1953-04-24

[Stage Direction]
Sixth report of standing committee on banking and commerce.-Mr. Cleaver.


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, in the course of last night's debate on trade and commerce estimates, as recorded on page 4316 of Hansard, the hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Fleming) asked me if any exports of scrap iron had been made to Japan in recent months. In replying to the hon. member I had in mind our policy covering scrap generated in eastern Canada, where well over 90 per cent of our scrap is collected and used, and I answered "No, none whatever."
I have since consulted our steel division and find that I overlooked the fact that we have a special problem in British Columbia, where the collection of certain types of scrap is in excess of the melting capacity of the local furnaces. The scrap dealers in buying heavy smelting scrap are obliged to take cast iron scrap, railroad car axles and other types, which are not in demand on the Pacific coast.
Cast iron scrap has also been in surplus in eastern Canada and in the United States and, accordingly, we have licensed the export of these types for shipment to Japan.
Since January 1, 1953, these permits have covered 3,650 tons of scrap iron, 325 tons of scrap railroad car axles, and 1,000 tons of small cuttings and shearings.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. J. Browne (St. John's West):: Mr. Speaker, about ten days ago I asked the acting minister of external affairs if the government had been in touch with the Chinese authorities as to the whereabouts of Bishop Cuthbert O'Gara who was supposed to be coming to Hong Kong, and he replied that inquiries had been made of the British
department of foreign affairs and that they were continuing inquiries. The minister indicated that he might have some information in a few days.


Hon. Paul Martin (Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member spoke to me the other day and I told him that I hoped to toe able to give him some information the day before yesterday. Yesterday I told him that I hoped to be able to give him information today. I am afraid that I will not be able to give him anything useful until perhaps next Tuesday.



DOUKHOBORS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay Wesf):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. In view of the rapidly-growing concern of the people of Kootenay West over the developing Sons of Freedom problem and the particular concern of the railroads, and in view of representations from various quarters that a dominion-provincial conference might be of assistance, I should like to ask the minister if he has received a request from the attorney general of British Columbia for a conference to discuss this serious problem.


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to my hon. friend's question is "No", but perhaps I should not leave it there. The attorney general of British Columbia wired me for an appointment on April 23, and then wired again to say that he could not be here on that date but would be here on April 30. It may be that he plans to raise this matter when he comes.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Beaudoin in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION A-Department-
57. Departmental administration, $280,729.


Mr. Gillis:: Last evening before the house adjourned I had been making some general observations on the question of immigration.
4334	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration I pointed out what in my opinion was necessary in order to get the kind of immigration into Canada that the country needed and was capable of absorbing. I tried to show the minister that in my judgment immigration, housing and employment are closely related, and that if our immigration policy is to be successful and in the best interests of the country it is necessary for resources and development, labour and immigration to work very closely together in planning immigration so that we will bring in the people we need and can use and so that at the same time there will be housing for them if and when they arrive in the communities to which they are allocated.
I was developing the point that I thought we were wrong in 1952 in that we imported a larger number of unskilled immigrants than could be absorbed. Figures for April, 1953, the latest that I have seen, show that there were 184,000 unemployed in Canada, and I am reasonably sure that if you take a look at the unemployment insurance offices across the country you will see that the great majority of unemployed in Canada today are unskilled workers. At the same time in all unemployment insurance offices throughout the country you will find that there are vacancies for skilled labour. Therefore it is my view that our planning was bad in 1952 in that we brought in people who aggravated the problem already existing in the country of the large number of Canadians who are thrown into the employment stream without vocational or any other kind of training which would enable them to make a contribution.
I know that a figure of 184,000 unemployed is considered normal. In fact there are people who use the argument that it is necessary and normal in a capitalist economy to have about that percentage of unemployed. The late Lord Bennett used to refer to that army of unemployed as a shifting mobile labour reserve that could be moved around where they were needed. I have always looked upon them as a threat outside the factory gates to the employed person so that he would be easier to handle and so that his demands with respect to wages and working conditions would not be so great knowing that people from this shifting mobile labour reserve could be moved in to replace him. So much for the question of employment and immigration.
The second point I should like to make has to do with housing. The government's own experts on the Curtis committee put the shortage of dwellings at the end of 1946 at 648,000. In the six years from 1946 to [Mr. Gillls.I

1951 inclusive net new family formations were about 513,000 and total housing construction amounted to about 496,000. There were probably 50,000 houses lost by fire, demolition and collapse from old age. Certainly the housing shortage must now be somewhere around 700,000 dwellings. Last year construction lagged behind and we have not caught up with the shortage.
In view of the housing shortage and our inability to catch up on the backlog, I suggest that the department of immigration is justified in these circumstances in slowing up on immigration and taking a look to see whether there is somewhere to house the people we are bringing into the country. In my opinion those who advocate a wide open door and unplanned immigration on the assumption that Canada is a great big country and can absorb all the people whom we can bring in and put them to work on our unlimited resources are unrealistic. I think that one of the first things the minister's department must do when considering immigrants is to make sure there is a place for them to live, and in that connection the department has to work closely with the Department of Resources and Development.
You will get the rugged individualist-and there are many of them in the house-who will say that our forefathers came to this country when it was a primeval forest and they did not hesitate. They built their own homes. Certainly, and at that time that was possible. People coming to this country could get grants of land. They could hew their own homes from the forest and build them. They may have been log cabins but nevertheless they were places in which to live. But the immigrant coming to the industrial sections of Canada today does not know whether he is going to get a job and he does not know where he is going to live. He cannot just step off the train, pick up an axe, knock down a tree and build a log cabin. Circumstances have changed. We are not living in the kind of world that existed when our forefathers came to this country and hewed their homes out of the primeval forest, as a lot of rugged individualists like to remind us today. Those days are gone.
Housing as related to immigration is a very important problem. I know that the minister must receive reports from time to time from the industrial sections of the country with respect to housing. It is a pretty discouraging proposition for an immigrant to come here with his family and find himself in a city like Montreal, Toronto or Windsor where, if he can find a suitable

place to live, it will take practically half of his income to pay the rent. Rents are completely out of line in all industrial areas today. In my opinion the whole immigration and housing policy needs re-examination.
There may be humanitarian reasons for bringing people here for whom we cannot provide jobs or decent housing. There may be reasons of international politics such as relieving the appalling pressure of population in Italy. Immigration may be part of our contribution with respect to economic aid to our NATO partners. It may be part of our contribution to world peace. But taking the picture in 1951 and 1952 it looks to me that wholesale immigration without careful planning cannot be absorbed by Canada under the present circumstances.
I also showed by statistics last night that a large percentage of our immigrants in 1951 and 1952 were listed as traders and professionals. We need doctors in every section of the country. I think every effort should be made where possible to supplement our medical set-up in all centres across Canada. We need doctors and there should be no restriction there except as to qualifications. We certainly need dentists. Let anyone try to get a dental appointment in this city or most other cities across Canada. We need dentists badly, and the only restriction should be as to qualifications. But on the other hand our immigration policy should be carefully designed to bring into the country people who are going to contribute to the gross national product. I do not think we need very many more hot dog stand operators and so on.
If you will examine the situation in most cities across the country I think you will find that you have sufficient service organizations in each of them to take care of perhaps twice their populations. I took a look at our own city of Sydney at one time in that light and I figured that we had a service organization that could have taken care of a city of 100,000 while Sydney had around 30,000 at that time. If the minister's department is gathering statistics of that kind he will find what I have said is true. In that field people who merely come into a city and set up a service organization contribute nothing to the gross national product and do not make very much of a contribution to the country. We need producers.
It is all right to say that we need an internal consuming market-and we do; but everyone who comes into the country and produces nothing takes something out of the pool of wealth which there is in the country
24, 1953	4335
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration and reduces the share of everyone else to that extent.
In view of those factors which I have placed on the record at this time, after carefully thinking about them, I believe that the minister will have to agree that what we need in this country is a planned immigration policy. We need an interdepartmental committee at least working between the departments of resources and development, labour, and immigration. It should be an internal committee that would sit down and plan the needs of the country with respect to skills required to make contributions and to bring in immigrants with that thought in mind. Then there is the matter of planning for housing. If we are going to allocate these people to certain areas in order that they may do certain things to contribute to the national economy they must have places to live. Housing is one of the first essentials, in my opinion, for people who are going to make their best contributions. In the final analysis all that most of us will ever get out of life is a decent place to live. It is a nice thing, and not too much to expect after you have struggled with the world for eight, ten or twelve hours outside, to be able to go home to the sanctuary of a place that you can call home-where you can rest and repair your shattered nerves in readiness for the struggle next day. As I say, I think that one of the most essential things in life is a place you can live in and call home.
I think that the only disagreement I have with the general policy is that it is not planned. If our figures for 1951 on employment, housing and the classification of immigrants are examined they definitely point out the need for interdepartmental planning on the part of the government in order to ensure that in the field of immigration the best contribution is going to be made not only with respect to populating our country but with respect to pushing our frontiers forward and building up our pool of wealth so that there will be more for all to share in the future.


Mr. Fulton:: Mr. Chairman, there are a
few remarks which I should like to make this morning and I have some suggestions in connection with immigration as well as other subjects. Before commencing my remarks I wonder, just so that we may clarify the procedure to be followed in the discussion, if I could ask the minister whether he cares at this time to make a statement on the other two branches of his department, that is citizenship and Indian affairs, in order that all of his general statement may be before us as we come to
4336	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration conclude the general discussion on this particular item. On the other hand, perhaps he would prefer to follow the course of making his statements on the other two branches when we reach those items-in which case, of course, we would probably expect to have further discussion firstly on citizenship and then on Indian affairs.


Mr. Harris:: Mr. Chairman, one of my
officials must attend a conference this afternoon and I would prefer to deal with immigration first, complete it, and then go on with the others.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I see. In that case, Mr. Chairman, probably a general discussion at this stage will be fairly well confined to immigration, although I hope the minister will not tie us down too closely because I have a suggestion to make at the outset with respect to the name of the department. Now it is called the Department of Citizenship and Immigration yet it deals with Indian affairs. If the Indians of Canada were citizens in all respects-full citizens-then there would be no point to the suggestion which I am about to make. But, since there are certain respects in which they are not in exactly the same position as those who are Canadian citizens, and since it is an effort of government policy subscribed to and supported by this house and the country as a whole to bring Indians to the point where they may be citizens without differentiation,
I think that the name of the department should be extended to include the word "Indian". That would indicate to the country as a whole, and particularly to the Indian population, the importance which is attached to the work of looking after Indians in Canada. It might be a bulky or rather lengthy name but I do not think it would be too long, in view of its importance, to call it the Department of Citizenship, Immigration and Indian Affairs. I hope the minister will cause the necessary amendment to be made to the statute setting up his department to give reflection to the concern which I know the department and he, as well as others of us, do feel about the importance of this subject.
Last night the minister made a general statement on immigration which was a review of previous performance and then it purported to be a statement of policy for the future. The minister in introducing the second part of his remarks said at page 4328 of Hansard:
And now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to take just a very brief look at the future.


We hoped that we would get a very definite and positive statement of government policy, but I feel that most of us who hoped that win be disappointed in that the minister's statement, while a statement of broad general principles, was not what we bad hoped to have in the way of a statement of policy. There is in it no indication of specific objectives or of specific limits of the broad general principles which are going to be applied by the government in giving effect to those principles. In view of the importance of the subject I do think that we are entitled to know just what the concrete, positive program of the government is with respect to immigration into Canada in the next few years. To what countries are we to look for the major sources of inflow of population? What limits of numbers or what objectives with respect to total immigration has the government in mind or what is it seeking to achieve in bringing people into Canada? About the only indication that we have, and it is pretty general and vague, is contained in these words on page 4328 of Hansard:
-the government will continue its program of immigration to stimulate Canadian growth and Canadian development.
We are still left with the question, quite unanswered, of exactly what that means in terms of numbers of people coming into Canada, and arrangements for their reception, their employment and their housing-all matters which, as the member for Cape Breton South has pointed out, go hand in hand with immigration policy. We are left without any information on those specific subjects and I must say, Mr. Chairman, that although the minister refers to a program of immigration to stimulate Canadian growth and development, and says that such is the government's policy, my impression is rather to the contrary. My impression is that the government is certainly not doing very much to stimulate immigration in the sense that it will contribute to the growth of Canada, but rather the government is following an extremely cautious policy. I have the feeling, anyway, that there is some slight pressure on the brake pedal, and that rather than stimulating the growth and development of Canada we are hardly keeping pace-if we are in fact keeping pace it is only just keeping pace-with the demand which, as the minister said, the nature and future of Canada makes for an increase in population. In particular, we are hardly keeping pace with the demand for farm workers. I think anyone coming from an agricultural constituency will agree that there is a considerable shortage of farm workers, and that the

government's immigration policy does not seem to be in tune with the necessities in that regard.
It seems to me that if we look at the succeeding paragraphs of the minister's statements, they bear out the contention that the government is not stimulating anything in this connection, but is applying a slight pressure on the brake pedal rather than on the accelerator.	In order that we may
intelligently and fully discuss this subject of immigration, I say again that we should know the government's objectives, and not just in the broad general terms which the minister used in his statement. At that time he said something to the effect that Canada could benefit by an increase in population, both with respect to the development of our own resources and to ensure world peace. I do not think those objectives are quite sufficient to enable us to discuss immigration policy intelligently. There are, of course, certain general statements of principles with respect to immigration with which I think everyone would agree, and that is about as far as the minister has gone.
Everyone realizes that an immigration policy must be realistic, and it must be in tune with the country's capacity to absorb extra people. In this respect I think that the words "capacity to absorb" must be understood in the sense of providing them with employment and accommodation. I believe this phrase is intended to convey the - impression of absorbing them in the physical sense as well as absorbing them in the cultural or moral sense. We must not bring in people more quickly than the national structure of Canada, in terms of national culture and national development, will absorb, because this is Canada. We want to develop it, not to change it. These limitations, that we must not bring in people faster than we can absorb them in either the physical or the cultural sense, are I think agreed upon by everyone in the house. I think it is agreed by everyone also that Canada's capacity to absorb in both senses is enormous. What we want to discuss then is the practical application of a policy of immigration which would apply these general principles which the minister has laid down and with which we all agree. But we have not very much yet in the way of statements from the government as to their policy which would enable us to have a factual discussion of these estimates.
I hope that in the course of the discussion, perhaps when he replies to the general remarks which will be made, the minister will give us something more definite in terms of the government's objectives as to the
24, 1953	4337
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration numbers being brought in here and the ways in which arrangements will be made for those who come here to be received, housed and provided with employment. I am speaking of arrangements along the lines suggested by the member for Cape Breton South for integrating the policy of the minister's department with that of the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Resources and Development, so that full employment and housing can be carefully integrated with immigration programs. I think we would be interested also to know what sort of machinery there is for integrating the immigration program with the policies of such other departments as mines and technical surveys, and to some extent trade and commerce, in so far as those departments have the over-all responsibility for Canada's physical development and Canada's prosperity in terms of production and trade. It seems to me that all these things must be carefully co-ordinated with the immigration program.
As I have said, Mr. Chairman, there are these difficulties in the way of discussing immigration policy, difficulties arising out of the lack of any definite statement of objectives. There are, however, certain suggestions which could be made to the minister, and certain indications of positive shortcomings which I believe are presently observable in the government's policy. I believe that in Canada we must strive consciously to develop a home market for our production so that we will not be dependent as we have been in the past on foreign markets, and we will not be as vulnerable as we have been in the past to world-wide depressions. No one will suggest we can completely insulate ourselves from conditions in the world around us, but I do suggest Canada could put herself in a position where she would be a great deal less vulnerable to depressions outside our borders, over which we have no control, than she is at the present time as a result of her great dependence on foreign markets. It is a conscious effort which I say we should be making to give ourselves a more balanced economy. This calls, I believe, for an integrated program of industrial development and of our transportation resources, both railway and highway, as the population developed, all of which would use more people in production.
At the same time as these things increased the number of people gainfully employed and increased production, they would also provide a greater consuming market here at home because of these extra people gainfully employed. There would be an increased consumption, particularly of agricultural and

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration industrial products, which would be turned out as a result of the expansion which we all foresee. I should like to see more signs of a positive plan of that sort being followed by the government. At the moment I agree with those who say that there are not yet evidences that such a conscious plan is being followed. Consequently, I think that there is a weakness in our immigration policy in that we are missing the boat with respect to large numbers of desirable immigrants who would like to come to Canada and who, in fact, are going elsewhere. We are thus allowing large numbers of potentially first-class citizens to pass us by.
The minister outlined the difficulties with respect to a country such as France, which he said was a country receiving immigrants rather than a source of emigrants, yet I believe there could be more positive action taken to encourage immigration from France, as well as other countries. I want to make it clear that I am not suggesting any undue emphasis should be placed upon immigration from any one country. We should, I think, accept and encourage immigration from any country whose citizens are capable of being absorbed into the culture which we now have in Canada. I believe that, subject to that over-all principle to which we adhere as firmly as any other party, we do allow unnecessary obstacles to continue in the way of immigration from the United Kingdom. The figures which I have before me, and which I want to place on the record at this time and to follow up later in particular discussion with the minister, show that proportionately a larger number of emigrants from the United Kingdom go to Australia and New Zealand rather than to Canada.
The minister last night placed on the record figures showing an increase in the proportionate numbers of the immigrants coming to Canada and originating in the United Kingdom. That is true, Mr. Chairman, but it is also true to say, according to my information, that that does not represent an actual increase in immigrants from the point of view of heads of families. My information is that the increase in the proportion coming from the United Kingdom was largely owing to the fact that wives and children of those who had already come to Canada came out in quite large numbers last year to join their husbands and that it did not represent an initial or new inflow of immigrants in the sense of new potential heads of families in Canada but was rather the result of the reunion of families, those wives and children having been left in Britain coming out to join their husbands


and fathers who had already come out in previous years.
I believe that there are methods ready to hand which could be evolved and which would go a long way in removing the obstacles which, as I have said, are unnecessarily allowed to stand in the way of immigration to Canada from the United Kingdom. One of these-and I think the most important one-would be for this government to conclude an agreement with the British government, as Australia has done, under the British settlement act which provides for assistance by the British government for their people to emigrate to other commonwealth countries. I cannot understand why more efforts have not been made to conclude an agreement along those lines. The fact is, Mr. Chairman, that according to my information the assisted passage loan scheme is not all the help it might be to immigrants coming here from the United Kingdom. It might be much more helpful if an agreement under their commonwealth settlement act could be made in this country. There is, so far as I know, no obstacle in the way of concluding such an agreement. It has been concluded with other commonwealth countries and I am at a loss to understand why it has not been concluded between Canada and the United Kingdom.
Then in the third place there are, I believe, certain aspects of our policy which bring us dangerously near to the possibility of criticism on the ground of discrimination. Here I want to make it clear that I am not advocating any open-door policy, particularly with respect to immigration from eastern countries. I have said previously this morning and I repeat now that we must preserve the ethnic balance of our nation. We want to take our country as we have it now and we want to develop it; we do not want to change it. Hence in our immigration policy we must be careful to preserve that ethnic balance. That fact in itself, it seems to me, dispels any idea of the open-door policy. I want to make it quite clear that I subscribe to that view. But what I am thinking of here is particularly the position of Canadian citizens of East Indian origin. Incidentally, I mentioned this problem last night and the minister said he would reply in his remarks. I take it that he overlooked doing so, and I hope he will deal with the matter a little bit later on.
It must be pointed out that these people are British subjects and have always been British subjects as well as being at the present time, in the great majority of cases, Canadian citizens. These men who have

been Canadian citizens for many years-some of them, as I pointed out last night, were born Canadians-are yet under a definite disability in comparison with others when it comes to the question of bringing in their relations. There is an extremely strict limitation, a strict quota, of only 250 a year now applied to the admission of relatives of Canadian citizens of East Indian origin.
The result of that policy is that these men who have been here for many years, who are first-class citizens making a real contribution to the development of our country, running large and prosperous farms, large and prosperous lumber mills-I am speaking particularly of conditions in British Columbia- and providing employment to their own families and such relatives as they have in the country as well as to other Canadians, are yet unable to bring in their relatives, a right which is extended within limits of degrees of relationship to all other Canadian citizens. It is extended even to those Canadian citizens who have been here only just long enough to become Canadian citizens namely for the five-year period necessary. They can bring in their relatives provided they can guarantee them employment and provided that their relatives come within the classes of relatives admissible under the regulations. There is no quota applied to them. They can bring them in up to any number, provided they meet those requirements. But in the case of these Canadian citizens of East Indian origin who have been here for many years-in some cases the families have been here for from 30 to 40 years-and have otherwise complied with the regulations, they cannot bring in their relatives because of this extremely limited quota of 250 a year. I believe there is necessity for a review of that situation.
I believe that there could be quite easily worked out a more generous and a broader policy with ample safeguards with respect to the preservation of the ethnic balance in Canada-which would enable us to bring in further valuable citizens and still ensure that there would be no danger of any disproportionate amount of immigration from eastern countries.
Mr. Chairman, these are a few comments on some of the weaknesses which I believe exist in present government policy. They are of a rather general nature but then, as I have pointed out, it is not easy to be specific when the minister himself, with respect to the government's program of immigration, was not at all specific last night.
There are one or two other considerations arising out of his statement which I wish he would clear up for us. Last night the
24, 1953	4339
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration minister told us that 194,000 entered Canada in 1951 and that the figure for 1952 of 164,000 represented a substantial decrease from that peak figure. In reviewing the annual statement of his department I find it stated in two places that there were 211,200 immigrants in the period under review. I was wondering whether the minister-


Joseph Henry Harris: That is the fiscal year. The figures I gave last night were for the calendar year.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister points out that this report deals with the fiscal year whereas the statement deals with the calendar year. That would perhaps account for the difference.
There is another matter which I would hope he would clear up. That is with respect to the figures he gave. I am reading now from the text of his statement. I have not it in Hansard before me but it is on the third page of his text, at the end of the second complete paragraph on that page, where the minister states:
In the final months of the year, while the number of arrivals was substantial . . . with the number of dependents in each of the final three months of the year exceeding the number of those coming here as workers. The figures were 15,616 dependents and1 11,944 workers.
That makes a total of 26,000. Does that mean 26,000 per month? The minister referred to that number in each of the final three months, and that would be an unusually high figure. In fact it would exceed any monthly total for the year 1951, which we were told was the peak year. Is that 26,000 per month or 26,000 for the final three months?


Joseph Henry Harris: For the final three months.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I do not want to get into a question-and-answer type of discussion at this stage, although I do want to have these particular difficulties cleared up. I would also appreciate a statement when the minister replies as to the effect which they anticipate in the department will be felt with respect to immigration from European countries by the difficulty he mentioned which is going to stand in the way of immigration from the United Kingdom. I refer to the shortage of shipping. The minister pointed out that on account of the numbers going over to the coronation and booking return passages the availability of accommodation for immigrants was expected to be considerably curtailed. Is that expected to stand in the way of or to create difficulties with respect to immigration from continental Europe, or is it to be an obstacle only in the way of immigration from the United Kingdom?
4340	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
With these remarks and questions, Mr. Chairman, I think I can leave the subject for the time being, just emphasizing, however, before I sit down, what I believe to be generally agreed as a principle to be taken by our immigration policy, and that is that we want to develop Canada, not to change it. We believe that there are enormous opportunities for development, enormous opportunities awaiting the people who will come here. We do believe that the immigration policy should be carefully worked out so as to preserve the ethnic balance which we now have, and which itself will ensure that those coming here have the chance of being absorbed rapidly and easily into our Canadian way of life.
Subject only to that principle, and to the limitations that they must not be brought here in numbers beyond our capacity to absorb, in the physical as well as the cultural sense, this would be I believe a sound policy on immigration today. What the minister said the government intended to do, but which we do not see any signs of their doing, was to work out a program of immigration to stimulate Canadian growth and development rather than merely allowing to exist such immigration as will barely keep pace with the actual physical demands being made by the shortage of population in the country today.


Mr. Shaw:: Mr. Chairman, we too listened with considerable interest to the statement made by the minister last night. We must confess that we have to agree with the hon. member for Kamloops when he indicated that probably the statement was too vague and too indefinite. It was a broad statement, which was intended as a general statement, but we do feel that possibly the minister could have been more specific with respect to certain aspects of immigration also, and more specific with respect to plans for the future.


Mr. Low:: Especially during the seventh
and possibly the final session of this parliament.


