern at the terminal.
Mr. Jones had the same remark to make about wheat board payment on barley.
The vice-president of the grain exchange said the same thing about the wheat board payment on oats.
The monotony of this performance might be relieved if a little variety was interjected therein. A well-trained parrot could do the job that is being done equally as well.
Mr. Jones never stops to explain that the average prices he quotes do not take into account storage charges, costs of conditioning tough and damp grain, interest on borrowed money and other expenses.
He does not calculate deliveries on prices prevalent during heavy delivery periods, thus presenting a true picture.
All his efforts are directed to discrediting the wheat board which, as every farmer knows, made a real achievement in marketing the badly damaged 1951 crop.
A comparison might be made with the performance of the open market when it was operating freely in the 1930's. In the six years from 1930 to 1935 inclusive the average price of wheat at the terminal under an unrestricted open market was 69 cents a bushel.
In 1932 Alberta farmers marketed a big crop of good quality and obtained therefrom the average price of 32 cents a bushel. They lost money on every bushel they produced.
I think that article sums up the situation so far as the grain exchange is concerned. I need not add anything further. But let no one think that the farmers of western Canada want to do away with the wheat board.
I should like to say a few words about old age pensions, and pensions for incurables. These are classes of people who require our

attention. There can be no doubt in my mind that almost every member in the house -and I use the word "almost" advisedly- would be in favour of increasing old age pensions, if it were put to an open and free vote in the house. I think the basis for determining an increased pension should not necessarily be, "Have we the money to increase the pension?" but rather, "Can we produce it? Have we the goods and services to provide increased pensions, without interfering in any way with the prosperity and progress of the country?"
I am sure the answer is that we can well afford to increase pensions. When we consider that our national product is in the neighbourhood of $22 billion, when we sit here and listen to the Prime Minister speak about the prosperity of Canada, and when we listen to hon. members speak about the great future of Canada, we should not hesitate to give increased pensions to those in need. Not only have we the actual production, but we have a great potential production.
This past season we had the largest crop of the very finest wheat in the history of Canada. Who will dare say that under those circumstances we cannot give our old age pensioners another loaf of bread? Who will dare say that with proper marketing conditions and proper inducements to agriculture we cannot give our old age pensioners or our incurables another pound of bacon, another dozen of eggs or another pound of butter? Surely there is no one in his right senses who will say that we cannot afford to raise old age pensions. Yet the lamentable fact is that the pensions are not being raised.
I know it will be said they were raised to $40 a month without the means test, which is something worth while, but it must be understood that today people cannot live on $40 a month any better than during the period of the depression they could live on $20 a month. You will therefore see the need of some further increases.
I received a letter from an old age pensioners' association which I think I should place on Hansard. It is from the Alberta old age pensioners' society, Calgary branch, and is addressed to me as the member of parliament for the constituency of Bow River, and I want to recognize this letter. This letter reads:
Dear Mr. Johnston:
May we draw your kind attention to the following points and requests?
In 1940 when this branch was first formed our older citizens of seventy were endeavouring to "exist" on twenty dollars basic pension monthly. Since then we have repeatedly appealed to parliament to raise this pension to fifty dollars. This amount perhaps in the past might have been enough to "exist" on. In the past twelve years the basic
The Address-Mr. Johnston pension has been raised step by step to forty dollars so that we have not even yet reached our past requested goal of fifty. With the present high cost of living, especially rentals, the present amount of forty dollars is only in the same proportion as the first twenty in 1940.
Knowing that our "really needy" citizens (those with no other assets) are still only "existing" on the present forty dollars and so still in a state of "semi-starvation," we wish to urgently request our representatives in parliament to seriously consider an "adequate" basic pension so that our "really needy" can, in the evening of their lives, have at least something more than the present "semi-starvation". Living conditions of these older citizens have never actually been improved, and they being the builders of this wonderful country should have first and the most serious consideration.
We also request a lowering of the age to sixty to cover those who, for many reasons, cannot earn their own living. Our "really needy" should have first consideration and an "adequate" pension to live on.
May we here state, that we were disappointed when a ceiling of sixty dollars was placed on all applicants over seventy for pension, or a two per cent on the income up to three thousand dollars, and so only penalizing the moderate or lower income earner. We, therefore, request that a sliding schedule of income tax on all incomes be given your immediate attention for obvious reasons. We respectfully submit that our citizens in more fortunate circumstances should be taxed more than those with moderate income, if there is to be any tax whatever.
May we ask if we could have your personal views on this serious state of affairs, and which we hope will be favourable and thank you in anticipation of your kind help.


