1953-11-24

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jean-Fransois Poulioi (Temiscouaia):: Mr. Speaker, the speech from the throne contains this paragraph:
As further steps in helping to improve social welfare, co-ordinated plans for rehabilitation of disabled persons are being worked out with the provinces and a measure to facilitate the establishment nation-wide of a federal-provincial assistance program for totally disabled persons will be submitted for your consideration.
Would the Minister of National Health and Welfare tell us what progress has been made in the discussions with the provinces with regard to the establishment of such a nationwide program?


Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman's interest in this problem is well known. He was good enough to give me notice of his intention to ask this question. In reply I can say that on November 10 on behalf of the government I wrote to all the provincial premiers advising them of the intention of the federal government to introduce in this house during the course of the present session legislation that would provide for a nation-wide scheme of dominion-provincial assistance or allowances to totally disabled persons. I have to date received replies from seven provincial governments which indicate that apparently there is genuine satisfaction over the initiative of the federal government, and also their concurrence to a conference to be held in that connection some time in January.



INQUIRY AS TO PROGRESS OF TREATY NEGOTIATIONS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinion):: I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce if he has any information to give the house concerning the progress of the negotiations with Japan for a trade treaty.


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I have not had a report recently from the negotiating team, but I understand the negotiations are proceeding and probably can be completed within the next few weeks.



INQUIRY AS TO ALLOCATION OF FREIGHT CARS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: I
should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce in regard to the allocation of freight cars for the handling of grain on the prairies. What is the system in effect at the moment, and are any changes to be brought about in order to remove what is claimed to be discrimination against certain areas?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Instructions went out to
the railroads at the beginning that cars were to be distributed fairly. As matters proceeded it was found that the larger points were being favoured as against the smaller ones. That is being cleared up. Returns come in every day and the railroad loadings are studied. I think that by the end of next month every point will have its full allotment of cars to take care of the present quota. We hope that at that time the quota can be increased, but it will not be increased until all points have been served.



SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Monday, November 23, consideration of the motion of Mr. A. H. Hollingworth for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Drew, and the amendment to the amendment of Mr. Coldwell.
Mr. H. O. While (Middlesex East):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in this throne speech debate I want to join many other hon. members in extending my congratulations to you and through you to your deputy and also to the mover (Mr. Hollingworth) and the seconder (Mr. Villeneuve) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I also want to extend my welcome to the new

The Address-Mr. H. O. White members who are having their first taste of parliament on this occasion. I wish them well and I know that they have all come here with a sincere desire to serve their constituencies and Canada.
I had intended, first of all, to direct some remarks to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) but I see he is just leaving. I had rather hoped that he would be in his seat.


Mr. St. Laurent:: I will remain to oblige the hon. member.


Harry Oliver White: I certainly appreciate that gesture on the part of the Prime Minister. It is not very often that I address remarks directly to him but I do feel that what I am about to say is important. I hope it is taken in the spirit in which it is given-for the good of Canada.
I think that the subject I raise is one of the most pressing problems which the government and the Prime Minister have to deal with in the days that lie ahead-and it does not concern external or foreign affairs. I feel that the Prime Minister, more than anyone else, realizes the problem that faces us. I wish to deal today with the upper house, its duties, present methods of appointment and reforms that are needed.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Perhaps I should remind the hon. member that it is against the rules to refer to debates in the other place.


Some hon. Members:: No, no.


Mr. Speaker:: I know that the hon. member will do so in a manner that will be respectful of our rules. I wish him at this moment to be aware of the rules that are in Beauchesne's third edition, to the effect that remarks pertaining to the other place must be made with very great care.


Harry Oliver White: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I shall try to keep within the rules.
I realize, of course, that an amendment to the constitution would be required to bring into effect some of the suggestions that I am about to make. I am also aware that promises or suggestions for reform in the past have not resulted in the desired effect. I do not propose to deal with this at length because time does not allow me to go into all the weaknesses, details and ramifications that are apparent. I shall respectfully suggest some remedies.
Let me at the outset say that I am not in favour of the abolition of the other place. That might conceivably be demanded if the present trend of events were to continue. I am also aware of the difficult role which
[Mr. White (Middlesex East) .1

members of the other place have to play in our constitutional set-up; they are the protectors of the rights of minorities. But we find in the other place a large majority of government supporters who are supposed to protect the rights of minorities, both individuals and groups. Occasionally the opposition there is aided by independent Liberal members and I am certain that is appreciated throughout the country.
At the time of confederation the other place was established for the purpose of maintaining a balance, to act as a regulator so that radical legislation would not be forced upon the people. It was established to protect the people and, as I mentioned before, particularly the rights of minorities. Let me say that I know that there will always be minorities in Canada and, as the ramifications of government extend out and out, and as centralization of government grows and grows, the rights of the individual seem to be forgotten. So, I am one of those who are rather perturbed about the trend of events.
The longer I am a member of parliament, the more convinced I am of the need to retain that other place. The longer I am a member the more I see the rights of individuals shoved aside. Speaking of minorities, I believe that at the close of the 1949 election there were in the maritimes over 200,000 people who were in the minority, and there were 205,000 in the province of Quebec. Now, Canadians require a strong upper chamber to review legislation with an unbiased mind and to protect them, as I said, from an all-powerful government. Just on the 19th of this month the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Lapointe) refused to define "casual labour" as it applied to his department. In other words, in that department one man can be treated differently from another. It just gives you an indication of what is happening in that department and what could happen in many other departments.
In connection with the protection of minorities and individuals, I might just mention that there is a small manufacturer in my riding. During the last year 17 different inspectors from one department of government or another visited his place of business. Each was trying to justify his existence. Those inspectors cannot add anything to the value of a manufacturer's product, but at the same time they can break him.
I am most decidedly against an elected other place. We may enact a very good measure in this house, but it is in the regulations and in the interpretation of the act that loopholes can be found. As is said many times a year, those may be loopholes through which you can drive a horse and carriage.

Dealing with minorities, I think it has already been pointed out that while this government enjoys a very comfortable majority in the house it did not receive 50 per cent of the votes of the people of Canada. Therefore, in a sense, something over 50 per cent of the people are in a minority as far as representation is concerned.
I am going to suggest, sir, that at no time should the opposition in the other house be lower than 25 per cent of the total membership and that at least one-third and preferably one-half of the members should be appointed by the provincial governments in power-the numbers being in direct relation to the population of the area entitled to representation under the constitution. I suggest that all appointments be for a term not to exceed ten years, or until age seventy-five, whichever shall occur first. If this suggestion were followed, the rise and fall of the fortunes of political parties in the provinces and in the dominion would be reflected in the membership of that chamber.
The government now has a mandate from the people for at least four years before there will be another general election. There will be abundant time in which to give this matter some serious thought, and to introduce the amendments required. I therefore ask the Prime Minister and his government to give serious consideration to the plan roughly outlined in order to restore the confidence of the Canadian people in the other place, to ensure to minority groups that their rights will be protected, and to ensure to all individuals the most cherished right under democratic government, namely, the freedom of the individual.
What I had intended also to say in connection with the throne speech has to do with trade, NATO and some of the items mentioned in the throne speech. I want to observe, however, that if it were not for the tragedy of it I would be amused and amazed at the speeches made by some of the government members, both from the maritimes and from the west:	In August they never had it
so good; in November they never had it so bad. Time and again during the twenty-first parliament the opposition warned the government of the dangers of inflation and of the loss of markets for primary products. Now the very things that were warned against are happening.
When the hon. member for Trinity-Conception (Mr. Stick) mentioned that fish from his province was selling for one cent a pound, the thought just crossed my mind, "I wonder what the consumer is paying for that fish?" and also, "If the spread is great, what are
The Address-Mr. H. O. White the combines investigation people doing about it, if anything?" Recently I was speaking to the hon. member for Norfolk (Mr. Anderson) and he tells me that fresh fish from his constituency is selling for five cents a pound. When the consumer hears this I imagine he will wonder what is happening from the time the fish is caught until it is in the frying-pan, and I also imagine that what he thinks about it will not be too complimentary.
While I am dealing with the throne speech I want to refer just for a moment to one paragraph. I shall go back to paragraph 6, which reads as follows:
Canada has continued to contribute to those international projects which will promote human welfare and thereby remove some of the causes of unrest and dislocation. You will be asked to approve further assistance for relief and rehabilitation, for technical assistance and for continued participation in the Colombo plan.
I think all hon. members are agreed that we in a favoured nation like this should make as great a contribution as possible to the less fortunate nations, not only for their good but for the cause of democracy and the preservation of our western way of life. On the other hand, I am a bit worried about how we deal with people who are unfortunate here at home. I sometimes think that the old saying, "Charity begins at home", should be taken to heart.
I want to say a word or two about the tornado that visited western Ontario last May and to say to the government that all the people in that area who were affected and who suffered loss are grateful for the grant that was announced by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Mr. Harris) last week and for aid from many other agencies. I think if I were going to pick out any one group of persons I should mention the Men-nonites from the Waterloo-Kitchener area who came up there day after day, hired their own transportation and brought their own meals, and contributed greatly to the rehabilitation of those who had suffered such great loss during that tornado.
I took the trouble to inquire into some of the other disasters. I think the Prime Minister will recall my asking some questions back in March of 1951 when there was a vote of $330,000 in the supplementary estimates for the re-construction and the re-equipping of a school at Rimouski following the disastrous fire there. I looked up just what grants had been made to the various areas where disaster of one kind or another had occurred. I find- and I may say that this is all taken from Hansard-that on June 25, 1948, at page 5831 dealing with the Fraser valley, there was a grant of a $5 million lump sum and 75 per
276	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. H. O. White cent of the cost of repairing, strengthening and reconstructing dikes and removing water and debris from flooded lands. On June 23, 1950, there was a vote of $12,500,000 for rehabilitation necessitated by the Red river flood. The reference is page 4083 of Hansard. On June 16, at page 3724 of Hansard, 1950, there was a grant of $2,500,000 from the federal government to be matched by the province. In the recent tornado disaster in western Ontario the federal government held back and left the first step up to the province. But that was not what happened in the instance to which I have referred, as I understand it. The federal government made the grant on the condition that the provincial government would match it, which they did; and I am not finding any fault with that grant. Those people suffered tremendous loss, and as I said in the first place, I think that charity should begin at home. Then on the same date, namely June 16, 1950, there was a grant of $300,000 for Cabano, the amount to be matched by the province, something which also was done. Then on March 18, 1953, with regard to the disastrous floods in Europe, not six months later but almost the next day $1 million was granted for European flood relief. I have no quarrel whatever with that grant.
Upon inquiry last night I found that with all the grants received-county, province, the Canadian disaster relief fund and the grants from the federal government-and they are extremely welcome, the people who suffered loss are still going to be obliged to absorb over 50 per cent of the loss. I took the trouble to inquire from the All Canada Insurance Federation of Montreal just what the losses were in Cabano and Rimouski. I find that of the total losses of almost $7 million, $6 million was paid back from one source or another.
My final comment on that matter is that as far as western Ontario is concerned it was too little and much too late. However, I believe in giving credit where credit is due, and I must give credit to the hon. member for Middlesex West (Mr. McCubbin), who has fought the battle for those victims in western Ontario. If it had not been1 for his representations I think that probably the $137,000 which we gratefully received might not have been forthcoming. Before any further disasters happen I think the government should lay down a pattern in consultation with the provinces so that there will be a known formula for the extension of relief immediately. Many of these farmers were not certain whether they were going to get a dollar or 1 per cent, 10 per cent or 75 per cent of their 

losses. Consequently they went through a period of six months not knowing what they could or should do. As I said before, it is too little and too late, and we should lay down a definite formula so that we will know what is going to happen.
I want to deal for a moment with paragraph 7 of the speech from the throne which has to do with defence of the north Atlantic. I am one of those who have said in the past and who still believe that to make such a defence alliance effective and lasting we must also trade with the nations with which we are allied. Trade is the keystone that will bind the bargain as far as our NATO commitments are concerned. While mutual defence pacts are laudable and while we believe in them, an improved and better understanding will follow if we also increase our trade with these nations.
I should like to deal with paragraph 8 of the speech from the throne which reads as follows:
Canada's total volume of external trade has reached record levels but dollar shortages in many countries have persisted and continue to create problems for some of our exporters. Another commonwealth conference with respect to financial and economic matters is to be held in Australia early in the new year.
In recent days newspaper articles have indicated that the United States is prepared to accept sterling in payment for some of its primary products. During the twentieth parliament I advocated that Canada should do that very thing. In the twenty-first parliament, I think in fact during the last session, I again put that idea forward. I pointed out that the government should accept sterling, invest that money in sterling countries and pay our primary producers in dollars. At some time these sterling investments abroad would become convertible and no loss would ensue. In the meantime we would retain for Canadian primary producers a traditional market that we have held for many years.
The action of the United States in being prepared to accept a certain amount of sterling in payment for primary products produced in the United States means, so far as Canada is concerned, but another step in the parade of lost markets. This is going to have an injurious effect. As I mentioned, paragraph 8 of the speech from the throne deals with trade, but the loss of our markets is being reflected in unemployment figures in this country. In addition, some things are taking place with respect to the number of persons unemployed that are not obvious from the unemployment figures. I refer to the fact that many plants are operating short time, some only half time and some less than that. Some plants that employed two or three hundred

men are now operating with less than a hundred. Thus loss of trade is reflected in loss of jobs.
I have mentioned before in the house that inflation has played a large part in the loss of markets because with the coming of inflation and increasing prices we have priced ourselves out of many European markets. Another factor that is very disturbing is the fact that unfair trade practices on the part of the United States have resulted in the banning of many Canadian products from that country. As Canadians we all welcomed the visit to Canada and to this chamber of President Eisenhower, and I think we were all impressed with the sincerity with which he emphasized how important it was that relations between our two countries should continue to be friendly and that this friendship should increase as time goes on.
But I respectfully suggest that such actions on the part of the United States are contrary to the Geneva trade agreements to which the United States was a signatory. They have not lived up to the agreements. We also find our textile industry being forced to lay off help and losing markets because of the dumping not of textiles from other foreign countries but of textiles from our next door neighbour, the United States, which dumping is robbing Canadian workmen of jobs and pay. What about suggesting to the United States that they honour their signature to the Geneva and subsequent agreements? What about dumping textiles on the Canadian market and thus threatening the livelihood of thousands of Canadian workmen and their families? Is the policy of the government again to be too little and too late?


Mr. A. M. Fraser (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne I wish first of all to extend to you, sir, my sincere congratulations on your unanimous election to your high office. May I be permitted to say that you have given convincing proof of your ability to preside over our deliberations with dignity, urbanity, considerateness and impartiality. We are indeed fortunate in our choice. I trust that all our decisions will be equally wise and happy.
I should also like to associate myself with the well-deserved tributes which have been paid to the mover (Mr. Hollingworth) and seconder (Mr. Villeneuve) of the address in reply, the hon. member for York Centre and the hon. member for Roberval. I feel confident that I am expressing the sentiments of all present when I venture to predict that the future of parliamentary democracy is assured in Canada as long as young men of the high
The Address-Mr. A. M. Fraser calibre of these two hon. members continue to offer themselves for election to our House of Commons.
I also wish, Mr. Speaker, to take advantage of this occasion to congratulate the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) on the decisive victory of the government in the general election last August. In my opinion the result of that election was a signal vote of confidence on the part of the Canadian people in the sound and farsighted policies which the Liberal administration has been pursuing both at home and abroad under his wise and vigorous leadership. Like other hon. members who have spoken from this side of the house, I am very conscious of the fact that I owe my election, in no small measure, to the prestige of his name. I wish to thank him for the invaluable support accorded me by his visit to St. John's where he spoke on my behalf. The Prime Minister is one of the truly great world statesmen of our time, and I am indeed proud to serve under such a leader.
I am proud too to represent the federal riding of St. John's East, and I wish to thank the voters of that historic district for having elected me to this house. St. John's East, Mr. Speaker, is a compact and well-balanced constituency. It has diversified economic interests. Among these are commerce, shipping, manufacturing, mining, agriculture, and fishing. Approximately half of the population of the riding live in St. John's proper. The other half live on Bell island in rural settlements along the beautiful shores of Conception bay and along the rugged but picturesque Atlantic coast line north of St. John's. My constituents include sturdy fishermen of such typical fishing settlements as Logy Bay, Bauline and Pouch Cove. They include the hard-working farmers in that area from Paradise to Marysvale, all of whom, I regret to say, are at present passing through a very difficult period because of the competition of low-priced food crops from the mainland provinces. They include also the skilled workers in several new manufacturing plants which form part of what I may call the diamond horseshoe of industry, which extends along the coast from Conception bay, not only in the riding which I have the honour to represent, but in that represented by my friend the hon. member for Trinity-Conception (Mr. Stick). These new industrial plants, and many others in other parts of Newfoundland, have been established through the initiative of the provincial government under the leadership of Premier Smallwood, with the object of broadening the base of the island's economy.
278	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. A. M. Fraser
Alongside these new industries stand the long-established mining operations on Bell island with their virtually unlimited deposits of iron ore. I was very sorry to learn, from the speech of the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis), that there is widespread unemployment among the coal miners of Glace Bay. We in St. John's East feel we are bound by close ties of sympathy to the hon. member's riding, for as the hon. member knows the Bell island iron mines are operated by Dominion Wabana Ore Limited, a subsidiary of the Dominion Steel and Coal Company, and the iron ore of Bell island helps to feed Dosco's steel mills at Sydney, Nova Scotia.
Bell island too has had its ups and downs, but I am glad to be able to inform the house that the production of iron ore at Bell island is now being well maintained and that the industry is affording full employment at good wages. Far from pursuing a restrictive policy on Bell island, the company has recently embarked on an impressive program of mechanization and modernization of its equipment. I hold no brief for the company, Mr. Speaker. Indeed, in the past, it has not displayed any conspicuous sense of public responsibility; but it is only fair to add that it is now showing a greater interest than hitherto in the welfare of the Bell island community. It has begun negotiations with the federal government for the construction of an airstrip on Bell island, and I understand that the maritime headquarters of the air transport board has undertaken to make a survey of the proposed site within the next month in order to decide upon its feasibility.
The construction of an airstrip on Bell island has, in my opinion, much to recommend it. It would reduce the isolation from which Bell island suffers in the winter and early spring when communication with Portugal Cove is rendered hazardous by ice and heavy seas. It would also provide a landing ground which could be used as an alternate to the T.C.A. terminal at Torbay airport in case of emergency. The company, I understand, is also consulting with the provincial government of Newfoundland in an effort to improve housing conditions on Bell island.
The urban section of the riding comprises the eastern part of the city of St. John's. It is there that the foundations of the British Empire were laid, for it was there in 1583, on King's beach, that that dauntless but ill-fated adventurer and explorer, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, took possession of the New Found Land in the name of his sovereign, Queen Elizabeth I. By royal proclamation Newfoundland was formally declared to belong to
tMr. Fr;>r". 'St. John's East).]

