1952-07-04

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, since it would appear likely that this will be the last day we will meet before the adjournment until November, and in view of the reported statements by the Prime Minister of Australia in regard to the desirability of holding a commonwealth conference, as well as another statement from London, I wonder if the Prime Minister could not give some assurance that Canada will consider extending an invitation, having regard to the fact that Canada's position is a peculiarly favourable one to indicate a willingness to explore this possibility.


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: I do not think there is any probability of Canada taking the initiative in the near future. The hon. member knows that these stories are not without some background, but I am not at liberty to discuss any details at this moment. I think any initiative taken by Canada at this time might be a serious embarrassment to those who have already taken initiative to bring about this kind of conference.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Arising out of the reply to the leader of the opposition just made by the Prime Minister, is it not a fact that departmental officials are now gathering information preparatory to a conference to be held in November? Is there not something like that going ahead at the very moment?


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: There is information being gathered for the purpose of making it available to those who are considering the calling of a conference at a not too distant date. The Canadian government has expressed its desire to co-operate to the fullest possible extent and to make whatever information can be gathered here available for consideration in that connection.


George Alexander Drew: I do not want to enlarge this matter because we must not extend it into a debate, but in view of what has been said
and the desire we all have that everything be done to advance a meeting of this kind I would most earnestly hope that Canada, with its peculiarly favourable position in relation to the commonwealth and the United States, will consider giving every possible lead in this direction that can be given.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE Customs and excise divisions-
302. General administration, $2,105,832.


Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: When we had a discussion last night with reference to this matter the hon. member for Greenwood asked several questions which I will attempt to answer at this time. As reported at page 4227 of Hansard for July 3, he said:
First of all I should like to know what the minister considers was the loss to the treasury last year from smuggling operations. He will recall what the Minister of Finance said . . .
The only answer I can give to that question is that nobody knows with any degree of accuracy what that loss was. It can only be an estimate and I would hesitate to make any estimate of what the loss has been in dollars and cents. The hon. member also said:
I do want, however, to get from the minister what he considers the most significant facts. First of all I want to know the number of prosecutions and seizures which were being made prior to the change in the tax on April 8 last, and whether the minister has reason to think the situation has improved very greatly. Some opinions I have heard, though I cannot profess to have verified them, seem to indicate that the change is not nearly as great as one might expect.
I will give the hon. member the information with reference to seizures and perhaps that will suffice to answer the question. Cigarettes seized in the fiscal year 1951-52 amounted to 14,375,891. As against that from April 1, 1952, to May 31, 1952, cigarettes seized amounted to 2,633,932. With respect to prosecutions, for the fiscal year 1951-52 completed prosecutions numbered 508 and those convicted numbered 498. From April 1, 1952, to May 31, 1952, there were 122 completed prosecutions and 117 convictions. The

Supply-National Revenue number of motor vehicles forfeited for carrying smuggled goods in the fiscal year 1951-52 was 152, and from April 1, 1952, to May 31, 1952, the number was 27. In that period there were 41 cases still pending.
I think perhaps I should put on the record the answer to the question of the hon. gentleman as to cigarettes seized by both police and ports for the years 1951 and 1952. I shall give first the 1952 seizures for the months of January to May inclusive. The figures are as follows:
1952	No. seized
January February March .. April ... May _____
1,889,290
1,470,019
1,060,025
1,494,772
1,139,160
I think the figures for the last six months of 1951 indicate the trend. They are as follows:
July ....
August ... September October .. November December
No. seized 873,980 960,674 734,747 1,323,645 2,048,838 1,521,594
In the whole year 1951 there were 11,080,291 cigarettes seized. The trend of the figures through July, August, September and October and reaching a high point in November indicates to me personally that smugglers of course always operate under cover if they can. In November the hours of darkness are longer which makes it easier for the smuggler to carry on his operations. Of course I think there is always going to be smuggling of cigarettes as long as there is a differential between the price at which they can be purchased in the United States and the price at which they are on sale in Canada. I will not deny that.


Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Could I ask the minister a question? Before the minister makes his general observations, I am wondering if he is going to give me the figure I asked for particularly last night. That was not the number of cigarettes seized but the number of seizures, that is to say, the number of cases of law-breaking. I said last night that seemed to me the most indicative figure. It is that figure that I should like to get particularly, and all the more because I notice that the prosecutions-and I would be interested to know why-seem to be only a small fraction of what I understand to be the number of seizures.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is this for cigarettes?


James Joseph McCann: This is all seizures.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I said last night that as long as we get a comparable figure we can carry the thing right through. Last night the minister gave me some figures for cigarettes and then said later that they were the figures for everything. What I am interested in is getting a comparable figure that can be carried right through.


James Joseph McCann: I doubt if it is possible to give a comparable figure. I say that for the reason that so far as a great many seizures are concerned there might be one carton oi cigarettes, a pair of boots, a tire in a trunk and something else. You could not put that down merely as a seizure of cigarettes, but it is a seizure.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: As long as we get a comparable figure I think that is the best that can be done, but I should like a comparable figure throughout.


James Joseph McCann: We will give comparable figures for all seizures for the first six months of 1952. They are as follows:
All seizures
January	 559
February	 609
March	   641
April	 660
May	 707
June	 648
Would the hon. member like the figures for 1951?
Starting in January the total number of seizures were: January, 426; February, 421; March, 457; April, 514; May, 600; June, 617; July, 587; August, 680; September, 731; October, 697; November, 687; December, 644. I can give you the totals in 1951 of cigarettes involved-the number of cigarettes that were seized.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: On the
figures the minister has given, as I took them down, the figures for 1952 show no lessening. The figures for 1952 run along practically parallel with those of 1951. I do not want to labour this and spend a lot of time on it but the minister says there is a peak from which we are receding.


James Joseph McCann: Mr. Chairman, I think that might be explained by the fact that there is an extra effort and more vigilance on the part of the police in making seizures- and on the part of the department too.


James Joseph McCann: We can give those figures. I think perhaps the most recent ones might be given first. In 1952 the total number of seizures in January was 559.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: One other question. If I took the figures down correctly the number of prosecutions for 1951-52 was only 508.


James Joseph McCann: That is right.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Less than the seizures for one month.


James Joseph McCann: Of course, the explanation is that there is not a prosecution in every case.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: That is certainly clear but I do want to know just the basis, if the minister can indicate it, on which we prosecute such a small number. There is probably some reason that I do not know of, but I would like to know it, and I would like to know also whether the minister thinks the deterrents are strong enough; because the picture one gets is disturbing. I read an estimate, and the figure is probably just plucked out of the atmosphere, but the estimate was that the police are only getting about five per cent. No doubt that is somebody's guess but there is a great deal going on which is not caught.


James Joseph McCann: Mr. Chairman, for the hon. gentleman's information, we prosecute the people whom we classify as commercial smugglers-those are the people who are definitely known to be in the business; but there is not a prosecution of the odd person who comes along and has a few cigarettes. The cigarettes may be confiscated and that is probably the end of it. If people wish to pay duty and penalty on them, well and good; that is done and that ends the case. If they do not, the cigarettes are confiscated and distributed to veterans' hospitals throughout the country.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: In other
words, you distinguish between professionals and enthusiastic amateurs. I am not going to 'comment further at the moment but I would like to ask a question on this. Just what does the minister consider to be the experience of his department as to the adequacy of the deterrents? This thing is keeping on and it is an ugly business. Has the minister any view to express?


James Joseph McCann: I think that the deterrents have been in a measure fairly effective in that they are helping to stop the big smuggling. Seizures have been made where a truck is seized and on it there is a load of cigarettes worth anywhere from $10,000 to $15,000. Now, we are not finding as much of that because when that truck is seized with $14,000 or $15,000 of cigarettes, and those concerned have to pay a fine, if there is a deterrent at all that is it. I think it is having its effect.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister will recall I think the representations of the tobacco industry particularly last year as to
Supply-National Revenue the damage they were suffering. Is there any indication from them of their feeling about the present situation, whether it has improved, and if so, how much?


James Joseph McCann: I might say that we have not had protest from the industry to the same extent this year. There were other factors in the lessened production figures last year and I refer particularly to the strike in the Imperial Tobacco Company. I do not think that the manufacturers of cigarettes are suffering very much because all indications are that .the total number of domestic cigarettes, Canadian cigarettes made and entered for consumption, is on the increase. For instance, in May of this year consumption was 1,750,711,685 while the consumption in February was only 1,098,023,345. One of the factors entering into that increase is that the budget in April reduced the tax to a degree at least and consumption has increased. Although I do not know that the hon. member for Greenwood appreciated or caught my point, I said last night that there was a great increase in the use of manufactured tobacco. It indicated that an awful lot of people, instead of using and buying tailor-made cigarettes, were making their own. Lately, in the last year or two at least, there has not been a tax on cigarette papers and a lot of people have found it more economical to manufacture their own cigarettes. But, on the whole, there has been an increase in the consumption of tailor-made cigarettes, and I think I can say that there has been less protest from the Canadian manufacturers of cigarettes.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I have just one more question on this point. Who is responsible for the border patrol? Has the department an enforcement branch of its own or does it call in the R.C.M.P. and direct the R.C.M.P,, or vice versa? Who is responsible? Also, to what extent has the patrol force been increased?


James Joseph McCann: Since 1932 the R.C.M.P. have been doing the patrol work for the Department of National Revenue.


Mrs. Fairclough:: Yesterday, I believe, the minister when referring to the increased estimates said that $1,900,000 odd was for salaries-increased salaries. I wonder if he would tell us whether this amount is attributable to raises in salaries or whether it is additions to staff; and possibly he would also comment on the policy of the department with respect to the dismissal of some employees and their replacement with auditors who have degrees?


James Joseph McCann: Well, Mr. Chairman, as I stated last night the estimates provide for an

Supply-National Revenue increase over last year of $1,999,153 and the larger part, 95 per cent of the $1,999,153, is required to cover adjustments in salaries occasioned by the general increase that was applicable to all government employees. In addition, with respect to the second part of the hon. member's question, part of that sum represents an increase in positions sufficient to bring us up to the same strength we had a year ago. Of course, we are always trying to improve the calibre of the staff but there have not been any releases for the purpose mentioned.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Will the minister state the over-all wage and salary roll of the department?


James Joseph McCann: There has been an increase of 118 in the salary quota. As of May 31, 1951, we had 4,886 permanents; 1,291 temporaries; and then we have what we call a seasonal staff. The hon. member will understand that in the busy part of the summer we need extra staff. There were 274 of those. This made a total of 6,451. For May 31, 1952, the permanents totalled 5,115. There have been a couple of hundred made permanent, so the temporaries are less, 1,205; seasonal staff is less, 249. This give us a total of 6,569, which is an over-all increase of 118 over the staff of a year ago.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: What is the amount of the total wage roll for the department?


James Joseph McCann: We provide for $21,608,037; that is the total amount for wages.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Then the increase in wages is almost 10 per cent over last year?


James Joseph McCann: Yes.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There is another matter I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. I think he has already been approached on this matter, and it relates to the sales tax imposed on church furniture. In the case of which I am aware, the donor of a gift to a church found that the furniture was marked "sales tax included". Upon making application he found that he had no claim for a rebate of this amount. In the very same church, another donor who had given a stained glass window found that there was no sales tax on those. It seems odd that one type of gift to a church is subject to sales tax and another is not, particularly when they both are classed as gifts to a place of worship.


James Joseph McCann: Church furnishings and
church pews are not exempt from sales tax. If the stained glass windows in this instance were a donation from abroad, we give a remission because usually they are erected as memorials. For instance, if an organ were

erected in a church and had a plaque on it that it was a memorial to those of that congregation who lost their lives in the war, then we make a remission of sales tax.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Would that apply to such things as a reredos, an altar or something of that nature which was given as a memorial? Are they exempt from sales tax?


James Joseph McCann: No, the exemption has not been extended that far. I presume the hon. member is familiar with the Excise Tax Act, schedule III, in which there are five pages of articles which are exempt from sales tax. A lot of the material that goes into the church -the stone, cement and many other things, the glass for windows-that is exempt from sales tax.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It seems to me like splitting hairs. I believe that if any of the equipment that goes into a church is exempt, that exemption might very well be extended to cover all the equipment of the church. I do not mean things like portable chairs and so on, but I mean the actual fixtures of the church. I cannot see where the department gains anything by splitting them into classifications and allowing exemption to one group and not another.


James Joseph McCann: That is the policy as I have outlined it. I want to indicate to the hon. member that this department is only administrative. If the law is changed and gives further exemptions we shall be very happy to administer the law as indicated in any changes that would be made.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I respectfully suggest that the minister, being the present custodian of policy let us say for the department, should suggest to his colleagues that the law be changed in that respect.


James Joseph McCann: That is the rather anomalous and perhaps unhappy situation: we are not policy makers.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: If you cannot make
changes in it, who can?


James Joseph McCann: We will bring your suggestions to the Department of Finance to see what can be done about them.


Mr. Coldwell:: I think it is rather odd that a stained glass window as a memorial could be exempt, and we will say a statue in a church or, we will say a reredos, would be taxed. It does not seem to me to be proper. In one instance you have a picture or an image or a reredos containing a number of images, and in one instance sales tax is not imposed while in the other instance it is. It does not seem to me to be sensible.


James Joseph McCann: Well, it is as it is; that is the best answer I can give you.


Mr. Lennard:: Did I understand the minister correctly when he said that if a pulpit were erected with a plaque on it saying that it was donated in memory of the men who had fallen in one of the great wars, that was tax free, but if a similar pulpit were erected as a memorial to some private individual or family, it would be taxed?


James Joseph McCann: I was not speaking about pulpits or altars, but about organs.


Frank Exton Lennard: I am asking about the other.


James Joseph McCann: The exemption is for
memorials or monuments, and those are exempt under the Excise Tax Act. It must be memorials or monuments erected to members of the armed forces who lost their lives in the service of their country. If an altar or pulpit were erected as a memorial, and it were so indicated, that would be given consideration for exemption and it might qualify.


Major James William Coldwell: A memorial to members of the armed forces?


James Joseph McCann: That is what it says, a memorial or monument erected to any members of the armed forces who lost their lives in the service of their country.


Major James William Coldwell: That narrows it.


Frank Exton Lennard: In other words, it does not apply to a memorial put up to private individuals?


James Joseph McCann: No.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should like to ask a question about the temporary employees. I noticed the minister gave a figure of 1,291 for temporaries. Then, he said that this represented a reduction of, I think, around 200 in the temporary staff. I understand that the temporary staff is not entitled to be on the pension plan. Is that correct?


James Joseph McCann: Yes; there was a reduction in temporaries this year, from 1,291 a year ago to 1,205; that would be a difference of 86.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: My second question is this. Having regard to my understanding that these people may not be on the pension plan, I would be interested to know just what the situation is with regard to this 1,291. For example, I would be interested in knowing how many of them have been years in the service. In other words, those who are not temporary in any real sense. Secondly, I would be interested to know what wastage there is. How big a problem is this 1,291? Have we got 1,291 people most of whom have been in the government service for a long time, who would like to be under the pension plan and who cannot be? Or have we got 1,291 55704-267i
Supply-National Revenue who are turning over fairly rapidly or where there is a great deal of wastage?


James Joseph McCann: As a matter of policy, 10 per cent of our staff outside of ports are temporary. An employee comes into the service and, after certain years of service and satisfaction, he is put on the permanent force. Let me indicate to the hon. member that in May, 1951, we had 4,886 permanents and that number has been increased in a year to 5,115. That is an increase of 229 in a year. I think that is a fair increase from temporary employment or from temporaries to permanents, within that time, relative to the number employed.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I would not want to argue against that statement. It is progress. But I am still left without an answer to my question. Let us take into consideration this number of 1,291. First of all, will the minister say exactly what their position is with regard to pension rights? I may not have stated it quite accurately. In the second place, will he say, for example, how many of those 1,291 have been in the service, let us say, five years?


James Joseph McCann: I am giving the information that we have not many who remain temporaries very long. As the hon. member will understand, the temporary pays into the retirement fund. Then when he becomes a permanent, he pays into the superannuation fund and he gets credit, of course, for the money he has put into the retirement fund. The retirement fund applies to temporaries and the superannuation fund applies to permanents. I am told that there are few of our employees whom it takes longer than one, two or three years to be transferred from the temporary force to the permanent force.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: That situation sounds fairly satisfactory, but let me ask one further question. When an employee is transferred from the temporary force to the permanent force, as the minister has pointed out, he has had deductions from his salary even during his period as a temporary. Then he becomes permanent and goes under the ordinary civil service plan. Is he in exactly the same position as that in which he would have been if he had been permanent from the time he began to make his payments?


James Joseph McCann: With regard to superannuation, he is in exactly the same position because he gets that credit.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am glad to hear that.


Frank Exton Lennard: I have a matter that I wish to draw to the attention of the minister. If

Supply-National Revenue my understanding is correct, a Canadian who visits the United States for a period longer than 48 hours is allowed to bring back every four months certain things to the value of $100. Is that right?


James Joseph McCann: That is right.


Frank Exton Lennard: I had this personal experience myself. A few months ago I visited the United States for ten days, came back and had $19 worth of goods to declare. I was not going over there on a spending spree. I declared that $19 worth of goods, and was immediately told that I would not be able to bring any more goods in from the United States until the four-months period was up. I do not think this is fair. If that is the policy, it encourages people who visit the United States to go the limit. In my case, as I say, I was on no spending spree. I declared this $19 worth of goods that I brought back, and I was immediately told that I would not be able to bring in any more goods tax-free for a four-months period. Is that the policy?


James Joseph McCann: The hon. gentleman understands the situation correctly and was given the correct information. It would be an impossible administrative and bookkeeping job if the situation were otherwise. I think I know what the hon. member has in mind. He brought in $19 worth of goods. I think it is his opinion that on another occasion he ought to be able to bring in $131 worth of goods or at least the difference between-


Frank Exton Lennard: Is the limit $150 or $100.


James Joseph McCann: $100. The hon. member thinks he should be able to bring in the other $81 worth?


Frank Exton Lennard: That is right.


James Joseph McCann: That would not be in accordance with the law.


Frank Exton Lennard: I am merely stating that I consider the strict law as being extremely unfair.


James Joseph McCann: I see what the hon. member means.


Frank Exton Lennard: It encourages people to go the limit and to fill the car full.


James Joseph McCann: That is a matter that can be given consideration. I do not know Whether any change will be made.


George Alexander Drew: I want to raise a matter that I had hoped I might be raising before this time, but this seems to be the only time when I can present it. I do so in the hope that the situation may be given consideration. I am dealing with a particular application that was made for service with this department. Sometimes it is only by dealing with individual

cases that it is possible to make an argument for reconsideration of the general policy. I am mentioning the case of a veteran of the last war by the name of Paul Flewwelling who served with the Royal Canadian Air Force and won the D.F.C. After four years' service with the R.C.A.F., in the bomber command, he returned to Canada. Like a great many other air force veterans he found that he could not become attached here and he went to Britain in 1947 to serve with the R.A.F. He returned in 1951, being unable to get a long term appointment with the R.A.F., in spite of the fact that he had been an instructor and had a high standing as a flying officer with the R.C.A.F. He then applied for a position with the department of customs and excise in Saint John. He wrote the civil service examinations in Saint John in December of 1951. He was informed that he had passed those examinations, but in January of this year he was told by the selection board that he could not get the position in any event because he had not been in the country for one year. He was informed by letter that he had passed the examinations but he was told orally that he could not get the appointment in any event for this reason.
This young man was born sixteen miles from Saint John. They have property there, and during the time that he was in England his wife held that property at all times while he was serving. I raise this point, and I shall be happy to give this young man's address and any other details to the minister or to anyone in the department because it seems to me that this represents one of those cases where regulations made for one purpose produce a result that was never intended. I feel sure that when there is a provision that someone will not be allowed to serve because he has not been in the country a year, it is obviously intended to apply to those who are strangers to Canada, and who are coming to Canada. Of course it is appropriate that persons should spend some time here, which would indicate that they were fitting into our general pattern of life, before they should be taken into the civil service and have to do with matters where they accept some responsibility in relation to the public. I feel, however, that that provision never could have been intended to apply to a young man who was born here and who spent all his life here except for the period that he served in forces that were associated with ours in a common cause.
I raise this now for two reasons: one, to deal with this as a specific case, and the other to use that specific case to express the hope that there will be a re-examination of some of these provisions so that any cases that are affected by service which really is

in the common cause and within the empire shall not deprive anyone of an opportunity for appointment to which he would have been entitled had he remained in Canada at the time, or in a Canadian uniform. This simply happened to be a case where, not being able to serve in a Canadian uniform in that branch of the service for which he was qualified, he joined the Royal Air Force and served in what after all is a common cause.


James Joseph McCann: I thank the leader of the opposition for bringing this particular case to our attention. The one year in the country regulation is not a regulation of the Department of National Revenue. That is a civil service regulation. From what the leader of the opposition says, I think he would be the exact type of man that we should like to have in our service, and I may say that there is no department of government, proportionate to the number of employees, that has more veterans within its service than we have. We have found them eminently satisfactory. They are well received by people coming into this country, and they carry on their duties very efficiently. What I will do is bring to the attention of the civil service commission and my colleagues this apparent anomaly, with a view to having it corrected.


George Alexander Drew: I wish to express my appreciation of the assurance given by the minister, and simply to leave it. I was giving this specific example as an illustration of what had happened. Recognizing that it is a general problem, I hope that by bringing this forward it may be possible to have the general service regulations recognize that many young men have gone out of Canada with no thought of leaving Canada but simply of making use ot the training that they had received in what they regarded at all times as a common cause within the commonwealth.


Mr. White (Middlesex East):: Before the item carries I want to return for a moment to the question of temporary and permanent employees. The reason I do that is that it has been brought to my attention in one particular instance that a man had served 22 years and was still on the temporary list. This was not in the minister's department, but in one of the departments of government. How many employees in the Department of National Revenue have been on a temporary basis for 15 years and 20 years?


James Joseph McCann: The answer to that is absolutely none. It may have been some other department of government.


Harry Oliver White: Yes.
Supply-National Revenue


James Joseph McCann: There is nobody in our service who has been on the temporary list for 15 years or 20 years.


Harry Oliver White: The reason I mentioned that was that I felt that it was very unjust treatment of any faithful civil servant.


Frank Exton Lennard: I have a question in connection with the international bridge at Niagara Falls. Are the quarters occupied by the customs officials there owned by the bridge authority and rented by the department?


James Joseph McCann: As with most other bridges of that type, the accommodations are owned by the bridge authority and are supplied free of charge to the Department of National Revenue. We send our officers there to do the work at the point of entry.


Frank Exton Lennard: Therefore you would not have much control? I happened to drift into the office at a time when it was raining quite a shower, and the roof was leaking terribly. They had to move several desks. I said: "You need umbrellas in here." They said: "There is not much we can do about this. The roof has been leaking for months, but they will not fix it." In the circumstances, I cannot see that you can do very much about it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Taxation division-
307. General administration, $1,537,200.
James Joseph McCann: No; that is a separate department. Will you call the supplementaries for customs and excise on page 11.


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. We shall now call item 732 of the supplementary estimates on page 11.
Customs and excise divisions-
Ports, outports and preventive stations-
732. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $66,000.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I notice that the details of this item on page 37 do not give any location. Is this merely in anticipation of general demand, or is there anything specific in mind in asking for this?


James Joseph McCann: I am afraid I was not listening attentively.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Is this a contingency item?


James Joseph McCann: It turns out that we require a little extra money for this.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the
minister just say a word as to the position with regard to collection of taxes at the
4240	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Revenue moment. I know it is pretty well up. Perhaps he can tell us exactly where it stands.


James Joseph McCann: That is under 307? Yes.
I want to make a short statement with reference to the taxation division. I think it will give information that will be beneficial. When presenting the estimates of the taxation division-


William Alfred Robinson: Order. Do I understand that item 732 is carried?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Taxation division-
307. General administration, $1,537,200.
James Joseph McCann: When presenting the estimates of the taxation division of the Department of National Revenue, I have made it a practice to make a short statement mentioning points that may be of particular interest to hon. members with regard to the operation of the taxation division.
At page 44 of the estimates will be found the total amount required for the operation of the division, which is $23,432,212. This compares with the amount of $25,472,294 provided in the estimates for 1951-52 and represents a reduction of $2,040,082. Also on page 44 will be found the estimate for the operation of the income tax appeal board amounting to $119,693 which is an increase of $22,074.
The principal reduction is in the estimate provided for salaries, although there are reductions in other items. The total provided for salaries this year is $20,143,432; this compares with a total of $22,040,694 provided for in the 1951-52 estimates and represents a reduction of $1,897,262.
The total staff of the division as at the end of May 1951 was 6,944 people and as at the 1st May, 1952, 6,355, of which number 433 persons represent casual help hired about the beginning of March for the three or four month peak period which occurs each year around the statutory filing date. The actual number of persons with the division at the present time is somewhat short of the number required and a limited number of employees with the requisite qualifications are being engaged through the civil service commission. The total staff required by the division for all district offices as well as at head office should be closer to 7,500 than the present number. However, in conformity with the division's policy of restricting the personnel engaged to those whose qualifications are best suited to the work, it is unlikely that this figure will be reached for some time. The average


monthly salary of all persons employed by the division at 1st May, 1952, was $252 as compared with $242 a year ago.
The next item to which I would like to refer is travelling expenses. The estimate for this year provides for a total of $700,000 which is $92,000 less than the estimate for last year. The department, in co-operation with the office of the comptroller of the treasury, scrutinize the travelling expenses very carefully and ensure that such are incurred only where warranted. Hon. members will appreciate that in the work of the division the part represented by the examination of records in the field is very important. For this reason it is essential that officials of the division do a good deal of their work in the field.
The third largest item in the estimates this year is for postage in the district offices. This item is $600,000 as compared to $650,000 provided for 1951-52.
The next item to which I would like to refer is for office stationery and supplies. The total amount provided in this year's estimates is $568,180 as compared to $719,500 for last year. This represents a reduction of $151,320. Every effort will be made to further reduce these costs and to ensure that they are kept to the essential minimum.
A closely related item for which an increased estimate is provided is office machine equipment. The amount this year is $142,500 as opposed to $35,000 last year. The increase in this item is occasioned by the acquisition of modern accounting machines and reproducing equipment which will be used in dealing with the accounts of employers deducting the tax at source from their employees. The revised procedure which has been developed effects substantial staff economies throughout the district offices and, in addition, achieves a more efficient bookkeeping system which should be of assistance to employers in their dealings with the district offices. The highest order of efficiency and service is warranted in accounting by the division for the taxes deducted by employers when one considers that through this source of revenue alone something like $800 million in taxes is collected. The revised system has been installed and is operating in several district offices.
Another related item for which there is a slight reduction is public forms. The amount submitted this year is $427,000 as against $440,000 provided for last year. A tremendous volume of public forms are required to be printed for this division and constant efforts are being made in co-operation with the queen's printer to effect economies. The wastage remains high and variations in the

methods of distribution are being tried with some slight success. The wastage is caused by two general factors: first, the need for providing complete and adequate distribution; second, the natural inclination of the individual taxpayer to provide himself with extra copies of the forms. This is a difficult matter, as the primary requisite is the service to which the public is entitled.
An excellent illustration of the economies that have been effected by improved methods and procedures within the taxation division is provided by a comparison of the total estimate for all items relating to printing, stationery and office equipment for each of the last four fiscal years:
1949-	50	
$1,610,0001950-	51	
1,605,0001951-	52	
1,254,5001952-	53	
1,197,380
The item for law costs is in total $230,000 as compared with $253,000 provided last year. The reduction is applicable to the vote for district offices which is $35,000 less than the amount provided last year. The saving achieved in this vote results from arrangements made with the R.C.M.P. who have undertaken a substantial part of the work in connection with prosecutions.
On the other hand, the vote for law costs under general administration which relates to the head office part of this work indicates an increase of $60,000 in this year's estimates, as against $48,000 provided last year. This increase is attributable to the number of appeals which are processed through the head office of the division as well as the exchequer court cases and collection matters.
I should like to make a brief comment about three of the other items. Advertising: this amount has been increased to $42,000 from $27,000 and is due in part to the opening of additional district offices as well as. a small expansion in the scope of this program. As a matter of interest to hon. members, the "file early campaign" this year was most successful. Throughout the divisions, approximately twice as many returns were filed in February and early in March as in previous years.
Armoured car service has been increased to $20,000 from $13,000 owing to the opening of additional district offices and increased rates.
The item for $75,000 for acquisition of housing accommodation which is provided this year relates to the moving of the headquarters for the Yukon district office from Dawson to Whitehorse. There are other government departments also being moved to Whitehorse and this amount represents the cost of
Supply-National Revenue accommodation being provided for the taxation division.
With respect to the income tax appeal board, the following figures illustrate the work dealt with by this board during each calendar year since its inception in 1949. The number of appeals received in 1949 was 122, disposed of, 55. In 1950, received, 423; disposed of, 299. In 1951, received, 469; disposed of, 443. To April 30, 1952, received, 81; disposed of, 108. The foregoing indicates that at April 30 there were 190 appeals being dealt with. Hon. members may have noted with respect to salaries of members of the board the provision for an additional member. It is felt that the work of the board will be expedited by the appointment of an additional member.
I should like to conclude this statement with a brief reference to certain points in connection with the present position of the work of the division.
As at 1st May, 1952, there was an inventory of individual returns of 128,049; at the same date in 1951, the inventory of individual returns was 133,075. The number of returns processed from 1st January, 1952, to 1st May, 1952, was 2,247,966 as compared with 1,707,276 processed during the same period in 1951.
With respect to corporation returns, the inventory of returns as at 1st May, 1952, was 14,184; as at 1st May, 1951, this inventory was 19,369.
The number of corporation returns received from May 1, 1951, to 1st May, 1952, was 61,718 as compared with 59,105 for the same period ending in 1951.
With respect to the individual income tax returns filed this spring, 1,481,000 refund applications had been forwarded to the comptroller of the treasury by 21st May. As of the same date, 1,328,000 refund cheques had been issued.
The collection of outstanding taxes also indicates some improvement as illustrated by the following figures:
At April 15,	1952, there were 127,949
accounts outstanding amounting to $46,648,577. As at the same date in 1951, there were 153,636 accounts outstanding amounting to $58,120,949.
The over-all administrative costs of operating the division as related to $100 revenue received for the fiscal period ending March 31, 1952, was 99 cents. As at the same period in 1951, this cost was $1.62.
Last year when speaking about the estimates, I indicated to hon. members that certain additional district offices would be opened during the forthcoming year. I am pleased to be able to report that offices are

Supply-National Revenue now fully operating in Kitchener, Sudbury, Victoria and Windsor. At St. Catharines a district office has been opened and should be in full operation very shortly. It is not planned to open further district offices this year.
I trust that the foregoing comments will be of assistance to hon. members in considering these estimates and shall be glad to provide any further information that may be desired. The total collections last year were $2,204,046,302.14.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I imagine it would be convenient under this general administration item to ask the minister for some information about the work of the income tax appeal board. In particular, I would like to know how many appeals have been dealt with, how many are pending and what length of time is involved.


