1953-05-13

Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. This morning's Montreal Gazette contains a story entitled "Canada to Buy Two Ferry Engines Here Despite Lower Bid by British Company." This article is inaccurate and unfair and is calculated to do harm to the Canadian company involved. There are two inaccuracies I should like to refer to, the first of which is as follows:
Opposition leader Drew rapped the government today for not awarding contracts to a British firm which had offered the lowest tenders for engines for two new Canadian ferries.
There is only one Canadian ferry involved. The second inaccuracy is to be found later on, and I quote:
The two ferries involved are one which will operate between Sydney, N.S. and Port aux Basques and the other will link Yarmouth, N.S. and Bar Harbor, Maine.
The Yarmouth-Bar Harbor, Maine, ferry is not involved in this transaction. The third statement which is calculated to do harm is as follows:
After describing the consultation with the C.N.R., the Minister of Transport said he thought that Fair-banks-Morse had "influenced" the ultimate decision.
The word "influenced" is in quotations which would indicate that I had used the word in relation to Fairbanks-Morse. The words I used are as follows, and I quote from Hansard which I obtained this morning:
I think the decision of defence production was influenced to some extent by the fact that the Canadian National Railways had had a great deal of experience with the Fairbanks-Morse engines in the operation of their ferry vessels. For that reason the contract went to the Canadian Fairbanks-Morse people.
Therefore it is fairly evident that at no time did I say nor is there anything in Hansard to indicate that Fairbanks-Morse had influenced the decision. As a matter of fact, Fairbanks-Morse had nothing to do with the decision taken.



PRIVY COUNCIL FOR CANADA


Mr. Daniel Mclvor (Fori William):: Hon. Mr. Speaker, on a question of privilege. Some people like to have the last word, but this time I want to have the first word and congratulate you and the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew) upon your recent appointments and tell the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) that he is a right honourable Liberal in the best sense of the term.



COMBINES INVESTIGATION ACT


Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, in making public the report of the commissioner of the Combines Investigation Act relating to a combine in connection with the distribution and sale of coarse papers in and around Vancouver, British Columbia, I stated that as soon as I had examined it carefully and received the opinion of counsel I would make a further announcement as to whether prosecution would be authorized.
The opinion of counsel is that prosecution proceedings are warranted by the evidence, and accordingly instructions to prosecute have been given.
The attorney general of British Columbia has indicated that the provincial authorities would co-operate.



REFERENCE TO PROCEDURE IN TABLING REPORTS

Stuart Sinclair Garson: I should like to give an answer to two questions which were asked by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) yesterday which were in these terms referring to myself as minister:
Has he received from the investigation side with the qualification that in the view of the commissioner the report need not be made public? As the minister knows, there is a section in the act which permits the commissioner to make that kind of a report, leaving it to the minister to decide whether such report should be made public. Has he had any reports of that kind since the act was amended last year?
I take it that when my hon. friend referred to the investigation side and to the commissioner he really meant the restrictive trade
5256	HOUSE OF
Combines Investigation Act practices commission in each case. Since the amendment of last year the restrictive trade practices commission is now the only body under the act which makes reports which must be published within thirty days after I have received them unless the commission states in writing that it believes the public interest would be better served by withholding publication, in which case I may decide whether the report either in whole or in part should be made public.
My answer to my hon. friend's question is that neither the restrictive trade practices commission since last year's amendment nor, indeed, for that matter, the commissioner prior to last year's amendment have ever submitted to me a report with the recommendation that it be withheld from publication.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might
ask a supplementary question. First, may I thank the minister for making it clear that my questions yesterday did relate to section 19, subsection 3, of the act. My question now is this:	Without getting involved in these
technical wordings, would the minister say whether any kind of report is being held back at all by him or by any of the people in the combines investigation branch.


Stuart Sinclair Garson: Well, my hon. friend asks these questions and one finds when he examines the wording that-and I am sure he does not intend them that way-they have pitfalls in them. When he says "any kind of report" he must know, from the many explanations which have been made in the house, that when an investigation is started, and then discontinued because there is no evidence to support its continuance, a report is made and always has been made to the minister to the effect that the investigation has been discontinued.
The act has never required that such a report be made public. It has always been treated as confidential; because otherwise a person or a company, or companies, in respect of whom an investigation was being proceeded with would be smeared quite unwarrantedly. The only other reports to which my hon. friend, I think, can be referring as "any kind of report" would be reports of that character, which the act has never required to be made public.


Stanley Howard Knowles: One other question; is the minister satisfied that after the coming election we will not find out something similar to what we found the last time?


Stuart Sinclair Garson: If that is what my hon. friend is worrying about, I am completely satisfied.



QUESTIONS


Mr. Spence:: Since January 1, 1945, what amounts have been spent in the county of Roberval, by the Department of National Defence and the Department of Defence Production?


Mr. Blanchette:: I have spoken to the hon. member for Roberval in connection with the subject matter of this question, and he has agreed to have it dropped.


Mr. Speaker:: Dropped.


NATIONAL DEFENCE-DESTRUCTION OF ANTIFREEZE
Mr. Diefenbaker:: 1.	Was any antifreeze destroyed by the Department of National Defence in Regina, during the last year?
2.	If so, what was the quantity in gallons and the value thereof?


Joseph-Adéodat Blanchette: 1 and 2. No.


OLD AGE SECURITY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance, and it is this:	Has
the minister made the report called for in section 11 (4) of the Old Age Security Act which says:
The Minister of Finance shall annually report to parliament the temporary loans, if any, made to the fund pursuant to this section, and whether, in his opinion, the revenues of the fund are or will be sufficient in the ensuing year to meet the charges on the fund without further loans and, if it appears that the revenues will not be sufficient, he shall state what measures he recommends for the purpose of increasing the revenues of the fund.


Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance):: The report has not yet been made.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Will it be
made during the period of this session?


Douglas Charles Abbott: I think it is very doubtful.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Supplementary to my first question, I wish to read these words:
The Minister of Finance shall annually report to parliament.
If, in fact, the report is not made before the house prorogues-which, it is hoped, will be in the near future-does the minister consider that this will not be an infraction of this section in the act? In other words how will we have this report made to parliament

unless it is made now? How can we be sure?


Douglas Charles Abbott: My hon. friend appreciates that the fiscal year ended just a little over a month ago. The question involved, particularly the matter of recommendation to parliament can be answered in this way, that it has not yet been possible for me or for my officials to complete the report called for by the statute, or to include in it the recommendations which are considered appropriate. But the report will be tabled, presumably at the earliest possible moment when parliament reconvenes, and there is nothing in the statute which fixes the term within which the report is to be made, except that it must be made annually.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: One further
question; when was the last report made?


Douglas Charles Abbott: There has been no report as yet, because the act had not been in operation for a full year.


Douglas Charles Abbott: Perhaps I might supplement my answer given to my hon. friend from Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell) and point out to him that it would not be possible to prepare the report required under the Old Age Security Act until the accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31 have been closed. My information is that will not be for another month or two. He will remember that payments under the act can be made out of the fund until the end of April anyway. However, my information is that the accounts will not be closed until another month or two.


REPORTED REQUEST BY UNITED STATES OFFICIALS TO LIMIT CANADIAN EXPORTS OF OATS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and I beg the indulgence of the house to make reference to a press dispatch by Associated Press from Washington under the dateline of May 10. It is to the effect that the secretary of agriculture, Mr. Benson, has asked Canadian officials to cut down on oats exports to the United States. Senator Young, Republican from North Dakota, told a reporter that he has a letter from Benson telling of this move.
My question is this:	Has the Canadian
government any request from the American
Inquiries of the Ministry government to cut down on oat exports, or to limit oat exports to the United States by executive order, or otherwise? If so, what has been the reply of the Canadian government?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, so far as I can find, no communication has been sent by the United States government to the Canadian government in that regard. There has been difficulty about Canadian oats being delivered in the United States market in very large quantities. Our officers have discussed the situation with the officers of the United States Department of Agriculture, but I am not aware that any conclusion has been reached.
I notice that the last paragraph in the dispatch states this:
Young had asked Benson what action he planned to take. Benson replied that two methods are under study. One would be the use of import quotas on Canadian oats. The other would be asking Canada to limit exports.
I might say that it is the practice of this government to prefer action by Canada rather than action by another government.


John George Diefenbaker: Is any such action being considered by Canada that would limit exports?


Clarence Decatur Howe: Anything I might say about the marketing of oats would be disturbing to those responsible for the marketing of them. I can assure the hon. member that the situation is being taken seriously, and a procedure is being conducted which we hope will be adequate.


IMPORTATION OF IRON CASTINGS FROM JAPAN
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. W. Noseworfhy (York South):: should like to ask whether the Minister of Trade and Commerce has received any information regarding the importation of iron castings from Japan. I asked my question about ten days ago.


Clarence Decatur Howe: The dominion bureau of
statistics reports that no importations are on record up to the time for which statistics were available, which was to the end of March. I have had inquiries made of the customs branch of the Department of National Revenue as to whether there have been later importations, and I have not yet received a reply.

Inquiries of the Ministry
IRRIGATION	LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT


SOUTH SASKATCHEWAN RIVER-DISCUSSION BETWEEN MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND PREMIER OF SASKATCHEWAN
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: should like to ask a question of the Prime Minister, or possibly the Minister of Agriculture. Is either of them in a position to report as to whether any tentative arrangements were entered into between the premier of Saskatchewan, Mr. Douglas, and the Minister of Agriculture relative to the Saskatchewan river dam and irrigation project, parliament as yet having had no report respecting those conversations?


Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture):: For the reason that the leader of the C.C.F. party asked a similar question yesterday when I was not here, I brought along with me this morning the only report there is of the meeting held in Regina. This is a report which was made by the premier of Saskatchewan. At the end of the conference which we had I was asked what report should be put out. I stated to the premier that he might put out whatever report he saw fit, but that I was not putting out any report. I am in every way satisfied with the report which the premier did put out and I think the best way of answering the question is to read that report, which is very short. It was published in the Regina Leader-Post on May 8, 1953, as follows:
The following is the text of Premier Douglas's statement Thursday afternoon:
"This morning the Right Hon. J. G. Gardiner met with the Saskatchewan cabinet for some two and one half hours. The main purpose of the meeting was to discuss Mr. Gardiner's letter of April 24 in which he asked the Saskatchewan government to submit a proposal as to what share of the cost they were prepared to assume in connection with the construction of the South Saskatchewan river development project. Mr. Gardiner clarified some of the conditions outlined in his letter and amplified the federal government's position with regard to the project.
"As a result of these discussions the Saskatchewan government has asked that the prairie provinces water board be convened at the earliest possible date in order that Saskatchewan may renew its application for an allocation of water. The Saskatchewan government has also agreed to submit to the federal government a proposal outlining the share of the costs which it is prepared to assume if the federal government will proceed with the undertaking."
That is the complete report and the only thing I have to add is that the water board has been called to meet on Friday, the day after tomorrow.


PROVISION OF FACILITIES DURING ALTERATIONS AND REPAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might have the indulgence of the house for a moment to raise a question regarding the library. I understand the library is to be out of action for the next two years and I wonder if Your Honour might be good enough to say a word to the house indicating the proposed arrangements, which I think will be of great importance not only from the point of view of members, but also from the point of view of the library staff.


Mr. Speaker:: I can say that the question of making satisfactory arrangements for the library so that hon. members will be able to obtain the books they require during the repairs and alterations of the library has received very careful consideration not only by myself but also by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) and the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier). After giving the matter very careful consideration it was decided that during the next year a portion of the reading room would be used as a library. Hon. members will realize that facilities will not be as complete during the period of reparation as they are at the present time. The librarians are endeavouring to work out a plan whereby the books which are used most frequently by members of parliament will at all times be available. How successful the new arrangements will be can only be determined by experience.
I want to take this opportunity of expressing my appreciation, and I am sure the appreciation of all hon. members, of the hard work, the interest and the enthusiasm with which the librarians and the staff have entered upon their task. I do hope that the arrangements will be as satisfactory as possible under the circumstances.

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


DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES
[Stage Direction]
133.	Markets and economics service, $211,815.
Mr. Browne (Si. John's West):: I wonder if the minister can tell us something about the operation of this branch. Do the officials of the branch have anything to do with markets in Brazil, Portugal and Spain?


Mr, Sinclair:: The foreign markets are handled by the Department of Trade and Commerce through their trade commissioners. The markets and economics division is the division which gives assistance to the industry in Canada. Foreign trade is handled by other departments.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
135. Industrial development service, $250,000.
William Joseph Browne: Has the
position of chairman been filled? I notice there is no vote for chairman of the board.


Mr. Sinclair:: Mr. Gushue, the previous chairman, is now president of Memorial university and we have combined the office of Mr. Bradbury and that of the chairman. That is the reason for the substantial reduction in the estimate.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
The Chairman:: There is a supplementary item here, No. 661.
661. Industrial development service-further amount required, $1,000,000.


William Joseph Browne: Who is going to have to do with the administration of this branch? What department will administer this?


James Sinclair: The industrial and technical service branches of the department will administer it. This vote is the first step we are taking to implement the recommendations of the Walsh report which is of such interest in Newfoundland. As I said last night, we were very anxious that the report be submitted before this session ended so that we could actually start this summer. As soon as the report was received by the government the Prime Minister set up an interdepartmental committee with representatives from the departments of finance, fisheries, labour, mines and technical surveys, public works, resources and development, and transport. Those officials reviewed the report and recommended a program which we can embark on this summer. The hon. member for St. John's West has studied the report, I know. Unfortunately, however, it is not as yet available for general distribution but the main recommendations at the conclusion of the report divided the responsibility amongst the three groups concerned, the provincial government, federal government and industry. Our interest is in the continuation and expansion of the work we have started to do over the last three years-experiments in fishing, more work in biological research and also in the technical end of handling fish, demonstration of new fishing techniques, and the 68108-332
Supply-Fisheries
first steps in building up central communities along the northeast coast in order to attract fishermen to those communities with better community facilities in the way of wharves and breakwaters, and assistance in the matter of new mechanical driers which are now being tried out along that coast. That is the program which we intend to launch this summer.
The Walsh report suggested that there should be a permanent standing committee in Newfoundland composed of representatives of the federal government, the provincial government and the industry to carry on this work. We feel that for this year at least, which is still an exploratory year, we should carry on with our present officials- that is, the interdepartmental committee of the federal departments concerned will continue their work. During the course of the year we will be able to see whether a permanent committee set up in Newfoundland would or would not be a better way of handling this program. The important thing, and I am quite sure the Newfoundland members will appreciate this, is that we did want to do something this year. It is for that reason that this vote has been placed in the estimates.


William Joseph Browne: With
reference to the industrial development service, the details for which are on page 196, I do not find the name of the person in charge. Who will be the director or the chairman of this group that is being set up, and where will he be located?


James Sinclair: The work of the committee in Ottawa comes directly under the deputy minister of fisheries. The actual carrying out of the program, in so far as this interdepartmental committee is concerned in Newfoundland, will be under the chief supervisor there, Mr. Bradbury, for the coming year.


William Joseph Browne: Will the
Newfoundland fisheries board come under that?


James Sinclair: Mr. Bradbury is the chairman of the fisheries board, but his principal office down there is chief supervisor of fisheries for the province of Newfoundland.


William Joseph Browne: Is there any special allocation out of this vote for any particular purpose, or have you come to that
stage?


James Sinclair: We have not come to that
stage, but the interdepartmental committee, in looking over the field in which these federal departments have responsibility, estimates that the Walsh report recommendations result

Supply-Fisheries
in the following division, roughly: 35 per cent fisheries; 35 per cent public works; 25 per cent resources and development-that is in connection with housing-and then labour and transport for the navigational aids and things like that, 5 per cent. That is a tentative estimate.


William Joseph Browne: Has any
consideration been given to the areas? I understand from a report that they are going to concentrate on places where there are bait depots, and make them centres to which people will be invited?


James Sinclair: That is not quite so. The
mines and technical surveys department, along with fisheries and other federal and provincial departments, last year started, and this year will finish, an economic survey of the entire coasts, and it is on the results of that economic survey that a decision will be made as to the best place to start this concentration of development. The bait depots are not necessarily the best places.


William Joseph Browne: I can only
hope that there will be no discrimination. I am not saying this in any offensive manner at all. I hope that, in order that the program may meet with the confidence of the fishermen, every care will be taken to avoid discrimination.


James Sinclair: We will certainly do that.


Mr. McLure:: Following item 135 there is
a note "appropriation not required for 1953-54." I understand that results from some change made in the department with regard to fur seals. I should like to know why there is not going to be any vote.


James Sinclair: This point was discussed last year. Under the Financial Administration Act, an appropriation was made for revolving funds for various departments. This is a fund which will revolve. It always seemed a little unfair to have the cost of this department's participation in this fur seal convention on the west coast included in the estimates. Nowhere in our estimates was there any item showing the actual net revenue which we derived from it. Last year our 20 per cent under the agreement with the United States, which results from the proceeds of fur sealing on the Pribilof islands, amounted to over $800,000. With the consent of the house that item was transferred to the Financial Administration Act in a revolving fund, so that item no longer appears as an expenditure under the fisheries department.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: But the fur seals will be taken care of by the fisheries department just the same?


James Sinclair: Oh, yes.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I am glad to know that the request I have made for a good many years has been followed out, and that is you are going to have all the skins processed in one place, no matter where that place is. I notice that during 1952 the skins were all processed by one concern, so that there is going to be a uniform processing and a uniform type of skin instead of the type we have been receiving on the market for the last few years. Although these skins were all stamped the same, they were not the same price. The minister says we made $800,000 last year, but if the skins had been all processed at one place we would have made over a million dollars. Seven or eight years ago I made the statement in this house that more than a million dollars should be made every year from this source.
However, there is some difficulty in this industry now, and I should like to get some information from the department about it. It seems that the seal herd is not increasing. As a matter of fact, within the last couple of years research workers have found a tremendous mortality amongst the pups. It has been ascertained that the mortality rate almost equals 25 per cent of the pups. I hope that the fisheries department will co-operate with the United States in connection with research work to find out more about the seal herd. I notice that within the last two years they have commenced to brand and tag the herd, but as yet they have been unable to find out where any of these animals go after they leave the Pribilof islands or where they come from when they arrive at those islands. The important thing is to see if the seals can be protected when they are leaving the islands.
I believe there are a couple of other nations who are taking a big toll out of these animals in the different seas. I understand that negotiations are under way with Japan to see if that country will refrain from poaching as much as they have been in the past. I only raise these points because years ago the fisheries department neglected the seals and in 1944-45 only had about $160,000 of revenue from that source. As I say, if the industry is properly handled it should bring in a revenue of over a million dollars, that is unless the herd goes below a take-off of some 65,000 skins. I should like to draw

to the minister's attention that Japan is anxious to get back in on the treaty. According to the treaty 80 per cent of the take goes to the United States and 20 per cent to Canada. I want to ask the minister not to allow Japan back in, that is if we have to give up any of our 20 per cent, because this is a revenue upon which you can depend for years. Mistakes were made some years ago when Canada had the opportunity of buying the whole herd. We neglected that, and since that time the United States has made over $40 million of net profit after buying the herd. We are now receiving 20 per cent, but I would urge upon the department to investigate the mortality amongst the young pups and to give every protection to the herd while coming to or leaving the Pribilof islands.
Another thing I want to mention is that you should continue to get the skins processed in one place. In looking up what happened last year, I find that on last years' sales there was a difference of $56 on the skins that were processed otherwise than in the St. Louis market. Anyone who attended those sales can easily see the reason why the difference has occurred. Let me repeat again:	Be sure and take your skins from
the Pribilof field for processing in the one place, as long as they have a process equal to that of the Fouke Fur Company of St. Louis, Missouri.


James Sinclair: The skins last year were all processed at the one place. Last year for the first time we were on the seas and the Aleutian islands on scientific research with the Americans. As to the seal population, it is reported now up to 5 million seals. Our scientific people and the Americans think that is about the limit of what those little barren islands can sustain. It takes a great many fish in the Bering sea to support 5 million seals. Our problem may now be overbreeding rather than lack of population. The fur seals are perhaps a class that might be included in the new north Pacific convention since they are under scientific study, they are under control with regard to killing, and they are being fully exploited.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: In connection with that
matter, I might say that the figures given by the minister as to the size of the herd at the present time do not correspond with the take-off. The take-off of pelt has gone down each year. According to last year's report, and as I had information from one member of the research party, it is now more difficult to make a selection of skins owing to some form of disease that is in 68108-332i
Supply-Fisheries
the herd that arrives there from time to time.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Field services-
136. Field services administration, $468,900.
Mr. Stuart (Charlotte):: If the minister has the figures, would he mind putting on the record the number of fishermen who were benefited by this bounty during the past year and the average payment?


James Sinclair: The number of fishermen
was 10,640; the number of vessels, 3,718. The bounty is $9.55 in each case.


Andrew Wesley Stuart: In your insurance plan is there any thought of using this sum for any other purpose?


James Sinclair: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Field services-
140.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $17,050.
Andrew Wesley Stuart: Has the minister any plan for improvement at the biological station in St. Andrews, such as in the way of a new building there which is greatly needed?


James Sinclair: That matter comes under a
later item, that of the fisheries research board.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Fish culture and development branch-
Field services-
141.	Operation and maintenance, $665,400'..
William Joseph Browne: Items 14f and 142 deal with the same subject. One deals with operation and maintenance and the other with the construction of buildings.. In the Walsh report dealing with salmon, they say:
The presence of a salmon hatchery in the province' with a competent local fish culture unit would be of great assistance both to research and practice in building up new salmon populations in parts of rivers now blocked or newly opened up to salmon.
After having described all the enemies the salmon have to face in order to produce spawn and for the young to grow they recommend hatcheries. There is no hatchery in Newfoundland. This matter has been mooted for many years and has been recommended by me. Has any consideration been given to that question up to the present time?


James Sinclair: The policy of the department on the west coast and in Newfoundland has been not to build hatcheries. Over the

Supply-Fisheries
long run we have found it better to clear the streams and to allow the salmon to find the very best natural hatcheries rather than to build artificial hatcheries. It is true that we have carried on artificial hatcheries in two of the maritime provinces; but certainly experience in British Columbia and in Newfoundland also, I think, shows that the best way to improve the salmon run is to clear the streams and to get rid of the predators which attack salmon and to put under control both commercial and sport fishing on those streams.


William Joseph Browne: While I can agree with the minister in theory, he must remember that in Newfoundland we have had experience, because I have done salmon fishing for many years. What has happened is that woodsmen have been allowed to cut trees along the banks of the rivers. The effect of that procedure is that when we have rainfall there is a quick run-off, and the rivers become nearly dry. Often there is no salmon fishing of any kind for tourists or sportsmen during the summer. Unless there is collaboration between the provincial government and the Department of Fisheries at Ottawa to prevent wood cutting along the banks of the rivers, in that way allowing the trees to grow up again, and if necessary to do reforestation along them, the situation will become worse. If nothing is done, the salmon fishery, as far as tourists and sportsmen are concerned, is going to be a thing of the past. I myself have seen rivers in my time go down badly on this account.
If I may refer to the next item, I notice that there is an expenditure of over $500,000 more. That item deals with fish culture and development branch, construction or acquisition of buildings. The amount is over $500,000 more than it was the previous year. I was just wondering about that. I refer to page 203. The amount is more than $500,000 more than the amount which was voted last year. We voted $318,190 and the estimated total for 1952-53 is $818,000. I do not know whether or not that is a misprint.


James Sinclair: $286,800 is the figure shown on page 23.


William Joseph Browne: I was
referring to page 203, at the bottom of the page.


James Sinclair: It is $286,800.


William Joseph Browne: That is the vote for last year, but the expenditure estimated for 1952-53 as given here in $818,000.


James Sinclair: The difference there is for the work done in the Babine river in British

Columbia, with regard to the Babine slide. We spent about half a million dollars in moving that slide.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Louis-René Beaudoin: Under this item of fish culture and development branch, there are items 141, 142 and supplementary item 663.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: There is one thing I wish to mention. I should have done so a moment ago, but I guess I missed it. What I wanted to say was this. It may be all right under fish culture here but it is something that has to do with markets. I refer to the changing of the name in the marketing of canned mackerel. The name "mackerel" has been hard to get on the market as a canned food. But when it has been marketed under a new name, that of tuna chicken, it had wonderful success. The matter was brought before the federation this last year, and I am sure it will come before the Department of Fisheries. For instance, they are going to ask permission to use the name "tuna chicken" on their cans. Without getting anybody into any trouble-because they are out of it now-may I say that a couple of fishermen made a great success-in a small way, of course-of selling canned mackerel but they did not sell it under the name "mackerel". They sold it under the name "tuna chicken". Of course, tuna and mackerel belong to the same family. When this question comes before the Department of Fisheries I hope those who are making the regulations will permit people to can mackerel and put it under the name of "tuna chicken". If they do there will be a tremendous market created, because canned tuna has no comparison with canned mackerel. They could not get the word "mackerel" to take successfully as a canned fish. By changing it to "tuna chicken" the market will take a great deal of the mackerel off our coast in the form of canned fish. I know that the demand on the market for it a few years ago before the authorities caught up with the men who were running the factory was good. They had a great success in marketing it.


James Sinclair: I do not think the sale of fish is aided by masquerading one fish as another. More than that, the Meat and Canned Foods Act specifically provides in section 18, subsection 2, paragraph (b):
A true and correct description of the contents of the can, including the vernacular name, and in the case of fish the minimum weight in avoirdupois of the contents and in the case of shellfish the minimum weight in avoirdupois of the dry meat in the can, plainly printed in a conspicuous manner, and the name of the place where the same was packed.

If mackerel could be sold for a short time at better prices by labelling it as tuna it might aid the man who is canning it, but it would certainly harm the trade. Large tuna used to be called horse mackerel in the United States and they marketed horse mackerel as chicken of the sea, but nevertheless it is a tuna. I do not think the fishing industry of Canada would be very happy if certain canners were allowed to sell fish under names which are not commonly accepted or under other names. In any case, the law would prohibit it here in Canada.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Since they belong to the
same family I do not see why that could not be done. They could still have the picture of the mackerel on the outside of the can if they wished. But tuna and mackerel belong to the same family although they may be called by different names. The only difference between the mackerel and the tuna is that the mackerel does not grow quite as large. When the tuna people advertise tuna they call it horse mackerel. The name "horse mackerel" would not have to be put on the canned foods.


Andrew Wesley Stuart: I should like to
say a word in this regard. For a great number of years the fisheries department have tried in every way to improve the very conditions that have been under discussion here for the last ten minutes, and I believe they have gone a long way and deserve a lot of credit for what they have done. The solid meats of clams and other shellfish that were in cans for years was a most deceitful way of marketing, and it took a long time to get away from that so that the purchaser or consumer got exactly what he paid for.
The idea suggested by the hon. member for Queens is again getting away from the facts. I might also add that in the sardine industry of this country for years we have not been able to ship sardines to Britain. We had to call them little fish in oil because sardines were considered to be a product of Sardinia, and we were not allowed to label them sardines. It was a great inconvenience to the sardine canners of this country.
I believe that mackerel should be labelled mackerel, and tuna fish should be labelled tuna fish, and in no way should we try to convince the public that they are getting something that they are not getting. In other words, I believe that, in the first instance, to put mackerel on the market and call it tuna fish might take, but the repeat orders might not be as encouraging. I believe that the department have been doing a fine job along this line and they should be encouraged to carry on. Let us
Supply-Fisheries
try to get away from the idea of labelling a can as containing something that it does not contain.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
143.	Consumer branch, $67,545.
Mr. Herridge:: I just have a brief comment on this item. On the invitation of the handsome Minister of Fisheries quite a number of members had the opportunity to enjoy a demonstration of cooking by some of the lady cooks in his department. Personally, I had the opportunity to attend one of these demonstrations, and I have never eaten such delicious fish in all my life. I rose to ask the minister what can be done to bring that information to the smaller centres, say in co-operation with women's organizations? I am quite sure that if a demonstration such as we were able to witness, and the fruits of which we were able to enjoy, could be enjoyed by people in smaller centres, the consumption of fish would be multiplied very quickly.


James Sinclair: The dietitians in our department do that very job. They go to schools, home economic classes, women's clubs, women's organizations, restaurant associations and hotels. One of the reasons why I invited the fisheries committee, the coastal members and the members of the restaurant committee over to the kitchen was for propaganda purposes. I hope that when the hon. member for Kootenay West goes back to his riding and addresses political meetings and non-political meetings he will take the opportunity to suggest the advantage of fish, and if it is properly cooked how tasty it will be. Perhaps other hon. members will do the same.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I notice the minister spoke of the representatives of the restaurant committee. Will he use his influence and have the propaganda so effective that the fish we get in the restaurant will be improved?


Mr. Robichaud:: I also wish to commend the Department of Fisheries for the fish cookery publications which they are putting out. I notice that on page 204 of the estimates the amount covering this item is $15,000. I heard some favourable comments last fall about the money expended on these publications. In my opinion that amount could be very well doubled and more of these fish cookery publications, which are so well put together and so useful to everyone, could be widely distributed throughout Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
144.	To provide for the destruction of harbour
and grey seals, $30,000.
5264	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
Winfield Chester Scott McLure: There is a reduction of $15,000 in this item. Are they giving the same bounty on each head, or are they reducing it? Why the reduction?


James Sinclair: The bounty is exactly the same. We put in the extra appropriation last year to take care of this matter in Newfoundland. The killing there by fishermen was relatively small. As well as the killing of predators that we do, we have representatives of our own protective staff on the east coast and west coast put on a drive against predators. The appropriation this year is at the amount that was spent last year on this predator control.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: The same amount will be
paid to Prince Edward Island?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Fisheries research board of Canada-
145.	Headquarters administration, $119,115.
James Sinclair: I suggest that the discussion
of my estimates be adjourned. I have a fisheries meeting to attend with a special committee of cabinet members. We can return to these estimates later this day.


Albany M. Robichaud: Before the discussion is
adjourned I have one question. When does the minister intend to give some details about the insurance plans?


James Sinclair: When I get to item 766. I
hoped last night it would encourage hon. members to pass the items with a little more dispatch, but when we come to item 766 I will lay the whole scheme before the committee.


Mr. Nowlan:: Will the minister be back *early?


James Sinclair: Early afternoon, I hope.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Therefore, when we
resume the study of the estimates of the Department of Fisheries, we shall consider item 145.


DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND TECHNICAL SURVEYS
[Stage Direction]
212. Departmental administration, $420,566.
Hon. George Prudham (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: I have a brief
statement that I should like to put on the record at this time. I am confining my remarks to the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, reserving any comments that I have to make on the coal board and the coal mining industry in particular until that item is called. Judging from our experience of last year, I would suggest that we might save some time if hon. members would try to follow the same procedure.