England and1 was recognized as the first colonial possession of the crown. That is why Newfoundland came to be known as Britain's oldest colony. Thus, 370 years ago, the cornerstone of the commonwealth was laid in what is now the capital city of Canada's tenth province. St. John's therefore provides a link between the spacious days of the first Elizabeth and the reign of our beloved Queen Elizabeth II.
For the citizens of St. John's, therefore, the coronation of Her Majesty, to which such felicitous reference has been made in the speech from the throne, has had a special significance, and they share with Her Majesty's loyal subjects everywhere the hope that the new reign will usher in another golden age for all her people.
It is a source of great satisfaction to free men everywhere that the forces of the United Nations have repelled the aggressors in Korea, and that the carnage there has been halted by a truce. I am sure that all hon. members will endorse the hope, firmly expressed in the speech from the throne, that a political conference will ultimately succeed in restoring peace to Korea. At present however it is well for us to remember that all that has been achieved there as yet is a truce, and a somewhat uneasy truce at that, but a truce of which I feel it may be said, as was said of the peace of Amiens, that it is a truce of which everybody was glad but of which nobody was particularly proud.
It is indeed very true, as was stated in the speech from the throne, that much remains to be done before there can be a permanent and durable peace in the world. That being so, the speech from the throne rightly emphasizes the need for the free nations to continue their efforts to build' up and maintain the necessary strength to deter aggression. In this vital task Canada has, I believe, a major role to play, and one which I feel confident she will play all the more effectively because of the strategic importance of her new province. During the second world war Newfoundland was transformed into the Gibraltar of the west, bristling with naval and air bases which were to play a decisive part in winning the all-important battle of the Atlantic. St. John's harbour, although too small to be used as an assembly point for convoys, proved an excellent convoy escort base for destroyers and frigates. St. John's also rendered very valuable service as a haven of refuge for ships striken by enemy submarines, and as a port of succour for survivors suffering from wounds and exposure.
Aircraft of the Royal Canadian Air Force, based on the great airports of Torbay and Gander, provided an umbrella of air power

for convoys over a vast expanse of the ocean to points where air coverage could be continued by planes operating from Iceland and the Azores. Thus, Newfoundland became, as it were, an unsinkable aircraft carrier guarding the western convoy routes against the ravenous packs of U-boats. She also became one of the sally-ports of freedom for many of the bombers which dominated the skies over Germany, and which, like an avenging host from out of the West, were ferried across the broad Atlantic to Britain, either direct from Gander or by way of Greenland and Iceland from Goose Bay in Labrador.
This brief historical sketch may serve to remind the house of Newfoundland's great strategic value in the recent past. Her strategic importance has not been diminished by post-war developments in sea and air power. The increased cruising range of the super-submarines of today has intensified the threat to the Atlantic lifeline between North America and western Europe. Therefore, in the tragic event of a third world war-which God forbid-the need for an advanced base for the escort of convoys, a base situated one-third of the way across the Atlantic from the North American continent, would be even more imperative than it was a decade ago. Atomic attacks on North America by jet-propelled aircraft would be a virtual certainty. Fighter aircraft, based in Newfoundland, could intercept hostile bombers en route across the Atlantic and harry them while still at a considerable distance from the North American mainland. Similarly, fighter aircraft, stationed at Goose airport in Labrador, could help in repulsing or at least disorganizing trans-polar air attacks along the Arctic approaches to Canada.
Newfoundland's strategic position made a most valuable contribution to the winning of the second world war. It may well be that she is destined to make an equally valuable contribution to the establishment and preservation of a real and lasting peace. The speech from the throne states that:
The alliance of the North Atlantic nations has been effective thus far in preventing aggression in Europe.
Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker, is a strong link in the chain of defence with which the signatories of that treaty are girdling the North Atlantic region.
I turn now, Mr. Speaker, to the question which is of paramount importance to the whole of Newfoundland, namely, the future of her fishing industry. First of all, I would like to assure the government that its scheme whereby the fishermen can insure their boats and gear has met with wholehearted approval in Newfoundland. It is a great boon to our
The Address-Mr. A. M. Fraser fishing industries. It is helping to combat the insecurity arising from the hazards of wind and wave.
There is, however, another source of insecurity against which our fishermen need protection even more, the economic insecurity which is caused by lost markets and low prices.
In the course of this debate, Mr. Speaker, the house has heard a great deal about the problems which farmers of the prairie provinces are encountering in marketing their wheat. I hasten to inform the house that we in Newfoundland have our marketing problems also. Dollar shortages in our Mediterranean markets and in Brazil have severely curtailed the effective demand for our salt codfish and have seriously depressed the price level. Indeed, the situation has become so acute that, only last month, our provincial government was obliged to make an advance of $1.50 a quintal to our fishermen in an effort to bridge the gap between this year's prices and the higher prices obtained last year. This, however, is only a short term expedient. To achieve a real solution of the fisheries problem, long range measures are necessary.
It was, therefore, with keen satisfaction that I read the following passage in the speech from the throne, and I quote:
My government is giving particular attention to the development of markets for our fisheries and to the encouragement of more modern methods in the Atlantic coast fisheries, particularly in the province of Newfoundland where the methods are in the greatest need of improvement.
Hon. members are probably aware, Mr. Speaker, that an important report on the Newfoundland fisheries was published a few months ago. It was a report prepared by a committee of experts appointed under the auspices of the federal government and the government of Newfoundland. This committee, presided over by Sir Albert Walsh, the Chief Justice of Newfoundland, made far-reaching recommendations for the more scientific utilization of our fishery resources, and for the transformation of the social and economic life of our fishermen. The implementation of these recommendations would mean a new deal for the fishermen of Newfoundland. Failure to implement them might well spell the doom of Newfoundland's fishing industry. Already the industry is being deserted by the youth of our island. It cannot long support this drain on its lifeblood.
The earnings and working conditions of our fishermen must be made more attractive if the industry is to survive and prosper. The Walsh report points the path to recovery. But the expenditure involved will cost many
280	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. A. M. Fraser millions of dollars over a period of ten years or longer. In my opinion, this is too heavy a burden to be shouldered by the provincial government. The provincial government cannot go it alone. It needs help from the federal government and on a substantial scale, help, for instance, in the form of marine works and fisheries research, especially experimental processing plants. Two things encourage me to hope that this assistance will be forthcoming. In the first place, there was the recent visit to Newfoundland of the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters), who accompanied the Secretary of State (Mr. Pickersgill) on a tour of the fishing areas selected as pilot projects. In the second place, there is the fact that Newfoundland alone among the provinces of Canada, has been mentioned by name, in the speech from the throne, and that special reference has been made to it in the paragraph on fisheries. It seems to me that these are two encouraging signs that the federal government is fully alive to the fact that the fishing industry is of fundamental and indispensable importance to the economy of Newfoundland.
Before I close, Mr. Speaker, I wish to make brief reference to a matter which, I expect, will engage the attention of this house before the end of the twenty-second parliament. It is a matter to which we in Newfoundland attach the greatest importance, namely, the revision of the terms of union which were signed on December 11, 1948, between Newfoundland and Canada.
With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I shall quote from these terms. Section 29 states that:
In view of the difficulty of predicting with suffi-cent accuracy the financial consequences to Newfoundland of becoming a province of Canada, the government of Canada will appoint a royal' commission within eight years from the date of union to review the financial position of the province of Newfoundland and to recommend the form and scale of additional financial assistance, if any, that may be required by the government of the province of Newfoundland to enable it to continue public services at the levels and standards reached subsequent to the date of union, without resorting to taxation more burdensome, having regard to capacity to pay, than that obtaining generally in the region comprising the maritime provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island.
You will note, Mr. Speaker, that the royal commission referred to is to be appointed within eight years from the date of union. This means that it will be appointed within the lifetime of this present parliament. We in Newfoundland are convinced that the financial terms of union ought to be revised upwards. We do not look for charity. All we ask is our just rights. I firmly believe, Mr. Speaker, that the future of Newfoundland will depend upon the report of that royal


commission and upon the reception it has at the hands of this house and of the government. The action taken will determine whether Newfoundland will be able to live as a respected and self-respecting member of the Canadian family. I have no doubt of the issue, for I have implicit faith in the strength of our cause, in the fairmindedness of this house, and in the sense of justice of the government of this great country.


Mr. H. R. Argue (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, during the time at my disposal I hope to deal mainly with the economic conditions affecting the agricultural industry as I see them.
Before going into that matter I wish to say that I along with other members of this house was very pleased to see Your Honour elected Speaker. I am sure that your election has been most popular in all parts of the house. I feel sure that you will occupy your high position with dignity and that four years from now all hon. members will agree that you have been one of the great Speakers of the House of Commons.
I listened with a great deal of interest to the remarks of the hon. member for Middlesex East (Mr. White). I too certainly think that it is time there was some reform of the other place. However, I do not agree with the hon. member in the type of reform he has suggested. I have the greatest respect for the members of the other place. I have known a number of them personally as members of this house and I am sure they are exercising their duties in the best interests of Canada as they see them. However, I think history will show that the other place has been famous mainly for delaying progressive legislation sent to it by this chamber.


Mr. Speaker:: I think the hon. member
should modify his impression. I do not think he should say in this house that the other place is delaying progressive legislation. Those words should be withdrawn.


Hazen Robert Argue: I did not mean to say anything that might be taken as being offensive. I was merely expressing my opinion in that I felt that the other place had not assisted, shall we say, in getting progressive legislation placed on the statute books of Caanda.


Mr. Speaker:: I think that is a reflection
upon the manner in which hon. members of the other place conduct their business. There should be no reflection cast upon their conduct and I think the hon. gentleman should withdraw those words.


Hazen Robert Argue: I assure you that I am happy to withdraw any words that may be offensive. All I had in mind was the example which

occurred, I believe in 1926, when the Old Age Pensions Act passed by this house was held up in the other place. In making my observation I support the position taken by the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, namely that the best reform that can be brought about is the abolition of the other place.
I want to support other bon. members who have asked for an increase in the war veterans allowance. It seems to me that the government might well have announced an increase in the war veterans allowance in the speech from the throne at the same time it announced legislation to provide pensions for the disabled. I believe that the war veterans who are on war veterans allowance have an excellent case in asking for a pension of $60 per month for single veterans and $120 for married veterans, and that the allowable income ceiling be raised to $1,200 for single veterans and $2,000 for married veterans. I feel that the veterans on war veterans allowance have to a large extent been a forgotten group in this country as far as benefits from this government are concerned.
I should like to see proposed at this session an amendment to the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. The hon. member for Dauphin (Mr. Zaplitny) referred the other night to a problem which had arisen in his constituency where farmers had been unable to seed because of flooding this last spring. As the Prairie Farm Assistance Act is now constituted, no benefit is provided for farmers who have suffered crop losses because they were unable to seed their normal crop acreage as a result of flooding. I should like to see an amendment to the act to provide that when a farmer was unable to seed the acreage he would ordinarily have seeded he would be considered as having had a crop failure for the purpose of calculating the crop failure bonus.
Let us take as an example a farmer who would ordinarily seed 300 acres of crops. Because of flooding he is unable to seed 200 acres but he may get 15 bushels per acre from the 100 acres he is able to seed. Under the act that 100 acres would go into the general formula and assessment and would tend to prevent farmers in that area from getting a bonus when in fact that particular farmer would have suffered a crop failure because the yield on his normal acreage would be only 5 bushels to the acre. At the present time in working out the formula he would be considered as having a yield of 15 bushels per acre.
The Address-Mr. Argue
I had the opportunity yesterday of sitting in for some time at the agricultural conference now going on in Ottawa. I was not there very long before something struck me quite forcibly. I noticed that there was only one member of the government attending the conference, the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner). Agriculture is one of the basic industries in Canada and it is facing difficult problems at the present time, yet this conference of representatives of provincial departments of labour, of farm organizations, of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, of the wheat pool, of co-operative organizations and of farm union organizations was attended by only one cabinet minister.
When the textile workers came to Ottawa to present their case to the government a number of influential members of the cabinet sat in on the conference and heard their brief. Heading the list was the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe), and closely associated with him were the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott), Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg), Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann) and Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier). There were five cabinet ministers present to hear the problems of the textile workers. I am all for it.
However, when farmers come to Ottawa from all parts of Canada, representing an industry probably ten times as large as the textile industry, representing Canada's basic industry, apparently the best the government can do for them is to have one member of the cabinet attend the conference.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If my hon. friend will allow me to make a comment, I would say that that conference was called by the Minister of Agriculture. Other members of the government do not attend unless they are invited. Personally I would be very glad to attend but I have not been invited and I do not know that any other minister has been invited.


Hazen Robert Argue: Well, that confirms the suspicion I had in my own mind, but I did not want to express it. The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) was running a one-man show.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The difference is that ordinarily people ask for the privilege of coming here to state difficulties. In this case it is a meeting called by a minister to discuss common problems-quite a different matter.


Hazen Robert Argue: Well, there may be a difference but I fail to see it. Here you have an agricultural conference, never mind who called
282	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Argue it, and it is taking place in Ottawa. Attending that conference are representatives of the provincial departments of agriculture. I make that comment because when I was at the conference yesterday I heard a number of delegates say, and I will paraphrase their remarks as best I can: We are discussing freight rates and the cost of shipping feeder cattle from the Moose Jaw feeder sale to the Toronto area. Freight rates have gone up 98 per cent-I believe they said-plus a further 7 per cent. It is all very nice, they said, to have the Minister of Agriculture hear this discussion, but probably we should have had the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) here as well.
I certainly think that the Minister of Agriculture should have invited the Minister of Trade and Commerce and other cabinet ministers to that conference.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I notice by the press that he offered to invite other ministers to attend but the offer was not accepted.


Hazen Robert Argue: I did not see that.


Clarence Decatur Howe: I did.


Hazen Robert Argue: I imagine that the conference would have been very pleased to have had the Minister of Trade and Commerce present in spite of whatever press report there might have been, because, when I was there, they were in the main discussing the problem of the huge grain surplus in western Canada and the impact of that grain surplus on all parts of the agricultural industry. They went on to say that the government's reports pointed out that for almost every agricultural commodity produced in Canada, and certainly for all important agricultural commodities produced in Canada, the price trend is down and the forecast is for a further drop in prices of most agricultural commodities next year.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That is not true of wheat, however.


Hazen Robert Argue: It is not true of wheat because it is happening now. We do not have to wait for the price of wheat to start falling. It has fallen 16 cents in the last three months.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Sixteen cents from what?


Hazen Robert Argue: From $2.05.


Mr. Knowles:: The minister had better go to the conference.


Hazen Robert Argue: I think so. They were pointing out that unless a market is obtained for grain a lot of farmers are likely to market increased quantities of grain through livestock. They are likely to increase their


numbers of livestock. As a matter of fact, that was the advice given by the Minister of Agriculture. He said: Produce more livestock, produce more poultry, and feed some of this huge surplus of grain. The delegates got up one at a time and said that might be very fine advice but where would they sell the beef, where would they sell the pork, the cheese, the butter and poultry-and there did not seem to be an answer to those questions.
Those present were given a number of papers prepared by the economics division of the Department of Agriculture, going over the probable future prices for main agricultural commodities. The reports said that beef prices for 1954 may average slightly lower than in 1953.
Beef, they said, will be down. Hogs, the report says, will suffer more than a seasonal decline in the last quarter of 1954. The reasoning for that was that farmers with huge surpluses of grain are likely to increase their production of hogs in 1954. With larger numbers of hogs coming on the market in 1954 the price of hogs next fall will likely suffer more than a seasonal decline.
The reports do not say very much about the price of dairy products. They just imply that prices for dairy products would be down as well. This is what they had to say: The dairy industry in 1954 would probably be as attractive as in 1953 because of the relationship of dairy products to beef prices.
In other words, a farmer will keep on milking a cow producing cream that is turned into butter so long as the price of butter does not fall faster than the price of beef. They said: Well, farmers will probably stay in the dairy industry next year to the same extent as they have in 1953 because dairying will not be any worse than producing beef.
I hope that markets and prices for wheat and other grains will be maintained in 1954, yes, increased in 1954, because an increase will be necessary if we are going to market anywhere near the quantity of grain in store in western Canada. The Minister of Trade and Commerce, speaking to the house on November 18, at the opening part of this session, dealt with the wheat situation. As the minister always does, he painted a very optimistic picture; but here and there throughout his speech there were references which I think suggest that all is not well with the wheat industry and our wheat markets. For example, he stated that sales during the present crop year down to November 4 amounted to 80-7 million bushels as compared with 103-7 million bushels in the same period

last year. In other words, our export clearances of wheat during that period are down 23 per cent. I made the statement a while ago that the price of wheat had gone down from the price commencing in this crop year of $2.05 to the present price of $1.89 per bushel-a drop of 16 cents.
There also has been a substantial drop in the price of No. 1 feed barley, a very important commodity to western farmers. The price last year naturally varied but ordinarily it was well above $1.10 per bushel. Now the price is down to a little over 90 cents a bushel. Those are the agricultural trends prevalent right now. The price of every single agricultural commodity right now is on the way down and the provincial departments and the provincial ministers of agriculture are aware of the situation. I heard two of them speak at the conference yesterday and I took notes of some of the things they said. Mr. Walsh, deputy minister of agriculture in the Nova Scotia government, a Liberal government, had this to say about agricultural conditions in Nova Scotia: Conditions in agriculture in Nova Scotia are the worst in the past nine years; are worse now than at any time since the dominion-provincial agricultural conferences were started back in 1944.
We listened to an address by Mr. Robertson, minister of agriculture for Manitoba, and he certainly did not paint a very optimistic picture of agricultural conditions in that province and the prospects for the Manitoba farmer. He said: The position of farmers in Canada appears to be getting rapidly worse; and he referred to the present state of affairs as "a very pessimistic looking situation." Those are the words of the minister of agriculture in a Manitoba Liberal government.
Here are these representatives of the agricultural industry meeting in Ottawa. They have one cabinet minister listening to the deliberations and they are saying time and again that the outlook for agriculture is not good. I suggest that those representatives should meet the whole cabinet before the conference is concluded and should present their own conclusions, after three days' deliberation, to the government of Canada in the hope that policies may be adopted to prevent a drastic recession in the agricultural industry.
I should now like to refer to some of the things that have been done with regard to the marketing of grain in western Canada over the last few months. I can say quite frankly that I really do not know why some of the policies have been adopted. When the election campaign was on, towards the end of July, the wheat quota was taken off all over western Canada. We saw the spectacle of
The Address-Mr. Argue some farmers trucking their grain 50 miles or 75 miles to a marketing point where there was some elevator space. The lifting of the quota in the dying weeks of the election campaign resulted in the plugging of almost every cubic foot of elevator space in western Canada; and when the new crop came on, and the election was over and the small quota of three bushels per acre came into effect, a great many farmers-in fact, the vast majority of them-could market little or none of their 1953 crop. The small farmer, with a small quota, found himself in a bad way economically.
I think it was a terrible mistake to remove that quota and to allow, as it did, certain farmers who happened to be in a preferred position to jam the elevators with 1952 wheat at the expense of orderly marketing for all farmers of the 1953 crop. What possible reason was there for taking off that quota? Did any agricultural organization in western Canada ask that the quota be taken off? None that I know of. However, it sounded good about that time of the year to be able to get up on a political platform and say, "The market is rosy. Everything will be fine. Look, the quota on wheat has just been taken off and you have the opportunity, if you can, to sell all the grain you have in storage on your farm." Another thing it did result in, however, is this. It resulted in filling elevator storage space in certain line elevator company houses that would not otherwise have been filled. It was a great boon to the line elevator companies to have the quota removed, and to have their elevator houses filled so that they could start collecting from the Canadian wheat board one cent per bushel per month for storage. It was a great thing for the line elevator companies but it has not assisted in the orderly marketing of the farmers' grain.
A somewhat similar thing took place not long ago. The car order book was removed, and the provision in the Canada Grain Act that made it possible for a farmer to order a car. That provision gave him some rights to order a car and to have it loaded with his wheat, something that the farmer had obtained fifty years ago and valued a great deal over the years. But the transport controller removed the car order book. He did not ask the farm organizations what they thought of it, because had he asked them I am sure that every single farm organization would have said, "Leave the car order book provision of the Canada Grain Act alone." The car order book provision was removed. The spotting of box cars now is in the hands of the transport controller on paper, but in practice it is in the hands of the railway
284	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Argue companies. The railway companies and the line elevator companies seem to get along very nicely, and the line elevator companies often get a larger proportion of box cars than they would require if the farmers could market their grain at the elevator of their own choice. Once again something has been done that will add tens of thousands of dollars of profit to the line elevator companies.
Then we had the recent appointment to the Canadian wheat board of Mr. Earle Robertson. He was the assistant manager of the Federal Grain Company at Winnipeg. I do not know the gentleman. Mr. Robertson may be a valuable member of the board as time goes on, but I do not think the minister should have appointed to a government board, which is engaged in the orderly marketing of grain, any member from any company having opposed orderly marketing for so many years. If you want a government board to function successfully, you should have it comprised of members who believe in that type of marketing.
Then we have another provision-and it is a recent one-namely the alternate delivery point. I guess I am not as smart on some matters as I might have thought I was, because I ordinarily thought that an alternate delivery point meant that one farmer had a second delivery point and so that, instead of hauling grain to point A, he might haul it to point B. But that is not what the alternate delivery point means at all. It means this. When the city of Regina, for example, is declared an alternate delivery point, any farmer in western Canada can haul grain to Regina within his quota. Farmers in my constituency, some of them one hundred miles from Regina, hauled grain to the city of Regina, and sold it there. Apparently many box cars were coming to Regina but it was not possible to get box cars at small country elevator points. Instead of distributing a few more box cars to some of these out of the way places, the transport controller sent the box cars to Regina. The wheat board makes it an alternate delivery point and the farmers have to spend 10 or 15 cents a bushel to haul their grain to Regina, where it is placed in box cars and taken to Fort William. That is what is done instead of the transport controller sending a few box cars into their local elevator points.
In the past I have advocated that farmers be given an advance on farm-stored grain. The speech delivered by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) the other day was an argument against any provision for an advance payment on grain held on farms. Again I want to quote a statement


made by the minister of agriculture for Manitoba at that conference yesterday with regard to the financial position of farmers who have large stocks of grain on hand. These are his words:	The farmers of Manitoba in many
districts are "suffering from a definite shortage of money".
Oh, we have heard it said that the farmers in western Canada have lots of money, that they have been getting interim payments, that they have been hauling substantial quantities of grain and that they do not need advance payments. But here we have a minister of agriculture who lives with the situation in Manitoba, and who knows it intimately; and who comes to a conference in Ottawa and says that something must be done to take care of this situation where the farmers are suffering from a definite shortage of money. The Minister of Trade and Commerce says that the experience which the government had two years ago, when they provided legislation for the advance of money to farmers through the banks, did not work out too well. He says, as a matter of fact, that it is too bad but there is over $40,000 still outstanding and that the Department of Finance had to pay losses to the banks in excess of $11,000.
I think that is painting a much darker picture than is warranted. The total amount of loans made under this act was $625,000 and a provision in the act made it possible for the government to pay the banks 25 per cent of the aggregate loans in case of loss. In other words, the government must have thought that there was a possibility that 25 per cent of these loans would go bad. How many went bad? One and a half per cent. The farmers did 1,600 per cent better in paying back their loans than must have been contemplated when the act was first introduced.