An hon. Member:: Why do you not give them the basic dividend?


Charles Edward Johnston: They are asking for it in British Columbia and the people are paying some attention to that. The health services which are given to old age pensioners in Alberta over and above what is provided by the federal government are becoming most attractive to people not only in British Columbia but in other parts of the world.
This brings me to the last point I want to speak about, a national health service. The subamendment deals with that. My leader has already stated in the house that the Social Credit movement in Canada favours the earliest possible introduction of a national health insurance program, and he set out in some detail the kind of program we favour. I shall not repeat what he said on Monday, November 24, but those who wish to find out what that policy is may turn to Hansard of that date.
On behalf of the Social Credit group here I want to say that we do not favour a socialistic type of state medicine as advocated by some socialists. However, the C.C.F. amendment as worded does not call for state medicine, nor indeed for a socialistic type of national health insurance. Therefore we

The Address-Mr. Thatcher find that our kind of national health insurance can come within the terms of the subamendment as worded, and consequently we shall vote for it.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Mr. Speaker, this debate has become so dead that I do not suppose I can make it any more so. In any event, I should like to speak for about ten minutes on one specific subject, the level of taxation in Canada. I am going to contend today, as I have over the past year, that federal taxes are now at the danger point. I believe that the national interest requires a sharp reduction, and I should like to make such a proposal to parliament at this time.
As hon. members know, our expenditures in 1952 are going to exceed $4,500 million, which is about ten times what they were in 1939. I would remind hon. members that even in the crucial years of world war II, in 1940, 1941, 1942 and 1943, when we were fighting for our very life as a nation, our budgets did not exceed the figure of the current budget. On only one occasion since confederation have federal taxes been so high. Most Canadians are paying more money out in taxes today, than for food. To my mind that is a dangerous situation.
It is small wonder that a great many citizens are becoming increasingly restive under the high level of taxation. Like other Canadians I am not going to take exception to taxes raised, first, for essential government expenditures; second, for social welfare programs which are provided by this parliament, or, third, for national defence. But like most Canadians I am becoming thoroughly fed up with the government policy of overtaxation, on the one hand, and its failure to eliminate waste and extravagance, on the other.
During the debate the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) told us that in his opinion there had not been much overtaxation. What are the facts? The first fiscal year under the present Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott! commenced on April 1, 1947. The period from that date to October 31 of this year represents 2,131 days. During that time the Liberal government has taken from the pockets of the Canadian taxpayer $2,150 million more than they have been able to spend. In other words, since the present Minister of Finance took office there has been overtaxation each and every day, including Sundays and holidays, of more than $1 million. Yet the Prime Minister blandly tells us that in his opinion there has not been overtaxation. I suggest that the figures speak for themselves.
It is rather interesting to note that during the same period United States investments


in Canada in our iron ore, our oil, our aluminum and other fields have been roughly $2,000 million. I think it is reasonable to suggest that if the Canadian tax rate had not been so harsh, Canadians might have financed a greater share of our post-war investment [DOT] program.
The huge surpluses we have had in recent years have not been effected by economy; rather they have been accomplished despite a substantial amount of extravagance in government spending. Several years ago the Minister of Finance, his parliamentary assistant at that time, and others gave us the assurance that non-defence expenditures were going to be curtailed and rigidly restricted. As a matter of fact I think some minister said some would be deferred in the interests of the defence effort. Apparently that promise has been forgotten, because Canada's non-defence expenditures this year are almost triple what they were at the end of the war. Spending is going on unabated, and the expenditures of almost every non-defence department are up substantially.
I have here a summary of departmental expenditures for the first seven months of the current fiscal year compared with the same period in 1951. From April 1 to October 31 of this year every single department of government but one has had substantially increased expenditures. The only one which has not is the department of the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe). Of course the reason for that apparent exception is that there was a census last year conducted by the bureau of statistics, and there is no expenditure for a census this year. In the seven months period I have mentioned, nondefence expenditures have gone up, compared with the same seven months last year, by $231 million. If there is any evidence of economy there I wish someone would tell me where it is.
I am going to say that the so-called economy drive announced by the minister several years ago is a complete failure. I think it was a political farce from the beginning. The Minister of Finance has discounted and disparaged suggestions that have been made for economies. He does not seem to be very much interested in the subject. I can tell him and parliament that the people of the country generally are bewildered and concerned over the attitude the Minister of Finance is taking in this regard. Since I came here I have tried to figure out why the government does not seem to be particularly interested in savings. Some hon. members may laugh, but I think one of the reasons is that there are not enough businessmen here in Ottawa.