Frederick Davis Shaw: As my hon. friend says,
especially during the seventh and possibly the final session of this parliament. We realize, however, that various statements have been made by the minister or by his departmental officials from time to time. We also realize that a number of publications have been printed to which we have had access, which have given us certain facts. We realize also that during the consideration of these estimates we shall have the opportunity of asking whatever searching questions we may desire


to ask, and we trust that all the information which we require will be forthcoming.
My colleagues and I have at all times supported a vigorous immigration policy; while hand in hand indicating that we would support a vigorous immigration policy we have also emphasized the fact that it should be a carefully thought out and well planned immigration policy. We realize fully the vastness of this great nation; the fact that it is underpopulated. We realize that its future strength and development will depend in no small measure upon the number of its people and possibly even more particularly upon the character of its people. We realize fully that through our immigration policy we can contribute immeasurably toward the welfare of thousands, tens of thousands and scores of thousands of persons who today find themselves domiciled in countries other than our own, people whose lives have been dislocated as a consequence of developments over which they have had no control.
We realize also that problems have definitely been created in various nations by circumstances over which they have no control, and while our assistance to these nations may take the form of material aid, we realize also that we can be of assistance to them in absorbing certain of their population which might be described as being under the circumstances surplus to their requirements.
We have never advocated nor supported the open-door policy as far as immigration is concerned, Mr. Chairman. But one of the things I feared most immediately after the cessation of hostilities was that in our great sympathy for unfortunate people we would throw our doors wide open and allow people to come in from everywhere, regardless of their backgrounds, regardless of the conditions of health and so forth. But I believe that we have kept our heads during that period, and while we have brought in a lot of people, at the same time I realize that we have maintained certain principles which I think are essential to the welfare of our nation.
I have said on more than one occasion that I desire to see the people who are coming to Canada under our immigration regulations of such a type as to offer some reasonable assurance that they can be fitted into our way of life. We feel that we must be absolutely certain that they have an appreciation of the democratic concept of human organizations. I have reason to believe that a good deal of care has been exercised by our teams of officers on the continent to try to convince themselves that these persons

do appreciate the democratic way of life and are prepared to fit into it, accept it and support it when they come to this country.
I commend the departmental officials for their attempts to see to it that those who come to our country enjoy a reasonably good standard of health.
However, I am going to be just a bit critical in this respect. In our desire to secure those who are of A-l health, as we say, probably we have been a bit unfair to some. In the field of communicable diseases we often have to be severe, as we say, although I have reason to believe that in instances, for example, where scar tissue resulting from an attack of pleurisy shows up in an X-ray, maybe as a precautionary measure we have not permitted those persons to come in. What can be done I am not certain, but it does occur to me on the basis of the cases which have come to my attention that we have been a bit unfair to certain persons; we have been unfair to persons wl^o may have been suffering from war wounds and from the scars of war.
I suggest that possibly there should be a re-examination of this aspect. I do now want to be misunderstood. I think we must clamp down tightly, as we have done, on communicable diseases, but I think some of these cases should be re-examined.
I realize fully that immigration is a federal responsibility, at least inasmuch as it applies to non-British persons. I have always felt that there should be a continuing measure of consultation between the federal immigration department and the provinces. Let us not forget that once these immigrants enter Canada the question of where they settle is not a matter over which the province has jurisdiction. We find in many instances that they will gather in large numbers within a province or even within a small section of a province. As far as schools, hospitals and so on are concerned, at least a temporary burden is created. Possibly we could reexamine that aspect and perhaps something could be done by way of financial assistance to help solve that problem.
In any event the immigration department should not hesitate to consult with and ask for general co-operation from the provinces. I think the provinces are quite reasonable in this respect and I believe this procedure would be for the welfare of our prospective immigrants.
I now want to say a word and in doing so I am speaking personally. When a person contemplates coming to this country I think it should be made clear to him and he should definitely understand that along
24, 1953	4341
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration with the great privileges we are prepared to extend to him there are responsibilities which he must assume. I cannot understand why there should be so many persons who have been here twenty, thirty or forty years without having acquired citizenship. As I say, I am speaking personally when I say this because I have not consulted with members of my group. I do think that it should be known to these people that they will be expected to take steps to acquire citizenship in the country. Perhaps I might be a little too severe in that respect if I were the one who was helping to determine policy, but it is just a suggestion I pass on to the minister.
I think if that fact were emphasized we would have more of these people acquiring citizenship after they had been here for the prescribed period of time.
There are one or two other matters I should like to refer to. One is the question of immigrants who are sponsored by farmers.
I believe they agree to spend a year on the farm of the sponsor. I have had quite a few complaints from farmers that these immigrants have not lived up to their agreement, whether it is in the form of a written contract or simply verbal. I think further consideration should be given to this matter. I have had quite a bit of correspondence which indicates that some rather unhappy situations have developed. I realize that there must be some method of ascertaining whether the conditions on the farm are such that the immigrant should be expected to remain there and carry out the undertaking they had given.
I think the time has come when consideration should be given to broadening our immigration policy with respect to those who are entitled to sponsor immigrants. Today it is held down to those who are close relatives. I heard of many cases where in my estimation the sponsor possessed all the characteristics which I would like to see in a sponsor and there was no reason to believe that the prospective immigrant would not have made a good Canadian citizen. But because of the restrictions in the act the officials had to refuse the application. I think the time has come when a further examination should be made of this aspect of the whole question because I believe we are doing an injustice to a great many people by carrying out that policy.
I do not want to be too critical because I must confess I do not know all the problems, but it seems to me that in the case of immigrants from the British Isles, and I say this after having come in contact with many cases, too much time is allowed to elapse in
4342	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration processing the application. I appreciate that there is a problem of transportation involved, but I am not dealing with that at the moment.
I recall the case of two sisters who were sponsored by their uncle. Their applications were submitted in the early fall but were not finalized until away on in the spring. They had to make two cancellations of their passages and as a matter of fact reached the point where they would have to go back to be re-examined medically because of the time that had elapsed from the first medical examination.
Everyone realizes that the men in charge of these matters have been making conscientious efforts to do a good job. I think by and large they have done a mighty good job. But I do feel that too much time is taken up in processing these applications.
There are in the British Isles many persons of limited means who are desirous of coming to Canada and I think we should go beyond this question of assisted passages. Many of these prospective immigrants are told of the great nation called Canada and the wonderful opportunities that will accrue to them if they come over. They are told, "You come over here and, if you are a farmer, contract to work on a farm; you Will acquire knowledge as to Canadian farming methods and then you will be able to farm for yourself."
The hon. member for Cape Breton South reminded us that the idea of grabbing an axe and going out and carving a farm out of the bush and then constructing a home is just something that does not happen today. To set yourself up on a farm, even in the most moderate fashion, is a pretty expensive proposition. Some of these immigrants have come to me and said that they were generally happy with this great country, that they recognized it as a wonderful country, but they seemed to think that possibly they had been misled a little. They complained that they found that they could not set themselves up.
I think the hon. member for Cape Breton South had a point when he said that the question of the availability of housing and all these things should become part of our immigration policy. We are doing these people no kindness if we take them out of one situation not to their liking and drop them into another situation which is still not to their liking. All these things should be considered as part of one great problem.
I do not think I agree with what the hon. member for Cape Breton South said with regard to capitalism. In fact I am afraid that


I disagree. When the hon. member was discussing unemployment and so on I was reminded of something I had read only a few days ago which came out of Czechoslovakia. In giving the people reasons for not giving them a 40-hour week the government indicated that the 40-hour week applied only to capitalist countries because by working only 40 hours the worker would have plenty of time left to undermine capitalism. They were told that once they had undermined capitalism then the 40-hour week would make no sense; they could then work 24 hours a day for the good of the country. I do not know just why that came into my mind at that time, but perhaps it was as a consequence of the hon. member's reference to capitalism.
I have no desire to detain the committee. We have not too much to complain about as far as our immigration policy is concerned. We think it could be improved in some respects. I suppose these things should be done with caution, but they may have been too cautious in certain respects. Possibly during the consideration of the individual items we will be able to secure further information and give expression to our views in that regard.


Mr. Riley:: Mr. Chairman, first of all I should like to congratulate the minister and the officials of his department on the sane and realistic manner in which they have been carrying out government policy on immigration.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What is it? Do you know?


Daniel Aloysius Riley: I see that the hon. member for Kamloops wants to make another speech. He may continue after I have finished.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I want to listen to yours.


Daniel Aloysius Riley: I am sure you will enjoy it and you may learn something.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I am always willing.


Daniel Aloysius Riley: I should like to point out to the minister, however, one or two small problems which have caused some concern in my mind. I came across an incident recently with respect to one of these new probationary Canadians who had come into the country as a domestic and was in the home of a friend of mine where there were a number of children. These new Canadians, particularly the younger ones, have in many instances been indoctrinated in a way of life which is different from and at variance with our own, and although they are anxious to come to this country and fit themselves into our way of life nevertheless there remain in them certain

vestiges of thinking which are not strictly in accordance with the Canadian way of thinking.
In this particular case the young lady employed as a domestic in the home from time to time made comparisons between the head of the state from which she came and our own sovereign. That may be understandable because of the respect that had been built up in her mind for the head of the state from which she came. But what made this appear serious to me was that, having been here only a few months, she was anticipating becoming a teacher in one of our schools as soon as she had a better grasp of our language. This may not be a problem for the minister or his department, but I do think, where there is a possibility of some of these new or probationary Canadians going into the school teaching profession in our country before they have attained a firm grasp of our concept of democracy, that the need for great caution should be emphasized to the school boards, municipalities and provinces which might be acting as hiring agencies.
Another problem is indicated by the table put on the record last evening by the minister showing the destination of new Canadians coming into the country. I note that out of 164,498 immigrants to the country last year only 790 were destined to the province of New Brunswick. I suggest to the minister that through the officials of his department he should try to encourage a more even distribution of new Canadians. We in the province of New Brunswick are not so concerned with the bringing in of labourers as we are with the bringing in of people who will work our land and fit into the different sections of the population where their services can be used without disrupting the general economy of the province. I think this is something on which some effort should be concentrated because we need population of the proper type in the province of New Brunswick. I think that the officials of the minister's department could, without too much effort, encourage some of these immigrants to settle in our part of the country.
When they come to Canada they have the preconceived idea that the only place in which they can make a living for themselves is west of the southeastern boundary of the province of Quebec. That is not correct. I think it could be pointed out to immigrants that those who have settled in the maritime provinces have fitted very well into our general social and economic structure and that with very few exceptions they are making for themselves a very good life in this new land.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
I should also like to point out to the minister that we have in the port city of Saint John a new immigration station which has been described and accepted generally not only in this country but all over the continent-and perhaps we can extend that comparison to many of the commonwealth countries which are encouraging immigration at the present time-as second to none on the continent. It is not the largest of course but it is geared to accommodate a large number of immigrants. These immigration facilities are not being put to the best use. All summer they are left virtually unstaffed with probably no more than a dozen or so new Canadians filtering through from other countries. I think that is a shame.
I do not hold the Department of Citizenship and Immigration entirely responsible, but I would point out to the minister that perhaps he or the officials of his department could encourage the shipping companies to bring immigrants into the port of Saint John. I realize that it is generally considered as a winter port. That belief exists but Saint John, like Halifax, is an all year round port and one which should be used as much as possible in bringing new Canadians into the country because it would not only provide extra commerce for the community but would also give immigrants the best of impressions of the new land in which they were arriving.
In connection with the immigration station we have a very competent and courteous customs service. I have often heard most sincere words of praise directed to the customs service in the city of Saint John. The customs facilities that have been established in the new immigration station are such as to provide the most courteous and competent system of handling the baggage not only of immigrants but of all travellers. The same applies to the immigration authorities there. The Red Cross people in the community have become so interested in the new facilities that they have provided a very fine nursery for the little children who are brought in by their parents to become future citizens of the country.
A great deal of voluntary effort on the part of the citizens of Saint John and Lancaster is directed toward making this first impression of new Canadians a warm and a lasting one. In addition there are a number of other organizations such as the Catholic Women's League and different church organizations which are directing a great deal of voluntary effort along these lines and they want to do more. They are very intent upon providing all the comforts which can be made available as well as the warmest welcome which can possibly be conceived for these new citizens.
4344	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
We have such fine facilities at Saint John that I would even recommend them to stowaways-because the detention quarters are very comfortable and well though firmly supervised. I point out to the house, as I have in the past to the officials of the department, that in Saint John we have the best immigration facilities in the country but they are not being used to good advantage. The Canadian Pacific Railway directs a great number of immigrants through our port during the wintertime but I think that other shipping lines should also take an interest in bringing immigrants to that port. I do not say that we should get all of the immigrants there but as large a number as possible should be directed to that port which has the most modern and best equipped facilities.


Mr. Hees:: Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that when a government brings people to its country, it should do everything it can to see that they have some place to live when they arrive. I believe it is pretty obvious that this government is doing just the reverse.
I would like to cite the actual dominion bureau of statistics figures for last year, showing how the situation deteriorated during that twelve months alone. Last year we built 73,000 new houses, but during the year the net new families added to our population were 93,000, so net new families exceeded houses built by 20,000.
The Curtis report, the report of a government-sponsored survey, made a number of years ago, estimated that during every year we have 13,500 houses which need to be replaced because of obsolescence. It is therefore obvious that during 1952 alone we built 33,500 fewer houses than were needed to keep pace with the net new families added, and the houses which should have been replaced owing to obsolescence. Now, Mr. Chairman, that situation has been going on for at least the past 18 years while this government has been in office. Today, by actual statistics, we are short half a million houses in this country.


The Chairman:: Order. I hope that the hon. member intends to relate his remarks on housing to the subject of immigration. Otherwise, I cannot allow him to proceed.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, I intend to do so. As the hon. member for Cape Breton South has said, housing and immigration are today very much allied subjects. I am dealing with the matter briefly, and I am not making a housing speech. I am showing what this government has to do in the way of producing houses in order to consider that it is


properly looking after the people who come to this country.
I believe that if the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration had been really on the job, he would have been continually pressing his colleague, the Minister of Resources and Development, to get more houses built for the people who are being brought to the country. The fact is just the reverse. In the three years during which the minister has held his portfolio, the number of houses that were built each year has decreased steadily, and last year we built 20 per cent fewer houses than we built in the first year that he held office.
Immigrants are finding it increasingly difficult to secure places to live. It is harder to find a place to live this year than it was three years ago. We are bringing more and more people to the country but we are building fewer and fewer houses, and I ask, Mr. Chairman, whether that make sense. I think the obvious answer is that it does not.
The increasing competition for the limited number of houses we have in this country is making it exceedingly difficult for the citizens who have lived here for many years, let alone those who are new arrivals. The increasing demand for the decreasing supply of housing is causing people who have lived here for many years, as well as those who are arriving in this country every day, to pay exorbitant rents, and many people simply cannot find a place in which to live.
I see the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration shaking his head.


Joseph Henry Harris: I was just shaking my head over your words "people who have lived here for many years". If you would relate your remarks to immigrants you would be in order.


George Harris Hees: I am talking of people whom this government has brought in as immigrants in the past few years. I think that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration should be interested in people whom this country brought in as immigrants five years or ten years ago, and those are the people I am talking about. Those people are finding it increasingly difficult to secure accommodation.
As I said to the Minister of Resources and Development the other day, I can take the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to places in Toronto where people with four or five children are living in one room and paying as much as $60 a month rent-and they are scared to death that they will be asked to move because of the children. If the minister and this government consider those to be the kind of conditions under which good citizens can be produced, then I am afraid I must very strongly disagree with them.

I outlined in the house three days ago, as reported at page 4172 of Hansard, what other countries are doing to build houses not only for people who come to their shores but for people who have lived there all their lives. If the government would follow the pattern set by other countries-and it is a very simple pattern-then we could double the house construction which is being carried on at the present time. That would make it possible for the people of this country, and for people whom this government brought to this country a few years ago, to find places to live at a reasonable rent.
I would like now to deal with another matter, Mr. Chairman, which is very closely related to immigration. It deals with a statement made two days ago by Mr. Jean Desy, director of the international service of the C.B.C., whose job it is to tell people all over the world what an attractive place Canada is to live in. He is supposed to be our prime salesman; yet, when speaking to the Richelieu Club in Quebec on Wednesday, and according to a prepared statement given out in advance to the Canadian press and obviously intended to be given very great publicity, Mr. Desy made the following statement, and I quote his words as they appear both in the prepared text and in their exact reproduction by the newspaper Le Canada on April 23.


An hon. Member:: What paper?


George Harris Hees: Le Canada. Mr. Desy said:
The two principal ethnic groups in Canada have natural, historical and constitutional rights to which new Canadians of other origin have no claim.
I believe, Mr. Chairman, that his statement is calculated to antagonize not only people who have recently come to this country from Europe and other parts of the world, but also those who have lived here for many years. Many of the people to whom Mr. Desy refers as having no natural, historical or constitutional rights have become very distinguished citizens of this country, and are among the best citizens we have.
I think it is a very strange statement indeed to come from a government employee whose job it is to speak to people all over the world telling them what an attractive place Canada is. I believe that by this statement he has said that Canada is a country in which we have two classes of citizens. I do not believe that is the kind of statement that is calculated to make people want to come to Canada.


Joseph Henry Harris: Does the hon. member not know that the English and French languages are guaranteed by the constitution, and that no other languages are?
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


George Harris Hees: Yes, I do, and so does every other citizen of Canada. I think that that is not the sort of thing that has to be repeated to get people to come to this country. Those of us who live here know that we have our language rights, and that is something we take for granted. I do not think a statement like this-which was intended to be given great publicity, or it would not have been given out as a prepared statement to the Canadian press with the obvious objective of getting nation-wide publicity-is the kind of statement calculated to make people who do not speak either English or French feel very much at home when they come to Canada. I would be very much surprised if the minister thinks so either.
I think it is interesting to remember that a very short time ago the government was quite willing to allow the director of the international service of the C.B.C., Mr. Desy, to spend $25,000 on a half-hour broadcast directed to Brazil.


The Deputy Chairman:: I think the hon. member will agree that I have allowed him a good deal of leeway in this debate. I know that he will forgive me if I say that, in my opinion, he did not relate his remarks on housing to the subject of immigration as he assured me he would do. Now the hon. member is attempting to discuss a question which certainly has no connection with immigration, and I must ask him to confine his remarks to this subject.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, I feel that Mr. Desy and his international service are very much connected with immigration.


Joseph Henry Harris: We do not use it in any form for immigration.


George Harris Hees: Then I should like to know the purpose of these international broadcasts.


Joseph Henry Harris: You ask that of the Department of External Affairs or the C.B.C. when the time comes.


George Harris Hees: All I say is that these broadcasts affect immigration acutely because the people to whom they are beamed listen to them and gain an impression of Canada. In many cases, these people have no other way of knowing anything about Canada. The broadcast to Brazil, about which I am speaking, Mr. Chairman, was, I believe, designed to tell the people in Brazil something about Canada, with the idea of inducing people from Brazil to come to Canada. It seems to me, and this is all I have to say about it, very strange that the government is willing to spend $25,000 on a broadcast to a country 3,000 miles away, when it permits its employee to make a much publicized statement-which was obviously intended to be given great publicity or it would
4346	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration not have been given out as a prepared statement to the Canadian press-which will obviously antagonize over a million people who live within our borders. I think our immigration would be greatly assisted if this government instructed the director of the international service of the C.B.C. to confine himself to telling people throughout the world what a fine place Canada is, and not to make statements calculated to antagonize not only the people we are bringing to this country this year but those who have come in in the years that have gone by.


Mr. Stewart (Winnipeg North):: There are some questions in my mind concerning immigration which the minister may answer later in the debate, and some comments which I have to make on the government's policy. There will be more brickbats than bouquets in my comments, but I would not like to minimize in any way my regard for what is a very hard-working staff. I appreciate the courtesy and attention which I have invariably received from them. It is also fair to say that, so far as the minister is concerned personally, whenever I have brought to his attention any case of obvious injustice or one in which some humanity was expected, the minister always treated me very fairly indeed.
Now, one of the questions in my mind arises out of a statement made by the minister last year in this debate. At page 4263 of Hansard for July 4, 1952, the minister said, in discussing policy:
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.
What is the government's view of the absorptive capacity? After all, it is quite conceivable that one could state a figure today for absorptive capacity which would be completely false within a week or a month or longer. If the government is doing any planning at all in immigration, it must have some concept of the absorptive capacity of the country, and I should like to know if any figure has been arrived at. This figure, of course, would have much to do with the policy of the government.
I, like others in this debate, have read with some care the statement the minister made yesterday. While I think the latter part of it would be an excellent speech to give to the Canadian Club, I am not so sure that we in this club appreciate that sort of rhetoric. We would rather have some more facts. The minister says that he would like to take a very brief look at the future. Later he says that we cannot fulfil our destiny and develop our resources with a population of only a
[Mr. Hees.l	|

little more than 14 j million; that is a truism. He says that the government is fully aware that natural increase will not alone provide the population we must have; that is a truism. He says that the government will continue its program of immigration to stimulate Canadian growth and Canadian development; undoubtedly, it will. But we want to know very precisely what this program is.
The minister goes on by saying that, to give effect to this, we are now selecting immigrants on a very wide basis. The basis is not yet wide enough, because I do not think the government has dropped its colour bars. I am not prepared to accept a policy which still raises the colour bar so far as immigration is concerned. I do not know whether or not this is hinted in that quotation from the minister's statement of last year which I read, concerning the fundamental character of our people. What, after all, is the fundamental character of our people? Do we differ so much from other people? Are we not a nation of saints and sinners, with the great majority of us somewhere in between? Have we not at one time found in our society those who murder as well as those who live in accordance with the concept of justice and mercy? I am not sure that I know what is the fundamental character 'of any nation. I only hope this is not a euphemism for skin pigmentation.
Another point which I have to mention, and I might as well do it now, concerns what I call very literally these terminological inexactitudes. I do not use that phrase in its usual connotation. I bring to the minister's attention again the erroneous use of the word "racial". I wish we could get away from it because there is neither scientific validity nor sense to it in the way in which it is used. The minister gives us a long table on page 4325 of Hansard for April 23, 1953, headed "Immigration to Canada by racial origin from overseas and totals from the United States." Now, I submit that there is no such thing as a Scottish race or an Irish race, or to take two different examples, the Belgian race or the Swiss. Are the Flemings and Walloons of Belgian races? What about the people who live within the cantons of Switzerland? Are you going to say they are of the Swiss race? Ethnically the term is outmoded, and I should like to see it removed.
Further down on the list we see "Hebrews".
I do not know whether the connotation here is race or religion. If it is race, there are Hebrews of oriental descent who profess the Hebrew faith; there are those of Negro descent and those of Caucasian descent whose faith is the Hebrew religion. I doubt if Hebrews are a race and therefore surely the word means

nothing at all. If it is used on a religious basis, then it is the only way in which it is used in this whole table. Again, we are given a table of those coming from northern European countries. But again I suggest that this table has merely been copied from previous years and I want to suggest further that it is time that it was changed. I must point out that geographically Esthonia, Latvia and Lithuania are in northern Europe; yet they are included, for some reason which I do not know, amongst the other countries. I wish these details, which are so annoying and which no government publication ought to have, could be changed and changed rapidly.
We have been told-and of course we are usually told by orators in some state of sobriety or another at some after-dinner speech-that this is a country of vast open spaces, and some go as far as to say that we are going to have 150 million people in this country within a few years. Others are much more cautious and conservative. But what I think we have to remember is that much of Canada or much of these vast spaces at the moment seems to be economically worthless and to consist of land on which we can settle no immigrants.
It is a mistake to believe that the physical formation of the country has anything to do with its absorptive capacity. It is conceivable -and this has happened in the past-that under certain economic conditions the absorptive capacity of this country could be nil. If we are going to have planned immigration-and I think the government will agree that they at least indulge in some form of planning although we consider it to be inadequate-then, as the hon. member for Cape Breton South said this morning, it must have some relation to the employment situation in the country.
Where you have a situation such as we have here in Canada now where there is a great capital expansion going on, obviously there is need and there is room for more immigration. But on the other hand, when you realize that we are short for our own people possibly anything between 700,000 and 750,000 homes, one could argue that this is not a time at all in which to encourage immigration. I say to the minister, as others have said, that if the government is going to have a planned policy of immigration, they must pay far more attention to the housing situation as it exists in this country. After all, planning has got to mean something more than merely financial or ethnic considerations.
My criticism here may be unjust, but the minister can answer me. I think there has
24, 1953	4347
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration been a tendency to have immigration to Canada at the wrong time of the year. Too frequently immigrants have been given leftover space on ships coming to this side of the Atlantic. They have had to take the space whenever they could get it, so they have landed here perhaps in the winter or in the early spring. They have landed at a time when seasonal unemployment was rising to its peak, and they have created some animosity, of course, amongst other workers in this country.
The minister has said that the coronation may perhaps affect the number of immigrants coming to Canada. But I would point out that the best time for immigrants to come here is in the late spring and the early summer, a time which will give them a chance to find a job, to find some sort of shelter and to become, at least to some extent, integrated into Canadian life before winter hits us. If there is going to be a great outgoing of North Americans to the other side for the coronation this summer, I assume that many of the ships are coming here empty from Britain to get passengers, and there should be space in them for immigrants to come to Canada.
Some comment has been made about the position of the organized workers towards immigration. Organized labour is not opposed to immigration. But what creates doubts amongst organized labour is the feeling that immigrants are coming into the country and going into the labour market when the unemployment figures are at their very highest. As a matter of fact, I believe those going into industry each year amount to less than one per cent of the total labour force, and normally such a small percentage would not be felt. But when they arrive at the wrong time of the year, when seasonal unemployment is high, opposition arises.
We have spoken of this matter before, and there may have been some change in policy of which I know nothing; but I want to refer again to the necessity for doing something more than merely giving loans to the heads of families who come over here. When an immigrant head of a family comes to Canada with the help of a loan, he has first of all got to face the fact that he has to support two homes, the home he lives in here and the one where his family is. That constitutes an extra and heavy burden on him. Furthermore, he has to repay the loan. He must save to do that. He has to send money so that he can bring his family over. He therefore finds himself in an intolerable economic situation. It would be a much better policy for the government to decide
4348	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration that the family will be brought over as a unit; the wage earner can then have that much of his overhead decreased and of course have a greater opportunity of repayment.
Criticisms have been made in the past- and now and again I have had reason to complain-about what seems to us to be rather unnecessary delay in the department. I remember a case which I brought to the attention of the department a year or two ago, and in which the officials said that this potential immigrant suffered from trachoma. I had doctors' certificates given to me by the wife of this man-and they were certificates signed by quite eminent eye specialists in Rome and Paris-saying that he did not have trachoma but rather that he suffered from what the doctors called a granulated cornea. I took the matter up with some medical friends of mine in Winnipeg and they said the doctor could easily make a mistake in such a case but undoubtedly it is the duty of the doctor responsible to the immigration authorities to be extremely careful. I am not holding the doctor responsible for this matter, but I felt there was an undue lapse of time in this case between the various medical examinations. Ultimately the department decided that granulated cornea was the right diagnosis. This man has come here and has fitted in very well. As a matter of fact he has had other examinations by eye specialists in Winnipeg who say that in their opinion they do not think he ever had trachoma. But the long delays between medical examinations could be obviated, more than has been the case in the past.
Another group who have complained- perhaps "group" is the wrong word-let me say a number of members of a group who have complained are those of Chinese ancestry. They have said that it has been a mistake to try to verify beyond doubt the age of a young man or a young woman by X-ray alone. It has been pointed out to me that there are no scientific data on the physical measurements of Chinese, that we are still working on a hit or miss method, and that anthropological surface measurements show great diversity even amongst Chinese, depending upon their descent, the climate in which they have lived, the sort of food they have received and their general environment. Hence we cannot work out any set of figures or any set of measurements which will cover all Chinese.
There is no objection whatsoever to the use of radiological films but I think they should be used to substantiate a case rather than as a substitute for proof. There must


be ways of establishing facts other than by merely saying that a radiological film shows that this man is over the age at which we permit anyone to come to this country. It is possible that there may be an error of between three to five years on either side amongst those people over 18. I should like the minister to comment as to the extent to which radiological evidence is used to decide the age of potential immigrants.
There is another matter on which I am not going to speak because my colleague the hon. member for York South has said he is going to deal with it. I refer to the case of British subjects from the British West Indies who many of us feel have been unfairly treated, and I support his contentions. There is a subject which was brought up last year by several hon. members, namely the question of the quota which is applied to people from India, Pakistan and Ceylon. There is a quota of 150 on those coming from India, 100 from Pakistan and 50 from Ceylon. I myself think that a quota is rather an unnecessary thing in view of the fact that quota allowances have never been fairly arrived at. The quota suggests to me a discrimination of some sort, and I do not think it is right that in the commonwealth of nations one group should be upon a quota basis while the others are not. These are matters which the minister will probably be able to answer when he is summing up this part of his estimates.