Clarence Decatur Howe: That reasoning is about as sound as most of your reasoning.


Hazen Robert Argue: Pardon?


Clarence Decatur Howe: That reasoning is about as sound as most of your reasoning.


Hazen Robert Argue: The minister took one little
point and dressed it all up to make it appear as though this scheme had been a terrible flop and that the farmers, by not repaying their loans, had cost the treasury a large sum of money. It was $11,000. Then the treasury had $1,588.75 paid to it from wheat board participation certificates. There has also been collected by banks from borrowers an additional $125, so the total loss to date on aggregate loans of $625,000 amounted to $9,664.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, no. We have already paid some losses.


Hazen Robert Argue: Pardon?


Clarence Decatur Howe: We have already paid $11,000 or $12,000 in losses.


Hazen Robert Argue: That is not what the minister said. He might have meant to say it but I am not a mind reader, and that is what the table shows.


Clarence Decatur Howe: Look at the table.


Hazen Robert Argue: The table shows net losses of $9,664.


Clarence Decatur Howe: No, no. You just cannot read; that is all.


Hazen Robert Argue: I remember something that
happened in the house last session. I said to the minister that I thought there would be a carryover of grain in Canada at July 31 of at least 330 million bushels. The minister said that was nonsense. He said I was all wet and wanted to know where I got those figures. Well, the carryover was 360 million bushels. I was too conservative in my estimate. If the minister wants to dispute his own figures this time, as he did at an earlier session this year, he can get up at some future time and correct those figures. But I make the statement that, even though the provisions of such loans made it impossible for the vast majority of farmers in a reasonable financial position to get any money, even though it was provided that a man had to be almost a marginal or submarginal farmer to get a loan, even though the banks could only lend $1,000 and no more, even though the loans in the main were, and had to be, to marginal farmers, the plan was a great success because instead of costing the federal treasury 25 per cent it only cost it 1J per cent as of November 18, 1953, according to the statement of the Minister of Trade and Commerce.
I say the minister should not yet give a definite no to the proposition that there should be some advances to farmers for grain stored on farms. I should like to see the wheat board, through the elevator companies, buy grain in farmers' storage on the farms and make an advance payment on such purchases. 1 think that would be more sensible than some of the things that are being done now in western Canada. For instance, if an elevator company can find an old coal shed or any run-down building, jam a few grain doors in it to fill up the holes, and fill the old broken-down building with 50,000 bushels of wheat, it will collect $500 a month in storage charges from the Canadian wheat board. I say it would be far better if the farmers were able to store their own
The Address-Mr. Argue grain in proper storage on their farms and were entitled to advance payment on the sale of that grain to the wheat board.
I say that such legislative action is absolutely necessary now because western farmers are short of money, no matter what anybody may say. I notice that the Minister of Trade and Commerce quoted Mr. Marler, the president of the Alberta federation of agriculture, in his speech. As found at page 129 of Hansard for November 18, Mr. Marler is quoted by the minister as saying:
The answer I am giving to the uninformed public in this matter is that the farmer is in a strong position . . . He . . . has his granaries full and in some instances grain piled in the field. This cannot be reckoned as a calamity but can only be assumed to add up to a condition greatly enhancing his economic position.
Mr. Marler says that the economic position of the farmer is greatly enhanced. Then Mr. Marler comes to the agricultural conference, and what is his solution for the economic problems facing the farmers of Canada? He says that production of wheat is the whole trouble and the way to correct the situation is to have a 30 per cent reduction in acreage seeded to wheat next year. At one time he says there is no problem and that the farmers' economic position is greatly enhanced. Yet when he comes to Ottawa he says that, in order to salvage the wheat producers of Canada, acreage should be cut by 30 per cent next year.
I believe the Minister of Trade and Commerce will turn down that kind of suggestion. I believe the producers of Canada will turn down that type of suggestion because in my opinion it is the duty and the function of the agricultural producers of Canada, as well as of other nations, to produce the maximum quantity of food possible in keeping with good agricultural practice. Let us find markets for all the food products that Canada can produce instead of trying to reduce our production to the markets that we are told are available today. Hundreds of millions of people in the world are hungry. Canada has a great opportunity now to see that our food is sent to needy nations throughout the world. I think that food could play a very decisive role in the battle for peace in the world at this time. I trust, I hope and I believe that the government of Canada will turn down any suggestion that agricultural production should be reduced and that rather our government will encourage agricultural production, will establish fair prices both to the producer and the consumer, and will undertake new trade policies to see that Canada's food production is made available to needy nations throughout the world.

The Address-Mr. Legare (Translation):


Mr. Gerard Legare (Rimouski):: Mr. Speaker, as I am a new member in the house, you will surely permit me to tell you that I have been quite impressed by the atmosphere of dignity that prevails in this chamber. Debates are also marked with dignity, that same dignity that so well characterizes our people and their leader, the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), all of which undoubtedly contributes to the great popularity enjoyed by Canada in all the countries of the world.
Mr. Speaker, you are a marvellous example of that dignity and I would be remiss in my duty if I failed to associate my humble voice with that of all those who have already congratulated you on your appointment and on the numerous qualities that have enabled you to accede to such a high and noble office.
I also extend my congratulations to the new members of the cabinet, to the new parliamentary assistants, as well as to the mover (Mr. Hollingworth) and the seconder (Mr. Villeneuve) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. These two gentlemen have made a promising start, while the new ministers and the new parliamentary assistants greatly deserve the honour that has been conferred upon them.
I was impressed by the atmosphere of the house, but I was also greatly touched by the warm welcome I received from several distinguished ministers on whose door I have knocked since the opening of this twenty-second parliament; I have no doubt that they will always honour me with their friendship although I have taken the liberty of disturbing them rather frequently in the interest of my constituency.
I have listened very carefully to the speech of Her Majesty's representative and I have found that once again the government of our marvellous country was giving due consideration to our problems in order to help all Canadians. I learned with great pleasure that the government intends to make loans easier for the building of houses. I now hope that the sponsors of that project and parliament itself will give it sufficient scope so that it may benefit not only city people but also those country people who wish to build new houses. Rural parishes should be progressing at the same pace as urban municipalities and it is in promoting the construction of new homes even in the smallest parishes that we will promote decentralization and relieve congestion in our larger cities. In giving our rural population as well as our
[Mi. Argue.]
city workers the same opportunity to build their own homes, on favourable terms, this government will contribute to a great extent to the stability of our people.
Another of the numerous government measures referred to in the speech from the throne has given a new lease on life to thousands of Canadians. I am speaking of the disabled whose existence is a nightmare, aggravated by the fact that, unable to obtain financial assistance, they are not in a position to remunerate those who help them. I would like all members of this house to take an ever-increasing interest in them, even should a federal-provincial agreement lead to the granting of pensions to these people. I would like also to see all my fellow citizens more deeply moved by their misfortune and endeavour to make them forget, as much as possible, at least temporarily, their unfortunate physical condition.
This social and humanitarian legislation could have found no better sponsor than the Prime Minister. I congratulate him most heartily on it, as well as on his having been returned to power with his government. Surrounded by men of undisputed ability he will continue to give this country that magnificent forward impulse which will ensure its continued progress. He has shown himself to be a great exponent of peace and democracy and for this reason he enjoys not only on this continent, but everywhere in Europe, after only a few short years of public life, a reputation equalled by only a few statesmen.
Mr. Speaker, the constituency of Rimouski has no fault to find with the administration of this country in the past years. As a matter of fact it once more expressed its satisfaction on August 10 last. However this does not mean that it expects nothing more; on the contrary. I will, in any event, have occasion to express certain wishes in a moment or so.
May I nevertheless be allowed to say that in social security payments alone the Department of National Health and Welfare, in the past four years, has distributed, in my constituency, more than $10,000,000. During the financial year 1952-53, grants totalling $2,606,500 were distributed as follows: family allowances, $1,492,000; old age pensions to those over 70, $1,017,500; old age assistance to those under 70, $97,000, not to mention pensions to the blind, assistance to hospitals, etc.
Mr. Speaker, I should like also to congratulate the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. NOVEMBER 24, 1953
Pearson) for having appointed Mr. Jules Leger as ambassador to Mexico. I had the great honour of being his guest during the pre-inaugural trip of Trans-Canada Air Lines to Mexico and I was pleased to note that the Mexicans have the highest regard for him. On that same occasion, Canada had also another distinguished ambassador in the person of the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin). In brilliant addresses, for which he is particularly noted, he emphasized to public authorities in Mexico that their country's health would fare better if they intensified their commercial relations with Canada.
I would like to be allowed a few more minutes, Mr. Speaker, in order to say a word or two about my county. Everybody seems to know Rimouski, and more particularly so since the catastrophic conflagration which destroyed half the city. Since May 6, 1951, that part which had been laid waste has been rebuilt, thanks to gifts from various governments, and from numerous charitable souls, thanks also to the remarkable courage displayed by the victims. I seize this opportunity to thank the federal government for the two and a half million dollars they gave to those who suffered from the disaster, so that they might build themselves new homes. But one should not think mistakenly that this gift and the other gifts-no more than the various insurances-have made good the losses. In fact, these losses have exceeded $25,000,000, while the relief assistance was no more than about half that sum. The conflagration may have made Rimouski famous abroad, but we must not forget that this publicity has cost the victims an over-all sum of about $12,000,000.
The county of Rimouski, which lies halfway between Quebec and Gaspe, comprises three cities: Trois Pistoles, Rimouski and Mont Joli and includes, besides, several lovely agricultural parishes. Mont Joli is endowed with a splendid airport which, during the last war, was used for the training of airmen from all over the commonwealth and which, since then, has been used mostly by civil aviation. This airport built by the government in my county is today one of the reasons for the growth of the city of Mont Joli. It seems to me that I would be remiss in my duty if I did not bring this fact to the attention of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) and the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton).
In case of another war, I could not object if the Canadian air force were to be based
The Address-Mr. Legare there, but I would think it my duty to ask that civil aviation continue to use that airport. So, if the Minister of National Defence were to contemplate the possibility of having to mobilize completely the Mont Joli airport, in case of international complications or even for the peacetime training of airmen, I would ask him to so inform the Department of Transport for, as I say, it is necessary for the economy of Mont Joli that landing strips remain available to civil aviation.
Rimouski also has its own airport, though it is not quite so large, and I want to thank the Minister of Transport who is having a landing strip built there. Both Mont Joli and Rimouski airports are now widely used by commercial aviation, with many daily flights between the two shores. These two airports will also be used to maintain a daily service between Gaspe and Montreal, via New Brunswick and Maine, if the board of transport commissioners will grant a permit to the Quebec Air company for the operation of that service. Incidentally, Quebec Air's application meets with opposition on the part of Canadian Pacific Air Lines, the very same company that wanted to establish a freight service in competition with Trans-Canada Air Lines.
Rimouski also has an important sea harbour which is largely used by coastal and transatlantic craft. Seafaring activities are progressing every year, and that is why I would need the co-operation of the Department of Public Works for the expansion of navigational facilities. I also am counting on the help of that department in developing the shipyard which is now being built at Rimouski and which is doubtlessly needed in the whole eastern part of Quebec.
I also would like to draw the attention of the Public Works Department to the necessity of developing other harbours or seaports in my county. The harbour of Trois Pistoles in particular would need to be planned in such a way as to be able to receive vessels of higher tonnage; the one at Pointe-au-Pere has urgent need of a shelter where ferries may be accommodated in gales and stormy weather.
Mr. Speaker, the time that is granted me today does not allow me to mention the other parishes in my county and to underline their most pressing needs. I shall certainly have an opportunity to do so some other time. However, I would like to draw the attention of the department right now to the consequences which would follow the realization of a project which has been under study for a few years now and whose object
288	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Legare would be to increase the potential power resources in a certain area of the province of New Brunswick, through the building of dams in Temiscouata. These dams would cause some flourishing agricultural parishes in my county to disappear, thus depriving my county of already too few arable tracts of land. In that case, whoever it may be that attempts to have this project realized I shall feel it my duty to protest and to object to its realization. As long as there remains so many other sources of water power in Quebec and in New Brunswick there should be no question of such a project which would have deplorable consequences. I would even add that the study of this project should be put aside without further delay, so that those who devote their energies to its study may direct their attention to other fields.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I shall express two other hopes, which are close to my heart and which deal with proposals already presented to the cabinet. The first concerns the increasing of the pensions paid to retired employees of the Canadian National Railways or to their widows. The intention the government has shown of increasing the remuneration of our civil servants and the veterans' pensions is already proof of the consideration given by the government to the welfare of the various classes in our society. Retired employees of our national railways are not getting a pension proportionate to the cost of living today. I know however that the Minister of Transport will lend an attentive ear to that request and that he will grant those employees, as has been done in the case of those other groups I mentioned, a higher remuneration.
My last request is for the construction without any delay of a railway on the north shore of the Gaspe peninsula. I do not wish to intrude into the field of action of my friend the member for Gaspe (Mr. Langlois) but I feel it would be in the interest of the entire country to give that district the benefit of railway service. The Gaspe peninsula will be the scene of gigantic development; mining operations are very active, new parishes are being established. However, that beautiful region, which is visited by thousands of tourists each year and which is perhaps the most beautiful part of Canada, has now reached the stage where the construction of a railway is necessary. It is now an economic necessity, and the growth of this district depends a great deal upon it. I therefore suppose that the Minister of Transport will give the matter further consideration without delay and will soon announce its realization.


(Text):


Mr. J. W. Monleiih (Perth):: Mr. Speaker, it appears to be customary, speaking in this debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne, to mention a wide range of subjects, and particularly for freshmen members to speak of their own ridings. In a moment or two I shall do this rather briefly. It is not my purpose to take up the time of the house in uttering a lot of platitudes; but there are certain achievements of the people in the county of Perth and some grave conditions now existing which I feel should be brought to the attention of hon. members.
Before making these observations however I should like to join previous speakers in passing on congratulations through you, sir, to Mr. Speaker. As a newcomer to the house, it is amazing to find how all the knowledge, experience and tact necessary for the proper fulfilment of the great responsibilities of that high office could be centred in one member. If it does not appear too brash on my part as a newcomer, I should like to say that I believe Mr. Speaker does possess those qualities.
And I would also congratulate you, sir, upon your elevation to your present position of Deputy Speaker. It was my good fortune to be associated with you during school days. Looking back I seem to recall that even then you displayed those qualities which now enable you to carry out your duties so admirably.
May I say just a word or two about my thoughts upon arriving here in Ottawa as the duly elected member in the House of Commons for the riding of Perth. I do not think any freshman at a university ever felt more like a freshman than I did on that particular morning. However, owing to the friendship, advice and suggestions offered by members on both sides of the house, I now feel somewhat more at home.
When I look at the map of this great Canada of ours and realize that I am one of the 265 persons sent here to govern the country, I feel very humble. I think we should all sit back and look at that map occasionally so that we may not lose that feeling of humility.
I should like to reiterate the sentiment expressed by the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort (Mr. Bryson) last Friday when he said:	jj (
This is a moment, Mr. Speaker, which I am not likely soon to forget, in rising for the first time to take part in a debate in the House of Commons.
And now a few words concerning my home city of Stratford and my riding of Perth. We are situated in the middle of the garden of

Canada. I think that, aside from our geographical location, this statement is borne out by the results of the recent elections. We are practically surrounded by ridings which saw fit either to return sitting members or to elect to the house new members who represent the party of which I am a supporter.
My constituency, which since the redistribution of 1933 has been known as Perth, formerly constituted two ridings, namely those of North Perth and South Perth. This county in the past has sent many illustrious members to Ottawa. It is my fervent hope that I shall be as faithful and industrious in fulfilling my duties as were my predecessors. Incidentally, I trust I may be excused for mentioning that my paternal grandfather represented North Perth in the House of Commons from 1873 to 1878. During that period, unfortunately, he also sat to the left of the Speaker. I am confident, sir, that, if I may use a slang expression, I shall enjoy going that gentleman one step better and having the experience of moving to the other side of the chamber.
We have in Stratford many manufacturing concerns. Time will not permit me to speak at length about all these business enterprises, of which we are justly proud. I should like however to say something to the house about our largest employer of labour, the Canadian National Railways. We have an investment by the C.N.R. in Stratford amounting to many millions of dollars, in the way of buildings and equipment provided for the repair of steam locomotives. I am greatly concerned about the future of these repair shops, and I do beseech consideration by the management of the Canadian National Railways by way of planning for the future use of these facilities. Since August 10 of this year there have been at least two and, if I am not mistaken, three separate lay-offs of employees. It has been intimated by the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) that these lay-offs are temporary; I can only trust that he is right.
This is serious for us. We feel that, because of the gradual dieselization of this system, unless planning for the future is begun now we are only going to suffer more and more lay-offs. As you may know, the Canadian Pacific Railway recently commenced a new fast diesel service between Toronto and Windsor. Will the present service which the Canadian National provides be able to compete successfully with this? I do not think so. This is a huge, continuously growing Canada and I suggest that the management of the Canadian National grow with the 83276-19
The Address-Mr. Monteith country. Let it develop new ideas to attract passenger revenue and improve freight service.
Surely in an expanding economy such as ours the Stratford Canadian National repair shops do not have to face a gradual reduction in employment simply because the system is becoming dieselized. As dieselization of the system progresses I urge the government to give early consideration to the use that will be made of the facilities provided by the Stratford shops, which facilities represent such a huge investment.
A particularly important attainment in the history of Stratford and of Canada materialized this past summer. I am speaking now of the Stratford Shakespearean festival. That festival was the greatest cultural achievement Canada has ever experienced. Unfortunately its production coincided somewhat with another interesting event in Canada this summer, in that it commenced early in July and ran through until after August 10. Most of us were, I think excusably so, very busy and probably could not find time to attend the festival. I believe it was on July 28 when the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) did squeeze in sufficient time to visit Stratford and incidentally the festival. I only hope he does not now feel that the time thus consumed was at all ill spent.
This festival originated in the mind of a Stratford young man by the name of Tom Patterson. He dreamed of such an undertaking for some time and finally convinced a number of the citizens of Stratford that he had something. This was a terrific decision to make, and I should like to congratulate particularly the promoter and those citizens who gave so unstintingly of their time and energy in the early stages of the production.
I should like to take a few moments of the time of this house to read a few of the objects of the Stratford Shakespearean festival foundation of Canada which was incorporated under the laws of the province of Ontario on October 31, 1952:
1.	To promote interest in, and the study of, the arts generally and literature, drama and music in particular.
2.	To advance knowledge and appreciation of and to stimulate interest in Shakespearean culture and tradition by theatrical performances and otherwise.
3.	To provide for facilities for education and instruction in the arts of the theatre.
4.	To provide improved opportunities for Canadian artistic talent.
5.	To advance the development of the arts of the theatre in Canada.