James Joseph McCann: Perhaps the hon. member missed what I said in giving my statement. With respect to the income tax appeal board, the following figures illustrate the work dealt with by this board during each calendar year since its inception in 1949. The number of appeals received in 1949 was 122, disposed of, 55. In 1950, received, 423; disposed of, 299. In 1951, received, 469; disposed of, 443. To April 30, 1952, received, 81; disposed of, 108. The foregoing indicates that at April 30 there were 190 appeals to be dealt with.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: What about the length of time?


James Joseph McCann: The average length of time taken to dispose of a case is three months.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: With reference to the figures the minister has given, when he says that in 1949 there were so many appeals and in 1950 there were so many, does that mean appeals lodged in those years or does that mean the appeals are for those taxation years?


James Joseph McCann: They were lodged, and that was the first year the appeal board was set up.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The appeals may have been for 1946, 1947 or 1948?


James Joseph McCann: They could well have been.


Mr. Fair:: On many occasions in the past I have brought to the attention of the house the question of taxation as it applies to farmers. We had intended to have quite a discussion but because the estimates of the Department of National Revenue have not been brought in until this late date it will have to be postponed until another time.


There is, however, a new brand of confiscation that has been imposed on farmers, and I have a letter concerning a particular case which was written by the lady concerned on the same date this session opened. I believe we discussed this matter to some extent at the time the budget resolutions were before the house. At that time I took up with the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance the question of bachelors not being able to receive an exemption for wages paid to housekeepers. At that time the parliamentary assistant thought it was quite a joke and he said that perhaps the farmer should marry the housekeeper. However, if some of the farmers concerned had attempted to pick a wife for the parliamentary assistant perhaps he would not have thought it was quite so much of a joke.
I think this matter deserves consideration because after all farmers are natural people. Every bachelor farmer has his work to do on his farm and I think he is entitled to exemption for the wages paid to a housekeeper, but up to the present time that has been denied. I believe that farmers are as much entitled to lead a natural life in every sense of the word as anybody else, but in the light of the circumstances which I intend to relate in a moment it will be apparent that they are not supposed to live that way.
The case I am concerned with at the present time has to do with a farmer and his wife. Apparently they did the natural thing some years ago and were married legally. The farmer was a man of small means. In my case when I came to this country I had $50 and when I got married I was in debt to the tune of a few thousand dollars. In this case the farmer's wife had owned some cattle before her marriage, and after they were married they naturally put their herds together and went to work as many of us did on our farms in the earlier days, and as I expect is being done at the present time. After some time the lady's herd of cattle increased, as did her husband's, and they were able to purchase a half section of land. However, the time came when ill health and general conditions compelled them to reduce their herds. They did so and apparently placed the proceeds of the sale in the bank in the husband's name but the wife had a power of attorney.
In 1948 a government annuity contract was purchased to yield the wife $100 a month as soon as she reached the age of 60, and I might say that in a very short time she will have reached that age. That policy cost them $13,268.76. The purchase was made out of the proceeds of the sale of their basic

livestock herd on which the income tax department had been satisfied so far as income tax was concerned. It was their money to do with as they pleased. If they had had a joint account, as many farmers and their wives do, and the lady had signed the cheque in payment for the annuity I do not suppose any trouble would have arisen in connection with the matter. However, because the husband signed the cheque we find that after a little while they received a notice of assessment from the taxation division at Edmonton indicating that they owed gift tax amounting to $1,184.63. The gift tax was assessed because the farmer had signed the cheque for the purchase of the annuity.
I do not believe they had any ulterior motive because they have not got very much property, but it was pointed out to them by the taxation division at Edmonton that it was one method of evading succession duty. At the time they purchased the annuity they were advised by the annuity office in Edmonton that there would be no tax on the transaction simply because they had already paid income tax on the amount received from the sale of their basic herd. However, they were assessed the sum of $1,184.63 and that amount has been confiscated from them in the Russian manner. That is not the way to increase production in this country. They and many other farmers have curtailed their production drastically because of the taxation methods employed. I believe such methods should not be tolerated by this or any other government.
Earlier in the session I took the matter up with the minister and had most courteous replies from him but we did not get a refund of the amount. I believe a refund with interest should have been made long before now. The amount should never have been collected to begin with. The result is that the annuity contract has cost these people $14,453.39 for an annuity of $100 per month. The policy is only guaranteed for ten years. The lady says that because of the state of her health she doubts very much whether she will reach the age of 70 but if she does she will have collected $12,000. It appears to me that there is something wrong. It would seem that there is a penalty because people live a natural life.
I am not accusing the minister of dishonesty, far from it. I have known him since 1935 and I have a lot of respect for him. However, I also know the farmers of the west, having lived there since 1914, almost forty years. I know the struggle that many young people have had in order to make a living, and now when they have reached a 55704-223
Supply-National Revenue certain age and their health is broken simply because of the conditions under which they have had to live, in what is a semi-arid part of the province along the south line of my constituency, they are treated in this way by the Department of National Revenue. I feel that it is not good enough and I am asking now that, without further delay, the Department of National Revenue refund those people the amount of $1,184.63 plus 6 per cent interest; because that is the amount the government would have charged them had they not paid their income tax.
I do not want to take up any more time-


Mr. Abbott:: Hear, hear.


Robert Fair: -but I do believe that in the interest of justice all round-and the farmers have not had any too much justice in the past either in the prices they have been allowed for their production or in these matters-the department should straighten this out.


Mr. Low:: This appears to be one of those cases where a strict application of the law does result in gross injustice. There is a remedy and the treasury board have the remedy in their hands. It is, by treasury board minute, to remit that gift tax and then bring into this house an amendment which would make it abundantly clear that no such gross injustice should be perpetrated again. I think the Department of National Revenue ought to ask for such a remission order so that these folks will not have to pay $14,453.39 for a ten-year annuity of $100 per month. It is only worth $12,000 now. Those folks would have been better off to have kept their cash.


James Joseph McCann: They are paying for the annuity-it is not $12,000 cash.


Solon Earl Low: On top of the payment for the annuity they have had to pay this gift tax of over $1,100 which is the thing we are talking about. I think it is iniquitous. I am not blaming the minister but I think it is one of those cases where strict application of the law will result in injustice. I do not see that there is any other interpretation which can be placed on it and I know that the minister himself would not want that to continue.


James Joseph McCann: I do not think there is much use discussing the individual case at this time. There has been a lot of correspondence on it and I suggest that this is exactly the type of case for which the income tax appeal board was set up. For the small sum of $15 an appeal can be made to that

Supply-National Revenue board and if the case goes favourably to the appellant the fee is refunded.


Solon Earl Low: Do you not think that at this time it would be wise to consider changing the act? That would make such injustices as this impossible in the future, and this is likely to happen to a number of people.


James Joseph McCann: In answer to that question I say again that we are only an administrative department and if changes are to be made representations might well be made to my colleague the Minister of Finance.


Solon Earl Low: I notice your colleague the Minister of Finance is listening now.


Douglas Charles Abbott: These matters are always considered.


Robert Fair: May I ask the minister whether it is too late to lodge an appeal now against this iniquitous practice?


James Joseph McCann: We will have to look into the matter to see whether it comes within the regulations that are set up regarding appeals. There is a time limit but I cannot say offhand what that time limit is.


Robert Fair: Would the minister please let me know?


James Joseph McCann: Yes, we can do that.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: There are two or three things I should like to mention to the minister at this time. In the first instance I would like to ask him when he is replying to give us some information about when we may expect the regulations regarding deferred capital cost allowance will be withdrawn. At the time those regulations were put into effect there were some restrictions on building, and supplies were not available. It was thought advisable to curtail investment in both building and equipment, but as conditions have eased somewhat, and as this particular regulation causes a considerable amount of difficulty from the standpoint of both accounting in the various establishments concerned and, I am sure, within the department itself, I hope that serious consideration will be given to withdrawing those regulations within the course of the current year.
The minister spoke a few moments ago about the time limit for the making of appeals. In that regard I might say that the government treats the taxpayer in a manner entirely different from that in which he is allowed to act himself. I have particular regard to investigations which have been made within the last couple of years. The main complaint I have had was from a professional man, a doctor, and I will use his case to illustrate.

In this instance the officials went into his office and went back not for one year or two years or three years but for ten years. I am sure that the minister, himself would have difficulty remembering details of operations in his office ten years ago. I know that I would myself. I do not think I can remember matters of administration within my office three years ago. If anyone asked me, unless I had a complete record on paper I am sure I could not answer any questions. I believe a busy professional man suffers considerable injustice when investigations are conducted over such a long period. I realize that during the war with the added work in the department and the difficulty of obtaining staff there was a backlog of work and examinations of returns were not completed for sometimes four or five years. But at the present time I think it is pretty well caught up-or that is the information I have; and I do not believe it is right that there should be no time limit on these investigations. If the department has not caught up with the taxpayer withih four or five years it does not seem fair that they should go back for that length of time unless there is quite a bit of evidence of failure to report income. Where a man has reported right along and has paid his tax it does not seem proper to me that the department, merely for the sake of checking his records, should go back ten years. In the particular case to which I have reference, when the investigation was over there had not been anything to speak of, and it does not seem proper.
Earlier in this session I spoke with regard to the method employed in the department for computing dependents' allowance with particular reference to children who are eligible for family allowances and those who are not. At that time I put a case on the record where a child did not qualify by reason of residence until December, and the parent of that child was only permitted to charge a $150 exemption. If my memory serves me well, the parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Finance at that time took up the question and said: Well, in any event, in the year in which the allowance ceased, that is the year in which the child became 16 years of age, the guardian or parent would benefit to the extent of being allowed the full $400 exemption despite the fact that the child was eligible for only a portion of the year.
In that case, peculiarly enough, they only received family allowance for two months- December in the one year and January in the next. I became interested in this case and wrote back to find out whether or not they did receive any allowance at all for December and I found that while they were

required to deduct only $150 for this dependent they did not even receive family allowances in the December in which the child qualified. In the following month, January of the following year, they received a cheque for two months-for December in the one year and for January of the next year-and that was the end of it. They received the one cheque for the two months and it prohibited the taxpayer from claiming the full allowance of $400 for that child for one year. Of course, he could claim it in the next year.
It does seem to me, Mr. Chairman, that there should be some sense to these things. Under normal conditions the parents would not even have applied for family allowance because it was apparent they could only receive it for two months. But even if they had not applied, the rules were still applicable to that case because the child was eligible within that month of December, and whether or not they received the family allowance they failed to receive the full allowance for that dependent. To my mind, this is wrong. I quite understand that a parent might well calculate that in three or four years it would be to his advantage not to have the family allowance but to claim the $400 dependent's allowance rather than the $150. I know what that would mean to the department, and that is one of the reasons this regulation was put into effect, because of the difficulties of administration.
Where a child coming into the country is sixteen years of age, it seems to me to be wrong that the parents are not permitted to claim the full amount of $400. In this case it meant quite a sizeable difference in tax. I had it calculated-I believe he had three children-and the difference in the tax amounted to some $123 which he was forced to remit in addition to what he had already paid. I believe that is a matter which should be given some consideration by the department.
Another matter which I brought up in the house a couple of weeks ago concerns the deduction of dues paid by professional engineers to their society in Ontario. I believe the minister will recall that I asked that question, and the answer was that the matter would be given consideration. I should like to know whether or not that has been done.
There is a rather technical matter which I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. It arises out of the current policy of the federal income tax department in attempting to tax what is usually called the reserve for unredeemed tickets of dairy, bakery and other businesses using tickets as a payment convenience for themselves and 55704-268i
Supply-National Revenue their customers. In some cases these amounts for unredeemed tickets have been set up on the company's books as reserves. I admit that the term "reserve" is really a misnomer when applied to all these tickets. This term may be the chief cause of the present trouble. It may be that a more acceptable accounting practice would be to credit the proceeds of tickets sold to an account named "liability for unredeemed tickets" or "customers' deposits on future sales." Then, when the goods or services were delivered and some tickets redeemed, they could enter the amount of the goods delivered as a sale, with a consequent reduction in the aforesaid liability account.
In computing taxable income, it is stated in the Income Tax Act, section 12 (1) (e), that no deduction from taxable income shall be allowed in respect of an amount transferred or credited to a reserve, contingent account, or sinking fund except as expressly permitted by this part. It can be argued that if the sales of tickets are not credited to income in the first place, it is not necessary to claim them as deductions. Moreover, if the proceeds of tickets are credited to a liability account not called by the term "reserve", it can be contended that the above subsection of the act does not apply to it.
I think it might be well to consider the relationship of this problem to some other industries, because some businesses require deposits on account of a customer's order for goods before they will proceed to work on or supply goods. For instance, in the case of a big machine ordered, a manufacturer may require a large deposit to help finance the cost of manufacture or to guard against a substantial loss if the customer does not accept delivery when the machine is completed. A rental may be prepaid, let us say, over a period of a year or a retaining fee received for work to be done in the succeeding year or a customer's accidentally overpaid balance may be left to apply on account of the next periodic purchase. All the foregoing represent payment received in advance of goods or privileges to be delivered, and the income tax department does not require them to be assessed as taxable income. They can be set up on the company's or individual's books and claimed as deferred. It does not require contractors to pay on profits until the contracts are completed. Why then does it require dairies and bakeries, transportation companies and so on, to pay on receipts for which they have not yet bought the goods to make delivery? I claim, Mr. Chairman, this is discrimination.

Supply-National Revenue
A very important point to be considered is that a real liability for a cash refund on tickets does exist. I have never heard of any dairy or bakery, and I am sure the minister has not either, which has refused to return cash on demand for any tickets presented to it. Just recently in Hamilton, as a matter of fact within the last couple of months when the Hamilton street railway issued new tickets at an increased rate it advertised particulars of, and actually carried out, a redemption of the old unused tickets in the hands of customers. The drivers for dairies and bakeries carry cash and tickets on the same basis, and they are equivalent in value, and equivalent to each other in making their returns at the end of the day when accounting for the day's sales. In practice, all the time they are giving cash on demand for tickets. Whether or not there is a legal liability to redeem in cash, so far as I know this practice has been followed in winding up or bankruptcy proceedings.
Businesses with a liability for outstanding tickets appearing on their financial statements, Mr. Chairman, are approached by the income tax assessors in the first place, and asked if they will accept an assessment on their ticket liability account. If so, they are offered the proposition that the full balance of the said liability may be added to the taxable income of the enterprise for the year 1949, or else may be spread over the years 1949 to 1951 in any reasonable proportion which can be substantiated by figures submitted by the taxpayer. If the taxpayer will not accept this proposition or indicates that he will appeal on principle to the appeal board, which he has a legal right to do, then the department will withdraw its proposition and assess the ticket liability account on the basis of increases in it for the full period from six years prior to the date of the last assessment to the present time. It will also charge interest-'there again we have a contentious point, Mr. Chairman-on those reopened assessments of prior years. This reopening of these old assessments often goes back to 1944 or 1943 affecting periods when the 75 per cent and 100 per cent excess profits taxes were in force, and resulting in very large additional bills for income and excess profits taxes. In those years the taxpayer had no inkling of any such treatment by the income tax department, and frequently the assessments are staggering to their financial position. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that the whole approach indicates strong-arm methods, with the use of a particularly heavy club to discourage appeals.


In closing these few remarks on this contentious subject I would ask the minister, in the first place, whether he will give consideration to this point and take whatever appropriate action may be necessary to revise the act in this regard. In the second place, I should like to ask him a personal question. During the course of my remarks someone was kind enough to send me some streetcar tickets. May I apply them on my income tax?


James Joseph McCann: All of the matters brought to our attention by the hon. member for Hamilton West have to do with policy, and I am glad that my colleague the Minister of Finance has been here. There are just one or two things I might say with reference to the assessment going back of over a period such as that which the hon. member claims. There is a six-year limitation with reference to re-assessment unless there are indications that correct returns have not been made.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: They took ten years in this one office.


James Joseph McCann: I have a long file on the matter myself. The gentleman in question is a friend of mine of many years' standing. I could name him if I wanted to.
With reference to the dues of engineers, that is a matter that would require a change in the law. As to the matter of reserve for tickets, that is, as I say, a policy question and is before the courts at the present time.
With reference to the matter of deferred depreciation, I believe the Minister of Trade and Commerce made a statement on that matter a short time ago.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the item carry?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: No. Following up the minister's remark that the matter of dues for professional engineers would require a change in the act-


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have already advised that that matter will be considered prior to the next budget. I made that answer to the question here about two months ago.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The minister answered it two months ago, certainly; but surely it does not take two months to decide whether the dues that a professional engineer pays to his association are any different from those which are paid to a union by a worker.


Douglas Charles Abbott: What I meant was that it would require a budgetary change, and that

I have indicated publicly that we will consider it with a great many other budgetary matters prior to the introduction of the next budget.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-
International shortwave broadcasting service-
54. Maintenance and operation including authority to credit to the appropriation revenue from rental of facilities in Radio Canada building to an amount of §140,000 and to re-expend it for the purposes of the international service. $1,982,675.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is the minister going to say something about the C.B.C.?


James Joseph McCann: Yes. This item 54 has to do with the maintenance and operation including authority to credit to the appropriation revenue certain amounts of money for the international shortwave broadcasting service.
Canada's shortwave service continues its work of interpreting Canada and its policies to the world. This is an increasingly important work. Canada is bearing its share in the mutual defence efforts of the free world to deter aggression. Canada is also bearing its share in the positive and intelligent presentation of the free world's position in the current struggle for the minds of men.
The work of this service in the world arena has great psychological, political and economic significance. It is a source of solid encouragement to all men who continue to believe in the democratic way of life; and there are many listeners-perhaps more than we may at times imagine-who do so under the most adverse circumstances. It is an untrammelled source of information that respects no frontiers, recognizes no iron curtains. With a twist of the listener's finger, it can fill a hall, hush to a whisper or be silent at a sound on the stairs. It is a source of fact -hard, uncompromising fact-for those who have no other access to fact, access otherwise only to distortion and perversion. And is it not truth which shall make men free? It is a source for knowledge of democratic processes and democratic achievement. And is not Canada a great source of inspiration for us here? Further, by developing a wider knowledge of our country and its resources, its economic and industrial potential and its business world, it serves as a means of conditioning for trade development markets such as Latin America which Canadians are now just beginning to exploit. Canada's economic growth is dependent on a healthy and expanding multilateral trade. As the Minister of Trade and Commerce recently has said:
Canada puts forth an effort to trade with every country in the world ... It is because we have that flexibility of outlook that ... we have been
Supply-National Revenue able to maintain an expanding level of trade and thus keep Canada prosperous.
The work of the international service daily grows more intensive and more complex. Even closer liaison has been established with the Department of External Affairs in the day-to-day policy administration and with B.B.C. and "The Voice of America" in the development of program services. The Canadian missions abroad are being given fuller information on the transmissions to the individual countries and are proving increasingly helpful in the information and guidance they are providing to the service.
The monthly program schedule of the service, which is sent out to listeners only on request, now has a circulation of over
100,000	copies. Mail response in the year 1951 was close to 40,000 letters from all parts of the world, with the greatest number coming from Europe where our transmissions are most heavily concentrated.
The relay of Canadian programs on the national services of other countries, whether direct or by disc, continues to expand. Canadian programs including the Canadian musical transcription service are aired by the broadcasting organizations of all the western European countries to which our service is transmitted and by twenty-seven Latin American stations in fourteen of the Latin American republics.
While it remains impossible to expand the language service, particularly to satellite countries, with the current limited transmitter facilities, greater opportunities for specialization have been effected for the various language units, and the projected Ukrainian service went on the air on the 1st of July of this year. All this is being done within an operating budget that remains relatively the same as in the previous fiscal year. This is achieved by a general reduction of freelance services and a limited increase in staff appointments. This results in a more efficient use of the funds available and a more effective preparation and control of program material. The disc relay service of domestic C.B.C. programs for the Canadian forces serving in Korea was extended at the end of 1951 to our forces serving in Germany. Canadian news and sports reviews are transmitted daily as well by international service to the forces in Germany, and arrangements are proceeding at the present time for similar transmissions to Korea.
In accordance with the announcement of the Prime Minister, the Canadian ambassador in Rome, Mr. Jean Desy, was seconded to the post of director general of international service and assumed his duties in that post on January 1 of this year.
4248	HOUSE OF
Supply-National Revenue
X think that statement attempts to cover some of the services of the international short wave broadcasting service and the item here, of which the details are given on page 127, outlines the expenditures for the international service this year. The total amount is $1,982,000 as compared with $1,709,000 a year ago.
I think hon. members will appreciate the fact that fees for performers, salaries and general expenses in connection with running services of this kind have increased somewhat over the years and are probably in keeping with the increase there has been in the cost of services of this kind in other fields.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister
has confined himself in the main to the international shortwave. I suppose that is because the larger figure is a statutory one.


James Joseph McCann: If you will excuse me just a moment, I might say that, with reference to the statutory item, the best answers to any questions that might be put in connection with it are contained in the C.B.C. annual report, which I tabled just two or three days ago. I shall be glad to attempt to answer any questions with reference to the operations of the C.B.C., but the hon. member for Greenwood will recall that just last fall a committee investigated all of the matters connected with C.B.C., and at that time a sort of preview was given of what the activities were and what the financial statement was likely to be.
X see some press comments with reference to an operating surplus. If you will recall, the amount of money that was paid to the *C.B.C. was paid very late in the year, and the fact is the money that was appropriated was for both capital expenditure and operating *expenditure. It shows an operating surplus, but as a matter of fact the corporation has not had the time, up to the end of the fiscal year, to spend the money that they intended to spend for extensions and betterments.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I have no doubt the minister's explanation is that we may take it for granted that when they have time they will certainly spend it.


James Joseph McCann: I quite agree.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I want to ask one technical question in connection with the shortwave, lest I forget it. Then I have some more general questions. Has the government ever given consideration to the establishment of additional shortwave transmitters in the maritimes, and possibly on the west coast as well, in order to increase the listening audience to "The Voice of Canada"? I realize this is not international shortwave, but I want
IMr. McCann.]

to get this question asked for fear there may be a chance of my forgetting it. Have I made it clear?


James Joseph McCann: I think I understand the question. Of course, that is a matter for the corporation and not for the government at this time; but we felt that the capital costs that we have in the shortwave at Sackville, which is supposed to be one of the finest in the world, just about meets the requirements and the services that we want to give, and at the moment we are not prepared to make further extensions on the west coast or anywhere else with reference to the shortwave system.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I should like to make one or two general observations, bearing in mind what the minister said a few moments iago, that it is a short time since last autumn. I want to recall the fact that we are in favour of the public control of radio broadcasting. The questions we raise and have raised are merely about the fact that the commission is still left as a competitor in business and as a judicial body, but I am not going to dwell on that. I just want to register it. I also want to recall that we deprecated the grant for a period of years, for the reason given that it was a thing which might get into politics. Therefore we wanted to take it out of politics and not to have the grant for a period of years. The argument put up at the time by the government did not seem to me very convincing. Many people here would like to see it taken out of politics. Perhaps the Minister of Finance would like to see his department carried on in that way. However, what I am coming to is this. I want to ask the minister two questions. First of all, in the report of the commission it says in broad general terms-this is the 1951-52 report-
The corporation will use the balance of its income to carry out to the fullest possible extent the recommendations of the royal commission. Improvements and extensions of service embodied in these recommendations were under active consideration at the close of the present fiscal year.
And so on. The minister will remember that in the report of the C.B.C. there were certain broad suggestions made last December. They are contained in sections 9, 11, 20 and 21 of the third report of the radio broadcasting committee. Perhaps the minister can say something in general on that. In particular, I want to draw attention to one of the important recommendations which were made by the commission and to ask what has been happening in connection with it.

The minister will recall that the Massey commission, in commenting on the commercial broadcasting of the C.B.C., said at page 291:
We therefore recommend:
h. That the board of governors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation refuse all commercial programs not acceptable in content and that they consider the possibility of eliminating some of the less desirable commercial programs now carried, and of replacing them by programs more appropriate to Canadian listeners.
I should like the minister to tell us what progress has been made along that line in particular. I should like to know what the income from commercial broadcasting has been since the making of this recommendation. In other words, will the minister tell us what progress has been made, and what the evidence of it is, toward carrying out this recommendation.


James Joseph McCann: I have not the report of the committee on broadcasting of last year before me, to which reference was made and specifically to recommendations 9, 11, 20 and 21. With reference to the other question having to do with the implementation of the recommendations of the Massey commission, 1 am informed by the officers that progress is being made in that line in reducing the commercial programs, and that some of the United States commercial programs that have formerly been carried in this country, when the contracts expire, are not being renewed. We are doing everything, at least the corporation is doing everything they can with reference to implementing the recommendations that were made by the Massey commission. Of course, as the hon. member for Greenwood will understand, that all takes time, just as well as it takes time to implement the positive suggestions and recommendations of the commission. As far as the commercial revenue of the C.B.C. goes, the budget of this year is $200,000 less for commercial programs than it was a year ago. The revenue that they expect to get will come down, they say, by $200,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the minister give me the figures for last year and this year so that we will get the relative importance of the $200,000?


James Joseph McCann: That will pretty well be found in the statement of business in the annual report. In the annual report at page 46 they show income and expenditures from April 1, 1951, to March 31, 1952. For commercial broadcasting it was $2,456,431.92. But the budget for this year is $200,000 less than that, which is approximately 10 per cent.
Supply-National Revenue


James MacKerras Macdonnell: May I ask
one supplementary question? This is a technical question having to do with the question I asked the minister a moment or two ago. I notice that in section 9 of the report there is a recommendation as follows:
The committee feels that with increased resources the corporation should take further steps to improve its coverage in outlying areas not receiving service and to equalize service in different parts of Canada.
I had intended commenting on the surplus, but the minister anticipated me. But I do point out-I have not the reference here- that it was one of the recommendations of the Massey commission and it certainly carried into the report of the committee. I am wondering when the minister gave such a firm answer a few minutes ago if anything further is contemplated.