I would like to make a brief statement reflecting both the importance of the mining and metallurgical industries in our country and the assistance given by the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys in solving the many problems brought about by the growth of these industries.
A few weeks ago, I had the opportunity of attending the annual meeting of the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy which was held in Edmonton, which shares with other areas of the province of Alberta the distinction of playing such an important part in the development and growth of the mineral industry in Canada and in the industrial development which follows in its wake.
As this tremendous development continues to take place in the mining and metallurgical industries in Canada more and more requests are made upon the services available in the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, ranging from mapping to geology, geography, geophysics, and to research and development work in ore dressing and metallurgy.
With some shortage and loss of technical staff experienced in latter years the services of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys are stretched to the limit in order to meet the increasing demands from both civilian and defence quarters,
A few weeks ago I distributed to all members of parliament a summary report recording the principal services rendered by the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys in 1952. The principal object of this report is to make available advance information which might prove useful in the consideration of the department's estimates for the present fiscal year.
Incidentally we received no response from hon. members as to whether they appreciated this and would like to have it continued. It does not cost very much to produce this report which we have been putting out for the last three years. If hon. members find it useful we shall be glad to continue it, but otherwise I do not think we will put it out next year.
Possibly a brief reference to some of the highlights of this report would provide us with a picture of the assistance which the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys provides to the mining and metallurgical industries in Canada, and to the public generally. The department comprises five branches; the surveys and mapping branch, the geological survey of Canada, the mines branch, the dominion observatories, and the geographical branch. The department also is responsible for the international boundary

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
commission, the Canadian board on geographical names, the explosives division, and the administration of the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act.
The need for maps and charts for defence purposes received increased attention in 1952, and this requirement will continue throughout the present fiscal year. There is also an increasing demand based on the expanded development of Canada's natural resources, and for recreational and other purposes. Over 900,000 maps and charts were distributed during 1952, more than three times the number distributed in 1947 and 250,000 more than in 1951. A further increase is expected for 1953.
The provision of adequate map and chart coverage is a task that must be spread over many years, as even the production of a single map sheet requires a minimum of two years of co-ordinated effort from the time it is commenced until the time the final map is available. However, this work has been greatly facilitated in recent years through the use of modern methods and equipment.
In 1952 the geodetic, topographic and legal surveys necessitated the fielding of 83 survey parties. Approximately the same number of parties will be sent into the field in 1953.
Now, a word or two about geological activities. The primary function of the geological survey of Canada is to obtain information of the geology of Canada that will be of assistance in the search for and development of mineral deposits. The results of its investigations also provide a basis for soil surveys, for the appraisal and conservation of Canada's mineral resources generally, including water supplies, and for the solution of geological problems that frequently arise in construction projects.
The work of the geological survey of Canada, both field and research, is coordinated with that of the provinces who undertake geological work of their own, in order to avoid any duplication or misunderstanding. In 1952, 78 parties were sent in the field. Approximately the same number of parties will be fielded in 1953.
The largest field operation in the Northwest Territories in 1952 was in the district of Keewatin and was named "Operation Kee-watin". It was quite different from the normal type in that geological traversing was done by helicopter. In the barren lands of northern Canada the season for canoe travel is not more than two months, and the helicopter project was an attempt to use a method that would permit work for a season of normal length so as to increase output and
cut down costs per square mile of area examined.
The project was definitely successful. Although the work cost $3.80 a square mile, which is approximately the cost by normal methods the area mapped was 57,000 square miles compared with about 2,000 square miles for a single normal field party. In other words, it would have taken one party about 25 years to complete the work by usual methods. Another helicopter-supported survey is planned for 1954.
Laboratory research in the geological sciences is presently restricted, owing to lack of space, but we hope to remedy this situation. A new building is being designed to house the geological survey of Canada, and the estimates of the Department of Public Works include a token sum towards the planning and designing of this much needed addition to our government buildings.
An office of the geological survey is maintained in Calgary where more than 90,000 rock cuttings from oil and gas wells were prepared for study in 1952. These represent about 900,000 feet of drilling, much the greater part of it in western Canada and the remainder in Ontario.
In the Calgary office a study was made of subsurface formations in southeastern and southern Saskatchewan. A detailed study and the log of a well penetrating the entire sedimentary succession in southern Saskatchewan was completed. The results of this work, now ready for publication, provide information of value in correlating the Saskatchewan formation with those in Manitoba and Alberta, and in the Williston basin of the adjoining parts of United States, where important oil discoveries have been made.
From all parts of Canada, prospectors, mine operators, educational institutions, farmers, and others submitted more than 9,000 specimens of minerals, rocks, soils, et cetera. These were examined free of charge and reported upon as to their nature, uses, and possible commercial value. Prospectors searching for uranium ore submitted 3,155 samples for radiometric assays, the results of which were provided promptly and without charge, as were those on 92 determinations of the specific radioactive minerals contained in the samples. A total of 123,321 geological reports and maps was distributed in 1952.
The geological survey of Canada has contributed in a very substantial way to the development of our country's mineral resources, and it has been and still is acknowledged as the essential cog in this development.
5266	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
The activities of our mines branch are directly concerned with all phases of the mining and metal industry-from the processing of the ore or mineral to the production, forming and fabrication of the metal ingot. Laboratories are maintained, designed and equipped to deal with special problems arising in the field of preparation, beneficiation and utilization of the products of the Canadian mining and metal industries. They occupy a unique position in this field and are not duplicated anywhere in Canada. They have grown with the expanding mining and industrial economy.
The growth of Canada's manufacturing industry, as I have pointed out earlier in my remarks, has presented new problems in the use of metals. The demands of the armed services and industry and the development of atomic energy require materials of mineral origin capable of endurance under conditions undreamed of prior to the last war. These problems are being studied by our mines branch engineers and scientists.
A list of current projects would include: the design of flowsheets for several new base metal mills, the separation of cobalt and silver in the cobalt ores and concentrates, investigations on the recovery of elemental sulphur, the extraction of gold from complex ores; investigation of methods of handling and cooling hot slags from titanium ores; efforts to produce titanium metal at a low cost; investigation of problems of low-grade iron ores; research at producing purer metals such as chromium, lithium and others; survey of possible sources of rare earths and metals such as germanium, studies towards the prevention of metal corrosion, devising treatment methods for uranium ores, the development of Canadian sources of industrial minerals such as sands, clays, refractory products and asbestos, the study of industrial waters, the study of rock pressures in coal mines, the problem of coal and coke preparation, the designing and testing of a coal-fired gas turbine, research on the oil sands of Alberta, and applied and fundamental research in the field of the metallurgy of steel, magnesium, aluminum and other metals and their alloys; and this, Mr. Chairman, is only an abbreviated list of the projects being dealt with in our mines branch.
The dominion observatories comprise the dominion observatory in Ottawa with its five divisions of positional astronomy, stellar physics, terrestrial magnetism, seismology, and gravity, and the dominion astrophysical observatory in Victoria, British Columbia, which is devoted almost entirely to the study


of astrophysics. Also much time and effort is devoted to research in fundamental science.
Two astronomical cameras, of extreme speed and capable of photographing a large area of the sky at one time, were installed during August last at the recently established meteor observatories at Meanook and Newbrook, Alberta. These cameras are approximately fifty times as fast as the best previous equipment and are being used to photograph meteors in a co-operative program sponsored in part by the defence services of Canada and the United States. The basic purpose of this program is the measurement of the winds and the densities in the upper atmosphere between 25 and 75 miles above the earth's surface.
The Meanook, Alberta, magnetic observatory is the base station for the control of all ground and airborne magnetic surveys in western and northwestern Canada. Together with the corresponding station at Agincourt, Ontario, it has been selected as one of the network of eleven key magnetic observatories throughout the world for the international study of terrestrial magnetism.
The geographical branch of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys is proving to be of great assistance to many departments and agencies of our government.
The main work of the branch is carried on in the division of Canadian geography. There is a small section dealing with foreign geography and this, together with drafting room, library, map library, and a clerical section, makes up the remainder of the branch.
Regional surveys deal with the physical, economic and social geography of a particular region as they affect such matters as agriculture, industry, transport and settlement. During 1952, such surveys were carried out in Cape Breton Island, southern Alberta, the Wager and Resolute bay areas of the Northwest Territories, and at various points in the Arctic.
On behalf of the civil defence organization of the Department of National Health and Welfare, intensive studies of urban geography were carried out in several localities in Canada.
Probably the most important project being carried out by the branch is the preparation of the new atlas of Canada. The work is being done on an interdepartmental basis, each department contributing its share of the basic data, which are then prepared for representation in the atlas. The section on the historical geography of Canada, prepared by the branch, in collaboration with the public archives, is completed and sections on transportation, fisheries and urban geography are well in hand.

Mr. Chairman, a tremendous activity is taking place in the development of our mineral resources and it is certainly not out of place that I would have taken some of the time of the house to give you this picture of our government's contribution to this development.
I do wish to take this opportunity to acknowledge and commend the high quality of the services rendered by officers of my department. Their contribution to Canadian mineral development has been an important factor in the broad program of national progress. As minister, I am proud of their high standards of skill and service. I am sure that pride in the splendid record of their accomplishment is shared by all members of this house. We certainly believe that more of this type of information should be made available to the people of Canada; and that is the main reason for putting this on the record this morning.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, while
abbreviated, the review given this morning by the minister is nevertheless a complete one in that it gives a comprehensive bird's-eye view of the activities of the department.
I certainly join with the minister in the words he uttered during the latter part of his observations, when he paid a compliment to the officers of his department who have done a fine piece of work in giving the assistance which their skills have made it possible for them to contribute to the mineral development within this country.
Having said that, I should like to ask the minister a number of general questions. One of these I have had before the house on other occasions, and that is the need for co-operation between the officials in the minister's department and those in certain other departments. I shall deal particularly with the situation in my own province of Saskatchewan, because it applies to other provinces as well.
I believe the time has come for a policy of co-operation between the various departments of government so as to assure in the largest possible measure the development of our resources for the benefit of our country, and also for the assistance of the nations within NATO in forging the shield of freedom.
Today in this country we are in the position where, more than ever before, the eyes of the world are on Canada, particularly because of the fact that other nations have become have-not nations while Canada has available vast hidden mineral resources so necessary to the development of our defence, for the raising of standards everywhere in the world. The minister mentioned a number 68108-333
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys of radium ore samples that have been examined by his department. I am going to speak particularly of that subject, for we in Saskatchewan believe that the development taking place in the northern part of that province has never been equalled anywhere at any time. However, there are not available in northern Saskatchewan the facilities for the transportation of those vast resources.
This spring there will be a uranium rush into the Beaverlodge area, the like of which has never taken place anywhere before. I should like to learn from the minister what collaboration and co-operation there has been between his department and the Department of Defence Production, and what is being done to assure that transportation facilities shall be available for those resources. I would ask him to tell us the measure of assistance being given by the officials of his department to the Department of Defence Production so that the maximum amount possible of these resources will be fabricated within Canada.
Certainly these departments cannot be compartments closed off one from the other. I suggest once again that the national government, in co-operation with the provinces, should have a policy whereby these northern areas will be opened up, and that available transportation facilities will be provided.
In the uranium areas of Saskatchewan most of the transport up to the present time has been by air from Edmonton or by water during the open seasons, whereas there could be made readily available without very large expenditure highway transportation facilities from Lac la Ronge in Saskatchewan to Beaverlodge. Also the old survey of the C.P.R., made from the Lac la Ronge district north to Stanley, could be used and it would be of vital assistance. According to the information I have about 32,000 tons of freight went over the 300 mile water route from the end of the rail at Waterways, Alberta, last season, and already 45,000 tons of freight have been moved over it this season, and the above figures do not include any freight for the Gunnar gold mines.
I believe that the Department of Defence Production, the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and the Department of National Defence should have a closer liaison than has been displayed up to the present time. I contend that one of the first things that would be done would be to provide for land transportation from the closest available and convenient places in northern Saskatchewan to this area. The highway that would be built and should be built to that end would also be available, should war ever come, as a defence highway in order to assure that the vast resources of uranium in that area should not be closed

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys off. A defence highway such as I suggest would provide accessibility and lower cost transportation than has heretofore existed. It would also lay the foundation for the necessary railroad facilities in that area, such as those being provided in Manitoba today to the Sherritt-Gordon plant at Lynn Lake. Not only would it assure transportation facilities at a reasonable cost today but it would also keep those resources in supply if war broke out. One of the greatest authorities in this country on that northern area is Dr. Mawdsley of the University of Saskatchewan. He was one of those who went into the area when others said there was nothing unusual in the potential mineral production of the area. Recently he was the authority for the statement that if ever war came a very few paratroopers, I think less than 200 he said, could destroy that potential uranium development in northern Saskatchewan, or rather render it unavailable, and destroy the possibility of that area being one of the main areas for the production of necessary atomic power.
I therefore wish to ask the minister what collaboration has taken place between himself and other members of the cabinet, and between the officials of his department, to the end that self-liquidating works such as I suggest can be proceeded with. I am particularly emphasizing production of uranium at the moment because that is one mineral, one commodity, that above everything else is necessary today.
The minister referred to titanium and there are also potential producing areas for that necessary resource. However, I particularly confine my remarks to the need for providing an assured potential supply of atomic munitions of war and also a potential supply of those things without which our standard of living and that of other parts of the world will not be elevated as we hope it will be if atomic energy is used as it should be. I would very much appreciate hearing from the minister in this connection, for this is a problem that affects Saskatchewan, and not only because of its physical location, since this potential uranium area within the next two or three years may well prove to be the second largest in the world. And it is, of course, of immense importance to our defence efforts.
Indeed, only recently I was in the United States and spoke in New York along with two other members of this house, ministers of the crown, who contributed to that series. One would almost think that the people of the United States for the first time had come to a realization that there is something north of the international boundary beyond quintuplets and mounted police. One would

almost think they had recently discovered a new world. Certainly the eyes of the world are on the mineral development of this country. It has within it possibilities of tremendous expansion; it has within it the development of our country and an increase in our population beyond anything that we can imagine today; it has within it the need for a declaration of a national policy that will assure that the maximum of these resources shall be developed and fabricated within our country.


Mr. Gillis:: Mr. Chairman, I want to say a few words in a general way on this item. While he was making his speech the minister asked if members thought that this report, the summary of activities, was worth while. I think it is. I would much sooner have that report than the main report. It is summarized, it is very clear, and it is well done.


John George Diefenbaker: Hear, hear.


Clarence Gillis: I think it is worth whatever money you are spending on it. As one member, I would suggest that you continue it.
There are two reasons why I would like to make some general observations on this item. One is that when you sit here too long without exercising yourself you get kind of fidgety, and when you get up and get your speech off your chest it is like a dog getting rid of his fleas. My second reason for speaking is that a few days ago I met a cabinet minister in the corridor and had a brief discussion with him on the subject of coal. Despite the fact that he is in the cabinet and that in this country the matter of coal has been a pretty serious one for many years, the subject of a lot of discussion in this house, his opinion was that the coal miners were paid so much money and they were so unreasonable in their demands. He could not understand, for example, why they charge $22.50 a ton for coal in Newfoundland, which is just 90 miles across the gulf from Cape Breton. It was a brief exchange of words, and it was not with the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys but another cabinet minister. I asked him if he knew how much the man received for producing that ton of coal, but he did not know. It was certainly a long way from $22.50. The man who produced it would get about $1.10 a ton for that coal and the rest of the charges between the pithead and Newfoundland brought the price up to $22.50. I believe that is something which would bear investigation. This cabinet member did not understand that, despite all the discussion we have had in the house. I still got the impression from him that he thought the man who dug the coal sold it for the $22.50.


George Prudham: He was only kidding.


Clarence Gillis: He was not kidding. I told him he had better stick to fish because he did not know very much about coal. I am sorry he is not in the house at the present time.
I know everyone wants to get away, but I am going to make a tew remarks at this time on the subject of the coal industry of Canada. The federal government has taken some responsibility for this industry. After many years of presenting briefs-


George Prudham: I do not wish to interrupt the hon. member, but I wonder if we would not facilitate our work a little if we reserved the coal discussion until the coal board people are here. I am not insisting.


Clarence Gillis: It would not facilitate us much because I would take up the same amount of time then. I may say what I have to say now so that the minister can analyse it and make a reply when the coal board estimate is being considered. I think we will get along faster if we deal with the matter now.
I said the government had taken some responsibility in the matter. They accepted this responsibility by the passage of the Dominion Coal Board Act, which was assented to on July 17, 1947. At that time this agency known as the dominion coal board was set up. The setting up of this body resulted from the report of the royal commission which probed the coal industry from coast to coast. In this act the board was given certain powers which are contained in sections 6 and 8 of the act. Section 6 reads as follows:
The board shall study, review and recommend to the minister from time to time such policies and measures as it considers necessary respecting the production, importation, distribution and use of coal in Canada.
Those powers are rather broad; in fact they seem to be all-inclusive so far as the industry is concerned. Now, section 8 sets out the duties of the board, and reads as follows:
The board shall:
(a)	administer, in accordance with regulations of the governor in council any subventions or subsidies relating to coal voted by parliament;
(b)	exercise and perform on behalf of the minister such powers, duties and functions of the minister relating to coal as the minister may require; and
(c)	exercise and perform any other powers, duties and functions conferred on or required to be performed by the board by or pursuant to any other act or order of the governor in council.
I have heard it stated many times by members of the union and industrialists that, so far as the coal board was concerned, it did not have any powers at all or that its powers were very restrictive. These two 68108-333J
J, 1953	52G3
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys sections which give the board its administrative functions are very clear, and I think they are very broad. I believe they could be used by the board in the regulation of the industry.
I do not think the board has been exercising its powers to the extent they should have been exercised, in view of the condition of the coal industry today from coast to coast.
In my own end of the country the industry has been going through a process of reorganization. They have been trying to mechanize these old mines and lower costs. The unions and the mine operators have been trying to negotiate a wage agreement since January of this year. A conciliation board is now sitting in an attempt to resolve the differences between the unions and the operators, but they are not making much progress. The big question, of course, is wages. The minister might say, what has this department to do with that? In my opinion the department and the coal board have a lot to do with it, because the act from which I have just quoted gives the coal board the authority to regulate markets, subventions, subsidies and so forth. I do not think the board has done very much about regulating markets.
One should remember that we are only producing, working at maximum capacity in this country, about 17 million tons of coal a year. On the other hand, we are importing about 27 million tons of coal from the United States. That is not so bad if you look at it from the point of view that industrialists who use coal have a right to import coal if they so desire. However, when it comes to a creature of the government, like the Canadian National Railways, importing large quantities of coal from the United States, and then you have the president of the Canadian National Railways stating that maritime coal cannot compete with United States coal, then something is wrong. In the railway committee recently I asked Mr. Gordon this question. Why should we insist that Canadian coal must compete with coal from the United States when no other commodity produced in Canada has to compete with a like product from the United States?
Take your automobile, for instance, and consider the tariffs and taxes you pay on it to protect the Canadian manufacturer. If you buy a car in Alberta, Saskatchewan or Nova Scotia, you are paying a tariff on your car to protect the manufacturers in central Canada. That is one example, and you can follow it through the whole economy of this country. Nothing produced in this country
5270	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys competes with a like product from the United States.


Mr. Hosking:: What about farm implements?


Clarence Gillis: The same thing applies.


Henry Alfred Hosking: There is no tariff on them.


Clarence Gillis: There is plenty of tariff. Take a look at your excise taxes. I do not want to get into that argument with you because there are all kinds of tariffs on those products if you want to trace them down. At the moment, I am talking about the president of the Canadian National Railways, who manages a government-operated system that is subsidized by the taxpayers of Canada, taking the position in the railway committee that Canadian coal must compete with coal from the United States or Canadian coal can go out of the picture. That is not a decision for the president of the national railway to make; it is a decision for the board of transport commissioners to make. Why is maritime coal not competitive in the eastern portion of this country? I am going to tell you. In 1951, when Mr. Gordon was before the railway committee, he pointed out to us that the economic market for maritime coal went as far west as Coteau in Quebec. That is about fifty miles west of Montreal. But he said that in that area maritime coal was competitive with United States coal. In 1953, when he was before that committee and it was pointed out to him that the small coal operators in the maritimes were about in the position that the industry 'was going to close up, that delegations had been in to meet the government with a plea for some re-arrangement of their markets, Mr. Gordon took the position before the committee that he was not going to pay any more for maritime coal than he was paying for United States coal. He said that the economic market for maritime coal was not even as far west as Moncton. We wanted to find out why that change had come about in a matter of a couple of years. I found out why it came about. I found out that Mr. Gordon himself was responsible for that change.
In 1933 there was a mile mill rate arrived at on company service hauls from the maritimes at least to Montreal. That mile mill rate at that time was fixed at 31 mills. In 1938 that agreement was revised between the railways and the government, and the rate was fixed at 5 mills per ton mile. Some time in 1952, without any consultation with the government or with the coal board, Mr. Gordon stepped up that rate to 11 mills per ton mile and at the same time he was hauling


United States coal from Rouses Point into Moncton at the old rate of 5 mills per ton mile.


Mr. Blackmore:: Can you beat that?


Clarence Gillis: By this action he displaced maritime coal or placed maritime coal at a disadvantage of over $2 a ton in the Moncton market. I was given at least some understanding that the matter was being discussed by the cabinet, that the coal board some two or three weeks ago were holding meetings in Montreal with railway officials, and that out of these negotiations would come some adjustment of that rate which I am discussing. However, to date there has not been any understanding. I have a dozen press clippings here. One indicates that the Minister of Transport thinks there will be some subvention adjustment. The next statement is to the effect that there is not going to be any adjustment. To date I have not been able to get any understanding as to whether the agreement which Mr. Gordon abrogated, without any consultation with any government officials, is going to be placed back where it was in order to retain the competitive position of maritime coal, at least as far west as Moncton. It is a serious question. When the minister is replying, I would suggest that he give us some understanding as to what has been done to restore the agreement that was abrogated by the Canadian National Railways with respect to a company service mill rate.


John Horne Blackmore: And what is contemplated to be done.


Clarence Gillis: This is not a grievance that I am conjuring up out of thin air myself. The minister of mines in the Nova Scotia government, Mr. McKinnon, has made some strong representations on the matter. He wired members of the railway committee when the committee was in session, and he asked us to have some understanding and some discussion with Mr. Gordon while the committee was in session. We did so, but we did not get much satisfaction on the question.
The figures that I am using are the figures which the minister of mines in Nova Scotia wired to the members of the committee, and I think they were Liberal members that he wired. They came to me and asked me if I would give them a hand in making the presentation before the committee. I therefore think that, before the house rises, the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys should bring us up to date on what came out of those meetings in Montreal in an attempt to adjust those rates.

The second thing that I should like the coal board to do is this. I am holding the coal board responsible for marketing Canadian coal in Canada. That is their job. The authority is given to them in section 6 of chapter 57 of 1947. On three occasions and in three questions I tried to get information, through this house, as to who were the importers of United States coal in Canada, and I have not yet received that information. I received an evasive answer that it was not in the public interest to divulge the business of importers at the customs. I did not ask about that. I wanted to know the names of the firms in Canada which are importing United States coal. I wanted to know that because I am reasonably sure that some of the large operators in Canada are importers of United States coal. I did not get their names. I think it is up to the coal board to find out whether coal operators in this country are allowing the industry in Canada to die because they can make more money by importing United States coal. If that is the case, then the coal board should have the responsibility of correcting the situation. There is something wrong when there is a refusal to give the names of the companies that operate in that business in Canada.


John Horne Blackmore: I think so too.


Clarence Gillis: I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Uren, the chairman of the coal board, and for the other members of the board. I hope there is not any agency behind the scene which nullifies their efforts to build a Canadian coal industry and to market that coal in Canada in so far as it is economically possible to do it. I hope there is nothing behind the scenes preventing them from developing a proper fuel policy in this country. I think the time has come when we must develop a proper fuel policy in this country. What I say is this. Take oil and market it wherever it is economically possible to do it. Take natural gas and do the same thing, where it is economically more advantageous to use it in certain areas than it is in others. But make the greatest use of coal possible in the areas where coal is more economic, and there are such areas. No one can tell me that piping natural gas about 3,000 miles from Alberta down into Quebec is going to turn out to be an economic proposition. But here is something that can happen. People can change over their heating plants and they may build on the assumption that they are going to heat their places by natural gas; but in a few years' time you may be short of natural gas in the area from which you are getting it-that is something that has happened all over Ontario- or something may go wrong with the pipe
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys line. You then have a building that is equipped to deal with no other type of fuel; hence you are placed at a great disadvantage.
I think that someone such as the coal board should give this proposition of piping natural gas down into the province of Quebec a serious looking over before it is finally decided on. If we strike the situation with which we were confronted during the last war, what will happen? Then, coal was more precious than gold. Gold mines were being closed down at that time, and people all over Canada were opening up gopher holes in order to get coal. The same thing can happen again.
I say that this business of a coal industry in this country is not receiving the attention that, in my opinion, it should receive. From the clippings I have I also note that United States interests at the present time are looking over sections of western Canada, having in mind the possibility of developing a coal industry there with United States capital. When the minister was talking, I was just thinking what a wonderful job the department is doing in making new discoveries,, carrying on all kinds of research, mapping' the country, and spending a great deal of' money in that way. Then when great deposits of base metals are found to assure the economy of this country as the leading part of the North American continent and a great contributor to the rest of the world in the future, after all of the work is done and all that money is spent the government on no occasion tries to retain any of those resources in the name of the Canadian people.


John Horne Blackmore: It is hard to believe.


Clarence Gillis: Let us develop some of it ourselves; let us hold on to it for posterity, or at least take a controlling interest in some of these great basic developments. The government is doing the work anyway. Most of the technical work is done by the government and why they do not retain some interest in it is beyond me. It is just handed over to United States interests or some other interest to develop and to take charge of our national economy.
Before he finishes his estimates I want the minister to tell me something about the coal board. When the coal board was set up five actual operators or people connected with the coal industry from the standpoint of management were appointed to the board, but there was also a representative of labour on the board, the late D. W. Morrison, who was president of the mine workers' union at the time. He passed away. Strong representations were made to the minister on the-
5272	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys question of replacing that labour representative on the board with someone who represented the people who dig the coal. I was rather surprised and shocked to learn that instead of acceding to the wishes of the mine workers' union and others, including myself, another coal operator was appointed to the board. I do not like to see that, because I believe in that board. I believe it is an organization that, if given a free hand and properly taken care of, can do a great job for the coal industry. I do not think you are going to get the real perspective if it is overloaded with people from the management side. You are getting a one-sided picture. There should be at least one representative of the men who dig the coal and understand the other side of the question. I have no objection to the man you put on;
I know Owen Hartigan very well, but he is a coal operator.
The principle of having a labour representative on the board was established when the board was set up. Instead of getting the respect of the men and instead of getting them to look to the board for some guidance in the solution of the many problems with which they have to contend, you find the men beginning to say that the board is just an operators' protective association. We have not anybody on it to restore some confidence among the men themselves. At the earliest ^possible moment the minister should consider placing on that board a man who represents the viewpoint of the men who dig the coal.
I am not going to say any more on this subject. I could talk on it all day. I just put my finger on a couple of the sore spots that I should like the minister to cure. I refer particularly to a representative of labour on the board. What progress is the minister making with the Canadian National Railways in readjusting the freight rate on company service? An agreement existed on it up until 1951. It was abrogated by the Canadian National Railways. Is the minister making any progress in the matter of restoring that rate and adjusting the subventions so that maritime coal can at least retain the economic position it has had over the years in the Quebec market?


John Horne Blackmore: I should like all of those things with respect to Alberta coal also.


Mr. Hansell:: I should like to continue the discussion on this coal policy at the present time if I may, so as not to break the continuity, and1 I will promise the minister that if he is agreeable I shall not talk on any other item in his estimates. Before going into the topic any farther, I notice it is one


minute to one o'clock. Will you call it one o'clock, Mr. Chairman?
At one o'clock the committee took recess.
The committee resumed at two p.m.


Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Chairman, before the luncheon recess we were considering this item having to do with mines and technical surveys. I am happy to follow the hon. member for Cape Breton South who has laboured for many years in the coal mines as well as occupying other responsible positions relating to the coal mining industry.
I rise to speak at this time because of the serious condition of the coal mining industry, particularly in the Crowsnest pass. I have in my hand a number of letters which I have received from coal miners' unions and other interested parties in the Crowsnest pass area whose complaint is that the coal mines are running on only half time. The first letter I have here is from a local miners' union in which the secretary has this to say:
As you are no doubt aware the mines in the Crowsnest pass are working very poorly.
He means poor time.
Bellevue has worked for the first four months in this year the wonderful total of 45 days.
If you figure that out it means that industry in that particular section has worked only 2J days a week. Things are becoming serious when that happens. I am not going to read all the letters I have received, but there is one from a man who unfortunately became in arrears with his income tax. He wanted to pay up and he made the proposition to the taxation authorities that he would pay so much a month. That was not agreeable to them as they contended he should pay more. He said he could not pay more because he was working only two or three days a week. All this means that we have a serious situation in the coal mining industry in that part of the country.
I am not going to be too hard on the minister and blame him for everything. He does not cause the sun to rise in the morning and the moon to shine at night; he is not omniscient. Things are as they are. I have never taken the position that the responsibility of the government is necessarily to find jobs for people. If that was their responsibility it would be better for them to put the whole country in the government service and then perhaps everyone would be more or less happy. I do not think that that is the function of government. But I do think that the function of government is to adopt such policies as will keep industry in a healthy state

and provide full employment to those who labour in industry.
Of course you have to go behind the scenes and consider government policy in respect of economics, which I am not going to do now. Just as long as the government pursues certain financial policies it becomes their responsibility to keep industry in a healthy state. If industry is in a healthy state we will not have unemployment problems. But an unemployment situation exists today and it is the responsibility of the government to solve this problem.
I should like to refer to the reports of the coal board. First I want to compliment the dominion coal board upon the job they are doing. In their own field I believe they are doing an excellent job. They cover many branches of the coal mining industry. I do not intend nor will I permit my remarks to be interpreted as casting any reflection upon the dominion coal board. But with all they have done, with all they may have proposed, we still have this problem of unemployment. Perhaps they consider it is not their concern, but that problem does exist in the coal mining industry of the Crowsnest pass area and I expect that what is true there is reasonably true of other parts of Canada.
Not long ago I asked that a return be brought down with respect to recommendations the coal board had made to the government. I made this inquiry because individuals in the Crowsnest pass area were interested to know what recommendations the coal board may have made to the government. I fancy they wanted to know what those recommendations were, and whether they had been carried out.
I received what I must say I considered a somewhat peculiar reply and, for the sake of brevity, I shall read only parts of it. I had asked for a copy of all recommendations of the dominion coal board during the years 1951 and 1952 to the dominion government, any provincial government, or to any other person or persons. This was the reply I got:
The dominion coal board was created by statute, the Dominion Coal Board Act, 11 George VI. chapter 57. The board was charged with the duty of studying, reviewing and recommending to the minister such policies or measures as it considered necessary respecting the production, importation, distribution and use of coal in Canada.
Then this paragraph:
The board, with some preliminary study, adopted some five objects toward a sound coal policy.
And then five headings are set out. I should like to read one or two of them, because I have a point to make here. This is No. 3:
Finding of steady and adequate markets for Canadian coal.
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
I do believe that when the minister replies he might tell us what steps have been taken during the last couple of years, not by way of surveying the situation, but in setting out any definite steps. What markets have been acquired for Canadian coal in the last couple of years?
And then the fourth paragraph is as follows:
Providing of reasonably full employment at fair wages for Canadian mine workers.
That is the one answer I should like to dwell upon, because certainly in the Crowsnest pass area there is anything but reasonably full employment. I am not going to make comments about the wages: that is something for the coal miners to discuss with their management. But certainly two and a half days a week is not in my opinion reasonably full employment.
Toward the end of the return there is a paragraph which, in a sense, is a bit amusing.
I shall just call it to the minister's attention. It says:
The board, by its terms of reference, does not report or recommend to the dominion government or any provincial government. Reports and recommendations are made to the minister only for such consideration and action as he may deem advisable.
I do not know if that paragraph is from the minister's pen, but I wonder whose eyes he thinks he is pulling the wool over. No; the board does not report to the government; it reports to the minister. Who does not know that? No one supposes that when a report is to be made they call a special cabinet meeting, and all sit around the table and say, "Now we have the report of the board." Certainly the report is made to the minister. So far as this is concerned, the minister is the government.
With all due respect I should say that the last paragraph is in these words:
Any of these reports or recommendations that have been adopted by the minister and acted upon are set out in the annual reports of the board.
I visualized that when the board made recommendations they were recorded on sheets of paper and placed before the minister so that he could analyse them. There could have been one every day, one every week or one each month. I am not concerned about how many there were. But I fancied that was the way the recommendations were made. I do not believe a government would be so loose in its administration as to have recommendations made by word of mouth; surely not. However, these reports were given with the return, and I had to be satisfied with them. Of course I had them in my library, anyway.
5274	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
I should like to read one or two paragraphs from the reports, since they were given to me in the return. In the dominion coal board annual report for the year 1951-52, the latest available, I read from page 19 under the heading, "Movement of Western Coal to Ontario", the following from the middle of the paragraph:
It is unfortunate that under existing transportation costs, the Alberta and British Columbia coals have been unable to secure a larger market in Ontario. The coals shipped for domestic use have been fully satisfactory in the markets supplied, while there are installations where the industrial coal can be used without difficulty. The knowledge that Canadian industries are becoming more dependent upon imported coal, due to our inability to supply them with our own products, is not very encouraging.
Then it goes on to comment concerning the possibility of an emergency in the United States which would have the effect of speeding up production of coal in Canada. To read all this gives a rather gloomy picture, does it not? It indicates to me that the industry must be on the decline. And I would say, too, that this was a report given when industrial activity in Canada was perhaps greater than it ever was before.
Then, at page 24 of the report, under the section dealing with Alberta and the Crows-nest pass area of British Columbia, and making special reference to the assistance given to the movement of coal, I read this paragraph:
The tonnage of Alberta and B.C. Crowsnest pass coal moved to points in Ontario east of the head of the lakes was less than half of that of the previous fiscal year.
That, too, is a gloomy picture. To continue the quotation:
One reason for this lies in the increase in the freight rates noted above. Other factors were the general reduction in the sale of all domestic coals throughout the area, the loss by fire of one of the larger producers and shippers to this market and the fact that the coal from the strip mines was not eligible for assistance until October.
The tonnage shipped to points in Ontario up to the head of the lakes was also considerably lower. The over-all movement of coal for railway use to Manitoba and Ontario was almost equal to that of the last fiscal year.
I read those two paragraphs to indicate to hon. members, including the minister, that the coal mining industry in the Crowsnest pass area is on the decline. Now that should not be. There is no argument about that.
Well, Mr. Chairman, if I might refer to this little summary that the minister referred to this morning, as did the hon. member for Cape Breton South, I too think it is a very commendable little booklet. It is very similar to the report of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, a little blue book that comes out annually, but it is a condensation, and I think it is very handy.


If it is not too much of an expense I would like to see it continued.
On page 65 of the summary of activities of this department there is a paragraph about coal preparation investigations. I will just read the first sentence:
Investigations concerning the marketing of finer sizes of coal continued to receive special attention because of their importance to the coal Industry in western Canada.
When the minister replies I would like him to state what special attention it was given and what was the result of that special attention. The investigations in respect of the finer sizes of coal were investigations concerning the marketing of this coal, and after all we must have markets for the coal because if the coal cannot be sold the mines are going to close. There is no argument about that.
I come to the annual report of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys for the year ending March 31, 1952. Under the section dealing with the 'ueJe division on page 85 I read this:
The efforts of the division were concentrated chiefly on technical problems of the coal industry, in the belief that well planned and co-operative research can do much toward enabling the industry to maintain its markets in competition with oil and natural gas.
I underline the phrase "to maintain its markets". Now, since I have read these paragraphs from various reports in respect of the amount of attention that is supposed to be given to the maintenance and securing of markets I would like an answer to the question: If that is so, then how is it that the coal mining industry in my constituency -and I expect this applies to others-is working practically half time, two and one-half days a week?
Now, Mr. Chairman, I recognize that over the years there has been some considerable assistance given to the coal mining industry by way of subsidizing the movement of coal, sums of money which were given of course to the railways in order that they might bring down their freight charges on coal and therefore find markets some distance from the coal mining areas. I would like to point out, although perhaps it is not too strong a point, that according to the estimates about $6 million is being appropriated this year for the movement of coal and I believe there is a further supplementary estimate of another $2 or $3 million-I have forgotten just how much. We appreciate that but I would point out that the gold mining industry, which keeps nobody warm, which turns no turbines, which fuels no trains or ships, and which is of no value whatever except for plugging your teeth, or making a watch chain or

wedding ring or something like that, has been given about $11 million in direct assistance-as a pure gift.
Now, we have been hammering at this business for a good many years since we came into this house. Last year the hon. member for Red Deer gave a speech on this same thing, deploring the fact that in all these years we have not arrived at a satisfactory national policy for coal. The hon. member for Bow River time and time again has risen in this house with the same plea. So has the hon. member for Lethbridge, who has a large coal mining industry in and around the city of Lethbridge. There are others who represent constituencies where there are coal mines, and we have been hammering at this for years. I would like to know from someone on the government side of the house, and perhaps the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys can answer, why it is that we have a national policy for everything under the sun except coal. We have a national agriculture policy; we have our Canadian wheat board, the channel through which all wheat in Canada is sold to the world; we have a cattle policy; we have the Agricultural Prices Support Act, a policy written right into the laws of this country; we have a railway policy; and we have a radio policy. Those are all governed by the law. We have a trade policy geared to meet particular trade situations; we have an immigration policy; we have a veterans affairs policy; we have an external affairs policy which is geared to meet various world movements, things that happen on the world stage in this day of change. However, when it comes to a coal mining policy, in a country with such vast coal resources which can be changed into all sorts of other types of production, which can drive our engines, drive our industries and create power, electricity and steam, what have we?


Mr. Cote (Maiapedia-Maiane):: Mr. Chairman-


Ernest George Hansell: It is strange that we have no national policy for that industry. I see that my hon. friend is rising. Perhaps he has a question; I do not know.


Alcide Côté: I would like to ask the hon. gentleman a question since he is asking lots of questions of the government. It is a very simple question.


Ernest George Hansell: Shoot.


John Horne Blackmore: Let us hear it.


Alcide Côté: I would like to ask whether there are special hours for sermons.


Ernest George Hansell: My hon. friend asks if there are special hours for sermons. I thought
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys he said "special hours for servants". Well, if he will hold his seat for a while, perhaps before we get through this might even resolve itself into a sermon. When a person asks a question like that I really feel I would like to preach a sermon. Yes, sir, I really do. I really feel I should like to preach a sermon on a certain evil that is rampant in this country.


Alcide Côté: What is it?


The Deputy Chairman:: Order. If the hon. member wishes to preach a sermon, I hope he will use as his text item 212.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Let us now take up the collection.


Ernest George Hansell: I must refresh my memory on what item 212 is, because when I preach a sermon I must have a text.
I think that I have said nearly enough on this item, except that I must say this additional word. A few years ago the government set up an admirable commission to study this whole coal mining industry from coast to coast, markets and types of coal. I believe that commission made one of the best reports we have ever had during the history of this country. Judge Carroll at the time headed that commission, and he now has the distinction of sitting in this House of Commons. The Carroll coal commission came up not only with a report that was admirable but with certain recommendations. I doubt very much whether any of those recommendations have ever been put into effect.
I am going to suggest to the minister that a small commission-it does not have to be a commission but perhaps a select body-should be chosen to go through the report of the Carroll commission. Perhaps additional studies could be undertaken in conjunction with the dominion coal board to bring the recommendations of the Carroll commission right up to date. Then, the government could take action to put those recommendations into effect.
We have a rather peculiar situation in respect to the coal mining industry today. It is almost unbelievable that in these days of industrial development, the coal mining industry in the Crowsnest pass and other parts of the country, in respect of employment, is witnessing the same thing it witnessed in the hungry thirties when this country was plunged into the depths of the depression. Does that not appear to be an extremely strange thing? Surely, Mr. Chairman, something more vigorous should occupy the attention of the government and the minister in charge to see that a situation of that kind should not occur.
5276	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
When Canada is going through the period of industrial activity that it is today, the coal mines of Canada should be going full blast. They are not. Something is wrong. The minister should tell us what he proposes to do about it. If not, the coal mining industry is going to be sunk, just as sure as you are born.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I intend to be quite brief at this trying stage of the session, Mr. Chairman, but I wish to make a few observations on this first item. The minister's department carries on a great deal of most interesting work, and work of great value to the country as a whole. In my opinion there are not many members of this house who have a full knowledge of the work carried on by the minister's department, and I am quite sure that work is almost unknown to large numbers of Canadians. It is the opinion of this group that in the coming session it would be wise for the minister to have his estimates go before the committee on mines, forests and waters, so that the members of the house who are on that committee will have an opportunity of hearing the heads of the various branches, thus gaining a fuller understanding and appreciation of the excellent work undertaken by the minister's officials.
I rise particularly at this time, Mr. Chairman, to bring to the attention of the house the concern of large numbers of miners and the operators of small base metal mines in my constituency who have written to me about the closing down of certain mines and the consequent increasing unemployment of miners in the district I have the honour to represent. As the minister knows, that is mainly occasioned by a drop in the price of base metals, and to some extent by the increase in smelting costs charged by the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company. I have an extract here from the Nelson Daily News, dated April 23, 1953, which is headed: "Six Kootenay mines close in last year; prices blamed."
Everyone knows that owing to the rise in the price of base metals after the commencement of the Korean war, there were some properties developed and operated which, at the present time, it is strictly uneconomical to operate. These properties simply have to suffer the consequences of a decline in prices, but there are other properties that are not of that character which find themselves in difficulty now. I know that, in the first instance, this matter is the responsibility of the government of British Columbia; we recognize that fact. But I do suggest that this situation requires co-operation. The minister should visit British Columbia, if at all possible, and meet the minister of mines in


British Columbia to discuss what could be done. They together should meet the representatives of the miners and the major mining companies to see what could be done as a result of government and industry cooperation to meet this developing situation, which is so serious to quite a number of my constituents. I urge the minister to give every consideration to making a trip to British Columbia to meet the minister of mines and advance the federal government's position and learn the provincial government's position.
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, I believe that a large corporation like Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company should accept some responsibility for assisting these smaller operators. This company should meet the smaller operators in co-operation with the provincial minister to ascertain if it is possible to continue some of these marginal operations. The Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company has a monopoly on smelting by virtue of its tremendous investment in plant, beyond the resources of small operators. Without any question its operations have brought great prosperity to the part of the country I have the honour to represent. It is not possible for the smaller operators to erect a smelting plant of that size, or to get the value from the ores this company gets because of its experience, knowledge and huge investment. Then again, this company has almost a complete monopoly of power resources in the south Kootenay country. I think in that connection the company has a responsibility to the smaller operators and to the people of this country.
In addition to that, Consolidated Mining and Smelting has almost a complete monopoly of the raw materials, with a large mountain of zinc and lead ore at Kimberley and another large mountain of ore in the Arrow lakes in reserve which has recently come into the possession of that corporation. On those accounts I think a company of this size has a responsibility to the industry as a whole, to the smaller operators and to the people. I suggest to the minister that if he has an opportunity to discuss this question with the provincial minister of mines, that fact should be brought to the attention of the company, and that they have a duty to do all they can reasonably be expected to do, to assist these mines that will not be able to operate if they are charged the present smelting prices. 1 believe that if the management of the company had this situation brought directly to their attention by federal and provincial governments they would be willing

to co-operate and do something, to keep the economic base metal mines in the Kootenays operating at the present time. The hon. member for Kootenay East spoke on this question when we were going into supply some two weeks ago. I quite understand his concern because, like me, he represents a constituency which includes a large number of miners and some people operating small base metal mines. After he discussed the situation in this house he placed on the order paper a resolution which is in the following terms:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should take into consideration the advisability of introducing legislation for the imposition of substantial export duties on nickel and asbestos being exported to the United States during periods in which that country imposes excessive import duties on lead and zinc.
Mr. Chairman, we quite appreciate that circumstances may develop which would require urgent and drastic measures as suggested by this resolution. But we in this group believe in doing everything we can to develop freer trade throughout the world; and we hope that, as a result of the visit of the Prime Minister to Washington, such a course of action as that suggested by the hon. member will not be necessary. Quite recently we adopted unanimously in the house a resolution which demonstrated that the Prime Minister went to Washington with the full support of every party and of all members in the house, to urge on the government of the United States that they reconsider some of the restrictive trade policies that have been mentioned in the papers and dispatches and give consideration to Canadian needs and Canadian requirements as a good neighbour, not as a hard-shelled, ruthless competitor. I am hopeful that, as a result of the Prime Minister's visit, the United States government will not permit the increase of import duties as suggested a week or two weeks ago and that we shall be able to negotiate a trade policy on this and other matters that affect the province from which I come so that there will be some improvement in the present situation, and unemployed miners return to work.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I again suggest to the minister that, in a situation like this, everything be done to co-operate as closely as possible with the minister of mines in the provincial government of British Columbia, whoever he is.


Mr. Johnston:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to say a few words on this item before it passes. First of all, I want to say to the minister that I too should like to join with others in asking
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys him to continue the production of this Department of Mines and Technical Surveys booklet, "Summary of Activities for 1952". In it I think there is some good information in a condensed form. I should like to say, as others have said, that it would be a good thing to have that publication continued.
I now want to turn my attention to the coal problem because it is an extremely important one not only in the province from which I come but in Canada as a whole. It seems to me that we should be taking a greater interest in the development of our coal industry, not merely from the selfish point of view of those of us who live in coal-mining areas but because it is, as a matter of fact, a national problem. Coal mining is something which, in my judgment, is extremely important in the economy of the nation. We recall quite well that during the last war we ran into some difficulty in supplying coal to the markets of Canada. It will be recalled that the United States found, almost overnight, that they needed a great supply of coal and that they could not continue to ship to Canada the amount of coal they had been shipping there previously. We were thus thrown on our own resources. Mining is that type of industry which just cannot be revived overnight. If we are so unfortunate as to be again involved in a war, it is likely that we shall find ourselves in the same condition as that in which we found ourselves the last time, and that we shall suddenly have to appeal to the industry in this country to revitalize their efforts in producing coal. You cannot produce miners overnight. In most cases mining is a lifetime occupation and those who are employed in that type of work come from people who have been so employed from generation to generation.
I spoke on this question earlier in the session and I have spoken on it almost every session since I have been in the House of Commons. On this occasion I do not want to repeat what I have said in the past. I know that we are getting close to the prorogation of parliament, and we do not want to prolong the discussion too long. Nevertheless, there are some things that I think I must indicate to the minister.
I have here before me a couple of newspaper clippings from Calgary, one from the Calgary Herald and one from the Albertan, which give a good picture of the way in which our mines are fast closing, and the way in which the industry is being closed out. I do not want to read them, but let me just put on the record some of the statistics which
5278	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys have been produced in this house. A return was brought down for the hon. member for Cape Breton South. In that return were given some of the production figures which I will give to the committee, as well as some from another return. According to the return tabled, the Alberta production in 1948 was
8.110.000	tons. In 1949 it was 8,616,000 tons; in 1950 it was 8,138,000 tons; in 1951 it was
7.660.000	tons and in 1952 it was 7,150,000 tons.
Those figures show that, for the province of Alberta alone, production has steadily-decreased from that figure of 8 million tons down to a little bit over 7 million tons. That is a great reduction in coal production in one province. Only in the one year, namely in 1951, did it go up at all and then it did not reach the 1950 level. I therefore think it is quite safe to say that ever since 1948 our coal production in the province of Alberta has continually declined.
In the return which was brought down, as I say, at the request of the hon. member for Cape Breton South, it was shown that over-all production in Canada was 17,360,000 tons. But the amount of coal which was imported from the United States-not counting the amount which was brought in by the Canadian National Railways-was
24.176.000	tons. It is a rather peculiar situation, Mr. Chairman, when we find that our importation of coal from the United States is greater by far than is the total amount of coal produced in Canada, and yet Canada has such a tremendous supply of coal.

I am not going to refer to Hansard, although I have it here, but when the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys was asked whether there was a good market for coal he remarked-and I think quite appropriately-that Ontario was a good market for all Alberta coal. If that is so- and I take it that it is so-it seems to me that the government should be doing something to see that Nova Scotia coal, Alberta coal, and Saskatchewan coal-in fact, Canadian coal-is made available to the Ontario market and to the Quebec market instead of having our miners being put out of work and increasing our supply by importation from the United States. I suppose the question would then come up: "Well, we have to buy something from the United States if we are going to sell there." That may be so, but I do not think we should continue the importation of coal to the extent that it is causing our own mines to be closed most rapidly.
Since I spoke in the house during this session on this subject, I wrote to a man in the Drumheller valley in order to find out a more detailed picture with regard to the mining situation in that valley. It is one of the largest producing areas of coal in western Canada. He made a survey of the area and I just want to show you what that survey was. It was dated April 13, 1953. Mr. Roy Hilbourn was the man who checked these different mines in the valley in order to see just what was taking place.
The result of the survey is as follows:
Mine	Place	Working	Not Working	Total60	140	20060	100	16050	75	12590	90100	10010	40	50200	200250	25040	140	180A.B.C. Coal	200	20075	45	1205	90	9570	45	1150	13	1350	70	12065	70	1358	17	250	30	30493	1,715	2,208

That shows that the condition of the coal mining industry in the Drumheller valley is extremely serious. Drumheller is a city, and the main source of revenue there is the mines. When you find men are being laid off in the coal mines of that district to that extent it presents a serious problem not only to that local area but to the mining district as a whole. It is happening not only in Drumheller; as the hon. member for Macleod said this morning, it is happening throughout the mines in his constituency, and as the hon. member for Acadia indicated a while ago, it is happening in his constituency.
A return brought down in this house showed very clearly that the coal mining industry across Canada was suffering from lack of markets, while at the same time we are importing large quantities of coal from the United States.
I was going to refer to the report of the coal board, but the hon. member for Macleod has quoted some of the sections that I intended to quote. It does seem to me that the coal board should be taking a more active part in endeavouring to find a more complete distribution of Canadian coal in Canadian markets. Some assistance has been given by the government in subventions. I hold in my hand an article which I think would be interesting to hon. members. It was taken from the Albertan of April 17. I should like to read one or two paragraphs because it refers to what we are talking about. One paragraph reads:
In the west, the government's action would mean widening the area westward from the head of the lakes within which the railways buy Canadian coal against the competition of United States coal going up the great lakes by water. At present, the radius extends to about mid-Saskatchewan for the Canadian National Railway and around Winnipeg for the Canadian Pacific Railway.
By "the government's action" is meant increasing the subventions. The article continues:
The arrangement between the government and the Canadian National Railway-biggest railway buyer of Canadian coal-
And may I interject here and say that the amount of coal bought last year by the Canadian National Railways from the United States was 2,215,000 tons. The article goes on:
-is that while the new formula is being worked out,-
That refers to the new formula on subsidies. I continue:
-is that while the new formula is being worked out, the railway will continue buying Canadian coal in consultation with the coal board. Later, the treasury-after the revised formula has been tied down-will square up with the government-owned line.
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
This is the paragraph I want to emphasize:
The formula now is based on the assumed out-of-pocket expenses of the Canadian National Railway in buying coal at the pithead-either in the United States or Canada-


George Prudham: Before that goes on the record I should say that it is not true. That reference is not correct. The coal board paid no subvention whatever on United States coal.


Charles Edward Johnston: I mentioned this privately to the minister yesterday. I told him I would bring it up so that he would have a chance to make a statement to the house. Let me finish reading it.
The formula now is based on the assumed out-of-pocket expenses of the Canadian National Railway in buying coal at the pithead-either in the United States or Canada-and having it hauled to coaling points. For the Canadian section of the haul, the government has been using a general figure of a half cent a mile per ton of coal, on which to base subvention payments. The Canadian National Railway for some time has been contending this is too low.
I accept immediately the statement the minister made; but this article definitely indicates that subventions are being paid on the movement of United States coal. As I asked the minister yesterday, is it possible that subsidies are being paid on United States coal after the United States coal arrives in Canada? Is there any form of assistance whatever by means of freight rates or subsidies given to the movement of United States coal once it lands in Canadian ports and is taken to other points in Canada for the use of the railways? That is the point that should be cleared up, because it could very easily be assumed that once the United States coal arrives in Canadian ports it is no longer United States coal but Canadian coal. I should like to make this clear. It does seem to me that if we are to pay subsidies on the movement of Canadian coal to assist the railways, then once the United States coal lands in Canadian ports the railways would almost expect to receive a subsidy on that coal moving from one point in Canada to another point in Canada.


George Prudham: The purpose of the subsidy on company service for the railways is to make Canadian coal competitive with the United States coal at the various coaling points. We pay no subsidy whatever on coal originating in the United States.


Mr.   Johnsion@: Even after it arrives at Canadian ports?


George Prudham: I said "originating in the
United States".


Charles Edward Johnston: That would include any
movement of United States coal from one point in Canada to another.
5280	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys


George Prudham: That is right.


Charles Edward Johnston: I do not think it should receive any subsidy. I am glad the minister has cleared up that point because it did appear to be so from this article that appeared in the Albertan of April 17, 1953.
We should look at this problem of subsidies from the broader point of view. Some people seem to criticize the paying of subsidies. I am not one of those. I can understand that we could soon get into a position where we would be subsidizing everything. I say, I am not one of those who criticize subsidies where they are drastically needed. We are giving assistance to various industries in this country in one form or another. There is hardly a major industry in Canada that does not get protection in some form or other, probably in the form of tariff protection as is true of radio and television sets. You cannot bring a television set in from the United States without paying 15 per cent excise and 10 per cent sales taxes. That is a very decided form of protection. In fact, it is a subsidy. Our television sets sell for a good deal more in Canada than do the same types of television sets in the United States. The same thing is true of the automobile and other industries. I am not picking those two out in order to criticize them; I just want to point out that we are assisting other industries in one form or another. When someone objects to subsidizing industry, in my opinion he is not on very good ground.
The hon. member for Macleod referred to the gold mining industry. We are subsidizing that industry to the extent of about $10 million to $11 million a year. The total for the last four years has been $40 million, and with this year it will be over $50 million. With a yearly production of about $100 million, that means a subsidy of about 10 per cent, which is a rather good one.
It seems to me that if we can go to that extent in subsidizing the gold mining industry -I am not criticizing that action at the moment although there is room for criticism- an industry that employs only 23,000 people when there are thousands of people employed in the coal mining industry, there is indicated a great need for an increase in the amount of the subvention in order that these coal mines may be kept alive. We will need these mines in time of emergency and we dare not allow them to be closed down.
The situation in the coal mining industry is extremely bad and unless the government takes the action which it has the power to take through the coal board this industry is indeed going to be in bad straits before very long. Men are being laid off and coal mines are


closing up according to the return from which I quoted a moment ago. In the Drumheller valley, in the Crowsnest pass and in the maritimes you find miners working only two or three days a week. How is a man going to make a living on that?
Some people point out that high wages are being paid to coal miners, that in some instances a coal miner may get $10, $12 or $13 a day, and it is contended that that is exorbitant. But when you find out that that may be the total amount he gets for a whole week's work, it does not look very good. The economic condition of miners in the Drumheller valley and other places in Alberta and throughout Canada is getting to be such that they cannot make a living. The stores in these localities are having to finance these men over the summer in the hope that in the winter there will be more coal orders and they will be able to pay their grocery bills. As the hon. member for Macleod pointed out, these conditions are quite similar to those that existed in the hungry thirties and yet we are supposed to be in a period of our greatest prosperity.
It seems to me that if we can adopt a national policy in connection with other types of production, we can do the same thing for coal. On April 23 the Minister of Trade and Commerce was reported on page 4307 of Hansard as saying:
We will continue to sell Newfoundland fish just as we have sold it ever since Newfoundland became part of Canada.
That indicates that something is being done for the fishing industry. It has been pointed out that the government is doing something for the agricultural industry. I am not criticizing that for a moment, but I do submit that government policy today is not such that it will keep this most important industry of coal mining even alive. Under present conditions the mines are going bankrupt and are closing down and miners are being thrown out of work.
Just the other day the Minister of Trade and Commerce indicated clearly that he was putting in a national fuel policy in connection with gas and oil. But that is something that affects Ontario and Quebec. It seems to me that when anything affects Ontario or Quebec something is done about it. The Minister of Trade and Commerce said that there would be no export of gas until Ontario's needs were supplied. I am not criticizing that, because I think Canada should come first; but if we can do that for gas and oil, why cannot we do it for coal?
The Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys has said that Ontario is a good market

for coal; the Minister of Trade and Commerce says that Ontario and Quebec are a good market for gas, the difference is that the Minister of Trade and Commerce is going to do something about it; he is not going to permit any more gas to be shipped out until Ontario and Quebec are supplied. I submit that the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys should make a similar statement and say that we are not going to have any more coal come in here from the United States to bankrupt our coal mining industry; we are going to keep Canada as a Canadian market.
If we can do it for gold, if we can do it for gas and oil, if we can do it for fish, if we can do it for agriculture, surely we can do it for the coal mining industry. This industry is essential, not only in times of peace but urgently so in times of war. I do not want to carry on the debate any longer, but I do contend that the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys should make a greater effort. 1 was going to say that he should copy the Minister of Trade and Commerce, but I do not suppose he needs to do that. On the other hand, the Minister of Trade and Commerce has made some drastic statements in regard to the marketing of fish and the marketing Qf gas and oil, and I think it would be quite in order for the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys to say to him: "You are doing that for Canada in those respects, we are going to do something for coal." If he would io that I can assure him that he would have full support from this side of the house.
The Depuiy Chairman: Shall the item carry?


John George Diefenbaker: Are we to hear from the minister?


William Alfred Robinson: I was wondering if :he minister could not reply under items 239 and 240 which have to do with the coal aoard.


George Prudham: Mr. Chairman, most hon. members spoke about coal, but the hon. member for Lake Centre asked a few questions regarding developments in northern Saskatchewan and perhaps I should take a few moments to answer them. The hon. member dated that there should be greater co-opera-ion among the departments of government.
' can tell him that there is close co-operation Detween the Department of Mines and Tech-lical Surveys and other departments of government. The hon. member referred to the Department of* Defence Production. Our mineral resources division allowed the Department of Defence Production to have two of )ur best men who have only recently come sack. They were on loan to that department !or many months.
13, 1953	5281
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys


John George Diefenbaker: Who were they?


George Prudham: Mr. Monture and Mr. Jones. The hon. member referred also to the need for mining roads in northern Saskatchewan. When the natural resources were transferred to the provinces they assumed the responsibility for their development. This department is not a policy-making department; we are merely a service department serving the needs of this government, the provincial governments and industry. I believe that on some occasions the Department of Resources and Development have assisted with mining roads, but the request has always originated with the province. If they see the need for assistance in connection with a certain mining road they make a formal request to the Department of Resources and Development and it is considered by this government.
There is very close liaison with the various provincial governments. Before our program for the year is finally decided upon we correspond with or in some instances visit the various provincial departments of mines to see that there is no overlapping and that our work is co-ordinated so far as it is possible to do so.