Mr. Cote (Maiapedia-Maiane):: I had no
intention to take part in this debate, but I think it is my duty to challenge a quotation made by the hon. member for Broadview with regard to a speech made in Quebec by the Hon. Jean Desy, or at least to challenge the way he put it and the inference that may be drawn from it. I think the sentence should be read not only in conformity with the text, which may be reproduced exactly in the newspaper mentioned, but also in relation to the rest of his speech.
The implication that the hon. member tried to put forward is not a correct one, I am sure. I do not think anyone in this country or anywhere else can reflect on the Hon. Jean Desy, whose reputation as our ambassador to several countries is high, and suggest that he has tried to create dissension amongst loyalist Canadian citizens, either former loyalists or new ones.
The Hon. Jean Desy was being questioned on external affairs and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, to which he is responsible, and not on immigration. In these two places no reflection has been cast upon him because of the way he was handling his job,

which is to be responsible for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's international service.
My third point is that while I do not want to impute motives to my hon. friend, I do suggest that he has not read the full text of Mr. Desy's speech. I am sure that if he had done so he would not have made the remarks he did, and I am sure that he will not succeed in the implication that he has tried to make. If that implication is there, then it is the responsibility of the hon. member for Broadview and not that of Mr. Desy.


Mr. Robichaud:: Mr. Chairman-


Louis-René Beaudoin: If the hon. member intends to make lengthy remarks perhaps we should call it one o'clock.
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at 2.30 p.m.


Albany M. Robichaud: Mr. Chairman, immigration is not a problem of major importance to my native province of New Brunswick; hence my remarks before this committee this afternoon will be brief. In answer to a question which I placed on the order paper the minister of immigration informed me that during a period extending from 1949 to 1952 inclusive only 3,888 immigrants to Canada gave New Brunswick as their destination. How many actually stayed in our province we do not know and apparently cannot find out as I am informed statistics are not available.
I was interested this forenoon listening to the remarks of the hon. member for Saint John-Albert when he deplored the little use that was made by the department of immigration of the excellent facilities of the port of Saint John for immigration purposes. I am happy to be able to say to the hon. member for Saint John-Albert that, on this occasion at least, I am in complete agreement with what he said.
I realize that the hon. member for Saint John-Albert was in a rather delicate position this morning as he did not consider it advisable or wise to appear to be critical of the department of immigration. I will venture to go one step further this afternoon than the hon. member for Saint John-Albert and assert that in my submission there has been apparent discrimination against the port of Saint John, New Brunswick, by the immigration authorities.
In answer to a question which I put on the order paper in February the minister of immigration stated on March 11, as reported in Hansard of that day, that from 1949 to 1952, out of a total of 255,344 immigrants who entered Canada through the ports of Halifax, 68108-275
24, 1953	4349
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Nova Scotia and Saint John, New Brunswick, 241,792 entered through the port of Halifax, Nova Scotia, as against the pitiful number of 13,552 who entered through our port of Saint John, New Brunswick. If my mathematics are correct, that means that 93 and a fraction per cent of those immigrants entered Canada through the port of Halifax, Nova Scotia, while only 6 and a fraction per cent entered Canada through our good port of Saint John.
I submit that this is something which should be looked into. I submit respectfully to the minister and his officials something which was pointed out this morning by the hon. member for Saint John-Albert, that we have very excellent facilities in the port of Saint John.
With the exception that I have referred to, as I said, immigration is not a major problem for the province of New Brunswick and I would not participate in this debate were it not that I wish to consider the problem of immigration objectively for a brief time and on a purely national level. My remarks will be directed first to the moral aspect of the problem and before I conclude my remarks I propose to bring to the attention of the minister and the committee recommendations that have been made by a recognized body of businessmen in connection with certain social and economic angles of the immigration picture.
The 1952 annual meeting of the leaders of the Roman Catholic church in Canada held in Ottawa last October decided in favour of a program to speed immigration. The archbishops and bishops of the church were of the opinion that countries, such as Canada, with unoccupied land should open their doors to people from overpopulated countries. In a prepared statement which was reported in the Canadian press of October 9 last, they said:
Immigration is a social question with many aspects. The church does not wish to pass judgment on the details of policy regarding immigration. but does point out to all that immigration is a moral question, subject to moral laws which should direct and inspire those whose duty it is to determine a policy of immigration.
The policy that governs the flow of immigration should be truly democratic and any regulations that would restrict, in an arbitrary manner, the emigration of people from an overpopulated country, or of refugees from persecuted lands would be contrary to the fundamental principles of justice and true peace.
The prelates went further and urged that action should be taken to see that families were not broken up by immigration, and their statement on this point contained the following:
Broken homes constitute a deplorable and disastrous problem, particularly when the head of the family is separated from wife and children; public and voluntary agencies should make an immediate and determined effort to reunite these families whose members already have permission to enter the country.
4350	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
The leaders of the Church of England and of the United Church of Canada have also expressed similar views on the problem of immigration. An editorial entitled "Population Problem" which appeared in the Moncton Daily Times during the week of October 12, 1952, referred to the meeting of the Roman Catholic archbishops and bishops in the following terms:
It is worth noting that archbishops and bishops of the Roman Catholic church at a meeting in Ottawa Thursday, went on record in a prepared statement urging countries with unoccupied land opening their doors to people from overpopulated countries. Recently leaders in the Church of England and the United Church voiced similar convictions. If one of the principal causes of international strife is to be eliminated a just and practical immigration policy by the "have" countries seems necessary.
Speaking recently on the occasion of the consecration of the new bishop of St. Boniface, Manitoba, His Excellency Bishop Blais, the apostolic delegate to Canada, His Excellency Monseigneur Antoniutti said, as reported in the French newspaper, L'Action Catholique of Quebec:
(Translation):
It therefore follows that all men enjoy a fundamental right which cannot be denied them: the right to immigrate from one country into another, in an orderly way no doubt, but also with freedom, so as to have access to material wealth. It behooves society to find the means of ensuring that right. Men without land have the right to cultivate unused lands and the people of those countries that do not have sufficient natural resources have a right to the abundant natural resources of countries without sufficient manpower.
(Text):
The leaders of our church, as well as the leaders of other churches or denominations, have not only the right but the duty, in my submission, to interest themselves in such a grave problem as that of immigration inasmuch as the problem carries a serious moral aspect and raises the primary right of man to enjoy the natural wealth and resources expressly created for man's enjoyment. Our church leaders have made it very clear indeed that it was not their intention nor was it their purpose to intervene in the technique or administrative side of immigration. They have advanced a formula for a policy of really and truly democratic and fair immigration as opposed to an exclusive and preferential system.
Before concluding, Mr. Chairman, I wish to direct the attention of the minister to a statement which was made recently by the board of trade of Montreal and which is to be found in their official newspaper, Commerce-Montreal, in its issue of February [DOT]la-st. It reads as follows:

(Translation):
Upon the request for intervention in favour of mass immigration to Canada from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, your chamber deemed it advisable to reassert its position on the matter. To put it briefly your chamber is of the opinion that immigration should be planned in accordance with Canada's economic and social needs. It believes that we should bring to Canada only those immigrants who can readily adapt themselves.
Moreover, your chamber is of the opinion that the federal government should find a solution to the housing problem before bringing large numbers of immigrants to Canada.
(Text):
Further on in the same article there is the following statement:
(Translation):
Your chamber has forwarded to the federal and provincial governments the brief announced in its annual report on French immigration to Canada. A relatively small number of French people are now emigrating to Canada.
Although most of the newcomers have found at least temporary employment, nevertheless their position remains very uneasy. The integration of these French people Into the French Canadian group undoubtedly raises very real problems. It is most urgent that an organization with the necessary means at its disposal be entrusted with the task of solving this problem.
( Text):
In conclusion, I submit to the minister that there is indeed need for a more realistic and a better socialized policy of immigration. As reported in the Moncton Daily Times on the 12th December, 1952, Mr. Robert Rae, president of the Dominion Bank, added his voice as a leading businessman to those in the church and industrial spheres in emphasizing the urgency of a positive, expansive and well controlled immigration program. Mr. Rae, deploring the absence of such a policy in the present department of immigration, is quoted as saying:
This lack In a country as wealthy and underpopulated as Canada is to be deplored on both social and economic grounds.
I therefore urge the minister and his officials to seriously consider the recommendations of the leaders not only of my church but of the Church of England and the United Church of Canada emphasizing the importance of the moral aspect of the problem of immigration, and I also urge the minister to give serious thought and study to these recommendations as well as to those emanating from well organized and well recognized groups of businessmen deploring the absence in Canada of a positive, expansive and well controlled policy on the all-important immigration issue.


Mr. Mclvor:: Mr. Chairman, in past years when I have approached the minister and some of his officials about bringing people to Canada from different places they have been honest enough to tell me that this is the law and we are not prepared to break


it even for you. That is my own language but that is the way I took it. I know it is true that they will follow the law and we have no right, no matter what the local need is, to expect them to break the law because they will not do so. I tried to get a tailor brought out from Italy for a local tailoring establishment because the owner of the establishment could not get a tailor any place in Canada. Because the tailor in Italy was not a relative the request was refused, and of course my friend thought that the government was terribly hard. He may get the tailor here in some other way. However, I should like to say that if a thing is right and you will stick to it the officials will see that you are right.
There is the outstanding example of a Hebrew family we brought out from Poland just two weeks before the war. I tried for two years to get that family brought out here. They landed in Fort William. The rest of their relatives have not been heard from since. They do not know where their uncles and aunts are unless they are across the river Jordan. A boy and girl of that family have been a credit to Canada. They have graduated in arts and are determined now to give Canada their best because Canada saved the lives of their father and mother and their own lives. The boy, who could not speak a word of English when he came here, won first prize for public speaking in our collegiate.
I give this example to show that the officials have still got a heart. While there may be a housing shortage, so far as immigrants seeking to come to Fort William are concerned housing is no problem. Those who want them brought here have houses and jobs for them. As I see it, we need far more immigrants in Canada. You can travel almost any place in Quebec and there is vacant land. Around Fort William we have splendid pieces of land that will grow beautiful potatoes. Therefore we need immigrants to cultivate the land and who will carry their own load.
As I said the other day, I am very pleased that the department of immigration has been getting a number of immigrants from the north of Ireland. I asked then if there was any possibility of getting more of them because men and women coming from the north of Ireland are able to take their places with Canadians anywhere in any type of work for which they are qualified. I congratulate the department on allowing more Irish immigrants to come to Canada, because we believe they are good immigrants.
I must admit that I have tried in vain to bring a young Chinaman out from China but 68108-275i
24, 1953	4351
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration it seemed that the quota was complete. I thought the boy was coming out to go to school in Fort William but an X-ray was taken of him and he was declared to be older than the father and mother said he was. I congratulate the department on having the age limit raised to 25 years and I am therefore hopeful that this potential Canadian citizen will get to Fort William. His father has a restaurant, a fine paying business, and he needs the boy there. The father is an old man both in his years and in his ways. I hope to see the boy come to Fort William.
I have another case of the same kind but because the age limit is raised the second boy may qualify. When the two boys come to Fort William, as I expect they will, we are going to have a real reception for those prospective Canadian citizens.
I just wish to thank the officials for the courtesy they have given me during the years. I could not have been better treated and, in fact, if I asked for something which they found was contrary to the law they were very kind in saying "no"; and "no" should be said to any member of parliament who wants an official to break the law of Canada.
Mr. Nose worthy: As the hon. member for Winnipeg North indicated this morning, I wish to discuss for a few minutes the question of immigration from the British West Indies. In my opinion, the policy which is followed by the government in regard to immigrants from the British West Indies is immigration by discrimination on the basis of colour. I know that the minister will object and say that such is not the case, but from all I can gather it is about the only conclusion one can reach regarding the government's present policy.
About a year ago I took up with the minister a special case. It was the case of a coloured Canadian citizen, a former employee of one of the railway companies, a man against whose character as a Canadian citizen there was no blot, a man who had lived a fairly exemplary life in his community, who wanted to bring his granddaughter from Barbados. I wrote to the minister and the minister in his reply said:
I have had the case reviewed by the immigration branch to ascertain whether some grounds could not be found for extending favourable consideration. It is quite evident, however, that Miss Braithwaite . . .
That was the young lady's name-
-does not qualify for admission under present regulations and in the circumstances no encouragement can be offered.
The minister goes on to say:
In reply to your last paragraph one of the conditions for admission to Canada is that immigrants should be able readily to become adapted and integrated into the life of the community within a reasonable time after their entry. In the light of
4352	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
experience it would be unrealistic to say that immigrants who have spent the greater part of their life in tropical or sub-tropical countries become readily adapted to the Canadian mode of life which, to no small extent, is determined by climatic conditions. It is a matter of record
-the minister said-
-that natives of such countries are more apt to break down in health than immigrants from countries where the climate is more akin to that of Canada. It is equally true that, generally speaking, persons from tropical or sub-tropical countries find it more difficult to succeed in the highly competitive Canadian economy. It would be quite contrary to fact, however, to infer from this that coloured immigrants are debarred from Canada. As in the past, favourable consideration is given in cases where the exceptional qualifications of the applicant offer reasonable assurance that he will find a satisfactory level in the Canadian community or where refusal would constitute extreme hardship on humanitarian grounds.
So, judging by the minister's statement, people from the British West Indies-British subjects from the British West Indies-are not considered to be suitable immigrants to Canada on the grounds that they cannot readily adapt themselves to the climatic conditions of our country or stand up against the competition of modern life in Canada, and that they are not likely to remain healthy in Canada. In order to find out just what the records were, because the minister in his letter said it is a matter of record, I put some questions on the order paper. I asked:
1.	How many persons of British West Indies origin are at present living in Canada?
The answer was:
Information not available.
2.	How many persons have entered Canada from the British West Indies during each of the five years 1947-1951, inclusive?
The answer was:
Statistics are not available as to the number of persons who have entered Canada-[DOT]


An hon. Member:: Some record.


Mr. Noseworihy:: That is the record. I then asked:
3.	How many applicants for entry to Canada from the British West Indies have been refused entry during each of the five years 1947-1951, inclusive?
The answer was:
Statistics on rejections are not maintained by country of origin.
4.	For what reasons were these applicants rejected and how many were rejected for each of these reasons?
The answer to that question was:
See answer to No. 3.
Which was:
Statistics on rejections are not maintained . . .
My next question was:
5.	How many students were admitted to Canada from the British West Indies for the purpose of studying in Canada during each of the years 19471951, inclusive?


The answer was:
Students admitted to Canada from the commonwealth countries are shown as British subjects and are not listed by country of origin. It is not possible, therefore, to give the number of students coming from the British West Indies.
6.	How many of these students applied for permanent residence in Canada?
The answer to that was:
Information not available.
The next question was:
7.	How many of these student applicants were granted permanent residence in Canada?
Again the answer was:
Information not available.
My final question was:
8.	Are any statistics available to show how immigrants to Canada from the British West Indies compare with immigrants from other warm climate countries in the following respects:	(a) health
records; (b) wages or salaries earned; (c) unemployment records; (d) profession and occupation followed; (e) public liabilities?
The answer was:
Statistics not available.
I gather from the answers to these eight questions-every single one of which was answered by the statement that statistics are not available or that records are not available-that, when the minister states in his letter to me that it is a matter of record, someone was judging the case on the basis of some theory that has probably been laid down by the department of immigration for some time rather than by any actual statistics or records.
Now, I sent a copy of that letter to Mr. Braithwaite, and Mr. Braithwaite sent his letter on to his union. He belongs to the brotherhood of sleeping car operators, a brotherhood that is affiliated with the American Federation of Labor and with the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada. It is often interesting for us to see ourselves as others see us, and I want to call to the minister's attention what the editor of the official organ of that union has to say regarding the minister's answers. These comments are contained in an editorial published in a paper called "The Black Worker", for March, 1952. The editor takes up the minister's answers point by point.
First, the minister says:
I have had the case reviewed by the immigration branch ... It is quite evident, however, that Miss Braithwaite does not qualify for admission under the present regulations . . .
The editor says:
Think of it! Here is a citizen of Canada who cannot even bring his granddaughter to Canada to see him. Why?
Not because she is a communist or a subversive of any stripe, who might plot and conspire against the government; not because she is an indigent

and may become a charge upon the government; not because she possesses some contaminating and contagious disease; but solely because she is a negro living in the West Indies!
That is the interpretation which the people affected place upon the minister's statement. His next statement is as follows:
In reply to your last paragraph, one of the conditions for admission to Canada is that immigrants should be able readily to become adapted and integrated into the life of the community . . .
Then the editorial raises this question:
What about the negroes already in Canada who came from the West Indies. We have heard no sound claim made to the effect that they have failed in adaptation or integration into the life of the community.
If a census were taken of the negroes in Canada from the West Indies, it would be found that percentagewise, they will compare favourably, (1) as law-abiding citizens; (2) as reliable and dependable workers; (3) as persons of good health; (4) as citizens non-dependent upon charity; (5) as citizens answering the call of their country to arms; (6) as church-goers, with the white citizens of the dominion of Canada.
The editorial goes on to point out that there are a great number of people from the West Indies living in Canada and occupying prominent positions; some are in the professions and some are active in the trade unions. The article makes a fairly good case of the charge that, apparently, there are few facts to support the statement with which the minister justifies his policy. The writer concludes that the policy followed by the department is pretty well a case of discrimination against British subjects on the basis of colour.
There are no statistics available in Canada, for instance, to show that the people from the West Indies do not do as well in this country, so far as health is concerned, or that they do not become integrated into the life *of the community as well as do people from southern Italy, where the climate is very much the same, or people from Florida, where the climate is not too different.
There is abundant evidence to show that in Chicago, and other northern cities of the United States where the climate is not so very different from that of Toronto, these immigrants have not been affected, nor has their health broken down by reason of climatic conditions. At a time when the Department of Labour has before us a bill outlawing discrimination by employers on the ground of race or colour, it ill behooves the department of immigration to pursue a discriminatory policy on that basis, particularly in regard to other British subjects. In the world today there are about two billion coloured people who are not yet communists. History may well turn upon whether or not these two billion coloured people throw in their lot with the western world or with the communist world.
24, 1953	4353
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
In the light of the attitude of these coloured races of Africa, Asia and India towards the western world, and in the light of their present attitude towards white people generally, I suggest that the minister revise his policy, particularly at this time when a number of people in Canada are contemplating the possibility of the British West Indies becoming a part of our dominion. I suggest that the minister give some attention to that revision and the present policy regarding immigrants from the British West Indies.


Mr. Maclnnis:: There is one matter or
perhaps two that I should like to comment on briefly while we are considering this item of the minister's estimates. I should like to say a word, in general, about our immigration policy, but I shall not take the time of the committee to do that because the hon. member for Cape Breton South came close enough to my point of view on the matter that I can accept what he said as being said on my behalf. The hon. member for York South has made reference to a matter in which he felt there was discrimination because of colour. I am going to raise another matter which is not on quite the same basis. I have reference to the Indians who are in Canada, and who are debarred from bringing relatives into the country on the same basis as, let us say, Europeans. They are debarred from doing so because of a proviso to P.C. 2743.


Mr. Green:: No; that is wiped out.


Donald MacInnis: 
I understand that some of those people now want to return to Canada, and I am not so sure that some of them have not done so. However, I believe they are finding some difficulty in returning. I would ask the minister to take that matter under consideration. If we want to be friendly with the Japanese nation, I would say that by doing justice to these people we would be doing more towards cementing that friendship than we accomplish by making a great ado about Prince Akihito. As for myself, I felt that demonstration to be a little bit cheap, considering what we have done to these people.
In all earnestness I suggest to the minister that he take into consideration those two questions I have mentioned, and give them his serious attention. I hope he will see what he can do to remove the reasons for discontent and what is actually discrimination in the case of the East Indians, and that he will also take up the other matter I mentioned.
I hope the minister will notice that I have not indulged in any criticism. There is no one whom I would be sorrier to criticize, and I should hate to be obliged to do so on some future occasion.


Mr. Pearkes:: Mr. Chairman, there is a matter I wish to bring to the attention of the minister, namely the plight of the Canadian citizens of oriental origin who have relatives still in the Far East. Canadian Chinese still experience considerable difficulty in obtaining permission for their close relatives to come to this country. While I am not in any way advocating any general increase in the amount of oriental immigration, yet for anyone who lives, as I do, in close proximity to a number of our Canadian Chinese, it is not hard to realize the anguish which parents suffer because they are not able to bring their children from communist China to this country; and that statement applies also to other people who have close relatives in communist China and cannot get them out. When I am at home I do not think a week passes that some Chinese Canadian does not come and visit me and ask me if I can do something to help him bring his child, or an aged parent or some other close relative to this country. As the minister knows, I have had a fairly extensive correspondence with his department on some cases.
When these relatives have been able to get as far as Hong Kong, owing to various difficulties there, it seems particularly difficult for them to get out of that country and come to Canada. I know that since the Chinese Immigration Act was repealed there has been an increase in the number of

Chinese who have come here, and that the classes of relatives that can be brought out have been extended so that now husbands, unmarried children up to 19, and up to 21 in certain circumstances, and, as the hon. member for Fort William intimated, even children up to the age of 25, under very special circumstances, may be brought in; but the number of cases of children between the ages of 21 and 25 admitted to this country is extremely limited.
When I was speaking on this subject a couple of years ago the minister said that one of the main difficulties was in the shortage of staff at the Hong Kong office. Surely that situation should have been remedied by this time, and there should now be adequate staff to cope with those refugees who have reached Hong Kong. But according to the table that was placed on Hansard yesterday, at page 4325, there has been a reduction of over 300 Chinese immigrants to this country in the last year. The figures for 1951 are given as 2,697, as opposed to 2,313 for the calendar year 1952. I admit that these figures compare favourably with those that have been given for such years as 1949, when only some 794 were brought into this country.
The Canadian Chinese, particularly those living on Vancouver island, for many years have been maintaining their relatives who have reached Hong Kong. They have been sending large sums of money to them. They have also been sending money by devious methods to their relatives who still remain on the mainland of China, but they feel that their relatives there do not get all the money that is sent to them. They believe that there is a system of extortion or blackmail to which considerable donations have to be made by the people in China before they receive the money which their Canadian relatives have sent to them.
As for the lot of those unfortunate people who are in Hong Kong, they are simply stranded there. In a great many instances they are not able to return to their native villages in communist China because of the danger to their very lives if they went back home. I am not going to raise any individual cases because I have taken them up with the minister and his departmental officials; but I do feel that if anything could be done during this period of stress to enable some more of the close relatives to come to Canada, and not place such very strict regulations upon tests which are applied, it would be of great assistance to these people.
I have had cases where affidavits have been produced, not only by Chinese relatives
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration but also by the white employers on Vancouver island, declaring that certain children were born at certain times. Unfortunately, when the individual has presented himself at the Hong Kong office he has not been granted a permit because it has been extraordinarily difficult for him to prove that he is the child of the parent who has made application for his entry to Canada, and he has found it difficult to answer some of the questions which are put to him in connection with other relatives living in China, uncles and so forth.
The question of age also crops up again and again. They are still having these X-ray pictures taken, and quite frequently they do not establish or confirm the age that has been given. There is a feeling that, owing to the malnutrition of the children during the past 20 years, the bone development has not been normal. Therefore I do make a plea for our Canadian Chinese citizens, who are loyal citizens, and urge that a little more latitude be granted to them in connection with bringing their close relatives to this country; and, where reasonable evidence is produced, that at least the benefit of the doubt should be given to the child who presents himself at the Hong Kong office.
Very much the same factors apply to our East Indian citizens. They have been granted citizenship rights, but of course they do not enjoy all the citizenship rights in so far as bringing their close relatives into this country is concerned. The East Indians live in fairly substantial numbers around Victoria. They have made their contribution to the economic and cultural life of British Columbia. They are law-abiding, hard-working citizens, and they feel very keenly that they are not permitted to bring in their close relatives.
I believe that certain quotas have been set. I am not quite certain, but I think it is between 200 and 250 for India and Pakistan. I did notice that, according to the table which was published in Hansard, and to which I have referred already, only 168 East Indians were permitted to come into Canada last year, and in the year before that only 97. So it seems to me that we are nowhere near reaching the quota, if it is, as has already been said here, between 200 and 250. And yet I have been told that in making application, or supporting applications being made- I am thinking particularly of one man who served in the British army as a driver in the first war and was very anxious to come to Canada to join relatives here, but the quota had already been filled.
I must ask the minister what the quota is. If it is what I have been led to believe, that
4356	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 200, it is quite obvious that it has not been filled in the last two years. While applications of those applying for this year's quota have not been granted, I do hope it will be possible to give consideration to those who are eligible to come to this country and that the full quota be admitted.