Parliament is running a $4| billion business, the biggest business anywhere in the nation, yet we are following practices and methods that would cause any corporation to go bankrupt if it were to do likewise. Take, for example, the fantastic duplication of effort right in this very building. We have two post offices, two or three police forces, two messenger staffs, two journals branches, two stenographic staffs, two treasury offices and so on all down the line. What business corporation in Canada would not remedy such a situation, particularly if the duplication were pointed out to it?
The taxpayer of Canada is the man who today is being taxed for waste of that kind. I think the composition of the cabinet is rather interesting. I looked through the Canadian Parliamentary Guide the other day and I find that of the twenty cabinet members, fourteen are lawyers, three are engineers, one is classed as a farmer, one is a doctor and one is a businessman. I think the professions represented are all excellent, but I cannot help wondering whether, if we had a few more businessmen and perhaps a coal miner and a few farmers thrown in here and there, we would not start to get the kind of government which would be interested in economy in order to bring down the tax rate. I think such a reform should be considered by the Prime Minister the next time he shuffles the membership of his cabinet.
I say that high taxes are lowering our standard of living and discouraging initiative generally. The amazing feature of the present situation is that the Minister of Finance quite nonchalantly and quite freely admits that taxes are too high. He made a series of tours during the past summer during which he spoke on taxation. I am only going to quote a sentence from one speech he made. On that occasion he was speaking in London, and the Canadian Press quotes him as follows:
I agree with almost everybody that tax rates are uncomfortably high and that we ought to follow tax policies which will lead towards lower rates.
That statement is very clear. The minister acknowledges that taxes are too high; yet, despite repeated representations by individuals and business concerns, despite unprecedented surpluses, the minister has done nothing so far to reduce taxation. Why? We can only assume because he is waiting for an election year. The Minister of Finance has told Canadians up and down the country that they can expect tax relief if and when they increase production and efficiency. I want to tell the minister and this parliament that high taxes in Canada today are doing more
The Address-Mr. Thatcher than any other single thing to lower production and efficiency. Because of high taxes there is a tendency in Canada today for individuals and corporations to become tax conscious rather than efficiency conscious.
I know of married women working at parttime employment who have quit their jobs when their income reached a certain point, because they did not want to be in a higher income tax category. There are many working people who are not interested in overtime work because so much of the additional pay goes to the tax collector. Every hon. member, those from western Canada at least, knows of farmers who have gone out of the production of hogs or livestock or poultry. Why? Because, as they put it, why should they work fourteen hours a day for Mr. Abbott? There are in Canada today business firms, corporations, which seek methods of spending profits on unnecessary advertising, donations, extra equipment or repairs, rather than be bled white by the Department of National Revenue.
I say that today there is growing hesitancy on the part of business firms to expand. If the new project is successful, the Minister of Finance takes most of the profits; but if, on the other hand, the project is a failure then the financial stability of the whole organization is jeopardized.


Mr. Sinclair:: Have you expanded at all in the last five years?


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I will come to you in a moment.


James Sinclair: Have you expanded at all in the last five years?


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: If I have, it has been despite the tax policies of the Liberal government, not on account of them.


James Sinclair: But have you?