The Address-Mr. Monteith
There is no doubt that the future of this festival is now assured. I feel that all culturally-minded people in Canada are grateful to those few in Stratford who had the foresight and initiative to make it possible.
I should like to present just a few statistics to show what effect this festival had upon the economy of Stratford and Canada as a whole. A total of 68,800 tickets were sold, 38 [DOT] 1 per cent being sold in the United States. Canadian National ticket sales from Toronto to Stratford were up 55 per cent during July and August, 1953 over the same period in 1952. Bank clearances were up over $3,850,000 during June, July and August, 1953 as compared with the corresponding period in 1952. It will be remembered that this is a city of approximately 19,000 people. Cars were parked in the festival parking lot from nine provinces in Canada and 35 states of the union to the south.
I trust that my words about this undertaking have not taken up too much of the time of the house. If we are through our business in time next summer I do hope every hon. member will avail himself of the opportunity of visiting Canada's greatest cultural achievement, the Stratford Shakespearean festival.
The other day the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor) mentioned in the house that his city possesses the finest water supply in Canada. I would respectfully take issue with that statement as undoubtedly the city of Stratford has that distinction. Our water comes from deep wells and possesses fluorine in exactly the correct quantities as they have been determined up to now. Comparisons have been made with other cities in Canada as to dental conditions, and I think the statistics resulting from those comparisons are favourable to my contention. I shall not burden hon. members with the details. A letter was written by the Department of National Health and Welfare to the medical officer of health of Stratford under date of April 29, 1949. One paragraph of this letter reads:
Stratford is to be congratulated upon its good fortune in having among its children what probably is the best dental condition of any city in Canada. The caries attack rate is more than two-thirds less than in the average Canadian city. It is believed that this is due to the fact that the Stratford water supply, as well as being excellent, contains from its natural sources, 1-3 PPM of flourine.
I feel that letter supports my view that Stratford possesses a quality of water beyond comparison.
I should like to mention that in Stratford as well as in other communities of Perth


county there are several depressed textile industries. These industries, along with dairy machinery manufacturers, appear to be suffering from unfair dumping on our markets from abroad. I expect there will be an opportunity later to discuss these matters.
I have not thus far made any mention of the wonderful farming country surrounding Stratford, nor of the towns and villages of Perth county. The welfare of those towns and villages, as well as the welfare of Stratford, depends to a large extent upon trade with the farming districts. May I point out that Perth county is in the midst of one of the best mixed farming districts in Canada. We have farmers concentrating on dairy cattle and dairy products, on beef cattle, on grains, on cash crops such as sugar beets, on poultry, on fur-bearing animals and on several other specialties. Many of these farmers have legitimate complaints which I feel should command our attention.
The drop in grain prices has been considerable, and this matter has been discussed at some length in this chamber. As a consequence I do not propose to enlarge on the subject. At some future date I may find it necessary to climb aboard with the hon. member for Lambton West (Mr. Murphy) and go for a ride on the sugar beet question.
I should like to bring to your attention the plight of the farmer who has been fattening beef cattle which he bought at say 29 cents a pound, who has been feeding them for several months and then has been forced to sell at say 19 cents per pound in order to meet bank loans. Such an operation cannot have any result other than financial ruin. Then there is the dairy farmer whose monthly milk cheque up until a comparatively short time ago was perhaps $350, but who is now receiving possibly $200. Such a man is in anything but a happy state of mind.
I should like to speak briefly concerning the cheese industry. The hon. member for Hastings South (Mr. Follwell) has claimed that the best cheese produced anywhere in Canada comes from his riding, but in my opinion Perth county has attained the position of producing cheese of a quality second to none. Reports concerning sediment in milk going into cheese production do, I am sure, bear out this contention.
Further, Mr. Speaker, I cannot share the hon. member's enthusiasm for the part the present government and the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) have played in the marketing of cheese. True, the Liberal government did buy 5J million pounds of cheese of last year's make; but was it not still

in Canada? Recent sales to Britain have left the whole industry in a much healthier condition. These sales have achieved the result of assuring the removal of 10 million pounds of cheese from the Canadian market. May I point out that these recent sales to Britain were made by the Ontario cheese marketing board without assistance from the federal government or the Minister of Agriculture. The cheese market has now firmed considerably, and the whole dairy industry will benefit from the fact that this deal was made in a straight businesslike manner without government interference.
May I conclude by stressing that many such benefits would accrue under an economy of free competition.
(Translation):


Mr. Charles Cannon (Iles-de-la-Madeleine):: Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of this twenty-second parliament, I wish to make my first remarks in French, which is the language of the great majority of my electors.
In keeping with the established tradition, I congratulate you more particularly on your election to the high office of Speaker of the house, an office which you fill with so much dignity and impartiality. You have all the qualifications required of the Speaker of the House of Commons, as has been so often repeated in newspapers and magazines in the country. While congratulating you on having been chosen for this office, may I also say that the House of Commons is indeed happy to have a Speaker as talented and as competent as you are.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I also offer you my sincere congratulations. We are confident that you will fill your office with the competence, the dignity and the impartiality which you have always shown as deputy chairman of the committees of the house.
As a member of the French-speaking minority of the house, I rejoice at the fact that the tradition of alternation has again been followed in electing as Speaker of the house a French-speaking member to succeed a member whose mother tongue was English.
(Text):
I wish to congratulate the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth) on his very able speech proposing the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I read it with great interest, and found it fully up to the standard expected of a fellow barrister from Toronto.
(Translation):
I also wish to congratulate particularly the mover of the address in reply to the speech from the throne for having made some of 83276-19J
The Address-Mr. Cannon his comments in French. For those of us from the province of Quebec and whose mother tongue is French, it is always a pleasure to hear our colleagues from the other provinces express themselves in our language.
I also wish to extend my congratulations to the hon. member for Roberval (Mr. Villeneuve) on the excellent speech he made and more especially for bringing back to the Liberal fold the constituency of Roberval which, due to organization difficulties, had temporarily gone astray.
I cannot conclude my preliminary remarks without extending also my congratulations to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) on his personal re-election and on having led our great Liberal party to a second consecutive victory. Even the most optimistic of prophets dared not forecast that Liberal members would be re-elected in such numbers. I am sure that all my colleagues will agree when I say that this great victory we have won is due to the personal prestige and reputation of the right hon. Prime Minister, without whom many of us would not be here.
As far as I am concerned, far from deceiving myself, I recognize that if I was elected m the past to represent the Iles-de-la-Madeleine and if I was re-elected this year, I owe this honour to the fact that I was one of the candidates of our beloved leader. (Text):
Mr. Speaker, the speech from the throne mentioned several important problems of national interest and indicated that legislation is to be introduced to cope with those problems. One of the most serious problems still facing the government today is housing. Although the government has done a lot to solve it in the past, the problem is still with us. I see in the speech from the throne a paragraph reading as follows:
While more houses are being built this year than ever before, the growing population of Canada requires a continued expansion of housing. You will be asked to consider measures to increase and broaden the supply of mortgage money so that more people with moderate incomes will be able to find facilities to assist them to build their own homes.
This will be done through an amendment to the National Housing Act to reduce to about 10 per cent the size of the down payment to be made by prospective home builders, and to increase facilities for borrowing on mortgage. The speech also mentions the revision of the Bank Act which has to be made every ten years according to law. This revision of the Bank Act will afford an opportunity to facilitate the supply of mortgage money for housing.
292	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Cannon
As is well known to hon. members, our chartered banks, under the Bank Act as it now exists, cannot lend money on mortgages. That is to say, they cannot make a loan directly to a client on the security of a mortgage. They can, however, take a mortgage as additional security for a loan that has already been made. As a result of this disposition of our Bank Act the great pool of savings that exists in the chartered banks is not available for new housing, and nearly all mortgage money for new housing at present has to come from six or seven large insurance companies. In other countries this pool of savings is available because savings money is not deposited in commercial banks that do not lend on mortgages but is deposited in savings banks and in building and loan associations which are authorized to. and do lend on mortgages for new housing. .
I have been told on good authority that the government has decided to amend the Bank Act in order to permit the banks to draw on this great pool of savings and lend money on new houses to overcome the shortage of funds presently available for that purpose. Some people may think this is a startling innovation on the part of the government, to authorize the banks to lend money directly on mortgages, and I must confess that I was, myself, a little surprised when the project was first mentioned to me. I immediately thought of the old reason, given to us in law school, for forbidding banks to lend on mortgages. It was to keep their investments in a sufficiently liquid position that they might at any time liquidate them and meet their obligations.
However, if one takes into consideration the fact that the mortgages will be protected by insurance and that precautions will be taken to ensure regular payments of taxes as well as regular payments of insurance premiums, one sees that these loans will not carry any considerable risk. If the banks are obliged to realize on such investments I think they will have no difficulty in selling those mortgages to other banks or loan companies, so they will preserve their liquid position which is so necessary for them if they are to accomplish their functions as institutions making loans out of moneys deposited with them.
Two things are certain. The first is that the people of this country expect the government to see that additional funds are made available for new housing; and the second is that the insurance companies, and other loan agencies who have carried most of the burden so far, cannot be expected to carry it alone and cannot be expected, either, to provide the additional funds now required.


The alternative would be for the government to raise the money by additional taxation or by increasing the national debt, and to use this money by lending it out to people for the construction of new homes.
I am quite sure you will agree with me, Mr. Speaker, when I say that I do not think the taxpayers of this country are ready at this time to endorse either of those alternatives, namely either an increase in taxation or an increase in the national debt, particularly when a simple solution is available such as the one suggested by the government, which is to allow our chartered banks, under certain protective conditions, to make those loans for new housing.
I therefore come to the conclusion that the government's solution to the problem, which is to make available for the construction of new houses the great pool of savings deposited with our chartered banks, is not only acceptable but that the government is to be commended for its initiative under the circumstances.
In the speech from the throne we also find the following reference to free trade:
My ministers are convinced that nations can best achieve economic strength and security through more liberal trade and overseas investment policies and they are continuing their efforts to bring about the progressive reduction of trade restrictions.
This is a reaffirmation of the historical and traditional Liberal principle of free trade, or trade as free as possible. We are a great exporting nation, and for our customers to be able to purchase our goods, we must buy theirs. They in turn, to be able to import our products, must export some of their own to other nations. The key to the prosperity of the world is a reduction in trade restrictions. Our largest customer is our great neighbour to the south. The fact that the recent speech made in Ottawa by the President of the United States did not give us any new ground for hope must not prevent us from continuing to hope that they will not only refrain from increasing tariffs but that they will reduce tariffs in favour of greater international trade which, as I have said, is the key to prosperity and is also, after all, the best way to combat communism.
The subject of foreign trade is of particular interest to my constituents, as nearly all of the smoked fish, salt fish and fish meal which they produce has to be exported because the Canadian market cannot absorb all of those products. At the present time we have a serious problem which arises out of the fact that we have a carryover of bloaters from the 1952 pack. For the information of the uninitiated, bloaters are smoked herring. We also

have a large 1953 pack which is not moving to market in the usual way. There is a surplus of approximately 150,000 boxes that should be disposed of in order to bring the situation back to normal.
The great producers of bloaters are the Magdalen islands and the county of Westmorland in New Brunswick. While mentioning the county of Westmorland I wish to salute the new member for that county who has taken his place in this house, to congratulate him on his election and to wish him a long and productive career in parliament.
These bloaters are produced in the early spring and preparations for their production and packing must be made this fall. In the Magdalen islands we have no hardwood which is required to make the fires to smoke the herring, which has to be imported this fall before the close of navigation. Also, the boxes for packing the herring must be imported during the winter, in the months of January or February. The producers of these bloaters hesitate to go to the expense of buying this wood and these boxes without being sure there will be a market for their products next spring. If the producers decided not to continue in the production of bloaters next spring it would be an extremely serious thing for the Magdalen islands because not only the fishermen but also a great number of people who work in those plants where they produce the smoked herring would be out of work if such a thing should happen.
I have submitted the problem to the Department of Fisheries, and as a solution I have suggested that some of the funds that are available under the Colombo plan to buy food for undernourished countries be used to buy up this excess of 150,000 boxes of bloaters. I understand that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Sinclair) is now on a tour of Asiatic countries who benefit from the Colombo plan, and I am looking forward with keen anticipation to his return because I hope to find him in the right frame of mind to look with favour on the suggestion I make, which is that these bloaters be used as part of our contribution to those countries where food is in short supply.
If the government do not accept my solution I hope they will find some other alternative solution, because there is no doubt that this problem of smoked herring is a serious one, and one that should be solved with the least possible delay.
The speech from the throne also contains a reference to the fishing industry reading as follows:
The scheme initiated during the last parliament for insuring boats and certain gear has recently been improved and is helping to meet the hazards
The Address-Mr. Cannon of the fishing industry. My government is giving particular attention to the development of markets for our fisheries and to the encouragement of more modern methods in the Atlantic coast fisheries, particularly in the province of Newfoundland where the methods are in the greatest need of improvement.
I thank the government for instituting this insurance scheme, which is a very good thing for the fisherman and enables them to insure their boats and some of their fishing gear. A representative of the Department of Fisheries has been in the Magdalen islands during the last few months educating the fishermen to the advantages of this scheme. I feel confident that, when the spring comes along, they will subscribe to it and will gladly pay the small premiums required in order to insure their boats and fishing gear.
In that connection I also wish to express the thanks of the fishermen to the government for the kind offer that was made this summer to advance 75 per cent of the losses sustained as the result of the destruction of lobster traps, if the province were to advance 25 per cent. My only regret is that the province of Quebec refused to co-operate with the federal government in this matter and refused to advance the 25 per cent. This has deprived the fishermen of my county of the 75 per cent which the federal government was willing to advance, and has placed them in a position of inferiority with regard to their neighbours in Prince Edward Island and the other maritime provinces which accepted this offer.
I have noted with pleasure that the government is giving particular attention to the development of markets for fisheries. I wish them every success in this venture because in a great many cases it is essential and vital not only to the prosperity but, I might say, even to the continued existence of our fisheries.
I also thank the government sincerely for the numerous public works that were carried out in my constituency during the last four years, particularly during the last year. I have no time to enumerate them, but I draw the attention of the new Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters) and his advisers particularly to the project of harbour improvement at Portage du Cap in my constituency. Portage du Cap is a place where there is a natural basin which is made to order for the fishermen, but unfortunately the outlet from this basin to the ocean is constantly clogged up by sand and it is very important that work be done there to open up an outlet to permit the fishermen to circulate freely between the basin and the sea outside.
294	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Cannon
In the estimates this year there was a sum of $75,000 as a preliminary amount for this work. Not all of this amount was spent. Some work was done, but it is essential that another amount be voted in the estimates this year so this very important work may be finished, as it will benefit a great number of the fishermen on Amherst island, the second most populous island of the Magdalen island group which I have the honour to represent.
At this point I wish to congratulate the new Minister of Public Works on being chosen for that post and to tell him that the member for Iles-de-la-Madeleine is looking forward to many years of close collaboration with him. I am sure I shall get along as well with the new minister as I did with his predecessor, who was-and I say this most sincerely-a real friend to the Magdalen islands and particularly to the fishermen there.
I note with pleasure the following paragraph in the speech from the throne:
As further steps in helping to improve social welfare, co-ordinated plans for rehabilitation of disabled persons are being worked out with the provinces and a measure to facilitate the establishment nation-wide of a federal-provincial assistance program for totally disabled persons will be submitted for your consideration.
The care of invalids has always been a problem in my constituency. There are quite a number of them, and as the people are not rich it is difficult for them to support these invalids and at the same time earn their own living. Every time the resolution proposed by the hon. member for Terrebonne (Mr. Bertrand), calling upon the government to do something about the problem of helping invalids, has come before the house I have supported it enthusiastically. I am therefore very pleased to see that the government has decided to do something about this problem. I note that it is proposed to give help only to totally disabled persons. I underline this and say I hope this is only the first step in the right direction, because I think that in justice all disabled persons having more than 40 or 50 per cent disability should get help from the government in proportion to the percentage of their disability.
I have three suggestions to make to the government with respect to fishermen. The first one concerns unemployment insurance. I have spoken at length on this matter on many occasions in the house. I have asked that an investigation be made into the possibility of obtaining unemployment insurance for fishermen. An investigation was made and a long report tabled. Unfortunately for me and my electors the conclusion was that the time was not yet ripe to introduce unemployment insurance for fishermen. But


in this new parliament I think in my first speech it is only right that I should repeat this request and point out that it is essential that fishermen be allowed to benefit from the unemployment insurance law.
The investigations that were made showed that in England and the United States fishermen do benefit from unemployment insurance laws, and I do not see why the fishermen of our country should not also receive these benefits. I have been told that to give them unemployment insurance would create great administrative problems; but administrative problems, however great they are, can always be surmounted. I have also been told it is difficult because fishing is only a seasonal industry in this country. Other seasonal industries such as the woodcutting industry have been given the benefit of unemployment insurance and I do not see why fishermen should not be given the same benefit.
In any case if it is impossible to extend the benefits of unemployment insurance to all our fishermen we should at least start with those fishermen who earn wages, those fishermen who are employees. These people are employees just the same as any other wage earners in Canada, and I respectfully submit that as employees it is not fair that they should be deprived of the benefits of the Unemployment Insurance Act from which all other employees in Canada benefit.
I ask the government to give this request serious consideration, and to make a first step in the right direction by extending the benefits of the Unemployment Insurance Act to fishermen helpers, fishermen who earn salaries. As hon. members know, there is a special provision in the Unemployment Insurance Act excepting all fishermen from the provisions of the act, and I have always felt that it was not fair that they should be deprived of this form of social security.
The second suggestion I wish to make is that a co-operative marketing act should be passed with the object of helping cooperatives market the products their members give them for sale. We have on our statutes the Agricultural Products Cooperative Marketing Act which was passed in 1939. Under that act the minister is authorized to guarantee co-operative associations the initial payment made by them to the primary producers of agricultural products. In other words the co-operative is sure of not losing any money on the initial payment it makes to its members. Of course the initial payment is not left entirely to the discretion of the co-operatives; it is settled by an agreement between the cooperative and the minister. However, it