Mr. Sinnott:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words on immigration and I join with previous speakers in thanking the minister for the co-operation he has given me in the past in regard to certain cases. The hon. member for York South referred to British Honduras or British West Indies. In my particular case a young gentleman would have been deprived of his Canadian citizenship if it had not been for the co-operation which I received from the minister. This young man is now teaching in one of the schools in Springfield constituency, and I think he is one of the kindliest, most intelligent and well-mannered persons we would hope to see.
They were having some difficulty in obtaining a teacher for this particular district, and as this man seemed to meet their needs they came to me and expressed the wish that he come back again. The result was that through the co-operation of the minister he is now back on the job and the whole district is satisfied. I imagine there are many more men with similar ability in British Honduras.
While I have no objection to immigration,
I think those on the other side should be very watchful to see that immigrants who come to this country are carefully selected. This should not be on the basis of racial discrimination or anything like that, but they should meet the medical and political qualifications.
I have referred before to a couple who slipped through the immigration department a year or two ago when suffering from a serious malady. They first stayed with relatives on a farm in Windsor and then they came to western Canada where they soon found themselves in the position where they could not take care of themselves. For medical aid and other assistance, they came to the municipality where I reside. That couple is now costing the municipality $40 a month or $480 a year. After ten years it will have cost that municipality $4,800 in addition to the medical attention they will have received.
That is not a good type of immigration. That is the type of immigrant we should keep away from this country. The people of this municipality have had placed upon their shoulders a financial burden when actually they have enough of a financial burden to take care of their own families.
[Mr. Pearkes.l

I urge upon the minister to make sure that in future the screening is carefully done, because this is a serious matter. It would be almost impossible to deport these people after they have been here for so long, but they are proving a serious burden upon the municipality in which I reside. During the past year, we know, certain officials on the other side have been quite lax. I believe this matter has been taken care of. I urge the minister to make sure that some of the things which have happened in the past do not recur in the future.
I should like to say a word about our farm immigration. Applications are being made by people to come to this country as farm workers which have never been lived up to. Many of these immigrants have been taken from the railway station and have never reached the farm at all. They have gone into industry in the city. This sort of thing should be stopped. The type of immigrant who will adopt these fraudulent means is not a good type of citizen to begin with. Strong measures should be taken to see that those who come here to work on a farm should live up to their obligations.
Representing this municipality as I have for some years, I can readily understand the financial burden that may be placed upon a municipality by the wrong kind of immigration. This matter has been raised by hon. members on the other side. While we are on this subject we should thoroughly discuss and attempt to mould this policy in order that we can get the most out of it.
This parliament is the parent governing body in Canada. While immigration is good for the country, at times it does cause a shortage of housing, a shortage of schools and a shortage of teachers. I think as a federal parliament we could go much farther toward helping these hard-pressed municipalities. All one needs to do is to look around and see the shortage there is in school rooms and how much it is costing these municipalities to take care of these citizens who are coming to this country. It is a good thing to have them come here, but I think that we as a federal parliament should go further to help these municipalities with their present difficulties.


Mr. Thatcher:: Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that the main issue which should be decided by this debate is, how many immigrants does Canada want in 1953? I notice that last evening the minister did not state the figure which the government believed should come in, and I noticed also that most speakers so far have not been specific. I say quite frankly, I believe that we have not been

bringing enough people to Canada this past year or so. I certainly believe that our immigration policy should be based on our absorptive capacity. But I am going to suggest that certainly in the last year that absorptive capacity has not been reached.
Certain remarks have been made in the house today that we have to watch unemployment. Of course that is sensible, but I repeat what I have said earlier, that every time a person picks up a daily newspaper he finds not columns of "help wanted" advertisements but page after page. I have in my hand at the moment today's Toronto Telegram and there are six or seven pages of help wanted advertisements seeking bricklayers, electricians, painters, domestics, unskilled workers, shippers, service station attendants, teachers, chauffeurs, bookkeepers and so on.


An hon. Member:: Hardware men.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Yes, certainly; hardware men are wanted.


An hon. Member:: Hardware merchants.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: In my opinion, no matter what city you mention, there is an acute and all-pervading labour shortage today. Many schools in my province are closed, and I believe also in other provinces, because teachers cannot be obtained. We have hospitals that are having great difficulty in carrying on operations, because they cannot get nurses and attendants. As has been mentioned by the hon. member for Springfield, many farmers cannot get farm help. Factories have had to curtail operations because in some cases they cannot obtain skilled workers.
I think there is room in Canada for thousands of domestics. I believe there is also room for a great many more unskilled workers. The way our industry is expanding today, there are not even enough workmen for those industries that are past the blueprint stage, let alone enough men for future expansion. Suppose the Minister of Defence Production decides this year that the nation is going to go ahead with the St. Lawrence seaway. Where would we get the men to build it? What would happen if the Minister of Agriculture decided to go ahead with the South Saskatchewan river project? Where would he get 10,000 workmen to build it? What if our gold mines should open again? Where are we going to get men to operate them?


An hon. Member:: From the unemployed.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I say it is folly for Canada to be short of workmen as we are today, when there are so many people in western Europe who want to emigrate to Canada.
24, 1953	4357
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration During the current session of parliament I have heard two main problems discussed again and again; the loss of our overseas markets for farm products, and high taxation. I think immigration can help solve both these problems or at least alleviate them. If we brought more people to our country we would have a larger and more stable domestic market for our farm products, at a time when we have lost many of our English markets. I also think that if immigration were more extensive the fantastic tax burden which Canadians are called upon to bear today could be spread out among more people. If the tax bill against production in Canada cannot be lowered, and apparently the government feels it cannot, then it seems to me it is sensible for us to step up production by immigration. It seems logical to me that the more rapidly our population increases, the sooner we can expect tax relief.
We have heard a great deal about the problems of the railroads during this session. I suggest that a larger population would ease some of the problems they are facing. I think greater immigration is needed for reasons of defence. In view of these facts, I suggest that the minister should set his immigration target for 1953 at a higher level than last year. I do not want to be too radical, so what I suggest is that we accept the suggestion made in Toronto last night by Mr. C. H. Millard, the head of one of our largest trade unions. Mr. Millard was speaking at a panel discussion held for the benefit of the Toronto business and professional club. In this morning's Globe and Mail there is the following report:
Mr. Millard, who insisted on seeking some concrete conclusion from the discussion, finally suggested Canada in the next ten years should admit about 2 per cent of its present population annually in immigration.
I believe that would work out to between
280.000	and 300,000 persons per year. I should like to suggest that our immediate objective for this year should be at least
300.000	people. In making that suggestion, I am very pleased to have the company of Mr. Millard, that eminent trade union leader.
There are only one or two other things I would suggest to the minister. I believe that the number of emigrants from Great Britain to this country fell down very badly last year. We only brought out 44,000 people. There are two reasons for that. The first is that the minister has withdrawn a good deal of the assistance on transportation which was formerly provided. The second is that the British government will not allow emigrants from that country to take out sufficient money. I think the minister should be more generous with assisted passages. At
4358	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration the same time the government should approach the British authorities to see if some system cannot be worked out whereby their government will permit emigrants from that country to bring more money to Canada.
I think Canada is also going to miss the boat if we do not bring in more people from Germany. I had hoped that when Chancellor Adenauer was here last week discussions would have been held as the result of which a good many more German immigrants would have been permitted to come to Canada. I say again that I do not favour unregulated immigration; it is only sensible that it should be planned. But I suggest that we should plan for an objective of 300,000 this year and not
160,000	as in 1952.


Mr. Dinsdale:: Mr. Chairman, I think it is significant that during the present session we have had an excellent discussion on external affairs and that today we find many members on all sides of the house taking an interest in matters pertaining to immigration. I feel that these two subjects are closely related. The problem of population is quite intimately connected with some of the difficulties that are facing us in the field of external affairs at the present time. I do not want to hold up the committee unduly, but I think it is rather important that a more or less extended discussion should take place at this time so that we may have a chance to direct the thinking of the public throughout Canada to this very important subject, and also because there have been very limited opportunities on other occasions to deal with matters pertaining to immigration.
This is the first time since I became a member of the house that we have had an extended discussion on immigration. As one who comes from a western constituency, I am most interested in the problems of immigration because we belong to that part of Canada which is sometimes described as "the halfempty half-continent". As I listened to the previous speaker, the hon. member for Moose Jaw, it seemed to me that he also was expressing a viewpoint that might be regarded as peculiar to the west. There is an old poem that describes the spirit of the west and contains a line something like this: "Out where the world is in the making, that's where the west begins". As we look at our lack of human resources on the prairies it is evident that that statement is definitely true because in our huge geographic areas we have tremendous spaces with very limited population. The province of Manitoba, for example, has only 800,000 citizens, a very small group indeed.
As the discussion has proceeded, many of the points that I had in mind have been mentioned so that accordingly my remarks


will be abbreviated. I agree that from the western viewpoint many of our problems would be overcome if we could solve the difficulty of depopulation. As the hon. member for Moose Jaw mentioned, we have agricultural problems that are with us continually, mainly those relating to the marketing of our products including our grain. A population increase would provide a domestic market which would alleviate that difficulty to a considerable extent. The same applies to the perennial railway problem and to all the other matters that have been mentioned by the previous speakers.
I have tried in my reading and my investigation of the subject since I came to Ottawa to discover the policy of the government in specific terms regarding immigration. The closest one can come to it is the rather vague statement made last July by the minister, which has already been quoted in the house several times today, that immigration is to take place not exceeding the absorptive capacity of the country and without altering the fundamental character of our people. Also there is to be immigration of such persons as are likely to contribute to our national life.
That statement was followed by a radio statement by the chief of the information service of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, Mr. E. B. Reid. He said that one important factor in Canadian immigration is its flexibility; so that in addition to the absorptive capacity and the policy which attempts to maintain what is described as the fundamental character of our nation we also have now this further principle of flexibility.
However, along with other hon. members of this chamber I have the feeling that each one of these categories is much too vague to provide the specific information that we need to understand the problem of immigration. Several members have queried "absorptive capacity." It is vague; it is not a fixed quantity, and not a fixed entity. The truth of my statement is indicated by the further principle laid down by the chief of the information service to the effect that immigration must be flexible. I think it would be helpful, as we proceed in our discussion of the departmental estimates, if we could come to more realistic grips with the program and the policy of immigration.
In the few minutes at my disposal I wish to deal with some of the principles of immigration as I understand them. During the past year we have seen a decline in the inflow of new citizens from 194,000 to 164,000 which is something like 30,000; but at the same time we have seen a percentage increase in the number of new citizens coming from the United Kingdom.


Joseph Henry Harris: Not only a percentage increase but an actual increase.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Supply-Citizenship and Immigration then, notwithstanding the downward trend in the influx of what might be called displaced persons, there is still a large reservoir available for movement to this country.
So far as I can gather through an examination of the records there seems to be a new trend in immigration to this country, which might be regarded as beginning last year and is no doubt due to the increasing selectivity that is being emphasized in connection with the movement of new citizens to Canada. Formerly there was a greater tendency to accept these new immigrants regardless of their skills. It would seem now that a screening process is being carried out much more closely. We find that last year there was a tendency for the largest number of immigrants to be people with clerical skills, trade training and even a good many in the professional categories. I have here a breakdown of the figures for the first ten months of 1952. Of the 146,000 who entered during that period, nearly 69,000 were classed as dependents of new citizens who had arrived earlier. Among the 77,000 with occupations, there were more than 20,000 skilled workers, more than 6,000 clerical workers, and over 6,000 professional people. There was also a group of about 18,000 who were classed as unskilled and semi-skilled. They were in the minority, as we can see. At the same time, around
16,000	immigrants entered who classified themselves as farmers.
This indicates that greater care is being taken in regard to selectivity. This may help to deal with the problem mentioned by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, where you have vast numbers of immigrants competing with our large reservoir of untrained and unskilled labour. It is significant too, I feel, in investigating the facts concerning the new trends in immigration, to discover that those people who are specially trained are not necessarily coming to this country to better themselves in a material way. In fact the professional group, until they become assimilated and integrated with our population, are going to find their lot much more difficult than it was in their native land. I would say that those who are coming to seek political refuge in this country should make an ideal type of citizen, because they are largely leaving Europe because of the pressure from communism.
However, this does produce a special difficulty, and I want to deal with it for a moment. Most of these immigrants with skills and trade training tend to gravitate to the urban areas. Speaking in broad terms, we find that at least half of them have come to Ontario. It has been estimated that a quarter have settled in the Toronto district,

that is a quarter of all the immigrants since the end of world war II. About 124,000 have settled in Quebec. This presents a special problem from the standpoint of assimilation or integration. In the minister's general remarks we were given no specific information in this regard, and I am wondering what program the government is carrying out by way of helping to integrate these people into our urban areas. It would be much easier to assimilate the newcomers into a rural district, because I believe the community life is much closer and more personal there. It is difficult enough even for a native-born Canadian who comes from another part of Canada to adapt himself to the big, blooming, buzzing confusion which makes up our modern urban life.
We do have some general information regarding the assimilation program being carried on by the government, but I should like to get some information on the following points. It was announced some time ago in the house that the provincial governments were going to be assisted financially in providing educational facilities. I am wondering how many provincial governments have taken advantage of that offer by the federal government, and how successfully the program is operating. From personal contact with the liaison officers of the department, I know that an excellent job is being done in the various regions of Canada. The liaison officer in Winnipeg, in particular, has been active not only in that city but in the western part of Manitoba, trying to encourage voluntary groups in the communities to participate in the responsibility of assimilation and to assist these newcomers in making a successful adjustment to the land of their adoption.
I feel that the government, so far as we can see, has not been nearly as enthusiastic as it should have been concerning immigration. Indeed, most of the immigrants who have come to this country have done so under their own steam and without too much encouragement from official sources. The government, in a general way also, has provided textbooks and facilities to help in the process of adjustment. In addition to the government effort in this regard, I feel it is essentially a community problem. These people are moving into community areas which have all sorts of social welfare services. They have all sorts of institutions and groups such as the Y.M.C.A., the Y.W.C.A., the Legions, the I.O.D.E., Catholic women's leagues, churches, labour unions and so forth. It seems to me that the solution to the problem of absorbing new citizens into our way of life is largely going to be found

through the co-operation and co-ordinated efforts of local community groups.
I am sure that if that were done the absorptive capacity might be expanded even as far as the hon. member for Moose Jaw has mentioned, to nearly 300,000 instead of making calculations based on 150,000 or 200,000 as has been the annual average since world war II. If we are going to deal with the urgent Canadian need for an increase in population the whole matter has to be viewed not from the standpoint of flexibility or the vague principles of policy that have been enunciated thus far, but from the viewpoint of necessity. We hear people express the opinion repeatedly that the next 25 years in Canadian development is going to be the important period. That the twentieth century belongs to Canada is a sentiment that has been expressed many times. But with 14 or 14J million as our population we are hardly going to be able to exploit the rich resources of the north and the rich resources that are only now coming to light in the western part of Canada. If we are to realize the golden age of Canadian development and progress, it will depend largely upon the launching of a comprehensive immigration program operating to bring in many more people than have thus far arrived in this country.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to speak at length because I think the policy for this group was well presented to the house by the hon. member for Cape Breton South who, in my opinion, gave a comprehensive, all-inclusive review of the immigration situation and of the general point of view of this group.
I fully appreciate the difficulties the minister encounters. I am sure the question of immigration produces for the minister many problems that are not apparent on the surface and do not meet the public eye. Personally, from the general comments I have heard throughout the country, I think it is generally conceded that the minister has done a fairly good job in connection with an extremely difficult matter.
I must express my appreciation of the courtesy of the officials of the minister's department. When I have had occasion to bring various cases to their attention, I have always found them to be most courteous and willing to go to a great deal of trouble to get files, to supply me with information and so on.
I am rising to speak, Mr. Chairman, because this is a subject which is causing serious concern among quite a large number of my constituents, especially those people
24, 1953	436I
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration who are organized in trade unions. I have had considerable correspondence from a number of trade unions in my constituency and from the interior of British Columbia on the question of immigration. I know the Canadian Congress of Labour and the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada are quite concerned about immigration policy. They are both in support of a planned immigration policy, but are greatly concerned that immigrants should not be brought into this country during periods of unemployment, particularly the winter months.
In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, I might say that a good number of unions in British Columbia are opposed to immigration entirely under present circumstances. That opposition seems to be somewhat unusual, but it is occasioned by a fear on the part of the loggers and the miners that they are going to be unemployed in the year ahead. It is occasioned by quite a large amount of unemployment among miners owing to the closing down of some base metal mines, and the closing down of a considerable number of operations in the logging industry. It is expected that quite a few thousand loggers will not return to work this summer as usual because of the restriction of overseas lumber markets and the lessening of activity in the lumber industry. Hence it is natural that these people should want to protect their livelihood and not want people brought to Canada to fill jobs while they are seeking employment.
In that connection I want to read from a news release issued jointly by the Department of Labour and the dominion bureau of statistics. It is marked "For release 11 a.m., Wednesday, April 22, 1953." From that we can see that it is fairly well up to date. This is April 24, if I can see the calendar correctly. This is what is stated on page 2:
The balance of the labour force consisted of 172,000 persons who did not work during the survey week and were looking for work. These, along with 12,000 who worked part of the week but also looked for work, make a total of 184,000 who were actively seeking jobs or more work during the week.
And again:
Applications for employment on hand at national employment service offices on March 19 totalled 407,742, an increase of 6,000 over the figure for February 19 and an increase of 25,500 over the total for March 20, 1952. Although the Canada total increased by 6,000 during the past month, three regions had fewer applications on file at March 19 than on February 19 (Atlantic 400, Ontario 4,300 and Pacific 6,200) while two regions experienced an increase in applications on file (Quebec 16,000, prairie 1,000). Compared with the situation a year ago all regions except Ontario have a larger number of applications on file although the increase is more marked in Quebec
4362	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration (21,700) and Atlantic (8,800) than in Pacific (7,200) and prairie (6,000), while the decrease in Ontario amounts to 18,300.
It is quite reasonable for unemployed loggers and miners to look with a certain amount of disfavour on the bringing to this country of large numbers of immigrants unless their employment is planned and they have jobs to go to without displacing others. Just a few minutes ago the hon. member for Springfield made some reference to people who have come from Europe to go on farms. I will tell you this, Mr. Chairman. From my experience a very small percentage of those people stayed on the farms. Some of them simply said they were farmers in order to come to Canada, and in some cases they never went near the farm. I have had farmers tell me that the men never turned up, and that in other cases they stayed on the farm for a month or two and then disappeared somewhere in this country. I expect some of them are now running secondhand stores.


Clarence Gillis: Or a hot dog stand.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Or a hot dog stand, as the hon. member for Cape Breton South says. One can well understand the concern of good Canadians over the competition they may experience from immigrants from Europe if these people are brought in here without consideration to the unemployment situation and are dumped on the labour market and taken advantage of by some employer, as they have been by some companies in British Columbia. While good Canadians who served in the last world war walk the streets of Vancouver displaced persons from Europe are taking their jobs at Kitimat and other places. I speak with some heat on this matter because some of these boys have talked to me about this situation, and have written to me about it.
Mention was made previously this afternoon of the fact that Mr. Millard suggested that we can absorb from 280,000 to 300,000 people yearly in Canada. I want to say without any equivocation that in my opinion Mr. Millard is talking through his hat. He does not understand the whole situation. He is speaking, I presume, from his own limited experience. I do not take any more notice of Mr. Millard's statement than I do of one by John Brown, the lumberman in my riding, or one by Tom Jones, the miner in another district. He is simply expressing his opinion. For anyone to suggest that fixed figure for immigration into this country at this time without giving consideration to our changing tempo of economic development, to the changing unemployment situation and to the housing situation as it exists generally in this country, is certainly not speaking with a knowledge of the concern of labour in Canada at this time.
[Mr. Herridge.l


Clarence Gillis: Hear, hear.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I note that I have a "hear, hear" from the hon. member for Cape Breton South.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Millard probably had not seen the figures that you just put on the record.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Possibly Mr. Millard spoke without a knowledge of those figures and particularly of the situation in British Columbia today. But I am speaking for the miners, the loggers and the workers of West Kootenay, and I have no hesitation in saying what I have said this afternoon. I am sure I speak also for the majority of the workers in British Columbia. I respect the minister for what he has done to direct immigration. It is a most difficult question. We want to receive into this country all the people that we can properly absorb and place in employment, but we do not want to receive into this country people who are going to push Canadians out of jobs and out of housing when housing is in such short supply at the present time.


Mr. Gagnon:: Hear, hear.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am very pleased to hear that I have the support of the hon. member for Chicoutimi. Chicoutimi is very close to Kootenay in pronunciation and I note that we are on common ground in this respect. Immigration policy is a serious matter for a great number of Canadians. I have had Canadian Legion branches write to me about this matter, also trade unions in my district, and other organizations. It is causing particular concern now. I trust that the minister will not listen to some of the suggestions he has heard this afternoon with respect to bringing persons into this country without giving careful consideration to the employment situation and our capacity to absorb them and house them.
Very recently I received a most interesting pamphlet from the international labour office entitled "Organization of Migration into Canada" by V. C. Phelan of the international labour office. I read this with a great deal of interest. It is a very interesting and informative document with respect to migration into Canada. On page 10 I find a paragraph having to do with administration, and I should like to quote these words:
It is the responsibility of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and his department to endeavour to determine in advance the absorptive capacity of Canada for immigration over a selected period, to discover where suitable and admissible immigrants are available, to control the flow and reduce any risk of failure of the absorptive capacity, and to arrange and execute the selection and processing of the prospective immigrants.

That is a very good definition of the responsibility of the minister and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, and I recognize that it is a very heavy responsibility. They are dealing with so many intangibles and probabilities. I fully appreciate all the difficulties the department has had, but I do urge that the utmost care be exercised in the selection of immigrants. We have brought into this country a great number of good people but in addition to those, Mr. Chairman, I have met some phonies. If I were the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration they would be back where they came from overnight.
I look upon Canadian citizenship as something to be proud of. I have met some people who have come to this country who were most ungrateful for what Canada has done by permitting them to come to this country and giving them an opportunity to live the life of the average Canadian. Therefore I do urge that the strictest selection be made; that we let people come to this country who will fit into our democratic way of life and appreciate the fact that we are giving them a great opportunity by admitting them to this country, and that here they will have an opportunity to live in one of the best countries in the world.
Second, Mr. Chairman, I do urge that our immigration be planned to meet the actual needs of expanding industry and agriculture, and that every consideration be given to the concern of the trade unions with respect to the absorptive capacity of the country. Do not bring people into this country to displace Canadian workers from jobs; do not bring people into this country to displace or compete with Canadian workers for scarce housing and accommodation.
Before I conclude I do want to support what the hon. member for Nanaimo had to say with respect to Chinese immigration. I have had quite a bit to do with them. I see the minister perking up and smiling at me. I have known a good number of Chinese in the interior of British Columbia for a great many years. The Chinese population of my constituency are regarded with affection by the old-timers who have known these people for years. There is something about a Chinese citizen who has been in this country for 20, 30 or 40 years which engenders the respect of Canadian citizens. They have some qualities that are appreciated by Canadians generally, and I support fully the plea by the hon. member for Nanaimo for bringing in the relatives of these Chinese citizens who have resided in this country for a long time. These people are producers. You will never find a Chinese citizen looking for relief or assistance
24, 1953	4363
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration of that kind. You will always find them busy producing goods or performing essential services.
This microscopic examination of Chinese bones with X-rays is in my opinion a bit overdone. What perplexes me, Mr. Chairman, is this. As far as the old age pension branch is concerned they claim you cannot tell the age of a man by X-raying his bones; that you cannot tell whether he is 70 or 75. I suggested that two or three years ago, and they said it could not be done. However, as far as the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is concerned they can tell the age of a man to within three months by X-raying his bones.
I am not blaming the officials for the departmental policies; but I do ask them not to squint too closely into that X-ray when they are looking at the bone structure of Chinese applicants. I am quite sure that in my constituency I have half a dozen who have made application to bring their sons from China, but whose applications have been rejected. From knowing these people for a long number of years I am quite certain that they are telling the truth, but there is this scientific investigation into their relatives' bone structure, and in my opinion it is not always dependable. I do urge that the minister give consideration to this question, and that where there is reasonable proof that these young people coming from China are children of the Chinese people in this country they be admitted.
I may say for the information of the committee that the Chinese in my constituency are very highly regarded. A young man who quite recently came from China to our community came to see me on a Sunday morning in a hotel in Trail. The father was so pleased about the arrival of the boy that he said he wanted to change his Chinese name and name him after me. I said: "That is quite all right, you can call him after me."