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: In other words, Canada
today is rapidly approaching the point where it is dumb to be thrifty. In a country where it takes about $6,000 in capital investment to create every new job, I think that is a dangerous point at which to arrive. I agree with the Minister of Finance when he says that increased production is needed in the country. It is needed to sustain our defence effort, it is needed to expand our program of social welfare, but I would tell him that there is nothing which is impeding greater production in Canada so much as his own policy of excessive taxation.
I believe that federal expenditures can and must be cut. I think one of the first steps needed to achieve this purpose is for the house to provide members with a greater

The Address-Mr. Sinclair opportunity to scrutinize proposed expenditures. Toward that end, I think that in the first place the estimates should be brought down at the beginning of the session and not half way through. The estimates having been brought down, I think they should not be referred to the committee of the whole because hon. members of the House of Commons, sitting as a large, unwieldy, and hurried committee, cannot obtain satisfaction in a committee of that kind. If the estimates were referred to special estimates committees, where responsible officials and departmental heads could be questioned orally, I think a good deal more satisfaction could be obtained. I believe members would then have a better chance to discover examples of extravagance than they have at the present time.
I should like to suggest several tax cuts to the Minister of Finance for his next budget. In the first place, there should be a 2 per cent cut in the general sales tax. This is the simplest and most effective way of relieving persons with low incomes. I think such a cut would reduce his revenue in the coming year by approximately $140 million. In the second place I think there should be a reduction in personal income tax of at least 10 per cent, and the greatest share of the relief should go to those in the lower income groups. I believe such a tax cut would reduce revenue by about $130 million. In the third place I believe the government should thoroughly review the level of corporation taxes. I remind the house that much of the revenue needed to finance social service programs must come from Canadian industry. It is essential that the rates of taxation should not be so high as to impede industrial expansion.
I think that in the next budget the minister should decrease over-all taxes by at least $375 million. Such cuts are feasible and sensible; because the tax experts tell us that in 1053 our national product will increase by at least 4 per cent. If that is so, the extra tax revenue should be at least $250 million, on top of the current surplus.
I say the Canadian people are becoming tired and very impatient over unnecessary high taxation. If the Liberal government fails to bring them tax relief-particularly those in the lower income brackets-it will be swept out of office at the next election just as decisively as were the Democrats in the United States.


James Sinclair: Mr. Speaker, I would be very happy to reply in a few words to this ten-minute speech on the subject of taxation, not that I am any

longer connected with the finance department but merely to answer the remarks made by the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher). Many hon. members will remember that most of what he said was incorporated in his now famous taxation speech of a year ago.
I would like particularly to comment on the figures he gave when speaking about the federal budget, and to show exactly where costs were increased. He pointed out, initially, that the federal budget today is roughly ten times what it was in 1939. However the whole pattern of the federal budget has changed very much since then. Out of this $44 billion budget, approximately half goes for defence spending as a result of Korea and communist aggression around the world. He did point out in this speech that he was not criticizing the defence spending, necessary as it is, so we can get on from this item.
The next great expenditure-very briefly and without breaking it down into departments-is $1 billion for federal social security measures under four main categories: old age pensions; family allowances; veterans' pensions and allowances; and the government's contribution to unemployment insurance. This $1 billion is not government spending in the sense that economists refer to government spending. The government does not spend this money by hiring people or buying material. This is money taken out of the taxation stream and paid as cash to various groups in Canada, for instance to the aged, as far as old age pensions are concerned, and as family allowances to the mothers of Canada. In this field I have never heard his group suggest that we should economize by cutting down spending on old age pensions. I think the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) will agree with that. As far as the cost of family allowances is concerned, again if we are going to save taxes there we would have to cut back cn family allowances. The hon. member for Moose Jaw may have his own opinions but I know the opinion of his party is that we should not economize in that way. Similar arguments prevail as far as unemployment insurance is concerned and as far as veterans' pensions and allowances are concerned. The only way to reduce the taxes necessary to pay for these measures is to reduce these benefits and pensions.
That $1 billion is entirely transfer payments. It is not spending by the government. It is taken in taxes from those who have done very well in this country, from those who are in the high income brackets. Taxation takes 52 per cent of the profits from every