James Joseph McCann: May I correct the hon. gentleman. I understood that he was asking with reference to stations on the west coast for shortwave broadcasting.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I may have misled the minister.


James Joseph McCann: If the hon. member will pardon the interruption, I can answer that now. The matter of extensions is being dealt with from day to day with a view to giving coverage to those parts of the country which did not formerly have it, for instance on the west coast and in districts like Kenora and Fort William, by means of what is called in the business booster transmitters. Considerable work is being done and the only thing that stopped us from doing this work in former years was the lack of funds. Now that funds are available these services will be extended as soon as booster transmitters become available. We aim to give coverage ultimately to all the people of Canada.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Perhaps I did mislead the minister, but I would like to ask my question again to be sure just what the answer is and so there will be no possibility of misunderstanding. Has the government given consideration to the establishment of additional shortwave transmitters in the maritimes, and possibly on the west coast as well, in order to increase the listening audience of "The Voice of Canada"?


James Joseph McCann: The answer I gave to that is correct. Consideration has been given, but no positive policy has been determined with reference to having a shortwave system on the west coast which would transmit to Japan and countries in that area, nor are we making additional expenditures for shortwave facilities in the maritimes. By certain

Supply-National Revenue adjustments to our shortwave station in the maritimes we can probably get a greater coverage than we presently have, but not by means of new stations.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Chairman, after what the hon. member for Greenwood has said, I would like to ask to what extent the broadcasting corporation is endeavouring to minimize commercial advertising on private stations. One of their obligations is to supervise broadcasting generally in Canada and they have certain regulations regarding the content of the programs of private stations and spot announcements and advertising.
I listen to the radio quite frequently and I admit that it is usually to the C.B.C. stations because I think their programs on the whole are superior and so free from this continuous advertising of all kinds of things, some of which may be good for you and some of which may upset your stomach or digestion or ruin your health generally.
I am wondering to what extent the broadcasting corporation is carrying out its obligation to see that the content of programs does not include a superabundance of advertising, as some do. I listen to some stations and I hear one spot announcement after the other, advertising all kinds of things. Not only are the programs spoiled, but I think I can say without hesitation that the people of Canada are fed up with the kind of high pressure advertising carried by many of these stations. I do not believe that the broadcasting corporation is carrying out its obligations under the act in this regard.
I just wanted to add that, when some criticism is made of the amount of advertising on the C.B.C. stations, I should like to see it cut out altogether on all stations, but I realize that that is idealistic and impractical under the form of broadcasting we have in our country.
I doubt very much if the broadcasting corporation is carrying out its obligations in another field, that of insisting upon the private stations using more live and local talent. There is the odd program in the country, like the fine one entitled "Singing Stars of Tomorrow." This is put on by a private company and is rendering great service to the country; but generally speaking I do not think the private stations are carrying out their obligations. After all, they are given a monopoly for the use of an airwave that belongs to the people of Canada and it was never intended that that should be used purely for private profit and gain. Again I ask the minister to tell me to what extent

the broadcasting corporation is carrying out its duties under the act in seeing that we have less of objectionable and frequent advertising.


James Joseph McCann: The suggestions of the hon. gentleman would be pretty hard to put into effect. The C.B.C. are applying the existing regulations which are constantly under review, but I cannot hold out much hope at the moment that there will be any drastic changes in the immediate future. Attempts will be made to improve programs on private stations and have them more in conformity with what we think a more idealistic system should be.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Chairman, I realize that
this is not an occasion when there should be an extended discussion of government policy with respect to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. One reason which limits our consideration of this subject to some extent is the decision to make annual payments under a statutory provision. I think that that is absolutely wrong, but nevertheless that practice has been adopted and it cannot be changed by discussion of the estimates at this time.
One point was raised by the minister to which I should like to refer, that is the function of the private station. I do not think that we are giving this system of combined public and private broadcasting a chance to operate on a basis which will produce real efficiency. I do not think that that can be done until the private stations are placed in a position of real competitive opportunity with the public stations.
If we believe in a dual system with competition then we should make it a really competitive system. The private stations should have the same rights to set up networks as the public stations. The private stations should be able to have the advantages of network arrangements for programs that the public stations have. Until that is done I am satisfied that talent in this country is not going to have the opportunity it should have through the advantage of a competitive system.
I can see many reasons in this country why there should be a public organization making it possible for programs to be carried into areas which otherwise would not be covered. I would point out that it was the Conservative party that carried it into effect. There can be no argument that our policy has always been that there should be public service of this kind. But I do believe that there should be a separation of the supervising and administrative body known as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the actual operation, which has become so largely a

commercial operation. I shall leave it at that, but I do not wish to leave any suggestion by my silence at this point that I believe we are getting anything like the service we should be getting for the money that is being expended to maintain the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. I think it has invaded fields that it was never intended to occupy. It has multiplied commercial operations which are not the function of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. I would hope that between now and next session there will be a real review of what the policy is with respect to the functions of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and that we will have a discussion, with some opportunity to carry it on as a general debate, with regard to the relationship of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the private stations of this country.
I do want to speak about one aspect of the work of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation about which I do not think enough has been said and with respect to which I do not think there is as yet any clearly defined policy. I think we have the most backward approach to television of any country with facilities comparable to those we now possess.


James Joseph McCann: By way of explanation, there is an item covering television. I intend to make a statement with reference to policy, and I think the matter might be discussed better after that statement is made.


George Alexander Drew: Since the minister is making that statement I will defer my remarks until later.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I want to add one comment. I have not read the report of the C.B.C. through but as far as I can see on casual perusal it consists almost wholly of giving a detailed account of what they have done, which of course is interesting. However, to my mind it underlines the great undesirability of having given it a grant for several years so that it does not have to come back each year and, so to speak, sell itself again to the house. The only reference I can find as to general policy is on the first page. I have already read it. It is to the effect that the corporation will use the balance of its income to carry out to the fullest possible extent the recommendations of the royal commission.
Subject to being corrected by someone who has read the report more carefully than I have, that is the sum total of the reference. I have also found no reference whatever to the report of the committee of this house which had a dozen or fifteen meetings and produced a very careful report. Again I am not going to dwell on it except to say that
Supply-National Revenue from what the minister has said I would still doubt whether the corporation has really taken very seriously the recommendation of the commission with respect to cutting down their amount of commercial broadcasting. I realize, as the minister has said, that you cannot do it overnight because you have contracts, but I think when this comes up next year we will be entitled to hold the commission to a very strict accounting on this point.


George Alexander Drew: I am deferring my comments about television but I wish to refer to one subject which I simply place before the minister for consideration. As far as the news reports of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation are concerned, I think that on the whole they may be regarded as excellent. I think they compare favourably with any news broadcasts by any broadcasting system anywhere in the world. But I wish to raise very vigorous objection to the propapanda broadcasts that go out under the guise of impartial comments. They are balanced slightly to the extent that every now and then a slightly objective statement may be made, but on Sundays particularly the so-called impartial observers go far beyond ordinary observations and in a great number of cases make slanted broadcasts which misinterpret the actual passage of events.
I shall not extend my remarks now, but any careful examination of the discussions that take place over the radio on the various Sunday broadcasts will leave little doubt in the minds of most people that some of those who take part in such broadcasts have no desire to follow an objective approach but in many cases carry out the same pattern that they follow when they are dealing with public affairs in their other activities which they carry on when they are not engaged in the service of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. At a time when people who seek to discuss public affairs are placed under very severe limitations as to their opportunity to discuss them over the radio, at a time when members of parliament are placed under definite limitations, I think it is entirely wrong that those who have expressed such clear political slants should be given such encouragement at public expense to express their views along a straight propaganda line.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Loans, investments and advances-
819. Loans to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation repayable with interest at a rate to be fixed by the governor in council on such terms and conditions as the governor in council may determine and to be applied in payment of expenditures to cover capital costs of television installations and to support the development of the service. Such loans.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-National Revenue *with interest, shall be a charge on the revenues of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation next after the charge imposed under the provisions of section 17 of the Canadian Broadcasting Act, 1936, $2,000,000.
James Joseph McCann: This item covers a further loan of $2 million to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to support the development of its television service and to provide for some additional capital expenditures. Members will recall that two and a half years ago, when we made the first loan to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for television development I said that we had to envisage considerable further financing for the Montreal and the Toronto projects. At that time a loan of $4,500,000 for television was made to the C.B.C., followed by a further loan of $1,500,000 in 1950. This total of $6 million already loaned will cover the capital cost of the production centre stations at Montreal and Toronto, and in addition will provide funds to cover other expenditures up to the time of going on the air with regular service.
The corporation expects to be providing regular service for the Montreal and Toronto projects early in September of this year. Through the years the national television service will be supported by the licence fees from those to whom it is available and by additional commercial revenue. The amount and the details of television licence fees are now under consideration and are expected to be announced prior to the inauguration of the regular service.
As I said when the subject first came up in the house, it will be necessary to provide loans to the corporation not only to cover capital installations but also to help to provide service during initial periods when the number of television viewers is building up. These loans are made on a businesslike basis to the corporation. Full interest rates are charged on them and the corporation will have to repay them in the future. As long as this system is maintained no tax money from individuals in Canada to whom the service is not available will be used to provide television service in other areas.
This loan of $2 million will also make it possible for the corporation to begin construction of a television station in the Ottawa area. It will be remembered that the last special committee of the house on broadcasting was told by representatives of the C.B.C. that the corporation would like to proceed as soon as possible with the construction simultaneously of television stations in seven other areas in addition to Montreal and Toronto. They said that a capital cost of some $7 

million would be involved. Loans for capital funds needed have to be provided by the government. The government has carefully considered these proposals and has decided that funds should be provided at the present moment to start only the station for the Ottawa area. By late next spring the network between Montreal and Toronto already should be passing through Ottawa and the operation of a station here will be particularly economical, more so than in any other area. The government is therefore, for the present, authorizing the start of this project.
We believe there is a sound basis in the national interest for a much wider plan covering nationally-owned television facilities in other parts of the country starting, for obvious reasons of economy, in those most heavily populated. We believe that before asking parliament to authorize the necessary loans it would be wise to wait until after the television service of the corporation has started, and it is possible for the public to get a better idea, of what Canadian television service will be. A much wider development of nationally-owned facilities would meet the principles of the Massey commission report, and will give Canadian life and Canadian talent a chance to develop through this new medium. A plan for wider expansion in the western, central and maritime provinces has been by no means rejected, but we think it wise to give the matter further study, in which some knowledge of what the C.B.C. can do at the Montreal and Toronto centres will be of great assistance. Canada will shortly be producing her own television and I think it will be possible to make more sure decisions about the future after the service has started.
Mr. Chairman, I think that outlines as briefly as we could put it the policy of the government with reference to the further development of television. New stations will be opened in Montreal and Toronto in September, and the advances that there have been in television development make it possible by a relay system developed by the Bell Telephone Company to transmit those programs from Montreal and Toronto. It makes it very easy to develop a station here in Ottawa where we expect to spend something in the neighbourhood of $800,000 for a station which will contain a transmitter and which will also have some origination programs.
As far as policy goes that is the extent of the development proposed until the public have had an opportunity of seeing what the development in Montreal and Toronto produces and how well they are satisfied with it.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Chairman, there is one point in regard to the development of television by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation which it seems to me does call for a careful re-examination by the government, and ultimately by the members of this house. I place it before the government at the moment in the hope that there may be reconsideration of this subject.
It seems to me that many of the arguments that can be made to support the spending of a substantial amount of public revenue on the maintenance of ordinary radio broadcasting cannot be made to apply in the same way to television. The minister has indicated that in a short time television will be available in Toronto and Montreal and fairly soon, as a result of a new system developed by the Bell Telephone Company, in Ottawa as well. That is not going to make television available generally throughout Canada.
I think it will be agreed that one of the fundamental ideas behind the set-up of a publicly-owned operating system, as distinguished from a supervisory body, was that it would make it possible to carry radio into every part of Canada and that the ordinary economic factors which might limit the availability of radio in distant areas, if it were carried out entirely by private stations, would be overcome. This does not apply at the present stage to television. Out of public funds contributed by the taxpayers of the whole of Canada television is going to be made available in Toronto, Montreal, and later in Ottawa. The minister has gone so far as to say that the expansion of television facilities in the west and in the mari-times has by no means been rejected. That is not a very optimistic expression of hope that in these areas there will be television.
The fact remains that private stations now operating ordinary radio have sought the right to provide television in areas which have no chance of getting television at an early date or at any reasonably early date if this present policy is adopted. Whatever arguments there may be in favour of the public operation of ordinary broadcasting, it seems to me that wisdom, economy and common sense would suggest that applications by private radio stations to operate television stations should be granted where those stations are ready to carry out the experimental work and to provide programs that otherwise will not be available for years.
Either this is a great modern means of communicating ideas or it is not. Most people think that it is. Most people think that although it is in its early stages it is a
Supply-National Revenue tremendously powerful means of influencing people's thoughts and of giving educational possibilities to people by this new and remarkable device. In many parts of Canada, for years to come, television broadcasts are going to be available only from the United States unless the policy is changed. That means that through subtle propaganda to a very considerable extent ideas of life in the United States are going to be permeating or are going to become parts of the thoughts of our people at a time that we are supporting the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation particularly for the purpose of developing Canadian thinking along Canadian lines.
I am not criticizing the fact that television broadcasts in the United States have -a very definite propaganda flavour in support of what is done by the United States. It would be unnatural if it were otherwise. I think that in every country these great media of communication naturally extol the virtues of their own country and place before the people of their own .country the developments that are taking place and the achievements of which they have every reason to be proud. For a long time Canadians will be seeing more of achievement in the United States than they will of achievement in Canada at a time when some of the most challenging things are being done in Canada which should be the inspiration of every young Canadian.
When private radio stations are ready to provide television broadcasts over widespread areas which under present policies will not be serviced by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation I think it is wrong to deny them that opportunity. By the use of moving picture films and other devices new stations can give television broadcasts in areas that will not otherwise be served and those television broadcasts would be broadcasts with a definite Canadian flavour.
I leave it there. I do not know how it is possible to justify in the minds of the taxpayers of the maritimes, of the prairie provinces, of the distant north and, yes, of a considerable part of Ontario and Quebec as well, the thought that their money shall be collected for the purpose of supplying television broadcasts to these favoured areas while the opportunity to have the television broadcasts that they know they could have from private stations is denied under a policy which I must confess I simply cannot understand.


Major James William Coldwell: May I say a word? I think most of the arguments the leader of the

Supply-National Revenue opposition used in favour of permitting private television broadcasting should be used in the opposite direction. As a matter of fact, the production of television programs is very expensive. I have no doubt that films and other programs that would be used by private stations, because they would be relatively cheaper, would be largely United States productions. As a matter of fact, when we speak of films I regret exceedingly that we are so dependent upon Hollywood and the United States for the production of films. From my observations of what has been done in radio, the private stations very largely rely on programs that originate in the United States or upon recordings that come almost exclusively from that country and have a distinctly American flavour.
The hon. member says that this is a great medium of public propaganda, and so it is. I do not think it is safe, in the days in which we live, to allow all the propaganda facilities to be in the hands of private stations or private interests. The House of Commons approved of the establishment of the so-called Massey commission. This commission investigated the matter of television very thoroughly, and we understood when the report was formulated and placed before the house that the probability was that this report would guide parliament and the broadcasting corporation as well as other cultural organizations in the country for a period of at least ten years.
I agree with the hon. member that we should not deny to the other parts of Canada the television facilities that will be available to Montreal and Toronto in the near future. But nonetheless, I think that while we expect the corporation to push ahead with television as rapidly as possible to serve as many communities as possible in Canada, we should bear in mind always that these very important facilities should be used as a means of the encouragement of Canadian education and of Canadian culture. I do not think we could do that if we relied on private stations indulging in commercial advertising. I do not think the United States programs give a good understanding or view of the American way of life. My viewing of television programs in the United States leads me to believe that they are quite inadequate, and often of a very low type, advertising all kinds of things that at least I would not want to see brought into my own home. I think that we should do everything we can to avoid the repetition of what has happened in the United States.
We might take some cognizance of what has been done under the B.B.C. in the United Kingdom. I have no doubt that if television facilities were placed in the hands of private

organizations, in order to make them pay for this very expensive means of entertainment or communication, they would endeavour to use all the hours they could so that the advertising revenue would pay for the facilities. In other words, they would have to operate their television stations most of the day in order to make ends meet. In the United Kingdom there are only certain hours when television is available, and that is because the kind of programs that they are using in the United Kingdom are of quite a different type, in many instances, from the kind of programs we see in the United States. We have the Massey report. The Massey commission went into this matter thoroughly, and investigated the systems in various countries. They made very definite recommendations for our guidance. I think we would do well to follow out the recommendations made by the Massey commission as much as possible, and at the same time encourage the broadcasting corporation by providing the necessary finances to establish television across the country. We should enable them to provide all Canadians, as rapidly as possible, with the opportunity to view television. I do think that we should be careful lest we permit the prostitution of this great new educational facility by the hucksters who advertise their wares over the radio to the annoyance of a large number of people.


Mr. Laing:: I should like to say a few words on this matter, because I think there is much to be said on both sides. I think that the government is to be commended for their cautious approach to television. I am aware that there are many educationists in Canada today who want no part of television. I have heard some of them come out and say that after a few generations of television oui* children will have, like Cyclops, but one eye. I do not think that is any solution. I do not think that we can turn back the clock. I think the only cure for the situation is to provide better programs.
I believe the government is to be commended for being cautious by reason of the cost of bringing television to the Canadian people. I do not think they have convinced the Canadian people adequately or made them aware of the difficulties standing in the way of television for everyone. I think a better job could be done in that line. I commend the minister for making progress in respect to Montreal and Toronto, and I think the entire house will accept his explanation as to why Ottawa was thought of as the third point of development. But 1 want to draw his attention to what is going on in Vancouver today. Anyone who has

read the Massey report would be very apprehensive if he took a look at Vancouver because the invasion is on there today. We have many hundreds of sets which are picking up programs that are beamed from Seattle and from a relay station now located in Bellingham, which is only sixty miles away.
There was a suggestion out there that it should not have been impossible for private stations and the corporation to work together to bring into Vancouver, probably at an earlier date than the corporation could otherwise have done, television programs. I do not share all the misgivings concerning private stations, under proper agreements, that are held by the hon. member who just spoke. But I will agree with him that the product of the invasion from the United States at the present time is, in fairly large part, a pretty shoddy performance.
Just in summing up, I think the minister should acquaint the Canadian people, by some publicity, with the magnitude of the problem and the great extent to which we are trying today to bring distinctly Canadian television programs to the Canadian people. In that regard, I do not think we have done a particularly good job. I think there would be, if it were properly explained, a tendency on the part of the Canadian people to wait.
We have been very fortunate, I am told, in being cautious in that we have avoided the fantastic mists which have been created in the United States owing to the blocking of certain wave lengths. There is much commendation due to the department.
I would ask the minister to give the Vancouver area his early attention. We are there drawing programs which probably could not be available to, let us say, a city like Winnipeg. The United States cities are close by us and the invasion is on. There are many hundreds of aerials. I do not have the figure for the minister. Probably he was given a copy of that able cartoon by Norris in the Vancouver Sun, showing the leader of the Boy Scout troop out with his boys. He said, "We will never get lost because there are enough television aerials in the area, and thanks to the C.B.C. they all point south." That is the situation in Vancouver. Norris' cartoon was inspired by the fact that there are, I would say, probably thousands in that general area. It is an area in which television could well be developed. We have high hills which provide for excellent pick-up. The pick-up from Seattle and I think from Bellingham-although I would not be sure of that-is very good in Vancouver. The American invasion is on and it is something which I think we should do our best to repel.
Supply-National Revenue


Harry Oliver White: There are two questions I should like to ask. One is on item 819, $2 million.


James Joseph McCann: That is the one we are now
discussing.


Harry Oliver White: Yes. If I understood the minister correctly, more money is going to be required. Can he give the committee any idea as to how much more it is anticipated will be required for this purpose?


James Joseph McCann: In future years?


Harry Oliver White: Yes; for television work.


James Joseph McCann: I could not at the moment hazard a guess at that figure. When I spoke on this matter when the policy of television first came under review, I particularly reminded the house that it was going to be costly. I want to thank the hon. members who have taken part in this debate on television. I think they clearly understand the policy.
With reference to the matter brought to our attention by the hon. member for Vancouver South, I think I can assure him that television will be in Vancouver. At what date, I just do not know nor does anybody else.
The leader of the opposition dealt principally with the matter of private stations being licensed. We are attempting to carry out the recommendations of the Massey commission. I would respectfully call his attention to one of the recommendations which says:
That no private television broadcasting stations be licensed until the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has available national television programs and that all private stations be required to serve as outlets for national programs.
In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, there is another reason why these applications cannot be dealt with at the present time, namely the shortage of steel. It became the policy of the government a year ago that no further licences either for sound broadcasting or for television would be considered until that situation was clarified.
With reference to the policy which I have stated, it is Montreal, Toronto and continue in Ottawa next year. Personally, I should like to have seen it extended. I should like to have seen it extended in western Ontario into the Hamilton, London, Windsor area and east as far as Quebec; because if we made that extension we would be able to give service to at least 50 per cent of the people of Canada. I have to include in the policy which we considered those areas that I have mentioned, and in addition Vancouver

Supply-National Revenue and Winnipeg. If the policy were followed of having a station in each of the provinces throughout Canada we would be able to service something in the neighbourhood of 75 per cent of the population. I think we can look forward with hope that technological advances and new techniques will make it possible at some time that there might be a complete coverage of the whole of Canada in a system which has national outlets in each of the provinces, in combination with a system of private stations which will be perhaps duplicating in some cities but which in other cities will be one national system having transmitter stations.
I can only say that this is a loan which will be repaid with interest and the C.B.C. are optimistic enough to believe that their revenue, from the licence fees when they are set up and from commercial programs, will be such that this will be a self-liquidating loan.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the item
carry?


George Alexander Drew: No, Mr. Chairman. There are two points I wish to mention which have been raised in the discussion. First of all, I must say that I hope no impression has been conveyed that the Massey report is regarded as sacrosanct.


James Joseph McCann: Oh, no.


George Alexander Drew: After all, there are in it many excellent recommendations and there are in it many recommendations with which I think there may be considerable disagreement. I do not think there is by any manner of means uniform agreement with regard to the recommendations in connection with the procedure by which television will be carried out. What I particularly wish to refer to is a comment that was made by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar in connection with the use of films. He spoke of the fact that if we were extending the operation of television and were using films, we would be simply increasing, shall we say, the United States content of the program because of our dependence on United States films. I think we are over-emphasizing our dependence on United States films when we speak of the type of film that would be broadcast over television.


Major James William Coldwell: Have we enough of them?


George Alexander Drew: What television is mainly using is film for news broadcasts. We have excellent moving picture reporters in this country who take moving pictures of events. We are not in any way dependent upon the United States for portrayals of life in Canada
[Mr. McCann.J

by moving picture films. Just a few days *ago I saw a film that perhaps many hon. members saw much earlier. I saw a picture on Newfoundland produced by Crawley Films here in Ottawa. It is as fine a documentary film as I have ever seen. It is a film that every Canadian should see. It is the kind of film that over television would be producing a really educational program.
There are many other films produced by public and private agencies in Canada. We would be in no way dependent upon United States films. On the contrary, if we made more television stations available we would help to build up a Canadian moving picture industry on a scale that we have not yet been able to contemplate. For that reason I suggest that the two go hand in hand, and that the handling of television may well provide the first real opportunity we have had to extend the moving picture activity in this country in the way that I hope it can be developed, in the interests of an effective portrayal of the life of the Canadian people.


Harry Oliver White: I wish to thank the minister for the rather full report he gave in answer to my question with regard to what was likely to be done and how much would be required to continue developing television. We in western Ontario are in a position similar to that described by the hon. member for Vancouver South. We are close to United States cities, and there is a considerable amount of television being seen and used in western Ontario. I was wondering whether the minister would care to suggest how soon we could expect Canadian television to be relayed to London and western Ontario points.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the item
carry?


Solon Earl Low: I am inclined to agree that the minister and his department will have some trouble with remote parts of Canada, as the leader of the opposition has said, if our efforts toward television are directed to the large cities. I am sure some arrangement will have to be worked out between the C.B.C. and the private stations. I do not see any way out of it. As the leader of the opposition has said, I do believe sufficient films will be made available to make it possible for these Canadian private stations to give service to other parts of Canada. I feel quite sure the minister himself is convinced that a form of agreement between the C.B.C. and private stations can be worked out and I am quite sure he realizes that that agreement could lay down some fairly specific regulations so that the private stations would

not be giving the kind of thing that we get from across the line so often.
I am convinced that the only way we will ever satisfy the people throughout the country and be fair to them is to give them the advantage as soon as possible of some television facilities outside of those large areas.


Major James William Coldwell: I do not want to prolong the discussion. May I just point this out. Those of us who were on the committee looking into the operation of the national film board got some idea of the time it takes to make a single, film which would be broadcast and probably occupy half an hour of television time. It takes weeks. The leader of the opposition mentioned the Crawley film, which is an excellent film. I understood it *took a very long period of time to make. The point I am making is this. There would not be a sufficient number of films of the type that the leader of the opposition had in mind to fill the time that would be necessary in order that the private stations could get the revenue that would compensate them for the facilities and for those activities.
Those are considerations that we must always keep in mind in discussing this. I quite agree with the leader of the opposition that there are very excellent reporters, camera men, who can operate a camera at sports events; but when you think of the sports events that are likely to be televised, again that would only occupy a relatively very small amount of television time. That is what I have in mind.


Mr. Fournier (Hull):: May I move that the committee rise, report progress and ask leave to sit again today? I wish to move a motion with the consent of the house.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Alphonse Fournier: Mr. Speaker, after consulting the
leaders of the opposition parties I wish to move, by leave:
That, notwithstanding the terms of any special or standing order, the house remain in continuous session this day until otherwise ordered.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following communication:
Ottawa, July 4, 1952
Sir,
I have the honour to inform you that the Honourable Patrick Kerwin, a judge of the Supreme
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Court of Canada, acting as Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber on Friday, the 4th July, at three o'clock, p.m., for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.
I have the honour to be, sir,
Your obedient servant,
J. F. Delaute,
Secretary to the Governor General (Administrative)

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



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE

[Stage Direction]
819. Loans, investments and advances-Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-
James Joseph McCann: I just want to reply to the hon. member for Middlesex East. I cannot give him a positive answer as to when people in the London district are likely to receive television programs. That will depend entirely upon government policy with reference to extension into that area; and, second, when parliament will vote the money to carry on that extension.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
57. Departmental administration, $244,046.
William Alfred Robinson: For the convenience of hon. members may I point out that the votes will be found commencing at page 9 of the blue book of estimates and the details at page 130.


Harry Oliver White: During the time the committee was reviewing the immigration bill I had intended to say something on immigration, but at that time I thought possibly my remarks might be confined to the bill. There are some other things I wanted to say, but I have refrained until now from saying them on the floor of the house.
I was one of the committee that reviewed the act clause by clause, and I must say that I cannot see any great number of flaws in it. If I were going to disagree with any at all, possibly it would be that part which requires the transportation companies to assume the cost of deportation of undesirables.
What I, have to say then has to do not particularly with the act but with its administration. During my years as a member I have had something to do with nearly all the departments of government at one time or another. While all the problems that I have referred to the department of immigration have received courteous attention, the results in every case have been negative.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Never once have I been able to get any good results. There has been delay, procrastination and excuses right down the line. I mention this because I was brought up to play ball, and I will play ball with any department, but I am not going to field all the foul balls all the time.
I am going to mention one case in particular. This case went on over quite a long period of time, and the department told me finally that there were a good number of reasons why this immigrant could not come to this country. Three weeks after the immigrant landed I was still being told by the department that he could not come here.
I have documentary proof to back up the cases I am going to cite. There is a feeling throughout the country of dissatisfaction with the operations of this department. There is a certain amount of speculation upon whom will fall the mantle of leadership and on a good many occasions the name of the minister has been mentioned favourably.


Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):: Mr. Chairman, on a question of privilege, the leadership of the Liberal party is in the very best hands and there are a great many people in Canada who hope that it remains that way.