Joseph Henry Harris: Why not me?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: So if you meet a Chinese boy in Canada who has my name you will understand the circumstances.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Do you say there might be any mistake?


Alistair McLeod Stewart: That is the story you want to tell.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I do urge that the applications of these good people be granted; and when I say this I know I have the support of the people of the community. These Chinese people are regarded in the community with something bordering almost on affection, particularly those who have had
4364	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration long residence there. I urge that the applications of these people be looked upon with favour and sympathy.
What I have had to say this afternoon, Mr. Chairman, has been quite brief, but I can assure you and the minister that I have spoken with the endorsation of the majority of the workers in my constituency and the majority of the people whom I represent. We want to see brought to Canada all the people we can support. We cannot live in this great and vast land without sharing it with other people. But we do ask that the greatest care be taken to bring these people in so they are fitted into our economic life and into the communities generally without displacing Canadians, without taking homes from Canadians, and without developing the frictions and the difficulties that arise as a result. When they have come as the result of careful selection and policies of that type, in a very short time they will become good Canadians like the rest of us.


William Joseph Browne: Mr. Chairman, the remarks of the previous speaker were so interesting and convincing that I hesitate to draw attention to the contradictions that were so evident in his speech. When he concluded I was not sure whether he was in favour of bringing in people or keeping them out. One thing is sure; he is not in favour of the policy that was enunciated by the minister last night, when he said that the government was fully aware of the need of this country to get more people. He said they were going to do their best to bring immigrants into this country on a very wide basis.
There is no doubt that a country like Canada, 3,500 miles wide and with population only along a railway strip across the country, with a huge hinterland which is still unpopulated, cannot justifiably refuse more immigrants. I do not think any man in his sane and sober senses could argue that way. More immigrants would mean more people to bear their share of taxation and more consumers to consume the enormous production of this rich land.
Take the matter of wheat alone. The people in this country will never be numerous enough to consume all the wheat that the country can produce. Last year this country produced 660 million bushels, which is equivalent to 220 million barrels of flour. In Newfoundland we figure an average of one barrel of flour per year per person; therefore 220 million people could be fed by the wheat produced in this country. If other articles of food were produced in the same proportion this country could support an immeasurably larger population.


The minister said that in pursuance of their immigration program they were going to give priority to wives, children and other close relatives. That is a very humane and understandable position which I think everyone will support. It is the declared permanent policy of the government to make a careful selection, as was requested by the previous speaker. They make a careful selection to try to get people who can be settled advantageously and permanently absorbed into the population. In doing that there has always been a sort of favouritism toward people of Nordic stock, people from the British Isles and from northern Europe. According to the figures in the report of the government a considerable number of people have come in from southern Europe, which I am glad to note. I think it would be a mistake to people this country with selections only from the Nordic races who in some cases have been lauded much too highly.
Then there is the question of continents other than Europe. If the white men have exploited the dark races in the past they have an opportunity now, which I am sure they are not going to use, of permitting the dark races to share in the tremendous riches which the white man has in his possession in the United States, and especially in this country.
Among the races who have been coming to Canada have been Japanese and Chinese. Before the war the Japanese came in annually by the hundreds, but since 1928 at least the Chinese have come in only one by one from a vast population of about 400 million. That continued until 1947, when the government relaxed the strict regulations against the Chinese. Since that time they have been permitted to come in at the rate of 3,000 annually.
The figures indicate that last year, up to March 31, 2,745 persons of Chinese origin came into Canada, and of that number 14 went to Newfoundland. As the minister knows, I have been interested in assisting the wives and children of Canadian citizens of Chinese origin living in Newfoundland to come to that province. If we had received our proportion of the 2,745 total we would have been entitled to 69. I ask the minister to keep that in mind when applications are made by Canadian citizens of Chinese origin residing in Newfoundland who want to bring in wives or children. I ask him to remember that Newfoundland's proportion has been unusually small, and not the number to which we were entitled. I urge him to act as generously as he can under those circumstances.
I know many of these Canadian citizens of Chinese origin who live in Newfoundland.

Many of them are in business, and if wives or sons were brought in there would be no displacement of workers. The children brought in would be able to carry on the business of their parents. I might say in passing that before 1949, when we entered into confederation, no Chinese women were allowed into Newfoundland. They always had to go back to China to get married and their children had to live there, as no children were permitted into Newfoundland. But that situation was changed under the new regulations which came into effect after confederation.
A committee of members of the other place has been discussing this subject. I note from the remarks of the hon. member for Nanaimo and the hon. member who preceded me that this same problem has arisen in different parts of the country. There seems to be a generally sympathetic attitude towards the Chinese. The deputy minister has admitted in the committee of the other place that they make good citizens.
It seems to me that although these people of Chinese origin have lived in pagan communities their outlook is much lik|e our own. They look upon the family as the most important social unit, and they consider the land as the only place where people can be brought up to be good citizens. While ethnically they may be difficult of absorption, because they have a similar attitude to our own, from political and other points of view they can be absorbed advantageously into the community. They seem to be able to fit into the community with no dislocation whatever.
This is all I wish to say, and I apologize if I have delayed the committee.


Mr. Coldwell:: Mr. Chairman, I intended to raise a matter on item 60 of the immigration estimates, but since it is unlikely that I shall be here when we reach that item I hope the minister will not mind my raising it at this stage.
Before I do so I should like to say something generally regarding immigration. I have noted the differences of opinion across the chamber with regard to the number of immigrants who can be received and absorbed in this country, where they can be placed and all the rest of it. But I think it all depends on how you look at it and where you come from. If you come from an industrial centre where there is unemployment, you do not want to see immigration. If you come from an area where employment is high and where there are opportunities for settlement, then of course you can see the possibility of absorbing immigrants in quite large numbers.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration
It is natural that in a discussion of this sort we should have a good many different opinions expressed, even by members of the same political party. What I intended to say in that regard is that what we need in any immigration policy is a plan to settle people.
I remember when Miss Margaret Bondfield came over here in 1924 and went across the country to see how British immigrants were being received. She told us in Regina that when these people come into the country there should be someone who had the kettle on to invite them in and give them a good hot cup of tea. That reception, she said, would do more to settle them than almost anything else that could be done for them.
There is a great deal in that. I was an immigrant. I came to this country in February, 1910, and in the years that followed I saw people being brought in by the transportation companies and dumped by the wayside. Fortunately there were free lands in those days that could be homesteaded. We do not have those free lands today, notwithstanding what the hon. member for St. John's West said. We do not have unlimited land on which to settle people. In those days we had large quantities of land, but even then people who came to this country were dumped by the wayside and suffered severe hardships for many years, although ultimately many of them became good citizens and good settlers.
I listened this afternoon to the plea of the hon. member for Vancouver East with which I have the greatest sympathy, as I have for the plea for coloured people made by the hon. member for York South and the plea made by the hon. member who has just discussed the problem of reuniting Chinese families in this country. I noted that the other day we received His Imperial Highness the Crown Prince of Japan with a good deal of honour, and that was the proper thing to do. I recollect that in 1937 we received Prince Chichibu, I think it was, with the same kind of honour when on his way to the coronation of George VI. I believe he was the most expensive guest ever entertained in Canada. We took him all over the country. Four years later we were at war with Japan, but when we came to the war many humble citizens of Canada of Japanese origin were treated in a manner which is a reflection upon the Christian spirit of the country in which we live today.
I think we should rectify that situation, and wherever there are young Canadians who, owing to the prejudice against them, were forced out of this country during the war years and went back to Japan because of the feeling of antagonism engendered against them, we should be prepared to take them back. I doubt very much whether under our
4366	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration citizenship act we have the right to keep them out.
I think I or somebody else asked a question in the house about that problem of the present Minister of National Health and Welfare, who was at that time steering the citizenship act through the house. The answer he gave led me at least to believe that these people born in Canada, and who had gone back to Japan under pressure, could in all probability come back to this country when things had settled down without any legal difficulties in that regard. I hope I am right in that respect. I have always felt that while we may honour princes and kings, we should at least treat humble citizens who come from the countries represented by these princes and kings as human beings and fellow members of the human race under the fatherhood of one God, if I may say so with all reverence.
What I really rose to say this afternoon was that the department of immigration at times seems to be very tardy in reaching decisions. Whether or not this is due to the fact that the department is inadequately staffed I do not know. I would join with others in the house in saying that any approaches I have made have been met with invariable courtesy. I do not want to be misunderstood in that regard, but on several occasions over the past number of years decisions have been tardy in many instances, and I think unnecessarily so.
Let me illustrate that by reference to a case I have before me at the moment. It is the case of a lady now resident in Montreal who made application to the department of immigration in order that her father and mother might come to Canada. Actually they are living at the present time in Venezuela. Her application was made to the department in the month of January, 1952. Several times since then the department has been approached. The lawyer concerned, whom I know very well-I do not want to mention his name, although I am quite prepared to give the name and also the letter to the minister if he so desires-approached the deputy minister and the inspector in chief in Montreal regarding this case on several occasions and he always got the same answer, namely that the department was still studying the application of the lawyer's clients.
The matter was brought to my attention and I wrote to the minister with respect to this case on March 6 of this year. I got the same answer. In his letter of March 12 the minister said in part:
In all cases of this nature, it is necessary to satisfactorily complete certain inquiries into the background of the proposed immigrants before a final decision may be reached. In this instance these inquiries were instituted at the time the application was submitted.
TMr. Coldwell.I

That was some 14 months before I approached the minister.
While they are progressing, they are not yet complete. All possible steps have been taken to finalize this case with a minimum of delay, and action was again taken recently in order to hasten a decision.


Joseph Henry Harris: What is the nationality of the mother and father?


Major James William Coldwell: At present they are in Venezuela, and I should think toy the name that they are Polish. Yes, that is right; this daughter was a Polish immigrant. I know that careful inquiries should be made. In fact I am in favour of it, but I think an effort should be made to speed up decisions so that they may be reached in a period less than 14 or 15 months. That is the point I am making. If the minister does not have sufficient staff, then I think it is up to the house to provide him with the necessary appropriations to get such staff.
I am not complaining about investigations. In fact I would go so far as to say that in some respects I do not think our investigations are comprehensive enough. I do not think people who are opposed to our democratic institutions and our democratic way of life are likely to become good citizens of Canada after they have reached the adult stage. I say that whether they are communists or whether they are not. I have met immigrants who have been admitted to this country who are anti-communist but at the same time they are anti-democratic. I have had some of them tell me quite frankly that Hitler tried to do a good job in Germany, that after all Hitler was not a bad fellow, and that parliament was all right but we did not get things done. Such people should be carefully investigated.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: That is the very type of people about whom I was talking.


Major James William Coldwell: When we let people into this country we want to be sure that they are not nazis, neo-nazis or fascists, whether they come from Italy, Germany, Poland or any other country.


Mr. Murray (Cariboo):: And no communists.


Major James William Coldwell: No communists, I agree. I think the communist is a danger to our democratic institutions, but the fascist and the nazi are equally dangerous. I am afraid that distinction is not always made by the department of immigration, and that we are in danger of bringing people into Canada who while anti-communist are entirely out of sympathy with our democratic way of life.
I do not say this because I am of British origin, but I should like to see more immigrants from northern and western Europe,

from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom, people who for centuries have had the background of our democratic institutions and understand our democratic way of life. If we do not get a little leaven to leaven the lump we are bringing in, some possessed of anti-democratic points of view, then we are going to find it difficult to maintain our democratic institutions in the years to come.
I want to say that to the minister because I believe it implicit that as far as possible we should encourage immigration from countries where there are democratic institutions, where they understand our democracy; and we should be careful that we do not bring into the country too large a proportion of people-I was going to say "any people"- who are not conversant with the ways of life that we call the democratic ways of life in the country in which we live.
The two main points I wanted to make were, first, that we might speed up these decisions because it is rather painful for people who are in this country to make pleas time and again to get their relatives in, provided they are acceptable in the sense which I have indicated. Second, I think much more care should be given than has been given to seeing that not only are communists kept out of the country-I know there is careful screening of communists, and I approve of that screening-but let the people who are imbued with the ideas of the fascists and the nazis be equally carefully screened before they are admitted to this country.
I think that immigrants properly settled in this country under a proper plan can contribute to the welfare of the country, of themselves and of the world. I have no sympathy with those who say that we are going to bring these people in to share our tax burden and consume our production; because these people are going to increase our taxation if we build schools and other facilities necessary for them, and they are going to increase our production. Probably they will balance gains and demands and we shall get no advantage, but when we are planning to build a nation in this country let us try to build it on a thoroughly democratic basis.


Mr. Hansell:: I shall only detain the committee for a minute or two, and perhaps the line of thought I shall follow will be somewhat different from the speeches that have already been made.
I wish to make two particular observations. First I would like to express my appreciation to the minister himself for the efforts he has put forth in the individual
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration cases which I have brought to him in the past. I believe that perhaps all members might be able to say the same thing. He has cared for any cases which I have brought to him, not as rapidly as I might have expected sometimes, but if cases have to be put before other governments we can excuse some delay. I have one case pending at the present time which I will not bring up here but I will take it to the minister personally and I am sure I will receive his attention on that case as I have received it in the past.
The second observation I wanted to make is in respect to a recognition by our Canadian people of the importance of their citizenship, and of obtaining some documentary evidence of it. I say this particularly in regard to any of our Canadian citizens who may be thinking of going abroad as tourists or for a few months of study. I have in mind those of my own profession who may be expecting to go to some other country on some missionary project or work. I know that such people are not numerous, but I have had some little experience with cases of that kind and I am quite certain that our Canadian citizens do not recognize the importance of having some documentary evidence of their Canadian citizenship.
Perhaps such importance is secondary in the minds of our people because it is something that does not touch their everyday life. Only when they get into difficulties do they begin to realize that they have not paid the attention which they should have paid to that matter. It is easy for young people having some idea of study, or world travel, or going to some other country as a missionary or teacher or something of that kind, to think they can do all sorts of things in their travels and then, in the end, they find they are in difficulty.
I know a case where a young gentleman left Canada to go to the United States to take up some studies. After taking his studies he did some professional work, and while in the United States he married. In the process of time he went over to China and spent a considerable period there. When certain circumstances in China meant that he had to leave he went to Africa because there was some Chinese work in Africa which he had an opportunity to take on and be of some service. The upshot of all this was that he found some difficulty in the first place in respect to the fact that he had married a young American citizen. There was some complication in respect of what her citizenship was and what her status was in some of these other countries. By the way, the young man himself

Private Bills
was born in England. Now he finds himself without a domicile and the only thing which he has to prove any citizenship at all is his birth certificate, and that sometimes does not prove anything. A birth certificate proves that you were born, but I do not know whether you need to have proof of that.
What I am trying to put over to the minister is that Canadian citizens should not regard these things lightly. You cannot travel all over the world from one country to another and to another and then another and stay for periods of time without having some difficulties. That is not the fault of the minister and it is not the fault of our legislation. It is the fault of people themselves because they do not realize the seriousness of their responsibilities in this respect.
I was talking to a gentleman some time ago and he told me that when he was a young man he was a colonel in Her Majesty's imperial forces. I suppose he served in Queen Victoria's day. He said he was sent out to India and that he travelled around the world and went to every country of the British commonwealth, and all he had for identification was a birth certificate. He said that a little while ago he took a similar trip around the world and that they fingerprinted him, photographed him, took blood tests, vaccinated him and detained him. He said sometimes he did not know whether he was going to be put in jail or whether he would ever get back. That indicates the situation now.


William Alfred Robinson: It being five o'clock, the house will proceed with the consideration of public and private bills.



PRIVATE BILLS


Mr. H. W. Winkler (Lisgar) moved: that the following bills be read the second time:
Bill No. 342, for the relief of Hanus Braun, otherwise known as John Browne.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 343, for the relief of Hazel Loisette Robinson Darby.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 344, for the relief of Pearle Elizabeth McLeod Martin.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 345, for the relief of Suzan Klamka Migicovsky.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 346, for the relief of Olive Margaret Searle Pfeffer.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 347, for the relief of Alfred Roger Holder.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 348, for the relief of Joseph Willie Brais.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 349, for the relief of Gladys Ola Taylor McLellan.-Mr. Winkler.

Bill No. 350, for the relief of Freda Smolar Brown.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 351, for the relief of Marguerita Downie Couture.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 352, for the relief of Howard Douglas War die.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 353, for the relief of Rose Brown-stien Lazarus.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 354, for the relief of Rebecca Bowman LeFloch.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 355, for the relief of John Stewart Hannah.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 356, for the relief of Harold Speevak.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 357, for the relief of Rita Rabino-vitch Abrams.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 358, for the relief of Marcel Roland Veilleux.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 359, for the relief of Mary Gordon Wilson LaForest.-Mr. Winkler.
Bill No. 360, for the relief of Lionel Jobin. -Mr. Winkler.


Ernest George Hansell: I do not know that I want to enter into any particular discussion of these private bills, but I should like to say that at five o'clock I was talking about citizens being detained, when I found myself not only detained but cut off. I just rise now to say that once again this year I want to protest this method of dealing with divorce bills.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bills read the second time and referred to the standing committee on miscellaneous private bills.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Beaudoin in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
57. Departmental administration, $280,729.
['On behalf of the Secretary of State for External Affairs I beg leave to table three copies of the report for 1952 of the council for technical co-operation in southeast Asia. At its recent policy session in Colombo the council agreed that this report be published simultaneously by member governments not later than April 24, 1953.']
Louis-René Beaudoin: The committee is considering the first item under citizenship and immigration. Perhaps at this time I should tell the hon. member for Macleod that at the time he was interrupted it was shortly after five o'clock. Under the rules we have to proceed to the consideration of private and public bills at five o'clock, and if he was interrupted at one minute past five he could not reasonably claim that he was cut off.
I thought perhaps we should have that understanding.


Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Chairman, I was just making a little pun to indicate the difference between being detained and being cut off.
I am not complaining. In fact I had forgotten that it was Friday. We work such long hours around here that one loses track of time. I was asked how I put in my week ends and I said that on Sunday morning

I went to church, and I worked the rest of the day. I work all day Saturday, and I do not always keep a record of whether it is Friday, Saturday or any other day. I was completely surprised when Your Honour left the chair and informed me that the hour for private bills had arrived.
I do not know that I need to go any further with what I was saying. I should like to ask, however, whether or not any effort has been made to bring to the attention of our Canadian people, particularly those in our universities, theological colleges and other schools, the seriousness of the responsibility that is theirs. I do not think it is a government responsibility necessarily, but it is a responsibility that every individual, as a Canadian citizen, should take upon himself. The citizenship and immigration laws throughout the world are extremely complicated. They are not uniform, and people are not always cognizant of those things.
I recall that during the war I was a member of the committee on defence regulations. It may not have been that committee, as I am trusting to my memory. I believe that Dr. Coleman or some official from the state department or immigration department was a witness at the time, and he told the committee that the immigration or citizenship laws of the various nations were not uniform. He gave an illustration to show that it was possible for a person to be a citizen of about seven countries at the same time. That seems almost incredible, but it was an illustration of how complicated the citizenship laws of the different countries were. They were not uniform. I am not blaming anyone for that. It just cannot be helped, but I believe the citizens of our country should know that. They should be told that when they go abroad to study they should have their citizenship papers, their birth certificates and everything else in order before they make a move.
I am wondering if the department could not do something toward informing the people of this situation. I know the department has published small booklets on citizenship and they are very fine booklets. I have given some of them to students at times, but I think they are published primarily for the information of immigrants who come to this country. I am wondering if it would not be a good idea to have some display advertising occasionally in some of our daily newspapers and the more widely circulated magazines. These advertisements could be in a sort of interrogative fashion. They could ask, how do you know you are a Canadian citizen? Have you got your certificate? Are you going abroad? If so, make sure that you have proof of
24, 1953	4369
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration citizenship. Something of that sort might be helpful. I am passing these suggestions along to the minister for what they are worth.


Mr. MacLean (Queens):: There are a few remarks, Mr. Chairman, I should like to make on this item. I have noticed that most of the speakers thus far have put the emphasis on immigration, and I think rightly so. However, there is one suggestion I should like to put on the record concerning citizenship. As has already been said, the department has published an excellent series of little booklets.
I was especially struck with the value of one entitled "Our Government", which describes how we as a people are governed at the federal, provincial and municipal levels. I suppose it is a booklet gotten out primarily for immigrants coming into the country, but it is something that would be of great value to many native-born people.
As to the processes of our government and what democracy means, and as to the need for preserving and hanging on to what we have in that regard, the ignorance of the Canadian people is abysmal, in some cases at least. I would suggest to the minister, if it has not already been done, that consideration might be given to sponsoring a film to be made by the national film board and following closely that little booklet called "Our Government". I think such a film would be of great value to the Canadian people in general. That is something that has perhaps already been done or is being considered; but if not, I think it might be worthy of consideration.
That is all I have to say on the question of citizenship, Mr. Chairman, but there are some remarks I should like to make with regard to this vast and thorny problem of immigration. I sympathize with the minister when he finds himself confronted with this problem because it is of vast importance and significance. I say that not because I think it is, in a selfish way, something that concerns us as a nation, and that in some way we would be better off if we let people come in or if we kept them out or if we let certain groups come in and kept others out. It is a greater question than that. After all, here we are, about 14J million people, sitting on a vast area of this earth's surface which is blessed with a great abundance of minerals and forest wealth and great areas of fertile soil. If we ourselves do not voluntarily do something about sharing this abundance with the populations of the world, the time may not be far away when we shall be forced, by drastic means, to share our vast natural
4370	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration resources. We, as a nation, cannot indefinitely retain this dog in the manger attitude about our resources.
Someone may say, "Why suddenly this problem? After all, civilizations have been going on for thousands of years. Why, all of a sudden, in the last 50 years or the last 10 years, should a shortage of this world's goods suddenly be created?" The answer is very simple. At the present time the population of the world is increasing at the rate of about 60,000 per day, net increase. In other words, every day we get up it means that the world has to supply the means of livelihood for about 60,000 new people; that is for a net increase of about 60,000.
That situation is created partly by the advances of science in the last number of years. In earlier times populations did not increase rapidly. Owing to plagues, famines and wars, the population of most areas of the globe remained fairly constant or even declined. At the time of the fall of the Roman empire the population of Europe was estimated to be about 100 million. In the 15th century it is estimated that that population had dropped to about two-thirds of that number. That drop, of course, was caused by pestilence, famine and, as I said before, disease.
For instance, during the black death at least a quarter of the population of England died off in one year. During the last century in Ireland alone it is estimated that a million people died of starvation. That happened in the small country of Ireland. In the last 100 years at least 100 million Chinese have died of starvation. A few simple scientific advances have cut down the death rates and the natural forces which kept the human population down. That fact is strikingly illustrated with regard to the British race.
I am now quoting from a book called "Human Fertility" by Cook. At page 54 of that book it is stated:
In 1650 there were only six million people living in the British Isles. Today they are represented by a multitude of descendants on every continent . . . In 1950 the descendants of the six million on the British Isles of 1650 showed a twenty-six fold increase, distributed in the following countries;
United Kingdom 	 Ireland 			 50,300,000
United States 			 84^000^000
Canada 		
	8 000 OOO
New Zealand 		
Scattered in Asia, Africa and	the
islands of the sea 		.... 5,000,000
Total 			 158,625,000
So in that period from 1650 to 1950, which is 300 years, you have a population increasing from 6 million to 158 million as the result of natural causes alone.