permits them to make a higher initial payment to the members of the co-operative, and is a great advantage for the farmers who benefit by it. There is no reason in the world why fishermen should not have the same advantage.
Fishermen are primary producers just as farmers are, and I come back again with the same argument that I have developed in the house before and which I 'am going to continue to develop until I gain my point. Fishermen should be treated exactly on the same footing as farmers, and all our beneficial legislation in favour of farmers should be extended to fishermen. I say that the government should take the initiative in passing another co-operative marketing act which would be called the fisheries cooperative marketing act and which would permit fishermen's co-operatives to enjoy the same advantages.
The third suggestion I wish to make concerns the telephone service on the Magdalen islands. As hon. members know, that telephone service is operated by the Department of Transport. During the war we had twenty-four-hour telephone service, in other words telephone service at any hour of the day or night, something which the people in the rest of Canada take for granted. On the Magdalen islands we cannot take these things for granted. We had that service during the war, but after the war ended this advantage was taken away from us and telephone service ended every night.
I have asked time and again that we should get twenty-four-hour telephone service, and I am very glad to tell the house that the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) has granted my request in part. Twenty-four-hour telephone service was granted for Grindstone island, which is the largest and most populous of our islands, but it has been withheld from the other two exchanges we have, the exchange on Amherst island, which is the second most populous, and the exchange at Grosse Isle, at the east end of the islands.
Now, I continually receive requests and petitions from my county concerning this twenty-four-hour telephone service. Indeed one came this morning from the chamber of commerce of Amherst island. They point out, quite rightly, that Amherst island is the county seat of the islands. It is where the courthouse is, where the registry office is, and there is no reason in the world why they should not have telephone service twenty-four hours a day.
On that island of Amherst, which is the second most populous, there is no hospital. The hospital is on Grindstone island, over ten miles away. There is only one doctor on Amherst island, and when he is away or ill,
The Address-Mr. Cannon inhabitants have to depend on the three other doctors who all reside on Grindstone island. If the doctor on Amherst island should fall sick or be away, there is no telephone service at night and a very serious situation might arise. There might even be loss of life. Therefore I call again upon the Minister of Transport to give us twenty-four-hour telephone service, and I ask him to make a point of seeing that the estimates of his department this year contain the necessary funds to allow the employment of the additional help that will be required to give us twenty-four-hour service at Amherst and Grosse Isle.
(Translation):
Before resuming my seat, Mr. Speaker, I want to add a few words about a rumour- I do not know whether it is founded or not- to the effect that a system of simultaneous interpretation is to be introduced, so that French speeches may be translated into English and vice versa. I think this would be an excellent idea, for both languages are official and, theoretically, we should be able to speak in French or English whenever we want. Yet, everyone knows that only the hon. members from Quebec and a few from the other provinces understand what we are saying when we speak French, whereas the vast majority does not. That is why I, for my part, generally express myself in English, though I would prefer to speak French, because it is the language of my constituents. That system has been successfully applied at the United Nations, where many languages are spoken. If simultaneous interpretation has proved satisfactory to the great majority of delegates at the United Nations, I believe it would be easier to introduce this system here, where we only have two official languages.
(Text):
Now, Mr. Speaker, there are many other members of this house who represent constituencies the majority of whose inhabitants earn their living as fishermen. I ask all those members to support me in the requests I have made of the government, with the exception of the requests concerning the Magdalen islands exclusively. These requests are for the benefit of all fishermen, and I underline particularly the solution of the problem of smoked herring, the bloaters, the extension of the benefits of the Unemployment Insurance Act to fishermen, and the passing of a fisheries products co-operative marketing act.


Mr. A. B. Patterson (Frasor Valley):: Mr. Speaker, being one of the new members in the House of Commons I feel that I should

The Address-Mr. Patterson first of all recognize my obligation to the electoral district of Fraser Valley and express my appreciation to the residents there for their confidence in electing me as their representative in this house. I recognize the fact that this is not a small honour that has been conferred upon me and I realize that as time goes on, I shall become increasingly conscious of the obligations that accompany the honour.
Hon. members have no doubt heard much about the beauties, the glories and the possibilities of the Fraser valley from the lips of those who have represented that riding in days gone by. It is a considerable riding, extending on the south side of the Fraser river from approximately Aldergrove up to a little beyond Boston Bar, a distance of perhaps 120 miles, and from the river to the international boundary. It includes as well the area along the north side of the Fraser river from Pitt Meadows to North Bend. It is an area that includes some of the very best agricultural land in the province, where small fruits, berries and vegetables are grown in abundance, and also where poultry raising and dairy farming engage the attention of many of the residents. Other industries include lumbering, fishing, mining, and some manufacturing.
For the benefit of some hon. members of the house who will no doubt wish to make their home in that area a little later on, I would like to just pinpoint several of the main areas in our community. In regard to Pitt Meadows, on the north side of the Fraser river, perhaps I should just quote briefly from the publication "The Lower Mainland Looks Ahead", published by the lower mainland regional planning board of British Columbia:
Pitt Meadows, because of soil quality, low elevation and unspoiled land is best suited for agriculture, and urban development should be discouraged. It contains potential industrial sites, however, which could be developed without harm to the surrounding arable land. Industries in these areas could help to provide employment for the Haney area, which in turn should act as the trade centre for Pitt Meadows.
Then the Haney area is dealt with in these words:
The Haney area seems very desirable for urban development. There are industrial sites within or close to it and proper development of Garibaldi park would bring trade to the area, as will the Dutch development in Pitt Meadows.
Then I should like to refer to the Abbotsford area, and I quote:
The Abbotsford area is the crossroads of the valley. It is also the trading centre of a considerable rural area, much of which is not yet developed (50 per cent of the usable land area is undeveloped in Matsqui and 20 per cent in Sumas).

For these reasons alone the Abbotsford area can expect to grow. But two other factors could also promote growth. First, there are suitable industrial sites alongside the railway north of the village. Second, the area would benefit if Sumas mountain were to be developed as a park.
Again, the Mission area is referred to in these words:
The Mission area is already established as a trading centre and also has some industry. There are excellent large industrial sites west of the village and it is not unlikely that industry will find these attractive as sites nearer the metropolitan area become scarcer.
Then as regards the Chilliwack area it has this to say:
The Chilliwack area is very attractive and flourishing. Its economy is mainly agricultural and it has attracted a considerable number of small holders . . . There are some excellent industrial sites nearby in Chilliwack, however, and it is not unlikely that industry might wish to establish there.
Then I would like to refer just briefly to the Harrison Hot Springs area:
By virtue of the natural beauty of Harrison lake and its attractive modern hotel, Harrison Hot Springs is now well established as a tourist centre.
I would also like to refer to Agassiz which is in one of the areas classed by the lower mainland regional planning board of British Columbia as being first-class agricultural land capable of producing a wide variety of crops with high yields.
Further up the valley we have Hope. The future of Hope hinges on regular commercial traffic. It is the only community of any size for many miles. Also it depends upon the tourist trade. Hope's main industry is that of lumbering. Farther up the valley, almost up the canyon, we have Boston Bar and North Bend, which are approximately 40 miles from Hope.
I have just given these few remarks about those areas in order to pinpoint some aspects in connection with the main sections of the constituency. The people of the Fraser valley are optimistic and industrious. Not only are they seeking a livelihood for today; they are building for tomorrow. They are people of vision; not only are they interested in themselves, but they are desirous of assisting in the building of a greater and better Canada. I count it a privilege to speak and to act on their behalf.
Problems of the constituency of Fraser Valley in many instances are those we share with others. Then again there are those which may be particularly our own. In his speech His Excellency made reference to the necessity for a continued expansion in housing. I feel, as do many other members in the house, that adequate housing must be provided to fill the needs and provide for the

enjoyment of our people. This continues to be one of the most insistent problems confronting us. I am sure we are all aware of the importance of housing. But may I say that at the present time houses are practically beyond the reach of a great many of our people in the middle and low income brackets. I am appalled when I see how some of our people are forced to live. I see people, good people, endeavouring to the very best of their ability to bring up their families, to give them advantages, to assist them in the development of character, to prepare them to face life and make a contribution to society; and I am disturbed when I see the conditions under which these people are trying to bring up their children. These housing conditions tend to impede the development of character and, I am afraid, in many cases contribute to juvenile delinquency.
I feel it is the responsibility of the dominion government not only to recognize this matter but, by providing for lower down payments and longer term loans, and by reducing interest rates on housing loans as well as by giving some assurance of continual employment, to make it possible for our people to build and own, or to buy, their own homes. Therefore we suggest that measures be taken to assist especially those families with limited means. In this way they will be greatly assisted in their endeavour to provide adequate and pleasant homes in which to live.
Another problem that has been called to the attention of the house by a number of other members is the plight of our senior citizens. Because of the temperate climate, and perhaps other considerations, we in British Columbia believe we have a larger concentration of Canada's senior citizens than have the other provinces of the dominion. These men and women are endeavouring to do their best with the limited means they have and the little they are receiving. But may I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that when we consider the hardship of the pioneering through which these, our senior citizens, have come, and when we endeavour to appraise the tremendous contribution they have made to the development of their, and our, country, then I suggest our appreciation should be shown in far greater measure than is the case at the present time.
I believe that at the present rate of assistance it is impossible for them to obtain board and room and personal incidentals or, on the other hand, to pay rent and board themselves. I would suggest that the government pay pensions to our senior citizens adequate to guarantee a decent standard of living. Actually 83276-20
The Address-Mr. Patterson these people are not better off than they were in 1939 when they were receiving $20 a month.
Another class of residents in my area who ask for consideration are the war veterans, especially those on war veterans allowances. As I have travelled across my constituency, and as I have conferred with those holding responsible positions in the Canadian Legion,
I have discovered that there is a strong and,
I believe, a justified feeling that, in view of the present cost of living, the basic rates should be raised. It is ridiculous to assume, it seems to me, that allowances of $50 and $90 respectively for single and married veterans are sufficient to provide the bare necessities of life, let alone to live in reasonable comfort, which is their due.
I should like to go on record as supporting their request for basic allowances of $60 and $120 respectively for single and married persons, with the elimination of the means test. I believe also that the permissible ceilings should be raised to $1,200 and $2,000 respectively for single and married persons, as they have requested.
This is not a request for a get-rich mandate, as some would suggest. I believe it is an expression of a sincere desire on the part of these men to engage in labour as their physical condition permits. Not only would this be beneficial to themselves, but it would make them feel they were making some contribution to the sum total of community effort and production. We recognize the fact, of course, that they have served their country well in time of war. Now they desire so far as possible to engage in some constructive effort without being penalized for that effort.
Therefore I wish to go on record in support of their request. I realize that a new provision released only recently has been inserted in the War Veterans Allowance Act, but I am told that the benefits of that section will assist only a limited number of war veterans allowance recipients. The majority are unable to take advantage of or obtain work under this particular section. Therefore they are forced to exist upon incomes entirely inadequate to procure the necessities of life. I would also urge, Mr. Speaker, that their request regarding the establishment of a permanent standing committee on veterans affairs receive the favourable consideration of the government at this time.
Permit me to state as well that I support wholeheartedly the proposal to give assistance to the disabled, as I do the request made by the Canadian National Institute for
298	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Patterson the Blind and the Canadian Council of the Blind on behalf of our citizens who are handicapped by blindness.
A problem that may not concern other constituencies as it does Fraser Valley is the matter of river bank erosion. There are two particular sections in the Fraser Valley constituency that are particularly affected by this condition. In the Agassiz area I am told that throughout the past number of years several hundred acres of the very best farmland have been lost through erosion. In the Albion region, farther down the river, the problem has become so acute that some homes will have to be moved in the near future to save them from the waters of the Fraser. Albion is in the fishing area, and the wash from the fishing boats and also from the tugs that move up and down the river add constantly to the process of erosion.
We feel that this is a problem which cannot be dealt with locally or even provincially. It is one which should have the technical and financial assistance of the federal government. Unless the situation is dealt with and the problem solved the residents of this area envisage the time when the whole area will be threatened. Some of the people have lived there for a good number of years, and they are being forced to watch their lands being slowly swallowed up by the waters of the Fraser river.
There are several other matters I should like to refer to briefly, one being the danger of flooding from the Vedder river in the Chilliwack area. This needs remedial action. The situation is gradually worsening, and grave concern is felt in this district over the ever-increasing dangers that threaten the adjacent area.
There are some other matters to which I should like to direct attention and which concern the people of the Fraser valley very definitely. One is the high cost of feed grain.
I have already referred to the fact that poultry raising, dairying and so on are carried on in my area, and the high cost of feed grain is a matter of great concern to those engaged in these industries. I shall only mention this at the present time, but at a later date I shall refer to it more fully.
Then there is the problem of adequate markets for dairy products, poultry products, berries, small fruits, lumber, fish and other products. For the residents of my constituency to maintain a comparatively respectable standard of living it is necessary that we have continuing and expanding markets for the products of our various industries, and also that adequate purchasing power be maintained in the hands of our people.


I come from the province which has been labelled "wacky" by the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Applewhaite). If people are "wacky" just because they happen to disagree with or differ from the hon. member's particular political opinions and views, then the people of the Fraser valley are in that category. May I say that this federal constituency is represented in the British Columbia provincial legislature by three Social Credit M.L.A.'s, two of whom are cabinet ministers. I should like to assure the hon. member for Skeena that should he choose to visit us in our valley paradise he will find that the people there possess a fairly high, or may I say a very high degree of intelligence, comparable no doubt to that possessed by the residents of Skeena.
In conclusion I should like to refer to an article which appeared in a recent issue of a newspaper, which suggested that there might be a difference of opinion with regard to the basic principles and policies of Social Credit as between the men who have been in the house for a number of years and those of us who have just been elected, especially from British Columbia. I can understand that this thought would arise in the minds of some, but may I say emphatically that there is no foundation for such an assumption or such a statement.
We have aligned ourselves with the Social Credit movement as being the only satisfactory and acceptable alternative to the present system. We have been elected on the Social Credit ticket. May I assure this house that the Social Credit members who have been here for a number of years and we who have been recently elected stand as one in our adoption of and adherence to the principles and policies of the Social Credit movement.
I should like to enlarge further on this thought and say in those memorable words that we believe all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, and that among those are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We believe that God in His goodness has provided sufficient of the necessities of life to house, feed and clothe all the people of the world.
We believe in a system of free individual enterprise with a program of monetary reform which will take the abuses out of the free enterprise system. We believe in international good will and the establishment of an international trade policy under which goods will be exchanged between nations on the basis of mutual advantage to all and

through which the production of the world will be made available to feed, clothe and house all the peoples of the world.
We may not all look as dapper as does our leader, the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Low); we may not all appear as businesslike as the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell); the lion-like expression on the countenance of the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) may not characterize the rest of us, but may we say that we are united in the belief that the principles and policies of Social Credit are sound and are the foundation upon which a greater and better Canada can and eventually will be built.
Mr. Speaker, I thank you.


Mr. A. R. Lusby (Cumberland):: Mr. Speaker, on this my first time to address this House of Commons I shall at the outset join with those others who have extended congratulations to you upon your election to the high and responsible office which you now hold. I have not had any great opportunity as yet to see the Speaker of the house in vigorous action. I am told that this is the honeymoon period, but that after it has expired there will be occasions when a firm hand is necessary. I have no doubt that you have all the qualities necessary to handle any situation that may arise.
I should also like to compliment the mover and seconder of the resolution in respect of the speech from the throne upon the very excellent manner in which they carried out their duties. Finally, while I am in a complimentary mood, I cannot refrain from extending to my fellow Nova Scotian, the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters), my congratulations upon his appointment to that post. He is, I am told, the first professional engineer who has ever occupied it. It seems eminently clear that those duties would call for an engineer, and his appointment is a good precedent. I see that the minister is not in his seat, so possibly I should reverse the situation and compliment the government upon its foresight in appointing him.
I am informed, I heard it from the chair, and I could have judged it from the nature of the previous addresses, that hon. gentlemen who take part in this debate are entitled to a very wide choice of subjects; and I think under those circumstances, although I am not planning to exhaust my allowable time, I should like to take a moment or two to speak of the capital city, Ottawa.
Before I came here to attend this session of parliament my personal acquaintance with the city was slight. However, in the last two 83276-204
The Address-Mr. Lusby weeks I have had an opportunity to enlarge that acquaintance, and I am happy to say that I think the capital city is one of which any Canadian can be justly proud. Even at this season of the year, which I presume is not the most favourable, it is a city of beauty and distinction. One or two qualities I could wish might be added, qualities that appeal to a Nova Scotian. If there were a tang of salt in the air, a pleasant outcry of the sea upon the ear, then even a Nova Scotian would ask for nothing better. But that, I fear, is beyond the powers, constitutional or otherwise, of even the federal government. Besides, from what I hear, the mayor would have to be consulted.
I said that my previous personal acquaintance with the city of Ottawa was quite slight. My last visit here was in June of 1950, when I arrived here with a large delegation from the maritime provinces to press for the construction of the Chignecto canal. That delegation was very representative, and I think it was stated then that it was the largest ever to have reached Ottawa, but it did not achieve its purpose. Unfortunately the timing was very inopportune, as it was coincident with the outbreak of the Korean war. However, I should like to say that in my part of the country the Chignecto canal is still a very live issue. The people there believe that the feasibility and possible economic benefits of the canal have never been thoroughly investigated and that the only suitable medium for such an investigation is a special commission, qualified and independent, to be appointed by the government. They hold the belief that if such a commission were set up its decision would be favourable. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to echo the words of the hon. member for Westmorland (Mr. Murphy) who said yesterday that the Chignecto canal must be built.
I have listened with keen interest, Mr. Speaker, to the various hon. members who have taken part in this debate. Inevitably a great deal of what has been said is of purely local or limited interest, but a newcomer is afforded an excellent opportunity to obtain a comprehensive grasp of regional and national problems and conditions. With many of the assertions that have been made I cannot, of course, agree; but I think this house may compliment itself upon the evident sincerity of all the speakers.
Representing as I do the fine old constituency of Cumberland, I take pride in recalling many sons of that county who have achieved high distinction in this parliament of Canada. I have heard some talk, and perhaps I should not call it boasting, about