successful business corporation in this country as a share for all of Canada in that prosperity, and that pattern has been approved by this parliament. These social security payments were initiated by the Liberal party and approved by this house. Never on the hustings, other than in the city of Moose Jaw, have I heard criticism of those payments, by the party to which he belongs, so taxes can not be cut on this billion dollars.
That takes care of $2J billion for defence and $1 billion for social security, expenditures of which his party has no criticism. The next item is caused by the fact that we did fight a war to save our freedom, the most expensive war in all history. We financed that war, because of the courageous financial action taken by Mr. Ilsley, better than any other country in the world as far as paying a greater percentage of the cost of the war out of current taxation is concerned. Nevertheless we did have to borrow as well. This time we did not borrow abroad. We did not borrow as we did in the first war, under Conservative management, at 5| per cent income tax free. We borrowed from the Canadian people at 3 per cent, subject to income tax. These war loans are an obligation to the Canadian people and each year our estimates show-last year speaking from memory it was $425 million-an item to meet interest payments on our national debt. Nine-tenths of the national debt today was incurred as a consequence of the war.
When my hon. friend says we have racked up surpluses, of course we have. That policy was announced by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) in 1945 in his famous white paper on post-war policy -that in good years we would have surpluses and reduce debt, the policy followed by all good businesses. That is the only way we can ever reduce that large fixed charge for interest payments on our national debt. The $425 million in our budget each year is again not being spent by the Canadian government to employ men or buy materials. It is a transfer of money raised in taxes as interest payments to those Canadians who loaned us money during the war to prosecute the war.
There are two ways in which we can cut down in our debt. One is what the Social Credit government did in 1935, to repudiate our loans. We will never do that. The only other way we can do it is to reduce the principal of the loan and so save interest payments. We are reducing our national debt each year. It is to the great credit of the present Minister of Finance (Mr. The Address-Mr. Sinclair Abbott) that in his period of office each year has been distinguished by a surplus. He has reduced our national debt by over $2 billion-almost 20 per cent-and no other country in the world can say that.
If my hon. friend suggests that we could have invested this money in Ungava or Kitimat or other places, he does not realize, or he chooses not to realize, that it is principally because we have such a sound financial administration here in Canada that we have attracted money from every part of the world for investment in Canada. The great criticism of Americans who come up here to invest is that in their own country they have this deficit spending. The United States government spend each year more than they raise in taxation, deficits which add to their tax burden.
My hon. friend was careful not to mention another new item in our federal budget-the tax rental agreements now signed by nine out of ten provinces. I spoke on them last summer, after the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) had spoken roundly condemning them, and I expressed the hope at that time that the good judgment of Premier Frost would soon lead him to enter' into such an agreement. I am very happy to say that he has seen the value of these tax rental agreements which help to equalize opportunity in all provinces. These agreements also return to the provinces much more than they were ever able to collect themselves. We are today collecting on behalf of the provinces $300 million in round figures from income taxes, corporation taxes, and succession duties which we pay back to them. We do not spend it. We do not spend it on materials and labour. It is again a straight transfer of cash back to the provinces. The provinces are very heartily in accord with it and why should they not be? The federal government gets all the criticism for high taxes, and passes on the money. They get the money but no criticism. The hon. member's own province, Saskatchewan, was never able to collect one-quarter as much in those fields as they get today from the federal government by renting them to us. All this results in another $300 million to be collected by the Minister of Finance. The hon. member will not want to cut taxes by reducing the payments to his province.
Taking those new fields, defence expenditures and cash transfers to the Canadian people and provinces off the total expenditure of the federal budget, in round figures we are left with about $700 million for all other expenditures-the normal expenditures to provide all the services of government in Canada. That is only about twice the figure
540	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Sinclair for similar expenditures in 1939. When one considers the change in the purchasing value of the dollar and the expansion of the country since that time which has demanded increased government services, we see that real spending for government services has not changed much since 1939. We are actually criticized for not having expanded many essential services more.
The hon. gentleman talks of taxation and uses this old canard, used generally by ignorant people on the hustings, to the effect that people won't work overtime because they will get in the next tax bracket and so lose money. It is impossible under our graduated tax system to earn more money and yet have less after taxation. Anyone who studies the tax tables knows that. You do not suddenly jump, for example, from the 17 per cent bracket to 19 per cent on your whole income. You have the 17 per cent tax to the end of the first thousand of taxable income above the basic exemptions, and then the next thousand is at 19 per cent, leaving 81 cents of income out of every extra dollar earned. This was a very popular rumour in the shipyards in my own riding during wartime, that if you worked extra hours you were going to lose money. Nobody in Canada, by working extra hours, can lose money. Most of the extra earnings is left to him, that is unless he is one of these very successful business operators who has so greatly expanded his business in the post-war years that he is now in the high income tax brackets. Then, you do pay a larger part in taxes, but some of the extra earnings still remain with even the millionaire.
The hon. member used this phrase-it sort of surprised me to hear a socialist member using it-that business is being bled white in this country and hesitated to expand because of too heavy taxation. Those were his words. What is the story in this country? Never in history has there been such a tremendous business expansion in every part of the country as in the last seven years, with no sign of hesitancy. In past debates my hon. friend has always been quite ready to use personal examples. I would suggest that the sort of expansion he has seen in his own business in the last seven years gives the lie to this statement about business being bled white, and that business hesitates to expand. He has become in these years, instead of a one-man hardware merchant, a tycoon running a chain of stores in Saskatchewan.
The hon. member is smiling happily now at the very thought that this Liberal administration should have offered that great opportunity. We have brought that opportunity to him, and seen to it that the people of Canada