Mr. Hodgson:: On Wednesday, December 3, I placed a question on the order paper regarding uranium deposits in the county of Haliburton. My question was as follows:
1.	Has the government of Canada or any department thereof been asked to permit the exportation to the United States of any uranium ore or concentrates?
2.	If so, by whom?
3.	Has uranium ore from the area in or around the county of Haliburton in Ontario been delivered to any department of the dominion government in Ottawa for research and assay?
4.	If so, by whom was such uranium ore delivered?
5.	What was the result of the researches made or assays taken, and was any report made to the party or parties making such ore deliveries?
6.	If not, for what reason?
At that time those questions were wiped off the order paper, just as quick as the snap of a finger, by the Minister of Trade and Commerce. He said that the information required was of a secret nature, and that it was not good for the public to know anything about this sort of thing. Well, the only secret part of that development in Haliburton has been the secrecy of the government in blocking it since 1930.
I have here a book written by Hugh K. Spence and R. K. Carnochan back in 1930. One of those men was a top man in the minister's department, and they -have been convinced of the importance of this deposit for the last fifteen years. Yet the people
5282	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys up there cannot obtain an assay report. I would like to know why.
After sending samples to the department the people were told that the sample had been hand-picked. Well, if the minister or anyone else in his department can tell me how you can hand-pick 20 tons of uranium ore to send down here in trucks, I would like to know how it could be done. How could one hand-pick chunks weighing 300 pounds each? I say that this was a fair sample, picked out by shovel. It was not taken from one small section of the area. When the sample was taken four shovelfuls were thrown out and one thrown on the truck, and I say that would be a fair sample. Then the whole thing was sent here to Ottawa.
If there is nothing valuable there, why does not the department tell us so? Why is there all this secrecy? That is what we want to know. Why is the department blocking this development, from stem to gudgeon, all along the line? Why has it been doing so for the last twenty years? There is no doubt about it that Ottawa is not the only place from which one can secure an assay report. Ore has been taken in other places, and I do not mind that. But reports have been made with respect to it.
From the reports made by the best geologists on the North American continent it is clear that we have plenty of rich ore, a great big body of it. The government has spent large sums of money in northwestern Canada, and they are making wide searches for rich ore. Yet there is plenty of it, rich uranium ore, right at the back door of the Chalk River plant and the government does not seem to want to do anything about it.
I do not know why this question is considered so secret, because there is nothing secret about it. Everyone knows there is plenty of uranium ore in the Haliburton area; everyone knows it from Ottawa to Haliburton and right down through the United States. This government needs it, too; if they do not, or. if they do not know it is there, then why do they say that it.is so secret? Why do they not want anybody else to know about it, or to have anything done about it?
It is about time the department stopped trying to block the development of this important industry in Canada. On the other hand, it should be giving all the help it can. This is a most valuable product, something that is for the welfare of Canada, and especially in matters of defence. Indeed, it can be used for the defence of the whole commonwealth.
Perhaps the minister would be prepared to answer when he reaches item 216, if he is not in a position to answer at the moment.


George Prudham: I am not familiar with the facts of the case to which the hon. member has referred. I shall make a note of it and send him a report tomorrow.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Thank you.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Geological surveys-
220. Administration, operation and maintenance, including the expenses of the national advisory committee on research in the geological sciences, and an amount of $1,800 for Canada's share of the cost of the committee on mineral resources and geology, London, England, $1,938,622.
William Joseph Browne: Will geological survey parties be in Newfoundland this year and, if so, in what region?


George Prudham: There will be one party at Springdale, one at Campbellton, one at Twil-lingate, one at Mount St. Gregory, one at Argentia, one at St. George's, and one in eastern Newfoundland.


William Joseph Browne: In what particular area will the one be located at Argentia?


George Prudham: My notes indicate that the area in question is a metallic ore area.


William Joseph Browne: How many will be in the party, and will they be operating under a geologist? If so, who will be in charge?


George Prudham: Mr. W. D. McCartney will be in charge.


William Joseph Browne: He is one
of the regular officers?


George Prudham: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Mines branch-
219. To provide for payments to McGill university in connection with the development of a coal-fired gas turbine, $100,000.
Clarence Gillis: We passed over this item rather quickly, and I suggest it requires some discussion. Would the minister bring us up to date on the progress being made at McGill university with respect to the university's experiments in connection with the development of a coal-fired gas turbine.


William Alfred Robinson: Is it agreed that we return to this item?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


George Prudham: I am glad the hon. member mentioned this subject. He, in company with other hon. members, was in Montreal some time ago to see this process. It is mosi interesting to laymen. I am greatly encouraged by the progress that has been made. A1

the moment the delay seems to be in connection with heat exchangers which require certain materials which have been in short supply. I understand that a strike in a certain factory has been responsible for the delay. Canadian Vickers Limited are in charge of making these particular units and they expect the missing parts will be ready within the next month. They hope to have the equipment in operation for test during August.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Topographical surveys, including expenses of the Canadian board on geographical names-
223. Administration, operation and maintenance, $1,435,114.
William Joseph Browne: Would the minister give the same information in connection with topographical surveys? Will there be survey parties in Newfoundland?


George Prudham: There will be one party operating in Newfoundland. They will be finishing control work for topographical mapping.


William Joseph Browne: In any
special area?


George Prudham: I have not that information at hand, but I shall get it for the hon. member.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian hydrographic service-
225. Administration, operation and maintenance, including Canada's annual contribution of $5,750 to the international hydrographic bureau, $2,389,576.
Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Can the minister give any information concerning the increase of $305,754 in this item?


George Prudham: The increase is largely accounted for by authorized increases in wage rates and higher costs of supplies; and by the cost of one additional ship on the Pacific coast, the Marabell.


William Joseph Browne: I notice here that there are seven sailing masters and it looks as though there are seven vessels. The master, the first officer, the second officer, third officer, chief engineer, second engineer, third engineer and fourth engineer seem to be full-time men. Do the ships lay up in the winter-the ships used for the surveys in the summer months?


George Prudham: They tie up in dock for maintenance and general repairs. The chief officers stay on.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
13, 1953	5283
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys
228. Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $236,850.
Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Can the minister tell us what this new equipment is? There is an increase of $196,000 here.


George Prudham: This vote is to provide for the purchase of new electronic equipment to be used by the R.C.A.F. in assisting the geodetic survey to carry out shoran-geodetic tri-lateration in sub-Arctic Canada, $210,000. The balance of $26,850 is for the purchase of theodolites, azimuth instruments, and miscellaneous tools and equipment for field work.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
233. Geographical branch-administration, operation and maintenance, $260,368.
William Joseph Browne: May I ask
the minister when the atlas will be finished?


George Prudham: We do not think it will be completed before 1955.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
(S) To provide for payments under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act (Chap. 15, Statutes of 1948, as amended), $11,000,000.
Mr. Catherwood:: I wonder if the minister has the figure for the number of gold mines that were closed during the year 1952 because of the fact that present prices for gold were not high enough to maintain operations.


George Prudham: The figure for mines closed for what reason?


A. Earl Catherwood: Owing to the fact that prices for gold were not high enough to warrant continued production.


George Prudham: Well, Mr. Chairman, mines close for various reasons and it would be very difficult for us to ascertain why in every case. Sometimes they run out of ore; sometimes their ore does not warrant production because it is of too low a grade. There may be various reasons. If the price of gold were $100 an ounce there would still be marginal mines. It is a very difficult question to answer.


A. Earl Catherwood: Has the minister figures for the number of gold mines that were closed down in 1952 and 1953 to date?


George Prudham: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, we have not got the information here but I will be very glad to send it to the hon. member.


A. Earl Catherwood: How much of the appropriation for last year, $11 million, was paid out
5284	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys to gold mines under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act?


George Prudham: In the year 1952 we paid out a total of $11,166,453.18.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister made an interesting observation just now. It was to the effect that if gold was $100 an ounce there would still be marginal gold mines closing down.


George Prudham: No, I said there would still be marginal gold mines.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister did not say "closing down"?


George Prudham: No.


John George Diefenbaker: I was just wondering whether that was a general observation with the figure picked out of the air


George Prudham: No. They will work right up to the margin of economic operation in any case.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
B-Dominion coal board-
239. Administrative and investigations of the dominion coal board, $106,991.
Charles Edward Johnston: I have in mind the report made by the coal board in regard to marketing coal and I wonder if the minister can tell us if there are any concrete proposals for distribution of Canadian coal to Canadian markets. Have they any concrete plans in mind?


George Prudham: I was hoping that my hon. friend would come forward with some concrete plans this afternoon.


Charles Edward Johnston: I gave a few suggestions but I wonder if you will follow them out.


George Prudham: My hon. friend's suggestions were largely to the effect that this government was not doing anything. However, I have a statement here which I should like to put on the record. I think it contains some very good suggestions and will answer a great many of the questions that have been asked this afternoon.
The development and application of a national policy for coal has been the subject of discussion and review by parliament practically since confederation. From the select committee of this house in 1877 to the report of the royal commission on coal in 1946, there has been a succession of investigations by committees of this house or of the other place.
The report of the royal commission on coal of 1946 is the last and most comprehensive of this series and, on the basis of the facts


produced, makes certain fairly definite recommendations.
The right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce, speaking in this house on June 17, 1947, on the second reading of the Dominion Coal Board Act, reviewed the problems of the Canadian coal industry, the findings of the commission and the proposed action of government in response to those findings. The dominion coal board was set up as the first step in developing the policies recommended by the commission and direction and funds have been provided to the board since then for the further development and administration of these policies.
It may be as well to point out that the royal commission recognized that central Canada would have to continue to rely upon coal imported from the United States. The commission reported that the policy of assistance to Canadian coal mines through duty on imported coal and transportation subventions on Canadian coal was well conceived and administered. It was their recommendation that this policy should be continued at about the same level of assistance. It was stated that, in any application of the policy, due regard should be maintained as to the cost of the coal. ___________
The dominion coal board was created by legislation and brought into being by proclamation on October 21, 1947. The board at an early stage in its deliberations adopted, with the concurrence of the minister, a series of principles that in effect may be recognized as a coal policy. These principles are:
(1)	The maintenance of an adequate supply of coal for our national requirements;
(2)	The support of a sound and healthy coal producing industry in Canada;
(3)	The development of steady and adequate markets for the output from Canadian mines;
(4)	The provision at fair wages of reasonably full employment for Canadian miners;
(5)	The possible extensions of the market
for Canadian coals, with the resultant savings of foreign exchange.

 

..This may well be the proper time to see
how these responsibilities have been discharged.
The first principle is the maintenance of an adequate supply of coal for our national requirements. It has been proven by the circumstances of two wars, and buttressed by the report of the royal commission, that we must continue to depend upon our neighbours for a large proportion of our coal supply. The board in the application of this principle must consider, first, the national interest in an adequate supply of coal and, secondly, the local interests of the Canadian producers.

It is unfortunate that in this matter, as in so many others affecting our Canadian life, distance and transportation are stubborn factors that cannot be forgotten or refuted. A survey of the six years since the board was instituted in 1947 shows that over that period Canadian consumers of coal have continued to enjoy an adequate supply at all times. This is so, largely owing to the clear thinking and well founded practices of the larger coal consumers and suppliers who have built up a program of supply and stockpiling that has proved adequate under all conditions. The one possible exception to this record of success occurred through neglect of the long established practice of supply and stockpiling.
The second principle established by the board was the support of a sound and healthy coal producing industry in Canada. In 1947 the coal mining industry in Canada showed a profit of one cent per ton of marketable coal produced, and the over-all production was 15,869,000 tons. In 1951 the industry produced 18,587,000 tons and showed a profit of 36 cents per ton. It must be admitted that this past year has shown a drop in output to approximately 17,579,000 tons, but this is almost entirely due to natural conditions. It is a fact that the weather has been unusually mild, and this has substantially reduced the consumption of fuel. For example, the consumption by the railways fell off by almost one million tons. On first thought, this might be laid at the door of the diesel, but this is not correct. In 1952 there were certainly more diesels, but there were only some 46 less steam locomotives. These 46 locomotives might consume 130,000 tons of coal throughout the year, so that the remaining drop in consumption of 870,000 tons was due to either mild weather or falling traffic. A normal winter could easily build up consumption to the level of 1950 or higher.
The support of a healthy producing industry should not be construed as support for any one operation. All mining ventures are limited in time, and from the moment when the first coal moves out of any mine the exhaustion of the deposit forms a definite limit to the time of operation. Government support and assistance under our way of life should extend to the industry either on a national or an area basis only, and within that area of free enterprise should have full scope to maintain competition, to weed out the inefficient operators, to eliminate those mines where approaching exhaustion or other
13, 1953	5285
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys physical conditions preclude production of good quality coal at a reasonable cost, and to reward the efficient.
There is one segment of the industry that is noted in the royal commission report as requiring special attention, and that is in Nova Scotia. The situation in that most important part of our coal industry has not been as happy as elsewhere. This portion of the industry has received additional assistance recommended by the commission through the Maritime Coal Production Assistance Act. Through this means a large sum of money through loans has been made available for the modernization of the collieries. This program is at present under way, with the effect of some reduction in operating efficiency in the transition period, but with the promise of substantial improvement as it develops. It would appear from all the data available, as well as from the figures I have quoted, that the Canadian coal producing industry as a whole has been supported and has had a healthy development through these six years.
The third principle calls for the development of steady and adequate markets for the output from Canadian mines. Since we live in a democracy and believe in individual enterprise, there is a very definite limit to the powers by which the market may be attained. The policy of transportation subventions established in the early 1930's, and followed since then by successive governments, represents the means adopted. In 1947 there were 573,000 tons of Canadian coal moving to markets under subvention at a cost of $693,888 or $1.21 per ton. In 1952, the movement was 2,713,000 tons, and the cost $6,530,103 or $2.41 per ton. This is evidence of the application of this principle and the cost of that application. In our efforts to promote the establishment of these markets, we have gone farther than was recommended by the commission.
The fourth principle calls for the provision at fair wages of reasonably full employment for Canadian miners. I have a table here setting out the salient facts from which I shall quote. With the approval of the house, I should like to submit the complete table for inclusion in Hansard.
The Depuiy Chairman: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


George Prudham: The table is as follows:
5286	HOUSE OF COMMONS
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys


SELECTED STATISTICS ON CANADIAN COAL MINING BASED ON REPORTS BY DOMINION BUREAU OF STATISTICS, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR AND DOMINION COAL BOARD
[Stage Direction]
A. Coal Production in Net Tons (000 omitted)
-	N.S.	N.B.	Sask.	Alta.	B.C.	Canada1952	5,905	743	2,083	7,195	1,652	17,5791951	6,308	653	2,223	7,659	1,739	18,5871950	6,478	607	2,203	8,116	1,730	19,1391949	6,182	541	1,870	8,617	1,907	19,1201948	6,430	522	1,589	8,123	1,780	18,4501947	4,118	345	1,571	8,070	1,764	15,869
B. Average Days Work Provided Per Year in Canadian Coal Mines
-	N.S.	N.B.	Saak.	Alta.	B.C.	Canada1952	254	272	253	235	217	2391951	250	262	249	225	216	2401950	247	257	245	213	208	2321949	241	249	235	215	213	2291948	243	259	231	207	199	2261947	207*	232	243	224	222	217
* Strike.
C. Average Weekly Salary, Week of Dec. 1st in Canadian Coal Mines
-	N.S.	N.B.	Sask.	Alta.	B.C.	Canada$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.1952	61 57	49 84	67 55	67 03	61 33	62 841951	55 65	45 27	74 31	63 58	57 80	58 261950	53 66	42 21	75 93	54 16	51 62	53 581949	51 40	39 83	62 39	58 94	51 40	53 661948	48 80	38 17	53 24	57 21	51 93	51 711947	41 94	36 51	48 98	48 17	43 86	44 17
D. Profit or Loss of Canadian Coal Mines Per Ton
-	N.S.	N.B.	Sask.	Alta.	B.C.	Canada$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.	$ cts.1952	Not yet available	1951	0 08	0 44	0 42	0 51	0 62	0 361950	0 26	0 05	0 37	0 31	0 44	0 301949	0 21	0 59	0 39	0 47	0 42	0 381948	0 34	0 84	0 31	0 37	0 53	0 381947	0 491	0 18	0 21	0 22	0 04	0 01
t Loss.
[Stage Direction]

In 1947, the average number of days worked per year in Canadian coal mines was 217, while in 1952 it was 239. Over one-half of our coal mines worked five days per week for 52 weeks in the year, and the remainder six days per week.
Charles Edward Johnston: What year was that?


George Prudham: 1952. As an average, therefore, there would be 286 working days available, but of these some 10 days are statutory holidays. There is also provision in the wage agreements for paid holidays of 14 days. In summary, there may be 266 days available for work. It is true that in some areas of the west where the coal produced is sold for household use and does not store well, the days worked are lower, as may be seen from the table submitted. As a comparison it may be noted that the coal mines in the United States worked 183 days in 1950. The figures I have given are for 1952.
The wages paid in coal mining are among the highest in Canadian industry. In 1945, the average weekly wage as at December 1 was $39.72, while in 1952 it was $62.84 for the corresponding period. As a comparison, the average weekly wage for all manufacturers in Canada on December 1, 1952, was $56.05. During this period there has been a small drop in the total number of men employed from 22,227 in 1947 to 21,808 in 1952. This is due to increasing mechanization with the decreasing demand for hand labour. It is clear that the policies followed have resulted in reasonably full employment at fair wages for Canadian miners. I recognize that today's problems are slightly different from what they were in 1952. I am not saying that there is no trouble anywhere; I am just citing these figures as facts.
Finally, principle No. 5 mentions the possible extensions of the market for Canadian coals with resultant savings in foreign exchange. Since this was adopted in 1947, there has been a radical change in the exchange situation. This has not meant that efforts to extend the markets for Canadian coals have been neglected. The board is continually studying the possibilities of increasing our local markets and developing an export trade. The development of oil and gas in western Canada has had a great effect. Through salesmanship, work and government assistance the coal industry has managed to grow throughout the six years, but it must be admitted that the last two or three have been tough. The possible further extension depends largely upon increasing efficiency of
13, 1953	5287
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys production and lowering costs. The board will continue to work at this problem. This problem of increasing costs must be shared by both management and labour. It is possible that if Canadian costs continue to rise the product of the Canadian mines will be priced out of the market.
The industry in western Canada is greatly affected by the use and production of gas and oil. The hon. members from Alberta know that to be so. This affects the mines in the Drumheller valley especially, as they produce the coal which is good for domestic purposes but unfortunately does not store well enough to have a wide acceptance in eastern markets. In other words, it has to be used shortly after it is produced. This applies to many mines in Alberta. The industry, if it is to be expanded, has two main problems, in my opinion. The first is to produce a product of uniform high quality that will be worthy of consumer acceptance in competition with American coal. Second, it must produce a product that can be stockpiled. The reason I say this is that, in my opinion, if the Ontario market for western coal is to be expanded, there must be a reliable and continuing source of such coal available to supply the market when it is needed.
Enlarging on that point, I should just like to say that since I was given the responsibility for the coal board, in the fall of the year we have from dealers throughout Ontario very frantic appeals for western coal; usually when they need it worst, when they are supplying their customers for the first of the heating season, Alberta coal is not available.
Many types of western coal cannot be stockpiled and therefore are restricted largely to the local market.


John Horne Blackmore: Will the minister permit a question?


George Prudham: Yes.


John Horne Blackmore: What would he give as the main reason why, at this particular season, Alberta coal would not be available?


George Prudham: I will enlarge on that point. In the past the practice has been to attempt to ship western coal to eastern markets during the fall and winter months only. Winter usually comes a week or two sooner in the west than in eastern Canada, thus creating a strong local demand which keeps the mines busy during the first few weeks of the heating season; and by the time the western market is supplied the eastern dealers have

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys begun to supply their customers from American sources. Further, the movement of western coal at that season of the year is always restricted because it coincides with the grain movement, with the inevitable shortage of transportation facilities.
In my opinion, the only way to build a stable year-round market for western coal in central Canada is by the establishment of marketing facilities whereby western coal of high quality could be stockpiled in strategic locations in eastern Canada ready for distribution when it is needed.
As I mentioned before, the province has the prime responsibility for developing its natural resources. They assumed that responsibility when these resources were given back to them. I am not criticizing the Alberta government at all. I believe that they are open to criticism just as much as is this government. They have collected large sums in royalties. I would urge them to spend some of the money that they are collecting, from the development of oil and gas, in helping the coal mining industry to develop a uniform product of high quality. That is one of the big obstacles that we find, or that the coal board finds, in promoting the sale of Alberta coal, namely the lack of uniformity in the product. I think the Alberta government could help materially in that one field especially.


Ernest George Hansell: May I ask whether the minister has approached the Alberta government on this matter?


George Prudham: I approached the previous mines minister and I mentioned it to Premier Manning the other day. He said that they had passed at the last session trade-mark legislation under which he hoped they could set up regulations that would help in this problem.
If this arrangement could be worked out by the industry-that is, production of a better product and the stockpiling in eastern Canada of coal capable of being stored- it would be possible to provide for year-round operation of the mines rather than seasonal operation, and it would provide a reliable source of fuel from Canadian sources for central Canada.
In conversation with responsible railway officials recently, I have been told that the railways would look with favour on year-round shipments of coal rather than seasonal shipments; and I am of opinion that this would be an excellent argument for the establishment of more favourable freight rates for the movement of coal.
The coal board will continue to assist the industry to help resolve this problem. I am not suggesting that the problems facing the coal industry are easy of solution. I know that the maritime coal industry is facing a very difficult period and will continue to have difficulties until the benefits from the mechanization program begin to show results.
I believe that in this review I have shown that the main principles, as laid down at the time of the establishment of the dominion coal board, which form the basis of our national coal policy, and as administered by the very efficient officers of the coal board over the last six years, have resulted in a period of stable operation, increasing employment and growing wages.
I am not overlooking the local problems. But in looking over the broad picture, I think one can say that the industry has not done too badly. We all hope that it can continue to expand and grow. As long as we believe in and live under a free enterprise system, the main responsibility for the solution of these problems rests with the industry. To that end I believe that the industry of western Canada-and I mention them because I know the operators better-are making an honest effort to help solve their own problems.
Hon. gentlemen have been suggesting that we should increase the subvention. I put that question up to the western operators association. I said: "Do you think that increased subventions are the answer to your problems?" They said, "No; we do not."


John Horne Blackmore: Will the minister permit a question there?


George Prudham: Yes.


John Horne Blackmore: Can he give the committee what reason they advanced for feeling that subventions would not help?


George Prudham: They gave some of the reasons that I have outlined here as what they thought was the right approach to this problem. I said that the Ontario market is the only market that is capable of being expanded for western coal. They agree with that. But in order to expand the Ontario market these problems that I have mentioned here have to be dealt with. First of all, they have to produce a product that can be stored, and they have to supply that coal when the Ontario consumers need it. By doing that, that is, by solving those two problems, they could go a long way towards solving the problem of year-round operation for the mines and possibly toward dealing with the freight rate problem.


John Horne Blackmore: Will the minister permit another question?


George Prudham: Yes.


John Horne Blackmore: Do they not feel that greater subventions would help them to tide over the period until such time as they could adjust themselves in the other matter?


George Prudham: As my hon. friend probably knows, the railways announced recently that they would forgo any flat rate increase in freight rates for another year. Had that increase gone into effect, I am quite sure that the industry would have been forced to ask for increased subventions.


Charles Edward Johnston: What was the actual
increase? Was it ten cents?


George Prudham: It was a very slight increase that affected some areas only.


John Horne Blackmore: Will the minister permit another question right there?


George Prudham: Yes.


John Horne Blackmore: If the subvention before the freight rate increase had been insufficient to permit Alberta coal to compete successfully in the Ontario market, it hardly seems reasonable, does it, to expect that a mere refraining from applying the additional freight rates would solve the difficulties for the Alberta coal producers? Do I make myself quite clear? It seems to me that the reason given there is hardly adequate. If, before the freight rates were increased, the Alberta producers could not get Alberta coal into the Ontario market on a competitive basis, if a mere refraining from making the increase were all that were offered it would hardly solve the problem, would it?


George Prudham: The last major increase was met by an increased subvention. The recent increase is only a few cents a ton and it affected very few shipments of coal in certain areas. It was not a general increase.
I have one other observation to make. The problems which affect coal production in Alberta largely affect the production in British Columbia as well. The hon. member for Kootenay West suggested that I should interview the minister of mines in British Columbia to discuss these problems to see if we could not arrange for closer co-operation. On that point, I should like to say that I did journey to Victoria last fall and made a point of calling on the minister of mines. I made an appointment with him and was there in ten minutes, but unfortunately he was unavoidably called elsewhere and I was unable to wait until he returned. I hope to
13, 1953	5289
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys have a discussion with him on some future occasion.
I have not dealt specifically with any of the questions. I think I shall let the hon. members ask me further questions.


Clarence Gillis: The minister has missed entirely the question I put to him with respect to the Canadian National Railways changing its policy on company service rate, which places maritime coal at a disadvantage of about $2.94 a ton even in the Moncton market. I understand that some two weeks ago representatives of the coal board met with the railways in Montreal for the purpose of ironing out that difference in the rate. The minister said to the hon. member for Bow River that there was no direct subvention on United States coal after it entered Canada. The difference in the rate at which the Canadian National Railways was hauling coal from Rouses Point to Moncton was this. They were taking it in there at a five mill on company service per ton mile rate, while they were charging eleven mills to take Sydney coal up, which in effect amounted to an indirect subsidy on United States coal on this side by the difference in the rate applied in hauling that coal into Moncton. Can the minister inform me whether he has any information on the progress that has been made in regard to that? Has the agreement that was abrogated by the railways been restored? What, is the mill rate now on the maritime coal that is being hauled from Sydney up to Montreal?


George Prudham: For the last two or three years the Canadian National Railways have been complaining that the five mills per ton mile rate for Canadian coal used on company service to make it competitive with United States coal was insufficient. A couple of months ago they filed their revised formula with the coal board. It was too late to study their proposal carefully at that time, because they were already purchasing coal for the coming season. At the request of the government, through the coal board the Canadian National Railways are continuing to purchase the same amount of coal as they purchased last year and these purchases are being made with the collaboration of the coal board. They are placing the orders where they are most needed; and pending a study of the proposal made by the Canadian National Railways by an independent commissioner, they are continuing to purchase coal in the same quantities as last year.
As to whether there will be any change in the subvention rate or not, I cannot say until the result of that investigation is known and the government decides at that time what to do.
5290	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys


Clarence Gillis: Can the minister tell me what the on company service per ton mile mill rate is at the present time from Sydney to Moncton?


George Prudham: Five mills; it is the same anywhere in the country.


Clarence Gillis: It has been changed.


George Prudham: No, it has not.


Clarence Gillis: I am not going to argue with the minister, but we had Mr. Gordon before the railways and shipping committee, and I was a member of that committee.


George Prudham: Since that time this other arrangement has been entered into.


Clarence Gillis: It is back to five mills. It was eleven mills at that time. Based on the figures that Mr. Gordon gave us, the maritime coal from Moncton was at the eleven mills rate.


George Prudham: That may be what they asked for, but it does not mean that they are going to get it. It depends on the result of this investigation, and what decision is made at that time as to what the railways will get.


Clarence Gillis: That is what they were charging.


George Prudham: No.


Clarence Gillis: Yes, they were. Mr. Gordon's figures and the statement made by the minister of mines of Nova Scotia, the Hon. A. H. McKinnon, definitely showed that the mill rate applied on maritime coal going into Moncton was eleven.


George Prudham: No, they could not charge it because we did not have the appropriation to pay it. They have probably based their purchases on that formula. And that would give United States coal an advantage of an additional six mills a ton mile, but the C.N.R. has never been paid any more than five mills a ton mile.


Clarence Gillis: Let me read the statement of the Hon. A. H. McKinnon. I am not going to read it all because it is quite lengthy. I shall read the part that is relevant to these figures. He said:
"It is difficult to see how Mr. Gordon arrived at the figures of comparative laid-down costs of Nova Scotia and United States coal unless he is using a different operating cost rate (O.C.S. rate) for both coals, to the prejudice of the Sydney product" the mines minister said.
The Sydney coal "costs at the mine $9.30. The normal freight rate for the 341-8 miles from Sydney to Moncton is $2.80, giving a cost laid down at Moncton of $12.10 per ton. In order to get the figure Mr. Gordon gave, $13.04, I conclude he must be using an operating cost rate of 11 mills per ton per mile," Mr. McKinnon said.
In his statement Mr. McKinnon makes it quite clear that there was an agreement in
IMr. Prudham.]

existence that went back to 1933 that definitely laid down the five mill rate.


George Prudham: Right.


Clarence Gillis: But in the figures of cost of coal to the Canadian National Railways in Moncton given by Mr. McKinnon it is evident that in his reasoning and in mine the eleven mill rate was applied to the Sydney coal.


George Prudham: I think the hon. member is correct there. They were basing their purchasing policy on that formula.


Clarence Gillis: What I am concerned about is that that applies to maritime coal even in Moncton, and places it at a disadvantage of $2.94 a ton, which is a big consideration, and it would add more than that to coal going to Montreal. Is the coal board making any progress in restoring the agreement and arriving at a definite figure that would be applicable to both maritime and United States coal so as to retain the competitive position that we have had over the years?


George Prudham: Our subvention does not apply to United States coal at any time. The coal board is endeavouring to get an agreement. If the five mills per ton mile rate is not right we would like to find out what is right. At no time did we ever insist that the five mills was enough. It is up to the railways to prove to us that they need more. At the present time the investigation is going on. In the meantime all the mines in Canada that normally supply the Canadian National Railways have received their orders or will within a day or two, and should know exactly where they stand for this season up to the totals that they purchased last year.


Clarence Gillis: That five mill rate will apply until such time as a new agreement is arrived at?


George Prudham: I do not think they will bill us until the new agreement is reached.


Charles Edward Johnston: I asked about the concessions that were given to the railroads on the movement of United States coal and whether they had any effect on the rates.


George Prudham: No.


Charles Edward Johnston: Then until the new agreement is in effect the movement of United States coal would affect the movement of Canadian coal in that particular area.


George Prudham: At no time have we paid any subvention or granted assistance for the movement of United States coal.


Clarence Gillis: I am not blaming the government for this; I am blaming the Canadian National Railways, who had an agreement with them which it was expected they would

live up to. The Canadian National abrogated that agreement and changed the mill rate without any reference to the government. They just pushed the agreement to one side and that did not come out until we began to get the figures in the railway committee. I still insist that the Canadian National had no right to change that mill rate because there was an agreement on it. What I am trying to get at now is whether you are hauling coal from Sydney on that five-mill rate until such time as the new agreement is arrived at.


George Prudham: It is not being hauled at any rate at all. There will be no payment to the Canadian National until this argument, if I can call it that, is settled. They are continuing to haul in the same quantities, from the same mines and up to the same total as they did last year. The orders have already been placed with the mines.