Harry Oliver White: Nevertheless if the minister is going to be judged upon the operations of the department of immigration I am afraid that he is losing favour with a certain number of people. I mention this for his own good; I do not care how he looks at it.
Ordinarily I do not take up a great deal of the time of the committee and this being the last day of the session probably I should apologize, but there are a few cases to which I should like to refer. I have the case of a farmer who wanted to bring out a farmer from his native country. This farmer went back to his native land on a visit and saw this other man. Yet a year and a half later he is still there. One excuse after another has been offered, but he has not been able to come.


Walter Edward Harris: What country?


Harry Oliver White: Switzerland. I have under my hand a circular put out by the deputy minister of labour. I do not think this was sent to members of parliament as I think it came to my home. It is addressed to Canadian employers and reads in part as follows:
-one thousand farm workers and 500 other classes, and some farm couples. There are also married couples who would be suitable for farm work and a few families with agricultural backgrounds.


On January 5 I wrote to the department in connection with a farmer who wanted a married couple with three, four or five children of public school age or older. Up to date he has not been able to secure that couple. I was told that they were not available so I went to the trouble of advertising in a German newspaper and I have here twelve applications from suitable families who are anxious and willing to come. There has been nothing but excuses from the department; they were not able to get them. I think that is the complete answer. These families are available if they want to find them. This farmer has a good brick house, a garden, cattle and everything they would need and he operates one of the finest farms in the country. Yet this family was not available.
I have another case here where an application was made early in June 1949, and the negotiations went on-you can see the thickness of the file-until some time in September, 1951. I mentioned this case in committee. At that time I received a letter from a Liberal lawyer saying that I would not need to take any more action in the case because he was taking it up. In December of that same year the immigrant, who had been refused admission because of tuberculosis, was admitted to the country. I can give the name and all the details. Apparently that was the best cure for tuberculosis that could be found, and it was certainly the quickest.
These are things that get under my skin and the public generally do not like them. I would be the first to object to anyone being admitted to the country who could not meet the health requirements. Early in the session I asked question No. 16 on the order paper which had to deal with the number of immigrants coming to this country who had been admitted to hospital because of tuberculosis. I should like to quote the questions I asked and the answers given by the minister as reported on page 348 of Hansard of March 12, as follows:


Mr. White (Middlesex East):: 1.	How many immigrants who came to Canada during the past two years have been hospitalized because of tuberculosis, in the following groups (a) immigrants from commonwealth countries; (b) displaced persons; (c) all others?
2.	How many in each of these groups were discovered to have the disease within six months of coming to Canada?


Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce):: 1.	Cases reported to Department of Citizenship and Immigration (a) 4; (b) 2; (c) 8; total 14.
2.	(a) 3; (b) 1; (c) 4; total 8.
I realize that that may be a correct reply as far as the department is concerned, but it does not give a true picture of what happened because probably many cases are hospitalized and not reported to the department. To back up that statement I have here in my

hand a statement from a very reliable authority that has had to do with some of these cases. I should like to indicate some of the things that I think should be done in order to see that persons coming to Canada are properly examined as far as tuberculosis is concerned.
There should be a most thorough study made of X-rays of the chest. The X-ray film should be at least four inches by five inches, and preferably fourteen inches by seventeen inches. Any suggested lesion in the film should delay the individual coming to Canada until such time as it is felt that there is absolutely no evidence of activity. A miniature film of the chest should be taken within a month following the individual's arrival in Canada. This should be kept for record purposes in a suitable film library. A repeat X-ray of the chest should be taken six months after arrival and possibly a third eighteen months after arrival. These X-rays need be only of the miniature variety. Too often immigrants coming to Canada are lost track of and are not followed up with repeat X-ray films of the chest as they should be. In the case of children, it might be well to have them tuberculin skin tested shortly after arrival in Canada.
While I am dealing with immigration, there is one question that has been mentioned many times before to which I should like to refer. Dominion bureau of statistics figures reveal that during the past ten years 591,000 odd immigrants came to Canada, and that in the same period some 486,000 people left Canada, so that we actually had a net gain of one out of each six who came here.


Walter Edward Harris: What years did you quote?


Harry Oliver White: These are figures released by the dominion bureau of statistics, and they show that although 591,000 immigrants entered Canada during the last ten years 486,000 people left during the same period.


Walter Edward Harris: What ten years is that?


Harry Oliver White: The ten years previous to 1951.


Walter Edward Harris: Whose figures are you quoting?


Harry Oliver White: These are figures that the leader of the opposition used in a speech at Toronto recently.


Walter Edward Harris: I thought you were quoting D.B.S. figures.
4. 1952
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Harry Oliver White: They were dominion bureau of statistics figures that he quoted.


Walter Edward Harris: I should like to see them.


Harry Oliver White: I think Canadians generally feel that with our vast areas we need more people of the right class. After all, as soon as an immigrant comes to this country he is immediately in the market for all the goods and services that he can purchase. I have said before that it would be far better to have these people in Canada producing wealth of one kind and another than to have them in Europe or elsewhere and have to give food and other things to them. As soon as they come here they become self-supporting and more. With all our great natural resources we can certainly absorb a great number of them. When they come here they become consumers, producers and taxpayers; they will likely have to pay sales tax on the very first item they purchase. They will be consumers of some of the surplus food products that the farmers of Canada are finding it difficult to dispose of at the present time.
One of the difficulties in securing the type of immigrant that we desire is the fact that many people in Europe who would like to come here have a stake in their homeland. They have investments there. They are the ones who would make good citizens here but because of the inconvertibility of exchange they are not able to bring very much of their resources to this country. Consequently they hesitate to leave their homeland where they already have a stake. I wonder if it would not be good policy on the part of the government to make long term loans to such people taking as collateral 25 per cent, 50 per cent, 75 per cent or whatever you like of their holdings in their homeland. Over a period of years it is quite possible that we would accumulate investments in other countries which would be quite an asset to us, especially if our dollar continues to rise. That would enable immigrants to come to this country who have demonstrated a certain amount of ability in their homeland.
I know very well that there are a good many in the British isles and elsewhere who would come here if they were able to bring a good portion of their wealth with them and invest it here. I think it is rather discouraging to many Canadians that the bulk of the emigrants from the United Kingdom are going to Australia, New Zealand and other places rather than to Canada. From the experience I have had in my constituency and elsewhere I do not believe there is anything, with the exception of the cost of

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration living and taxation, that is of more concern to people generally than the question of immigration. In view of what I have said to the minister I hope he will revise his plans and adopt some of the suggestions I have made. I must confess that all the dealings I have had with the department have been discouraging.


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry to
hear my hon. friend say what he has said. Of course I am at a slight disadvantage. He has not done me the favour of referring these particular cases to me either by name or by any other means so that I could identify them. I want to point out to the committee, however, that as he himself admits it is undesirable to admit to this country people suffering from tuberculosis or similar diseases. He cited one case that he said had been before the department for over two years. I take it during that time my hon. friend was seeking to convince the government that they ought to admit that particular immigrant because he did not have tuberculosis, and on pure speculation I would also think that during that time it would be safe to say that the department was writing to my hon, friend and saying that we were taking other X-rays of that particular person and hoping that the results would be more favourable in the future, as has turned out to be the case in the end. Would that be correct?


Harry Oliver White: That is about correct.


Walter Edward Harris: Then I suggest my hon. friend was not being entirely fair with the committee in his comments. He also raised the question of obtaining a farm family with a specific number of children. I am sorry that we have not been able to produce a farm family according to those specifications. We do our best, as I think my hon. friend knows. I think he will also agree with me that in the main the farm workers in Ontario are of Dutch and German origin, and that the choice of those who are to be Dutch immigrants lies largely with the Netherlands government as a result of our agreement. Of course we have an interest in their health and other matters. At the same time I must express surprise and disappointment that in the matter of five months we were not able to find a family with the specified number of children for that particular farmer, and if he will again refer the matter to me I shall be delighted to see what I can do, even in the short time we have.
My hon. friend raised two other points. One was that a greater proportion of the immigration should be from the United Kingdom. He may have been present in the house when I said a little over a month ago that

immigration from the United Kingdom was a greater proportion of the total this year. I would ask leave to table a statement of the immigration for the first five months which will indicate that during that time immigration from the United Kingdom rose something in the order of 75 or 80 per cent over the comparable period of 1951. It also indicates that immigration from France rose over 100 per cent, and that immigration from the north European countries is generally up and immigration from other areas generally down.
Finally, my hon. friend referred to some
590,000	immigrants having entered this country and over 480,000 having left. I can only say that I am not aware of the dominion bureau of statistics ever having issued figures of that kind. If he will give me the reference I shall be glad to look into it.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Chairman, there is a
matter I wish to refer to, and it is this. My mind goes back to April of 1949. There had been a conference of commonwealth prime ministers and I recollect that the Prime Minister of Canada made a statement following the decision of India and the commonwealth countries for her to remain within the commonwealth as an independent republic and he said:
Everyone will rejoice in the fact that, notwithstanding the exercise by the people of India of their right to determine the form of their domestic government, it has been found possible to have India remain a member of the commonwealth and to continue for the peace of the world the association of those nations whose traditions give them the same concept of a proper way of living and of democratic processes designed to further the welfare of the men and women of their respective nations.
That of course was the comment made on the announcement from London in April of 1949 of the association of India with the commonwealth. The declaration read this way:
Accordingly, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Pakistan and Ceylon hereby declare that they remain united as free-
And I want to draw attention to the next words.
*-and equal members of the commonwealth of nations, freely co-operating in the pursuit of peace, liberty and progress.
That evoked statements by the leader of the opposition, myself, and others in the house expressing our approval both of the statement and of what was involved. I am rising this afternoon to say, as briefly as I can, that while there may be some equality among the component parts of the commonwealth as countries Canada is not according to the citizens of all the commonwealth countries associated with her equal status as

individuals when it comes to immigration. I think it is a matter of some concern that considerable dissatisfaction has been created among persons of commonwealth origin because they have not been granted the same privilege of bringing their relatives to Canada as has been granted to persons of European origin living in Canada. I think that is a matter that should be carefully considered by the department and by the house.
After all the world is undergoing very great changes and I think that one of the vital matters that we have to consider within the commonwealth is the great value of the association of Pakistan, India and Ceylon with our commonwealth countries. As long as we continue to exercise any discrimination against persons of origins within other commonwealth countries so long shall we be endangering that association.
Now I know that the people of those countries, and particularly of India, realize that there are difficulties in opening wide the gates of immigration into this country, and consequently there is an arrangement between India and Canada regarding a quota system as applied to our fellow commonwealth citizens from India. I do not think that there is a quota imposed by India against Canadians who wish to reside in India. I am not sure of that but I think I am right in saying it.
On the occasion to which I refer I said:
We are now associated with a great people differ-'ing in creed, in colour and in all that guides the long evolution of a race and determines its characteristics. I hope that this will enable us in our country, and those in the countries associated with us, to end forever every vestige of racial and religious discrimination and intolerance among the people of this commonwealth.
I feel that has not been carried out and that the vestiges remain through the fact that our fellow citizens of commonwealth origin are denied the privilege of bringing their relatives to Canada, as do their fellow citizens of European origins. That is a matter of great concern to all of us and particularly, of course, to the proud people of India who have set up their independent republic but have remained associated with us in the commonwealth.
The restriction is imposed by order in council P.C. 2743 under the authority, of course, of the Immigration Act, which provides:
the provisions hereinbefore set out shall not apply to immigrants of any Asiatic race.
I am not going into that generally this morning though I hold the view that this discrimination is dangerous and also that P.C. 2115 is dangerous. We are living in a world today when we are on trial as democratic countries and our opponents in their propaganda use every possible means to show that
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration we are giving lip service to freedom, equality and democracy but that we are not fulfilling our obligations in those respects within the borders of our own country.
I want to say to the minister, apart altogether from the reference to Asiatic persons and persons of Asiatic origin in general, that particular consideration should be given to this matter of restricting the entry into Canada of relatives of those who are already happily and usefully settled in our country.
I do not want to discuss the two points involved this morning but what I want to do is focus the attention of the minister and the house on this one disability, the disability imposed upon residents of Canada, of India and commonwealth	origin-a	disability
imposed so that they may not bring into the country their close relatives except under a quota system not imposed on those of European origin. That is the point I want to bring home to the minister and I ask for reconsideration in order to remove the dissatisfaction that is quite properly felt by our compatriots of Indian origin.


Solon Earl Low: I would like to follow up what has been said by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar. I want to say at the outset that I believe the minister is doing a good job. He has begun to get hold of this whole department and is doing in my judgment an excellent job.
I am not in favour of an open-door policy at all. I believe a wisely selective and executed policy is best for our country; but at the same time I do believe that since these Indian people have come to Canada and have been granted citizenship and are proving themselves to be good citizens, and also since they have become partners in the commonwealth and are associated with the other parts of the commonwealth on a satisfactory basis, there remains no good reason why the restrictions and provisos of P.C. 2743 should continue to apply to them. I believe that the East Indian Canadian citizens should be allowed to bring their relatives on the same basis as members of any other racial group who come to Canada under the quota.
I agree with the minister that a quota should be continued on some negotiated basis, whatever it may be. Certainly I believe we should give very careful consideration indeed to placing-


Major James William Coldwell: Would you include relatives and friends in the quota?


Solon Earl Low: Yes. As a matter of fact, I think wherever the quota is applied the East Indian people already here should be allowed to name the greater part of those who do come. I believe that would solve the situation. I think they would be happy under that sort
4262	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration of agreement. There should be some sort of quota, but the major portion of those who come in the future ought to be nominated by the people who are already here.
I hope the minister will remove this restriction against the East Indian people. I do not consider for one moment that the East Indian people should be lumped in with the Asiatic races as they are now under the immigration law.


Walter Edward Harris: Lest there be any misunderstanding of this point I should like to say a word about it. I do not want to take any time, and I appreciate what hon. members have said. I think they may be overlooking what the practice is. In that connection, may I point out that it was the present government that negotiated the agreement with these countries which set the quota over and above that which existed up to the end of 1950. At that time a very limited number in the close relative classes could be admitted from India. In the settlement of the arrangement that 150 additional might come from that country, certain additional agreements were made. Those agreements were that preference would be given to what may be termed close relatives, though not as close as I think the hon. member would lead us to believe. Under P.C. 2115 the wife and unmarried children under certain conditions may come into the country. Then when he speaks of close relatives he may be thinking perhaps of grandchildren, brothers and sisters.
Now those persons obtain preference in the 150 quota, and to be precise we set aside I think it was 50 of the 150 for that group. To go further, I might say there were not 50 applicants, so anybody in Canada of East Indian origin who has applied for a close relative in the group the hon. members have been mentioning, and who has had his application refused, has been refused on some ground other than the quota. There was more than ample room for. all the close relatives group that have been mentioned.


Solon Earl Low: I appreciate that, but is it not true that the proviso to P.C. 2743 states that the provision hereinbefore set out shall not apply to immigrants of any Asiatic race, and that that still applies to the East Indian people? What I would suggest is that whatever may be the arrangement with respect to quota, it would be advisable to remove the people of East Indian origin from the terms of the restrictive order in council.


Walter Edward Harris: I may say that P.C. 2743 was repealed two years ago. The hon. member is probably referring to P.Q. 2856.


George Alexander Drew: I want to add my comment on this subject. I have deferred my comments because I intended to include them in the general remarks I propose to make later. Since this matter has been raised, I wish to emphasize that I do not think it is satisfactory that any arrangement for immigration into Canada for residents of India, Pakistan or Ceylon should simply be bulked in any order in council that applies to immigration from Asia.
The member for Rosetown-Biggar has pointed out that at the time we welcomed the new association with India, Pakistan and Ceylon which was established some little time ago, I expressed my pleasure that this step had been taken. At that time I indicated my own belief that by every means within our power we should demonstrate our desire to show that we recognize this partnership and regard India, Pakistan and Ceylon as belonging to a great world partnership. Anything less than that would be inclined to impair what may easily be one of the most important international relationships that now exist. I do not want to repeat the arguments I have made over and over again that there can be few things more important today than seeking to strengthen the bonds of friendship between the free nations of the British commonwealth.
There can be few experiments with greater influence on the future than the joining in a friendly arrangement of this kind of the great free nations of Asia with the nations of North America and Europe. When we hear the figures mentioned, it seems that they are strangely small in comparison with the tremendous populations of these great countries. It seems that they are inconsistent with our desire to express that friendship in practical terms. Nevertheless, those are details that could be worked out. I do urge that in whatever we do we bear in mind that any gesture which demonstrates our desire to recognize our association with India, Pakistan and Ceylon as a real, permanent partnership of free nations within the commonwealth, can be of immense advantage to the whole world.
I simply close my remarks in relation to this particular point by saying I should like the government to consider the importance and advantage of having any arrangements with those three nations of the commonwealth embraced in a separate order in council and a separate agreement. Under no circumstances should they simply be bulked with the general population of Asia, as they have been in the past.


Major James William Coldwell: That is precisely the point we are all trying to make to the minister. As

a matter of fact, some commonwealth countries are subject to certain regulations regarding immigration. I think these still stand. The classes of persons admissible under the order in council are, first, the husband or wife, the son, daughter, brother or sister, together with husband or wife or unmarried child; father or mother; the orphaned nephew or niece under 21 years of age of any person legally resident in Canada who is in a position to receive and care for such relative. The term "orphaned" in this connection means a person bereaved of both parents. Another class of person is a woman intending to get married, so long as the man is able to maintain his intended wife.
Where the discrimination comes in is that that seems applicable to all the commonwealth countries. We are all free and equal for purposes of immigration, and we are grouped together as persons born in or naturalized within commonwealth countries; but under another order in council, P.C. 2115, we prohibit the entry of those of any Asiatic race, except of course under the agreement that has been referred to. There is the discrimination which is irksome, and I think is understandably disliked by our fellow citizens in India and the east.


Walter Edward Harris: May I add to
what has been said by pointing out that the agreement with this country specifically excludes P.C. 2115. It sets out an agreement for migration from that country. That has removed the discrimination my hon. friend has spoken about.


Major James William Coldwell: Only to a limited extent.


Walter Edward Harris: Perhaps so.


Mr. Roberge:: I should like to ask the minister to give consideration to some temporary officers in his department who have been in the service for many years and who are still temporary. I have in my constituency a few of these men who have been working in the immigration department for probably five or six years. They own their homes and have been doing a good job. They still do not know what is going to happen; they seem to be uneasy about the future. They have approached me a couple of times. I should like to place this request before the minister and ask him if he would consider increasing the number of permanent employees in his department by a reasonable number. I think there are now some 60 or 65 permanent. I would suggest that he might bring the figure up to 75, in cases where the trend in the port is on the increase and the officers in question are perfectly satisfactory to the department.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
The other question I should like to ask is with regard to the combined work of immigration and customs. In some ports apparently it has not proved to be as satisfactory as had been expected. Does the minister think that work will be carried on in the future, or have there been any changes? In some instances commercial officials have been attended by some of the immigration inspectors and some by customs and immigration inspectors. This procedure has not proven to be fully satisfactory, and I was wondering whether the minister would give us an idea as to how this procedure has worked out in the last year or so.


Walter Edward Harris: I can assure the hon. member that there is an increase in the permanent establishment from 70 to 85. I shall look into the other question.


Louis-Édouard Roberge: Thank you.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is the minister going to make a general statement on immigration policy? I had hoped to catch the chairman's eye earlier but I am raising the question now.


Walter Edward Harris: I had one ready, Mr. Chairman, but the hon. member for Middlesex East intervened first in the debate and we have been proceeding from that point.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the minister make the statement now?


Walter Edward Harris: I think so.
Mr. Chairman, in presenting the annual report on immigration I should like to deal with the many things which occurred before and during the year 1951 which gave rise to the largest and most successful immigrant year since the war. Before doing so, however, it would be just as well for me to re-state the policy of immigration to which I have referred on every occasion that I have presented a report to the house. That policy is to admit to Canada in numbers not exceeding the absorptive capacity of our country and without altering the fundamental character of our people, such persons as are likely to contribute to our national life.
This department was created in January 1950, though, of course, it was a combination of branches of government already at that time functioning. When the first estimates were presented in this house, many members said that the government was not doing much about immigration, that we had no plan for immigration; that they were quite dissatisfied with the reduction in the number of immigrants from 1948, when there were 125,000 admitted, to 1949 when there were about
4264	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
90,000	admitted. During the debates in the spring of 1950, while no figure was placed upon the numbers who might come in, many stated that 90,000 was not sufficient. I think this was in keeping with the opinion of nearly all members of the house who spoke in the debates, at the end of the war, about immigration. There had been almost unanimous approval for the admission to Canada of people from Europe, especially those persons who had a claim upon our charity by reason of the unfortunate plight in which they found themselves. In addition, everyone recognized that Canada could only grow substantially if it grew by taking immigrants as well as by natural growth. And it was generally agreed that Canada should grow in numbers so as to be able to develop our great resources. The debates of 1945-6-7-8 show clearly that parliament was almost unanimous in its belief that immigration as a policy was desirable. Believing as we did that immigration could assist in the building of our country and people, we undertook throughout 1950 every step which we thought was in the interests of the Canadian people to stimulate immigration, without at the same time imposing upon the Canadian taxpayer any expense which was not justified.

As we saw it in the fall and winter of
1950-51, there was an unsatisfied demand for almost every form of labour in Canada. As well there was a demand for farm settlers because of the regularly changing population on the farm. In addition, there were complaints that the re-armament program was not progressing fast enough. So it became known abroad that Canada was accepting immigrants and large numbers made arrangements to come to what they were sure was the country of the future.
I am satisfied that everything which could have been done last year to stimulate immigration was done; and I am satisfied, sir, that those who came here were not only welcome, they were actually needed.
May I have consent to table a statement for the calendar year 1951 as well as the five months' statement for this year that I mentioned earlier?


William Alfred Robinson: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Walter Edward Harris: The statements are as follows:
[Mr. Harris (Grey-Bruce) .1

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration



IMMIGRATION TO CANADA, BY ORIGINS FROM OVERSEAS AND TOTALS FROM THE UNITED STATES

[Stage Direction]
English.
Irish___
Scottish
Welsh...
Totals	
United States	
North European-
Belgian	
Danish	
Dutch	
Finnish	
French	
German	
Icelandic	
Norwegian	
Swedish	
Swiss	
Totals	
Others-
Albanian	
Arabian	
Armenian	
Bulgarian	
Chinese	
Czecho-Slovakian	
East Indian	
Estonian	
Greek	
Hebrew	
Iranian	
Italian	
Japanese	
Jugo-Slavian	
Lettish	
Lithuanian	
Magyar	
Maltese	
Mexican	
Negro	
North American Indian
Polish	
Portuguese	
Roumanian	
Russian	
Spanish	
Syrian	
Turkish	
Ukrainian	
Others	
Totals	
Grand Totals	
Calendar	Calendar	PercentagesYear	Year	of1950	1951	increase8,700	19,109	1,362	2,506	3,123	9,201	242	554	13,427	31,370	1347,799	7,732	457	2,638	905	4,613	7,404	19,130	483	4,130	1,188	6,193	5,825	32,395	13	18	237	896	139	798	409	1,061	17,060	71,872	32128	54	28	52	35	80	85	360	1,741	2,697	1,441	3,142	77	97	1,949	4,573	866	2,885	2,429	6,599	2	7	9,059	24,351	11	3	1,013	4,144	1,766	2,789	960	1,330	1,577	4,376	840	1,600	2	12	90	91	1	6,612	12,938	87	157	392	995	604	2,273	67	671	86	208	9	19	3,769	6,894	20	35,626	83,417	13473,912	194,391	1634266	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration

[Stage Direction]
-	From Overseas	From U.S.A.	TotalsSex-	93,133	2,685	95,81850,118	3,121	53,239Children under 18	43,408	1,926	45,334Totals	186,659	7,732	194,391Occupation-	25,639	251	25,89030,551	456	31,007Skilled 	32,988	694	33,6824,858	459	5,3173,390	611	4,0012,444	512	2,9566,477	54	6,5314,570	832	5,402
110,917	3,869	114,786
			
32,949	1,989	34,93842,793	1,874	44,667
75,742	3,863	79,605
			
Destination-	207	52	2591,785	250	2,0351,214	209	1,423178	33	21144,570	1,463	46,033101,522	3,320	104,8428,511	238	8,7494,020	158	4,17811,440	798	12,23813,198	1,196	14,39414	15	29
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration

[Stage Direction]
-	Five Months ended May 31, 1951	Five Months ended May 31, 1952	Percentages of Increase and Decrease
	6,462	11,303	
	856	1,945	
	3,091	5,046	
	190	371	
10,599	18,665	76+2,926	3,006	3+North European-	866	777	1,598	1,167	9,132	11,184	502	1,547	1,747	2,426	5,993	12,566	4	18	218	601	215	263	402	753	20,677	31,302	51+Others-	18	16	26	26	26	31	126	83	1,106	1,150	1,401	613	41	32	2,434	660	862	703	2,416	2,326	3	7	6,076	12,118	2	1	1,238	1,458	1,059	1,050	407	549	1,456	925	306	136	2	4	30	28	4,113	3,724	34	58	306	242	475	725	59	171	56	86	9	9	2,073	2,169	1	17	26,154	29,115	11 +60,356	82,088	36+
* Includes an estimated 1,382 Austrians during 1952.
4268	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration

[Stage Direction]
Sex-
Adult Males	
Adult Females	
Children under 18	
Totals	
Occupation-
Gainfully Occupied-
Farming	
Unskilled and Semi-skilled....
Skilled	
Clerical	
Professional	
Trading	
Female Domestics	
Others	
Totals	
Not Gainfully Occupied-
Dependent Wives	
Dependent Children	
Others	
Totals	
Destination-
Newfoundland	
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	
Prince Edward Island	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Yukon and Northwest Territories
As this year began it became evident that there were less demands for immigration as the needs were being met.
When the supplementary estimates of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration were being considered I gave the house certain undertakings that at the appropriate time I would deal with certain matters.
On several occasions during the discussion of the supplementary estimates the matter of farm workers was raised and concern was expressed over the fact that a proportion of those people who secured admission to Canada because they represented themselves as farm labourers were not staying on the farm for their allotted period.
The fact is that a very large majority of those who come to Canada as farm workers have remained on the farm for their allotted period and, indeed, many have remained well beyond it and are still on the land even though they came to Canada three and four years ago.
CMr. Harris (Grey-Bruce).]
From Overseas	From U.S.A.	Totals36,653	1,133	37,78622,633	1,131	23,76419,796	742	20,53879,082	3,006	82,0889,473	99	9,57212,384	195	12,57912,688	221	12,9092,932	151	3,0832,308	377	2,6851,338	169	1,5072,915	17	2,932748	45	79344,786	1,274	46,06013,332	761	14,09319,135	732	19,8671,829	239	2,06834,296	1,732	36,028136	27	1631,287	78	1,365361	55	416107	14	12117,712	461	18,17343,160	1,110	44,2703,107	73	3,1801,590	85	1,6755,258	560	5,8186,356	536	6,8928	7	15
We hear, of course, about the man who does not live up to his obligations. We hear nothing much about the thousands who do and the result has been that the small percentage of defaulting farm workers stand out in unfortunate contrast to the others.
One of the objects of the Canadian immigration policy is to build up Canadian agriculture. We are doing that and in proof of that statement I would put on the record the achievement of just one racial group, those from the Netherlands. It is true those from the Netherlands are, perhaps, a little different from the average farm labourer. Their roots are perhaps a little more deeply in the soil. They move as a family unit in many cases and the selection is made with the co-operation of Netherlands authorities.
However, from the inception of the movement from Holland, up until March 30, 1952, a total of about fifteen thousand Dutch families had come forward to Canada. Of

these more than 4,500 families are now farming on their own account, either as farm owners or farm tenants. Many thousands more are still employed on the farms of Canadians, learning Canadian methods, saving their money and planning for the time when they will have farms of their own.
It would, of course, be possible to take steps which would ensure that the man who says he is coming to Canada as a farm worker remains a farm worker. We could even hold the possibility of deportation over his head, as indeed is done in some countries. However, it is my opinion that the Canadian people would be entirely opposed to any such practice. It would be contrary to the whole Canadian belief in freedom of the individual.
It is much better, I believe, to ensure through our selection that the farm labourer who comes to Canada comes from a farming background in his homeland, and is of a type most likely to make a lifetime career out of farming in Canada.
The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre was anxious to know whether in our planning we took into account the jobs available and the areas in which they were available, and whether consideration was given to the countries from which immigrants are selected. The answer in both cases is "yes". First of all I want to make it clear that no policy of immigration can be operated on a stop and go basis. We cannot possibly develop that policy on a plan that calls for one specific immigrant for one specific opportunity. We must be prepared to have faith in our country and the opportunity it will offer to those prepared to work. This means that if we believe in Canada's future, if we believe ours is a developing country, we must be prepared to bring in some people, knowing that when they are on the ground Canada will have a place for them.
In regard to the question of planning and the countries of selection, I wish to assure the house that every effort is being made to increase the number of immigrants from the United Kingdom and France, and I am glad to report that during the fiscal year
1951-52 a total of 36,000 immigrants of English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh origin came to Canada, as compared with 15,429 in the previous fiscal year. From France we received 6,666 as compared with 1,845. We also had a large intake of people from the northern European countries which in the past have contributed a good type of immigrant, who have readily become integrated into the
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Canadian communities in which they have made their homes. I . think every debate on immigration has indicated that it is the desire of this house that we should have a substantial number from northern Europe.
Earlier in the session there were some questions about the assisted passage scheme. The assisted passage plan was suspended last October but has again been in operation since the supplementary estimates were passed.
Under this plan the government advanced to the immigrant a substantial portion of his fare to Canada, provided that he was entering an occupation in Canada where there was definite need of his services. The advance is considered a loan and is recoverable in monthly instalments over a maximum period of two years.
As at the end of May a total of 16,255 had come to Canada under the assisted passage plan, and $2,746,006 had been advanced in fares. So far the record of repayment has been good, and it is anticipated that by the end of July a total in excess of $1 million will have been repaid.
There are two other matters on which I promised information to the house. The first of these concerns those whose establishment in Canada is delayed through no fault of their own, who become indigent as a result of sickness or accident. We have been in communication with all provincial governments in regard to these people and have offered to assume, under some circumstances, half the costs of hospitalization and welfare expended on their behalf. An agreement to this effect has been signed with the province of Ontario and negotiations are continuing with the other nine provinces. I should like to table a copy of that agreement.
The other matter concerns the issuing of fraudulent visas. Earlier in the session I gave the house all the information I felt I could give at the time in view of the investigation which was then going on. I am still somewhat limited in the information I can provide on this matter, but I can report that the investigation by officers of the R.C.M.P. has now been virtually completed. Agents of the Department of Justice have before them the report of the R.C.M.P. and in addition a total of more than 1,200 exhibits which are being carefully studied.
I believe I have completed my undertakings which I gave to hon. members, but I should like to say a word about the quality of the immigrants coming to Canada. A few weeks ago in this house a return was made which indicated that in the past two years a total of 193 new industries had been established in Canada through investment of foreign
4270	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration capital. Not all these were immigrant industries, of course, but a significant percentage of them were.
It is true that in the years immediately following world war II a substantial percentage of our immigrants were displaced persons, but that percentage has been decreasing and more and more of those coming to Canada have come from a background of employment and the home. Last year only 22 per cent were in the displaced person category. The remainder were people who came to Canada voluntarily because they saw here a developing country, a country with an expanding economy which offered opportunity to those who would work. These people do not arrive here penniless. True, the money they can bring is restricted by currency regulations, but in the calendar year 1951 they brought to Canada more than $60 million in new capital. They brought in other capital, but they also brought skills and all of them and their dependents were consumers from the moment of their arrival here. That, I suggest, is an important aspect of immigration.
Indications for 1952 are that the intake may not reach the 1951 figure. Because of the improved situation in regard to shipping we have been able to move to Canada in the first five months of the year a total of 82,000 persons, but it is expected as well that the figures will decline beginning this month, and it is not the intention of the government to admit certain workers after the end of October.
Substantially higher are the figures for British immigration which totalled 18,665 for the	first five months of	this year
as compared with 10,599 for the first five months of 1951, and indeed a figure which exceeds our total British immigration in the calendar year 1950 by over
5,000.	The figures from France are also up, with 2,426 arriving in the first five months of 1952 as compared with 1,747 in the same five months a year ago. The figures for other countries, while greater, are not so in proportion. It would appear that this year there will be a greater percentage from the United Kingdom and northern Europe and a smaller percentage from the other countries. For example, for the first five months 23 per cent of all immigrants were from the United Kingdom as compared with 17J per cent in 1951; 38 per cent were from northern Europe as compared with 34 per cent in 1951; and 39 per cent were from other countries as compared with 48i per cent in 1951.
I should like to place on Hansard for the benefit of all hon. members a summary of those persons who are admissible to Canada, made up according to the countries of origin
[Stage Direction]

and indicating the occupations, the close relative groups and the like, so that hon. members may know precisely who is admissible from what particular country. In particular I should point out that in the past the countries of Turkey, Syria, Lebanon and Iran have been dealt with as if they were under P.C. 2115. This statement indicates that they shall not be so dealt with in the future.
William Alfred Robinson: Order. The
minister in his statement referred to a number of documents. Do I understand that the committee has agreed to the tabling of the documents?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes. The regulations are as follows:
Department of Citizenship and Immigration Immigration policy
Summary of persons admissible Under P.C. 2856 and P.C. 2115
1.	(A) Persons born or naturalized in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa, citizens of Ireland, citizens of the United States, citizens of France, on evidence that they have employment or sufficient means to maintain themselves for a reasonable period after their arrival in Canada, or are sponsored by a legal resident of Canada.
(B)	Non-nationals in countries named above:
(i)	dose relatives, in the following classes, sponsored by a legal resident of Canada,
-Husband or wife;
-Son or daughter, brother or sister, together with husband or wife and unmarried children:
-Father or mother;
-Grandparents;
-Orphan nephew or niece under 21 years of age;
-Fiance (e) s;
(ii)	cases of exceptional merit;
(iii)	refugees.
(C)	All non-nationals (except refugees) mentioned above require two years' resident in the country where they apply for visa.
2.	From Belgium, Luxembourg, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland:
(A)	Nationals:
(i)	Persons in certain trades as may be approved from time to time, who have funds to pay for their transportation and to maintain themselves in Canada until they have secured employment.
(ii)	Persons mentioned in paragraph 1 (B) (i) and (ii) above.
(B)	Non-nationals as in paragraph 1(B) (i), (ii),
(iii)	and 1(C) above.
3.	From Holland:
(A)	Nationals:
(i)	Agricultural workers, some artisans and workers selected under agreement with The Netherlands government.
(ii)	Persons mentioned in paragraph 1(B)	(i)
and (ii) above.
(B)	Non-nationals as above in 1(B)	(i), (ii),
(iii)	and 1(C).

4.	From Germany, Austria, Greece and Finland:
(A)	Nationals:
(i)	Agriculturists, farm workers, domestics, nurses and nurses' aides.
(ii)	Persons mentioned in paragraph 1(B) (i) and (ii) above.
(B)	Non-nationals as above in 1(B)	(i), (ii),
(iii)	and 1(C).
5.	From Italy:
(A)	Nationals:
(i) Workers for whom orders have been approved prior to June 1952.
(ii) Close relatives in the following classes, i.e., husband, wife, minor unmarried children, parents and fiance (e)s.
(B)	Non-nationals as in paragraph 1(B)	(i),
(ii), (iii) and 1(C) above.
6.	From Israel, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Iran:
Persons as in paragraph 1(B) (i) and (ii) above.
7.	From all other European countries:
Persons as in paragraph 1(B) (i) above.
8.	From South America:
(A)	Nationals:
(i)	Person mentioned in paragraph 1(B) (i) above.
(ii)	Other cases on their individual merit.
(B)	Non-nationals as in paragraph 1(B)	(i),
(ii) and 1(C).
9.	From British West Indies:
Persons as in paragraph 1(B) (i) and (ii).
10.	From India, Pakistan and Ceylon:
(A) Husband or wife and unmarried children under 21 years of age of Canadian citizens, plus those admissible under the agreement with India (150), Pakistan (100), and Ceylon (50).
11.	For other Asians:
(A) Husband or wife and unmarried children under 21 years of age of Canadian citizens, and other unmarried children in accordance with statement made in the House of Commons last June.
12.	All others:
As in paragraph 1 (B) (i) above.


Arthur Laing: I wish to devote a very few minutes to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. Substantially I want to compliment the minister on what I think has been a very excellent job done for the Canadian people. Oh, there have been complaints. I remember in Vancouver last winter when for a very short time we had 200 or 300 people who had to be accommodated in an immigration shed, and there were complaints from labour and from other people too that we were bringing people here who could not be accommodated. I hope we will balance this off against the very substantial and infinitely greater number of cases of people who have come to this country in the last two or three years, have become admirably established and have made a great contribution to Canada in their new skills, their new outlook and their old background, if I may say so.
There has been a great deal of success. We hear very little of the success. We hear a great deal of the odd failure. I want to suggest to the minister, in line with the remark of the hon. member for Brant-Wentworth, that we should probably pay a little more attention in a practical way to settling farm
4, 1952	4271
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration immigrants. I think the majority of those people, coming from the northern part of Europe and being independent people, would prefer to work on their own farms as soon as they possibly could after coming here instead of working for someone else.
I have the idea that is a field in which the federal administration could work with the provinces by way of modest loans in setting up farm population on some of our newer land. In the northern half of British Columbia we have vast areas of splendid land which could be opened up, but in many instances these people are coming over with inadequate sums of money.
There are those who say people are not coming in fast enough, that we need people quickly and so on, but we should bear in mind that many countries in Europe are not anxious to lose their people and have set up regulations pertaining to the export of money and so on as a bar to their leaving.
I think in the main we have done a good job. I want to compliment the minister upon his action with regard to one or two minority groups which by and large we have looked upon in the past if not as being undesirable, at least as being difficult to work into the fabric of Canadian life. I refer first to the Chinese who came to Canada in the early part of the century in great numbers. Then we adopted a closed door policy against them. In recent years the minister and his department has given attention to bringing over some of the close relatives of these people.
I want to say a word on behalf of another group of people who are part of the brotherhood within the commonwealth of nations, the East Indians. We have at the present time in British Columbia approximately 2,000 East Indians. I remember distinctly in 1913 when a boat arrived in Vancouver with a great number of East Indians aboard who were seeking entry into Canada. Entry was refused and the ship remained in harbour for many weeks, and finally had to return these people to India. Out of that incident arose a disruption of relations between peoples who were together at that time under the British crown, and it did not do us any good across the years.
The recent proposal announced by the minister is to bring in 150 East Indians a year. This is a small number, but it will do something to help cure an old sore. We are finding now, both in the case of the East Indians and the Chinese, that these people have become well educated. Our East Indians have improved their lot in British Columbia, where many of them are now mill owners. I have in mind one who is No. 2 air pilot for
4272	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the Canadian Pacific Air Lines and is going to fly the Pacific when they inaugurate their schedule.
I want to compliment whoever may have been responsible-probably it was the civil service-for the appointment of an East Indian to the bureau of statistics here in Ottawa. This man is a graduate of the University of British Columbia and is admirably versed in mathematics. We should bear in mind that although Canada is small in population, it is rapidly achieving a foremost position among the nations of the world because of our resources and the integrity of the people. A spirit of open-mindedness with regard to immigration from various countries of the world will do much to add to our stature, but we should bring in only the best people. Again I repeat that the minister has done an admirable job for us in this matter of immigration to our country.


Mr. Gibson:: I should like to endorse what the hon. member for Vancouver South and others have said with regard to this question of allowing more East Indians to enter Canada. I trust that the minister will give serious consideration to this problem.


Mr. Sinclair:: Mr. Chairman, I would feel backward if I did not speak on this matter. In recent years we have been gratified by the action taken to allow Canadians of Chinese descent to bring their relatives to Canada, especially in view of the situation in the continental part of China. East Indians and Pakistanis who live in British Columbia are in an even more special position in that they are British subjects as well as Canadian citizens. I think it is quite in order when they propose that they should be afforded the same opportunity that is given to Canadians of Chinese origin to bring in their close relatives, both for the sake of good relations between Canada and Pakistan and India and relations within the province of British Columbia itself.
There was a time in British Columbia when oriental people, Japanese, Chinese and East Indians-we referred to them as Hindus- were regarded as being most indigestible, as peoples we could not possibly assimilate. That was probably true of the first generation who came to this country as low-grade labour to work on the railroads. But those of us who have gone through school in British Columbia have seen the great change which has taken place. These young Canadians who are of a little different stock from our own have fitted into the life of the province. I think the same facilities should be provided for the admission of relatives of these Canadians who are of either Indian or Pakistani stock that are afforded to those of Chinese stock.
[Mr. Lamg.l


Walter Edward Harris: I do not think the hon. member for Coast-Capilano was in the chamber when I said that the agreement we had negotiated with the governments of India and Pakistan provided for the admission to Canada not only of close relatives described as being the wife, husband or unmarried children under 21 years of age of a Canadian citizen, but in addition 150 others. Under the arrangements between the two governments, administratively we are giving preference in the 150 to other close relatives, such as brothers, sisters and the like.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say just a word or two. The minister's statement certainly added something to the situation, but I must confess that the chief impression I got was that there was an agreement under which Canada would admit a certain number of people in each group. The minister indicated that there was a general feeling in favour of greater immigration, but I got only the most general Impression as to any policy which is to be followed or any set of principles which is to be adopted. However, I am not going to plunge into that further at this time.
I have in mind a few questions I should like to ask on administration matters. One feels that there is overlapping between the Department of Labour and the department of immigration. Inevitably some of those who are admitted eventually become public charges, and the best information I can get indicates that there is overlapping there. Those in need are able to get help from both labour and immigration; sometimes they are able to get it also from welfare groups, ethnic societies and individual sponsors. I do not think the minister will disagree with me when I say that from one point of view there is what you might call a partnership between the departments, but from another point of view there is overlapping.
Then another question comes to my mind. In this assisted passage scheme I understand the assistance is given to the worker but not to his wife and children. That leaves him with a tremendous task on his hands when he arrives here, because he has to pay back his own passage, support his family while they are in Europe, and get the money to bring them out. These are some of the questions in my mind, and perhaps the minister would deal with them and one or two others that I should like to ask later.


Walter Edward Harris: I suppose it would be true to say that there is overlapping in the sense that the Department of Labour and the department of immigration, both abroad and here, interest themselves in the immigrant. However, it has been found by experience since the war that there are

separate functions for each department, both tending to aid the immigrant in becoming settled in Canada. For example, before this department as such was set up the Department of Labour administered the movement of people under IRO. They continued to do that until the end of last year, when IRO ceased to function. To that extent it might have been desirable that there should be a division of responsibility. The purpose of the overlapping both here and abroad is very simple. We desire to have the best possible information as to opportunities in Canada, and in addition we want to have the best possible judgment as to the suitability of the applicants abroad. Labour can be of assistance in that regard.
When the immigrant comes to this country he may be placed by labour if he happens to be one of these refugees under IRO; and if he happens to be placed by immigration and in due course finds himself out of employment, naturally he is entitled to the assistance of the national employment service, and of the placement service of our own department. So far as I am concerned, I am satisfied that the two departments each contribute something to the choice of the immigrant and to the settlement of the immigrant in this country.
With respect to the assisted passage scheme, I agree that we do not extend it to the dependents of a worker; and that is a debatable point. It may not be desirable on social grounds to separate the head of the family from the dependents for any length of time, and an argument can be made that if we advance money to bring forward the head of the family we could also advance money for the dependents. That of course would not apply in the case of a single immigrant. The purpose of the assisted passage scheme originally was to provide the means of bringing to Canada some person who was needed here, having in mind as well that the chances would be that he could probably make a go of it and find the means of bringing forward his family.
I agree if the family is large and if the immigrant happens to go to British Columbia, it will cost a great deal of money to bring his wife and children forward. That is one of the weaknesses of the assisted passage scheme but I think it is one of the weaknesses that must be accepted with the desire to bring the person in the first place.


Mr. Churchill:: In the first instance I should ike to thank the minister for answering the question I asked him on March 28 with regard :o the policy of the department. His state-nent was not quite as comprehensive as I roped it would be, but he has assisted in our
4, 1952	4273
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration understanding of the problem. I think the subject of immigration requires greater understanding on the part of the Canadian people. I believe there is a wide diversity of opinion with regard to the benefits or otherwise of immigration. We tend to look back to the period of the early years of this century when immigrants came into our country in very large numbers and were largely bent on taking up farm lands, particularly in western Canada. We consider there was considerable success attached to that great movement of people. At the present time it is not possible to absorb people into Canada on that scale and with that intention, as it was in those earlier years. The subject of immigration has become somewhat more complicated and deserves very careful attention.
With the growing industrialization of our country and the trend toward urbanization there is no question but that the immigrant is not as easily placed as he was in the first twenty years of this century. That is why I have been wondering about our immigration policy. Let me put this question to the minister. Over a period of years what increase in the population of Canada can be attributed to immigration? Has the minister at his disposal information that will indicate to us the relationship between immigration, natural increase and loss of population to the United States and other countries? Would we be further ahead in putting more emphasis on attempting to retain the natural increase of our country rather than putting our efforts into drawing immigrants into Canada? There is no question but that there is a serious loss of people each year to the United States and elsewhere.
It is on these grounds that I say there is perhaps a lack of understanding throughout Canada as to immigration. Is it as valuable as we have sometimes thought it to be? I do not suggest for one minute that we have not received immense contributions from immigrant people. After all, we ourselves are either immigrants or the descendants of immigrants, and the country has benefited from those who have come here in the past and from those who are coming at the present time. But is our emphasis perhaps wrongly placed? I should like to have the minister's comments on that problem. One of the reasons I raise it is that checking in the Canada Year Book for 1951 I noticed according to paragraph 13 on page 152, which deals with presumed permanent movement of population between Canada and the United States for the years ending June 30, 1940 to 1949, that over that period we
4274	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration appear to have lost to the United States 131,742 persons. That is our net loss to that country.
The figures there appear to indicate that not only do our native born depart to the United States but also many people who have not established themselves as permanent residents, immigrants who have entered our country just as a stopping place before going elsewhere. When we are spending several millions of dollars on immigration, are we aware of the fact that we are losing many of our immigrants and perhaps many of our native born who, with a somewhat different emphasis with respect to our economy, might be retained within the country?
I have a number of problems I should like to take up with the minister. I do not propose to use too much of the time of the house, but I think this department requires careful study for our own information and for the information of the people of Canada. I should like to draw the minister's attention to an article which I presume he has already seen, and perhaps has answered, though I did not see the answer in the press. This article is dated April 26, 1952, and appeared in the Globe and Mail. It has reference to a meeting of the school of social work of the University of Toronto and the Toronto welfare council. The subject dealt with was immigration. From my knowledge of the situation in Winnipeg, and from my experience with the Winnipeg welfare council, I vrould say that the problems discussed in this article are perhaps the same in western Canada as they are in Ontario. I would like to quote just one or two passages here and perhaps the minister will make some comment. The article starts off as follows:
Prospective newcomers should be given a start in basic English before they arrive in Canada and the process of integrating them into the Canadian way of life needs a major overhauling.
These were two of the views expressed last night at a conference on new immigrants, held under the auspices of the school of social work of the University of Toronto, and the Toronto welfare council.
Then further on: Professor C. D. Hendry, who is director of the social work school, dealt with the problems facing the services. This is the statement made by Professor Hendry:
The public as a whole, he said, seemed to lack clarity, conviction and certainty as to how many immigrants can be absorbed. He described public policy on immigration as: "Cautious, conservative but essentially constructive." Dealing with specific attitudes, he found unawareness, lack of information, and apathy prevailed in some quarters, while in others there was fear that job security of Canadians was threatened by the immigrants.


He goes on to say, and these are his exact words as given in quotation marks in the paper; speaking of agency officials-
"I regret to say some are cold and even harsh in their treatment of new citizens."
Dr. Hendry has some further comments along that line and then Professor Wolfgang Friedmann, of the school of law, University of Toronto, and again I am quoting from the newspaper, said:
Many things could be done before the immigrants arrive in Canada. A common bond united all agencies which dealt with one or another of the problems of immigrants; a common desire to meet the challenge offered by the arrival in Canada of 200,000 newcomers annually.
Then Stephen Davidovitch, adviser, citizenship branch, Ontario department of education, said:
-the lot of the present-day immigrant was infinitely better than that of the immigrant of 50 years ago. Generally speaking, the public agreed that the immigrant should be helped but not mollycoddled.
I think we are in agreement with that.
An association composed of representatives of ethnic groups, to meet the immigrant and advise him on such matters as housing and jobs, would be a distinct advancement, he felt. Such a body might also make loans to newcomers and in this way prevent them from being fleeced by tricksters. . . Education of the newcomer, particularly in English, was stressed by the speaker as a prime necessity.
Miss Florence Philpott, executive secretary, Toronto welfare council, said:
A great deal of commendable work had been done. She stressed the lack of integrated, co-ordinated program.
After reviewing the existing services available to immigrants, Miss Philpott remarked that far too few of them availed themselves of their use. The fact that many of the agencies had not informed the immigrants of the existence of these services was not surprising, Miss Philpott said. She doubted whether these agencies knew the services existed, either.
What I am wondering about, Mr. Chairman, is the amount of co-operation that exists between this department and the various provincial governments on whom apparently the final responsibility rests when the immigrants are admitted. In experience, a great deal of the work in connection with immigrants seems to fall upon voluntary organizations and welfare services. To what extent the department has a plan with regard to aiding immigrants on arrival, in conjunction with the province, as suggested in that article, is a question on which I would like to hear some comment from the minister.
I will stop at that point, though I have some other questions to take up later.


Walter Edward Harris: I can briefly remark that I did not see the particular

article; but the hon. member will appreciate that there were officers of this department of government at that meeting and they made a report to us. I should also add that this year we are granting to the gentlemen he has mentioned, or at any rate to the department he has mentioned, the sum of $2,500 for study of this particular problem. That is not to suggest that it has not been studied before by ourselves, but it is merely to obtain views of the kind that have been read today, of persons who look at us from the outside.
We recognize that one can always do more for an immigrant than is being done and that there will be immigrants who will have great difficulty in becoming settled. Those are the ones you will hear about at a meeting of social workers. I do say there has been a minimum of difficulty to this moment in settling those people and, I think, a minimum of difficulty in having them accepted into the Canadian community.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I was hoping the minister would say something about my earlier question regarding emigration, but he may do that later on. I would suggest at this point that the question of education enters into this immigrant problem, in that a considerable proportion of immigrants are, I presume, juvenile and individuals of school age. Perhaps the minister could give us some figures that would indicate the number of school age who entered the country last year.
I would point out to him and to the dominion government that the bringing in of immigrant children, desirable as they are, adds a further burden to the municipalities who are concerned with the educational problem. A friend of mine in the city of Winnipeg who is interested in this matter has suggested to me that the number of immigrant children added to the Winnipeg school rolls as of last September 1 would represent the equivalent of perhaps ten classrooms. I have not had the opportunity of checking his figures, but it does seem that something like that might very well happen. If you bring in several thousand children, even at the rate of crowded classrooms of 40 students, obviously you have to supply something rather extensive in the way of accommodation. This burden I am sure is falling upon the cities, and certainly it has done so in the case of Winnipeg, because we have received a fair proportion of immigrant families. I am not sure that this particular problem has been faced or whether anything useful can be done about it; but on other occasions when I have been talking about federal aid for education this was in our minds. A dominion policy that brings in people of 55704-270
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration school age should also, as a corollary, provide some assistance to the municipalities that are faced with the heavy financial burden of providing for their education. Unless the education of our immigrants is carried on, certainly that of the immigrant children, they will not become effective Canadian citizens. At the same time, along with that goes night classes for adult immigrants. Upon whom does that burden fall? Is there some assistance from the dominion government for that purpose?


Walter Edward Harris: Well, to answer the question first asked, during 1951 the number of children up to 14 years of age admitted was 39,474. My other figures run from 15 to 19, so not all of those could be considered to be of school age, but I shall add them anyway; 13,268.
With respect to the cost of education, of course it goes without saying that when they come here they are entitled to education at the expense of the public. If the hon. member feels that the city of Winnipeg is not prepared to accept this as a charge upon the city, he will say so. Up to this moment we have had no protest from the city of Winnipeg with respect to the education of the children of immigrants.
On the other point as to the cost of education for adults in night classes, this department does supply a very large number of textbooks for use in those schools. There is another item which my friend may come to later which indicates that last year we spent $116,000 on providing those to any provincial governments that asked for them, and I think all did ask for them.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I would not want the minister to leave the impression, which he may not have intended, that Winnipeg is not ready and well able to receive all the immigrants who come. It is a friendly city, I would have you know, and we welcome those who come to us. We try to look after them. I was attempting to point out that an extra burden is placed upon the municipalities throughout Canada because of the policy of the dominion government.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I want to ask the minister one question. In those cases to which he referred, of immigrants who for one reason or another, were temporarily unable to look after themselves, from what public sources does the money come to look after them?


Walter Edward Harris: It is under vote 63.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Does the minister say that all the money for that
4276	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration comes out of his department? My understanding was the contrary.


Walter Edward Harris: That applies to immigrants under the department of immigration. The Department of Labour has a vote which they apply to immigrants brought forward by that department.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Does that mean that certain immigrants would be maintained by one department and certain ones by another? You may have people, let us say at Ajax, some being maintained by one department and some by another. Would they not be in separate compartments?


Walter Edward Harris: At Ajax there are both immigrants who came here through this department and those who came sponsored by the labour department under IRO.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Does
that not create difficulties in having these people mixed and receiving aid from two separate departments?


Walter Edward Harris: No, it has not
so far as I know.


George Alexander Drew: Before we pass this item, I want to suggest that perhaps what is happening this afternoon indicates the advantage to any important department of holding its estimates off until the last moment. This subject is being discussed in an atmosphere of complacency that is wholly out of line with the sentiments of the people of this country generally toward the administration of this department. It has already been said today, and I feel sure it is true, that next to the burden of taxation and the high cost of living there is no single subject about which there is as much dissatisfaction as there is in regard to our over-all policy of immigration.
But there is one subject to which I wish to refer before this passes from discussion in this house into the wider discussion that undoubtedly will be carried on in the press and in public, as it has been so vigorously for some months. I refer to the implications of the disclosure of corruption and fraud amongst various officials attached to this department. I refer once again to an article that has been referred to before, the article in Maclean's magazine of March 15 of this year under the title, "How racketeers sold entry into Canada.'' I would also refer to an editorial in the Ottawa Journal of February 21 of this year under the heading "Immigration by fraud," referring to disclosures that there had been fraud in connection with illegal entry into Canada of an undisclosed number of persons through the activities of an
[Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood) .1

agent of this department at Karlsruhe, Germany. The article in Maclean's magazine of March 15 referred to the activities of government officials in connection with immigration from Italy. The statements were unequivocal; they were positive. This article by one of the best known writers in this country contains this positive statement at the top:
Corrupt Canadian government officials and unscrupulous travel agencies have extorted thousands of dollars to smuggle Italian immigrants into Canada.
The minister has simply referred to this by indicating that an inquiry has advanced to the stage where it may be hoped that it can be closed at an early date. I suggest that this indicates something of a nature that calls for the most thoroughgoing investigation, and not merely an investigation of a possible breach of trust or criminal action. The Maclean's article on the one hand, and the Ottawa Journal editorial on the other, I merely choose as examples of the many editorials and public statements that have been made indicating widespread concern about something that may by no manner of means be confined to the known cases which have been indicated in this way. It is not usual that it is only the known cases that emerge in the way these did before there were any investigations, so far as we are aware.
In connnection with the Maclean's article to which I have referred, it speaks of a widespread organization, describes the methods by which an agency named in this article had been carrying on activities; and it describes how a man, named, obtained false declarations that certain people were getting certain farmers to work for them. This article also refers to the information which had been obtained that similar activities had been carried on in Germany.
There are two angles to a disclosure of this kind. The first is the breach of trust by the officials. The second is the fact that if these people, as citizens of Canada, were obtaining money by false pretences and had broken their trust, then criminal prosecutions should follow. Third, and extremely important, there is the situation that is produced by the activities of these people in connection with immigration itself. On the one hand there would appear to have been a substantial entry into Canada of immigrants who should not have come. On the other hand it would appear that many immigrants who could have come in any event were paying sums of money to these officials in the mistaken idea that this was necessary in order to enter Canada.
It is not just enough to be told what action has been taken in relation to the officials.