are getting their share of his increased prosperity out of the 52 per cent corporation tax which we assess on his business.
In closing-I wanted to speak immediately after the hon. gentleman because these stories go abroad if the charges are not refuted-* I want to say that the hon. member spoke in very understandable language so far as the electorate are concerned. He did not concern himself too much with facts or figures. I want to recapitulate again what the actual position is respecting the federal budget. So far as government spending of the type we had in 1939 is concerned, today's budget is about double what it was in dollar terms and about the same in real value. Today half of our budget is for defence, which we didn't have in 1939. There is an extra billion dollars of transfer payments for social security, which we didn't have in 1939

which every party in this house endorsed. There is the necessity of honouring our obligation to pay interest on this money which we borrowed from the Canadian people in time of war, $423 million which we didn't have in 1939. Then we have tried to equalize the standards across this country in a manner that would not leave rich provinces and poor provinces. The poor provinces-and Saskatchewan was one of them before the war-were having great difficulty in maintaining even a minimum standard.
These post-war tax agreements have resulted in a raising of the level of opportunity across the country, and have meant that the federal government has had to raise $300 million more in taxation, which was not done in 1939. The federal government does not spend this money but turns over that cash to the provinces. Finally we get down to this residue of about $700 million for actually government spending for all the services tire Canadian people over the years have requested from the federal government- public works, transport, police, post office and all the rest. I should not close with a question

I am sorry the leader of the C.C.F. is not in his seat, but I see the senior member for Vancouver East (Mr. Maclnnis)-but I want to ask, and I am sure this house would like to know, whether this is a new statement of C.C.F. policy, the assertion by the hon. member for Moose Jaw that corporation taxes are much too high and should be reduced. I am sure the house would welcome a statement on that point.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I wonder if the minister would permit a question? He suggested that in our budget at the present time there are fixed expenditures to the extent, I think, of about $3-7 billion. He indicated they were

for social welfare, interest on debt, payments to the provinces and so on. Is he, on behalf of the government, taking the attitude today that it is not possible to have economies in these expenditures? That is the impression he gave me.


James Sinclair: Mr. Speaker, as you will recall I at no time suggested any such thing. I would go further and point out that nowhere in his speech did the hon. member suggest specific economies. That is the great difference-


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I certainly did. On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I suggested that there are a lot of places for economy right in this house.


James Sinclair: The hon. member went back to one or two of the illustrations he used in his speech before. You will recall that in his speech last session he suggested economies in family allowances and old age pension payments, but those were immediately repudiated by his party. The only thing he has suggested so far in today's version of last session's speech is economies so far as the House of Commons post office and the Senate post office are concerned. The hon. member has been here seven years, and he should know that the management of the House of Commons and the management of the Senate is not the responsibility of the government but is the responsibility of the House and the Senate.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I should like to know if the Minister of Fisheries, since he became minister, has taken any steps in his own department to try to bring about economies. This little pamphlet shows that fisheries expenditures are up 35 per cent in the first seven months of this year. The first day of last week I received from his department a bulletin-


Mr. Depuiy Speaker:: Order. The hon.
member may ask a question, but he must not make another speech.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Does the minister think these eight booklets on how to make salads, delicious recipes for tuna, Canadian fish recipes, are of any particular advantage?