Ernest George Hansell: Mr. Chairman, I promised the minister when I spoke first that I was not going to speak any further. I am not going to speak at any extended length now because I know we are hoping to prorogue as soon as possible, but I did listen with interest to the minister's statement and I cannot help but feel that we have listened to the same type of statement for many years. His predecessors came up with the same explanation through the years. We have been sitting in this corner of the house for seventeen years now and have heard a similar statement made every year. The only difference between the minister's statement and the previous statements is the variation in some of the figures.
We have been told that the government is trying to create a sound coal mining industry, with markets and full employment. That has always been said and they are still working toward it. All because there is no overall Canadian coal policy. The minister mentioned those three elements in the government's attitude toward the industry. Surely the minister cannot say, when this large coal mining industry in Canada is working only two and a half days a week, that it is in a sound position, with markets and full employment.
If you read quickly the employment figures which he gave for 1952 they seem to present a more favourable picture than actually is the case. I can understand that those figures might be accurate for 1952. I have no way of disputing the figures and I suppose they are right. But if half the coal miners were working five days a week, if they averaged five days a week in 1952, and many others 68108-334
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys worked only two and a half days a week, then it looks to me as though some must have worked about eight days a week. That just does not add up. Perhaps in 1952 the Crows-nest pass area averaged more than two and a half days a week, but the point is that this is May, 1953. In May, 1953, the industry is working about two and a half days a week.
These coal miners have to pay rent just the same; they have to buy food just the same. It is small comfort to the thousands of men in a certain area who are working only two and a half days a week to be told that they should sit back and relax and be thankful because half the industry is working pretty nearly full time. That sort of thing would be a pretty slim fare.
The minister explained how the markets had become somewhat seasonal and that perhaps the coal mining industry had not been able to deliver coal at the proper time. All I can say about that is that it simply indicates the need for an adequate Canadian coal industry. This seasonal thing is not something that has happened recently. You cannot blame everything on the weather. We may have had a mild winter and that may have had some effect upon mines producing domestic coal, but the Crowsnest pass mines produce industrial coal. After all we have had springtime, summer and winter ever since the dawn of creation. To blame our difficulties on the seasons just indicates to me that we are in dire need of a coal policy.
I do not hear the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Minister of Agriculture getting up and saying that it is just too bad that they harvest wheat only in the fall, that it would be different if they would harvest it all the year round. They do not talk that way, because we have a wheat board and a wheat policy. Once again I say that there is need for a definite coal policy that will provide coal for the Canadian people, keep the industry solvent and bring about pretty well full-time employment.


Charles Edward Johnston: Mr. Chairman, when item 239 was called I asked the minister what the coal board was doing to initiate an effective national fuel policy for Canada. The minister got up immediately and said with a great deal of enthusiasm, "I expected the hon. member was going to ask that and I have something here to tell him which is really going to be good," or words to that effect. I immediately said to myself, "This is just before an election and they are coming out with a national fuel policy, which is all to the good; elections do some good at
5292	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys some times". But when I listened to the minister I found that there was no semblance of a new national fuel policy for Canada to be found in his remarks.


George Prudham: Can the hon. gentleman suggest what he thinks would be a good national fuel policy and how he would administer it?


Charles Edward Johnston: I have told the minister in this house on several occasions what I thought should be done and he has not taken advantage of that. That may not be his particular fault but the thing I want to emphasize is that I asked what the government was doing through the coal board to establish an effective national fuel policy for Canada. I took down just a few notes while the minister was speaking. He said that one of the principles of the new policy was a sound and healthy industry for Canada. I think under the circumstances this industry is anything but healthy; the signs are that it is not going to be very healthy. The figures produced by the dominion bureau of statistics show that our production in Canada has been dropping every year. It may be true, as the minister has said, that we have had a mild winter, and that therefore a smaller quantity of coal has been marketed. But if we go back over the years we find that our coal production has been reduced. The minister has said that we are supposed to keep an adequate supply for Canadian requirements. No one would suggest that that could be described as a new policy, particularly when many of our mines are closing down. Surely that is not going to be very encouraging for the mining industry and the miners of this country, when they are told that this is the new national fuel policy that we are going to have.


George Prudham: I did not suggest it was new. I said it was a consistent policy over the years.


Charles Edward Johnston: The minister says it is not new, and X agree wholeheartedly in that. He says it is the type of thing that has been going on for the last few years. But I say to him that is not good enough, and I would strongly urge the minister to do something. It is his responsibility to act so as to give our coal mining industry a policy which would bring it up to par and leave it in a healthy condition. In this way, in a time of emergency, we would be able to fall back on that industry for our requirements. That is in the interests of Canada, and I am sure it is also in the interests of the coal mining industry and those who are engaged in it.


Mr. Higgins:: Mr. Chairman, may I be permitted to revert for a moment to the preceding item. I did not have a chance to speak when it was before the committee. I refer to


the question of the boundary between Labrador and Newfoundland. Is the minister in a position to make a statement as to what has happened in this connection?


George Prudham: Is it the wish of the committee that we revert to that item?


Louis-René Beaudoin: Has the discussion with respect to the coal board terminated?


Clarence Gillis: I would like to add one word. The minister asked if we had anything to recommend by way of a national fuel policy. I am not going to say anything about it at all, except this: if you would take a look at Hansard for the month of June, 1948, you will find where I spelled out in detail the mechanics of a national fuel policy. I do not remember the exact date, but it was at some time in that month.


George Prudham: I have no doubt that all hon. members could figure out a very satisfactory fuel policy. But do not forget that the development of these resources is in the hands of the provinces; and a national policy that would solve all the ills of the coal mining industry in Canada, and supply the consumers of Canada with Canadian coal, sounds very nice. But how are we going to bring it about? You cannot put the industry, the consumers, or the people of Canada in a strait-jacket. This is a democracy; and so long as private enterprise is in the field, and so long as we believe in free private enterprise, democracy has to work in a slower manner. I am convinced that, with the help of this government, the coal board, and such provincial governments as will co-operate, the industry will eventually move out of its present difficulty.
I believe the major sore spot in the west has been aggravated largely through the development of oil and gas, which has displaced Alberta coal, and especially the softer types of coal, in the local market.
A few months ago I met the operators in the Drumheller valley. I talked over their problems with their executive, and discussed how they might be helped. The suggestion was made, and acted upon, that we appoint representatives of the industry, the Alberta department of research, the coal board and a member of the fuels branch of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. They have been working on the problem of producing a product which will store. As yet that report has not been completed and has not come to my hand. However, they are making an honest effort, in co-operation with the coal board and others, to solve this problem. I do not think it is at all hopeless.
As some hon. members have said, we are passing through a period of transition. I share their worries and apprehensions about

workers in the constituencies. However, I think the situation could be a lot worse-at least it seems to be worse in United States mines-so far as unemployment is concerned. I am sure the situation will work out.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Louis-René Beaudoin: I think it is the wish of the minister to reply to the question asked by the hon. member for St. John's East in connection with item 238, which was carried earlier. However, I wished to dispose of the discussion of the coal board item before returning to the one to which the hon. member referred.
238. Provincial and territorial boundary surveys -administration, operation and maintenance, $48,924.


George Prudham: In connection with the
Quebec-Labrador boundary, the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys will head up a commission to establish a boundary, after a request by both provinces. The expense of the survey is shared equally, I believe, by this government and the two provincial governments concerned. As yet we have had no request from either Quebec or Newfoundland.


Gordon Francis Higgins: And the cost will be split three ways?


George Prudham: I believe that is so, but I would not be sure of it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES Fisheries research board of Canada-
145. Headquarters administration, $119,115.
William Joseph Browne: I would like to have a report from the fisheries research board. The parliamentary assistant said that it was in the hands of the printers. Is it ready for publication? Then, my second question is this: who will be the Newfoundland representative or representatives on the fisheries research board?


Mr. MacNaughl:: Mr. Chairman, in connection with the first question, I checked on the report of the fisheries research board and I find that it is still in the hands of the queen's printer. I have also checked the date on which it was tabled in former years, and I find that at least in the last three years it was tabled during the month of June. So there is nothing unusual this year in the fact that the report is not ready for tabling at this early date.
In replying to the second question, there has been no decision made concerning the Newfoundland appointment on the research board.
68108-334i
Supply-Fisheries


Gordon Francis Higgins: I should like briefly to review this item. First of all I would say to the minister how much we appreciated the luncheon served in the experimental kitchen of his department, and what it has done for the consumption of fish. We are truly grateful for having had this demonstration of what can be done with fish when it is handled properly. I want to say to him that I have a Canadian Press report dated April 23, headed "Hold Pork Program interferes with Fish Sales". I am not going to read it all but the suggestion is that the stockpiling of pork is interfering with the selling of fish. It goes further into the idea that the present glut in our fresh fish market is particularly caused by this pork piling, if you want to put it that way. I do wish the minister to remember that it may be perfectly all right to buy up all the pork that may be bought, but if that is going to interfere with our fish sales it should not be handled in the way it is handled. I will send this particular clipping over to the minister with the remark made by Mr. Welch, director of the fisheries council of Canada.
"I suggest the government get out of pork," replied Mr. Welch.
Well, it sounds as though we were on the pig's back, but I do not approve of it.
I am not going into the matter very far but the minister knows that Newfoundland is approaching a very new program in fisheries. I am not going to go into the massive Walsh report that the minister has referred to except to say that I think it is a very valuable report that is going to be implemented, I am sure, by the minister and the premier of Newfoundland. Again, though probably I do not see eye to eye with the premier on this matter, I want to read to the minister this quotation from a speech by the premier on January 3, 1953, as reported by the Evening Telegram of that date. The premier is talking of the new fisheries program and he says:
Of course this program will not, will most definitely not be carried out in a month or a year. If it could be carried out in a year it hardly would be worth talking about. What we want is a program that will need years and years to be carried out. Because, mark my words, what we are tackling when we tackle the fishery, is a problem that is very, very old: it was old when I was a boy; it was old when the oldest living fisherman was a boy. It always was a trouble, and that trouble is certainly not going to be cured all of a sudden.
It will take years, and it will take millions and millions of dollars.
Some of those millions will come from the Newfoundland government, some I hope will come from the Canadian government, and is it too much to hope that some will come from the Newfoundland fish trade?
I merely want to echo the words of the premier and say that I do hope, since the

Supply-Fisheries
minister has been down there and seen the problem and since his parliamentary assistant knows the problem pretty well, that we will all get together and implement this program as it should be implemented.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
International commissions-
148. To provide for Canadian share of expenses
of the international fisheries commission appointed under treaty dated January 29, 1937, between Canada and the United States for the preservation of the north Pacific halibut fisheries, $55,900.
Mr. Applewhaiie:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the minister a question on item 148 and perhaps I might be permitted to ask it on item 152 at the same time, as both items deal with the international commissions, dealing amongst other things with halibut in the north Pacific ocean.
When I was speaking briefly on the new treaty with the United States regarding the conservation of halibut-that treaty provides for the appointment of one additional commissioner from Canada-I made a suggestion that I would like to repeat now. May I make it very clear that I have not the slightest criticism to offer about the excellent services rendered to Canada by both commissioners who now represent us. At the same time provision has been made for a third commissioner. Under the so-called Japanese peace treaty, under item 152, commissioners from Canada will be appointed.
I would like to ask the minister whether he will give most serious consideration to making certain that on both commissions there shall be a commissioner who is a practical long-line fisherman from the Pacific coast.


James Sinclair: Now that the halibut commission membership has been extended it is my intention to recommend to the government that the commissioners be representatives of the federal Department of Fisheries, persons who have practical knowledge of the industry, practical knowledge of fishing. They will not be representatives of the fishing industry but they will be representatives of Canada who have special knowledge of the processing operation and the fishing operation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
153.	To provide for operation and maintenance of Newfoundland bait service, $309,195.
Louis-René Beaudoin: There is a supplementary item here, No. 666. Is it agreed that these items shall be considered together?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.

666. To authorize the Minister of Fisheries, on behalf of the government of Canada, to enter into an agreement with the government of Newfoundland, subject to the approval of the governor in council, which shall provide for the operation by Newfoundland of the Newfoundland bait services and which may provide for the transfer to Newfoundland of property pertaining thereto; and to provide for a payment to Newfoundland in accordance with the said agreement, $1,250,000.


James Sinclair: Newfoundland is the only one of the provinces where the governments, either federal or provincial, actually operate the bait service. It was done by the commission of government and since confederation our federal Department of Fisheries has administered the operation. We took over the operation of the bait depots at that time. They are actually a losing proposition and we lose, on an average, about $170,000 a year. The bait depots are very useful as far as the fishermen are concerned and we agreed to take over those depots and operate them without fundamental change. One reason why the losses are increasing is that the type of fishing has changed. They are getting out of bait fishing and more into trawling and seining. Nevertheless there will be great need for these depots for years to come.
Another reason why they lose money is that, unlike bait depots run by industry in other provinces, they have just the single operation of freezing bait. In the maritime provinces these bait depots are associated with cold storage plants where fish is filleted and held. One of the recommendations of the Walsh committee was to try to develop plants around these bait depots which, as well as processing salt cod, would provide outlets for fresh and frozen fish. With that in mind the Newfoundland government approached the federal government and the suggestion was that we would turn back the bait depots to them. Under the amendment to the British North America Act we have the responsibility of seeing that bait service is maintained-but the provincial government in its proposal will obtain leases from those fishing operators in the province who will agree to take over the bait depots and extend them by putting in filleting machines and cold storage warehouses.
To us the proposition seemed a progressive one, providing that the depots were maintained. We entered into negotiations with the premier of Newfoundland on that ground. There has been a little misunderstanding in Newfoundland in one respect. It was thought that a crown corporation was going to be set up. That is not so. This offer is open to any one of the present industry operators in Newfoundland or to any other person who comes forward. The reason we have two

votes in these estimates is that until some agreement is reached which is acceptable to us, with our responsibility under the terms of union, we must continue to operate those bait depots. If during this summer or fall we can work out an agreement which will enable us to discharge our responsibility to the fishermen and at the same time enable these depots to be put on an economic basis and be used for something more than bait depots, we will go ahead with such an agreement.


William Joseph Browne: An announcement made by the Newfoundland papers several days ago said that the government has made agreements in principle with Fisheries Products Limited to assume responsibility for the bait service-hitherto a federal responsibility. Was the minister aware of that?


James Sinclair: * That statement was drawn to my attention. As a matter of fact, I had a meeting with Premier Smallwood here today on that very subject.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Bring him in.


James Sinclair: We made it quite clear to the Newfoundland government that our understanding was that if these bait depots are made available they must be made available to all operators down there and not to just one operator.
The Newfoundland government, as you know, in recent years has provided a great deal in the way of loans to a number of operators down there to improve their plants. We did not enter into those agreements, but we think they are very helpful to the plants. We are not prepared to comment on any relations the fishermen may have with any of these companies, but since we have a formal responsibility to see that bait is made available to the fishermen, we will be careful to see that in any arrangement we do enter into the fishermen and other operators in the province will be protected. That is why there is this double vote. Only one will be used. While there may be a change in direction, in accordance with the recommendations in the Walsh report, under the terms of union we still have the fundamental responsibility for seeing that the bait depot service is made available to the fishermen without fundamental change.


William Joseph Browne: This lease has not been made with Fisheries Products Limited?


James Sinclair: Not as far as we are concerned, nor have the bait depots been turned over. We are still operating the bait depots,
Supply-Fisheries
and we will see any agreement before we enter into it.


William Joseph Browne: He says in this speech:
We have been fortunate in being able to enter into arrangements with a Newfoundland company to assume the responsibility, under a lease, of the bait services which are being transferred to this government.


James Sinclair: The bait services have not been transferred because we are constitutionally obligated. I can assure the fishermen and the hon. member that we will see that the bait depots are made available to the fishermen without any fundamental change.


Gordon Francis Higgins: There is just one point to which reference has been made before during the discussion of these estimates, and during the time we were discussing the amendment to the Fisheries Act. It is the question of the use of the ports in Newfoundland by foreign trawlers. I merely wanted to bring this matter to the attention of the minister again. It is important that foreign trawlers, Portuguese and others, be permitted to come in and buy what they want in St. John's. I have a letter here from a reputable person for whom I can vouch, and I should like to quote two paragraphs from it.
The trawler business is of much more value to the economy of St. John's than anyone imagines. I have obtained some figures, and might say, that more than three million dollars is spent in disbursements. The trawlers call here for coal, oil, salt, provisions, and repairs.
In addition to the money spent for the benefit of the ships, the members of the crew all spend a certain amount of money in the stores in St. John's. The captains obtain funds from the agents, and sometimes during a visit of two or three days as much as $3,000 would be spent by one crew.
Then he says:
Included in the sum referred to above was an amount of $145,000 for herring purchased, which was used for bait.
I merely draw this to the minister's attention so he will realize how important it is that foreign trawlers be allowed to come into St. John's, as they always have.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
154.	To provide for the extension of educational work in co-operative producing and selling among fishermen, $80,000.
Edward Turney Applewhaite: This item is to provide federal government assistance in connection with educational work in co-operative producing and selling. In connection with selling, we have heard a great deal during the discussion of these estimates to indicate that is the greatest practical problem facing the fishing industry today. I do not think there is anybody in Ottawa who knows that better
52S6

Supply-Fisheries
than the Minister of Fisheries. I think perhaps I may be permitted to say that there is nobody better qualified to assist in finding markets for our fishermen than the present Minister of Fisheries.
This item is not very large, but it does perform a very valuable service. It is a service that is greatly appreciated by the fishermen on the Pacific coast, who would like to see it extended. It can only be extended, of course, if more funds are available. The minister is, I think, by training and at heart, an economist and therefore he will know that it is good economy and good government to help people to help themselves. That is what this item will do. I have a long letter in my hand from the Prince Rupert fishermen's co-operative association. I am not going to read it all, but I am going to read the resolution they adopted.
I should like to say that, although I do not know anything about the associations on the Atlantic coast, this is undoubtedly the soundest association of its kind in British Columbia, and most likely in Canada. When I say "sound" I do not mean only sound financially, I mean sound in their thinking. The resolution which they adopted reads:
Whereas the federal Department of Fisheries has recognized the need for co-operative education amongst the fishermen of Canada, and;
Whereas the grant made for the purpose of progressing this work on the B.C, coast has only permitted a limited program, and;
Whereas the serious situation facing the fishermen's co-operative association has evidenced the need for a more extensive program,
Therefore be it resolved that this annual general meeting of the Prince Rupert fishermen's co-operative association urgently request the Department of Fisheries to increase the grant for co-operative education amongst fishermen on the B.C. coast and to ensure the wider application of this program.
I should like to ask the minister how much of the vote was spent on the Pacific during the past year; and during the present year how much of the vote is it estimated will be spent on the Pacific? I should like to urge him to take whatever action is possible to increase the vote, and certainly increase the amount available for this work on the Pacific.


Mr. Bryce:: I should like to ask the minister why this vote, which is to provide for educational work in co-operative producing and selling, cannot be extended to Manitoba. I have mentioned this point on different occasions when previous estimates were under discussion, and I have always been told that, since Manitoba controls her own fisheries, we have no right to that money. I do not think that is right. This $80,000, whether or not it is spent, is there in the estimates and must come out of the consolidated revenue fund.
I do not think it should make any difference

whether the fisherman is in Prince Rupert, Vancouver, Halifax or where he is. If the money can be used for adult education amongst fishermen, I think the minister should see that the prairies get a share of it. We need education there just as well as they do on the Atlantic or Pacific coast.
I should like the minister to tell me if some of it could be made available so we could start a program.


James Sinclair: Actually I answered the hon. member for Selkirk last night, but he had left the chamber. I answered him because he had raised this particular problem when we had our general debate on fisheries. This is a vote of $80,000 for assistance in co-operative education in fisheries. We do not initiate the courses at these three universities, St. Francis Xavier, which is almost the home of this movement in Nova Scotia, Ste. Anne de la Pocatiere in Quebec, and the University of British Columbia. The educational authorities there, in co-operation with local groups, have started courses in co-operative education. Then they have asked us to help them, and we have helped them.
I said last night that if one of the prairie universities wanted to start such a course and lay out a program for co-operative education amongst the fishermen, or if there are any large groups in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta who would like to form a co-operative group and ask us to help, we will be glad to help. The matter of the provincial control of fisheries is not a factor so far as I am concerned, because we do help Ste. Anne de la Pocatiere in Quebec. However, we do not start the courses, but we are willing to assist. The primary responsibility for education is provincial. If the universities in these provinces are willing to start such courses in cooperative education, they could certainly get assistance in planning those courses from the universities which have them. We will listen to them sympathetically.
I mentioned last night that the next most obvious place was the new university in Newfoundland, Memorial university. The recommendation of the Walsh committee is that we should give substantial assistance to that university in starting a course for the fishermen down there. We certainly will, once the university lays down the courses.
So far as the member for Skeena is concerned, last year we allotted $10,000 to the University of British Columbia. It was not quite all spent. They actually submit bills up to that $10,000. For any extension of their services, they would require a larger appropriation. I understand that the fishermen's co-operative group in British Columbia are approaching the university authorities with

the thought of having an expanded course in the university in the year ahead.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I wish to make one final remark and thank the minister for his remarks about the new university in Newfoundland. Would he feel it would be wise to include a course in codology down there? Maybe we could create a doctor of codology.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
155.	To provide for administration expenses of the Fisheries Prices Support Act, 1944, $72,380.
William Scottie Bryce: Can the minister tell us how much money has been spent in support of Manitoba fish prices up to the present time?


James Sinclair: As far as this year's support for prairie fish is concerned, the payments have not been completed. The total cost is estimated to be about $250,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Loans, investments and advances-fisheries-
765. To provide for an advance to the government of Nova Scotia in accordance with the terms of an agreement between the government of Canada and the government of Nova Scotia, to be entered into with the approval of the governor in council, in an amount not exceeding one-half of loans made by the government of Nova Scotia to fishermen for the purpose of replacing abnormal losses of equipment suffered by reason of severe weather conditions in the 1951-52 fishing season, $80,000.
Mr. Kirk (Digby-Yarmouth):: This is the item covering the agreement between the Nova Scotia government and the federal government as to loans to fishermen who suffered so severely in the storms of a year or more ago. During my travels through the counties of southwestern Nova Scotia, in the latter part of the fall, a great many of the fishermen who had obtained those loans spoke to me of the benefit they had received and of their appreciation. Since so many of them had requested that these loans be granted, and since the two governments had worked together and cooperated in the plan, several of them went so far as to suggest that I should do what I am doing now, namely extend their thanks personally to the minister and his department.


William Joseph Browne: Is the minister going to give us a statement about that matter?


James Sinclair: On the next item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
766. To authorize and provide for the establishment of one or more special accounts in the consolidated revenue fund for the purposes of a plan to be known as the fishermen's indemnity and
Supply-Fisheries
loan plan, to be administered in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, for the purpose of assisting fishermen to meet abnormal capital losses; and to authorize payment from the accounts in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with the regulations, of indemnities, loans and administrative expenses, the accounts to be credited with all amounts received by way of premiums, recoveries and repayments, and with advances to the said accounts in accordance with the regulations, such advances not at any time to exceed $250,000.
James Sinclair: This is the item which will permit the inauguration of this scheme of fishermen's insurance on boats and on one type of gear, which I referred to yesterday. In the house at various times comparisons have been made-not in a carping manner, but nevertheless there have been comparisons -between the facilities available to the farmers of Canada as compared with those available to the other primary producer of food, the fishermen. There is no doubt about it that fishing is an even more hazardous occupation than is farming. Because of the very nature of the industry, it has been more difficult for a fisherman to obtain definite aid in the form of either credits or grants or insurance.
That is especially true as far as the small fishermen's boats are concerned. The large boats-the seiners on the west coast and the trawlers and draggers on the east coast- are assessed and registered and can be insured by private insurance companies or by cooperative insurance companies at a reasonable rate; I think it is about 4| per cent. But unfortunately the great bulk of the fishing fleet, which is owned by the fishermen themselves or groups of fishermen, consists of boats which are smaller than that.
The private insurance companies have found it impossible to offer insurance to those classes of boats, for an obvious reason: The cost of administration would be so great in assessing the boat, and in having field men go out after storms, wrecks or fires in order to assess the damage. The rates quoted on small boats such as those I have mentioned would run from 12 to 20 per cent. Obviously no fisherman with a small boat can afford to pay such premium rates. Because of this situation the department this year made an investigation, as a consequence of the demand from every corner of the house from members representing fishing ridings that we should do something since the private insurance companies were unable to enter the field, and that the government had the responsibility to begin some system of vessel insurance.
The problem is limited first of all obviously by the value of the boats. We find that boats of a value of $7,500 could quite easily get commercial insurance. So the first step was to have our committee from both our

Supply-Fisheries
department and the insurance branch of the Department of Finance visit the coast and assess the storm damage. The hon. member for St. John's East some two or three weeks ago asked a question about the committee's work down in St. John's. They worked out what they thought would be an equitable rate for such insurance. We are now ready to go ahead with a provisional plan of such insurance.
That is one reason we are doing it by an item in the estimates rather than by legislation. It is a new field. It is a field in which we are going to have to gather a lot of experience. Hence for the first year or two we are starting with what might be called a rock-bottom plan in order to get the administration rolling and to gain with respect to such an insurance plan the experience which can be gained only by. having a plan in action.
The first approach was this. We quickly found that we could conquer this matter of costly administration because as a federal Department of Fisheries we have fishery inspectors, officers of our department, in every fishing area which is administered by the federal government. These men, with their regular duties, could easily combine the work of assessing boats and assessing the loss due to storm or other damage. That was a great step forward.
We then thought of confining the scheme for the first years to the coastal provinces where we have control of the fisheries, namely British Columbia, the three maritime provinces and Newfoundland. But various Quebec members-including the hon. member for Iles-de-la-Madeleine and also the hon. member for Gaspe in particular-protested strongly that this would be unfair on much the same grounds as those just mentioned by the hon. member for Selkirk, that the Quebec fishermen who were fishing in the gulf of St. Lawrence would feel that they were not getting the protection which has been afforded to other Canadians through the federal government. So we have now decided to have the scheme cover the five Atlantic provinces and British Columbia.
We propose to offer to the fisherman, by July 1 of this year, or as soon as the administrative details can be worked out, the opportunity to insure his boat and its fixed equip-ment-that is the engine-up to a maximum value of $7,500 for a premium of one per cent of the appraised value. In cases of total loss, there will be an indemnity of 60 per cent of the appraised value. In cases of serious damage-damage of over 30 per cent of the appraised value-there will be an indemnity of 85 per cent of the amount by which the 
repair bills are in excess of the 30 per cent minimum. We are having to include in this scheme the same deductible amount, to cover minor damage, as is common with automobile insurance.
To give an example, on a $1,000 boat- which is the common boat along parts of the Newfoundland coast and the maritime coast- the premium will be $10 a year. If this boat is lost or, if in the case of damage the repairs would cost more than the appraised value, the fisherman will receive 60 per cent or $600. In the case of partial damage, the fisherman himself must pay the first $300, which is deductible. In the case of damage amounting to say, $800, the fisherman would pay $375 and the indemnity fund would pay $425.
In addition to loss or damage to their boats, there is another factor of loss, and it is a significant factor. I refer to the loss of gear, traps and pots which are put out to sea and which can be lost by storm. Here again no commercial insurance is available. This is a much more difficult problem than that of boats, because of the expendable nature of much of this fishing gear and the obvious difficulties of trying to administer any form of insurance of this gear. We thought, however, that we should make a start on one type of gear in order to gain the experience which we will have to have before we can expand this scheme more widely; and we chose lobster pots as being the type of gear on which we should start this year. There are over 2 million lobster pots in operation in the Atlantic provinces. They are fairly costly, with the cost ranging from $3 to $7 or $8 a pot.
The losses through storms in recent years have been quite severe; the previous item referred to by the hon. member for Digby-Yarmouth, for example, the item of $80,000 being our share of loans for losses of lobster pots in Nova Scotia in storms a couple of years ago. To make a start on gear insurance we propose to offer to the lobster fishermen, commencing with the opening of the fall season on August 10, in the Northumberland strait area the opportunity of securing partial coverage for lobster traps through the payment of a premium of $7.50 per one hundred traps for the legal fishing season. The premium will be $15 each for two seasons or a single six months' season. Some areas have only a single two months' season. There the premium rate will be $7.50 per hundred traps. In the area where they have two two-months' seasons or a six months' season the premium will be $15 per one hundred traps.
The normal annual wear and tear of course is a very difficult point when it comes to

insuring gear which is expended. Our committee examined the records and talked to the fishermen concerned, and it was generally agreed that there was a 25 per cent loss on lobster traps through wear and tear in each year. That would be the normal loss; and in order to take care of this normal annual wear and tear amounting to about 25 per cent of the traps used, the fishermen will have to take responsibility for the first 25 per cent of the traps which must be replaced in any given season, and it is on the abnormal loss that there will be an indemnity of $1.50 for each trap lost in excess of 25 per cent. For example, a fisherman with 200 traps will pay a premium of $15 for the regular two months' season, and he will receive $1.50 for each trap lost in excess of 50, which would be his normal wear and tear on 200 traps for a short season.
We would like to provide protection to fishermen using other types of gear, such as herring weirs, mackerel and salmon nets, cod traps, crab traps and so forth, but we feel that we must first gain experience in this field of gear insurance on the lobster traps. Our fisheries officers over this winter will be gathering data on the expendability of other types of gear so that perhaps next year we shall be in a position to extend this gear insurance to cover things other than lobster traps.
The other point of concern was the matter of credit for a fisherman who has lost his boat. A fisherman with a $1,000 boat, if it were lost, gets $600 back in insurance. He still has the problem of finding money to replace his $1,000 boat; he has to find another $400. In the four years I was with the Department of Finance I was especially impressed with the Farm Improvement Loans Act, one of the best acts on the statute books of this country, which has done so much for the farmer, in making credit available to him through the banks and has done so much for the farm implement industry in this country through the very greatly increased volume of sales-and it has not been a bad thing for the banks, either.
The banks have been unable up to now to extend such credit facilities to fishing boats, when the entire boat could be lost in a storm, and especially when it was so difficult to obtain insurance for the small boats. The large company boats and the boats operating as fishing fleets have been able to get bank credit, but the smaller fisherman has had to rely for credit on the local merchant or perhaps the processor to whom he sold his fish.
This committee made quite a study of the need for credit of fishermen in those areas,
Supply-Fisheries
and in contacts with the banking officials there was the feeling that if this insurance scheme does work out there will be an opportunity to begin a fishermen's loan improvement act somewhat similar to the Farm Improvement Loans Act, because the banks will then have some security for the boats that may be lost at sea. Therefore for this year we are not going to try to go into the credit field, but we shall see how this insurance scheme works out. If it works as well as we hope it will, we shall be in a position then to suggest some form of fishermen's credit parallel to the very excellent credit now available to the farmers of the country through the Farm Improvement Loans Act.


William Joseph Browne: I should like to make a few observations. First of all I should like to congratulate those responsible for designing such a scheme. I think I followed all the information given, and it seems to me to be a very good effort for the first year. As experience grows they can extend the coverage. It seems to be very ingenious and those responsible deserve congratulation.
I am very glad also to hear that the minister has been impressed with the arguments that have been advanced on the desirability of giving fishermen advantages similar to those enjoyed by farmers under the Farm Improvement Loans Act. The beginning which he is making now I feel sure is the beginning of a scheme that will be of great benefit to fishermen all over Canada.


William Scottie Bryce: Will this extend to inland fishermen?