The simple sanitary advances have caused the natural increase in the population to accelerate at a terrific rate. Even if that acceleration did not increase further beyond its present rate, and the current increase of one per cent per year were to continue for only the better part of a century, the numbers would have more than doubled in 75 years. This is the way the world population would multiply in two centuries. In 1950 the world's population was about 2-3 billion. In 70 more years-that is by 2020-the population will have doubled to 4-6 billion, and so on. So in 200 years from now the population of the world, at its present rate of increase, will have reached over 18 billion.
We should therefore recognize that there are, in the other parts of the world, large and increasing pressures of populations demanding living room or living space. I think it is childish for us to expect that we with our meagre population, can hold out against that pressure for any length of time.
As I say, Mr. Chairman, I do not look on this problem of immigration as merely a national or an international one. It is a world problem that must be tackled with courage of a high level. The amount of productive land in the world is small. The hardships and privations which are caused by the lack of food and living room are greatly accentuated if the populations, as they exist, are not reasonably evenly distributed over the productive areas of the world. For instance, in the case of China it has been estimated that 100 million Chinese have died of starvation during the past century. There is little likelihood that we have seen the end of famines. China possesses less than one-half acre of arable land per person. That briefly is the situation in the more densely populated parts of the world.
As I said, of course, this becomes a multilateral problem, a problem which must be tackled by this nation on the one hand and the other possible sources of immigration on the other. It is all very well for a person to point out the difficulties and not suggest any cure. I am not going to suggest that I know the answer, or anything of that sort. But I am justified in pointing out the problem and perhaps making some suggestions which might be used as a point from which we should do some thinking.
This is not a problem which concerns Canada and any other single country. I should like to take as an illustration the problem as it exists between Canada on the one hand and the United Kingdom on the other, merely as an example. I am not suggesting that the United Kingdom is the only suitable source of immigrants, but I should like to take


from the present system under which we try to bring in agricultural labour or those who will settle on the land. We must remember that that is a difficult thing to do. To begin with, the days when a family could push off into the wilderness and carve themselves a new home with no other capital than a couple of oxen and a few primitive agricultural tools are gone for ever. It takes a great deal of capital to establish yourself in agriculture at the present time.
You are trying to do the impossible when you try to force people into agriculture against their will. The reason it is difficult to keep immigrants on the land is that farmers cannot pay them wages comparable to those paid in the cities. There is no equal opportunity in agriculture. The opportunities in agriculture for those already on the land and their families would be greatly enhanced if home markets were built up by the creation of new towns in sparsely settled areas.
It may seem rather unusual to refer to new towns, but even in the United Kingdom they recognize that it is not a good thing to have your population crowded into a few large cities. That is even truer of this country. We should try to organize our economy so that our increasing population will find homes for themselves in new locations spread more evenly across the whole breadth of our great country.
At the present time the population of a few large cities is increasing at a very rapid rate. This creates many problems in the way of traffic congestion, the creation of slums and the vital problem of creating the most attractive atomic bomb targets that could exist on the face of the earth. These are things we should try to avoid. Therefore I think something should be done to have our immigration funnelled into new locations where it could be leavened by native-born Canadians to bring about a uniformity in culture and way of life.
I have already quoted from a book called "The Next British Empire". This was written before the last war by a forward-thinking Englishman who had foreseen most of the difficulties with which we are now faced. He suggests a cure for those difficulties, and in one place he says:
Up to the present our dominions have shown an understandable but somewhat exaggerated fear of having their standard of living lowered by any large influx of cheap labour. But why cheap? Simple because, if the labour arrives before the jobs, wages will naturally fall. But if the courage of manufacturers first creates a demand for workers, as it has to the west of London, all the subsequent march of labour to that point does not upset the market and create depression. London, in spite of having absorbed over 1,000,000 provincial newcomers since 1921, has a lower percentage of unemployment than any other manufacturing


Mr.   Baler@: I know the minister is quite
anxious to be getting along with his estimates and I do not intend to take very much time with my remarks, but only once in going through life do we celebrate a fiftieth anniversary of almost anything, whether it be our birthday or our marriage. I have been listening this afternoon and I have heard the words "emigration" and "immigration" several times. It recalls to my mind that on the 31st day of March, 1903, I became an emigrant when I sailed from Liverpool and on the 12th of April following I became an immigrant when we landed at Saint John, New Brunswick.
I want to take this opportunity of thanking the minister and the officials of his department for procuring for me a photostatic copy of the passenger list of the S.S. Lake Manitoba which sailed from Liverpool on March 31, 1903 and arrived at Saint John,
24, 1953
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration New Brunswick, on April 12, 1903. On page 20 of the list there are three names among many others. The first of the three I am going to mention is William Bater, age 39, tobacconist. That was my father. The next is Master Bater, age 14, my brother, who is still farming in the district where I farm. The next one is Master Bater, age 11, who happens to be myself.
I promised that I would only be a short time, but before sitting down I should like to read an extract from the Montreal Gazette of April 12, 1903. The dispatch is from Saint John, New Brunswick, and reads as follows: Four special trains, carrying the Barr colonists, numbering 1,960, left here today for the Saskatoon district, where the new Canadians will establish homes and cities. The party, which is declared to be the greatest emigration from England since the departure of William Penn, arrived Saturday morning on the steamship Lake Manitoba, whose cargo of humanity was packed like fish in a box. The colonists bring with them half a million pounds sterling. They are probably the finest body of men, women and children that ever landed here. Lawyers, doctors, clergymen, merchants, aristocrats, farmers, clerks, artisans, domestics, tradeswomen and labourers are included, besides babies by the score. On the passage, which occupied eleven days, there was not a death or a case of serious illness on the congested ship. Reverend I. M. Barr, the organizer of the party, is a brisk businesslike man who is full of enthusiasm over the prospects of his scheme. He says 1,500 more colonists are to follow, and that 10,000 will come next year.
With respect to the last two words "next year", that never did come about so far as the Reverend Mr. Barr was concerned because he left very shortly after reaching Saskatoon. As you know, many of the colonists rebelled against him and the colony was taken over by the Reverend Mr. Lloyd after whom the town of Lloydminster was named. This summer at Lloydminster, which is a great oil town on the border between Alberta and Saskatchewan, a celebration is going to be held in connection with the fiftieth anniversary of the Barr colony. It was in the district surrounding Lloydminster that the government along with the Reverend Mr. Barr and Mr. Lloyd had picked out a certain number of homesteads to be taken up by the Barr colonists. I have no doubt that the hon. member for Battle River and myself will be playing a small part in that celebration this summer.
Much has been said about immigrants coming to Canada. Last summer on our farm we employed a young couple who had come to Canada some two years ago through the minister's department. The young man was accustomed to farming in Great Britain. He had served his time in the British navy in the last war, and he brought his young wife and child with him. He spent his first year on a farm just north of Toronto and
4374	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration then wanted to go west. He has been with us on our farm for approximately twelve months and I can say that he has been very satisfactory. He was accustomed to farming in England, and I think he is going to make a real good citizen of Canada.


Mr. Fair:: Mr. Chairman, my name is not included in the list just referred to by the hon. member for The Battlefords, but I may say that I arrived in the real home of the Barr colonists, the town of Lloydminster, on January 10, 1914. At that time it was a rather small town, but today it is one of the most progressive in Alberta or in Canada. There is a group of businessmen there who have been building up their businesses, and at the present time the town has a population of considerably more than 4,000. I think what they have done is a credit to these people.
I only wish time would permit the hon. member who has just taken his seat to relate some of the experiences of the men and women who came here in 1903. It would be well worth while, because none of them were experienced farmers. They were businessmen who had been engaged in different lines of business in the old country, and they have certainly made a contribution to the welfare of Canada. Around Lloydminster they have cleared thousands of acres of land and are growing millions of bushels of grain. Now we also have oil developments there. The Canadian National is being supplied with oil for its diesels, and oil is also being supplied for many other purposes including the production of roofing and roadbuilding materials.
I did not want to let this moment go by without adding my words to those of the hon. member for The Battlefords. It is really amazing to see the progress that has been made there in a short time.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall the item carry?


Edmund Davie Fulton: Before it carries, I wonder if the minister would now care to make a reply to the general statements, and then we could get on with the questioning on the detailed items.


Joseph Henry Harris: If we might carry the general item, I could then speak first on the first item of immigration.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Citizenship-
58. Citizenship registration branch, $195,964.
['If we might carry the general item, I could then speak first on the first item of immigration.']
Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, this is the first item dealing with citizenship and there are a number of questions.
TMr. Bater 1


Joseph Henry Harris: I will make a statement on citizenship; or do you want to go ahead?


Edmund Davie Fulton: I should be glad if the minister would make a statement.


Joseph Henry Harris: Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a few moments to speak about citizenship, and I shall do my best to make it very short.
In presenting the estimates of the citizenship registration branch of the department for consideration of hon. members, I am glad to report that all signs point to a growing awareness of the value and responsibilities of Canadian citizenship. As hon. members know, this branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration is responsible for administration of the Canadian Citizenship Act with the exception of those two sections which provide for citizenship training and naturalization court proceedings. The branch is also the custodian of all records under the act and is the agency which issues all certificates of citizenship.
Considering the very great increase in immigration to Canada since the end of world war II we would naturally expect a substantial increase in the number of applications for Canadian citizenship. This, of course, has not yet occurred because of the fact that an immigrant must be a resident in Canada for five years before he can apply for citizenship.
Declarations of intention which precede the actual application for citizenship are, however, showing an encouraging increase. In 1952 these totalled 13,323, exceeding by some
4,000	the total filed in each of the previous five years. I anticipate that this trend will become more noticeable, for in recent months the number of declarations of intention filed with the department has shown a substantial increase each month over an average of any of the months since the citizenship act came into force. I would suggest that this increasing interest is an indication that the program of training in citizenship which has been in operation since 1947 is beginning to show results.
I would draw particularly to the attention of hon. members the interest in citizenship shown in recent months by various veterans organizations across Canada. Not only are these organizations taking the lead in helping to create a greater awareness of Canadian citizenship but the members are also, as individuals, applying in increasing numbers for their certificates of proof of Canadian citizenship which are available to ex-service men and women without charge. I have had the very great Dleasure during the past year

of participating in several ceremonies where practically the complete membership of a veterans' organization has received certificates.
In addition to the veterans' organizations, members of Canadian service clubs are also showing a very great interest in this worthwhile work.
It is worthy of note that, among the largest ethnic groups to receive certificates of Canadian citizenship in 1952, were 1,281 persons of Polish nationality. A large portion of these were the Polish veterans who were among the first of the immigrants to be admitted to Canada after the end of world war II. They were men who fought bravely in Italy and in our own Canadian corps in northern Europe, and who cast their lot with the free world when their own country passed into the sphere of communistic domination. I am glad to pay tribute to the manner in which these men are assuming the duties of citizenship in Canada.
In submitting the estimates of the Canadian citizenship branch, I should like to emphasize the role played by the branch in the integration of newcomers. The branch works closely with national and local voluntary organizations and has assisted in the creation and development of some 50 citizenship committees in various cities and towns across Canada. These committees, which include representatives of various ethnic groups, co-ordinate the activities of local organizations that are engaged in the promotion of "civism" and particularly in assisting new Canadians to adjust themselves more rapidly to life in Canada. They have done valuable work and I welcome the opportunity of expressing the government's appreciation of the assistance they have given-and I am sure that I can add the appreciation of the house as well.
At the request of national and local voluntary organizations, the branch has also assisted in developing general citizenship programs embracing such themes as the responsibilities of citizenship in a democracy, the problems of newcomers and language and citizenship classes.
With reference to the latter subject, as announced previously to the house the department has offered to pay to the respective provinces a sum equal to one-half of the amount expended by the provinces themselves in respect of language and citizenship classes for immigrants. The citizenship branch will be responsible for completing the necessary agreements with the respective provincial authorities under which the grants will be paid, and for the administration of such
24, 1953	4375
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration grants. It is recognized that instruction in language and civics contributes much toward the rapid integration of newcomers and the proposed grants for this purpose should be of material assistance in the further development and extension of such instruction.
At present the department, through the citizenship branch, offers free of charge to the various departments of education and other agencies conducting language and citizenship classes all of the necessary teaching materials. These include language texts in both French and English as well as the citizenship series booklets on the geography, history, government and resources of Canada. A fifth booklet in the series on our transportation services has been completed and will be available for use in the near future.
The branch has also produced a series of film strips relating to the geography, history, government and resources of Canada that have been well received and widely used in citizenship classes. In fact, up to the end of last year, over 12,000 prints of these film strips have been sold by the national film board. A further series of film strips on the development of our transportation services is nearing completion, and will soon be available.
The integration of newcomers requires the assistance and support of all citizens and particularly of national and local voluntary organizations. It is intended, therefore, to hold this spring or summer a national seminar on the subject of integration. It is hoped that all aspects of the problem will be explored at this seminar and recommendations made that will lead to further action required to accelerate the integration of newcomers and ethnic groups.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Chairman, perhaps before we start questioning the minister on citizenship you might call it six o'clock.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
["Mr. Chairman, perhaps before we start questioning the minister on citizenship you might call it six o'clock.\nAt six o'clock the committee took recess."]
Edmund Davie Fulton: Just before six o'clock, Mr. Chairman, the minister had concluded his introductory statement on the citizenship branch of his department. There are some questions I should like to ask him concerning the work of that branch. I do not very often throw bouquets around, and I am only going to throw a small one tonight, but I should like to say that I think the department is working along very sound lines in the efforts it is making to convince new Canadians that
4376	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration they are welcome in Canada, and also in the efforts the department is making toward giving them a sense of what Canada means and the opportunities and advantages which will be theirs when they acquire Canadian citizenship.
On reading the last annual report of the department I have been quite impressed to find an outline of the steps that have been taken in that connection. One thing which does concern me, and it was touched upon by the minister in his statement, is the extent to which the applications for citizenship appear to lag behind the number of immigrants admitted into Canada during the post-war years. The last annual report covers the fiscal year ended March 31, 1952. At pages 16 and 17 it shows that during the fiscal year 19,833 certificates were issued and 8,845 declarations of intention were filed. Since 1945, that is for the last five years, there have never been less than 66,990 immigrants admitted. It takes an immigrant five years to acquire Canadian citizenship; therefore I think it can be seen that these approximately
20,000	certificates represent a small percentage when compared with the 66,000 immigrants admitted annually. This indicates that there is a substantial number who have never acquired Canadian citizenship and who have not yet filed their declaration of intention to do so.
When you find that there are only 8,845 declarations of intention to acquire Canadian citizenship, and compare that with the figure of 66,990 immigrants in 1947 and 79,194 immigrants for 1948, it seems to me that the problem becomes one of major importance. The minister did touch upon the matter. He said the department was encouraged by the increase in the number of declarations of intention filed during the current calendar year. My information, of course, comes from the last annual report which covers only the fiscal year ended March 31, 1952. I would appreciate it if the minister would say a word or two more on this subject.
I believe my question is well founded. Is there not a disturbing shortage of applications for citizenship and declarations of intention to apply for citizenship being filed, in comparison with the number of immigrants admitted? What positive steps is the department taking to carry forward the work of impressing upon the potential new Canadians to an even greater extent the importance and desirability of becoming fully qualified Canadians citizens by obtaining certificates of citizenship?


Joseph Henry Harris: The hon. member has pointed out that there were about 66,000 immigrants in 1947, but I think I would say there were
64,000	in that year. Of those about 38,000 were from the United Kingdom. Our experience has been that those people do not very often apply for citizenship certificates, that is the percentage is not as great as in other cases. This leaves something like 26,000, and of those it may be said that some 8,000 have applied. Of the 27,000 a good many would be infants, who would have to be taken into account in that figure of 8,000 declarations of intention. I am not suggesting that those who declared their intention during the last year were, in all cases, 1947 entrants.
We are concerned that we do not get into the position which was mentioned by one hon. member, of having people wait a good many years to take out their citizenship papers. We have no means of imposing any restrictions on them if they do not, and we have not any form of sanction that we could impose. On the other hand, it is our thinking that during the calendar year 1953 the 1947 group will have run over the five-year period. Of course many people put things off, and they do not apply at the first possible moment. We think that as a result of the experience we have this year we will be able to judge much better what people will be doing with respect to citizenship. If there are any steps that can be taken after this year to draw to the attention of a newcomer of 1947 or earlier that he has now had the opportunity and we should like him to take advantage of it, we shall certainly do so.
We feel that with municipal corporations, provincial governments and our own government contributing in some form, together with the voluntary organizations doing so much good work in welcoming these people to Canada and into these little societies, looking after them at night schools, and so on, these people should, in all conscience, take the earliest possible opportunity of applying for Canadian citizenship.


Edmund Davie Fulton: In connection with that subject, what steps are being taken to impress upon the new arrivals the desirability of becoming citizens? I noticed in the annual report at page 10 a paragraph dealing with the distribution of film strips which are made available for citizenship instruction in either English or French. After giving a list of the titles, the paragraph concludes:
During the fiscal year 1951-1952, these strips were in wide demand, and 6,440 were sold to educational organizations and interested groups.
The titles which are given these film strips certainly suggest that they would contain

matter of great interest and importance in instructing new Canadians. I was wondering whether or not the minister could say where full information could be obtained by an organization which might be interested in showing these films to new Canadians in their vicinity. These organizations might want information as to the content of the films, how they can be obtained and what procedure has to be followed. It occurs to me that here is a field where members of parliament, and others who are interested in this work of welcoming new Canadians, might avail themselves of this new instrument. Perhaps they could interest service clubs and other similar organizations to which they belong in having once a month or once a year, or with whatever frequency would be suggested, evenings when they would be hosts to the new Canadians in their area and ask them in for a showing of these films.
I must confess that it seems to me an area in which with a little bit of work and a little bit of interest, any one of us could make quite a considerable contribution to interesting our communities and community organizations in that work. Will the minister tell us, for the record, what the procedure is as to getting these films and on what terms they are available?


Joseph Henry Harris: These films are produced by the national film board and are sold at a nominal fee to the provincial governments, which use them through their film distributing organizations. In other words, a voluntary organization can write in and get a film for showing such as my hon. friend indicates. In addition to that, however, our liaison officers, who were only appointed after 1950, do encourage the use of these films at the voluntary organizational meetings and will show them on request at service clubs and other similar institutions. I for one should be glad if any person or group of persons or any hon. members would in fact put on an evening of some kind for the benefit of newcomers or even for the benefit of Canadians, to show them these things because I think the film strips are of good use for this purpose.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Do I understand that anyone or any organization interested should contact in the first instance the provincial educational department, and that they would have full information and would have a stock of these films on hand?


Joseph Henry Harris: Yes; and the film board has a stock to sell and will sell them for a dollar.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Then the report also contains another interesting item. I see that I have
24, 1953	4377
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration really been discussing both the citizensnip branch and the citizenship registration branch under the same heading. One small question arises out of page 19 of the report which is headed "Number of certificates issued to aliens by countries of origin" and under the heading "Great Britain" there is the figure of 53. I should probably know this, but I confess to being a little bit disturbed about it. Is a British subject coming from the United Kingdom officially classified as an alien, even if he has been lawfully admitted to Canada?


Joseph Henry Harris: I should not think so, but I will have to find an explanation. In the item that is referred to, the countries of origin are the countries from which these people come. That is residence, not nationality or racial origin.


Edmund Davie Fulton: We would presume that these would be persons who originated in Great Britain but were not necessarily British subjects?


Joseph Henry Harris: That is right.


Howard Charles Green: I think we have come a long way in our approach to this problem of citizenship. It is encouraging to hear from the minister that steps have been taken to make the people who have come to this country and have become naturalized, feel welcome. Only a few years ago all that happened was that they appeared in a crowded naturalization court, two friends spoke on their behalf and then they got out of the crowd as best they could. Then some time later they took the oath of allegiance before a notary public. I think Canada was extremely shortsighted in her approach to this problem of welcoming new citizens. I am afraid we are still a long way behind our cousins, the Americans. I should like the minister to explain to the committee why it is that we cannot have a procedure somewhat similar to that followed by them.
I have here the program for the 32nd annual public reception welcoming naturalized citizens of 1952-53 in the city of Portland, Oregon, under the auspices of the Portland Americanization council. This was held this year on February 22, the 221st anniversary of George Washington's birthday. In addition to setting out the officers of this Americanization council, it sets out a list of 90 on a reception committee and 30 on a hospitality committee. They had a receiving line which included the governor of the state and his wife, and the secretary of state for the state of Oregon and his wife; the treasurer of the state of Oregon; the United States district attorney; the mayor and commissioners of the city of Portland and ladies; the board of county commissioners for, I presume, the county of Multnomah. On the inside of the program there is a list of the
4378	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration names of those who have been naturalized during the year 1952-53. I notice that there are 103 from Canada, by far the largest number from any country; 43 from England and a similar number from Germany, and several hundred altogether in the list.
They had a program which included the grand entry of colours; pledge to the flag- we might be under some difficulty in Canada deciding which flag we were to use; however, perhaps that will be straightened out one of these days-the national anthem-where we again might have some difficulty-invocation by a leading clergyman; official welcome and response by one of these new citizens who is described as of the class of 1952. Then there are selections by a choir, presentation of banner to the city of Portland, the acceptance, tribute to the flag; then an address by a former dean of the college of law; a song "God Bless America", then the benediction and the retiring of colours. That program was recorded and broadcast over several radio stations.
On the back of the program we have a list of organizations which belong to this Portland Americanization council. It is a long list and I shall refer to only a few in which I think hon. members would be more likely to be interested. There are the American Legion with about 30 branches; the American Red Cross; the archdiocesan organization of Catholic women; Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks; B'nai B'rith; Boy Scouts of America; Canadian Legion and auxiliary-and I would ask you to note that; this is a welcome in Portland, Oregon-Catholic Daughters of America; central labour council; council of churches; council of parents and teachers; Fraternal Order of Eagles; federated Jewish society; Independent Order of Odd Fellows; junior chamber of commerce; Kiwanis Club; Multnomah bar association-I presume that is the legal bar; Portland chamber of commerce; Portland police department; Portland Lions Club and auxiliary; Rotary Club and so on. There are dozens of these organizations belonging to this Americanization council.
Is there not some way in which in Canada we can work out some friendly welcome of this type which includes representatives of all the leading organizations of the city? Perhaps we are too phlegmatic. I do not know why it is that we have hesitated for so long to do things of this type. Millions of Canadian citizens have become such by naturalization, I think a larger number than in any other country of the world except the United States. It is of such tremendous importance to make these new Canadians feel at home, feel that they are accepted as such; and I cannot think of any finer way to do it than by some such scheme as this.


At the present time in Vancouver, thanks to the efforts of one outstanding citizen, Will Walton, who unfortunately has passed away, the Canadian Club is doing great work in this connection. He was assisted by immigration officials, some of the judges, and various other clubs. There we do have a fine welcome given in the courts when people are naturalized. I think we should go farther and have something like this plan of the Americanization council of Portland. I presume that is happening in every large city in the United States every year, and it is no wonder that you get such a remarkable national spirit in that great country. I do hope that Canada can adopt some such method. I am sure it would help to strengthen the spirit of this nation. Can the minister tell us whether an effort of that kind would be possible?


Joseph Henry Harris: The Canadian Citizenship Act has been in force now for only six years plus a few months. We have been experimenting with the business of the form that will be followed before the courts and the reception that shall be given to immigrants by welfare groups before that, and I must confess that to my knowledge not much is done in the way of a reception afterward, except in the city of Vancouver, as my hon. friend has mentioned. On the other hand, I have attended similar small receptions in several towns and small cities in Ontario, but as a rule they are the tentative beginning of something that should grow and be accepted more from time to time.
Nothing but good can come from a reception of that kind. It is a public acknowledgment, in addition to the legal one which is made on the occasion of their taking the oath of allegiance after they have been granted their citizenship. That is something that must be done, but this is something that will bring to the immigrant, the new Canadian, the sense of an interest in him by the other members of the community, and we are hopeful that, as I mentioned in my earlier remarks, we can find a good solution to it which would be a dignified public reception with sufficient solemnity to be impressive and at the same time friendly enough so the people would not be backward about attending.


Mr. Motl:: I should like to say a few words on this matter at this time. First of all may I say I do appreciate the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra and of the minister who mentioned that he knew that Vancouver was doing a wonderful job-


Joseph Henry Harris: I should have included New Westminster.


Mr.   Moil@: -in accepting new citizens in our city. It would be only right at this time if I mentioned what happens in my own city of New Westminster. The judge who swears in the new citizens plays a very important part in just what kind of ceremony takes place. For the last four or five years Judge Sullivan of the county court in New Westminster has had an outstanding ceremony in our city. On several occasions I have been asked to speak. Senator Tom Reid was asked to speak on many other occasions.
To give you an idea of just what does happen, invitations go out to all the local bodies, including the local council of women, the mayor and the council, the president and members of the executive of the board of trade, and the bar association has always been represented by seven or eight of the outstanding members of the bar in their robes. We also have a member of the R.C.M.P. in a red coat, and our own local police.
They do have an outstanding ceremony. We are always asking the judges who come from Vancouver why they do not put on a similar ceremony in Vancouver. I should like to bring this to the attention of my good friend the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra because it has now moved along to a point where the service clubs have a citizenship night once a year in the stadium in New Westminster. They send invitations to all the new citizens, and have representatives of the New Westminster regiment, the Boy Scouts and the Girl Guides, and several bands. An outstanding program is held at the stadium. On several occasions I have sent the program to the minister. We are very proud of the ceremony that takes place in New Westminster, which has always been known as a royal city. We try to keep that name before the public. We welcome our new citizens to the city, and we extend our congratulations to Judge Sullivan of the county court who has been a leader in the movement for the ceremony that takes place.