Some hon. Members:: Sure they are.


James Sinclair: When I heard that the hon. member was going to speak about economies, it was suggested that he was going to speak about these fish booklets which our department turns out. I am answering the hon. member's question, Mr. Speaker, and not making a separate speech. I was delighted when I heard this, and it is for that reason I have this material on hay desk. He is the
The Address-Mr. Sinclair first C.C.F. member since Harry Archibald left here in 1949 who has shown any interest in fisheries, even such negative interest as this. One of the most important jobs which the fishing industry and fishermen ask us to do is to increase the sale of fish here in Canada. It was for that reason they asked us to prepare these excellent booklets which have had a very wide reception in women's clubs and organizations across the country and have helped to increase fish sales. The total cost of issue amounts to $24,000, and that amounts to -012 of one per cent of the annual value of the fishing industry in Canada.
I have this to suggest to the hon. member. He does not know much about fishing and I do not know much about the hardware business, but if all he spent on advertising his business since 1945 had been -012 of one per cent of his sales, he would not have a chain of hardware stores now but would be behind the counter selling nails for somebody else.


Mr. Cruickshank:: Any more questions?


Mr. J. H. Blackmore (Lethbridge):: Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Acadia (Mr. Quelch):
That the amendment be amended by adding at the end thereof the following:
"(f) To bring before this house, for adoption, a realistic financial and economic policy that will 
ensure the orderly development of Canada's resources, guarantee adequate markets at remunerative prices to producers, and provide to every Canadian his just share of the wealth our resources can be made to yield."
About seven years ago this December this house was engaged in a stern struggle over the Bretton Woods agreement. Hon. members who were present on that occasion will recall that the only ones in the house who opposed the acceptance of the Bretton Woods agreement and pointed to the dangers and deficiencies in that agreement were the Social Crediters. We now find that the Bretton Woods agreement has failed dismally to accomplish those things which all other members of the house were so certain it would accomplish.
Meanwhile conditions in the world have deteriorated. If we had been wise enough in 1945 to discern that the Bretton Woods agreement had not any possibility of solving the problems threatening the world we would have had seven years to spend in trying actively to determine what would solve the problems of the world. Seven years have passed in rapid deterioration in world relations and, shall I say, in the morale of the world; and conditions are far worse than they were in 1945.
I should like to read excerpts from four speeches by men whom I think the house will respect, which excerpts indicate the truth of what I have just said. The executive directors of the international monetary fund in their 1952 annual report stated:
It is a melancholy fact that seven years after the end of the war the fund has to report that the international payments are still far from having attained a state of balance and that exchange difficulties and exchange restrictions are again, over large parts of the trading world, the order of the day.
Horacio Lafer, chairman of the board of governors of the international bank in his address on September 3, 1952 stated:
The third serious problem we have to face is the widespread balance of payments disequilibrium affecting many countries. While there is surplus production in many areas and acute needs in others, trade cannot flow because of the lack of needed currency.
Here is another one from "Trade Winds" from Babson's "Washington Forecast", September 22, 1952:
U.S. exports and imports are still dropping. While we still maintain a favourable balance of trade, storm warnings are up around the world. In spite of all our economic aid and overseas procurement, the big bugaboo is the off-shore dollar shortage. Dollars were more plentiful abroad after our post-Korea spending spree. That was followed by a strong foreign market for our products. Now, the dollars are running out. As a result, our exports have dropped an average of almost 10 per cent per month since early spring.