James Sinclair: It will not extend to the prairie fishermen for the first year. We did extend it to the Quebec fishermen because they are fishing in the gulf of St. Lawrence in the areas which are also fished by the Newfoundland fishermen, by the fishermen of Prince Edward Island, the north shore of New Brunswick and of Nova Scotia. Therefore they are in an adjacent area where we have our own fishery officers. We may have to hire one or two other officers in Quebec to cover their fishermen in the gulf of St. Lawrence. We have not such officers operating in the prairie regions, and so unfortunately we cannot extend it to the prairie fishermen this year; but I would hope that very shortly we shall be able to extend it there, too.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I should like to say a word on behalf of the fishermen of my constituency. I can say to the minister and to the officers of his department that this scheme will give to our fishermen some protection similar to that which farmers and other are getting. Representations have been made on this from

Supply-Fisheries
time to time. While we cannot expect every detail of this scheme to be worked out to the entire satisfaction of all at this time, I do believe that the scheme which is outlined by the minister will be a real start on something that will be of great interest to the small liner and to the larger fishermen as well.
As I said at the beginning, I wish to congratulate the minister and his officers for putting this scheme on trial, and I am sure that hon. members who are interested in the fisheries of their constituencies will give every support and co-operation to the minister in working out the details.


Clarence Gillis: I want to say amen to what has been said by the hon. member for Queens. This measure is indicative of the progressive thinking of the department. It is a long step in the right direction of government insurance particularly, which will be cheaper, will give better coverage and will be better administered than if the minister had got it from Lloyd's or from someone else. It is a very good move and long overdue.


Stanley Howard Knowles: One question; is it intended- if this insurance plan works out, as I am sure it will-to put it in statutory form at an early date?


James Sinclair: When I made my earlier remarks I was looking at the hon. member. I take it he did not see me. The committee has been instructed to consider and prepare, in the light of experience, the appropriate legislation. We can only operate a scheme like this on a provisional basis, and then we can take other action once we have gained experience after two or three years of operation. But for this year at least there will have to be an item in the estimates.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I hoped you had that in mind when you were looking at me.


James Sinclair: The hon. member has never before honoured us with participation in the discussion of the estimates of the Department of Fisheries and we are glad to have him with us, if only on a constitutional matter.
As far as this government insurance scheme is concerned, I may say that the private marine insurance companies are happy to see us enter this field which they have been unable to cover. Anything which improves the credit standing of these people is an aid to the whole industry.


Andrew Wesley Stuart: I agree wholeheartedly with what the minister has said with regard to the difficulty of devising a plan of insurance that will work in all branches of
(Mr. McLure.]
the industry. It will take a lot of research, but I am pleased that a start has been made. As the minister has mentioned, there are sardine weirs and other structures that cost thousands of dollars. Some of these are in exposed places where the damage each year is much greater than it is in others. The same would apply to lobster gear. In some places the losses are much greater than in others.
It is a big problem. I realize fully that a lot of study must be given to this matter, and that it will take time before a plan is worked out which will protect those who want to be protected. It is most encouraging to the fishermen to realize that boats up to a value of $7,500 can be insured. In the past the difficulty has been, particularly with boats operated by gasoline engines, that the rates quoted by private marine insurance companies were simply prohibitive and it was impossible for these men to insure. This is a plan which I am sure will be endorsed by every fisherman on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, and I congratulate the minister and his officials upon bringing it forward at this session of parliament.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Mr. Chairman, I want merely to add my congratulations to the minister, and to ask him if there is any change in the deal for unemployment insurance for fishermen.


Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk: Mr. Chairman, the minister and his officials must be very happy to have so many hon. members getting up and congratulating them. A year or so ago I brought up two problems, one longterm and one short-term. A few moments ago the minister made an announcement regarding loans which takes care of the shortterm problem. This insurance plan takes care of the long-term problem.
I am particularly interested in this insurance plan because last year the 3,000 fishermen in the three counties of Digby, Yarmouth and Shelburne put out approximately one-third of a million lobster pots, and caught approximately 10 million pounds of lobster, which had a market value of approximately $4 million. So it will be seen that it is a big industry in our area. I know the people there are going to be exceptionally pleased with this, and I again extend their thanks in advance.


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Chairman, the fact that Social Credit members have said nothing during these estimates of the Department of Fisheries is no indication that they are not deeply interested in the matter or that they are not deeply appreciative of the minister.
I think the minister has shown great promise and is doing a good job for the fishing industry, a job that has long needed to be

done. We congratulate him, especially upon this insurance scheme which he has just announced.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
733. Departmental administration-further amount required, $5,000.
William Scottie Bryce: Mr. Chairman, I want to ask the minister about a case which I brought up first in 1950, then again in 1951, and again in 1952. It has to do with a lady who lost her daughter in the sinking of the Athenia 14 years ago, in 1939. This claim has never been paid, and this woman needs the money. She was injured herself. I think the minister is quite familiar with the case, because I have talked personally with him about it and we have had correspondence about it as well. I have quite a sheaf of letters here dealing with this case and I think some settlement should be made.


Hon. F. G. Bradley (Secretary of State):: Is
the hon. member speaking about a war claim?


William Scottie Bryce: Yes.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Hearings have been held already on some 127 claims; 8 claims have been paid in a total amount of approximtely $6,000, and hearings are proceeding. I cannot give the hon. member any information about the particular claim he is referring to, because I have not the name.


William Scottie Bryce: This lady's name is Mrs. Holmes. She lost her girl in the sinking of this ship in 1939. I do not think the Canadian government will have to pay it; it would be paid by reparations from Germany.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: These claims are being
handled by the chief war claims commissioner and several deputies. I have no information at the moment as to the details.


Clarence Gillis: What is the position now in regard to prisoners of war? The Ilsley commission made certain recommendations to the government, one of which was that $1 per day be paid to prisoners of war held by the Japanese, and by the gestapo or the SS. in Germany. However, there is quite a large group of prisoners of war who do not come within that category. I understand that representations have been made to the Secretary of State and the Prime Minister to have this $1 per day paid across the board to all prisoners of war. Has the government changed its position in regard to that matter?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Under the Ilsley report that amount would be payable without proof of maltreatment to prisoners of war held by the Japanese. A conference was held recently 68108-335*
Supply-Secretary of State with representatives of men who had been prisoners of war in Germany, and the matter is now under consideration.


Clarence Gillis: No decision has been reached?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: No.


William Scottie Bryce: My constituent will think I am foolish or something, because I have never been able to give her any information as to what is taking place in connection with her claim. Will the minister take this case into consideration and tell me when this woman is likely to have her claim paid?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I shall be very happy to take it up with the commissioner and find out its present status.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
420.	Companies branch, $84,655.
Mr. Fleming:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a word about the companies branch. I shall not pretend that what I have to say is new, as the situation has been mentioned in the house on previous occasions.
This is a revenue-producing branch. The last annual report of the department does not indicate the exact revenue, but it is substantial. It is a branch that deals with the public and I think should be required to give service.
There have been certain changes in the branch. I think this companies branch has some very excellent senior officials in it. I cannot understand why it is that, when we look at the details as they are set out at page 478, we find provision for a salary of just $7,200 for the director of this branch. It seems to me that when you have a man of the competence of the present director, Mr. Cattanach, if you expect to hold such a man in this important position the salary range ought to be increased. It is very important, Mr. Chairman, that in a branch like this you have at the head a man whose competence is respected by those members of the legal profession who are dealing with the branch. I know that Mr. Cattanach does command the respect of the legal profession. And, looking at the salary range of $6,900 to $7,500 as indicated at page 478, it strikes me that that is not the kind of salary that is going to retain a man of his ability.
There is another point in relation to this matter which I think should be discussed. I have emphasized that this is a branch that is dealing with the public, and that the public is entitled to service. When a competent man is put in charge of a branch I suggest that some reasonable latitude should be allowed to him through the organization of his department, to give the kind of service the public

Supply-Secretary of State expects. There have been complaints for a long time from the legal profession about delays. This criticism is not directed against the senior officials of the branch, but the delays are laid at the door of the branch. It may be that there is not enough staff. It may be that the civil service commission, when they made their study of the branch, did not correctly apprehend the demands made upon it.
Nevertheless it seems to me that, to carry on the work assigned to it and to give the service the public expects of it, when the public is paying fees to the branch for the service it is to receive, a staff adequate to the demands should be provided; and the competent man placed at the head of the branch should have some reasonable measure of latitude in organizing it. The public looks to him to carry the responsibilities of that branch.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: The salary of the official in question is not, of course, set by this department. However, I would be quite willing to bring the matter to the attention of the civil service commission and treasury board. Meanwhile I may say that recently we added another solicitor to the staff in an endeavour to speed things up.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
421.	Trade marks branch, including a contribution of $2,400 to the International Office for the Protection of Industrial Property, $91,182.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Is the minister in a position to indicate now when the. new act respecting unfair competition is likely to be proclaimed?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I would not undertake to prophesy that, but I am hopeful that we may get it into operation on January 1.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: In view of the recent alterations in legislation, and following the report of the trade marks law revision committee, would the minister say whether the duties of the branch are going to be increased substantially, and whether he is taking that into account in the matter of his organization?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Yes, the duties of the branch will be substantially increased, and we are taking that into account. A few moments ago I pointed out that we could not expect to get the new act into operation before January 1, because, it must be kept in mind, while we now have the act, there are regulations to be prepared. These will be substantial, as my hon. friend understands. I expect that we will call in the gentlemen who so kindly acted on the original committee to help us out in that respect as well.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
422.	Bureau for translations, $979,583.
Donald Methuen Fleming: It is to be noted that there is a fairly substantial increase here, from $898,025 to $979,583. The details at page 479 indicate that the increase is attributable to an increase in personnel in the bureau, from 238 last year to 259 this year. I can appreciate the many demands made on the bureau for translations. The annual report of the department draws attention to the work of translation both in connection with the records and publications of this house and the other place, and also to the extent of translation work carried out on behalf of the different departments. I notice at page 19 of the annual report mention is made of the fact that in the fiscal year ended March 31, 1952 translations were made of over 102,000 pieces of correspondence, 63,000 printed pages of various government publications and 128,000 mimeographed pages of circulars, regulations, instructions and so on. That is altogether apart from the work of translating the records of parliament.
Would the minister indicate-and perhaps the references I have made are sufficient to answer my question-why there is this increase in staff. Is the work increasing at that rate? The increase in personnel seems to be in the translators of various classes, and stenographers.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Most of the increase is due to the Department of National Defence, the work of which has been transferred to us. As a matter of fact we have added 21 new positions. The volume of work this branch has to do is growing from year to year.


Donald Methuen Fleming: To what extent in the last year has this transfer to the minister's department relieved the Department of National Defence?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: The difference has been about twelve positions, involving about $30,000 or $40,000.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is this due to extra translating work connected with NATO? How is there extra translation work involved from the Department of National Defence?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: The work formerly done by translators in that department has now been transferred to this department. I do not think NATO would have anything to do with it.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Of what
nature is the bulk of the translation work in the Department of National Defence? Is it merely between English and French?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Mainly between English and French; but I would not say it is strictly confined to those two languages.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
424. Patent division, $854,456.
Donald Methuen Fleming: As this is the item for the patent office, we should, as has been customary from year to year, ask the minister if some progress cannot be made in reducing the backlog of pending patent applications. The last annual report, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1952, indicates the number of patent applications filed. We seek a reduction in the very large backlog which has been the besetting problem of this office for many years.
Again, this is an office that is set up to give service to the public, service for which the public pays. It is a revenue-producing branch; and I should like to say, as has been said annually for many years, that I think the present situation cannot be regarded as anything but unsatisfactory. Whatever progress has been made has not been enough to make a sufficient dent or impression in this heavy backlog, or to have come anywhere close to remedying the situation which has for a long time been highly unsatisfactory in a branch that should be giving prompt service to the public.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Has the minister anything
to say?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I realize that what my hon. friend has said is not altogether without justification. What he fails to take into account is the difficulties with which the department is faced. The work of the patent office is growing year by year, and it is not always easy to get staff to do the work. As a matter of fact, our staff is short at the present time. It is exceedingly difficult to get qualified examiners and, at times, equally difficult to hold them. The new applications received this year numbered 16,052. That is 604 more than we received last year. The number of cases allowed was 10,167, 44 more than last year. The number of examiners' reports was 12,282, 946 less than last year. The number of examiners' actions was 22,449, 902 less than last year. The number of cases disposed of was 13,644, 852 less than last year. The number of patents printed was 9,700. The number of patents issued was 184 more than for last year.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I thank the minister for
those figures which are, of course, more recent than those shown in the annual report of the department. However, I do not think
Supply-Secretary of State anyone can take any satisfaction out of those figures. I think they strengthen and underline what I was saying earlier; and, on the theme that the work of the department is increasing, let me make this observation. It is quite true that the number of patent applications in the fiscal year ended March 31, 1953, as the minister has just indicated, represents an increase of some 600 over those for the fiscal year 1951-52. But, Mr. Chairman, the number of applications received even in this last fiscal year is not a record. In the fiscal year ended March 31, 1947, we had 16,922 applications for patents. In the fiscal year ended March 31, 1948, we had 16,585 applications. There was a substantial drop in the fiscal year 1948-49, but since that time the number of applications year by year has been rising steadily but slowly.
This department, Mr. Chairman, is not taking sufficient steps, it seems to me, to cope with the volume of work that is being placed upon the office. We can recognize that the present staff working under existing conditions may be doing its best; but the best that it is doing is not good enough to meet the needs and the proper demands of the public for service through the patent office.
This plea has been made year after year. We do not see any particular change year by year, and I think it is time the house made it quite clear to the minister that it is not satisfied with the way the department has been handling the problem. There must be something much more energetic, something much more far-reaching in the way of action to meet the volume of work and reduce this big backlog of applications, than is being done.
I do not intend to prolong my argument, Mr. Chairman, but I do wish something could be done to stir up the government to take action to provide what is required either in the way of staff or accommodation so the public may receive service commensurate with the need and with the payments which the public makes for services.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, in connection with the estimates of another department yesterday the hon. member for Greenwood asked whether the department concerned was put in a position to recoup its expenses. I do not wish to imply that I agreed with the inference that was made yesterday, but I wonder if that kind of a question might not appropriately be asked on this item. Is the money that we spend all outgo so far as the treasury is concerned, or is any portion of this money recouped from those who gain, by the issuing of these patents?

Supply-Secretary of State


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Mr. Chairman, our expenditures in the last fiscal year for this branch were $822,898. The revenue, as at March 31, amounted to $701,943.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
425. Copyright and industrial designs division, including a contribution of $2,100 to the union office for the protection of literary and artistic works, $20,438.
Mrs. Fairclough:: I wonder if the Secretary of State will say whether he contemplates providing Canadian composers with means for copyrighting their original musical compositions?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I do not know that there is anything to prevent a Canadian composer from copyrighting his production now.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The department offers no facilities for copyright, Mr. Chairman. The only procedure open to a composer is to mail a copy of the composition "fS~iiimself on a given date, sealed and registered, and never open it, in order that he may prove that the composition was his on that date. Such compositions can be copyrighted in the United States, and the only course open to Canadians is to copyright their compositions in the United States.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: As a matter of fact copyright exists without registration, and I do not understand why the particular case to which my hon. friend refers cannot be straightened out.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: This is not a particular case. I have been all through it, and I tried very hard to get Canadian copyright for an original composition. You just cannot get it in Canada.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: My understanding is that they are registered every day.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: The name can be registered but not the composition.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
735. To provide for special expenditures by all departments in connection with the coronation of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth IX, $1,000,000.
Donald Methuen Fleming: I wonder if the minister would indicate to the committee in general how this sum is to be expended.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Mr. Chairman, this will cover the expenses of the department itself in connection with travelling expenses, salaries, office expenses and various other expenditures to the amount of about $67,970. The Department of External Affairs will require roughly $25,000. Canada House has a vote 
here for expenditures which will be made by them for various purposes over there, including decorations, the hire of cars and one thing and another like that, amounting to some $14,000. Then the Department of Public Works requires a substantial amount, $243,500, for decorations all over Canada.


Mr. Fraser:: Will that be for decorations for public buildings all over Canada?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Yes. The Department of National Defence requires $468,000, roughly. They have a contingent in the Ottawa ceremony, and there will be some 700 or 800 servicemen over in London. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police will require $75,200, and there is $100,000 for the expenses of the Canadian mint in connection with the production of the school children's medallion.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Is the item of $243,500 for the Department of Public Works to be used exclusively for the decoration of public buildings, or is anything else included?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: It will cover the decoration of public buildings, that is federal buildings, in the various parts of Canada and the decoration of the parliament buildings as well as confederation square.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: And the new platform.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Public archives-
312. Bibliographic centre (national library). $76,608.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister tell us whether or not a decision has yet been reached to go ahead with the construction of a national library?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: A decision has been reached to go ahead with the construction of the national library, and the site has been selected. I do not think the plans have yet been prepared. I do not think there is any amount in the public works estimates for construction, but it is proposed to proceed with the construction of a national library as soon as possible.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Any timetable?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: No, I do not think so.


Donald Methuen Fleming: What is the site?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Well, now, I speak subject to correction, but it is the site of one of the temporary buildings. I think it is No. 1.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

Public printing and stationery-313. Departmental administration, $497,818.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: There seems to be an increase of about $105,000 in departmental administration. I can understand some of the other things better than that. Can the minister explain the necessity for that increase?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I think the explanation is that in the past there have been a number of these positions paid for out of the advance account, and they have now been transferred to administration. They will no longer be paid out of the advance account, that is the $4 million which is advanced by the Department of Finance as a sort of revolving trading fund.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
691. Plant equipment and replacements-further amount required, $104,323.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Before we leave this general subject of printing and stationery, could the minister tell me where provision is made for the printing of the revised statutes of Canada. They do not come under the item for printing and binding of annual statutes.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I understand that is in the
justice department estimates.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: In connection with 691, why is it that we have vote No. 317 for the same purpose amounting to $341,518, which is an increase of $144,000, and now we have on top of that a supplementary vote of $104,000. Why,is it that they cannot estimate better than that?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: Mr. Chairman, at the time
the estimates were prepared the department did not have its position sufficiently far advanced to make a recommendation for certain special plant and equipment which they required. This is an amount to cover that additional plant and equipment.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Office of the chief electoral officer-
56. Salaries and expenses of office. $66,070.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to say one or
two things with respect to this item. First of all, I wish to draw to the attention of the Secretary of State a newspaper account that appeared in the Winnipeg Free Press of Tuesday, March 10, 1953. On page 12 of that issue there is an article headed "Mechanics of Election heard by Liberal group." I shall read one or two sentences from that article.
Elucidation of the "Mechanics of an Election" was given by Kenneth McKenzie, headquarters
Supply-Secretary of State
secretary of Manitoba Liberal Progressive association at a meeting of greater Winnipeg women's Liberal association, Monday in the Y.W.C.A.
The next sentence is within quotation marks, and reads as follows:
"Enumerators can make the difference between winning and losing an election," he stated "for they bring in information which is the basis of the whole campaign. Poll canvassers work on lists compiled by them and party adherents are offered assistance in getting to the polls-everything from transportation to baby sitters".
I feel, Mr. Chairman, that that statement is a reflection on the chief electoral officer whose estimates we now have before us, and on the satisfactory way in which elections are generally run, at least in my experience. On many occasions well-deserved tributes have been paid in this house to the splendid way in which Mr. Nelson Castonguay carries on this work, as did his father before him. But I should like to know whether this represents the view of the Liberal party, that enumerators paid out of public funds for work in connection with the election are regarded as working for the party and as being primarily on the job to get information to be of assistance to party adherents.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I have no knowledge of this particular article which has been mentioned by my hon. friend. I can only say that, from the standpoint of the chief electoral officer, that is not the case.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am glad to have the Secretary of State make that pronouncement. I hope the Liberal party across this country will pay attention to it.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
William Alfred Robinson: Item 78. Is it carried?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Just a minute, Mr. Chairman. What is it?


William Alfred Robinson: Item 78 is in connection with the civil service commission.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Just a minute. When you jump around, Mr. Chairman, to all the odds and ends that come under the Secretary of State, I think it would be a good idea to let us know when you change from one division to another.
Civil service commission-
78. Salaries and contingencies of the commission, $2,018,879.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Under this one item having to do with the civil service commission, there are again one or two comments that I should like to make. First of all I wish to bring to the attention of the Secretary of State, who is the cabinet minister who speaks in

Supply-Secretary of State parliament for the civil service commission, the protests being made by civil service organizations across Canada at the present time at the refusal of the government to consider their requests for salary increases and other changes in their working conditions. Speaking at the moment not only for myself but for my colleague the hon. member for Selkirk and my colleague the hon. member for Winnipeg North, I may say that within the past few days we have been in receipt of extremely strong representations concerning this matter from a number of civil service organizations in Winnipeg.


Clarence Gillis: Cape Breton South, too.


Stanley Howard Knowles: My colleague the hon. member for Cape Breton South is asking to be included. No doubt he is referring to representations from his part of the country. 1 imagine that other members in all parts of the house are getting similar representations from wherever civil servants are working for the government.
Had this matter come before us earlier in the session when more time was available,
I had intended to make one of those 40-minute speeches which we are entitled to make, but I will not do so at this time. I took the trouble to give some study to this matter and to look at the figures. In my view the civil servants have a good case in their claim for salary increases. If you compare their average wages and salaries with those in other comparable types of employment, and if you look at the increases they have had and compare them with the increases that other employees have had over the past few years, on that basis I am satisfied that they have an increase coming to them.
I should also say that in terms of the right of workers-and after all, our civil servants are workers-to an improvement step by step in their standard of living by virtue of the improvements in production and in technological advance, on that basis also they are entitled to an increase in their salaries. I feel too that further consideration should be given to the extension of the five-day week amongst the civil servants.
I present to the minister these claims that, as I say, are now coming to us from civil service organizations across Canada. At the start I said we spoke

those of us from the Winnipeg area, at any rate-for those in our own area; but I am sure we speak for civil servants all over the country. Indeed, some of the resolutions I have on my desk are addressed to the Minister of Finance, to the Secretary of State and to the chairman of the civil service commission. Despite the 

negative answer which the Prime Minister gave to the Leader of the Opposition a couple of days ago, I urge as strongly as I can that this matter be given further consideration at this time.


William Scottie Bryce: I feel guilty in rising in the dying hours of the session to say anything about this matter, but I am going to cut it short. I am going to endorse what was said by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. I too have received telegrams from these people who are dissatisfied with the action of the cabinet in turning down their recommendations for better working conditions and an adjustment in salaries. If the matter had come before us earlier no doubt we would have been able to say a great deal more about it.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, I cannot
allow this item to pass without making my annual plea to the Secretary of State, namely that when changes are contemplated in the composition of the civil service commission the next commissioner appointed should be a woman. With the large number of women there are in the civil service, I feel strongly that they should have a voice in the management of the commission. I urge upon the Secretary of State that he take this plea under serious consideration. I shall be extremely pleased if he can see fit to accede to my request.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I know of no intention at
the moment to retire any member of the civil service commission. But when that situation arises, I have no doubt that due consideration will be given to the representation made by my hon. friend.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask the Secretary
of State one question which arises out of something that was said here in the house not many days ago. Who appoints the officials and the employees who work in connection with the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act administration? That is P.F.R.A.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I would not undertake to
answer that question offhand. It will depend on the statute. If under the statute they come under the civil service commission, then that is the way they are appointed. If on the other hand there is some special statute which provides some other method of appointment, say by order in council, then they would be appointed in that way.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Offhand, the Secretary of
State would expect that these people would be appointed as civil servants by the civil service commission?


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I could not say that. The
Prairie Farm Assistance Act, I presume, has become practically a permanent act now, although originally it was not intended to be so. I am afraid I could not give the answer.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It was P.F.R.A. about which I was speaking.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I will obtain the answer and let the hon. member have it. I have not the answer now.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should be glad if the
Secretary of State would do that.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I will do it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The other day the hon.
member for Dauphin said these people were all appointed by the Minister of Agriculture. I found that hard to believe.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I do not think that is true.


Stanley Howard Knowles: At least I would hate to have to believe it.


Frederick Gordon Bradley: I do not think it is true.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
William Alfred Robinson: Order. Department of the Postmaster General, item 302.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Before we start on another
department, Mr. Chairman, would the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration indicate to us now in what order the remaining departments will be proceeded with in committee?


Mr. Harris:: Unless there is any serious
objection-and I should be glad to accommodate any member of the opposition-we would proceed with post office, resources and development, justice, national revenue, labour and citizenship and immigration.


POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
[Stage Direction]
302. Departmental administration, $1,159,011.
Alcide Côté: It
may not be inappropriate at this time to make a brief statement of our financial position as we see it at the end of the fiscal year just terminated, and to comment on one or two items which might be of particular interest.
The estimated revenue for the fiscal year ending on March 31 will reach the highest figure in the history of the postal service. It will be in the neighbourhood of $130 million, an increase of approximately $8 million over the previous fiscal year. The estimated amount of revenues over expenditures will, however, be less than last year. This will be in the neighbourhood of $5 million compared to $6,500,000 for the fiscal
Supply-Post Office
year ending March 31, 1952. This is principally due to rising costs occasioned by such features as increased salaries for the employees, higher compensation to the railways, the extension of postal services to remote areas, and the development of better carrier delivery.
As an indication of the progressive trend during the last fiscal year, there has been an increase of approximately 8 per cent in the volume carried by rail. The number of ton miles of air conveyance has increased by 400,000 also 8 per cent. In urban centres the extensions in letter carrier delivery have brought service to over 50,000 additional families, while in rural areas rural mail delivery has been granted to over 14,000 new boxholders.
I mention these figures simply to indicate that we are still moving forward and at the same time endeavouring to live within our revenues. I think it is generally appreciated that it has been the policy through the years to give service within the limits of the revenues collected. This is a policy which is followed by a number of postal administrations, and I am sure you will agree that it is a sound one. It has been proven by experience, not only by our experience but by the unfortunate experience of others who have departed from this principle and as a result have incurred substantial deficits, which naturally impose an additional burden on the taxpayer.
This brings me to one item which I think I should mention, as it was referred to during my estimates last year; that is, the question of a return to the second delivery in the residential sections of the cities. I indicated last year that while we were not contemplating any change in the one-delivery system at that time, we did not entirely rule out the possibility of reinstating two deliveries when conditions were appropriate. I must say, with a certain amount of regret, that I do not feel that we are justified in incurring at the present time the added cost which the return to two deliveries a day would involve.
At the same time I must mention that we have been able to make substantial progress in the improvement of the service to the one-delivery area, either by a readjustment of routes or by other equally efficient methods, and I feel there is not the pressure for two deliveries which previously existed.
I might at this point refer to the steps which have been taken recently to improve the situation in regard to rural mail couriers. As you are aware, the house has given approval to a bill which will permit an adjustment in the contract rate to rural mail

Supply-Post Office
couriers. This it is estimated will add to our already mounting expenditures an increase of almost $1,500,000 a year. In addition there have also been pressing demands for increases in frequency and other concessions in regard to the application of the regulations governing rural mail delivery.
All these items are costly, but I feel sure I am expressing the desire of the majority of the members of this house when I say it is the general opinion that priority in the way of improvement in compensation should go to the rural mail couriers. Discussions which took place in the house when the bill was presented leave no doubt in my mind on that score.
Personally I feel it is my good fortune to be in office at a time when this measure for the improvement of the conditions under which rural mail couriers operate has been adopted. Not that I claim any particular credit for the benefits which will result, because I feel that members from all sides of the house have assisted in the passing of this measure. It is the result of a co-operative effort, irrespective of party.
I should therefore like to pay tribute to those members who sat on the committee dealing with the question of rural mail delivery. They did excellent work, and I wish to express my personal appreciation of the fair and impartial way in which it was undertaken. There was no evidence of partisanship, but simply an earnest desire to improve within reason the conditions of the rural mail couriers.
I should also like to thank the members of the committee for their words of commendation in regard to the complete information which was always available and to the co-operative and efficient manner in which the officers of the department assisted the committee in the completion of its task.
This is a brief statement I have to make at this time. I might add that I was asked a question by the hon. member for Peel about the conditions of the Brampton, Ontario, post office. I should like to make the following statement. The unsatisfactory postal accommodation has been known to this department since 1949, when an item for a new building was entered in our list of projects with the Department of Public Works.
A site at the corner of George and Main streets was suggested to the Department of Public Works but no action was taken because no funds were available. The category of the project for this new building has been raised to "A", top priority, on the 11th of April, 1953 and request made for early investigation of site so that it might not be

lost. On the 15th April, 1953, the deputy minister of the Department of Public Works stated "the real estate adviser will be called to investigate the site situation in Brampton." We cannot predict when a new building will be erected at Brampton, as no funds have been provided in the main or supplementary estimates of the Department of Public Works for this year. This is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: I just want to say a word
in connection with what the minister has said about not putting in the two mail deliveries a day, as we had before. The trouble with having only one delivery is that a district that used to be covered in the morning is sometimes not covered until the afternoon, because they took off postmen when the two deliveries were cut out and the postman now looks after one section in the morning and in the afternoon he will look after another district entirely. This has meant that people who are sending out business letters and one thing and another find that they do not reach their destination on time, although the mail might be in the post office. Because of the way deliveries are now made they are not delivered until the afternoon, and this has necessitated the use of special delivery stamps to ensure delivery of the mail in the morning. It has no doubt meant more revenue for the Post Office Department, but it is not good for business.
The minister said the estimated amount of revenue over expenditure is some $5 million. Is that net or gross?


Alcide Côté: This is a paper surplus. We do not consider the cost of erecting buildings that are supplied by public works and the franking privileges which are given to members of parliament and others. It is only a paper surplus.


Gordon Knapman Fraser: The post office took away
from the members some of the privileges they had. Members of parliament used to be able to register mail from here, passports and other things of that nature. Members of parliament now have to pay for that. I would think the revenue over expenditure would be a great deal over $5 million.