Mr. Higgins:: I have not heard too much of this debate, but I was quite interested in the remarks of the last two speakers, particularly the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, who always makes an interesting address.
As I understand the situation, both hon. members spoke about what happens after the immigrants have been in Canada for some time. The situation that we should tackle in Canada is what happens when the immigrants come to Canada first. The first view they have of Canada and of Canadians is important. It may not happen at all the ports of entry; it may not even happen in
24, 1953	4379
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration that one small port that I heard described as the port of Saint John-the hon. member is not here to enjoy what I have to say about it. But I have seen quite a number of immigrants come to Gander, having been brought over by Trans-Canada and other air lines. These lines were employed by the government in those days. I have seen them come in with tags on them, as you would tag a cow, a horse or any other kind of animal you were shipping. It was very obvious why they were tagged in that way. It was not done to discredit them or as a mark of dishonour. They were tagged because they could not speak English or any other language of the country. Their destination was put on the tag and they were told how they had to buy their food and where they had to buy their food, and what have you.
The thing I want to say to the minister is this. I do not know whether that system still exists as it did in the days I am speaking of, but at all ports of entry the minister should have people who could interpret the language of these immigrants, whether it was Italian, Norwegian-I was going to say Irish, but I will not because of my hon. friend who is sitting in front of me. It is quite obvious that quite a number of nationalities do not speak English, and when they come to the ports of this country the first thing they have to do is to deal with a foreign language. They do not know what is going on around them; they do not know what they are being invited to do, and it upsets them very much.
If that condition still exists, then I say to the minister that he should have people stationed at these ports who can speak the language of these particular immigrants. It would not cost very much, and the first impression sometimes means so much.
Then I come to the points that have been made already, and I only want to reiterate what has been said before. I do not believe this planning of immigration by the government has been definite by any means. I do not think immigration is as well planned as it might have been. I feel that the parts of the country in which these immigrants may want to settle should have an opportunity of discussing things with the minister or with the officials of the department. I am thinking especially of a conversation I had earlier in the day with an hon. member from Prince Edward Island. He told me that they would like to have a lot of high-class farmers in that part of the country. The same applies to other parts of the country, and I think it would be a good idea if the minister consulted the various provinces to see what types of people they wanted and in what
4380	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration numbers. He could then cut his garment according to the cloth.
I noticed the following in the last bulletin I received from the department of external affairs at Dublin, and by the way this is southern Ireland:
An Irish-Canadian club to promote closer cultural and trade relations between the two countries was formed at a meeting held in Dublin last week. The club is to have branches throughout Ireland and in Canada. It is estimated that there are nearly 1,000 Canadians living in Ireland and 1,500,000 of Irish descent in Canada.
I believe I read in the paper where the minister had stated that quite a number of Irishmen were coming over.


An hon. Member:: From the north.


Gordon Francis Higgins: That is what I was going to say; let me say it, will you? I think there should be a fair proportion come from southern Ireland. I do not know what the situation is there, and it may be that southern Irishmen do not want to leave their home. But every opportunity should be given to them if they want to come. After all, if there are 1,000 Canadians in Ireland surely we should have another five or six thousand Irishmen over here.
The last point I wish to raise has been mentioned already this afternoon, and I merely want to reiterate what has been said. I refer to Chinese immigrants who may want to come to Canada. In so far as I know the Chinese are a most excellent race and make fine citizens. The officials of the department have been most helpful to me in connection with any applications I have made. I found them very courteous and kindly. In view of the terrible position of the Chinese in China and Hong Kong I should like to see everything possible done in order that the wives and children of Chinese who are here may come to this country without too many difficulties being placed in their way.


Louis-René Beaudoin: The discussion has been principally on immigration, so may we consider that items 58 and 59 are carried, and then we could go on to immigration.


Mr. Knight:: Mr. Chairman-*


Louis-René Beaudoin: If any hon. members wish to speak on immigration I would ask them to wait until item 60 is called.


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: I feel compelled to rise if only to prove to my hon. friend from St. John's East that we from the north of Ireland also speak English. If I might be reminiscent, I hope my hon. friend is not like a certain old lady whom I met in Pennsylvania when a small boy. I went to stay with an aunt there 

at a hotel in the Pocono hills. I was a little white-haired boy-I was going to say that I am still white-haired, but without the hair -and we met this American lady who was staying at the hotel. She asked who the little boy was, and my aunt told her that I had just come out from Ireland three weeks previously. She said, "My, how quickly he has learned the language".
I am glad to see that the population of Canada has been increased by three or four hundred good men from Northern Ireland, and I congratulate the minister, in so far as he deserves it, on that account. As far as I can tell about the hon. member behind me, his forebears did not come from Northern Ireland. Though his southern brogue remains, I suggest that he is not Irish at all. I notice that in the Ottawa valley practically everybody claims to be Irish. When anyone tells you he is- Irish and you ask where he came from he says, "My great-grandfather left Ireland in 1801". That is not being Irish at all. Such people, perhaps like my hon. friend, say "Oh, we are Irish improved". Well, perhaps in their case some improvement was necessary.
I just wanted to say a word about citizenship.


An hon. Member:: Canadian or Irish?


Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: The question of Irish citizenship is too difficult to discuss, so I shall confine myself to the Canadian variety. I should like to inquire about these ceremonies. We have heard of a ceremony on a pretentious scale described by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, and then one on a more modest scale described by the hon. member for New Westminster. In the city of Saskatoon we have made an effort to give these people a welcome when they receive their certificates. Judge Smith is at the court house and a group of people, including the mayor and representatives of various- organizations, welcome these people and say a friendly word to them.
I thought that when the act was passed a few years ago this procedure was definitely laid down. I remember that the government issued a booklet outlining the ceremony that could be held on these occasions. I imagine that it is being used in many places. I should like to ask the minister to what extent these ceremonies are being held and to what extent are people being merely handed their citizenship papers without any formality. When the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra was describing the ceremony used I could not help but think that moderation might perhaps be useful. As far as I can see there was everything in that program except movie

stars, and God forbid that we should introduce that type of ballyhoo in a ceremony granting citizenship.
I want to say one word on the matter of language, and I must confess that I am leaning in the direction of the hon. member from Newfoundland. Most of our immigrants come from Holland and Germany at the present time, and it occurs to me that there must be Canadian citizens of German or Dutch origin who could be employed over there in the teaching of English. They would have the racial origin of the country to which they were assigned. I am thinking of older teachers or perhaps retired teachers and people of that sort who could be used to give these people instruction in the use of the English language, and they would not then suffer the embarrassment upon their arrival here described by the hon. member for St. John's East.


Joseph Henry Harris: I do not think my hon. friend perhaps understood what the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra and I were speaking about, or did not note the difference. I think my hon. friend was referring to a reception given by a leading group of citizens in the city of Portland for those who had acquired their citizenship during a given year. It was a formal reception with a ceremony which was attended by representative groups as well as by representatives, apparently, of the state government. What he was referring to before in connection with our booklet were the simple ceremonies that we have suggested immediately after the swearing in by county judge. That would occur three, four, five or six times a year, as the county judge felt it necessary to complete the work of his court.
I think there is a place for both. One is a completion of the legal requirements of the case. The other is a more open public reception and acknowledgment of their citizenship during that year.


Major James William Coldwell: I know that it has been done at a number of smaller points in Saskatchewan. Senator Aseltine and I had the pleasure last year of attending a very interesting ceremony over which the county court judge presided. The mayor and the reeves from the neighbouring countryside were present at the ceremony at which a number of people were welcomed. A banquet was held, and they were made to feel that they were being taken into the citizenship of the area. It can be done on a much smaller scale in small places, and I think a good deal of encouragement should be given. I know that the welcome at Rosetown was one of the nicest functions I have attended since I have been a member of parliament.
24, 1953	4381
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Joseph Henry Harris: I hope the practice is growing. We are going to encourage it.


Mr. Brooks:: I have listened with interest to what hon. members have said about looking after immigrants on their arrival and taking them into citizenship. There is usually quite a period of time in between. I was very much interested in reading an article today in a pamphlet entitled "Industry" published by the Canadian Manufacturers Association. The view is expressed in the article that we do not pay enough attention to immigrants after they reach Canada from the point of view of teaching them something about our country. It is suggested that these people have a tendency to come here with a love for their own country, which is natural, and to get together in groups with the result that they do not learn enough about Canada.
It is pointed out that a few years ago, in order to overcome this difficulty, the United States fitted up a "freedom train" which went from one end of the country to the other visiting every city, town and village. On board were such things as a copy of the constitution of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, Lincoln's Gettysburg address, the muskets of George Washington's army and many articles of that kind. People were taught the history of their country in a practical way. The article goes on to say:
Well, the history of Canada could certainly fill a train.
That is very true.
The British North America Act with all the original signatures, the extant documents of Frontenac and Montcalm, Alexander Graham Bell's original telephone, the case books of Dr. Banting, the discoverer of insulin, the test tubes from the laboratory of Charles Saunders who discovered the now world famous Marquis wheat, the pistols of General Wolfe and even the cap worn by the heroic Laura Secord are just some of the things which come immediately to mind. Maybe there were some things about the freedom train which we wouldn't like. They could easily be changed. But the effort to build up a national patriotic consciousness is surely something which we should applaud.
There is no problem as to the children. They go to our schools and learn these things, but the older immigrants do not have that opportunity. I would suggest to the minister that he might consider something of this kind so that the history of our country may be better known to older immigrants entering Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
59. Citizenship branch, $390,464.
['I have listened with interest to what hon. members have said about looking after immigrants on their arrival and taking them into citizenship. There is usually quite a period of time in between. I was very much interested in reading an article today in a pamphlet entitled "Industry" published by the Canadian Manufacturers Association. The view is expressed in the article that we do not pay enough attention to immigrants after they reach Canada from the point of view of teaching them something about our country. It is suggested that these people have a tendency to come here with a love for their own country, which is natural, and to get together in groups with the result that they do not learn enough about Canada.\nIt is pointed out that a few years ago, in order to overcome this difficulty, the United States fitted up a "freedom train" which went from one end of the country to the other visiting every city, town and village. On board were such things as a copy of the constitution of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, Lincoln\'s Gettysburg address, the muskets of George Washington\'s army and many articles of that kind. People were taught the history of their country in a practical way. The article goes on to say:\nWell, the history of Canada could certainly fill a train.\nThat is very true.\nThe British North America Act with all the original signatures, the extant documents of Frontenac and Montcalm, Alexander Graham Bell\'s original telephone, the case books of Dr. Banting, the discoverer of insulin, the test tubes from the laboratory of Charles Saunders who discovered the now world famous Marquis wheat, the pistols of General Wolfe and even the cap worn by the heroic Laura Secord are just some of the things which come immediately to mind. Maybe there were some things about the freedom train which we wouldn\'t like. They could easily be changed. But the effort to build up a national patriotic consciousness is surely something which we should applaud.\nThere is no problem as to the children. They go to our schools and learn these things, but the older immigrants do not have that opportunity. I would suggest to the minister that he might consider something of this kind so that the history of our country may be better known to older immigrants entering Canada.']
Edmund Davie Fulton: Has any consideration been given to any sort of compulsory qualification before a citizenship certificate is granted? I
4382	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration do not refer to the language qualification, which was discussed briefly in connection with a bill we had before us a little while ago. Is there any requirement that they must have attended so many classes or anything of that sort? I appreciate that it is most difficult. Here we are on the one hand suggesting that they should be urged to take out their certificates of citizenship as soon as they qualify from the point of view of residence, and I appreciate that it would perhaps appear inconsistent if in the face of that we put other obstacles in their way and compelled them to comply with this or that regulation before they could obtain them.
I wonder if some happy medium could not be arrived at whereby if free classes on citizenship were available in a locality, perhaps some classes using films or visual education and some the lecture method, which might take only four or five nights during a year, consideration might then be given to making attendance compulsory at such classes before these people would be regarded as qualified for citizenship. Has any consideration been given to that, or as to whether anything along these lines could be worked out? I know that efforts are being made by voluntary organizations in certain provinces to give classes, and that is what made me wonder whether there was a possibility of making attendance compulsory to a certain extent?


Joseph Henry Harris: We are in the process of drafting a number of regulations having to do with these classes. In the meantime, however, where they have been held and where a certificate has been granted the county judge will accept that as evidence of certain accomplishments. But it will happen, of course, that some applicant for citizenship who has attended no classes at all but who is fully qualified according to the standards we set down will come before a judge. Therefore it is difficult to say that such a rule should apply, although we undoubtedly encourage them to do so. On the other hand, there are also many places where we have no classes, yet by private tuition and selfhelp the immigrant is able to appear before the judge. Where there are no classes we are seeking to have them if we can, and where there are classes we are doing our best to see that as many people as possible attend them and that some recognition is given for having done so which will permit them to have easier access to the courts and their citizenship.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I think that is a very excellent idea. I hope the minister can report to us that other provinces besides Ontario and British Columbia are awarding certificates of


proficiency. Have any other provinces adopted that scheme?


Joseph Henry Harris: I think that is all at the moment.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Can the minister tell us for the record who is the new director of the citizenship branch in succession to the late Mr. Frank Foulds, to whose work I think we are all glad to pay tribute.


Joseph Henry Harris: We have not appointed a new director. There is an acting director, Mr. Eugene Bussiere, but the permanent appointment has not been made.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Immigration branch-
60. Administration of the Immigration Act, $824,403.
['We have not appointed a new director. There is an acting director, Mr. Eugene Bussiere, but the permanent appointment has not been made.']
Edmund Davie Fulton: The minister said he would take advantage of this item to reply to the general discussion and suggestions that have been made with respect to immigration.


Joseph Henry Harris: Mr. Chairman, I wish immediately to thank hon. members for their kind remarks about myself and the officials of the branch for the work we have been doing. I believe hon. members realize that in dealing with immigration we are dealing with human beings; and while there are certain definite prohibitions in the Immigration Act which must be observed, nevertheless the regulations are flexible and should be used with discretion. They should not always be applied rigidly. The department tries to follow that practice within the policy laid down from time to time by the government. Where we are able to assist hon. members, not only are we glad to do so but we should in fact do so.
In the general discussion it seemed to me that every shade of opinion was expressed as to immigration; and it occurred to me that everything that was said this afternoon has been said at one time or another by myself and by my officials, when we have been discussing the policy of immigration. There are times when one takes the view taken by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, which I think is probably the most restrictive approach that has been stated so far in this debate. On other occasions perhaps we would take a view more in line with that of the hon. member for Queens who, if I understood him correctly, while he did not recommend it in exact terms, nevertheless thought in terms of a general migration of people at some time in the future of the world.
In between those two extremes the Canadian immigration policy tries to function. As

everyone has said, we have to observe our absorptive capacity, and we must try to determine that capacity not only from year to year but in fact from month to month. We bear in mind what the hon. member for Cape Breton South said, namely that there may be a scarcity of labour at a given time and that by the time we have found the people to fill that scarcity, it no longer exists.
So in supplying the labour market we must pursue a cautious policy. But at the same time I do not think we should allow our caution to overcome the natural optimism which all Canadians have as to the future of this country. I noticed that every member who spoke about the mechanics of immigration did say that consideration should be given to the winter season and the seasonal unemployment we have at that time, and that we should not have many immigrants entering the labour market during those months.
With a certain amount of modesty I can say "Thank you", because we introduced that policy last summer, and I believe it was quite successful this winter. As I said last night, we have had no confusion, no conflict, and no surplus number of workers in any given community. That to some extent restricts the number of people who can be admitted to Canada in any twelve month period, because if to a considerable extent you shut off migration in late October, or at some such time, and presume to open it in late February or early March, you then shut off four months of the year which otherwise could be used to bring in people at a time when perhaps they could be absorbed.
There has been considerable discussion as to whether or not we had more immigrants in 1951 than we should have taken into the country. I suggest that that was not so, although I do not want to engage in any argument with hon. members on the point, because I realize that everything they have said today has been helpful. Every suggestion they have made will be followed up. But 1951 was the beginning of the expansion in this country of industries connected with preparations for carrying out our commitments with NATO. There was a greater demand than we could meet for both skilled and unskilled workers in almost every line. Therefore we did our utmost to meet that necessity.
As I said last July, and repeated last night, it would appear that that met the requirements of the day, and that perhaps there was not going to be a continuing demand for skilled and unskilled labour for that particular purpose. I think I did point out last night that, in particular, there was little G8108-277i
24, 1953	4383
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration demand this year for persons to go into the mines, the logging industry and the like; and my recollection is that the hon. member for Kootenay West spoke about that this afternoon. Looking at the figures I find that we took in only about 900 loggers during the whole of last year, which is away down from what it had been at any time prior to that. This indicates that we can operate immigration to fit conditions as we see them, according to the information we receive.
It was suggested by the hon. member for Kamloops and the hon. member for Cape Breton South that we should have recourse to other departments of government, and should have interdepartmental committees studying migration. It was said that we should co-ordinate our efforts along those lines. I say with all respect that we have had similar committees since I became minister, and I believe they were in existence for some time prior to that. The whole policy is made up as the result of information available to the government in all its departments, and as a result of the opinions expressed by those on our staff and on the staffs of other departments who can best form opinions as to the likely requirements in the foreseeable future.
We never go beyond twelve months; and for that reason one may say that we do not plan for the distant future. We do not. We do not claim to do so at the moment. We merely say that from month to month and, at the most, up to a year in advance, we have certain plans and certain expectations of what can be done by way of migration.
Something was said about consulting provincial governments. We do that as well. Their opinions, along with the opinions of other groups in Canada, are taken into account when we arrive at conclusions as to what should be done.
I believe that is all I need say about the general debate. I would repeat, however, that all the doubts and all the hopes expressed this afternoon by every speaker are constantly in our minds. Migration should not at any time displace Canadian workmen. Migration should only be a means to add to our population in such a manner that we will grow in numbers, and grow as well in our standard of living, not reduce it. On the other hand we should not, because of too much caution, miss the opportunity which most of us believe this country has in the next few years.
Specifically, there was a general discussion about matters having to do with those Canadian citizens of East Indian origin, and of certain Chinese-Canadian difficulties. Some
4384	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration reference was made, also, to the assisted passage scheme in respect of the United Kingdom, with which I shall now deal.
The assisted passage scheme was instituted for the purpose of providing the means of admitting to Canada persons with certain skills who were needed, and on the basis that these persons would not have the money with which to purchase transportation. The classes of persons who from time to time would qualify applied to all countries in which we used the assisted passage plan. That is, if we said that a person in the United Kingdom who was a nurse's aide could have the benefit of assisted passage, we said also that a person in a similar position in another country could have the benefit of assisted passage, because there was need in this country for such persons. It is true that the people in the United Kingdom who have come forward have not used the assisted passage scheme to anything like the extent that it has been used by others from continental Europe. But that is only to be expected, because people in the United Kingdom have more money and more means than those on the continent. In particular I think it is fair to say that the people of Germany have literally no means whatever. If we desire to have them here, and if they have the qualifications we want, then it is to be expected that they will apply in greater numbers than any others for assisted passage.
With respect to the persons in British Columbia of East Indian origin, it is true that there is a restriction on the number of people of that particular origin who can be admitted from the east. In 1950 they were restricted to those persons who were admissible under P.C. 2115, namely the unmarried children under 18 of Canadian citizens resident here, or the wife of a Canadian citizen. Since that time we have successively extended the group to take care of the husband, unmarried children up to 19, then up to 21 and later up to 25 under certain circumstances. I have forgotten who it was, but this afternoon someone said that the admissible groups here are those 19, and under certain circumstances 21. That is not so; the admissible group is up to 21, and under certain circumstances up to 25.


Edmund Davie Fulton: They are all subject to an over-all quota?


Joseph Henry Harris: That is not subject to quota; that is absolute. All those people can come in under P.C. 2115. But in addition to that 150 other persons may come from India, 100 more from Pakistan and 50 from Ceylon. As was pointed out this afternoon, we have not met that total number of 300 because of


difficulties which occurred in finding a suitable staff to go to India. We finally found a staff late last year. I expect that this year will see that number coming close to the quota. I am told that there are hardly any coming from Ceylon, so that to the extent of that 50 we may not meet the quota. Indeed, it may not be so even in the case of Pakistan, but I am quite satisfied that the number from India will, this year, be to the limit permissible.
When the hon. member suggested that these people are not permitted to bring their relatives out, I suggest he is not being entirely accurate, although I know he has no intention of not being so. This quota, if I may call it that because in fact it is, has only been in existence now for the past two years. There have been certain operating difficulties, but we are gaining experience in dealing with it. I should like to point out the persons who did come during 1951, the last figures I have. In 1951 there was one spouse of a person here; one child; seven fiancees; 14 parents, brothers and sisters; and 127 other groups.
The other groups were made up as follows: married children, 24; sisters, brothers and brothers-in-law, 24; nephews and nieces, 35; cousins, 16; grandchildren, 5; grandnephew, 1. Then there was employer application for specific purposes, 8. There was an adjustment of temporary status of persons already here who had not been properly landed, 10; and there were four more who in fact were in the country illegally, and we then regularized their papers. This brought the total to 127. I suggest that that catalogue of relatives is indicative of the type of immigration we will have when this really begins to function a little more successfully than it has up to the present time. The lack of success has been wholly due to our inability to find a staff, but the staff is now there and working in New Delhi.
The other question raised was that of a Chinese Canadian who wants to bring forward his children. I only speak of it because of the reference made by the hon. member for Kootenay West to the X-ray procedures. The committee should remember that the use of X-rays for determining age is only resorted to after an inspection has been made of the applicant by our staff in Hong Kong, and that person has been rejected as a result of the investigation. I discussed this with the head of the Hong Kong immigration office, Mr. Peters, when he was here on leave. I have checked Mr. Peters' work from time to time. I am thoroughly satisfied that Mr. Peters is a highly competent immigration

officer who knows the situation in the east as well as anyone we can get for that purpose.
When he examines a person who presents himself as the child of an applicant in Canada, he examines him having in mind certain procedures and certain knowledge which the person must have if he is a member of that family. If the immigration officer comes to the conclusion the person is not as represented then, and then only, the applicant is given the opportunity, if he wishes to take advantage of it, of having X-ray photographs taken to indicate whether or not an error has been made in Mr. Peters' judgment. It was stated this afternoon that we claim these photographs to be accurate to within three or four months. We do not. We realize that medical opinion is not completely satisfied on some points of this procedure, and that in fact there should be a variation which would allow for the ordinary uncertainties which any doctor admits exist in these things. We do-when I say "we" I must say not this department but the Department of National Health and Welfare -consider these X-rays in the light of what the ordinary doctor would expect to find by way of variation in the age group.
I do not know anything about this subject other than that I am told that an X-ray examination of the bone structure is reasonably accurate up to 19, 20, 21, 22 or 23 years of age, but probably not beyond that. It is that group with whom we are dealing. We do not examine people beyond 25 years of age, because 25 is the outside age limit. As I said before, it is never a complete bar to admission of any person. It is only an additional opportunity that he has to prove the facts which he alleges.
Nevertheless I recognize that there have been many cases where Chinese Canadian citizens feel that these examinations have not yielded the results they should. I think many hon. members in this house will bear me out when I say that we constantly review individual cases to see if there is any possibility that an error has been made, or that additional information might be obtained on which we could base a different conclusion. That is always the policy, and we shall continue at all times to accept any evidence that applicants can bring to us. We will review all cases on request. In fact I hope we can find an even better method of dealing with them than we have at the present time, although I am told it might entail considerable expense in the Hong Kong office.
I think I have covered all the specific subjects mentioned. If not, I apologize and I shall be glad to speak of them if anybody reminds me of what they are.
24, 1953	4385
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Edmund Davie Fulton: I appreciate the minister dealing with the points which have been raised. There are just two matters that I should like to follow up, arising out of what he said, and I should like to start with one of the later ones, namely the position of East Indians. I do not want to quibble over the question of whether or not I was accurate, but I believe it is important to be certain as to whether or not there is differentiation or discrimination between them and other Canadians. While it is true that they can bring in their relatives within these limited categories, children under 21 and in certain circumstances 25-


Joseph Henry Harris: May I interrupt to say that I was in error. The permission up to 25 was in the case of Chinese.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Yes. While it is true that they can bring in their immediate relatives within these limited degrees, without reference to the quota, any other degree of relative such as cousin, nephew or grandson does come within the quota of 150, in so far as India is concerned, and Pakistan 100, or for the Indian subcontinent exclusive of Ceylon, 250 a year. On the other hand, in the case of any other Canadian citizen, even one who may recently have come here and just qualified as a Canadian citizen, my understanding is that, provided he can give the usual guarantees as to ability to support the immigrant applied for and can comply in other ways with the requirements, he can apply not only for his relatives but for his friends in his country of origin in Europe, provided again that the friend comes within the general but much broader classification of admissible persons from those countries. There is therefore a much narrower restriction on the type of persons whom Canadian citizens of East Indian origin may apply for as compared with citizens of European origin; and even those are restricted within this quota of 250. It was in that sense that I meant there was a difference bordering on discrimination.
The minister has explained some of the difficulties giving rise to the fact that the quotas

even those limited quotas-have not yet been filled. I should like to ask him whether there will be a carryover; in other words, if only 127 out of 150 were actually processed, passed and admitted to Canada in the first year-that is in 1951-will that balance of 23 carry over into the quota for 1952? And will the unfilled balance of the cumulative quota for 1952 carry over and be added to the quota of 250 for 1953? It seems to me it is only fair that this should be done particularly if, as the minister says, it was administrative difficulties which were responsible for the fact that the quota was not filled in the first year.


Joseph Henry Harris: The answer is yes.
4386	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Edmund Davie Fulton: 
I do not see why it is not possible for us to work out with the British government an extension of our assisted passage scheme applicable to people from the United Kingdom, under their empire settlement act, in order to ease the burden on the British family which wishes to immigrate to Canada as a unit. I should like to hear from the minister whether he has any really insuperable objection to concluding such an arrangement.