The Address-Mr. Lusby the marvellous natural resources of other Constituencies, but if hon. members boast of those, then I think it is in order for Cumberland county to boast of its distinguished men. I speak of them without regard to party.
We may go back to the infancy of the dominion and I will name Sir Charles Tupper, a former prime minister. Then there were the Dickeys, very prominent politically in their time and whose name, I am glad to note, is now borne in this house with increasing credit by a descendant of one of them. In later times we have had Hon. E. N. Rhodes, a former Speaker of this house as well as a former premier of Nova Scotia; and more recently still we have had two men whom I consider great in every sense, Hon. Norman Rogers and Hon. J. L. Ralston. Both those men were, of course, personally known to a large number of hon. members. They both rendered outstanding service as ministers of national defence during the trying times of the second world war.
' All these men were natives of Cumberland county and all, or nearly all, were natives of my own town of Amherst. They are gone now, "townsmen of a stiller town"; but I venture to say that their names will be remembered in this house as long as our democratic institutions endure.
I think, Mr. Speaker, it is fitting, as this is the honeymoon period, that I should also mention at this time that very worthy and conscientious gentleman who represented Cumberland in this house from 1940 to 1953 although unfortunately, at least from some points of view, he was always in the opposition. In retiring from public life may I say that Mr. Percy C. Black carries with him the respect and esteem of everyone who knows him, regardless of their political affiliations.
However, Mr. Speaker, if Cumberland county has in its history some distinguished men of whom it may boast, it also has a number of economic problems of which it does not boast but which must be faced and overcome if we are to maintain and keep high our level of prosperity. The economy of the county is a mixed one. We have farming, mining, lumbering, manufacturing, fishing, and other occupations of lesser importance. I think it is fair to say that the problems of any one group are, in general, problems of similar groups elsewhere in the maritimes.
During this debate I have noted the great emphasis which has been placed upon the problems of the wheat farmer in the west. We in the east understand and sympathize. We realize that the wheat farmer has on his

hands a very serious problem of marketing. We hope and believe this government will play its full and just part in helping to solve that problem; but, Mr. Speaker, a proper perspective must be maintained. I should like to remind this house that the farmers of the maritime provinces, though perhaps not as numerous or as well organized or as vocal as their counterparts in the west, nonetheless constitute a very important segment of our agricultural economy. They too are entitled to a fair share of federal aid and co-operation. In the last election on August 10 the people 'of the maritimes, including the maritime farmers, put a very enthusiastic stamp of approval upon the policies of the government, and rightly so. However, that is not to say that these policies are to be considered as in any way being static, or that there is no room for further advance and progress.
For example, in the matter of assisting in the movement of feed grains from the west to the east, thereby enabling the maritime farmer to lower in some degree his high cost of production, this government has made a very good beginning, but in my opinion that program should be greatly expanded. It should be raised to the level of a settled national policy.
Again, the people of the maritime provinces acknowledge and appreciate the value of the vast marshland rehabilitation program which is being carried out in the maritimes. That work is being done efficiently and well. Yesterday I had the opportunity of speaking with the man in charge. It is expected that it will be completed, or at least substantially completed, well within the lifetime of this present parliament. But I submit that the federal government should take the lead in expanding research to determine new uses to which the reclaimed lands may be put.
Those lands cannot be used profitably again, as they once were, for growing only hay. I believe that research-and this is the day of scientific research-could discover many crops which could be profitably grown on those soils. In particular the feasibility of profitably raising beef cattle on a large scale on those marshes should be thoroughly explored. The experimental farm maintained by the federal government in the county of Cumberland, which farm lies on the very borders of the marshlands, is an ideal and natural centre for such research. A good deal of more or less preliminary investigation into these matters of which I speak has, I know, already been carried out but the work should be greatly intensified and expanded if any substantial results are to be available for the guidance of the marsh owners before the work of reclamation is completed. I should

like to commend the whole subject to the earnest attention of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner).
Like farming, coal mining is an important industry in Cumberland county as well as elsewhere in Nova Scotia. The other day in the course of the debate the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) devoted a considerable amount of time and attention to the problems of the Nova Scotia coal mining industry. Without subscribing to all or perhaps even to many of his views concerning cause and cure, I do agree that the outlook for coal mining in Nova Scotia is grave. If the coal industry is to survive and prosper, new markets must be found to offset those lost through increased competition from other forms of fuel.
Above and beyond the system of freight subventions this government should, in conjunction with the provincial government, initiate an exhaustive program of research- and again I say it is the day of scientific research-in order to determine all possible new uses for coal. I mean not merely new or expanded uses for it as fuel, such as its increased use for the production of electricity or in the coal-fired gas turbine engine, in the development of which the government has already assisted materially; I mean uses not yet commercially recognized. It may well be that the day will come when the importance of coal as a fuel will be secondary to its value as a storehouse and source of chemicals and other substances required for the many new processes of industry which are themselves so much the product of research.
When one thinks of the possible-and I think you may say the probable-fearful impact of atomic industrial power upon the use of coal as fuel, one is filled with foreboding. Should it not be the concern of this government, which played so large a part in atomic research, to initiate a program to determine new uses for the coal which may or almost certainly will be displaced in the market by atomic power when it becomes a reality? I submit that it should be the concern of government, and that that program should foe put into effect without delay.
A third important industry in my constituency is manufacturing. That industry is centred chiefly, though not entirely, in the town of Amherst. The maritime manufacturer, struggling against the handicaps of distance from large centres of population, rising freight rates and the resultant high costs of production, views the immediate future with some concern. In order to have a balanced national economy, I would urge
The Address-Mr. Lushy upon the government the need of encouraging industry in the maritimes; and more immediately I would urge the need of providing more contracts in the town of Amherst in order to keep the level of employment there, high. I would particularly urge the need-; in fact I think I may say the desirability-[DOT]. of utilizing to the full the modern aircraft repair facilities available in the new plant located in that town.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, if I may just have, a moment or two more, let me say this. There is a common and, I think, somewhat bitter saying down in the maritimes that,, compared with the rest of Canada, the maritimes are the tail of the dog. That is an expression which I have heard quite frequently. It is fostered, of course, by economic comparisons. I do not consider that it is a fortunate or desirable figure of speech. Of course, if you consider it broadly, it is very misleading. After all, no one ever heard of the best brains of the dog being located in its tail. But if we accept it just for the moment, and from an economic point of view only, I should like to say that the canine tail is usually a reliable expression of the well-being or otherwise of the whole canine body. To carry the analogy a little bit further, I say that you can have no stable or enduring national prosperity in Canada unless every part of the country has its fair share of that prosperity.
In the speech from the throne mention is made of the fact that some sectors of the Canadian economy have been facing difficulties. The maritimes are one such sector.' Those difficulties arise from various circumstances. They arise from our geographical position far from the centres of population, from the long rail haul and to some extent from scarcity of raw materials. They do not arise from the character of the people. As we face those difficulties with courage and determination, we ask the government to give us a reasonable measure of aid and cooperation in order to assist in overcoming the difficulties.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.
Mr. Hayden Sianlon (Leeds):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to take this opportunity to congratulate you on being elected Speaker of the house. Under your care I am sure the dignity of the house will be well preserved. Like many other hon. members who have made their first or maiden speeches, this is a

The Address-Mr. Stanton moment I shall never forget. Ten months ago even the very idea of having the opportunity to sit in the House of Commons with the other hon. members of the twenty-second parliament of Canada was indeed the farthest thing from my thoughts. But the electors of that grand old constituency of Leeds of which I am so proud, especially since the election of August 10, realizing that it was time for a change, elected me as their member and humble representative in the house, and it shall be my desire to serve them and the people of Canada generally to the best of my ability.
The speech from the throne was rather vague as usual, but I am sure all hon. members received most favourably the announcement that those who are disabled are to receive some assistance. I would recommend that the government give consideration to the textile industry, which is passing through such trying times at present, and that it also give pensions to the blind without a means test, for where are there people more deserving of assistance today than the blind?
It was with pleasure that I listened to the address of the President of the United States, particularly so in that he was quite certain that the joint development of the St. Lawrence seaway would be received favourably by congress at the coming session. This, I am sure, will be regarded as good news by the people not only of Leeds but indeed of Canada as a whole, inasmuch as the beginning of this great project is long overdue.
What could develop our nation more than to have ocean cargo ships able to travel into the very bowels of the continent, a distance of 2,500 miles? What really interests eastern Ontario and especially Leeds is the immense amount of electrical power that could be generated by developing this vast reservoir of water. By having an adequate supply of electrical power together with an improved water route and highway transportation, we in Leeds can envisage an immense expansion of industry from Montreal to Niagara and perhaps as far west as Sarnia and Windsor. Who knows but what this same area may rival or perhaps surpass the Ruhr valley. Indeed, it is our fondest hope. While we are speaking about this great development of the St. Lawrence seaway and ocean-going liners traversing the waterway even to the upper regions of lake Superior, may I say that I am sure the hon. member for Fort William (Mr. Mclvor) will need more than hockey and baseball teams. He will need enlarged wharves and deeper water terminals.
[Mr. Stanton.l

But we must not forget that with expansion comes responsibility at all levels of government, whether municipal, provincial or federal. Each has its particular part to play. The St. Lawrence seaway will mean the deepening of harbours and the extension of wharves. With the increase of population the housing situation will become acute. In fact housing is already at a premium in most of the cities and towns. With increased population will come a need for schools, and our boards of education will be called upon to grapple with this situation. Sometimes we may think we are overburdened with school taxation, but we must remind ourselves that nothing pays larger dividends than preparing the children of today to take their place in the competitive world of tomorrow.
I should like to direct the attention of the government at this time to the railway station we have in Brockville, which is a disgrace to any town or city of that size. It is true that it served the purpose generations ago when Brockville was a town of perhaps a thousand inhabitants, but now with the city and surrounding district having a population of 18,000 people surely we are entitled to something better. We in Leeds, and particularly the people of Brockville, hope that in the not too distant future the building of a new station will receive due consideration.
What we do treasure in Leeds is the beauty of its scenery. What could be grander or more fascinating than a trip through the Thousand islands which are all situated in the St. Lawrence river within the boundaries of Leeds county, of the Rideau canal with its many lakes? There are also the many lakes throughout the central part of the county. I draw particular attention to Charleston lake, with an indented shore line of over 100 miles. We have many thousands of tourists from not only the United States to our south but from the cities and towns of Ontario and Quebec. They come to enjoy our hospitality, view our scenery and partake of the excellent fishing which the lakes and rivers provide.
As my constituency is 50 per cent rural, I would be very remiss in my duties as the elected representative for the riding if I did not bring before the house the plight the rural inhabitants find themselves in at the present time, which is attributable to lower prices for cheese, dairy cattle and beef. This situation has been caused, we must admit, by the loss of markets, more particularly that of Great Britain. Let us take cheese as an example, for we all know, whether we are

whole milk shippers or concentrated producers, that milk manufactured into cheese is the logical way to dispose of our milk surplus.
As I listened to hon. members on my left and their problems with respect to wheat, and hon. members from British Columbia and the maritimes telling about the difficulties of the -fishing industry, I began to wonder if there was a dairy cow in Canada. With all due respect to the farmers of the west and the east, I have been in the west and I know they have their problems at the present time and that they must be rectified. They are faced with an immense amount of wheat now stored in outside granaries. I also realize that the coal miners of Cape Breton and the fishermen of the maritimes have their problems which require the consideration of the government.
The cheese producer of Ontario has a serious problem, which has been extremely pronounced during the past two years. I do not like to talk blue ruin, but it is a fact that these producers have not been receiving a proper remuneration for their product which would give them the purchasing power to maintain their farms, machinery and homes according to the standard which is justly theirs. No man and wife work harder or longer hours than the dairy farmer and his wife. They work 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
I do not desire to delve into statistics tonight, Mr. Speaker, but I should like to give this house a true and comprehensive picture of the situation as it exists today on the dairy farms. I hope to do so by presenting figures to show what the farmer received per 100 pounds of milk manufactured into cheese during the years 1951 to 1953. I should like to make a comparison of those three years. The figures I present will relate to the summer months, because milk production for cheese is seasonal. We find a high price for cheese, say 30 or 32 cents a pound in January and February, when there is no milk produced for cheese. The bulk of the milk which is manfactured into cheese is produced in the months of May, June, July, August, September and October.
During 1951 the average price per 100 pounds received for milk during the months I have mentioned was $2.80, while during 1953 for the same period it was $1.81, or a decrease of 99 cents per 100 pounds or 36 per cent. The average production per cow is 6,200 pounds of milk, and the average herd in Ontario consists of 16 cows. This means the farmer's revenue from milk decreased between the years 1951 and 1953 by $992.
The Address-Mr. Stanton
The farmers who operate dairy farms have other revenue from dairy cows, and a small amount from beef. A farmer would sell, on an average, approximately four dairy cows. In the past he has been privileged to ship these cows to an assured market across the line in the United States. Today this market is a little over half what it was in 1951. If he shipped four cows, therefore, there would be a decrease in revenue of about $125 per cow because in 1951 he would have received from $275 to $300 for a cow while today he would be lucky to receive $150. The decrease in revenue from the sale of the four cows would total about $500.
A farmer generally has two or three cows which he sells for beef. In 1951 he would have received for those cows anywhere from $150 to $200, whereas today he is receiving anywhere from $50 to $75. He would, therefore, have a decrease in revenue from this source of $200. I am safe in saying that the average farmer in the dairy districts of Ontario has suffered a decrease in revenue in 1953 as compared with 1951 of approximately $1,600 or about 40 per cent. These figures illustrate the plight of the dairy farmer today. We read in different magazines that agricultural revenue is down by 24 per cent. I contend that the revenue of the dairy farmer today is lower than in any other branch of agriculture.
It seems too bad that the British market, which we enjoyed for many years, is slipping away. We must realize that our great neighbour to the south is willing to accept our products only so long as there is no surplus of those products in the United States. As soon as there is a surplus of any product within the United States, they have no respect for the trade treaty which they signed at Geneva. They have enacted legislation which permits them to restrict any product coming into their country, and they do not hesitate to put up the bars against our dairy products. This has been a serious blow to the dairy farmers of Leeds county and in fact of the province as a whole.
The high level of business activity in Canada shows signs of falling. Many of the industrial plants which manufacture farm machinery are working only part-time, and this is due to the decrease in the purchasing power of the farmer. I plead with the government to make every effort to expand our markets with the British commonwealth. In the past this has been our best market, our most stable market. We have been hesitant about accepting British sterling, but we must accept it in payment for our produce and trade with Britain or we will find that our dairy farmers, indeed all the farmers in Canada, will be in a wilderness financially.

The Address-Mr. Cauchon Any hon. member in this house who has any knowledge of municipal councils knows how hard it is going to be for many farmers to meet their tax bills, through no fault of their own. Give Canada a strong agricultural economy, with good purchasing power, and you will have a strong national economy which will result in a decent standard of living for all in this fair dominion of ours.
(Translation):


Mr. Robert Cauchon (Beauharnois-Salaberry):: Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I pay my tribute to the hon. member for Vaudreuil-Soulanges (Mr. Beaudoin) on his election to the position of Speaker of the House of Commons. All have unanimously recognized his experience and great ability in parliamentary procedure. It is with great satisfaction, Mr. Speaker, that, on behalf of the people of Beauharnois-Salaberry whom I have the honour to represent in this house, I extend to you our most sincere congratulations and offer our most complete co-operation.
(Text):
Before speaking today on a subject of great importance to my constituency of Beau-harnois-Salaberry, I wish to extend my congratulations to the hon. member for York Centre (Mr. Hollingworth), who so ably moved the address in reply to the speech from the throne-
(Translation):
-and also to the hon. member for Roberval (Mr. Villeneuve) the seconder, who so ably fulfilled his task.
(Text):
The case I am going to present tonight, Mr. Speaker, is that of the textile industry in Canada, more particularly because it affects the peace of mind and well-being of workers in my own riding. If I did not present that case I would be neglecting my duty to those whose confidence enables me to be here today.
Valleyfield is an industrial city of about 23,000 and has a silk mill, a branch factory of Duplan, which is a United States company manufacturing synthetic fibres, and also the Montreal Cottons plant, now a subsidiary of Dominion Textiles. In 1943 these plants employed 3,921 workers, and they now employ only 1,654. I do not feel that I am taking the time or taxing the patience of the house with what is purely a local problem. It goes far beyond that. Possibly it does affect Ontario and Quebec more than other provinces; but we must not forget that in every province there is a textile industry. The total labour force thus employed is about 90,000, and I

should say this is a number not to be disregarded, in view of our population.
The annual total production of that industry is about $800 million, or approximately a million dollars more than the average annual value of our wheat crop.
The basic requirements of some branches of that industry are coal, air, water, trees; even com, feathers, egg albumen, milk and meat scraps. All these are or can be used in making certain synthetic fibres such as nylon, orlon, and others not so well known.
These raw materials are available in Canada; certain of them would otherwise be wasted. Then, too, we have power, coal, hydro, oil, gas, the necessary transportation facilities, and an industry alert to its responsibility to produce up-to-date quality fabrics. And we must not forget that we also have a skilled, conscientious textile labour force.
In spite of these favourable conditions I learn from Mr. King's editorial in the Canadian Textile Journal, of November 6, 1953, that the Canadian textile industry does not have as much of the domestic market as it should. I quote:
The cotton yarn and cloth industry has not much more than 50 per cent of its home market; the wool textile industry has not much more than 60 per cent and synthetic textiles about 75 per cent.
Some economists contend that Canada should have no cotton industry because she does not produce the basic raw material. I do not agree. We must, moreover, face the fact that we do have a cotton industry and that it and its workers have served this country well both in war and in peace. During wartime we were virtually cut off from foreign textiles, but our domestic industry supplied the civilian needs and those of the armed forces, including 400 million pounds of military cotton goods, silk and nylon for parachutes, blankets and many, many other products, down to shoe laces.
Then, too, it supplied the demands for insulation in electrical appliances, fibres used in tires and in brake linings, sports equipment and household goods, such as rugs and oilcloth. And do not forget that this was at a time when United States dollars were most needed.
Let us glance now for a moment at recent trends in this industry. From 1935 to 1939, 73 per cent of the Canadian civilian fabric requirements in cotton, nylon, rayon and wool was supplied by Canada. From 1943 to 1949, 61 per cent was so supplied; in 1950, 68 per cent; in 1951, 66 per cent; in 1952, 55 per cent, and in 1953 an estimated 51 per cent. These figures were compiled by the primary textiles institute.

Can this trend be allowed to continue? From statistics presented by Duplan, and applying to synthetic fibres, I learn that though in 1950 only 10 per cent of Canadian needs was supplied by the United States, today 27 per cent comes from that country. What does this mean weekly in terms of lost working hours? Well over two and a half million.
After a careful study of these figures, and evidence obtained in my home city, I have come to the conclusion that it is with reason that the textile industry complains1 of the dumping of United States goods. Though it is true that the rise in the value of our dollar in relation to the United States dollar did have the effect of lowering our tariff, that could not in itself account for the present depression in the Canadian textile industry.
We must not forget that the cost of American mass-produced goods for a mass market is always below the cost of goods produced in Canada for a small domestic market. The textile industry aided by tariffs has been able, until recently, to meet this competition. When, in addition to this advantage, United States manufacturers by selling below cost an exceedingly small volume of end of the run or off-season goods at home can throw the remaining large volume on Canadian markets, then our industry faces too great odds, and Canadian labour suffers.
How can the textile industry meet this competition? Would anyone in this house suggest that workers' wages be reduced? If so he is unfamiliar with living costs in urban centres. Though I feel very strongly on this question, I shall take time only to point out that to lower wages is at the same time to lower purchasing power.
Remember that this purchasing power of the textile workers supports Canada's other industries, and supports them steadily, not being subject to changes in tariff rates or the interpretation of existing tariffs. Certainly the United States is most conscious of this fact. She always has been, and I can see little likelihood of her changing her policy. The closing of United States branch factories in Canada will hardly influence her to change.
One might say the crisis could be met by reducing dividends. I am not in favour of excessively high dividends at the expense of wages, but can I or anyone else expect that capital will be invested to improve or expand established industries, or develop new ones, unless capital is assured of fair returns? That method, too, would reduce the purchasing power of Canadians.
The Address-Mr. Cauchon
Another way is for the Canadian textile industry to take measures to reduce costs and improve quality, the best way of meeting competition. Can it thus work out its own salvation, and has it tried to do so? It has, we know, kept up with many changes such as swinging to rayon, celanese, nylon and blends. In Valleyfield, Montreal Cottons has spent more than four and a half millions since 1946 in buying new looms, spinning frames, winders and other machinery designed to lower costs and improve quality. It is interesting to note that from 1950 to 1953 the company has lowered prices on all its goods by more than the drop in the price in raw cotton during that period. For instance, broadcloth "A", the largest single item produced, dropped from 52J cents per yard in 1950 to 39 cents in 1953. The company can produce a million yards of cotton per week; it now actually produces 450,000 yards. Established in 1877, it is now one of the largest mills of its kind and makes rayon as well as cotton. It would then appear that this industry is doing its part to meet the challenge, but in spite of its efforts workers have been laid off and their take-home pay severely reduced.
Finally we could re-examine GATT. I am proud that our government has honoured its obligations under this agreement, but I am not sure that all the signatories have adhered as closely to its spirit. The United States is probably justified in its stand on free trade, a stand which means free trade as long as it does not affect the United States labour market. Pressure by United States manufacturing and commercial interests has kept that country strongly protectionist, which is its right. Although we are not strongly protectionist, in the light of the present situation and the possibility of quotas and restrictions on our primary products entering the United States, surely it is our right to protect our industry and workers from unfair competition. By unfair competition I refer to the loophole in GATT which permits goods to enter our markets at sacrifice prices because United States manufacturers have a surplus stock.
Personally I believe such action to be the answer to the problem. In 1950 the United States imposed a tariff of 30 per cent on a certain type and quality of fabrics; the United Kingdom had a tariff of 27 per cent and Canada, 17 per cent. By 1952 our imports rose by about 45 million yards and Canadian production dropped by about 86 million yards.
Just what has that meant to my constituency? There is located in Valleyfield one of the oldest cotton factories in Canada. Its workers, and those of the other two plants in
306	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Winch the city, are now faced with lay-offs, a sharp reduction in hours, small take-home pay and little chance of employment elsewhere. What are they to do? Unfortunately we have no new industries to take up the surplus labour, nor is it easy for workers trained in the making of textiles to adapt themselves to other kinds of labour. They know their jobs and do them well, but they have little chance to acquire other skills.
They can draw unemployment insurance and in some cases would be better off financially to be drawing this insurance, for it would amount to more than their pay for the same period. In 1953 the wages paid will be over $500,000 less than the wages paid in 1950, and this in spite of an average hourly wage increase of 33-3 per cent. I would remind you that in 1950 this company paid Canada $1,343,408.32 in income tax; in 1952 it paid no income tax. I have a letter from the Duplan company dated November 23, 1953 which states:
At the present time, we are running on a very much curtailed basis and if forced to continue to operate on the same basis, our payroll for the next twelve months would only be approximately $200,000 or about 55 per cent of our 1951-52 average.
You can understand my concern for those employed by the textile factories in the constituency which I represent. But because the Liberal government has always protected the welfare of the workers and has been responsible for much of the labour legislation which benefits them, I am confident that it will not delay in taking what action is necessary to relieve the present distress of Canada's textile workers.


Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, rising on this occasion to make my contribution to the address in reply to the speech from the throne I desire first of all to express my great appreciation to the electors of Vancouver East who have given me this opportunity to take my place and make my contribution, be it small or large, accepted or rejected, in connection with the vital issues that come before this House of Commons affecting the lives and well-being of the Canadian people.
I trust that hon. members will pardon me if I make personal reference to being the elected member in this twenty-second parliament for the constituency of Vancouver East. Naturally I take a great deal of satisfaction and pride in the fact that on the first occasion I have had the honour to be a member of the House of Commons I represent a constituency which, although the boundaries are different, is the same by name that I had the honour to represent in the legislature of British Columbia for some
[Mr. Cauchon.l

twenty years. I appreciate also that in this House of Commons I have as my colleague the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway (Mr. Maclnnis) who from 1930 until August 10 of this year represented the constituency of Vancouver East in this house.
I say in all humbleness and sincerity that no matter how long I may be here, one term or for additional terms, at the expiration of that time if I come anywhere near approaching the record of service and achievement established by the hon. member who was previously known as the member for Vancouver East, then when my time comes to leave this august body I shall do so feeling that I have truly represented those who sent me here.
I found it a most interesting experience, Mr. Speaker, to have the opportunity of listening, in one day's proceedings, to the leaders of all political parties in this house. I refer to that day when the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) made his contribution from the opposition benches in reply to the speech from the throne. He was followed by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) as the leader of the Liberal party, by the leader of our own party, the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell), and the leader of the Social Credit party, the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Low).
It was an unusual experience, it was an interesting education, and confirmed what I had been led to believe before I came here. On the surface it appeared that the Conservatives were criticizing and attacking the Liberal government; it appeared that the Social Crediters were attacking and criticizing the Liberal government. But, sir, if you went underneath all their criticisms, all their attacks boiled down to this: that all through every speech-and I have listened most intently-ran the theme of their satisfaction in, and their support of, the glory, the accomplishments, and the perpetuity of the economic system of free enterprise or monopoly enterprise as it should be called in its present advanced stage.
Fundamentally, economically and politically, so far there has been shown no basic differentiation whatsoever between Liberals, Conservatives and Social Crediters. As a matter of fact, after listening to the Conservative and Social Credit criticism I have reached the conclusion that they have only one complaint, and that is that they are not over there running capitalism instead of the Liberals. That is all that is bothering them.


Mr. Hodgson:: All out of step except Tommy.


Harold Edward Winch: Naturally you have heard from the C.C.F. We too criticize and attack but

on an entirely different basis, the basis that it is our sincere belief from study and from knowledge that economic systems are like men-birth, life, decay and death-and that out of the old must come the new.
As responsible citizens of this dominion, as responsible members on the floor of the House of Commons, the senior government of the Dominion of Canada, we have the responsibility of conscientiously planning a transition period from the old order into the new. The old order, which admittedly was required, had to come into being, had a service to perform and did a magnificent job, namely that of solving man's age-old problem of production; of being able to produce, under all circumstances, goods in the quality and quantity required by the human race. Having solved that problem but having failed to solve the problem of distribution, it is now our job to move ahead into a new social order that can solve it.
In other words we in the C.C.F. group are proud to call ourselves socialists. We have a vision of the future; we have an objective in mind, one which I think can very aptly be put in this way. The people of Canada, of all political parties and of all religions, are proud to call themselves Christians. This is as it should be. But from my knowledge of Christianity and the teachings of Christ, He taught co-operation and not competition. He taught social consciousness and not personal profit. For 2,000 years we have been preaching Christianity. Stumbling as we may be doing, criticized as we have been and may still be, we socialists in Canada are consciously striving to achieve an economic order in Canada where we can practise that which Christianity preaches.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Harold Edward Winch: I was interested in the remarks of the Leader of the Opposition when he referred to the Liberals, and especially to the Prime Minister, as "silk hat socialists". I was happy to see the enjoyment with which this was received by the Prime Minister and, I am inclined to think, the chagrin of the Leader of the Opposition in the way the Prime Minister took it. Reference was also made to the C.C.F. as being "Liberals in a hurry".


An hon. Member:: He was right.


Harold Edward Winch: My hon. friend says he was right. Perhaps that was intended to irritate us, to get our backs up. Sir, I have heard that for years. In British Columbia it has been hurled against me, and I do not mind it one bit. I am a socialist and am proud of it. We will do everything within our power to
The Address-Mr. Winch achieve our objective, but we know that you cannot change the world overnight. You cannot change an economic system overnight. Evolution, man and nations, just do not function that way. So, with our objective and our vision we know we have to move step by step toward a new day, toward a new age.
But in moving toward that new day, that new age, that new objective, that new conception, and that new consciousness, there is really something that should be remembered by those who call themselves progressives. It is far more important to do something in policy or in the enactment of legislation because it is the right thing to do than it is to do it because of public pressure or political expediency.
I think the record of the Liberals and Conservatives in Canada will prove, and I say it without fear of contradiction-honest contradiction-that the only progressive measures ever introduced by Liberals and Conservatives in the seats of government have not come about because they were the right thing to do, or because it was time to do them, but because of either the demand and pressure by the public of Canada, or political expediency before an election. We believe that true democracy demands a parliament and a government that moves because it is right, it is just and it is necessary.
Going back, however, to being called a "Liberal in a hurry", I do not mind it one bit as long as you call me a "Liberal in a hurry" knowing my goal is socialism. I would rather be a "Liberal in a hurry" than be a status quo Liberal of the present day, because in my estimation the status quo Liberal of today has lost the Gladstonian touch, if I may put it that way. They do not recognize that a new day and new age require a new approach. I certainly would not want to be called that strange paradox a Progressive Conservative, because not only is there a paradox in the name but, in my opinion, a Conservative represents an antiquated philosophy which is politically moribund and atrophied.


Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: That is what your people thought in England.


Harold Edward Winch: There is a rumbling from my right, Mr. Speaker, but I am not objecting because you always get death rattles from a dying organism.
Mr. Speaker, neither would I want to be known as a Social Crediter. I can assure you that they have no program. They have no philosophy. If so, they have never outlined
308	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Winch it. Fundamentally, if you remove the emotional histrionics, it is conservatism in reverse; and what could be worse than that?
As I said, the C.C.F. realize, as all socialists know, that you cannot change the world overnight. You cannot change the economic system overnight. Although we have a socialist goal, we are living under capitalism. We are living under an administration in the Dominion of Canada that believes in the monopoly enterprise system. Therefore, as elected members and as citizens it is our responsibility to put forward constructive criticisms and suggestions that may influence the government, who alone have the power to introduce measures that will prove of benefit to the country and make for the wellbeing of the people. May I say-I am speaking personally but I know I express the opinion of our entire C.C.F. group-with respect to any legislation that is introduced, if it is good we will vote for it; if it is not good we will say so definitely as strongly as we can, and we will vote against it.
As my time is limited, there are one or two matters I should like to draw to the attention of the government in order to show where I think they stand indicted in their administration of the present system. From Vancouver yesterday I received information to this effect: "Do you remember the woman who telephoned you in great agitation one day during the summer about getting social assistance? Something must have gone wrong. Last night she left the gas jets on".
I remember this case very well. It was that of a woman separated from her husband, who had had no support for many years, who was ill and in need of assistance, and she got it. Single assistance is not very much, even in British Columbia where I think it is the highest in Canada. But out of that she had to pay $40 a month rent. The balance she had to live on, to buy food and to buy clothes.
I know this government and this house have not the only control and jurisdiction with regard to pensions. That jurisdiction is divided among many fields, federal, provincial and municipal. But, sir, I say that in all fields 'of aid to the insecure it is the responsibility of this government, as the senior government, to give a lead in the matter of a decent standard of pensions; and where necessary, because it is the senior government and has the senior forms of revenue, to assist the provinces in their jurisdiction in the matter of pensions.
It may be of interest to the house to know that in the city of Vancouver where I live,


and one section of which I represent, from January of this year until October 37 people committed suicide.


An hon. Member:: It must have been the C.C.F. government.


Harold Edward Winch: No. We have a Social Credit government in British Columbia, not a C.C.F. government. But that is not the point. I do not blame any government. It is the system that is to blame, and what the governments do in operating that system. From 1948 until October of this year 217 people committed suicide in the city of Vancouver. Those figures are official. I got them only this morning by wire from the chief of police of Vancouver. The majority of those 217 who committed suicide were elderly people dependent upon some form of governmental assistance.


An hon. Member:: Were they all C.C.F.?


Harold Edward Winch: I do not ask corpses how they voted, but I notice that a lot of corpses in the last election voted, I presume for free enterprise. Mr. Speaker, if I may continue, of the 217 who committed suicide the majority were elderly people dependent upon government assistance who because of their insecurity, because of old age or physical or other disability, decided that life was not worth living. Legally-and rightfully legally-it is called suicide. But morally Mr. Speaker, it was murder by an economic system supported by three parties on the floor of this house.
I will tell you why I say that. We are living in one of the greatest countries of the world, with the greatest resources and greatest potentialities. Not only do we have the resources and the potentialities, but a country such as this is able to make its contribution in two world wars and. even today deliberately, as a matter of policy, devotes almost half its entire expenditure to defence or war purposes. Yet at the same time we have heard on the floor of this house that there is so much wheat we do not know what to do with it; that we have had the greatest season ever for fish but we have not sold last year's pack; and as to canned fruits, we have not got rid of last year's pack. In British Columbia the yards are filled with timber and we are facing the greatest lay-off in twenty years in the woodworking industries of that province.
I say it is an indictment of this system and it is an indictment of Liberals, Conservatives and Social Crediters who support this system when we pay pensions of $40, $50 and $60 a month to the insecure people of the Dominion of Canada. I say, when they cannot stand any more and commit suicide under the

system, it is murder. We have to do something about it. I hope, sir, we can do something about it in the Dominion of Canada. We are asking this government at this session to rectify the situation, to bring in the necessary legislation, to do its part to raise the standard of living of those who come under its jurisdiction and immediately to work out plans, in co-operation with provincial governments, in order to assist them to raise the standard of living of those who come within their jurisdiction, and the responsibility for whom normally and basically is theirs.
Another matter related to that which I have just been speaking about is housing. I am not going to speak about housing plans as set forth so concisely and explicitly by our party leader. I agree with everything he said. But I do want to speak on a matter that was mentioned this afternoon, namely that of senior citizens' housing. This government has a responsibility to assist in senior citizens' housing. If something were done, it would alleviate a serious situation; and something can be done. Five or six years ago, when nothing was being done with regard to low-rental housing for senior citizens or those in the same pension group, a few people got together in British Columbia and said that something had to be done. They raised a little bit of money. They went to the provincial government of that day and put forward their plans for a nonprofit organization to build homes for old age pensioners and those in that income group.
The idea caught. The provincial government said: "Go ahead and we will give you a grant." This society was known as the New Vista society. I know whereof I speak, because I am a member of it. By statute of the province of British Columbia I am one of the two lifetime directors. I want to say that we could not have gone as far as we did if it had not been for the support and co-operation of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation which came forward and has consistently come forward over a period of years and always granted a mortgage for the work we were doing. I am very happy to be able to say that officials from Ottawa and investigators from all over North America have told us that we have marvellous houses and a wonderful plan.
But here is the point, Mr. Speaker. By the end of this year in this one development alone we will have an investment of half a million dollars in homes, good houses, rented to old age pensioners for approximately $20 or $21 a month, with all taxes, water rates, depreciation, interest, capital and everything
The Address-Mr. Winch else paid. But, sir, that does not touch the problem. What could we not do if we had a senior government in Canada that also recognized a responsibility at least to the same extent as the provincial government and came forward with a matching grant? Then we could proceed not only so much faster and in greater quantity of construction but perhaps would be able to have even lower rents.
I would ask the government to seriously consider giving this matter attention, striking off on a new route-you have not done it before-interesting yourselves in this matter of low rental housing for senior citizens and helping those who are trying to do something strictly on a non-profit basis.
I have two recommendations to make in that regard. First of all, I do not want to be misunderstood. I commend and thank Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for the assistance they have given us, but consider this; that before we are through we will have to pay back to them over double what we have borrowed from them. In other words the federal government actually is not contributing one cent to these projects. They are lending their money and they get it back more than double. It would encourage people across Canada if the government would lower the interest on projects of this type and, as I have already mentioned, consider the making of a grant.
Such a policy is required not only because of the need for housing but also because of the situation in the timber and woodworking industries in the Dominion of Canada. As I said, in British Columbia we are facing one of the tightest crises we have had in twenty years. Approximately 1,000 have been laid off in the woodworking end of our major industry alone. The inspiration of taking the lead in providing houses for senior citizens across Canada, which lead I am certain would be followed by the provinces, would not only provide a partial answer to the housing problem but would provide a partial answer to where we are going to find a market for our wood products; and in giving that partial answer it would mean employment for the people in the woodworking industry of this dominion.
When you consider these matters you have also to bear in mind the unemployment situation. It is getting difficult, and if we are honest we will admit it. It is covered in part by social assistance, the responsibility of the provincial governments and the municipalities. It is covered in part by unemployment insurance, but there are those who are
310	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Winch caught in between. In the green book proposals it was definitely stated that if the provincial governments would sign financial agreements with the federal government this government would accept the responsibility for working out a plan for the maintenance of the employable unemployed who are not covered by any other means. To my knowledge not one move has ever been made by the federal government to fulfil the promise and obligation set forth in the green book proposals.
What is the result? I know that hardly a day goes by without men and sometimes their wives and children coming into our office in Vancouver. Perhaps they are involved in a mix-up with the workmen's compensation board and they cannot get social assistance. They have no unemployment insurance and their rent is due. They are evicted. They have to live, and they come to us as members of parliament and say: "What am I going to do?" The municipality says it is not its responsibility. The province says it is not its responsibility. Ottawa says it is not its responsibility. Then whose responsibility are they? What are they supposed to do? Lie down and die?


An hon. Member:: Commit suicide.


Harold Edward Winch: Commit suicide? We-and I am going to say "we"-have been negligent in that this matter has not been attended to. In view of the growing crisis, in view of the instability of markets at the moment, in view of the fact that we do not know and may not know for weeks or months just what is going to happen with respect to the international markets upon which Canada, and British Columbia in particular, is dependent, this step should be immediately taken. The C.C.F. is asking that the members of the government take under consideration immediately a policy for the fulfilment of the green book proposals, to see to it that no matter from what cause insecurity arises the people of Canada are going to have at least a degree of decency and security.
My time is now within minutes of expiring, and I am going to have to leave for another occasion a number of things I had hoped to speak about. Because I do not want to break the rules or be called to order I want to conclude not by trying to give you any advice, because that is not my position and I would be impudent if I tried to do so, but by bringing to the attention of the government the concluding remarks in the speech made by a former Liberal leader and Liberal premier of the province of British


Columbia. I regret that he did not follow his own advice, and I hope the federal government will. He said:
Where precedent is good, follow it. Where precedent is bad, jettison it. Where new precedent is needed, have the courage and vision to establish it.
(Translation):


Mr. Fernand Girard (Lapoinie):: Mr. Speaker, I believe I am one of the youngest members of this parliament. In that capacity, I take it upon myself to offer, on behalf of all young Canadians, my most sincere congratulations to all those who have been elected to this parliament.
May I also pay my respects to the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) and wish him a long life.
Mr. Speaker, as soon as I came into this chamber, where I have the honour of sitting for the first time, I realized that your recent election as Speaker had been unanimously well received by the members of the government and all opposition groups as being a very judicious choice indeed. The easy and correct way in which you express yourself in both languages once again attests the bilingual character of the Canadian parliament.
As a newspaperman, may I also offer my good wishes to my colleagues of the press gallery whose work in this house is just as important as ours because they have the extremely difficult and delicate task of presenting to the Canadian people all the ideas put forth in this house, whatever value such ideas may have. I sincerely hope that they will soon acquire a professional standing in Canada because, although the pay is small, their profession requires wider knowledge than most other professions.
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of representing in this house the working people of Lapointe county. May I say that I was astonished upon my arrival in the house to see that approximately nine out of ten members did not know where my constituency was located. I believe I am helping all my hon. colleagues by telling them where Lapointe county is located and telling them why the constituency I represent is considered one of the most important in Canada. In that connection, I would like to quote the words of the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) when he spoke at Arvida in my constituency, on August 19, 1952. I quote:
The kingdom of the Saguenay and the province of Alberta are the two parts of Canada which show most promise and which are assured of an extraordinary industrial development.