It is also necessary to know what is going to be done with regard to the immigrants. As to these immigrants who paid money unnecessarily to these men who have broken their trust and are probably also guilty of criminal offences, certainly if it is humanly possible that money should be obtained, and paid back to the immigrants. It may not be possible. Most certainly it is an unfortunate thing if their innocent paying of this money means that there is no way by which they can recover.
But the other side of this picture is that those who have obtained entry into Canada by fraud may well have come here for purposes of which we are only too well aware at this time. Therefore any conduct of this nature, in breaking the immigration laws of Canada at such a time as this, should be looked upon with particular concern. I would hope that the investigations that are taking place will be completed soon; that prompt action will be taken to deal with every single case disclosed; that a complete and comprehensive public statement will be made with regard to every aspect of this situation as disclosed in part by the earlier information which was made public in the manner I have described, so the real concern in the minds of the people of Canada may be allayed at least in some measure and there may be an assurance that the laxity which permitted fraud of this nature will be checked so that in future the immigration laws and such immigration policy as may exist will in fact be enforced by the officials of the department.
Just before I close these remarks may I say that no remark I have made is to be taken as a reflection on the regular officials of the department here who, I know, give that kind of service one would expect. But here are disclosures of fraud on the part of people who in some way were permitted to have an influence upon the entry into Canada of immigrants, and it is a situation which calls for action of a nature which will reassure the public with regard to the procedure that is being followed.


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Chairman, may I assure the leader of the opposition that when the information came to the ears of this department that there were any irregularities at all, we began the investigation some time before any publicity appeared about it. In fact it was the action taken by this department in connection with certain legal matters which drew it to the attention of the public.
There are several problems involved, as he has said. First, what action is to be taken with respect to the immigration officer 55704-2701
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration who permitted himself to be found breaking his trust? Second, what is to be done with respect to that person who induced him to do so? Third, what is to be done with respect to others who knowingly, and perhaps not knowingly, contributed to the activities of this group?
I must say that I personally have been disappointed at the progress which has been made in going through the many matters involved. When I say I was disappointed, I mean that I was disappointed only in the length of time it has taken, but not in the work that has been done. When I discussed this matter as late as Tuesday night of this week with some of the officials of the Department of Justice, I fully appreciated the time that was required to go thoroughly into the whole question as it may affect all the persons concerned in Canada and abroad. Just as soon as we have come to a conclusion as to the extent of the activity and the means to take to bring before the courts those who have broken our laws, we shall do so; and at the same time, within the rules which apply when matters are before the courts, we shall give as much information as possible to the public.
I want to thank the leader of the opposition for his reference to the officials of the department. I knew he would say what he has said when he remembered that he had not done so previously. I think the use of the headline in the one article was misleading, as I pointed out to the hon. member for Kamloops at one time this session. It is commonly understood that the term "officials", when related to the civil service, means a particular group of people. I want to assure the committee that no official I know of is concerned in this matter.


Mr. Blackmore:: Perhaps the minister has already given the information that I should like to have him give me; I have not been here all during the discussion. Has he any facilities through which he is able to keep in touch with these immigrants and to find out whether or not they are being taken advantage of by the people who are employing them? Is there any agency to which they can apply in case they feel that they have sustained an injustice at the hands of Canadian people?


Walter Edward Harris: We have a settlement officer in the city of Edmonton in my hon. friend's province. Not only is he obliged to find places for immigrants, but he is obliged to keep in contact with them, and to be of assistance to the immigrant should he need assistance in any difficulty he may have with his employer or with anyone else.
4278	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


John Horne Blackmore: Is there a particular man in the province who does this work?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes; and more than one in some of the larger provinces.


John Horne Blackmore: By what means would a person in my constituency in southern Alberta be able to get in touch with that man in Edmonton? Is he told who that man is, and is he given his name and more or less made acquainted with him so he would feel certain that his petition would be heard?


Walter Edward Harris: In many many cases the settlement officer is the one who meets the immigrant and directs him to the place to which he is to go. Of course that does not occur in every case, but the immigrant is informed of the fact that we have these officers, and of their location, though he may possibly forget and misplace the paper at a later time.


George Alexander Drew: There is one point I wish to refer to briefly; I am speaking particularly of education for adult immigrants. There can be no doubt about the ordinary educational facilities being available to those of the ordinary education age. It is extremely important that adult immigrants have an opportunity for education which not only gives them the advantage of the two official languages of Canada but also gives them information with regard to our form of democracy and with regard to many things about our country which are of importance. The textbooks that are being supplied by the department in that respect are very good and are being used to great advantage.
I believe more could be done through an extension of the co-operation between the department and the departments of education of the provinces than is being done at the moment. On this occasion I am not raising this critically, because we are dealing with a relatively new field. I simply put this forward and leave the thought as something I should like to have considered by the department.
More and more we recognize the advantage of visual instruction. I would hope that a conference between some representative or representatives of the department and representatives of departments of education in the provinces would consider the possibility of arranging for a type of visual education which could be produced by the national film board and would become generally available across the country. Certain films are available now, but these films are not of the type I have in mind. Films which illustrate in a pictorial form certain types of our system of national, provincial and .educational government, certain types of our


own characteristic Canadian way of doing things in different parts of the country, would all be very helpful in connection with these programs.
In offering this suggestion may I pay my personal tribute to some of these voluntary organizations which, along with the organizations set up by the provincial governments, are doing a magnificent job at this time in giving educational training to the immigrants. I do not propose to pick them out, because in some cases they are religious organizations, in some cases they are under particular racial groups, and under various public service activities. But a splendid job is being done which deserves the commendation of hon. members and the people of Canada. I am only suggesting that with the experience already behind us, it would be desirable that we extend the facilities for visual education and assist education in every way we can through the opportunities we now have.


Walter Edward Harris: I agree that one of the best means of education is the visual method and, as the leader of the opposition has indicated, we have films; but at one time or another there has been some criticism, not criticism of the films we have but merely, as my hon. friend has said, a request for other and perhaps better films. I want to assure him that in the citizenship branch we are doing what we can to provide these, and we shall take under advisement the recommendation he has made.
I do want to join with him in again expressing my thanks to all the organizations which contribute to this work. I have said repeatedly that we could not function in providing the immigrant with an easy means of entry into Canadian life without them. In fact I have gone farther and said that if they did not do it I do not know who would, unless the government did it. But I think it is recognized that it is not desirable that we should provide all the means, because those means are provided by voluntary organizations on the spot, by zealous workers who know local circumstances and who, because of their interest in these people and their interest in the Canadian people as a whole, have volunteered their help. It is a most remarkable work, and I think it is having most remarkable results.


Mr. Fulton:: I want to refer briefly to a subject already discussed, not for the purpose of reopening it but simply to indicate that I support the proposal which was placed before the minister. Unfortunately another engagement prevented me from being here when the matter was first raised. I refer to the question of allowing Canadians of East Indian origin to bring into the country their

relatives from India. The proposal, which has been set forth in detail in a brief submitted by the Khalsa Diwan society of Vancouver, is that the Indian people be treated for this purpose not along with the general classification of persons of Asiatic race, but that they be regarded as what in fact they are, members of the commonwealth, so the restriction applicable at the present time under the provisions of P.C. 2743 would not apply with respect to Canadian citizens of East Indian origin who are anxious to bring their relatives into Canada.
As I say, this matter has been discussed previously; and it is for the purpose of indicating that I too support the suggestions which have been made to the minister that I bring it up at this time. I do so particularly because I have some knowledge of the splendid contribution the East Indians are making to the social and economic life of Canada. We have a quite substantial group of them in Kamloops. They are engaged very successfully in farming, lumbering and all other types of activities which contribute in a very real way to the economic as well as the social welfare of our part of the country.
Just as a final illustration I should like to say that recently I had occasion to submit to the minister an application for the inclusion in the current quota of some relatives of one of those East Indians who lives in Kamloops. The application was supported by a group of prominent citizens who signed a letter to the effect that they supported the application. It was remarkable to see who signed that letter. There was the past mayor of Kamloops, the present mayor, the bank managers, prominent citizens in every walk of life, social and business in that city and district. I think that indicates the very high regard in which these people are held in the communities where they are settled and where they are good Canadians.
I do hope the minister and his officials will find it possible to discontinue the restrictions on the applications from those of East Indian origin who are Canadian citizens for the admission of their relatives to Canada. I regret I was not here when it was discussed, and that it is necessary to go back to the subject, but I want to make it clear that I support the recommendations made.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian affairs branch-
Education-
682. Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $147,237.
Major James William Coldwell: What is happening in regard to the Indians who are being put off the
Supply-Health and Welfare reserves? I have had several inquiries from Saskatchewan, and some complaints. I believe the band makes the decision. Is the decision the band makes subject to appeal?


Walter Edward Harris: I will delay the committee only one minute to answer my hon. friend. The Indian Act, which came into force in September, provided that Indians might appeal against the omission from the band list of any name, or against the inclusion on the band list of any name. That appeal must have been registered within six months of September 4. All the appeals are now in. The procedure set out in the act provided that the appeal would be heard by the registrar, who is a departmental official. There then would be an appeal from his decision to a county or district court judge. No action has been taken as yet because we have just been accumulating information.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
B-Civil defence (formerly under Department of
National Defence) -
294. To provide for the civil defence program and to authorize total commitments against future years in the amount of $575,000, $6,508,839.
George Alexander Drew: Mr. Chairman, this item was before the committee on June 6 and has been standing since. At that time the hon. member for Calgary East raised the point that although a larger amount is being asked for this year, $6,508,839 as compared with $4,196,202 last year, only $844,851 was spent. Certain explanations were given. In fact an attempt was made to rather chide the hon. member for raising the question by pointing out that, on the one hand, arguments were made in favour of economy and, on the other hand, when money was not spent questions were raised about that. The discussion ended at that stage.
Although we have reached this stage in the session I do not think the matter should be left in that position. We are asked to consider an appropriation of $6,508,839 for civil defence. What was pointed out by the hon. member for Calgary East was that although $4,196,202 was provided last year, only $844,851 was spent. In doing that he was naturally raising the question why there should be an increased appropriation asked for this year.
The very fact that an attempt was made to divert attention from the question asked by suggesting that there was a surprising contrast in a request for economy, on the one hand, and then questions raised as to why
4280	HOUSE OF
Supply-Health and Welfare the whole amount was not spent indicates the measure of unreality with which we are dealing with this subject.
Civil defence is as important as it is described from time to time by the minister or by those attached to the department, or it is not. Generally speaking there does not seem to be any measure of urgency that is in keeping with the statements that are made from time to time. We seem to be proceeding with this at a rather leisurely pace which is wholly inconsistent with the statements that are made about the seriousness of world affairs. The day before yesterday the Secretary of State for External Affairs spoke in Winnipeg and, according to a Canadian Press dispatch, said:
The free world must be prepared for an Increase in tension in Europe.
The possibility of accidentally "slipping" into a third world war will increase in the next two or three months until German ratification is decided one way or another.
The Secretary of State for External Affairs was emphasizing the urgency of the situation which might develop within the next few months, yet we are told that to a substantial extent the difficulty in proceeding with civil defence is that there are no agreements with some of the provinces. So far as I have been able to ascertain agreements have been made with only two provinces, Ontario and Alberta. This covers only part of the problem.
Under these agreements payments will be made by the dominion government for part of the civil defence activities and for certain responsibilities that would arise. For instance, in the case of the agreement with Ontario there is an undertaking in connection with the extremely important question of uniformity of hose couplings so that fire equipment from one community may be used in another, which proved to be of such immense value in the United Kingdom and other countries which were bombed during the last war.
The minister who is responsible for this activity quoted a statement by Sir John Hodsoll, appearing in the Montreal Star of May 9, who had visited this country to inquire into civil defence activities, as he had in the United States. He was reported to have expressed his approval of what he found in Canada. I am not aware of how much of Canada Sir John Hodsoll saw, but it is just possible that he may have been beguiled by some of this most effective propaganda that emanates from the department of the minister who is responsible for this particular task.
Nevertheless we are not as much concerned with what may be said by somebody from outside Canada about what is happening here


as we are with what we know is actually taking place in Canada. We know that no effective civil defence organization is in existence across this country at this time. We know that if, to use the considered terms of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, we should slip into another war within the next two or three months we would not be ready to deal with the problems that would arise in the case of attack.
I hope no one will suggest that I am being an alarmist when I speak in these terms. I am referring to the statement of the minister for external affairs that such a possibility exists. If it does exist, then we should be considering this subject with the sense of urgency that is related to a statement of that kind by the minister responsible for our external affairs. We should know to what extent steps have been taken or should be taken to deal with first aid, with firefighting, with the designation of target areas, with the setting up of reception areas, with mutual aid to communities, and matters of that kind. We should know to what extent these arrangements are known to those who will be responsible for carrying them out. We should also know something of what has been done in regard to the establishment of emergency hospitals, emergency transportation and engineering services. We also should know something about the organization that would integrate the activities of the dominion, provincial and municipal services that would be brought together. I am not going to go into the field of civil defence, because that is a very broad field indeed. However, one thing that is clear is that there cannot be an effective civil defence organization under the plans now contemplated until there are agreements with the provinces. The necessity for those agreements is indicated by the very fact that there are agreements now with Ontario and Alberta covering only a limited part of this problem, it is true, but still covering some part of it.
The minister has already indicated certain difficulties that will exist until these agreements are completed. Either this is something real or it is not. If it is something real, then we need an organization that can go into operation right away. If it is not real then we should not be asked to vote more than $6 million for this particular task, remembering that the $6 million is only a limited part of the over-all cost of the civil defence organization that would be set up through the activities of the dominion, provincial and municipal organizations. If this is something that is important, if there is in fact a danger and that danger should become a reality, is it going to be any answer to anybody in this country who suffers as a result to say that

we did not have an agreement with your province, we were not able to convince them that civil defence was really a provincial problem?
Civil defence and the assurance of civil ' defence surely must be a national responsibility. Surely it can be no answer, in the event that a situation should arise calling for civil defence, to say, "oh, we did not achieve any agreements". Actually some of the provincial governments, and perhaps all of them, do not believe it is their responsibility. Some of them have made a move toward entering into agreements or have entered into agreements because they feel that something must be done in any event, but surely civil defence is a part of the whole problem of defence. Surely if civil defence is necessary, whatever steps are necessary to assure civil defence should be taken. Surely this extra burden imposed because of world conditions, over which no provincial government and no municipal authority can have any control, should not be added to the already heavy burden of the provincial and municipal governments.
At a time when municipal councils are having all the difficulties they can handle it does not seem reasonable that this new burden, wholly unrelated to the ordinary municipal tasks, should toe added to what has already been thrown upon them. I suggest that no matter what may have happened before, no matter what may have been regarded as adequate under the circumstances, if the government really thinks the Secretary of State for External Affairs is correctly interpreting the situation when he predicts that the next two or three months are going to be as critical as any months that lie ahead of us, months within which, to use his words, "there is a possibility of slipping into war", we should be doing more than we are doing now to tackle this problem with a sense of urgency and reality.
I do wish to say that the officer in charge of civil defence, Major General Worthington, is an officer whose experience, energy and adaptability to new conditions command the confidence of all who know him and undoubtedly should command the confidence of all Canadians. I cannot imagine any officer in Canada who could more effectively perform that task on the basis of his record in the different military and other duties that he has undertaken. But this problem relates to a fundamental decision as to whether there is urgency and necessity for civil defence. If there is, then 1 suggest that an acceptance of the responsibility by the dominion government calls for action to meet any situation which may arise in keeping with the possibilities,
Supply-Health and Welfare remote as we hope they are, that have been pictured within the past few days by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. No one wishes to be an alarmist, but there would be no reason for the organization of civil defence at all unless it were against the possibility of just such a situation as is contemplated by the statement of the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
In the light of that statement, in the light of world events related to it, and having regard to the vital importance of civil defence in the preservation of our whole economy and the confidence of our people, I feel that the problem should be tackled with a sense of reality that does not yet seem to have emerged.
Let me point out one of the things which should be in the mind of every one of us. We have heard a great deal in the past few days about the bombing of the power plants on the Yalu river. I am not going to enter into the controversy relating to that bombing.
I should imagine that most young Canadians in Korea will have very definite views as to the desirability of permitting electricity from that source to be used to assist the communists in their efforts to build up their military strength. Nevertheless I think that having regard to the importance of these targets and the extent to which it was clear that they were given a No. 1 priority, we should remember that in this country a higher percentage of industry is based upon electrical power than in any other great industrial country in the world.
In every area which would be open to an attack of that kind, part of the general morale of our people would be related to the plans which might be made in keeping with the knowledge of that simple fact. I know we have not time for an extended debate on this subject. I am putting my views forward at this time with the hope that they may be given consideration, particularly in the light of the assessment of world affairs made only two days ago by the Secretary of State for External Affairs.


Mr, Marlin:: As the hon. gentleman who has just spoken has said, there is not time for the kind of discussion which he and I would like to have on this important matter. I can only say that generally speaking I agree with what he has said. That does not mean to say that in all particulars as to the division of responsibility he and I would be in full accord, but generally speaking I want him to know that in a general way I agree with what he has said.
The policy we pursue is one of decentralization. That is the practice followed in the United Kingdom where they have had perhaps the greatest experience in civil

Supply-Health and Welfare defence. It is also the practice being followed in the United States, a country comparable for our present purpose in governmental structure to our own. As the leader of the opposition knows, so far as financial responsibility is concerned, even during the war the municipal organizations and local governments in the United Kingdom continued to bear a very heavy portion of the cost of civil defence. There were co-ordinating plans issued and general direction given by the central government, but the purchase of civil defence equipment, the stockpiling of material and the like in the United Kingdom were done, as we are doing it, on a share for share basis. We do regard this matter as important. It is difficult, I may say frankly, to determine the full extent to which we should go; and in this matter we are guided not only by our own appreciations of the temper of the world at this time but also by the consultative arrangements we have with the ten provinces who with the federal government constitute the civil defence committee of this country.
We met with all the provinces about six weeks ago in this building and reviewed what had been done and what it was proposed to do during the ensuing year. I would not say that we were in agreement on all counts, but the following quotation from the Edmonton Journal of May 7, in which the minister in charge of civil defence for the province of Alberta expressed his view of the conference, sets out, I think, better than anything I can say the measure of understanding between ourselves and the provinces. Mr. Gerhart is reported to have said:
Although differences of opinion still exist between the federal and the Alberta governments "better understanding than ever before" of the problems of civil defence was shown at the Ottawa meetings. The minister was hopeful that existing problems now slowing defence co-ordination could be cleared up soon.
Our conception of the problem is this. If a civil defence organization has to be employed, civil defence cannot be done here in Ottawa or in any provincial capital alone, but on the local level. Civil defence is essentially a local matter; it is comparable to the role of the good citizen coming to the aid of his neighbour through voluntary action; and if you have not developed an adequate local organization nothing that is done at the centre will be fully effective. Proceeding on that principle the provinces and ourselves have arrived at a division of responsibility somewhat as follows. We are responsible for certain phases of activity, notably training and the provision of training equipment. The provinces are responsible for setting up their provincial civil defence organizations and,
[Mr. Martin.l
through them in most communities under their jurisdiction, a civil defence organization with a civil defence director at the head.
Every community in Canada of any size now has a civil defence director; they come directly, in the scheme of organization, under the minister of civil defence for the provinces; for instance, in the province of Ontario, the provincial secretary. At the centre we are responsible for the training of the individuals whose job it is to carry on the training schools and to build up the local organizations. For instance, at our local school at the Connaught Ranges here in Ottawa we have in the past year and a half trained some 1,600 people. We have brought these individuals from all parts of Canada, paid their expenses while here, their travelling expenses, and so on. Those men and women have gone back to their local communities and have either taken jobs as civil defence co-ordinators or have fitted themselves into the local organization in one way or another.
This is an impressive record. I think that training is a basic requirement, because unless you have people who have some conception of what civil defence is all about you cannot carry on the effort at the local level.
In addition the federal government has the responsibility for publication of manuals, production of displays and films that are being used to train leaders and to bring home to the people the desirability of taking part in the civil defence organization. We have undertaken, and we have carried out this undertaking, to. give to the provinces and through them to the municipalities concerned all kinds of training equipment including, for instance, such things as coveralls, helmets, respirators, stirrup pumps and certain kinds of other material. Those are outright grants or gifts, purchased by us and given to the provinces for the purpose of building up their local organizations.
In addition we have entered into an arrangement with the St. John Ambulance Corps for the training of civil defence workers in first aid. As the leader of the opposition has said, this is an important phase of civil defence training. Normally the St. John Ambulance Corps would train about 55,000 people a year in first aid activity. We hope that in the ensuing period they will be able to train some 132,000 people in first aid. We are paying them on an agreed basis to carry on that work.
In addition we have established here our own advance warning communication system, independent of the armed forces, and

independent of the normal systems of communication utilized by the civil arm of government. We have established an advance warning communication system that will be for the exclusive use of the civil defence organization. When I discussed this particular matter in the house before, I indicated that I could not go into details and the hon. member for Nanaimo was kind enough to take advantage of the invitation I then issued to discuss privately with me the particulars of that system.
In addition to our responsibility for the things I have been talking about in a general way, equipment for training, maintaining, and -our responsibility for manuals, films and so on, we will now enter into a matching arrangement in respect of certain phases of the program which a year ago we were not prepared to recognize as a federal responsibility. This matching arrangement will provide that the federal government will pay 50 per cent of any project in which a province wishes to participate. We discussed this matter at the conference six weeks ago and we have great expectations that certain undertakings, which we consider in the long term to be matters of special interest to the provinces but have an indirect civil defence value, may be carried out.
I wish to indicate now that I would not want to say or to have anyone say that if this country were subjected to an attack such as the hon. gentleman has envisaged, we would have an adequate civil defence organization. I would be the last man to claim that. This is not the case, nor is it the case with Sweden, the United States, the United Kingdom or any other country where obviously there must be a very intimate interest in this problem at this time. What I want the country to know, and what I am sure my hon. friend would want me to say, is that there is a very considerable amount of civil defence activity going on in Canada. Every city that we conceive to be of possible significance as a target area has a civil defence director. We estimate now that there would be about 60,000 civil defence workers in Canada. Cities like Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Montreal, Windsor, and Halifax are well organized. In the city of Winnipeg they have about 3,500 workers; in the city of Montreal they have about 8,500 workers; and the budget of the city of Montreal for civil defence is something like $200,000 for the ensuing year.
These general observations will give, as I want them to give, ample evidence that this matter is being taken seriously. We
Supply-Health and Welfare are not at the point where one can say that we have a civil defence organization that by any stretch of the imagination will take care of the needs that might conceivably arise. I do not suppose any nation will ever be able to claim that; because in the kind of warfare that we must envisage, if it should ever come, as the leader of the opposition has said and I do not disagree, we have to realize the inevitability of a certain amount of risk.
I want the house and the leader of the opposition to know that the general plans of the provinces and ourselves are now sufficiently developed to justify what Sir John Hodsoll said, namely that on a comparative basis civil defence preparations in this country are comparable with those of any other country. Sir John Hodsoll has had the opportunity of sitting in on the meetings with the ten provinces. He has visited the entire country. As a matter of fact, he has been visiting again this week with the mayors of our country, along with General Worthington, at the mayors' conference in Calgary.
I want to thank the leader of the opposition for the well deserved tribute he paid to the civil defence director in Canada, who is carrying on this very difficult task with singular success.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is it the
general practice to divorce civil defence from the war or defence departments?


Mr. Martin:: We are following the practice of the United Kingdom and the United States. In the United Kingdom, it is under the home office.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
209. General administration, $393,448.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: There is a question I want to ask in this connection. Is the position of assistant chief of committees vacant? If so, what steps are being taken to fill it?


Mr. Speaker:: The position is vacant. It is a permanent position, and the appointment will be made by the civil service commission.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
116. Departmental administration, including the former administration of the Farmers Creditors Arrangement Act, 1943, and the administration of the Municipal Grants Act, and the custody of paid cheques formerly administered by the auditor general's office, $1,643,396.
Mr. Langlois (Gaspe):: I have three questions I should like to ask the minister. The first

Supply-Finance
one deals with the taxation agreements with provincial governments. I should like to know first what amount the province of Quebec would have obtained from the federal treasury by signing a taxation agreement this year. My second question is, what amount does the province of Quebec estimate it will collect in the same fields of taxation this year? My third question is, how does this estimate compare with the amount reported by the Quebec treasurer as having been, collected in the same fields of taxation last year?


Douglas Charles Abbott: In answer to the hon. member's first question, were Quebec under an agreement with the federal government, our estimates would indicate that in the past fiscal year, that is 1951-52, Quebec would have received a payment including statutory subsidies of $90,358,000. In his budget speech of January 9 this year the provincial treasurer for the province of Quebec, Mr. Onesime Gagnon, estimated the collections from taxation, corporation and succession duties and the federal subsidy would total $88,896,000. In the previous fiscal year Mr. Gagnon estimated that his receipts from those resources would be $89,646,000. He shows a somewhat higher estimate for receipts from succession duties in that period. If Quebec were to enter into an agreement under the amended proposals, which are now before the provinces for the coming fiscal year,
1952-53, on the basis of our present estimates the payment to Quebec, including statutory subsidies, would be $115,003,725.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: We have all been delighted at this instance of dominion-provincial co-operation.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I have no complaint, Mr. Chairman.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the
minister say something about the over-all organization of the department, particularly having regard to the number in it and the number of temporary employees?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Does the hon. member want to know how many employees we have?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Yes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: The total employees in the department for the current year, that is 1952-53, are 4,886 as against 5,088 last year,
a decrease of 202.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the minister give us a breakdown under the main headings?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Most of this information, as the hon. member is aware, is contained in the details of the estimates at page 175. It shows the breakdown between permanents and temporaries.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister said 4,000-


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is the total employees in the department, yes. If the hon. member will look at the details on page 177, he will see a further breakdown of the 4,000 odd employees.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will the minister say a word as to the temporaries? I asked a similar question this morning of
the Department of National Revenue. What is the trend with regard to temporaries? What would you say as to the number of temporaries with years of service?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I am informed that, broadly speaking, we are making as many temporary civil servants permanent as the civil service machinery will permit. As the hon. member knows, in all departments the practice is, broadly speaking, to have a quota of permanents and temporaries. In the normal turnover of the service, as permanent civil servants retire we try to keep the appointments up to our quota.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Yes, but I am interested in taking this one step further. I want to know what the trend is. Your department has increased in number very substantially-


Douglas Charles Abbott: Decreased.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Last year, but increased over the years. I am anxious to know what the broad picture of the temporaries is; that is, let us say how many have you with over five years of service?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think I probably could have got that information for the hon. member had he mentioned he wanted a breakdown. It is the sort of thing which takes a little time to get out. I shall make a note of it and drop the hon. member a line.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: We shall not keep the deputy of the governor general waiting for that.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The figures which the minister has given us indicate a reduction of 202 in the staff. The wartime prices and trade board having been closed, and 265 employees having thus been eliminated from the staff, it would look as though, instead of a reduction of 202, there is an increase of 63 in the regular staff.


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is right. The total decrease is accounted for by the elimination of the wartime prices and trade board. The increases are principally in the office of the comptroller of the treasury, with regard to old age pensions and the like.