Alcide Côté: Though the revenues are higher this year, the surplus is smaller than last year on account of higher expenditures.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Will you call it six
o'clock, Mr. Chairman?
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at seven o'clock.
Ellen Louks Fairclough: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a word at this time about the letter carriers who serve in various parts of this country. Earlier in the session we had a discussion on the rural mail carriers under a bill which was then before us, but very little has been said about the letter carriers in the urban centres. I think it would be well to recall that most of these men are veterans. As a matter of fact, for quite a long time it was impossible to get a job as a letter carrier unless you were a veteran. Many of these men suffer infirmities which may not prevent them from working in gainful employment but which may slow them up a little. That was all taken into consideration at the time these men were given jobs.
They are men of proved service and are employed in a branch of government which is possibly the closest to the people of this country. Practically everyone knows his postman by name. I realize that there are exceptions, but I think in most cases the postman is quite popular with the people on his route. The average postman has knowledge of their affairs. I recall during the war when the postman would be watching for letters from the boys overseas just as avidly as the people who were to receive them. They would watch for these letters as they sorted their mail, and their sympathies went out to the people who were eventually to receive them.
A mail carrier might say that Mrs. Smith down the street had received a letter from her boy, that he had just handed it to her. Soon everyone on the street knew that Mrs. Smith had received a letter from her boy. She would be getting telephone calls from people who wanted to know how the boy was, how he was getting along and so on. The letter carriers in these urban centres become part of the community; they are an institution.
I know you do get the odd character who may be a little rambunctious and who stirs people up, but that happens in any walk of life or in any occupation. You find people who are not properly adjusted, but I think by and large the letter carrier serves his community and serves it well. For this reason it gives me cause for anxiety to find out that relations between the letter carriers and the Post Office Department are not always the sweetest. I do not want to go into these in detail at this late hour and date, but I just want to say that I do not believe any controversy is always the fault of the one side.
Supply-Post Office
Where you have difficulties you generally find there are faults on both sides. Sometimes the fault is nothing more than a little belligerency, but it exists. If both sides indulge in that sort of thing you soon have a complicated and bitter situation. I believe that is what has happened in the relations between the Post Office Department and the letter carriers in various centres. I am not referring particularly to any one centre, but I do know that there has been difficulty in Hamilton and in Toronto.
I urge the Postmaster General to consider the situation that exists, and realize that these are men who have served their country well. Most of them are no longer young and, as I say, some have physical infirmities which, while they do not prohibit them from working, nevertheless slow them up a little. I think the minister should take that into consideration.
I should like also to refer to the salaries paid to these men. I think any man should be paid a wage which permits him to take his place in his community life on the same terms and with the same advantages that workers of comparable classes enjoy. So it was somewhat of a shock to me to learn that in the city of Hamilton one letter carrier applied for a house in the new housing scheme at the old airport which, I believe, is under the supervision of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. This was a rental project. The man in question was earning $2,850 a year. He applied for a house in this district and was told that he did not make enough money to be considered a good economic risk, and that therefore he could not have a house in that particular district. The salary he was told would be the minimum was $2,964. Hon. members will see that there was a difference of only $114 a year between the amount he was receiving and the amount they said he would need to have before he could have a house. Nevertheless this man was prohibited from participating in that development.
Another man in the letter carrier service in Hamilton wanted to purchase a house under the National Housing Act. He was told that his salary was too small, that he was not considered a good risk by the mortgage company. He made $2,850, and the mortgage company said he would have to be making $3,000 a year before they would permit him to purchase a home.
It seems to me wrong that on the one hand the government lays down rules and regulations under which people can occupy certain premises coming under their jurisdiction, and on the other hand it prohibits its own employees from participating in those schemes which, supposedly, are for their enjoyment.

Supply-Post Office
The government proceeds to make rules which are detrimental to those people who make an effort to come under the scheme. Therefore I thought it my duty to draw these instances to the attention of the Postmaster General.
I am not suggesting that this matter of the occupancy of houses is one which comes entirely within the Post Office Department. Nevertheless I feel there should be some sort of co-operation between those departments which would permit people to participate in schemes which, actually, are the children of this government.
It is not my purpose to speak at greater length at this time in the session. If I have any further comments to make I shall make them when the respective items are called. I did think, however, that I should bring these points to the attention of the minister.


Alcide Côté: Let me assure the hon. member that we feel the relations between letter carriers and the department are very cordial. At all times they are free to make their own representations to the officials of the department. So far as salaries are concerned, I can only say that we are ready to co-operate with them. But we must keep in mind the fact that, after all, this is a matter which comes under the jurisdiction of the civil service commission.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Perhaps the minister
would speak to his confreres to see if some scheme cannot be evolved whereby those people who operate lending institutions will be assured at least that a man who earns his living as a letter carrier is a good economic risk.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few remarks on this first item in the Post Office Department. There was a time in Canadian history when that was considered to be one of the most efficient departments of government in this country. I can remember when we could rely upon the post office as being exceptionally efficient. I think each time we have had a new postmaster general-and we have had lots of them in recent years-the service has deteriorated, and the relationship between the administration and the employees has also been deteriorating.
For instance, there was a time not so long ago when one could mail a letter here in the House of Commons post office on Monday afternoon with a reasonable hope that it would be delivered in Toronto some time on the following day. I find now, by actual experience, that if I want a letter delivered by Wednesday, or possibly Thursday, I must mail it here in the post office in this building on Monday. Last week letters I mailed here

on Monday were delivered in Toronto on Wednesday afternoon, and that was better than the average service.
That is one of the complaints I receive regarding the Post Office Department. I do not know what the trouble is, but I do suggest that two statements made this afternoon by the minister are somewhat revealing. He told us of all the extensions and improvements in the service. He made particular reference to extensions, and then he assured us that the department was still living within its revenue.
I do not know just what that means. I presume it means that this is one department of government where the economy axe has been applied. If it is, then probably the minister should be congratulated upon being the head of the one and only department of government of which that is true. And it is unfortunate that it should be true only of a department that is supported by the public, and should be pretty well self-supporting.
Another statement by the minister was that there is not now so much pressure for the two deliveries a day. This would indicate, I suppose, that the policy of the department is determined by the amount of pressure the public brings to bear upon it, and that so long as the public keep up that pressure they may expect some reasonable attention. But the moment they ease up on the pressure, then the department eases up in its service to the public. I suppose there is such a thing as getting used to certain conditions. I suppose one could even get used to hanging, if one were hanging long enough. The public, I suppose, does eventually become accustomed to the kind of inefficient service they get from this department, and gradually lessens its pressure.
I should like now to speak of employer-employee relations in so far as the Toronto post office employees are concerned, and particularly the letter carriers of Toronto and district. Toronto members will recall that nearly two years ago there was a joint meeting of the Toronto branches of the federated association of letter carriers and the Canadian postal employees' association in that city. I believe it was in the month of June. That meeting was held at the time the one delivery a day was first introduced, and there was a great deal of discontent expressed at the meeting. But all the discontent was not concerned with the disturbance which had been caused by the introduction of the one delivery a day.
That meeting presented the then postmaster general, Mr. Rinfret, with an eight-point brief. He assured the meeting that

since the points raised in the brief involved government policy he would present them to his colleagues in the cabinet for discussion and decision, and would let them know what decision the cabinet reached. Time went on from June until the end of October and no word had been received from the department as to whether or not these questions had been submitted to the cabinet. The association officials got in touch with the department, and about the end of November, or some time in November, the joint executive of those associations received a reply.
That reply was most unsatisfactory. Later in November they informed the minister of their dissatisfaction. That was in November of 1951, and I am told that not one word has been heard from the department regarding the eight points raised in that brief which the postmaster general of that time had given them every assurance would be discussed.
In the interval of nearly two years, as I understand it, one of the complaints that was raised has been fairly satisfactorily smoothed over and settled. That was the disagreement regarding the time allowed various letter carriers for their various routes. I understand that it has been settled to the satisfaction of the letter carriers.
I am going to remind the minister of some of the other points in the brief, since I have a copy of it here and since I am quite sure he is going to hear from those associations before long. They are seething with discontent at the present time, and I suggest that the Postmaster General give some consideration to the points which were raised two years ago and which I can assure him will be raised again within the very near future.
The first matter about which there is still some dissatisfaction is collective bargaining rights for postal employees. I know there is a section in the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act-section 55, I think- which excludes civil servants from the benefits of that act. Notwithstanding that, civil servants and particularly postal employees feel that even within the limits of that act as it stands at the present time it should be possible for the government to give the postal employees certain conciliation and arbitration rights, which are enjoyed by employees of private industry. The letter carriers and the clerks in the minister's department in the Toronto area at least are very insistent that some steps be taken to provide them with some form of collective bargaining rights.
I know the answer that has been given by the minister and others on this question. I
Supply-Post Office
know the department considers that the national joint council of public servants of Canada is the body that has been provided, and that it should be competent to handle these collective bargaining agreements; but I am told by the representatives of the employees that the body is not considered to be by any means a satisfactory medium through which to carry on these negotiations.
In the first place, I am told, the role of the national joint council is specifically limited to that of an advisory body. While it was modelled on a similar organization in Great Britain it even falls short in some very vital respects, of that body which was in turn discarded in Great Britain some years ago as being unsatisfactory. Anyone who gives any study to this question, I think, must reach the conclusion that the federal government, and certainly the Post Office Department, is about the most antiquated, out of date, arbitrary and reactionary employer in this country. I believe you have to reach the conclusion that the government which supports private enterprise, which seeks to guide and direct private industry in its labour relationships, is itself far behind anything that can be found in private enterprise in this country.
The second point was that the employees asked to have a five-day week. I understand the government has taken the position that the five-day week will be granted when that can be done without any extra cost to the department. That again is not the position which the best employers of labour in this country take. The government again, instead of setting an example for employers of labour as it should, is itself far behind private enterprise, is itself creating or establishing anything but good relations with its employees in the matter of the five-day week.
The third point asked for at that time was an adequate cost of living bonus. I understand that at the present time postal employees are asking for an increase of $300 a year across the board. If one compares the salaries which are paid to postal clerks and letter carriers in the United States with those paid in Canada one cannot fail to see that the request of Canadian employees is very fair. I am told that in the United States clerks and letter carriers receive the same salary. The minimum for both in the United States, that is the starting salary for both, is $420 higher than the maximum salary paid to letter carriers in Canada. The figures I have are as follows. In the United States the starting point for both letter carriers and clerks is $3,270. Today the maximum for both in the United States is $4,307. I am

Supply-Post Office
told that the maximum-if these figures are not correct I want the minister to correct them-for clerks in Canada is $3,130. You will notice that is less than the starting point in the United States. The maximum for letter carriers in Canada is $2,850, as against the starting point of $3,270 in the United States, a difference of some $420. When one considers the salary that is being paid to clerks, which works out to $1.24 to $1.36 per hour, and when one compares those salaries with what is paid for similar work in the United States, I think one realizes that the request of the clerks and letter carriers is fair.
The next cause for discontent which I find registered by a number of correspondents on this subject is that when the department recently did give some increases in salary, those increases were granted only to those in specialized fields and those in the higher salaried categories, and were not granted to those who were doing the day to day work of clerk or letter carrier. Then again, if one compares the increases which private enterprise has given its employees since 1951 with the increases given by the post office to its employees, one is struck with the difference. According to the dominion bureau of statistics the increases received by the employees of private enterprise from December, 1951 to April, 1952 was 22 per cent. During that period the postal employees received an increase of 8 per cent. If one had the figures showing the increases in salaries paid by private corporations since that date one would find that the spread was still greater.
Those were among the points raised which caused the most dissatisfaction. I suppose probably the next in order was their request that they be given time and a half for overtime. I read in one of the reports that the officials of the department refused to consider the payment of overtime because of the nature of the letter carrier's work. It was claimed that the payment of overtime would only be an incentive to a slow-down. I wonder what we would think of any industry that took that position, that the payment of time and a half for overtime would only lead to a slow-down in production in that industry? That is the antiquated point of view the Post Office Department is taking toward its employees.
I think that, in the interests of good service to the Canadian people and in the interests of the morale of the employees of that department, it is high time the government brought its employee-employer relationships more in line with those of good employers in this country.

There were other points in this brief. The check-off was requested. I am reminded, of course, that before the 1930's the postal employees were paid time and a half for overtime. I understand that it was during the Conservative regime in the early thirties that the practice of paying time and a half for overtime was discontinued. Apparently the Liberals have thought it wise to follow one of the worst features of that particular Conservative regime. They are still carrying out the policy introduced by the Conservatives in the thirties.
I understand that it is close to 30 years since the postal employees' association was deprived of the right of the check-off. I do not know just what will be the effect of the new regulation which the government has announced regarding the check-off. I should like the Postmaster General to tell us whether or not the letter carriers who belong to an association that is affiliated with the Toronto labour council will enjoy the benefit of the check-off or if it will only be those who belong to the civil service association who will enjoy that right. I think the minister should clear up that point for us. Those are a few of the things I want the minister to explain.
There are one or two other matters I wish to mention. I have been asking in this house for about eight years now for a post office for York township. We have a municipality of something over 100,000 people. The only explanation I got from the department for their reluctance to give us a postal building is that a postal building in the township would not diminish to any great extent either the distance or the time occupied by letter carriers in travelling from the post office to their routes. In my opinion that should not be the criterion which should decide whether or not a municipality gets a postal building. There are many services that can be rendered to communities where there are regular postal buildings instead of a whole series of branch post offices tucked away in hardware stores, cigar stores and every other kind of store where there happens to be a good Liberal supporter.
I want to say this. Representing that riding as I do, in my time I have seen post offices taken away from businessmen who were giving reasonable service and given to others for no other reason in the world that I can discover except that they were good Liberal workers or good Liberal ward heelers.
I suggest to the minister that this is a public service and that the service which one renders, as a ward heeler of the Liberal

party, should not be a deciding factor in determining where that sub-post office should or should not be located. If we want to get certain information, or several types of service, we have to travel down to one of the city post offices. For the life of me I cannot see why a municipality of nearly 100,000 people in this day and age should not have a post office building in their township. It is a completely urban township. There is only one reason I know of, and that is that this particular riding has never elected a Liberal to this house. I do not know of any other reason why the township over the years has been deprived of a post office.


Mr. Ferguson:: It should get two post offices.


Joseph William Noseworthy: If I am any judge, I would say that they will go without a post office for a long while if they are obliged to elect a Liberal here before they get one.
I have another point about which I should like the minister to tell us. It is a little bit outside of my own bailiwick. This week I have received some resolutions from a number of groups of people living in North Bay with regard to the need for a post office building in that community. When the minister is making his statement I should like him to tell us whether any consideration is being given to a new post office building in North Bay as well as in South York.


Mr. Henry:: I shall not detain the committee long, but there are two brief questions concerning mail deliveries and postal labour conditions which I should like to place before the minister at this time. I realize that he is going to speak and give a statement on conditions prevailing in the city of Toronto.
My first question is as to the delivery of mail, and my second is as to labour conditions prevailing as between the employees and the department. My questions therefore are these. What effect will the erection of new postal station "Q" in Rosedale riding have on mail delivery generally in the area and what new facilities, if any, is the department providing there to help provide better mail delivery? Will the minister put on record the substance of the very carefully prepared statement which he gave to Toronto Liberal members, if not to other members from Toronto, toward the end of April with respect to labour conditions prevailing and advances made in the settlement of matters in dispute and under negotiation as between Toronto postal employees and the department?


Mr.   Cofe@St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville: If I may be allowed to answer this question
Supply-Post Office
about Toronto postal station "Q", I should like to do so. The new building will provide greatly improved accommodation for postal patrons. There will be a night box lobby, where lock boxholders can get their mail at night. The building will accommodate a larger number of letter carriers, which will increase the area of delivery from that centre. The carriers will be closer to the beginning of their walks in many cases, and will be able to start delivery somewhat earlier. There will be better parking accommodation for the public. There will be improved tailboard space for post office vehicles. It will be near the new subway station, which will be one-half block east. It is located near the busy intersection of Yonge street and St. Clair avenue, but will be slightly off Yonge street, which will reduce possible traffic congestion.
To answer the hon. member who spoke prior to the hon. member for Rosedale, may I say that the North Bay post office has been placed in category A. Funds have already been made available in the amount of $175,000. The site is available and plans are actually being studied.
I do not want to make as long a speech as that which my hon. friend made but, if I may, I should like to deal briefly with the questions on which he touched. I want to tell him first that although he stated that the employees had never heard anything from the department, I think that statement is not quite accurate. I myself saw a long letter from my predecessor answering the association on all points which were mentioned in the letter from the association. I do not want to deal with all eight points, but I may tell my hon. friend that since that time some of those points have been solved.


Joseph William Noseworthy: Only one.


Mr. Cole (SI. Jean-Iberville-Napierville):: For instance, the check-off is a matter which has been settled. It has been granted, and regulations are actually being prepared.


Joseph William Noseworthy: That will make two out of the eight.


Charles Delmar Coyle: He spoke about the five-day week. The question of the five-day week is one which applies to the civil service as a whole. We cannot deal with it in isolation as it affects the Post Office Department. The government has already expressed the view that the five-day week will be considered where (1) it does not involve any increase in staff; (2) it does not involve any increase in cost; and (3) there will be no deterioration in service. It is quite evident that the five-day week cannot be applied to the postal service

Supply-Post Office
with our present staff. We would have to increase the staff and increase the expenditures. Since the postal service of the department does not fall within the conditions expressed by the government policy, we could not at present proceed with the five-day week in the postal department.
When the hon. member speaks about overtime, I should tell him that we received the representations of the associations, including this one he mentioned. Their officials contact our own officials and discuss all these problems. The employees themselves told us that they did not want to work overtime. We agree with them. When these employees have done a good day's work we feel, as do they, that that is sufficient. At present we give equivalent time off or pro rata payment in cash. On account of fluctuating volume it is difficult to avoid overtime entirely. We have based our staffs on the average volume. When the mails are light, employees are released as soon as the work is completed; when the mails are heavy, overtime is sometimes necessary. We make no deduction when employees are released early, but we do compensate them when additional time is worked.
As I told you before, employees have indicated that they do not wish to work overtime at all, and we are in sympathy with them. We are therefore studying ways and means to readjust staffs so as to eliminate overtime by increasing our emergency staffs.
My hon. friend made comparisons between the salaries we pay here and those paid in the United States. The economies of the two countries are quite different. Let me mention another item. In Canada, besides paying the salaries of the employees, we furnish them with their uniforms. In the United States the employees are obliged to buy their own equipment, to pay for their boots and suits. Therefore you start with a difference in the salary itself. Besides that there is a huge difference in the economy. Incidentally, I might add, in the United States they have annual deficits of over $600 million. If my hon. friend will read the letter sent by my predecessor-I do not recall having written myself, but I have read the letter sent by my predecessor-he will find that all the points he raised in his speech were dealt with.
The officials of the department are always in contact with representatives of the associations. We are ready to co-operate with them. As far as salaries are concerned, even though it is a question which falls under the jurisdiction of the civil service commission we are ready to co-operate with them and help them make their representations. I do not know of the bad morale which the hon. member intimated existed in the service. We feel

that the workers have a natural right to make their own representations, and in the department all our officials are trying to help them out with their problems. That is done in all spheres, whether it is with the department or the joint council or even before the civil service commission.
I do not know whether I have covered all the points brought out by my hon. friend, but he will find all the explanations in the statements made by the Prime Minister and in the letter I have already mentioned.


Henry Alfred Hosking: Without taking up too much of the time of the committee I should like to make a few remarks in regard to the department of the Postmaster General. This is one department that deals with more Canadians than any other department of government. By and large the people of Canada appreciate the services they get from the post office more than they appreciate any service given by the government. Everyone likes to get his mail, and on time. In saying this to the minister I would hope that he might pass it on to his staff. I believe the mail service in Canada is second to none. I should like to commend his employees for the good job they have done.
I should like to thank the minister personally for setting up a committee to study the conditions of the rural mail couriers. I am certain that those who receive mail through the rural mail delivery will agree with me when I say that the couriers are the best and most loyal employees of our government. They deliver the mail at all times, in all kinds of weather and under very difficult conditions. I hope that when the recommendations of the committee are dealt with these worthy employees will be satisfactorily paid for their services.
I hope when our present Postmaster General is Postmaster General in the next parliament he will consider setting up a committee to study the whole postal service, and that it will be possible for this committee to make recommendations to the civil service commis^ sion in regard to implementing a five-day week with satisfactory salaries. If the same careful study is given to that problem that was given by the committee in the present session, we shall be able to straighten out many of the difficulties of the staff that we find in the postal service today.
I should like to see consideration given to working conditions, so that employees would not have to work overtime. The facts the minister has cited with respect to the paying of carriers for overtime work and permitting them to quit as soon as their job is done on the light days are reasonable. If we had a committee during the next session it would give us an opportunity to look into all these

factors. I certainly join with all members in appreciating the things the minister has done in the past year.


William Scottie Bryce: I should like to draw one or two matters to the attention of the Postmaster General. Before I do that I want to say how pleased I was to find that the government was able to put $25,000 in the estimates of the Department of Public Works for a new post office at' Selkirk. It is badly needed, and I do hope that the $25,000 is not going to be a revote year after year, but that it will be used.
I had intended when I spoke on this matter to quote an article from the Selkirk Enterprise, which deals with the congestion at Selkirk. It says:
New Post Office Needed in Selkirk
Selkirk's present post office was never planned to accommodate the increased amount of service which this busy town of 6,200 now demands. Built over 40 years ago when the population was only 2,900, this same post office is now handling many times the amount of mail, stamps, postal notes, et cetera, which passed through the office more than forty years ago.
The tremendous pressure of peak periods such as was experienced during the ten days before Christmas is not fully understood by the boxholder who every day goes to the post office to find his mail neatly sorted and waiting to be taken to his home or his place of business.
Just to give the committee an idea of the amount of business done in that post office, during the Christmas period they sold 120,000 two-cent stamps. Therefore it is really high time we had a new post office. I am going to send this paper over to the Postmaster General. Under one of the pictures he will see the following:
General delivery accommodation, now much too small for Selkirk's bustling post office, was bottleneck often during the holiday season rush.
Under another picture there is the following:
Mountain of mail at local post office.
And there is nowhere to put it.


Alcide Côté: I can assure my hon. friend that we agree with him. We feel that we need a new post office, and I can tell him that the detailed requirements have already been submitted to public works.


William Scottie Bryce: Thanks very much; that is really good news. I have another item that I can deal with very quickly. The last time the minister's estimates were up I talked about the service at Dugald, the place in which I have lived for over thirty years. We get poorer service there now than we had thirty years ago. Then we had mail every day. Now, as the minister explained to me in his
Supply-Post Office
letter, the mail goes east three times a week and it comes west three times a week, which is still service every second day.
The people of Dugald deserve better treatment than that. Dugald is about twelve miles from Winnipeg and in another fifteen years will probably be a suburb of that city. For them to get their mail only three times a week is not good enough. Dugald is a centre of a prosperous farming community, and if the farmers want to get their mail to Winnipeg they have to send it by the milk truck driver when he goes in in the morning. The post office loses revenue, because if a letter is mailed in Dugald it takes a four-cent stamp, whereas when the milk truck driver posts it in Winnipeg it requires only a three-cent stamp. The postal authorities in Winnipeg frown on this practice and say we should not do it. These are important farming people, and they require a daily service. With the loss of revenue brought about by this practice the department would do better to put in a daily service.
There is only one rural mail route out of Dugald, I believe for a distance of about 80 miles. I should like to read a letter I received from the women's institute of Dugald:
The Dugald women's institute have sponsored a petition to improve the mail service in our district. The present service is not as good as it was 30 years ago when the mail came directly from Winnipeg by mail carrier 3 times a week. It now comes to Dugald on the train and goes out on the route 3 times a week.
The petition having about 370 names, asked for a daily mail service from Winnipeg coming out on the Dugald road, then following the present mail route and going in on the centre line (or vice versa).
There are other districts close to us, where the roads are not as good as ours, which enjoy a daily mail service.
This is a district which has been settled for many years (our agricultural society is 71 years old). The land is high in price, we are served by hydro, there are many new schools, yet we have an obsolete mail service.
The Dugald women's institute earnestly ask that everything possible be done to grant this request.
Yours respectfully,
Mrs. S. Hanson, Sec.
Dugald W.I.
I have to go back there, and if the minister is not able to do anything for me I know the welcome mat will not be out for me.
The last matter I want to bring up is something I tried to bring up in the committee when we were considering rural routes, but it was suggested that I leave it until these estimates were before us. I think the best

Supply-Post Office
thing to do would be to read this letter which I received:
Dear Sir:
You will be surprised to get this letter but I was a mail carrier for five years and I am interested in the debates volume 95, number 34 official report the different thing that you and your members bring up they are all about right and I hope this committee that has been appointed will have some power. It won't do me any good, don't think but I am thinking about others across Canada that could get the same trick played on them as I did. My term ran out December 31, 1952 but never got any word. On December 18 and they wrote me, will you carry on at same rate of pay pending contract arrangement? I said I would.
Well I thought this would be a renewal the same as they gave me in 1948, but on Jan. 5, 1953 they put it up for tender to close Jan. 23. So I put in my bid for $1,393.55, the same as it has always been. So another man seen in the newspaper where rural mail carriers was going to get a raise in wages so he found out some way what I got, then he put in for less, to get it-I hear about
cents a trip less or 8-9 dollars a year. So he was the lowest tender and they gave it to him. So I got word I was done on Feb. 28, so I lost all I had and the one that got it is painting by day, runs a barber shop at night.
Now I hope you and your committee will give careful consideration to other contracts that might be due, if he has been a good carrier, I would like to see him have a chance and not lose out the way I did.
I do not think this man got a fair deal, and I would like to have the minister's comments. If he wants to look into the case he can write me later.


Mr.   Coie@SI Jean-Iberville-Napierville: I recall having had correspondence with my hon. friend about the Dugald matter, but I do not recall the details and I shall look into them. With regard to the last matter he raised, I think it would be unfair for the department to award a contract to anyone but the lowest tenderer. We cannot prevent a man acting as barber during his off hours, as that is not within our jurisdiction. It is unfortunate when a man bids too low, but either we have to retain the tender system or give it up. We have decided that we should retain that system and at the same time find a way to readjust those cases where the men are underpaid. We cannot control every case, and at times the contractors themselves are to blame when they do not succeed in obtaining a contract.


William Scottie Bryce: I would like to have brought up this matter in committee, but it was suggested that I leave it. I would like to know whether this man got an increase later on.


Charles Delmar Coyle: I shall look into the case.


William Scottie Bryce: If he did, it would be unfair; if he did not get an increase in wages and is still doing the job for 2| cents less per trip, then I know you are trying to save money.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Mr. Chairman, I regret that I was not in the committee when the post office estimates were first called, to have the opportunity of hearing the opening remarks of the Postmaster General. However, I shall read them in Hansard, as I know they will indicate an enthusiasm for his new position.
I always have taken a great interest in post office affairs. I can remember looking over the estimates and noting where this department showed a surplus of $6 million, $8 million some years, $9 million and as high as $13 million. I used to think that this was a wonderful department of the government when it could pay all its expenses and still show these enormous surpluses. All of a sudden, without any warning, they faded away; not only that, there is a deficit. I am not condemning the Postmaster General, but it would be most interesting to have a committee of this House of Commons find out how that money disappeared so quickly. Surely there must have been some easy sliding in connection with it. Otherwise how could a surplus of $11 million disappear and the following year have a deficit of many millions of dollars?
As I say, I am not placing any blame on the Postmaster General, but it would be most interesting to find out those facts. Were there fewer postage stamps sold? We know it is pretty hard to tell the cost of a four cent postage stamp. I suppose it would be a very small fraction of a cent. Anyway, I would like to see this brought before the house so we might learn how it is that the Post Office Department does not show a revenue. It is said, of course, that there is a revenue; but at the same time we are asked to vote $110,881,988. If the old method of accounting had been followed in this department we would have some idea of the revenue it produced. Instead of that, however, we are confronted with this vote of more than $110 million, and I am sure hon. members would be interested to learn what the earning capacity of the Post Office Department actually is.
I was surprised to hear the hon. member for Wellington South suggest a few moments ago that there should be a five-day week for mail carriers, or couriers; I am not sure which term he used. He had better not suggest that to the people in the community in which I live. They would not want to go back to a five-day week service. In fact, they are asking for something more than a six-day week. Some communities are asking for double delivery, if the mail routes are not too long
Then there is another matter I would bring to the attention of the minister, one which I

have discussed on several other occasions. We hear a good deal of talk about urban mail carriers. These men are on contract and are civil servants. They know what their salary is to be from year to year, as their increases are granted under the act. I suggest, however, that we cannot begin to compare the urban mail carriers with the rural mail couriers, because two different types of employment are involved, and there are twc kinds of work to be done.
The city mail carriers know what their work is each day. They know the ground they will have to cover. They are by no means overpaid, because their work is strenuous, day in and day out. In my city we have an excellent staff of mail carriers. But when we consider the rural mail couriers we find that they work on contract. The courier has to fulfil his contract, and must deliver the mail six days a week. At the end of four years, when his contract is up for renewal, he is no longer anything more than a private individual, because he must go to work again to find out whether he can continue in his job. Someone comes along and underbids him to the tune of $5 a month, or $5 a year, or even less than that; $2.50 a year. He loses his job.
I was greatly disappointed in what was done recently by a committee set up to investigate the problems of the rural mail couriers. If one reads the report of the committee he finds that it does not give the Postmaster General anything to work on by way of suggestions as to what should be done for these men. However, when Bill 197 was passed there was one thing it did do; it gave him almost absolute power, and put a great deal of patronage into his hands, something no one in the public service should have.
Be that as it may, we must take things as they come. I have considered carefully the salaries of rural mail couriers in my constituency. While I have not complete information from all of them so far as expenses incurred are concerned, I And that on the average they make as wages for themselves from $1.25 to $3.69 a day. Very few of them can say they get a wage amounting to this latter sum. There is no difficulty in figuring out these amounts. For instance, I have before me the information concerning one man who is on a contract at $2,000. His expenses for the year amounted to $933. One needs only to divide the balance by 310 days of labour to find out at once that this mail courier does not have a very large daily
Supply-Post Office
wage. The same man could work an eight-hour day on the highway and get three times as much pay.
I shall not say much more about the mail couriers, because it is now up to the Postmaster General to take action. He has authority to deal with the contracts that come before him. I know that two or three couriers from my constituency have written to him, and I am waiting to see how he will deal with them. I have in mind particularly one man who has been in the service for seven or eight years, and for five years before that had given war service. I find now, however, that there are four or five tenders in competition with this man. Some of the tenderers are no good at all, but that will have to be investigated by the Postmaster General. But because the other tenders are just a little lower than the amount this man is asking, his contract is held up. As I say, I am not going to interfere at all, but I am going to watch carefully how cases like that are handled. And if I do not like it, the department will hear about it later on.
I should like to say a word about our post office at Charlottetown, and I am not referring particularly to the post office building. We have there an excellent staff. I have said before that we are not recognized as a postal zone, notwithstanding the fact that we are a province of Canada. According to the agreement on which we went into union we should be recognized as such, and our post office should be a separate unit by itself. As I said here a year ago, we have no right to be tacked on to the province of New Brunswick, and I am going to repeat what I said before.
Suppose some country post office in my constituency wants some little matter adjusted. They come into the city post office at Charlottetown, where the men are quite able to adjust the matter. It may be only the moving of a box out in one of the communities, but they have no authority to move it and what do they do? They have to get in touch with New Brunswick and after that with the superior officer in Moncton, and about a week after that again they get in touch with Ottawa. What confusion. Why in the Sam Hill don't they make this a postal zone of their own? We are a province, and I am going to demand that again.