The county of Lapointe is situated in the kingdom of the Saguenay, between those of Chicoutimi and lake St. John. It includes the towns of Jonquiere, Kenogami and Arvida as well as an important group of prosperous and industrious agricultural parishes.
Jonquiere is the county town. It has a population of over 25,000 and its location in the centre of all the Saguenay towns has earned for it the title of metropolis of the Saguenay. It is an essentially industrial community with its great aluminum and paper factories and a large number of smaller but no less prosperous industries which are a tribute to the spirit of enterprise of its people.
Kenogami, with 11,000 people, is a world paper capital. There may be found the famous Price mills producing close to 2,000 tons of newsprint a day.
Arvida is the third largest town in the constituency. It would be superfluous to recall that in it is to be found the greatest aluminum plant in the world. This plant alone covers an area of 1J miles long by -J of a mile wide and its daily production reaches 2 million pounds of aluminum. It represents a capital investment of $373 million.
The constituency of Lapointe is also a water power paradise with a production of over 2 million horsepower. I shall mention only the enormous Shipshaw power plant which everybody knows, and which is said also to be one of the largest in the world.
It is not without reason that our Prime Minister has said of our district that it was one of the most promising of our country. Recent analyses have established that the iron mines of St. Charles which are not yet developed and which are all located in my constituency are the richest in iron and titanium that we know of in the whole of North America. That is why, together with all other counties of the Saguenay, I strongly support the representations made to the government requesting that the Canadian National Railways, whose intention it is to build a railway connecting Chibougamau to the commercial world, build this railway in the Saguenay district. The importance of building in my constituency blast furnaces, for the development of the iron mines in Chibougamau, is strongly enhanced by the anticipated development of the iron mines of St. Charles.
The Address

Mr. Girard
My county considers agriculture as one of its greatest resources. On numerous occasions its farming class has been cited as a model for its advanced farming methods. I would like to mention the potato growers of St. Ambroise who have allotted to that crop many sandy tracts of land and have made of the district a potato-growing centre now renowned throughout the province of Quebec.
Due to the proximity of some large plants, the urban population of my county is made up of workers. The Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg) was pointing out to me last week that the workers of my district do not give him much trouble. I wanted to bring up this personal piece of evidence to show the spirit of harmony and understanding which characterizes the relations between groups of workers and employers in my county. Our workers belong to good unions which endeavour to get for them fair treatment, without in the process disrupting the harmony which prevails among all the citizens of our county. Our social groups are active and our municipalities are all anxious to outdo one another when it comes to promoting the social and material welfare of their members.
Mr. Speaker, the electors of my county, and more particularly a good number of Social Crediters have entrusted me with the mission of requesting of the government an increase in family allowances. I maintain that if family allowances have been set at the present amount, it is because, in fixing that amount, the government took into consideration the cost of living borne by Canadian families. As the cost of living index has since gone up considerably, it is fair and reasonable to proceed to an adjustment of family allowances, in order to have them correspond to the needs of the family and remain faithful to the spirit in which they were granted at the outset.
The workers of my constituency face numerous problems such as unemployment, taxation, disability pensions and various other social measures. I hope soon to be able to expound them one by one, for those problems deserve very special attention.
Mr. Speaker, before concluding my remarks I would like to submit to the government the urgency and necessity of taking steps to curb the spread of communism in
312	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Girard Canada. I believe that this government, whose distinct duty is to protect our democratic freedoms, should enact legislation outlawing communism in Canada.
The Canadian people have a right to doubt the sincerity of a government which asked them to sacrifice an impressive number of human lives and millions of dollars to fight communism in Korea but which lets communists do as they wish in our country. During the last political campaign, the fact that nearly one hundred candidates were allowed to preach their subversive doctrine to our people was a betrayal of the blood shed by our sons in the fight against communists in Korea. What is more, it is those same principles of democratic freedom, which communists aim to destroy, that enabled communists to obtain free time on the C.B.C. in order to indoctrinate us. Would it be superfluous to recall that their candidates received 59,693 votes in Canada, that is 30,000 more than at the previous election?
The mounted police long ago acquired international fame and I am happy to pay them that tribute in the house. However, our police, although aware of numerous communistic activities detrimental to our country, are unable to curb those subversive activities because they cannot invoke any legislation outlawing communism. Quebec is the only province to have taken action to restrict communist activities through its padlock law. Such an isolated effort from one province cannot be truly effective unless it is completed and strengthened by federal legislation to curb communist activities on the national level.
I would like to quote an authority from outside the province of Quebec, so that I may not be accused of repeating political opinions expressed in my province. I wish to quote the Labour Review of January-February 1949, which calls itself:
The only official organ of the Canadian Federation of Labour.
Under the heading, "Quebec knows how to handle Communists", it states:
(Text):
In no other province is there anything like that general prohibition of communist organizations. Except in Quebec, communist groups can function openly without molestation. They do exist in Quebec, but they operate mainly under cover, and although their outlawry suits their furtive character it does nothing to enhance their appeal to
'Mr. Girard.]

the masses. Quebec's experience belies the contention of super-sensitive civil-righters elsewhere that to deprive the communists of their "democratic" right to organize for revolution and bloody terror would cause communism to flourish underground. The prohibition of communist organization on the surface has probably driven most of what's left of it down below, but it certainly has not caused the foul fungus to expand and extend as the pinko goodwillies tearfully prophesied.
(Translation):
And so on. It concludes as follows: (Text):
But the government of Premier Maurice Duplessis is unquestionably right in planning to withhold from communists an administrative serr vice which, in its aim to promote harmony in industry, runs directly counter to their designs. Until there is enacted by parliament a national equivalent to its general outlawing of communist organizations, which is much to be desired, Quebec seems likely to stand alone as holding the practical solution to the problem of minimizing their opportunities to do mischief in the industrial field.
(Translation):
We haven't the right, in the name of democratic liberty, to suffer that same liberty to be destroyed. There is no need to indulge in a lengthy discussion to establish that fact. One has only to look at the world situation to be convinced of the truth of these statements. The recent inquiries on soviet espionage activities, both in Canada and the United States, have shown to what extent the communist virus strikes at the root of our soundest institutions.
When an absent-minded driver goes through a red light he is immediately penalized by law. This is necessary to ensure the security of our citizens. How much more important it is then to stop these murderers of our liberties who go about this country undisturbed and against whom the law has not as yet provided any stop signs.
I know, Mr. Speaker, that the outlawing of communism will not be sufficient to put a complete end to the ravages of this social virus of the twentieth century. Communism is begotten by hunger, misery and the abuses of capitalism and is best opposed by social measures. The plan put forward by the government in order to encourage the building of homes for small wage earners is, to my mind, a much better method of fighting communism than guns or armies on a war footing. Unless and until the government puts into operation in this country this truly social legislation based on the needs of the family, the very foundation of our society,

no real obstacle will have been placed in the path of communism.
I find it unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, to have to mention that the centralizing program of the government is the ideal ground for the expansion of communism in our country. Allow me to quote in this connection an excerpt from an editorial published in Le Droit of June 12, 1948, which censures the centralizing policy as being the favourite weapon of those who are striving to promote the establishment of communism in our country. I quote:
The communist leaders do not explain to the masses the marxist philosophy under its real aspect and in all its consequences. They speak of a central power which would have a firmer grip over private affairs and social bodies. They are especially in favour of moderate and radical socialist parties which constitute a step toward their goal. State socialism is undoubtedly the antichamber of communism. It makes the people familiar with socialization, nationalization. When the state has succeeded in controlling big industries, it then impinges upon family affairs in all classes of society and becomes "the agent and regulator of all human activity".
Oh, many of those who are all for socialism protest that they want to socialize only certain public utilities, but there is in the party the radical group who are bent on putting into the hands of the government all available resources and all means of production.
If it is true that we must prepare against aggression, it is truer still that the most effective war budget is to be found in a set of social measures which have regard for private enterprise and take into consideration the needs of the family, because charity is more effective than violence and love stronger than fear. There is a first step to take before attacking communism in its most cunning entrenchments, where it takes advantage of the want and the sufferings of the people; there is an all-important measure that must be taken: the outlawing of those who would have as the only social reform world revolution and who make a virtue of spying and of betraying their country.


Mr. Hector Dupuis (Si. Mary):: Mr. Speaker, at the outset of my remarks it is with real pleasure-and not solely to conform to an established tradition-that I join those of my colleagues who have extended to the Speaker their congratulations on his election as Speaker of the House of Commons.
I have known our Speaker for a number of years. He had a hard time at the outset of his career and without his extraordinary courage and his hard work he would not have gained the reputation of a very well-informed parliamentarian.
The Address-Mr. Dupuis
We had occasion-more particularly during the last session-of seeing him act as Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons; members of all parties, from both the right and the left, have unanimously recognized his impartiality and his knowledge of parliamentary law, which gives us the assurance that under his rule all members of the House of Commons will be treated with full justice as they were under his predecessors.
(Text):
I should like to compliment you, sir, upon your holding the office of Deputy Speaker. We noted that last year, on occasions, you presided over the chamber when we sat in committee. Perhaps I am not expressing myself clearly, because I was not prepared to speak in English this evening. I am sure however that you, sir, will understand what I mean-that is, that we have found you completely qualified to perform the functions you are now performing, and we feel assured that your knowledge guarantees for us that your service in the position you occupy will be beneficial in the deliberations of the house.
(Translation):
We just had a general election. The face of this house has not changed much. We see the leader of the Conservative opposition (Mr. Drew) occupying the same seat, which I indeed wish him to occupy for many years to come. We also see our friends from the C.C.F. who have come back perhaps increased in number, but hardly in strength, while our friends of the Social Credit are trying to explain the intricacies of the policy they want to apply to this country.
As for myself, I am perfectly content as to the state of this parliament. The Liberal government, headed by one of the greatest leaders we ever had, has given to this country a good administration. It has probably not solved all the problems in the manner desired, but a government must be given some time to do everything that is required to improve the situation of the country. We must, however, recognize that the present government and, more particularly its leader, have shown much good will and have so ably governed this country that we boast of occupying a most advantageous position amongst all nations of the world. Such results do not just happen. A few moments ago, a C.C.F. member was saying that they have been accused of being Liberals in a hurry.

The Address-Mr. Dupuis Without the slightest shadow of a doubt- the Prime Minister has said the same thing on a previous occasion-times are changing. Fifty years ago anyone who would have advocated the setting-up of an old age pension system would have been considered as an unnatural son. Today that institution is accepted, probably on account of the new problems now confronting every family. It is acknowledged that the government must take care of the older citizens because, through their work, they have served their country, and that an allowance must be paid to them so that they may be assured of a certain security when they cannot work any longer or when they cannot find an employer in spite of the fact that they are still able to do some work.
It is understood that we are progressing more and more in the path of emancipation, if I may use that term, and the Liberal government has realized that it is not a good thing to go too fast but that it is preferable to proceed cautiously according to the requirements of different periods; it is always wise not to do things hurriedly but to resort first to democratic ways of solving out problems.
I have no intention of making a long speech. I have only jotted down a few notes, a while ago. Economic problems were debated and decided during the last electoral campaign. We have heard people trying to lead the electors to believe that it was possible to accomplish miracles, for example to reduce taxes by some $500 million while increasing expenditures by some $1 billion.
It is unnecessary to name the person who said that, because I believe he knows whom I mean. That statement was evidently made with the aim of influencing the people in order to obtain a majority in parliament; it was judged for what it was worth by the Canadian electors.
Many subjects were brought up. They raised, during the electoral campaign, among others, the question of scandalous expenses in the army; they tried to hold government leaders responsible for a waste of money they qualified as unprecedented. But, no doubt, they forgot to talk about the war period of 1914-19 when public money was being wasted on a grand scale. I think that the Conservative party squandered public moneys when, for instance, they issued


soldiers boots with cardboard soles and heels of the same material.
They forgot to talk about the scandal of that period; they forgot to talk about money loaned to certain countries in the sole interest of some commercial and industrial concerns. They did not mention those things, but alleged only small scandals which were scrutinized during a parliamentary inquiry by the committee appointed to study these matters. While they were trying to give undue importance to very ordinary cases of theft, which are, in the circumstances, in no way comparable with thefts occurring in private industry, we realized that there was practically nothing left to blame on the government.
Judgment has been passed on all these things. There has been talk of provincial autonomy, particularly that of the province of Quebec. But, would someone name one person, one single member of this government who has even attempted to undermine the autonomy of the province of Quebec? I say this, Mr. Speaker, that if ever any minister, whoever he may be, would attempt to remove one tithe of autonomy from my province, my first reaction would be, not to cross the floor of this house, since I have but little faith in the sincerity of those who go about shouting about "infringement upon autonomy!", but to protest, to leave the ranks of the party who would have made so bold as to impinge upon the autonomy of my province.
But it may be well to recall that the government, which does not beg for subsidies, nevertheless accepted some without raising any cries about provincial autonomy. It has accepted grants for hospitals, for example, and even for universities on certain occasions.
When the very one who posed as the champion of autonomy was called to order by his own followers, he immediately changed his tune, while continuing to brandish this autonomist flag which is being saluted by the supporters of a party which is represented in this house, although not officially, by a certain group who came here as independents but are made up, in fact, of Tories and disguised followers of the Union Nationale.
Mr. Speaker, all these points have already been raised. It has even been promised- extraordinary promises have been made- that a bridge would be built between Three Rivers and the south shore.

I know very well that the great leader of the Conservative party went to Three Rivers and said: "As for myself, I shall cut taxes by $500 million and I shall build a bridge between Three Rivers and the south shore."
Which reminds me that the partisans of a certain provincial government had promised to build an arena; unfortunately their candidate was defeated, with the result that the people of Sorel had to build their arena themselves.
With all due deference to the Leader of the Opposition, the people of Three Rivers will have to wait until we are able to build a bridge, or build it themselves; it is not that we will act out of revenge, as was the case in Richelieu county but because we cannot afford this when we haven't got the money.
I say this to show what attitude our opponents took during the last election campaign: bold promises, misrepresentation of the facts in the so-called scandals and the so-called encroachments of the federal government on the autonomy of the province. Well, all that was appraised by the electors who rendered their decision and re-elected the party which for a good many years has been contributing continuously to the progress of our country.
For this reason, the speeches coming from the other side are rather dull and include rather obsolete suggestions. All those matters have been thrashed out during the last general election and if I may be allowed to say so, it is difficult to come back to them without being open to ridicule. The value of the Liberal administration, and more particularly during the last parliament, has been recognized in a definite manner and we should now turn towards the future.
There are undoubtedly a number of problems left, which require a serious study by the government. Most certainly, all suggestions volunteered by our friends in the opposition will be welcome. Often Progressive Conservatives are heard to say: We have several interesting suggestions to make; we know what to do in order to lighten the taxation burden, but we shall not speak before the election. It seems to me that one fails in one's duties as a member of parliament when one withholds suggestions which might often be considered and implemented by the government. I do not feel authorized to speak on behalf of the government; however, I am almost certain that the govern-
The Address-Mr. Dupuis ment itself would be most happy to receive from the other side of the house any suggestions that might improve the record of a government whose wish is not to socialize the Canadian people, but to administer the nation's business more and more efficiently.
Now, gentlemen of the opposition, it is your turn to speak but for heaven's sake do not criticize things you are not at all sure about! Especially do not charge the government with sapping provincial autonomy, when you have the strongest safeguard in this matter.
I would speak longer on this question of autonomy, Mr. Speaker, were it not for a commission composed of worthy men now sitting in the province of Quebec. It may sit for a couple of years, and it seems to me that it would be ill-timed to expound a particular point of view and make hasty suggestions, when many associations are just submitting theirs to this commission. I think that would be ill-advised to criticize beforehand any policy which might have been laid down by the government which has set up the commission. I do not doubt in the least that all its members will make a thorough study of the matter of autonomy. In any case, the members of the commission will most certainly study the matter carefully. I do not question their ability and sense of justice, and I am sure they will recognize the jurisdiction of the federal government as well as that of the provincial authorities in the field of taxation.
Had I been given the opportunity, I would have liked to be better prepared to make more elaborate suggestions before the budget because it is too late for suggestions when things are cut and dried. It is preferable to offer our suggestions before the budget is brought down because I do not believe that we can effect many changes in the budget when action has been taken concerning the fiscal year involved.
I wish to draw the attention of the government to a particular point and nobody will be surprised since I represent a riding whose population is made up of workers in a proportion of approximately 85 per cent. Anything which concerns labour is, as a matter of fact, of interest to those who represent that group.
The riding of St. Mary is the home of good and honest workers, who are satisfied when they get reasonable wages, high enough
316	HOUSE OF
The Address-Mr. Dupuis to meet the needs of their families. They would without any doubt accept a raise but they are not in any way interested in creating trouble. They are peaceful citizens expecting to be paid sufficiently to enable them to face their obligations.
There is a special class of workers on whose behalf I have always fought and shall keep on fighting.
Labour unions provide, through their joint committees, for agreements between management and labour, for the drafting of contracts that set the salary rate to be paid to the different tradesmen. But there is still one category of workers who have not yet been able to form a strong organization-and I believe they would be well advised to do so- that would strive to obtain for them a reasonable salary, to which they are entitled. I am speaking of that group commonly referred to as the white-collar workers, the clerical employees and more particularly the people employed by governments, whether it be at the municipal, the provincial or the federal level, who are not getting, in my opinion, the salaries they should be getting. I am not blaming the federal government more than any other, but I believe, Mr. Speaker, that a commission should be established to investigate seriously the salary paid to some employees.
I am told that some employees doing the same kind of work as others in other departments are not receiving the same rate of pay. I know that the federal government is more unjust than others in that field. However, we are not aiming at doing worse than others, but better. I think that, if you compare salaries paid by the federal government and those paid by the government of my province, you will realize that the former is more generous. However, I believe that there is still room for improvement. Wage scales of various categories of salaried people should be examined, such as secretaries, statisticians and others, who, in fact, are not treated on the same basis in all departments. I heard somebody mention store clerks. Well, I feel that if I were a store clerk, a white-collar worker in a private industry, I would start a movement in order to set up an organization, because I am sincerely convinced that the situation is alarming. It is lawful for them to organize, except for the civil servants of my province who are not free to assert their rights, or to submit their rightful claims.


I am however speaking generally since I am not among those who have set themselves the task of being the uncompromising opponents of the working people. I speak for industry in general and I do believe that these people would be well advised to form associations since they have a perfect right to do so and this would be to their advantage.
Certain industries pay their employees very well indeed; fortunately so, and I would like to remind the government of some of its own employees in the various departments, who are not all treated in the same way.
There is another question. I would have liked to discuss it at greater length, but, after all, time is limited and I still have two or three little points to submit to the government. I would like to suggest to the government-and there is no time like the present to do so since the Criminal Code is to be revised-that they consent to an amendment to the Criminal Code which would allow for a national lottery. I am in favour of a national lottery for a number of reasons. I cannot understand that such a thing can be allowed -besides, the words I am now uttering are not new, they are very old arguments often resorted to-I cannot understand that one may legally bet on a horse race, while it is not permitted to buy a lottery ticket to allay misery and at the same time help our hospitals. I cannot understand that people earn $50,000 or $140,000-lucky people-and are not-I do not say they should, mind you- be prosecuted. I fail however to understand such an attitude since they commit an act forbidden by the Criminal Code. They nevertheless win fabulous sums of money. Once again, I do not wish to speak for the case of those who would like to see these people prosecuted in accordance with the law. They hit the jackpot, they do not pay any income tax although it is the result of an illegal act. The result of this anomaly is that the European hospitals reap all the millions, which they get each year, while our hospitals have to rely on grants and donations. I have not the figures here, but I do not think I am wrong in saying that, as a result of different subscription campaigns, there were paid in, during the last five or six years, no less than $50 million in the city of Montreal alone, in subscriptions to hospitals. We went and begged that money from the industrialists, from everyone. In speaking for a national lottery I do not ask that we do away with private charity. But if we can give a few more millions to the hospitals, these subscrip-

tion campaigns could be maintained, because we all realize the great need for beds, which is at the present time the major problem of our hospitals. More than ever we need hospitals for tuberculosis, cancer cases or any other diseases. So, if we were to give our hospitals these millions which go out to Europe, it seems to me that we would do something splendid. I hope I shall not shock any of the hon. members in stating that I have seen how people holding high positions in our universities and in our schools carefully hide the lottery ticket they have purchased, while loudly denouncing the scandal of a national lottery which, according to them, would legalize what they brand as gambling. I am
The Address-Mr. Dupuis even told that some members of the House of Commons buy lottery tickets. I do not know if it is true but I maintain that it is possible. I would be loath to blame those who indulge in such activities; but while this lottery has millions of subscribers, I wonder why we could not, once and for all, legalize public subscription to this type of humanitarian project.
(Text):
On motion of Mr. Dupuis the debate was adjourned.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, November 25, 1953