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Chairman, I feel that the general situation which obtains in the world at the present time requires that we should make some study of the financial affairs of our nation. I should therefore like to make a few remarks. 1 do not expect the minister to take the time to make any comment upon what I have to say unless he so desires this afternoon.
I realize that we have not as much time at our disposal as we should like to have. It is a most regrettable thing that the estimates of the Department of Finance, the most important estimates in the nation, should have to come in at the time these are coming in.
I am not implying that there is any fault on the part of the minister, but that fact does not in any way detract from the importance of these estimates. The balance wheel of the whole economy of the nation is its finance department.
I do not have nearly so much feeling of concern about the minister's department since the passing of the bill recently by which the Bank of Canada Act was amended so as to make it practically certain that no gold entered into the consideration of Canada's money. I have contended for 17 years in the House of Commons that the only real backing of money is, and ought to be, goods and services, quite regardless of the amount of gold we may or may not have.
On June 26 I laid down four principles which, in my judgment, are essential in a realistic financial system. On that occasion I defined a realistic financial system as one which could make what is physically possible, financially possible. As soon as one realizes that the justification for finance is physical reality in respect of goods, then one understands my principle that whatever is physically possible, it ought to be possible to make financially possible. I therefore once more lay down the four principles essential for a realistic financial system, namely, a system that could make what is physically possible financially possible.
The first principle is that the value of money depends upon goods and services, a statement which was tacitly agreed to, by the passage of the bill, by the Department of Finance. The second is that debt-free money, under certain circumstances, can be created by a state soundly, and used safely in the conduct of the financial and economic affairs of the nation. The third one is that granted adequate production, the use of debt-free money in establishing and maintaining stabilized prices throughout the nation is entirely feasible. The fourth principle is that the use of debt-free money to supply purchasing 55704-2713s
Supply-Finance
power to consumers in order to enable them to buy the production of a nation is completely sound and should be so recognized.
In connection with this fourth principle, may I lay down a certain modification. On June 26 I was contemplating only the financing of the consumption of goods and services within the nation. It also is true, in connection with a realistic financial system, that debt-free money can be created by a state for the financing of consumption outside that state, under suitable circumstances. I have illustrated that fact several times already this year by referring to what occurred in world war I when the finance department printed $50 million worth of bills, and purchased $50 million worth of wheat and lent it to Great Britain for a number of years. In that case the debt-free money mechanism was used to finance consumption outside the nation.
To sum up, not only can this debt-free money be used to produce markets within the nation but it can be used to produce markets to finance consumption outside the nation. This modification is of the utmost importance in the particular age in which we live. I hope to elaborate on that matter to a certain extent in the remarks which I shall make, and I hope they will not be unduly long.
There are two kinds of export markets that we need to finance. First of all, there is the market in which we are going to deliver goods-sell them if you wish to call it that-to nations which do not have the wherewithal to pay us, as for example the hundreds of millions of people who today dwell in Asia who have no means whatsoever whereby to repay us in goods, services or in any other form whatsoever. These people constitute an excellent market if we can only determine the means whereby to furnish them with purchasing power.
Then we have the class of market found in a nation which is able to return to us goods which we, for some reason or other, are unable to accept. We would find an example of that sort of market in Great Britain. Great Britain can consume almost unlimited quantities of our surplus production, but when she comes to send us textiles or other British production in order to repay us, then for reasons which we consider good, we do not feel that it is advisable to accept those goods and to allow them to come into competition with our own production in our own country and thus to distort our own economy. We therefore find that we have two kinds of export markets in which to finance the consumption of our surplus production.

Supply-Finance
I maintain that this principle of financing export markets is of major importance in the world as we see it around us today. In fact, I think there is no other possible democratically safe solution to the problem of distribution in the world, as it is at present constituted, at least in the years in which we are now living.
Among the strangest things that I have encountered during the days that have been going by are speeches like the one that was recently given by Mr. Graham Towers, governor of the Bank of Canada, down in eastern Canada in which he condemned trade curbs. Knowing Mr. Towers as I know him, I find myself completely astounded that such a speech as that should have emanated from him at all. Our Minister of Finance has been down in the United States giving the people there a lecture about the necessity of loosening up their trade restrictions and of allowing our goods to come into their economy. Knowing the minister as I know him, I can hardly imagine that, without some high motive or other, he would make such remarks as that in a neighbouring country. I understand that our Secretary of State for External Affairs has gone down to the United States and said the same kind of thing to the American people, indicating that they should loosen up their restrictions and allow our goods to come into their economy, in competition with their own goods.
The United States are simply not going to do that! The sooner we recognize that fact, the sooner we shall be ready to look to something else. It is just utterly foolish for us to expect the United States to allow Canadian goods like cheese, and other things that we want to send to the United States, to go in there when they do not need those goods.
I think I will quote a few passages from a good article which appeared in the Montreal Gazette of May 2, 1952. It is called "The Paradox of U.S. Trade Bars", by Michael L. Hoffman, New York Times Service. From it I read as follows:
Geneva.
It was an essential part of the Marshall plan that Europe should earn its way by increasing production and selling abroad more of what its farms and factories produce.
And further in the article I read:
The United States said it would not use quotas to restrict imports and objected to other countries doing so except in emergencies to protect their monetary reserves. The United States said it would simplify its customs laws, which often exclude goods for capricious reasons.
By 1951 Europe had increased sales to the United States by about 30 per cent. All of Europe's exports to the United States, however, still amounted to a paltry $100 million a month-1/230 of our monthly national income.

And further on:
After five years of promises by the administration, congress still has not passed any customs simplification law. The United States has not joined the ITO. Unilaterally and in violation of the general agreement on tariffs and trade, the United States slapped quotas on imports of cheese, milk products and casein, thus at one blow crippling the major dollar-earning industries in Italy, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway and New Zealand.
Since mid-1950 the axe has fallen on fur-felt hat bodies, almonds and cheese. In the form of hearings under the so-called "escape clause" in the American reciprocal trade law-which authorizes the tariff commission to raise duties if it finds that the domestic manufacturer has been seriously injured by competition-the axe is now hanging over motorcycles, bicycles, wines, pottery, "blue cheese," tobacco, pipes and wood screws.
The article goes on:
The feeling in Europe is this: If, under one kind of escape clause or another, United States producers are to be guaranteed that any product which proves itself marketable in the United States behind a protective wall high enough to overcome the difference in European and American costs, Europe will never be able to earn enough dollars to enable it to enter fully into a trading community with the United States based on a principle of non-discrimination.
From the European point of view the root of the problem is the American belief that it is right and necessary to exclude products of "cheap labour". If products of labour that is "cheap" in dollar terms (meaning that it would be cheap if it were in the United States) are to be kept out, Europe does not have a chance.
And I might say not only does Europe not have a chance, but neither does any other country in the world. This is a most revealing article, a most frank and honest statement of the situation exactly as it is in the year of our Lord, 1952, the year we happen to be living in. If there is anyone reckless enough, in the face of an article like that and in the face of the realities that support that article, to imagine for one minute that the United States is going to loosen up her trade restrictions to permit enough goods to come in from the outside to obtain dollars which the nations need with which to buy United States produce, all I can say is that he is far more of an optimist and probably more of an unrealist than really should be running at large nowadays.
May I just give a few more bits of evidence to indicate the small possibility that the United States will contemplate bringing in goods from abroad. The United States wants to sell goods. She does not want to buy unless it be raw materials. When she is able to sell the goods she is able to produce she is able to give markets to her own producers; she is able to give jobs to her own people. Above all other things, the object of the United States today is to find jobs for her people. Roosevelt said in a broadcast in October, 1944: "I mean to find jobs for 60 million Americans by tripling our exports abroad."

Notice he did not say a word about imports, and he did not mean a word about imports. Neither have said or meant the realistic men who have succeeded him in office in the United States.
Here is some more evidence of the growing self-sufficiency of the United States. The United States self-sufficiency is the major single factor in the world today. I am citing some information that I gathered in the December, 1949, issue of the Reader's Digest. This article has to do with the scarcity of United States dollars. It deals with the various commodities which the United States used to import, but which in recent years she has learned to manufacture substitutes for, or to manufacture herself. The first one of importance is cryolite. It used to be bought from Greenland, a colony of Denmark, which country used to use the American dollars from cryolite to buy United States machines. The United States in world war II manufactured synthetically her cryolite. It has almost displaced the Greenland product. Since before world war I the United States have developed synthetic sodium nitrate plants at Muscle Shoals, Alabama and Hopewell, Virginia, nitrate identical with that coming from Chile which used to provide the United States with nitrogen fertilizer. For Chile's sake only, the United States agrees not to operate some government plants. Any moment the United States may decide to manufacture all the nitrates she needs.
Before 1913 the United States bought 26,000 tons of dyes a year, making herself only
3,000	tons. By 1923 nine-tenths of the United States consumption was United States made, with 18 million pounds over for export. By 1939 the United States was making 1,000 different kinds of dyes with production equal to Germany's. By the end of world war II she had captured all of Germany's dye secrets. This was one of the difficulties that stood in the way of Germany in her attempts to recover industrially. It stands in her way today in any attempt to recapture her markets.
Let us take rubber. In 1940 the United States purchased 1-8 billion pounds of crude rubber. Four years later she was making 2 billion pounds of synthetic rubber. In 1939 the United States imported from India 95 per cent of dll the mica she used. Today United States makes its own mica by a formula seized from Germany-one more difficulty for Germany. The United States used to import all of its camphor from Formosa. In 1933 the United States began making camphor from turpentine, and now she makes more than she can use. Another difficulty for China, you see. Thirty-five years ago all the United States optical glass and instruments came from Germany, France
Supply-Finance
and England. They are now all produced in the United States. Cigarette papers used to come from France made by her from linen rags by a secret process. Now they are all made in the United States by a secret process from flax fibre, and $10 million of United States dollars are therefore denied to France.
As regards silk, between 80 million pounds and 90 million pounds a year used to come from Japan. Nearly $500 million a year was the cost. It is now made in the United States as nylon from coal, air and water. Soybeans used to come from Manchuria. Now United States farmers produce over 200 million bushels a year. Her sugar could now all be produced from sugar beets in America, whereas Americans used to import a very great deal from abroad.
Figs used to come from abroad. Now in the southwestern states over 60 million pounds of figs are produced in a year. Dates, prior to 1920, all came from North Africa and the Middle East, but now the United States produces around 20 million pounds yearly in the deserts of southern California and Arizona. Tungsten used to be imported from China or Bolivia but the United States is now using molybdenum, of which they have a whole mountain in Colorado. She now produces her own. Shellac used to come from India but now it is made from synthetic resin and corn glutens. Jute for burlap used to come from India. Now the United States has a substitute made from long-fibre spruce. And so the list goes on.
It is quite obvious that the United States is becoming more and more self-sufficient and will continue to become more and more selfsufficient as her knowledge of scientific techniques increases and the inventive genius of her people evolves new substances made from the things they already have. In the face of this fact, and others which I could adduce to bring us up to date, how can any realistic individual persuade himself into imagining that the United States is ever again under normal conditions going to be to any great extent a market for any outside nation?
The question is: What are we going to do about this situation? Here are the realities that face us. What are we going to do about them? We certainly cannot rely on trade where we have to depend upon the United States as being a partner in that trade. At the same time, we can rely upon having United States competition pressing into our very vitals in every market of the world including our own. Once more I ask: What are we going to do about it? I do not expect the minister to answer this question, but I am asking the question for those who read

Supply-Finance
Hansard and the other members of the house to answer. If you were the Minister of Finance, what would you do about that? You cannot go on as we have done. It is just absurd, because you face a situation utterly new.
What is the United States herself going to do about it? We cannot solve her problems, but I will venture to say that if the United States used her constitutional power to have congress create money debt-free as Lincoln did to represent the surplus goods which she has to sell in the world and she sent those created dollars away to the nations within whose borders she desired to sell her products she would have no difficulty whatsoever in disposing of her surpluses and her producers would be just as well off as though they had received the money of that particular nation in return for what had been sent abroad.
This is a point of extreme importance. Those who have not read "The United States in the World Economy", an official United States document published in 1943 and which is available in our library, will do well to read it and find out how the United States financed her exports abroad between 1918 and 1928 by loans to the nations which would be the prospective buyers of her goods. We know also how under the Marshall plan the United States has financed the consumption of her goods abroad. We know that she has now another act, the name of which I never can recall, under which she is sending abroad .great sums of money with whieh the people who receive that money will buy United States goods. Thus the United States is already established and is carrying on quite successfully a method of financing the consumption of her goods by sending money abroad to buy those goods.
Surely that indicates the line along which the solution lies. No nation would be able to tax its people for enough money to lend abroad for people to buy its goods. No nation could afford to go into debt to get money to send abroad. But nations like the United States and Canada certainly could create money debt-free in so far as they had surplus goods and send that money abroad.
There is one further aspect of this matter to which I think we should give some attention. Those who have read the Economic Review, a periodical issued by the United Kingdom information office in Ottawa, will have been impressed by an article in the current issue entitled, "Trade, not Aid." The British do not want aid from abroad. All they want is trade. But we cannot trade with them nor can the United States because when either of us takes their goods into our economy they compete with our own and put

our own producers out of business, throwing a lot of our people into the unemployed lists. No realistic administration could tolerate that sort of thing.
What are we going to do for Britain to let her have trade and not aid? Why not say to Britain, "Prepare us all the goods that you feel you would like to send us to buy goods from Canada that you might desire, and we will accept ownership of those goods in Britain." We would not promise to let them come into Canada to compete with our own producers, but we would accept the goods to cancel off the debt. If we deliver a million dollars worth of goods to Great Britain and they produce and deliver for us a million dollars worth of goods, we would accept ownership of those goods in Britain. Where they go from there would be another matter.
We are a partner in the Colombo plan. What we are doing under that plan is just small change, but the plan is a fine idea. We could be distributing goods and services to the various members of the commonwealth for the benefit and blessing of the people of the commonwealth. Why not take that million dollars worth of goods which Britain would have produced and delivered to us to pay for a million dollars worth of products of various kinds that she has obtained from us, and have them distributed under the Colombo plan?
If we create a million dollars worth of debt-free money in Canada and buy a million dollars worth of our own cheese for example in Canada, the dollars which the producers receive would be just as good as solid gold or the money they would get if the cheese were sold in the best market in the world. If we sent Britain a million dollars worth of cheese or let her have a million debt-free dollars to buy cheese, that cheese would be delivered to Britain which would bless Britain. Then if we enabled her to produce a million dollars worth of textiles or other goods to pay for that cheese and have those goods come into our possession in Britain, we would have been repaid. Then we could say to Britain, we wish you to send those goods to Sierra Leone or South Africa or Ceylon or India, or any other part of the empire. By doing that we should greatly bless the recipients of those goods and greatly bless Britain because we should have enabled her to maintain her prosperity and self-respect.
Can anyone find anything wrong with that device or suggestion? Now, the United States could similarly accept payment for as many exports as she might see fit to produce and

export for the next fifteen or twenty years, and even beyond that. This illustrates the value that could accrue to us in these perilous times in which we are living by the use of the debt-free money device to finance the consumption of our goods abroad.
There is one more step which I have suggested in times past and which I am going to suggest once more for the minister's serious consideration. I am quite heartened by the move he has made in respect of the Bank of Canada. I feel that the minister and his department are progressing right along. All they have to do is grow a little faster and we shall make still more progress. May I suggest then once more what 1 have suggested already. Why not let Britain be the distributing centre? There are no people on the face of the earth who know more about the goods which the various parts of the empire and in fact the world itself produce or need. Why not let Britain use the great knowledge and experience she has of trade channels, and those extensive trade connections which she has built up over the centuries to distribute these goods in accordance with the needs of the commonwealth and then the needs of people outside the commonwealth? Why not let Britain use the pound sterling when she begins to distribute these goods? As far as I have been able to find, no monetary unit has been more successful than the pound sterling backed by British production in the hands of Great Britain during the last half century. Why not let her expand the pound sterling and by means of the pound sterling bring in the things from other countries that they can supply her and return to them the goods they need from her own supply, these supplies being greatly augmented and supplemented by imports from everywhere and contributions from Canada and other members of the commonwealth? Let Britain, greatly strengthened by all of this, distribute goods abroad.
I submit that the suggestion I have made this afternoon constitutes the answer to an extremely important situation facing the world at the present time. Before taking my seat I wish to read certain quotations from a speech of the Prime Minister, who has been making some forward-looking speeches recently. I notice he is here in the chamber and has been paying close attention to what 1 am saying. I think it was in Montreal-he will correct me if I am wrong-that he made a speech indicating the great things that were ahead of this country by reason of the discovery of atomic energy. Let me say to the Prime Minister that while that speech was full of vision and understanding it will
, 1952	4289
Supply-Finance
not do a bit of good to increase our productive capacity through atomic energy if we cannot sell our goods. The Prime Minister will understand that fully. The world will only be worse off as the result of discovery of atomic energy if it increases its productive capacity without learning how to distribute.
I wish to read one or two passages from a speech the Prime Minister delivered on January 22, 1952, at the annual meeting of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture in Montreal. There are a number of passages in the speech which would reward consideration, but I am only going to quote two. He said:
I doubt if we can ever hope for the secure peace in the world which we all want so much as long as great numbers of people are barely able to eke out an existence bordering on, or in many cases below, the subsistence level.
Further on he says:
I realize of course that there are serious problems of distribution as you were reminded by your president this morning.
The Prime Minister had nothing to say about what might be the solution to those problems. That is the thing the world wants. What is your solution? Further on the Prime Minister used these words:
It has been ably stated that "never before has the close relationship between food and peace, food and justice, and food and human happiness been so widely accepted."
These words do the Prime Minister great honour. May I submit to him that if he equips himself so that one year from the date on which he delivered that speech he can go before that same organization and tell it how to distribute these goods he will be the outstanding man of the world and the world will recognize him as such. I submit what I have said this afternoon may give the Prime Minister something to think about as he prepares to deliver such a speech.


['The minister will understand that it was not about the amount but rather the manner in which these items are brought in at the very last, when the membership of the house is depleted, that I was complaining. Such large amounts should be given more careful consideration.']
James MacKerras Macdonnell: I want to raise a point with the minister that could involve a lot of time but as far as I am concerned I am going to do it briefly. It is a very simple question. We are members of the Bretton Woods agreement. We have subscribed and we are also interested in the world bank. I am not one of those who join the hue and cry against Bretton Woods at all, but I am concerned about their position. They seem to be drifting into the position of someone who is on the sidelines watching what is going on rather than taking part, and I would be glad if the minister would say a word or two as to what he feels the position is there.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I do not know that I can quite agree that we are in a position on the sidelines. We have been forced, as the result of

Supply-Finance
circumstances with which the hon. member is thoroughly familiar, to notify the fund, and we did so in September of 1950, that we were no longer able to maintain a fixed parity for our currency unit. We indicated at that time that so far as we could see there was no prospect of our being able to do so in the immediate future. That action was not taken because of reasons which were peculiar to ourselves but because of the very abnormal conditions which existed in the world, the great multiplicity of exchange controls, quantitative restrictions on trade and the like. We' expressed the hope and the intention that as soon as it was possible for us to do so we would live up to our obligations under the agreement.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: We are still members, and the only point I want to make is this. One realizes very well the multiplicity of reasons that have to a very considerable extent frustrated the expectations of seven or eight years ago. I read Mr. Ilsley's speech of December, 1945, just the other day. Among other things he pointed out the advantage of the organization in providing a meeting place where views could be exchanged. However, I should like to pass this on to the minister. It seems to me at the moment that the situation is so full of difficulty that one does wish that somehow they could adopt a more positive attitude. For example, all they had to say to Great Britain in her difficulties was to suggest that she should do away with her restrictions. I do not suppose there is anyone in this house who would like to see restrictions done away with more than I would, but that did not seem to me to be very practical advice, and one just wonders whether they are sitting in an ivory tower.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Certainly conditions are not such as were envisaged when the international monetary fund was created. As to doing away with restrictions and whether or not it is practical to do so, it is perhaps a case of which comes first, the chicken or the egg.


Mr. Bryce:: I have one question to ask the minister, and perhaps he would allow me to ask it now. Can he tell me when his department will be paying claims to people who lost relatives in the sinking of the Athenia in the first days of the war?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I could answer in a general way. There are a number of claims filed now for interim compensation, as my hon. friend knows, under the policy announced by the Prime Minister. These claims are being considered currently by treasury board. At each meeting a number of them come forward for decision as to whether they are within the 
conditions which permit interim payment to be made pending final determination as to what the amount of the payment should be.


William Scottie Bryce: That pretty well answers my question. This lady lost her daughter in the sinking of the boat, but I do not think she has asked for interim payment.


Douglas Charles Abbott: If my hon. friend will send the name to my office I will see what the status of the claim is.	,


William Scottie Bryce: I will do that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration of various acts and costs of special functions-
124. Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation-adjustment payments in respect of subsidies previously paid, and costs of administration, $30,500.
['I will do that.']
James MacKerras Macdonnell: I want to ask a question about the commodity prices stabilization corporation. As I understand it, this is a sort of hangover from the wartime prices and trade board and is the mechanism for dealing with subsidies?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Correct. It only performs one function now. We have to keep it in existence to settle various outstanding claims in connection with subsidies. The staff is down to a minimum and there is a very small appropriation. There are some disputed claims still outstanding. It is not functioning as a continuing organization, of course.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Then one would hope that perhaps the $30,000 it is going to cost this year will disappear by next year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would hope so. I t.hinV it is very likely.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Payments to municipalities-
Grants to municipalities in lieu of taxes on federal property-
127. To provide for payments to municipalities in accordance with the Municipal Grants Act; and to provide for payments to municipalities under order in council of July 19, 1950, P.C. 3456, in respect of the cost of medical and hospital services and supplies furnished to federal employees and other persons specified therein, $2,360,800.
['I would hope so. I t.hinV it is very likely.']
James MacKerras Macdonnell: May I have a word on this item, concerning payments to municipalities. Is that situation now working out I will not say to the full satisfaction of the municipalities, but is it on a complete basis? The other thing I want to know is about crown corporations. They are paying income tax, but do they pay their full taxes in all municipalities as well? I refer to real estate taxes.


Douglas Charles Abbott: As my hon. friend will recall the policy there was enunciated previously.

Crown companies are expected to arrange with municipalities for the payment of municipal taxes in the same way that other industrial concerns frequently make arrangements for the payment of their taxes. The basis on which they are supposed to do it is, a fair tax payment on normal commercial principles, and those are being made.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: They are treated the same as any ordinary private or commercial corporations?


Douglas Charles Abbott: That is right; that is the principle.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: They are given no higher negotiating basis?


Douglas Charles Abbott: No.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I think this might be a place to ask one further question and it is: To what extent is the government's interest bill being affected by the rise in interest rates? Is it beginning to add substantially to our interest bill as yet?


Douglas Charles Abbott: Not substantially, but it is beginning to show up.
Payments to municipalities-
695. To provide grants in lieu of taxes under regulations approved by the governor In council to rural municipalities that do not qualify under the Municipal Grants Act, but which incur substantial increased expenses or loss of tax revenue by reason of the existence within their borders of federal property, $100,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I would like to ask a word of explanation about this. Is it an arrangement which has been made in general?


Douglas Charles Abbott: These are cases which have arisen where certain municipalities cannot claim under the Municipal Grants Act because they do not provide any material service to the crown properties. There are large camps in certain areas in Canada which are completely self-contained and which are taken out of municipalities. Those camps have their own fire services, water services, and so on; yet in some cases some loss is suffered by the rural municipality. After consideration we felt that we could make provision for them. There are not too many, perhaps there are 20 or 25 municipalities of that kind in Canada. When the regulations are prepared we can and should make some adjustment for that class of municipality. The regulations of course will be carried out as soon as they are enacted.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
686. Representation abroad-operational-including payment of salaries of high commissioners, ambassadors, ministers plenipotentiary, consuls, secretaries and staff appointed as directed by the
Supply-External Affairs governor general in council, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Civil Service Act or any of its amendments-further amount required, $100,000.
Major James William Coldwell: As this will be the last opportunity, I would just like to ask a question regarding the representations Canada has made regarding the Yalu river bombing. I perhaps might also ask a question here about the speech made by a Yugoslav whose name I have not before me at the moment, but the minister indicated that the matter was under consideration. Was his visa cancelled and was he ordered to leave the country?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would have to inform myself on that; I do not know.


Major James William Coldwell: Perhaps the answer can be given to me privately.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I will see to that.


Major James William Coldwell: What about the Yalu river bombing? I think that has disturbed Canadians more than anything else has for a long time. It has also disturbed people in other NATO countries. I have followed the British debates rather closely, and I wondered whether our Department of External Affairs had received any assurance that in future consultations will be had before anything of that sort is done. As a matter of fact, I think people felt a great deal of misgiving when MacArthur was nearing those targets. When they were bombed the other day there was consternation lest the war should spread into Asia-the last thing anyone in the world wants to see today-and result in a global war.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I would certainly share that view, but I am not informed of what communications have been passed with respect to the matter. I feel sure there have been some, but since my hon. friend's remarks are on the record I will see that they are brought to the attention of the minister himself. He will be back next week, and it may be that he himself might feel that he would want to issue a statement.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
811. Airways and airports-operation and maintenance-airway and airport traffic control-further amount required, $33,800.
Solon Earl Low: Before this passes I wonder if the Minister of Finance would draw to the attention of the Minister of Transport a matter which I think is of very great importance. My attention was called to it just a day or two ago by a short editorial which appeared in the June 5 edition of the Herald-Tribune

Supply-Transport
of the town of Grande Prairie. The heading is "Let's Be Consistent":
By a near-miracle, a youthful Sexsmith pilot escaped death last week when his plane catapulted to earth as he was attempting a landing on a farm field on the edge of Grande Prairie.
Soon after the accident, Department of Transport officials were on the scene to investigate.
It doubtless won't appear in the findings but the fact is the Department of Transport is fundamentally to blame for the circumstances which set the stage for last week's accident.
Why did the group of Grande Prairie and district men owning the Aeronca figuring in the crash find it necessary to base their plane in a farm field in the first place?
The reason, pure and simple, is that the rates the Department of Transport charges for hangar space or even parking space at its airports places a heavy additional financial burden on owners of private light aircraft.
At the Grande Prairie airport, which is controlled by the Department of Transport, it costs a light aircraft owner $10 or $11 a month to park his plane outside the hangar. Rental for space inside the hangar ranges between $25 and $30 monthly.
It is costly enough to operate and maintain a light aircraft.
It is nonsense for the Department of Transport, by its rental scale, to drive these light planes from properly-equipped airports to hazardous, makeshift landing strips in country fields.
The policy is all the more nonsensical when one considers that, in Grande Prairie's case, hangars at the airport are standing idle and empty except for the rare occasion when one or two visiting light planes are placed in storage overnight.
A policy which is at once discouraging private flying and making it more hazardous is all the more difficult to understand alongside the federal government's avowed intention to do everything possible to train young pilots. The importance the government places on training air-minded young Canadians as pilots is pointed up by its policy of making a $100 grant to every man who obtains his private pilot's licence at an approved flying school.
In the interests of consistency, as well as for the welfare of Canadian aviation, the government should review a policy which is driving private pilots to country fields and setting the stage for accidents with the near tragic consequences of the mishap here.
That is the end of the short editorial. The fact is, Mr. Chairman, that a young pilot hit a power line and his plane crashed. It is the greatest miracle that he was not killed. This matter has been found of such interest generally that I notice the October, 1951, edition of the magazine Aircraft contains certain letters to the editor complaining about the same situation. I am not going to take time to read this particular letter over the signature of J. H. Dalen of Grande Prairie. I shall just point out these one or two facts. Mr. Dalen points out that the hangar at Grande Prairie airport is never heated, the water and lights are turned off, the roof leaks causing the formation of ice on aircraft parked inside during a spring thaw; the doors are never closed which results in snow blowing in and covering 90 per cent of the floor space. Then he goes on to suggest that these small private planes are

required to pay excessive charges. As a consequence they find parking space in farmers' fields some distance from the airport.
In the same magazine, Aircraft, I find an editorial on page 106 that refers to the same situation. I know something about the hangar at Grande Prairie airport. I would ask the Minister of Transport to investigate that matter and see if it would not be possible to do two things: First, to have the hangar put into good shape, repair the roof and see that the doors are made tight and are properly hanging on their hinges; second, to see if it would not be possible to arrive at a more moderate scale of rental for private planes when they are parked in the hangar of an airport.


Douglas Charles Abbott: I shall see that the hon. member's comments are brought to the attention of the minister and his officials.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I do not wish to dwell upon this unduly, but here are estimates totalling $4-5 million which we are asked to pass in a breath. Looking over the main portion of them, it looks to me as though they are for construction of one type or another. We have had some experience in the past with estimates which have been put through for construction and the construction never materialized. I deplore the fact that these estimates were not considered at the time the main estimates for the Department of Transport were considered. While it is not the time, at this late hour, to debate the matter, I cannot let them pass without raising an objection.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps I can explain to the hon. member that construction estimates are considered with the main estimates, and we try to keep those as tight as possible. When I say "we" I am referring to the Minister of Finance and the treasury board. Sometimes construction programs go forward far more rapidly than had been anticipated, and that accounts for the major portion of the supplementary items here. In other cases some degree of urgency develops after the main estimates are prepared in February.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The minister will understand that it was not about the amount but rather the manner in which these items are brought in at the very last, when the membership of the house is depleted, that I was complaining. Such large amounts should be given more careful consideration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Resolutions reported, read the second time and concurred in.