Joseph Henry Harris: The government of the day between 1921 and 1927 had, at various times, agreements with the United Kingdom under the empire settlement act. We have not had any agreement since that time. That has been the policy since the war, and I think it was a carryover of the policy which had been determined some years before. I think the feeling is that this country should at all times retain absolute control over migration to Canada, and that we can best do that by financing migration ourselves if we feel we should spend money on it, or by admitting people if they choose to come.
We have had experience with the act. Without reflecting in any way whatever on others who use it, may I say that suggestions have been made that you do not necessarily get the best type of immigrant if he is almost wholly subsidized to come. In fact experience 20 years ago led to that conclusion at that time, in some cases. We have therefore, so far, not accepted the standing offer which is in the empire settlement act; and that fact does not seem to have adversely affected the migration to Canada.
If you compare the figures of those who went to Australia and those who came to Canada you will find that while they did run ahead-and you would expect that-they are not so much greater than Canadian figures as to indicate that the lack of this plan is a definite deterrent to migration to this country. My recollection is that to the end of 1951 something like 290,000 people left the United Kingdom for Australia, and while I cannot give the figures to the end of 1951 to Canada, I think to the end of 1952 it would be around 250,000.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: From what date; since the war?


Joseph Henry Harris: Yes, since the war. But a very considerable factor in migration to Australia and New Zealand was of course the fact that the people could take their money with them. The hon. member for Brandon made reference to that this afternoon. Perhaps he did not give the credit to this government that he might have given. He recited the considerable sum of money that anybody in the United Kingdom could bring to this country.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I might conclude on that point. I think it is important to point out that according to my information the reason there is a substantial increase, up to 42,000, which is not after all a very large part of the total immigration, is that a large portion of this
42.000	consists of wives and children coming out to join their husbands and fathers, and naturally do not represent new family units migrating from the United Kingdom in the year in question. I have been told that since 1947, 170,000 immigrants have gone from the United Kingdom to Australia alone under this empire settlement act.


Joseph Henry Harris: In one year?


Edmund Davie Fulton: No, since 1947. In view of the comparisons between the two countries of Australia and Canada, I venture to say, if I may without offence to Australia, that the relative attractions of the two countries indicate that Australia has been doing disproportionately well, that is disproportionately well as compared to Canada and what we have to offer to a potential British immigrant. Therefore it seems to me we should be giving more consideration to the plan. Dealing with the minister's argument-I do not want to protract this unduly-I want to ask him whether he will deal with this. He made what would appear to me, on the face of it at any rate, to be two potentially
24. 1953
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration valid objections to the use of the empire settlement act. I wonder whether we can analyse it a little further and see if they are so valid as they might seem.
First the minister said it was the opinion of those concerned with policy that you get a better type of immigrant if his passage is not completely subsidized. Well, now, it seems to me that with respect to that principle, by far the greater proportion of the displaced persons who have come here have had their passages virtually completely subsidized either by one of the refugee organizations or by the passage money being put up or guaranteed by somebody in Canada. Therefore both in the latter case particularly and in the former case the immigrant might eventually be under some obligation to repay the money.
It seems to me that by far the majority of the displaced persons being admitted to Canada have had their passage money virtually completely subsidized. I do not want to suggest that that makes them less desirable immigrants; in fact I do not make that suggestion. It was the only way they could get here. Therefore, since I do not make that suggestion, I suggest to the minister it would not be an objection applicable to the use of the empire settlement act in the case of the United Kingdom immigrant.
The minister also used words to this effect, that it was the feeling of those responsible for the policy that it was most desirable that we should retain exclusive jurisdiction over the-I do not know the exact word he used -selection of our immigrants. Do I understand from this that the use of the empire settlement act would deprive us in some way of the complete and final decision as to what immigrants came from the United Kingdom; Because if it would, then I think it is a valid objection. I should be very surprised if an agreement with the British government under that act would in fact deprive us of any element of decision as to whether or not an immigrant was suitable and should come forward.
I wish the minister would deal with these two points, because if they are to be accepted as valid then perhaps I would be more inclined to accept the objections to that scheme than I am at the moment, because I cannot see how the argument applies.


Joseph Henry Harris: Before I answer that I might point out that of the 42,000 who came here last year, 18,000 were relatives, so 24,000 of those persons to whom my hon. friend refers were either heads of families or single workers.

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration


Edmund Davie Fulton: The number 24,000 in one year is not very many, really.


Joseph Henry Harris: Perhaps not, but my hon. friend heard his colleague from Gloucester this afternoon urge upon the government that families should not be broken up, and that we should have these people come forward to the head of the family at the earliest possible moment; and you must make that allowance.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I was not objecting here at all; I was trying to put this in proper perspective.


Joseph Henry Harris: The proper perspective is that you must have both. The other arguments I made I think are still valid. The persons who came forward as displaced persons, totalling
165,000	since the war, were persons who were subsidized, as my hon. friend says. They were subsidized for the reason he gave (a) they had no money whatever, but (b) they were a problem which was on the doorstep of the United Nations, something which was wholly removed from migration as a national policy. It was an international situation in which humanity came into play, in which self-interest required that a problem had to be solved, and I do not think these people can be used as an argument as to the normal course of migration in any form.
On the other question, when you enter into an agreement with respect to persons who will come to Canada and you subsidize them, it is inevitable at once that the other party to the agreement should be given some consideration. In other words, if you make an agreement with another party, in common courtesy you have to hear his opinions and perhaps agree to them on occasion. I am not suggesting that it would not be proper that they be agreed to. At the present time our offices abroad choose the persons who can come provided they meet the standards we impose, and under those circumstances we accept full responsibility for any mistakes that may be made. I think we are getting the type of immigrant most suitable to this country. If it is found that the policy is not working out satisfactorily we can change it immediately parliament indicates its dissatisfaction.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: The hon. member for Vancouver East has been called out of the chamber, and he asked me to ask the minister a question on his behalf. I understand that the hon. member asked some questions this afternoon with regard to the policy of the department in connection with certain Japanese who were repatriated to Japan
IMr. Harris.]

and now wish to return to Canada. Can the minister answer the hon. member's question?


Joseph Henry Harris: I think that question could be better asked either in the external affairs committee or on the external affairs estimates, because if those persons are citizens of Canada we do not handle the mechanics of admitting them; it is done through external affairs. If they are not citizens of Canada they would be admissible upon application under P.C. 2115 by anyone here who could claim the proper relationship as set out in that order. I think my hon. friend is referring to a group of persons who may be claiming to be Canadian citizens, and they would come forward upon application to external affairs, not to immigration.


Mr. McLure:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a suggestion to the minister under this item. I have not said anything on immigration or citizenship because the time has been all taken up. Some $26 million is to be spent on immigration and citizenship, but what I would like to see for Prince Edward Island is a policy to end migration. Through the fault of the government we lose a lot of our population every year, and these people could easily be kept there. If the same support were given to the people of the province, in different ways, that is given to bringing immigrants into the province we could retain at least a thousand people a year who are now leaving the province to go to other places.
I have nothing to say against immigration, but I urge upon the government through this department that they adopt some plan, especially for a province like ours, to keep people at home instead of bringing in other people to replace them. This could be in the form of loans to farmers' sons. In most cases a farmer's son cannot get as good a place or as large a loan as the person coming from outside.


Mr. Ferguson:: Mr. Chairman, this country is a member of the United Nations and it is really amusing at times to listen to the variety of ideas we hear on immigration. In my opinion immigration is one of the greatest factors that must be considered by Canada. I lived in the United States for a number of years, and a very able man who had started as a coal miner in Virginia and amassed a vast fortune through the desire to work advised me to return to my native land. He said to me, "You have a country there with tremendous undeveloped resources; it is the last great country in the world that offers what it does." Yet we have men in this country and in this parliament who want to put the brakes on prosperity, who want to put the brakes on

progress. Because we are being fooled to some extent by the Russians the stock market drops and values are reduced by millions of dollars, simply because we are not carrying on an all-out war or almost an all-out war.
We have a country with resources second to none; but through lack of planning by the old Conservative party and the present Liberal party, which brags that it has been in power so long, we are faced with a quandary as to what to do. This government consists of various departments which are like cog wheels that should be meshing properly. Years ago they should have been thinking of what they were going to do with the iron ore they knew was located north of the great lakes. Forty-five years ago I sailed over lakes in the north country that covered great bodies of iron ore. The knowledge that there were vast ore bodies in northern Ontario, northern Quebec or Labrador was not gained just recently.
If we could not develop those with our own money, why did we not plan in conjunction with industry in the United States and with our own industry to develop these resources? We knew for years that there were vast oil fields in Alberta. No one will deny that, particularly the oil people. A man who was associated with my father in the law practice and who worked in conjunction with Imperial Oil years ago told me that they capped oil wells in Alberta at least 25 years ago.
These resources are being developed with the aid of millions of dollars of foreign capital. We are talking about the need of more immigrants. Mr. Millard, a great labour leader, has been accused of being almost crazy because he has stated that 250,000 immigrants could be brought into this country. He means if there was work planned for them to do when they arrived; he means if there were houses to be built.
The minister of immigration is a man of great resources, and probably he is doing his very best in the department. There has been great laxness on the part of this government in connection with the general development of Canada, and this includes the department of immigration. The same laxness was shown by the Conservative government in the past, and now the sins of the fathers are being visited on the people of today.
This is still going on. Why should we worry if there is an armistice in Korea? Why should industrial stocks in Canada drop? Why should unemployment be created? Every man in the House of Commons with any semblance of ability knows full well that we have not enough labour to meet the demands that would be created with an economy planned with the industrialists of this country,
24, 1953	4389
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration planned with the financial men of this country, planned with the industrialists of Europe and of the United States; planned with their money. We must go there for money. We must go there for help in our engineering problems. But what do we do?


An hon. Member:: Move to the left.


An hon. Member:: Come on over here.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: I am speaking as a Conservative who has lived in this country all his life with the exception of a few years, a man whose grandparents came to this country over 150 years ago. I am speaking on behalf of the people I love and the country I love, and I am sick and tired of seeing it go down. I am sick and tired of seeing it act like a thermometer. Every time the wind blows, the sun rises or the cold comes, up and down goes the prosperity of our country. It is absolutely unnecessary. Take the country of Japan. Fifty years after an American admiral went there and told them how to do a little bit of business they were able to make almost any nation shudder if they threatened it with war. They were able to defeat the great Russian nation years ago. How do they exist? Where do they get their natural resources? From an almost barren island.
Look at what we have. Look at the money we are making. The government should be leaders, and not follow the practice every time they want anything done of picking on the one man in their party who is an industrialist, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, the Minister of Defence Production, the minister all-powerful.


An hon. Member:: Amen.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Look at the arguments against the C.C.F. party. In the Conservative party we have lawyers, doctors, farmers, industrialists and financial men. That is why the Liberal party and the Conservative party are preferable to a party that preaches class hatred and looks at the picture from one side only.


An hon. Member:: Boloney.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: What are we doing? The present government, with all its ability and experience, is carrying on in almost the same manner as the Labour government of Great Britain did. The Minister of Public Works says he has a job. He says when someone has asked for a post office he will see that it is built. He will see that tenders are called. I just cannot believe that the Minister of Public Works and the other ministers are consulted with respect to immigration. How much immigration will we need this
-4390	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration year, next year and next year and next year for the next ten years? How much financing will we have to do?
I am not suggesting for a moment that the government should take over the country and try to run it, but I am suggesting that they should endeavour to co-operate with the people who are doing a good job financially. The people of Europe who have come to this country as immigrants are solid rocks in the foundation of Canada. Today we heard of a Chinese, an honest, loyal and decent citizen, who has been kept out of the country. I cannot understand the hearts of people who at one moment preach United Nations and down with communism and then act in this way. I do not know any better way of bringing about communism than to say we love you and then punch a man in the face at the same time. The abolition of slums and the putting of these people into proper housing will obliterate any thought of communism.
In my home at the present time I have a little Chinese boy who was brought to Canada to join his father six months ago at a cost of $1,000. Fancy paying a thousand dollars to bring a child you love and cherish from China to Canada. Surely the government could make some kind of arrangement with a shipping company whereby it would only cost $200 or $250. This boy's mother and sister are still in China. Imagine bringing a little boy of 12 out here at a cost to the father of $1,000. The expense is so great that the father, who has been here for 20 years, has had to leave his wife and another child in China.
We talk about being human beings. It is time we changed our thoughts and actions. That boy came out in August. Last month his father was stricken with an illness from which he cannot recover. He is now in hospital in Collingwood. I have taken the boy into my home. These things should not be necessary. This man is married to this woman in China and he has a little girl there. The wherewithal should be given to this man. If we are going to allow such a man to come to our country he should be able to bring his family here so he can enjoy the family life to which he is entitled as much as you or I or any other citizen of the country.
The father of that little boy is a Canadian citizen. What does that mean? Does it not really mean freedom for everybody? Does it not mean the same possibilities irrespective of creed, religion or nationality? The government says: Take out your Canadian citizenship paper; pay $5. In my opinion no man who is willing to work and abide by the


laws of the country needs to take out any paper. That is sufficient to show what kind of a citizen he is. The mere taking out of a citizenship paper and having your photograph taken while being given your certificate does not make you a Canadian. It does not change your ideas if they are communistic. It does not make you a man who believes in democratic government.
The government should hide their heads in shame in the light of conditions in the year 1953. Some members of the House of Commons doubt whether there should be any immigration for the next five or ten years. Some of them go so far as to say we should not bring any more immigrants into the country. I say bring in three or four million good people of the right kind of stock to help us develop what God has given us. Let there be no more puttering around by the government. Let them get down to earth and do a real job.


Gordon Francis Higgins: The minister referred to Mr. Peters, the chief immigration officer at Hong Kong. I thoroughly agree that he is a very fine type of civil servant, as are most of the officers of the department. But I do bring to the minister's attention, because it has come to me from very many sources on very many occasions, that there is something a little bit rotten in the state of China, if you will, with respect to the Chinese part of the establishment at Hong Kong. The minister is aware already that there have been all kinds of stories of money being passed and so on before Chinese could come here. I bring the matter to his attention as it has been brought to mine.


Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: I want to make one brief reference to the minister's statement tonight. I think one must say quite frankly that what the minister said sounded practical. In effect he said what is contained in a paragraph of what he said yesterday, that the approach should be realistic, that we must anticipate future developments as closely as we can and gear our immigration program to them. Then he spoke about the opportunities for growth, and said the government must seize the opportunity and make the maximum use of it in the interests of our people. Then he spoke about one thing he did not mention tonight. He hinted briefly at the question of defence, how much Canada has to contribute to the peace of the world, and said that that contribution will be greater as we grow in number.
As I said a moment ago, I think there is a lot of common sense in that approach by

the minister. But on the other hand I think it is not unfair to say also that it is almost wholly negative. You are more or less like the fly on the wheel. You are circling around; you are keeping track of what is going on and fitting yourself into that, but it seems to me there is no evidence there of a taking hold of the situation, of any lead of any kind. In a sense there is really no policy except the policy of trying to mesh in with what is going on.
I admit that in a sense that is a policy, but it is perhaps not unfair to call it a policy of negation, in a way. It is very different, from example, from the policy of Australia which has been outlined, although I am not sure their policy is perfect by any means. But one aspect of the negation seems to be that we have had two entirely different views presented to us. One of them was contained in the very interesting speech of the hon. member for Cape Breton South, in which he pretty well wound up by criticizing the government. I shall read these words:
Our selection of immigrants should be along the lines of the requirements of the country, but in the last year we have imported unskilled labour when we should have been bringing in skilled people to fill vacancies that already exist at the employment offices.
Then the hon. member for Moose Jaw indicated that Canada is very short of people with different kinds of knowledge, including hardware men.
This leads me to ask the minister one or two questions, the answers to which I hope will throw some light on the practical outcome of the approach which he has suggested. For example, he has made reference to our arrangements abroad, and has spoken about our having an agreement with the Netherlands. He says, after referring to other countries:
There is one exception to the above; that is in the Netherlands, with which country we have an agreement for the selection of immigrants.
I would ask the minister to tell us two things. First of all would he give us the nature of that agreement. It seems to me, on the face of it, sensible to have an agreement; and the minister, as I gather from the tenor of his speech, thinks well of it too. He thinks it is a very sensible and workmanlike position to be in. Will he say something about the working agreement, and will he tell us also why, apparently, we have an agreement only with the Netherlands?


Joseph Henry Harris: At the end of the war the government of the Netherlands decided that they would serve their interests best by encouraging migration out of their country.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration An agreement was entered into in the spring of 1947 with the government of Canada whereby an institution called the Netherlands foundation was established for the purpose of processing would-be emigrants from the Netherlands.
We agreed at that time to take numbers which would be agreed upon from time to time of farm workers and farm settlers. In essence the terms have remained much the same. We indicate in advance approximately the number of persons from that country we think we could absorb during the coming shipping year. We have our offices in The Hague and, in conjunction with the Netherlands foundation, who find the people and send them to us, we process them. There has been some variation, I may say, in that while it started out to be wholly agricultural in content, it is not entirely that way now. The total figures for last year were, I believe, 22,000, of whom about 15,000 would have been agricultural, although I am not sure of the exact number.
It is the only country with which we have such an agreement; and it is peculiar to that country because they desire out of their own funds to do the finding of the immigrants and deliver them to us for examination within their country.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Have we tried to make any other such arrangement?


Joseph Henry Harris: No; but I think I might add that most other European countries, with the exception of Germany, are not particularly anxious to encourage migration.


Edmund Davie Fulton: What about the United Kingdom? Could not an agreement along those lines be made under their settlement act?


Joseph Henry Harris: I suppose an agreement of that kind could be made. But it has been traditional for the government of Canada, and in fact for some provincial governments, to maintain offices in London for the purpose of soliciting people to come to this country.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is the Netherlands foundation sponsored by the government, or is it a privately sponsored organization?


Joseph Henry Harris: It consists of various private organizations; but it is established by the government, and carries out the duty of selecting migrants not only to Canada but to Australia and other countries, under the assistance and with the approval of the Netherlands government.


Mr. Cardiff:: I should like to ask a question, but if it is not convenient to answer I might
4392	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration be able to get the information in some other way. How many immigrants had Canada absorbed until the end of 1948, and how many in each year since?


Joseph Henry Harris: I would have to have a statement prepared to answer that.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall the item carry?


Edmund Davie Fulton: There is one other point. The minister outlined an agreement with the Netherlands. It appears to be unobjectionable. I think he told us that the Netherlands actually finds the immigrants and brings them forward to us for examination. If that is unobjectionable in the case of the Netherlands, why is an agreement along similar lines objectionable in the case of the United Kingdom? We would still maintain the right to examine them in our offices in the United Kingdom. It seems to me what the minister has said disposes of his earlier argument against such agreements.


Joseph Henry Harris: I said at the beginning that the government of the Netherlands embarked upon a policy of encouraging their people to go abroad. So far as I know that has not been the policy of any government in the United Kingdom since the war. They have maintained their settlement act, whereby they subsidized passages under certain conditions.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Is that not the same thing?


Joseph Henry Harris: No, not quite the same. In fact I believe I can quote the present leader of the government in the United Kingdom as saying something about its being a rather difficult thing, and that they ought to see it through. But I think the hon. member would find that he would be getting into a field that is wholly different from the Netherlands, where for the sake of their own economy they decided specifically that they would have to reduce their population.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
61. Field and inspectional service, Canada- operation and maintenance, including $10,000 for grants to immigrant welfare organizations, $5,204,217.
['No, not quite the same. In fact I believe I can quote the present leader of the government in the United Kingdom as saying something about its being a rather difficult thing, and that they ought to see it through. But I think the hon. member would find that he would be getting into a field that is wholly different from the Netherlands, where for the sake of their own economy they decided specifically that they would have to reduce their population.']
Clarence Gillis: Under this item I should like to bring something to the minister's attention. I note that the item refers to field and inspectional service, and my question deals with both of them. I see here $10,000 for grants to welfare organizations dealing with immigrants. I have a press clipping in my hand from tonight's Ottawa Journal that pretty well bears out the fears I was expressing today about bringing in immigrants who may not find jobs when they get here, and have TMr. Cardiff.!

no accommodation. This Canadian Press dispatch emanates from Edmonton, Alberta, and states:
John A. Gough, an English immigrant, who claimed false information given him by Canadian immigration authorities in Britain was partly responsible for him turning to crime, pleaded guilty yesterday to five break-in charges, and was sentenced to one year.
Gough said that before he left England a year ago, he was assured there would be a job and accommodation for him in Canada. He claimed this was not the case.
I am not saying this press statement is absolutely accurate, but apparently there must be something in it. I would ask the minister, under this item, to give the committee a general description of how that inspectional service is carried on in Great Britain, and how immigrants are handled when they land in Canada. What does this welfare organization do, that is receiving the grant of $10,000? Is there some redress for a man of this kind-in this instance he is in jail-to appeal to the welfare organization to assist him in finding employment, so as to keep him out of the toils of the law?
This case comes to our attention because the details have appeared in the press. However, there may be many more similar cases across the country. Are any efforts made to prevent these men getting into the toils of the law and ending up in jail?


Joseph Henry Harris: If I might make one brief answer, it would be this. I could explain to my hon. friend just what the situation is, and at considerable length. I would be prepared to do so at any time he chooses. I think you realize that with nearly 800,000 people coming here since the end of the war, there are bound to be people who do not fit in and who may have formed the impression that they were given certain assurances. I have personally investigated many, many cases where people have said they were told thus and so. I find a wholly different story. I do not suggest that this young man is misleading anybody, but I do not think anyone could seriously hope that, in a migration of that size, you would not find some unfortunate people who would get into trouble when they got here, or that there would not be some who would have come with ideas which no reasonable person should have in the first place, and who come with no more than the ordinary encouragement which I think anybody here would expect our immigration officers to give.
Now, if we are going to have a policy of immigration we are bound to have immigration officers who like to tell people about the advantages of Canada. If you are not going

to have that, if you do not want that, then say so and if that is government policy you will not have immigration officers doing that. As I understand the policy of this government, and as I understand the policy of parliament in the past six years since the end of the war, there never has been, except on one occasion, a member who spoke positively against all immigration. If you have immigration you are bound to have immigration officers who will put forward not the most glowing picture of this country-though they could do so reasonably- but a reasonably optimistic picture encouraging people to come to what they believe is a good country.


Clarence Gillis: I agree with everything the minister has said, but that does not answer my question. What I should like the minister to do at another time is to give us a blow by blow description of how this selection is made, and what happens when these immigrants-


Joseph Henry Harris: I shall give you a blow by blow description of what happened to that particular immigrant if you will give me his name.


Clarence Gillis: I do not know his name, but I shall give you the clipping. You can check on it. There is only one thing I want that inspector in Britain to tell the truth about, and that is whether or not he said there would be a job available when this man landed in Canada, and that he would have a place to live. I do not care what else he said by way of window dressing, but did this officer say there would be a good job and good accommodation when that man came here? If he was so assured, then I think he was misled.
However, I should like a description of just how the selection is made, and what guidance the immigrant gets when he lands in Canada. What does this welfare organization do which gets the $10,000 grant?


Louis-René Beaudoin: Shall items 61, 62 and 63
carry?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: It is ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman.


Louis-René Beaudoin: The only reason I have asked whether these items would carry is that we had a long discussion on the item for the administration of the whole department. On the first item for the immigration branch we had another general discussion. There was a discussion of assistance to immigrants, which is item 63, and field and inspection service, which is items 61 and 62. It was for that reason I asked if these items would carry. If hon. members wish to discuss them further, that is their privilege. It is now five minutes past ten, so I can only report progress and ask leave to sit again.
Reports


Alfred Johnson Brooks: There has been a discussion, but there have been committees sitting all day. A committee of which I was a member sat this morning, this afternoon and this evening. There has been no opportunity for some hon. members to discuss this subject.


Louis-René Beaudoin: The hon. member knows that the chairman cannot be guided by that fact. When we have a general discussion of the administration item there is no way for the chairman to know who is absent because he is attending a standing committee or because he is detained elsewhere. Even if the chairman knew, the rules say that, by practice, a general discussion takes place on the first item, and then the committee continues with discussion being directly relevant to the various items.
Item stands.
Progress reported.



Paul Joseph James Martin: May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to revert to routine proceedings?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Has the minister leave to revert to routine proceedings?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Paul Joseph James Martin: On behalf of the Secretary of State for External Affairs I beg leave to table three copies of the report for 1952 of the council for technical co-operation in southeast Asia. At its recent policy session in Colombo the council agreed that this report be published simultaneously by member governments not later than April 24, 1953.



BANKING AND COMMERCE


Mr. Hughes Cleaver (Halton):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to revert to the order of business for the tabling of reports.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it agreed that the hon. member may have leave?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Hughes Cleaver: I now present the seventh report of the standing committee on banking and commerce.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Mr. Fournier (Hull):: Mr. Speaker, on
Monday we shall consider the resolution standing in the name of the Minister of

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration Trade and Commerce to approve the international wheat agreement. Then we shall move to go into supply, and hope to pass the motion with little or no discussion. Then we shall take up the estimates of the following departments: the Prime Minister's office, legislation, agriculture, mines and technical surveys.


[Stage Direction]
It being ten minutes after ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
The following items were passed in committee of supply:

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
57.	Departmental administration, $280,729. Citizenship-
58.	Citizenship registration branch, $195,964.
59.	Citizenship branch, $390,464.
Immigration branch-
60.	Administration of the Immigration Act, $824,403.