One more from "A World Economic Crisis" in Whaley-Eaton Service, September 6, 1952:
A world economic crisis is in the making, as indicated in the report of the International Monetary Fund to the effect that financial conditions have worsened. There has been a backslide towards a tangle of restrictive money and trade controls. Solutions are yet to be forthcoming. The British are expected to have a major program ready for presentation to the next American president soon after the election. As reported last week, this will probably call for removal of trade barriers to a degree heretofore not contemplated.
To all those who have been giving careful thought to international affairs, who have studied with some understanding causes of world war II and world war I and the cause of the great depression which led to world war II, may I suggest that the statements contained in those comments carry the gravest import. Those quotations indicate strongly that our main problem in the world is a monetary problem. We in this group have been contending in season and out of season ever since we came here in 1936 that our problem is a monetary problem. We must not expect to find a solution in any other direction.
Let us then give the minutest attention to our monetary system. Thus far our pleadings, shall I say, have largely fallen on deaf ears. Members of the Conservative party, members of the C.C.F. party and some Liberals have begun to wonder how in the world it was that the Social Crediters were right on Bretton Woods while they were all wrong, but it has not dawned on them that Social Crediters knew some great fundamental facts about trade and money matters in this world which unfortunately these gentlemen either had not learned or had not learned their significance. Once more I call the attention of the house and the country, and our neighbouring countries if they will listen, to the fact that our problem is a monetary problem especially if war preparation ceases in the world.
Money is a remarkable mechanism. There is nothing mysterious about it. There is nothing sacred about money. Money is created by man to meet man's convenience and to help man solve his problems of production and distribution. Money ought to be the servant of man, but up to the present time in the history of the world money has been the master of man and has caused man some of the most grievous torture that he has experienced on this planet. On the face of the earth there is not one dollar, one pound, one mark, one franc, one lira, yen or ruble that human agencies have not brought into being.
Why do men dread money? Why do they fear the proposal that a government should
The Address-Mr. Blackmore create money, when the constitutions of the United States and Canada specifically give the central government the authority and the responsibility to create money and do not say that they should put that responsibility on the shoulders of bankers? The kings of Great Britain created the nation's money, and the money was the king's money for centuries. In those days the country was happier, considering the progress of economic affairs, than it has ever been since the bankers began to create money.
The result of .the whole thing is that we have had plenty of trouble. What is the reason that men fear money? Everybody in the house and in the country knows that too much money in the economy tends to cause inflation or a rise of prices through having too few goods in relation to the money in circulation. In other words there would be too many dollars chasing too few goods, as the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell) put it so well one time, causing a scarcity of goods and a rise in their price. Too little money in an economy tends to cause deflation or a fall in prices and employment, through having too many goods in relation to the money in circulation or, in other words, too few dollars chasing too many goods.
Certainly it ought to occur to everybody that one of the main things mankind should aim at, in this day and age particularly, is a device whereby the amount of money can be kept in constant relation to the amount of goods so there would be at all times the right amount of money chasing the right amount of goods. It should not be impossible for an age that has created radar, guided missiles, the jet plane, the atom bomb, the hydrogen bomb, that has contemplated flights into space, to create a device which would guarantee that regular relation between money in circulation and goods available for purchase. Why is it that apparently nobody, except Social Crediters, has given any attention to this matter? It strikes me as astounding.
Usually there have been present complicating factors, which is one reason it has been hard to tie down any particular aspect of inflation or deflation. The result of it all has been that monetary science is as yet utterly inadequate and its conclusions bitterly contentious. An example of that is to be found in our own day and generation. An increase in prices in the United States and Canada has been deliberately manipulated by crudely and sordidly selfish men, and now practically all statesmen are endeavouring to show that that increase in prices was the result of too much money, which is a preposterous falsehood.

The Address-Mr. Blackmore In Canada the increase in prices commenced in 1946, as I have pointed out to the house time and again, with the increase of $5 a ton in steel. From there it spread until it affected the whole Canadian price structure and put that structure on the skids. For any person in his right senses to try to blame that rise in prices on too much money is for him to be either fantastically and naively uninformed and unenlightened or deliberately hypocritical, one of the two. I imagine that the period from 1946 to 1951 will go down in history as one of the evidences of the bad results of having too much money in circulation! It is merely a complicating factor which makes it so difficult for men to come to understand the true facts about money. I should like to read one short quotation before I ask to adjourn the debate, because I

think it is better that it should be included in today's Hansard. Sir Basil Blackett had these words to say in 1931:
In view of what we have done with currency and currency with us in the last twenty years, we are all of us fit for the lunatic asylum. If many currency experts go mad, it is the natural result of their coming face to face with the insanity of the monetary system with which man has tortured himself ever since he passed from barter to money.
Twenty-one years have passed since the writing of those words, and they are probably doubly true today. Still the horrible insanity goes on.
On motion of Mr. Blackmore the debate was adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, December 11, 1952