["I move that the house do now adjourn.\nMotion agreed to and the house adjourned at 5.30 p.m., until Thursday, November 20, 1952, at eleven o'clock a.m., unless otherwise ordered, pursuant to the provisions of the special order made Friday, June 27, 1952.\n[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:"]
Douglas Charles Abbott: that the house go into committee of ways and. means.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Beaudoin in the chair.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Resolved, that towards making good the supply granted to Her Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1953, the sums of $2,363,584,922.60 and $82,732,188, respectively, be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
Mr. Abbott thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 394, for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1953.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, considered in committee, reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the house went up to the Senate chamber.
And being returned:
Mr. Speaker informed the house that the Deputy Governor General had been pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the royal assent to the following bills:
An act for the relief of Irene Mary Johnson Muirhead.
An act for the relief of Vera Kathleen Martin Lightfoot.
An act for the relief of Albert Chevalier.
An act for the relief of Roland Lesage.
An act for the relief of Joseph Timothy O'Connor. An act for the relief of Victoria Elias Abdelhay. An act for the relief of Margaret Edith Grace Batt Trent.
An act for the relief of Pearl Abramovitch Hoffman.
An act for the relief of Lily Sperling Kofsky.
An act for the relief of Jean Isobel Taylor Cuffling.
An act for the relief of Charles William Ledger. An act for the relief of Benjamin Gordon Church. An act for the relief of Laura Juliette Aubert Macdonald.
An act for the relief of Jean Lesly Macfarlane Cameron.
An act for the relief of Sarto Desnoyers.
An act for the relief of Jean Marc Duckett Audet.
An act for the relief of Eugene Cote.
The Royal Assent
An act for the relief of Anna Lapinska Chole-wicki.
An act tor the relief of Alexander William Hyndman.
An act for the relief of Vivian Mary Dickson Stewart.
An act for the relief of Stanley Baker Smith.
An act for the relief of Rebekah Ellinor Conley Eurman.
An act for the relief of Allan Gowans.
An act for the relief of Marie Jacqueline Michelle Major Valiquette.
An act for the relief of May Clara Taylor D1 Biasio.
An act for the relief of Regina Joan Lee Mills. An act for the relief of Violette Chartrand Fairon.
An act for the relief of Doreen Elizabeth Lawton Batty.
An act for the relief of Norma Meldrum Drysdale McGown.
An act for the relief of Jean Elizabeth Wood Jackson.
An act for the relief of Louisa Ryan Heke.
An act for the relief of Maurice Speyer.
An act for the relief of Lorraine Souillet Heaven. An act for the relief of Charlotte Elizabeth Johnston Rawson.
An act for the relief of Eleanor Luba Hirschfield Mott.
An act for the relief of Marguerite Anne Sweeting Russell.
An act for the relief of Amy Stirling Price.
An act for the relief of Jean Irene Ross Roche.
An act for the relief of Regina Landry Brouillard. An act for the relief of Jean-Paul Malo.
An act for the relief of Robert Arthur Reeve.
An act for the relief of Joyce Mary Barton Vallis. An act for the relief of Lawrence Edward James. An act for the relief of Helene Mary Reusing Hutchins.
An act for the relief of Charles Lewis Lipton.
An act for the relief of Joseph Kovacs.
An act for the relief of Ann Martha Treglown Goodfellow.
An act for the relief of Meryl Elman Kluger Schreiber.
An act for the relief of Janusz Juljan Borzecki.
An act for the relief of Perley John Walden.
An act for the relief of Louis Jules Fabry.
An act for the relief of Kathleen Anne Bentley Hainsworth.
An act for the relief of Ethel McCready Thomas. An act for the relief of Lois Edith Laffoley Kelly. An act for the relief of Evelyn Helen Cowell Varrin.
An act for the relief of Marion Helen Hawes Gordon.
An act for the relief of Winnifred Isobel Bassett Yuill.
An act for the relief of Eileen May Walker Cole. An act for the relief of Frank Ashworth.
An act for the relief of Margaret Galbraith Hardie McCall.
An act for the relief of Goldie Natovitch Molson. An act for the relief of Norma Veronica Besner Roast.
An act for the relief of Catherine Anna Regan Herdt.
An act for the relief of Errol Alexander Edgley. An act for the relief of Marie Marguerite Eugenie Lucie Prevost Lalonde.
An act for the relief of Myrtle Meloche Reath.
An act for the relief of Eileen Margaret Smith Bates.
An act for the relief of Selim Jean Malakie, otherwise known as Solomon Malacket.
An act for the relief of Ruby Lydia Donnelly Champion.
[Stage Direction]
Adjournment
An act for the relief of Edna Edith Lily Caron Gourdie.
An act to provide for carrying into effect the Treaty of Peace between Canada and Japan.
An act to incorporate the Belleville Harbour Commissioners.
An act to amend The Unemployment Insurance Act, 1940.
An act respecting the Northwest Territories.
An act to amend The International Boundary Waters Treaty Act.
An act to revise the capital structure of the Canadian National Railway Company and to provide for certain other financial matters.
An act to amend The Canada Grain Act.
An act respecting immigration.
An act respecting allowances for war veterans and their dependents.
An act to amend The Veterans Benefit Act, 1951. An act to amend The Veterans Insurance Act.
An act to amend the Pension Act.
An act to amend The Civilian War Pensions and Allowances Act.
An act to amend The Army Benevolent Fund Act, 1947.
An act to authorize the provision of moneys to meet certain capital expenditures of the Canadian National Railways System during the calendar year 1952, and to authorize the guarantee by Her Majesty of certain securities to be issued by the Canadian National Railway Company.
An act to authorize the government of Canada to enter into agreements with the governments of the provinces pursuant to which in return for compensation, the provinces agree to refrain from levying certain taxes for a limited period.
An act respecting Marine and Aviation War Risks Insurance and Reinsurance Agreements.
An act respecting Currency, the Royal Canadian Mint and the Exchange Fund.
An act to provide Retiring Allowances, on a contributory basis, to persons who have served as Members of the House of Commons of Canada.
An act to amend The Eastern Rocky Mountain Forest Conservation Act.
An act to incorporate Ogdensburg Bridge Authority.
An act to incorporate The Canadian Shipowners Mutual Assurance Association.
An act to amend the Combines Investigation Act and the Criminal Code.
An act to readjust the representation in the House of Commons.
To these bills the royal assent was pronounced by the Clerk of the Senate in the following words:
In Her Majesty's name the Honourable the Deputy Governor General doth assent to these bills.
Then the Speaker of the House of Commons addressed the Deputy Governor General as follows:
May it please Your Honour:
The Commons of Canada have voted supplies required to enable the government to defray certain expenses of the public service.
In the name of the Commons, I present to Your Honour the following bill:
An act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1953.
To which bill I humbly request Your Honour's assent.
To this bill the Clerk of the Senate, by command of the Deputy Governor General, did thereupon say:
In Her Majesty's name, the Honourable the Deputy Governor General thanks her loyal subjects, accepts their benevolence, and assents to this bill.
Mr. Garson:: I move that the house do now adjourn.
Motion agreed to and the house adjourned at 5.30 p.m., until Thursday, November 20, 1952, at eleven o'clock a.m., unless otherwise ordered, pursuant to the provisions of the special order made Friday, June 27, 1952.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply]:


DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE
[Stage Direction]
Customs and excise divisions-
302.	General administration, $2,105,832.
303.	Inspection, investigation and audit services, $2,924,216.
Ports, outports and preventive stations-
304.	Operation and maintenance, $19,643,329.
305.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $1,064,050.
306.	Customs excise seizure expenses and adjustments. $191,000.
Taxation division-
307.	General administration, $1,537,200.
308.	Internal inspection and verification, $832,322.
309.	District offices, $21,062,690.
Income tax appeal board-
310.	Administration expenses, $74,360.
Customs and excise divisions-
Ports, outports and preventive stations-
732. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $66,000.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-
International shortwave broadcasting service-
54.	Maintenance and operation including authority to credit to the appropriation revenue from rental of facilities in Radio Canada building to an amount of $140,000 and to re-expend it for the purposes of the international service, $1,982,675.
55.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, including supervision, $56,595.
International shortwave broadcasting service-
676.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, including supervision-further amount required, $228,138.
Loans, investments and advances-
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-
819. Loans to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation repayable with interest at a rate to be fixed by the governor in council on such terms and conditions as the governor in council may determine and to be applied in payment of expenditures to cover capital costs of television installations and to support the development of the service such loans, with interest, shall be a charge on the revenues of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation next after the charge imposed under the provisions of section 17 of the Canadian Broadcasting Act, 1936, $2,000,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
57.	Departmental administration, $244,046.
[Stage Direction]
Citizenship-
58.	Citizenship registration branch, $221,187.
59.	Citizenship branch, $364,837.
Immigration branch-
60.	Administration of the Immigration Act, $839,128.
61.	Field and inspectional service, Canada-operation and maintenance, including $10,000 for grants to immigrant welfare organizations, $4,795,069.
62.	Field and inspectional service, abroad-operation and maintenance, $1,748,250.
63.	To provide, subject to the approval of the treasury board, for trans-oceanic and inland transportation assistance for immigrants, including care en route and while awaiting employment, $2,600,000. Indian affairs branch-
64.	Branch administration, $327,142.
Indian agencies -
65.	Operation and maintenance, $2,118,495.
66.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment, $636,410.
Reserves and trusts-
67.	Operation and maintenance, $118,008.
68.	Acquisition of land, $16,000.
Welfare of Indians-
69.	Operation and maintenance, $2,309,562.
70.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment, $1,096,002.
71.	Grants to agricultural exhibitions and Indian fairs, $7,450.
Fur conservation-
72.	Operation and maintenance, $334,011. Education-
73.	Operation and maintenance, $6,158,943.
74.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment, $3,981,850.
75.	Grant to provide additional services to Indians of British Columbia, $100,000.
B-National gallery of Canada-
76.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $215,368.
77.	Payment to the national gallery purchase account for the purpose of acquiring works of art, in conformity with section 8 of the National Gallery Act, $100,000.
A-Department-
Immigration branch-
677.	Field and inspectional service, Canada- operation and maintenance-further amount required, $37,000.
678.	Field and inspectional service, abroad-operation and maintenance-further amount required, $96,600.
Indian affairs branch-
Indian agencies-
679.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $71,900.
Reserves and trusts-
680.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $25,500.
681.	Acquisition of buildings, works, land, permanent improvements and new equipment-further amount required, $162,750.
Education-
682.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $147,237.
Supply
B-National gallery of Canada-
683.	Payment to national gallery purchase account for the purpose of acquiring works of art in conformity with section 8 of the National Gallery Act -further amount required to purchase works of art with foreign currencies owned by Canada, and available only for governmental or other limited purposes, $30,000.

[Stage Direction]
National health branch-
Health services-
729.	Immigration medical services-further amount required, $46,544.
Laboratory of hygiene-
730.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $200,000.
731.	Special technical services-further amount required, $30,000.
B-Civil defence-(formerly under Department of National Defence) -
294. To provide for the civil defence program and to authorize total commitments against future years in the amount of $575,000, $6,508,839.

[Stage Direction]
The Senate-
The Speaker of the Senate-
208.	Allowance in lieu of residence, $3,000.
209.	General administration, $393,448.
House of Commons-
The Speaker of the House of Commons-
210.	Allowance in lieu of residence, $3,000. Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons-
211.	Allowance in lieu of apartments, $1,500.
212.	General administration-estimates of the clerk, $1,027,657.
213.	Estimates of the sergeant-at-arms, $624,236.
214.	Subscriptions to publications of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association to be distributed to members of the House of Commons, and to provide for the Canadian share of expenses of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, $10,000.
215.	To provide hereby, notwithstanding anything contained in the Financial Administration Act or the provisions of the Senate and House of Commons Act respecting the independence of parliament, for the payment out of the consolidated revenue fund to each member of the House of Commons appointed by the governor in council to be a parliamentary assistant (which appointment shall not render such member ineligible or disqualify him as a member of the House of Commons) to assist a minister of the crown in such manner and to such extent as the minister may determine and to represent his department in the House of Commons in the absence of the minister therefrom, a salary of four thousand dollars per annum, and pro rata for any period less than a year, $56,000.
216.	To provide for an allowance to the deputy chairman of committees, $2,000.
217.	To provide an amount required for defraying expenses of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association's visit to Canada, $150,000.
General-
218.	Printing of parliament, including salaries of staff of the joint distribution office, $270,865.
Library of Parliament-
219.	General administration, $162,001.
[Stage Direction]
Supply
Pensions and other benefits-
220.	Pension to the unmarried sister of the late Colonel Harry Baker, M.P., $700.
The Senate-
716.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment of the full sessional indemnity for the sixth session of the twenty-first parliament, 1952, to members of the Senate for days lost through absence caused by public business, by illness, or on account of death. Payments to be made as the treasury board may direct, $11,500.
717.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment to each member of the Senate who attended the first part of the sixth session which commenced on February 28, 1952, and ended on April 9, 1952, of an amount representing the actual transportation and living expenses of such member while on the journey between Ottawa and his place of residence after the Easter adjournment of parliament on April 9, 1952, and on the return journey from his place of residence to Ottawa at the end of the recess which commenced on that date, or at any other one time during the sixth session of the twenty-first parliament, $5,000; and in addition thereto a sum of $500 for the payment to members of the Senate the actual transportation and living expenses incurred during the Christmas adjournment of the fifth session of the twenty-first parliament, and not previously paid, $5,500.
718. General	administration-further	amount
required, $12,337.
House of Commons-
719.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment of the full sessional indemnity for the sixth session of the twenty-first parliament, 1952, to members of the House of Commons for days lost through absence caused by public business, by illness, or on account of death. Payments to be made as the treasury board may direct, $13,175.
720.	To provide, notwithstanding anything contained in the Senate and House of Commons Act, for the payment to each member of the House of Commons who attended the first part of the sixth session, which commenced on February 28, 1952, and ended on April 9, 1952, of an amount representing the actual transportation and living expenses of such member while on the journey between Ottawa and his place of residence after the Easter adjournment of parliament on April 9, 1952, and on the return journey from his place of residence to Ottawa at the end of the recess which commenced on that date, or at any other one time during the sixth session of the twenty-first parliament, $18,000.
721.	General administration-estimates of the clerk-further amount required, $52,600.
722.	Estimates of the sergeant-at-arms-further amount required, $28,300.

[Stage Direction]
739.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $18,137.
740.	Distribution of official documents-further amount required, $3,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Supreme Court of Canada-
706.	Administration-further amount required, $7,000.
Yukon Territorial Court-
707.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $23,000.
708. Combines investigation	branch-further amount required, $58,500.
B-Penitentiaries-
Office of the commissioner of penitentiaries-
709.	Construction, improvements and new equipment, including provision for the establishment and construction of a new institution in the province of Quebec for the confinement and reformation of federal prisoners-further amount required, $199,950.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police-
Land services-arising out of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, enforcement of federal statutes generally, and other incidental expenses-
780.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $303,698.
781. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $608,851.
Marine services-arising out of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, enforcement of federal statutes generally, and other incidental expenses-
782.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $9,000.
783. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $850.
Aviation services-arising out of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, enforcement of federal statutes generally, and other incidental expenses-
784.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $4,000.
785.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment-further amount required, $3,000.
Pensions and other benefits-
786.	Government's contribution to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police pension account, $452,910.
Privy council-
Privy council office-
736. General	administration-further	amount
required, $5,500.
General-
737.	To provide for expenses of the royal commission on the South Saskatchewan irrigation and powrer project-further amount required, $35,000. Public archives-
B-Bibliographic centre-
738.	Bibliographic centre (national library) - further amount required, $10,600.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Mines branch-
Mineral resources investigations-
723.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment-further amount required, $50,000.
Surveys and mapping branch-
724.	International boundary commission-administration, operation and maintenance-further amount required, $16,650.
725.	Legal surveys and aeronautical charts- administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $47,000.
Map compilation and reproduction-
726.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment-further amount required, $94,425.

Dominion observatories-
Dominion observatory, Ottawa and field stations-
727.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $13,000.
B-Dominion coal board-
728.	Payments in connection with the movements of coal under conditions prescribed by the governor in council-further amount required, $1,471,000.

[Stage Direction]
General administration-
710.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $8,890.
Annuities Act-
711.	Subject to sections four, seven and eight of the Government Annuities Act, but notwithstanding any other provisions of the act, to authorize the Minister of Labour in accordance with regulations approved by the governor in council on the recommendation of the treasury board to enter into an agreement to vary the terms of a contract for the payment of an annuity entered into under the said act or other authority of parliament or to substitute another contract for such a contract containing such terms and with effect from such date as the Minister of Labour deems necessary, and to authorize the Minister of Labour to enter into a contract with a purchaser, in terms approved by the governor in council, for payment of an annuity the amount of which decreases on a day specified in the contract, under which there may be paid an annuity greater than the maximum permitted under the act between the due date of the first instalment of annuity and the said day, provided the annuity agreed to be paid does not exceed the actuarial equivalent of a constant annuity for the maximum amount so permitted in respect of the annuitant, having the same date of commencement and the same term certain, if any, as the annuity payable under the contract, and to provide for payments in the current and subsequent fiscal years out of the government annuities account in accordance with the contracts so amended or entered into, $1.
712.	Labour Gazette, authorized by Labour Department Act-further amount required, $5,000.
Vocational Training Co-ordination-
713.	Administration-further amount required, $5,000.
To provide for carrying out the purposes of the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act, 1942, and agreements made thereunder: to authorize the Minister of Labour to enter into agreements with any province on terms approved by the governor in council for the training of persons to fit them for defence industries, the training of members of Her Majesty's forces and other persons to fit them for skilled armed services occupations and training under youth training projects and to provide for the expenditures thereunder and under vocational training agreements entered into in previous years-
714.	Training payments to the provinces-further amount required,.^$320,000
Terminable services-
715.	To provide for expenses that may be incurred in the arranging for and the movement of workers from outside Canada to work on farms and other essential industry in Canada when Canadian labour is not available to meet the need: including costs connected with the supervision and welfare of persons already immigrated to Canada under former
Supply
authorized labour movements and administrative expenses connected therewith-further amount required, $227,500.

[Stage Direction]
General services-
700.	Industrial development service-further amount required, $218,000.
Field services-
Protection branch-
701.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $18,000.
Fish culture and development branch-
702.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $125,000.
703.	Consumer branch-further amount required, $18,500.
Fisheries research board-
704.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $122,000.
Special-
705.	Amount required to recoup the fisheries prices support account to cover net operating loss of the fisheries prices support board during the fiscal year 1951-52, $1,219,263.

[Stage Direction]
Patent and copyright office-
787.	Copyright and industrial designs division- further amount required, $7,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department and missions abroad-
686. Representation	abroad-operational-including payment of salaries of high commissioners, ambassadors, ministers plenipotentiary, consuls, secretaries and staff appointed as directed by the governor general in council, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Civil Service Act or any of its amendments-further amount required, $100,000.
687.	To provide for the construction and execution in Canada of seven doors to be donated by Canada to the United Nations permanent headquarters in New York-further amount required, $28,500.
688.	To authorize and provide for the payment from foreign currencies owned by Canada and available only for governmental or other limited purposes in France, the Netherlands and Italy, of fellowships and scholarships and travelling expenses to enable Canadians to study in those countries and for payment to the Royal Society of Canada of amounts not to exceed $4,000 in all to meet travelling and other administrative costs incurred by the society for those it may designate to act on its behalf in selecting persons to receive fellowships and scholarships, $44,000.
B-General-
North Atlantic treaty organization-
689.	To provide, subject to the approval of the governor general in council and notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Civil Service Act, for special administrative expenses, including payment of remuneration, in connection with the assignment by the Canadian government of Canadians to the international staff of the North Atlantic treaty organization (part recoverable from the North Atlantic treaty organization), $55,000. International civil aviation organization-
690.	To provide the international civil aviation organization with office accommodation at less than commercial rates-further amount required, $141,972.
[Stage Direction]
Supply
International joint commission-
691.	Salaries and expenses of the commission (formerly provided by statute), $81,011.
Terminable services-
692.	Contribution to the United Nations international children's emergency fund, $500,000.
693.	Contribution to the United Nations relief and works agency for Palestine refugees in the Near East, $600,000.
694.	To provide for a gift of wheat as a contribution to famine relief for Greece, $30,000.
[Stage Direction]
General administration-
116.	Departmental administration (including the former administration of the Farmers Creditors Arrangement Act, 1943, and the administration of the Municipal Grants Act, and the custody of paid cheques formerly administered by the auditor general's office), $1,643,396.
117.	Comptroller of the treasury-central office and branch offices administration, $13,610,929.
Administration of various acts and costs of special functions-
118.	Superannuation and retirement acts-administration, $193,086.
119.	The Bank Act-salaries and expenses of the inspector general of banks' office, $29,836.
120.	Administration of the Farm Improvement Loans Act, 1944, and the Veterans' Business and Professional Loans Act, 1946, $69,687.
121.	Expenses of the tariff board, $108,830.
Expenses of the Royal Canadian Mint and the assay office, Vancouver, B.C.-
122.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $1,058,487.
123.	Construction or acquisitions of new equipment, $113,279.
124.	Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation- adjustment payments in respect of subsidies previously paid, and costs of administration, $30,500.
125.	Administration of employees' instalment purchase plan, including sale and delivery of Canada savings bonds to government employees, and of employees' group insurance plans, $120,447.
126.	Administration of the Consumer Credit (Temporary Provisions) Act, $92,936.
Payments to municipalities-
Grants to municipalities in lieu of taxes on federal property-
127.	To provide for payments to municipalities in accordance with the Municipal Grants Act; and to provide for payments to municipalities under order in council of July 19, 1950, P.C. 3456, in respect of the cost of medical and hospital services and supplies furnished to federal employees and other persons specified therein, $2,360,800.
Contingencies and miscellaneous-
128.	To provide, subject to the approval of the treasury board, for miscellaneous minor and unforeseen expenses and to authorize the re-use of any sums repaid to this appropriation from other appropriations, $1,000,000.
129.	Cost of telephone service at Ottawa for all departments, $778,000.
General items of payroll costs including superannuation payments-
130.	To provide for a government contribution to the superannuation fund in an amount equal to the estimated current and arrears payments of individual contributors in the previous fiscal year, $13,269,149.
131.	To provide, subject to the approval of the treasury board, for supplementing other votes for the payment of salaries, wages and other paylist charges, $1,500,000.
132.	To provide for the government's contribution, as an employer, to the unemployment insurance fund in respect of government employees paid through the central pay office, $1,150,000.
Miscellaneous grants-
133.	Canadian general council of the Boy Scouts, $15,000.
134.	Canadian council of the Girl Guides Association, $9,000.
135.	Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, $3,000.
136.	Royal Canadian Academy of Arts, $4,025.
137.	Canadian Writers Foundation, $4,000.
138.	Canadian Olympic Association, $20,000.
139.	Boys' Clubs of Canada, $10,000.
140.	Canadian Association of Consumers (formerly included under wartime prices and trade board), $6,000.
Payments to municipalities-
695.	To provide grants in lieu of taxes under regulations approved by the governor in council to rural municipalities that do not qualify under the Municipal Grants Act, but which incur substantial increased expenses or loss of tax revenue by reason of the existence within their borders of federal property, $100,000.
Contingencies and miscellaneous-
696.	To authorize (a) the custodian of enemy property to transfer to the Minister of Finance such property, including the proceeds and earnings of property, that is vested in the custodian in respect of world war II as the governor in council prescribes; (b) the Minister of Finance to hold, sell or otherwise administer property received by him from the custodian under paragraph (a) or from other sources by way of reparations by former enemies (except Italy) in respect of world war II. and (c) the Minister of Finance to establish a special account in the consolidated revenue fund to be known as the war claims fund, to which shall be credited all money received by him from the custodian under paragraph (a) or from other sources by way of reparations by former enemies (except Italy) in respect of world war II, the proceeds of sale of property under paragraph (b), the earnings of property specified in paragraph (b) and amounts recovered from persons who have received overpayments in respect of claims arising out of world war II; and, notwithstanding section 35 of the Financial Administration Act, to provide for payments out of the war claims fund in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, to persons who claim compensation in respect of world war II, for the payment out of the war claims fund in the current and subsequent fiscal years of expenses incurred in investigating and reporting on claims of those persons and for the repayment out of the war claims fund to vote 128 (miscellaneous minor and unforeseen expenses) of all amounts that have been paid out of that vote pursuant to the war claims interim compensation rules established by order in council P.C. 667 of February 4, 1952, $1.
697.	To authorize the Minister of Finance to establish a special account in thf consolidated revenue fund to be called the war claims (Italy) account, to which shall be credited all amounts received from Italy by way of settlement of its obligations under the treaty of peace between Canada and Italy that was signed at Paris on February 10, 1947 and, notwithstanding section 35 of the Financial Administration Act, to provide for payment out of the said account in the current and

subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with the war claims (Italy) settlement regulations established by order in council P.C. 5818 of November 6, 1951, and any amendments that may be made thereto by the governor in council, $1.
698.	Amount required to cover losses incurred on foreign exchange tendered in payment of accounts receivable, $5,000.
Grants to universities-
699.	To provide grants to institutions of higher learning recognized in each province by the government of Canada and the government of the province as being universities or institutions of equivalent standing equal to an amount, for each province, not exceeding 50 cents per head of its population as certified by the dominion bureau of statistics divided among the recognized institutions of the province proportionately to their enrolment of full time intramural students in personal attendance at the recognized institution or at an institution in the same province affiliated with it who are registered in courses of university level recognized as leading to and counting year for year toward a university degree awarded by a university in Canada and the Minister of Finance may for this purpose more particularly define the terms "university level" and "university degree," $7,250,000.
171.	Departmental administration, $428,968.
172.	Expenses of work in the interests of fire prevention, $50,398.
Auditor general's office-
53. Salaries and expenses of office, $597,111.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Canal services-
791.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $597,220.
792.	To provide for expenses in connection with the St. Lawrence ship canal surveys and investigations-further amount required, $15,000.
793.	For settlement of some 257 petitions of right, in accordance with the judgment of the privy council in 1952, in the petition of right of Canada Steamship Lines Ltd., versus the Queen, as a result of destruction by fire in 1944 of St. Gabriel shed No. 1, of the department, on the Lachine canal, $400,000.
Marine services-
Marine service steamers-
794.	Construction or acquisition of vessels and equipment, as detailed in the estimates-capital- further amount required, $827,500.
Aids to navigation-
795.	Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $50,421.
796.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $63,020.
Nautical services-
797.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $16,400.
Pilotage service-
798.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $35,800.
Supply
799.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $11,500.
800.	Steamship inspection-further amount required, $9,300.
801.	To reimburse Ecole Technique de Rimouskl, Inc, in an amount not exceeding $200,000, for the purchase, on behalf of Her Majesty, of certain machinery and equipment to be installed at the said school for the purpose of conducting courses in marine engineering: gross estimated cost, $200,000; less expenditures for this purpose under vote 804, estimates of 1951-52, $143,226, $56,774.
Railway and steamship services-
802.	Strait of Canso-transportation improvements and facilities-capital-further amount required, $450,000.
Canadian government railways-
803.	Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels, as detailed in the estimates-capital- further amount required, $300,000.
804.	Construction or acquisition of vessels for Newfoundland coastal services-preliminary plans and specifications, $100,000.
Air services-
Telecommunications division-
Airways and airports-radio aviation services-
805.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-capital-further amount required, $174,800.
Radio Act and regulations-
806.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $20,500.
Radio aids to marine navigation-
807.	Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $100,000.
Telegraph and telephone service-
808.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $210,000.
Northwest communication system-
809.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-capital-further amount required, $23,500.
Meteorological division-
810.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $33,000.
Civil aviation division-
Airways and airports-
Operation and maintenance-
811.	Airway and airport traffic control-further amount required, $33,800.
Construction services-
812.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-capital-further amount required, $398,810.
813.	Contributions, subject to the approval of the governor in council, to assist municipalities in the development of and improvement to airports, the sites of which have been provided by such municipalities-further amount required, $94,105.
Supply
[Stage Direction]
B-General-
Canadian maritime commission-
814.	Steamship subventions for coastal services, as detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $55,000.
National harbours board-
815.	Advances to national harbours board, subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet expenditures applicable to the calendar year 1952 on the following account; reconstruction and capital expenditures- Halifax-further amount required, $430,000.
National harbours board-
820. Advances to national harbours board, subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet expenditures applicable to the calendar year 1952, on the following account: reconstruction and capital expenditures-Montreal -further amount required, $1,070,000.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, November 20, 1952