Mr. Hees:: We're right behind you.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: As I said, our contract of 1873 reads that we should have these and other things in comparison with other provinces in Canada. You cannot deny us that right according to our agreement and until we do

Supply-Post Office
get it you will hear from me as long as I am here.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Hear, hear.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: I am not going to say anything more about the staff there, although we have an excellent staff and they are giving excellent service. There is one man on the staff, however, that I wish to speak about again. He is a man who has put in 53 years of service in the postal department in Charlottetown. He has never had a day's holidays, and has always worked a 12-hour day. He is still going strong; and when you figure it up according to the laws of the land and the laws of the 8-hour day he has given 79 years of service. Now, that is a record for any man. What does the department in Ottawa want to do, Mr. Chairman? They want to get rid of this man.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Shame.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: But they cannot get anybody to do the job at three times what they are paying him, and he is still there. They cannot get rid of him as long as he is fulfilling his end of the contract. He goes to work at eight o'clock in the morning, he has no meal hours, no time off, no rest period and he works until eight o'clock at night. A short time ago the department, out of sympathy or something, granted him the privilege of taking half an hour off, and he can go home at half past seven. That was a wonderful thing, Mr. Chairman.
That is not the sad part of it. He was making a fairly good living under his contract, but he is just getting by now. What did the department do? They put in metering machines. That is all right. It is a great thing for the merchants and others who are putting out a lot of mail. But what did the department do? They refused to give this man his commission on the stamps the metering machine was using.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Shame.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: His commission under his contract was only $2 on every $100 worth sold. However, the post office refuses to give him that now. It is not much wonder that they have big revenues and big surpluses if they conduct all their business in that way; but since there is no surplus now I do not know what to say about it.
I do want to say to you, Mr. Chairman, and through you to the new Postmaster General, that this man after giving 79 years' service, taking the 8-hour day as you must today, ought to have some small pension. Then let him retire. Other people are getting

enormous pensions, and I do not blame them for getting all they can; but a thing like this looks so small for our postal department here in Ottawa, taking from this man over half of his legitimate commission. It would amount to $780, I understand, or probably a little more according to the number of stamps sold. They have no right, Mr. Chairman- and I want the minister to hear this-to defraud that man of the commission that is due him.
I have spoken on this before, but I am going to keep it up for a while yet.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Hear, hear.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Someone might say, as a member of the department and a previous Postmaster General said before, that they could fire this man at any time. I said, "Try". "We have a contract", he said; and I said, "Yes, but I defy you or the Postmaster General or the department to show that contract." "Oh," he says, "we know where it is." I said, "I know where one of them is, a duplicate." The department has not that contract, but it reads that as long as he is giving service to the public he is entitled to 2 per cent on all postage stamps used in the city of Charlottetown.
I just bring these conditions to the attention of the new Postmaster General. Surely he will have enough sympathy to say to himself, "Well, here is a man who has given 53 years of actual service since he signed the contract, and 79 years of real service in terms of an 8-hour day. Let us not be so rude as to take away more than 50 per cent of his earnings by these metering machines."


Donald Methuen Fleming: Hear, hear.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: Mr. Chairman, I am not going to take up some other items I would like to mention, because I do not want anyone to think I am trying to hold up these estimates. I do say again that I was rather disappointed in the committee of the house that was set up to study the problems of the rural mail couriers. There are no two ways about it, that committee were either in a hurry or they missed out on what was to be considered. Most of the problems considered were all right and I have no objection to them, but I do think a few of the rural mail couriers themselves from different localities should have been brought in. Then the committee and the Postmaster General would soon have found out what they desired and what they really wanted.
I have often said on the floor of the house here when these estimates were up that discrimination as between contracts-and I

am speaking particularly of my own constituency-is something that one can hardly realize until he figures it out. You will find, as I said before, one man driving 20 miles and receiving a certain amount. There will be another man driving 40 miles who will receive $500 less than the man driving 20 miles. I have made calculations for every mail route in my constituency, and I have placed most of those figures on the record. I am not going to repeat that at this late date.
I want to close by saying this to the Postmaster General. I hope he will make a visit to our province in the near future-I am not making any prognostications about the election-to see what is going on there in the Post Office Department. I should like him to look over our post office and our staff, and I know he will find certain things which, in his wisdom, he will correct. Then I would not have to come here and talk in this manner on the floor of the house.


Charles Delmar Coyle: I want to thank the hon. member for the kind invitation he has given me to visit his province after the election when I shall be back, as he suggests, as Postmaster General. I should like to remind the hon. member that he can find the revenues and expenditures in the annual report which the department tables in this house. He was inquiring about the reason for the deficit in 1951. We had an increase in employees' salaries of about $2,500,000, and in the additional amount paid to railways of $3 million. I believe that will explain why we had a deficit.
In so far as Bill No. 107 is concerned, which is awaiting royal assent, it was the subject of a unanimous report by the committee. I think it is only fair, therefore, to say that all the members of the committee believed what they decided. I am sure some good will result from it. So far as the man who has been 79 years in the service is concerned, I may tell the hon. member that that man is not considered an employee of the post office department. He is a stamp vendor, and is paid a commission on all the stamps he sells. We have no jurisdiction over him, therefore, to say whether he shall start at eight o'clock or nine o'clock in the morning. If he desired it, we might even give him a year off. He is a commission agent, so he is his own boss. He receives a commission on the stamps he sells.


Winfield Chester Scott McLure: May I interrupt for a
moment? Will the minister look at this contract and read it some day? You will find that you are absolutely wrong. He has a contract with the Post Office Department. It may be to sell stamps, but that does not make
Supply-Post Office
any difference. The contract specifies that he is to get a 2 per cent commission on all stamps sold in that zone, not that he sells.


Alcide Côté: I am under the impression that he gets a commission on the stamps he sells. In any event, I shall come to your province after the election and we shall settle that.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The first matter I wish to draw to the attention of the Postmaster General can be dealt with very briefly. I would simply ask him to refer to Hansard for this afternoon, where he will note that I had something to say to his colleague the Secretary of State regarding representations received from Winnipeg in connection with the salary question so far as post office and other civil service employees are concerned. He will find that I referred to representations that had come from my city of Winnipeg to those of us representing that area. I may tell him that some of those representations were from the postal employees who are, to use their own words, quite disturbed over the announcement that there will be no salary adjustment for postal workers at the present time. I urge upon the Postmaster General that he do his best on behalf of these employees for whom he is responsible by taking this matter up as strongly as he can with his colleagues in the cabinet who have something to say about this matter, particularly the Minister of Finance.
The second matter about which I should like to say a word is a little human interest story. I do not have the reputation of spending much of the time of the house in complimenting or thanking the government, but to do so three or four times in the course of 16 sessions might not be out of place. During the time when we were very much concerned in this house over the recent floods in Britain, Belgium and The Netherlands, I happened to be one of those who said something on the floor of the house. Apparently my name got into a story that appeared in one of the newspapers in Holland. I gather that my connection with Winnipeg must have been included in the story. As a result of that, in due course I received a letter from a family in Rotterdam who were deeply concerned over the fact that they had lost track of some close relatives of theirs who had moved to Canada many years before. It was thought that the family had settled in the Winnipeg area.
In this letter I was asked if I could ascertain the whereabouts of these relatives. First of all, I may say that the letter was in Dutch, so that I could not make it out; hence I referred it to the bureau for translations here in Ottawa. When the letter was translated I

Supply-Post Office
discovered what it was they wanted, so I simply wrote to the postmaster at Winnipeg, Mr. C. W. Heisler. He went right to work on the matter and it was not very long until, by placing the matter in the hands of special officers of the post office in Winnipeg, he had located the family. These people have thus been reunited. Only a couple of days ago I received a further letter from Rotterdam, this time in English, expressing thanks for what I had done and asking me to express their thanks to Mr. Heisler. I have not yet got around to writing him, but since these estimates were up today I thought I might extend this word of appreciation to him by mentioning this incident on the floor of the house.
I turn now to another matter, and I am still in a grateful mood. However, that will not last. As the Postmaster General will recall, some time ago I took up with him the desire of the historical and scientific society of Manitoba to have the first post office in western Canada reopened, at least on a partial basis. Representations were made to the Postmaster General by Dr. Ross Mitchell, the president of that society, and as the Postmaster General knows I took the matter up with him both by letter and here on the floor of the house. There was a little delay, but in due course the request was met and the Post Office Department made arrangements for a special cachet to be issued for this post office so that it will be possible for mail to be received there and postmarked as going out from this first post office to be opened in western Canada.
This post office is popularly known as the Ross post office. The original building, although it has had to be repaired, is still there. It was built of squared logs for William Ross, the son of Alexander Ross, the first sheriff of the old Red River colony, who was also a teacher and the colony's first historian. Back in February, 1855, the council of Assiniboia appointed William Ross as postmaster, and this post office began its operations on February 28, 1855. As I have already indicated, there is a certain amount of interest in this historic old site, and it is being met in part by the reopening of the post office this very month, under the supervision of the historic and scientific society of Manitoba.
There is, however, another group in Winnipeg who feel that there is yet another way in which this historic post office should be recognized. I refer to the Winnipeg philatelic society, who suggest that this would really be an appropriate event to recognize by the issuing of a special stamp. We are asking for something well in advance because, as the Postmaster General knows-indeed, he has told me about it personally-it takes a long while to get a new stamp prepared. The one hundredth anniversary of the opening of

this first post office in western Canada is off a bit in the future yet; it will take place on February 28, 1955.
I strongly urge upon the Postmaster General that consideration be given to the issuing of a special stamp to mark that occasion. As I say, representations to that effect were made to the Postmaster General some time ago by Mr. A. R. Bloxham, secretary of the Winnipeg philatelic society. I supported those representations in a letter which I wrote to the Postmaster General on January 13. However, the Postmaster General replied on January 16 in a vein which not only was negative but which suggested that the door was closed. I hope I can get the door open again.
In this letter the Postmaster General argued that it is not the practice in Canada to go in for many special stamps, as is done in some other countries. He pointed out to me that the department has indeed issued few postage stamps to mark the founding of cities, let alone the founding of special post offices. He indicated that there are a few exceptions; for example, there have been special stamps marking the founding of the cities of Quebec and Halifax. I gather that there has been nothing of a commemorative character so far as Winnipeg is concerned or the Postmaster General would surely have referred to it in his letter. At any rate, he concluded his letter by telling me that he was afraid it would be inadvisable to issue a postage stamp in 1955 illustrating the subject of this first post office in western Canada.
I do not want to make unfair comparisons, Mr. Chairman, but some of the postage stamps that we have been seeing lately, with some of these animal heads on them, seem to me to be less deserving than an event such as this. In view of the fact that there is still a reasonable amount of time to consider this matter, I press it upon the Postmaster General. I hope he will have his officials look at it again and see whether this is not really an event of some historic significance that he would be well advised to recognize in this way. I am sure that Winnipeg would appreciate the honour of having this original post office in western Canada recognized in this way, and I am sure the Postmaster General and his department would do honour to themselves if they would consider this matter favourably.
Since invitations are being extended to the Postmaster General to visit various parts of the country, I hope that some time soon he will come along to the constituency of Winnipeg North Centre, either before or after the election; or for that matter, he can come along during the election. I should be glad to see him in Winnipeg North Centre at any

time. I should be glad to take him down and show him this interesting building which has been put into shape again and which he has made it possible to be operated again as a post office. I think he should take this other step and recognize this historic event by arranging to have a special stamp issued to commemorate this one hundredth anniversary which will take place, as I say, on February 28, 1955.


Alcide Côté: I want to thank my hon. friend. Everybody is so agreeable tonight that I cannot deny my hon. friend the promise that I shall at least look into the matter again. He said he hoped that in 1955 I would issue a stamp. I thank him for the-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Careful, now. I want the Postmaster General to start the ball rolling now. Somebody else may issue the actual stamp when the time comes.


Mr.   Coie@St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville: I shall look into the matter.


Mr. Green:: Mr. Chairman, it had been my understanding that in the suburban areas in the cities where there are small businesses there is a delivery twice a day. Apparently that is not the case in some of the suburban districts in Vancouver. They are getting only one delivery a day.
In addition, within the last few days I have had a complaint that where a registered letter is addressed to a business house in one of these districts and the office does not happen to be open when the carrier calls, the registered letter is taken back to the subpost office and is not taken again on any letter deliveries to that address, but that a notice is sent out saying that the addressee will have to go to the sub-post office in order to get the registered letter. That procedure seems to indicate very poor service. I would hope that the practice can be discontinued.


Alcide Côté: I do not know the details of that particular case. First, I may say to my hon. friend that we arrange two deliveries where the proportion is over 25 per cent industrial. As far as the notification in regard to registered mail, we try to deliver twice. Then if we have no success in locating the party, we do as he suggested. As far as the business walks are concerned I may tell my hon. friend that those with over 50 per cent of business calls receive two deliveries per day, or more where the volume of mail warrants additional delivery by letter carrier. As to mixed walks, those with 25 per cent to 50 per cent of business calls are served twice per day. As to residential walks, those with
Supply-Post Office
less than 25 per cent of business calls are served once per day.


Howard Charles Green: Does that not mean that where you have a district in which there is, say, one street with 50 business places, it may be impossible for them to get more than one delivery a day? I doubt whether this arbitrary rule of 50 per cent or 25 per cent is a fair way to meet the situation. Surely the post office could take a district which is known as a business centre and in that district deliver at least twice a day.


Alcide Côté: We study each case on its own merits. We do not act arbitrarily. We try to rearrange routes so that reasonable service is given.


Howard Charles Green: The complaint I have had is about the Kerrisdale district in Vancouver. I wish the Postmaster General would have an investigation made of the service there.


Alcide Côté: We shall be glad to look into this matter.


William Joseph Browne: I should like to ask the Postmaster General whether any consideration has been given to the question of the centralization of postal activities in the city of St. John's. The oldest government building we have in St. John's, Newfoundland, is the post office. It was built back in the middle of the last century. I do not think it can be suitable for the business that is being done there at the present time. As a matter of fact, part of the business has to be done in another building, namely a temporary building that was taken over after the war from the admiralty. I feel that a general reorganization of the postal business in the city of St. John's is urgently necessary.


Alcide Côté: There is a vote in the estimates in the amount of $50,000 for building purposes. We are investigating the site, and the plans are approved.


George Harris Hees: A couple of months ago I asked the Postmaster General whether the government would consider issuing a special stamp to commemorate a very important event that will take place next December when the city of Toronto opens the first subway transit system in Canada, and I hope he has given this matter a great deal of consideration in the meantime.


Mr. Parent:: And put your picture on it.


George Harris Hees: Yes, catching the first train. The Toronto transportation commission have prepared some information for me on this. Naturally they are very anxious to have this stamp issued, and they tell me that between 1897 and 1951 we have had 19 special issues

Supply-Post Office
of stamps to commemorate special events in Canada, starting in 1897 with the commemoration of the diamond jubilee, and ending in 1951 with the celebration of the centenary of the Canadian post office. In addition to that, during the last 25 years, five special issues of stamps have been made to commemorate special events in the field of transportation. In 1928 there was a special delivery stamp issued; in 1933 there was a stamp to commemorate the Royal William steamship; in 1938 an air mail stamp showing mail transportation in the Northwest Territories; in 1946 a stamp commemorating ocean train ferry, and in 1951 the centenary of postal administration, an issuance of three stamps showing trains, boats, stage coach and airplane.
The Toronto transportation commission have gone into this matter quite seriously. They have a stamp club of their own, as a matter of fact. They estimate that 80,000 of these special stamps will be sold. They estimate that the sale of these stamps will be divided between Toronto, the philatelic agency at Ottawa and other post offices, chiefly to stamp collectors. They tell me that a special issue of stamps is always widely advertised weeks ahead by the Canadian post office, by all stamp collecting magazines in the United States and in the British empire, with full details as to where these stamps may be bought and the reason for the issue.
They also advise me that in 1951, when the post office had a special exhibit at the Canadian National Exhibition in Toronto commemorating their 100th anniversary, a special sub-post office was set up in the automotive building, where the stamps were sold, and letters were cancelled in full view of the public. Tremendous crowds purchased stamps at this point. The arrangements were supervised by Mr. Perry, Canadian post office public relations officer in Toronto.
They go on to make a statement which is very hard to believe. They say the Canadian post office has never issued a postage stamp depicting any feature or landmark of Toronto. I know that is hard to believe, but it seems to be a fact. They go on to say that the post office has, however, issued stamps showing scenes in the following places:	Quebec,
Ottawa, Montreal, Hamilton, Halifax, Niagara Falls, Victoria, British Columbia, Winnipeg, Fort William, Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Vancouver, and Grand Pre.
Everybody will agree that it is high time a special issue was made to commemorate some special event in Toronto, and I can think of no more fitting occasion than the
[Mr. Hees.l
opening of the first subway transit system in Canada, which will be opened in Toronto in December next. I do hope the minister will be in a position to tell me that the post- office has given favourable consideration to this extremely reasonable proposition, and that we shall have a special stamp issue to commemorate this memorable event.


Charles Delmar Coyle: I may say to my hon. friend that I am glad to tell him I shall keep on giving consideration to his suggestion.


George Harris Hees: Has his consideration progressed at all since I first asked the question? Are we getting warm?


Charles Delmar Coyle: It is progressing as Metro is progressing.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
303. Operations-including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, also including administration, $64,155,723.
Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask the Postmaster General a question? I think it would properly come under operations. I have had a number of complaints about food parcels not reaching their destination. I refer particularly to food parcels being mailed by Canadians to people in the United Kingdom. Apparently in some instances when a parcel has been lost, if it has not been insured, there is no recompense or compensation to the sender. Is it not possible to have all such parcels insured automatically as part of the service?


Alcide Côté: I am informed there is no insurance on food parcels.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In other words it is not possible to get it at all?


Alcide Côté: No. It is a matter of agreement between ourselves and Great Britain, and no mutual agreement has been arrived at.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: I notice there is an increase of $2,740,000 odd in this item. I suppose that is to take care of the new legislation that gives authority to increase mail carriers' salaries without advertising the position. How soon does the minister expect the legislation to become law?


Alcide Côté: As soon as royal assent is given to the bill.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Can you tell me how soon that will be?


Alcide Côté: It depends on you.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: What does the minister mean, it depends on me?


Alcide Côté: As soon as the house prorogues we will have royal assent of all the bills that are left.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: What does the minister mean?


Charles Delmar Coyle: As soon as we all stop talking.


Clayton Wesley Hodgson: As soon as the session closes something will be done about it?


Alcide Côté: Speaking seriously, I want to tell my hon. friend that it would not be proper to start working on the applications until the bill passed this house. The bill has not the authority of law until it receives royal assent, and as soon as it receives royal assent we shall start working on the applications. We will have royal assent as soon as the house concludes its business. If hon. members are ready to co-operate we shall have royal assent tomorrow.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT 364. Departmental administration, $399,090.
Mr. Macdonald (Edmonton East):: Mr. Chairman, I sense the urgency of trying to resolve the estimates and the desire of hon. members to get home as soon as possible, but I wish to take advantage of this opportunity when the estimates of the Minister of Resources and Development are before the committee to refer again to the need for an all-weather year-round highway linking the east and the west through the Yellowhead pass in the Canadian rockies. I spoke on this matter in some detail four years ago, and my remarks will be found at pages 2037-38 of Hansard of 1949. I shall not take the time of the committee at the moment to repeat what I said at that time.
In my remarks in 1949 I pointed out the more practical nature of the Yellowhead route as against a route through the Kicking Horse pass. The Kicking Horse pass route is the approved route of the trans-Canada highway, and it is along the Kicking Horse pass that that highway will lie. On the grounds of more favourable terrain, elevation and weather conditions alone, I still maintain that the central route, the Yellowhead pass route is the best, and that was the route I recommended when I spoke in 1949 on the trans-Canada highway.
13, 1953
Supply-Resources and Development
That national interest demanded the choice of the Yellowhead route at that time, and dictates its completion now, is no less clearly indicated. An editorial in the Edmonton Journal of April 30 of this year reads:
Defence need, of course, is but one reason favouring construction of the Yellowhead highway, and the whole Evergreen highway system linking Edmonton with Vancouver and Winnipeg by a northerly route. They also promise large tourist returns, of both provincial and national interest, and are bound to develop into a highly important east-west commercial artery.
It is difficult not to assume that purely political considerations were the basis of the Alberta government's decision to choose the southern route. Now, that government endorses the more northerly route in the guise of it being a "defence" highway. They are now endorsing the route through the Yellowhead pass that I requested be inquired into in 1949, and they are now asking for that under the guise of it being a defence highway. It is difficult not to assume that political considerations, having in them an element of timeliness, are the basis for this sudden endorsation of a route which not long ago was beyond consideration. That this statement is! not pure assumption I think is clear from a news story which appeared in the Edmonton Journal of April 29, 1953, and I quote:
Deploring Prime Minister St. Laurent's "attitude" toward defence highways and military roads, Hon. Gordon Taylor, Alberta highways minister, asserted Wednesday that the Prime Minister "has shown as much vision as an ostrich with his head in the sand".
And again:
"The Prime Minister of Canada and his cabinet colleagues," Mr. Taylor declared, "should get the blinkers off their eyes."
There was more in that news story of the same vein. It is deplorable that an Alberta government minister should make such statements in reference to our illustrious Prime Minister. We have in our Prime Minister one of the world's leading statesmen. There is not a member in the House of Commons who would refer to our Prime Minister in other than terms of high regard and respect. Our Prime Minister serves Canada with great distinction. The Edmonton Journal had this editorial comment to make on Mr. Taylor's statement:
"Only harm can be done by the sort of namecalling in which Alberta's highways minister, Hon. Gordon Taylor, indulged in Wednesday. . . Abusive references to the Prime Minister will do anything but promote federal-provincial co-operation."
I do not think Mr. Taylor need worry about federal co-operation regardless of his vulgar remarks which would not at any time promote the kind of consultative co-operation
5324	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development necessary to decide this highway question. I am quite sure the necessary co-operation will be forthcoming. I do not think the Prime Minister will be deflected in any way from doing what he conceives to be his duty by any name-calling.
As the western provinces, and Alberta particularly, have requested a conference on the whole matter of western highways with a view to defence, I have no doubt whatever that the fullest co-operation will be extended them. In view of the press of business at this time, to suggest a postponement and reappraisal of the matter at a later date is not, I suggest, putting one's head in the sand like an ostrich.
But political considerations are the least important aspect of this matter. Perhaps at this time we can afford a double link through this area of western Canada to the coast. If so, no one will be more heartily in favour of such a program than myself. There is, however, one serious aspect of such a possibility which may invalidate completely the southern route as at present proposed. I shall come to that in a moment.
A vast and important area in terms of population, of growing industrial importance, of rapid increase in known and anticipated economic resources is comprehended in the general area Winnipeg-Saskatoon-Edmonton-Kamloops-Vancouver, all of which the Yel-lowhead route would serve. My position is that the west, and Alberta especially, by the very facts of geography needs the most practical and possibly even a double outlet to the Pacific on industrial, climatic and defence grounds. If only one route is practical, then it should be the Yellowhead route. In that respect I recommended in 1949 that an impartial fact-finding committee be appointed to investigate every aspect of the matter. Certainly highways are a provincial responsibility, but with the federal government paying half the cost it seemed to me that the national interest in the proposed expenditure would warrant the closest attention to choice of the best route.
Today as never before the people of Canada stand to benefit in the most national sense, from a central, western road linking with the trans-Canada highway as at present approved, subject to one qualification. Such a road, built to trans-Canada standards, would tap the growing resources of the west's north and centre, and serve as a peripheral link to that northern complex of communications we are developing or will have to develop soon in connection with the defence of our nation.


The Alaska highway, the Hay River route, the John Hart development, are all part of the actual or potential broad, strategic and industrial network which will supplement our railways and penetrate areas where they would be uneconomic or impractical. No one can predict the future, but we can plan for it in the light of present day knowledge. We are today at a stage in our industrial, our economic, our national development when we must keep pace with that development or take the serious economic and social conse-quencies. I would be remiss, indeed, if I did not again emphasize my considered opinion, that this highway development, which I have long advocated as being essential, is part and parcel of that long-range high level of employment and investment which it is the policy of this party to maintain.
And now for the qualification I mentioned. I have referred to the examination of the present route of the trans-Canada highway through the mountains, and at this time 1 shall refer to this matter only briefly. There is, it appears to me, some danger that the present approved trans-Canada route by way of the Big Bend may, in the not too distant future, conflict with the possible development of the Columbia river basin as a major source of vital hydroelectric power. 1 would urge that in the very near future the broadest possible study be given this possibility. It could mean the complete abandonment of the trans-Canada highway over a vast territory-a costly matter indeed, once construction is undertaken.
There was tabled in the house on April 27 correspondence exchanged between the Prime Minister and the premier of Alberta. The Prime Minister's letter to the premier of Alberta dated April 18 says, in its last paragraph:
I will communicate with you further after this session of parliament has been prorogued and endeavour to set a date which will be mutually satisfactory.
To me, the Prime Minister meant in that paragraph that he would endeavour to set a date that would be satisfactory to those elected representatives of the prairie west and British Columbia so they could come down here to discuss the question of further highways in the west. I do sincerely hope that from this consultative and co-operative conference there will be planned the building of a highway to serve Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Edmonton and on through the Yellowhead pass to Kamloops, thence to the Pacific coast.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, I have spoken to the minister on a number of occasions this session in the hope that he might give heed to some of the views put forward by members

of the opposition, and that he and his department might make some changes in their present housing policy which, no matter what the minister may say about it, and no matter how good he thinks it is, adds up to simply this, that it is not getting the houses built which we need to house the people of this country.
The building industry states it can build 125,000 houses in a year. Last year we built 73,000. As I have said to the minister on several occasions, last year alone we built 33,500 fewer houses than were needed to keep pace with new family formations and obsolescence, let alone trying to cut into the half million housing backlog which we had as of January 1 this year.
But the minister just does not seem to want to pay any attention. He seems to think the present housing policy is quite satisfactory; that 73,000 houses a year is good enough; and the fact that the building industry can build 125,000 houses a year is quite unimportant. He does not seem impressed by the fact that we have a housing backlog of half a million houses; no, that does not seem to matter to him at all. So we just go merrily on our way with far too few houses, paying no attention whatever to the housing needs of the Canadian people.
I think if the minister would use the same good judgment in the housing field that he uses on the baseball field our housing needs would be looked after very quickly, because on the baseball field, as a very efficient catcher, he is most efficient at blocking off a runner who is trying to get to home base. However, unfortunately he tries to do exactly the same thing in the housing field. He seems to think he is playing the same game, with the result that he blocks off with equal efficiency the builders who are striving for that goal of 125,000 houses a year. The minister traps them around second base and says, "No, you just stop there; 73,000 houses is enough; one more move and you've had it."
That is the situation today. I hope the minister may at long last listen to what a great many builders have told me in long hours of serious discussion with them, because I realize I do not know too much about housing; but I am always anxious to learn.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


George Harris Hees: In that respect I am unlike hon. members opposite, because I am willing to learn; I do not think I know it all. Hon. members opposite seem to think that they know it all, and they do not think they need to learn anything. So, as a humble student-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.
68108-336J
13, 1953	5325
Supply-Resources and Development


George Harris Hees: Mr. Chairman, it sounds as though some of those horses on the payroll have got into the chamber this evening. Maybe we ought to throw them a few oats to keep them quiet.


Mr. Dickey:: There is nothing worse than a stale joke.


George Harris Hees: And now, Mr. Chairman, after these rather rude interruptions, perhaps I might proceed. I am going to bring forward not my views but views that have been expressed to me over and over again by men who can build the houses which this country needs, at prices the people can pay, and so end our housing shortage in the very near future-that is, if they are just given the chance to do it.
As I have said before, and as they have said on many occasions, there are three reasons why we are critically short of housing today. First of all there is the shortage of serviced land. This is making it impossible for builders to build the houses they want to build in the locations in which they want to build them. Second there is the matter of the high down payment, which makes it impossible for people of moderate means to buy houses. And, third, there is the high interest rate and the short amortization period which makes it impossible for people of moderate means to carry new houses.
I should like to deal with each of those reasons. First of all there is the matter of the lack of serviced land. This can be overcome only if the municipalities are given adequate sources of revenue from which they can finance the building of schools, roads, water mains, sewers and all the other local improvements that are needed if builders are to come into subdivisions to build houses. If the municipalities will not allow the builders to come in, then naturally the houses will not be built.
On November 24 the Leader of the Opposition made a very sensible suggestion to the government when he said that it should call together a dominion-provincial conference to discuss the possibility of reallocating sources of revenue of municipalities, so they could finance these expenditures which they are called upon to make.
Second, there is the high down payment. That is the greatest obstacle in the way of building a new house, and it would be the easiest one for the government to remove. However, for some reason or other the government simply and steadfastly says No. There is no explanation; it is just plain No. The minimum down payment which a person has to make under N.H.A. housing today is $2,000, and that is 20 per cent on a $10,000 house. Now, Mr. Chairman, people who earn
5326	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development a moderate salary simply cannot get that kind of money together. In order to get together $2,000 you would have to have, as a very minimum, a salary of $5,000 a year, and you would have to earn that for four years running. You would have to be willing to set aside 10 per cent of that amount each year for four years, and that is no mean feat. So anybody earning less than $5,000 a year is virtually excluded from buying a new house.
I have talked to a great many workingmen who have said to me, "I have been able to save $500 or $600 and I can get another $500 or $600 from the credit union to which 1 belong; but I simply cannot find $2,000. I want to have a house of my own, and I feel that on my salary I can carry it, but I simply cannot get together that down payment". They feel that a $1,000 down payment would be reasonable. As a down payment 'on a minimum $10,000 N.H.A. house, that would be 10 per cent.
Again I very strongly urge the minister to give consideration to this matter. I have been urging it for a long time, and I do not know whether there is much use in speaking to him again because he does not seem to be interested. I cannot see any difficulty in the way of the government reducing the down payment to 10 per cent. The United States have done that. As I have told the minister, through their national housing authority, for a $7,000 house the United States requires a down payment of only 5 per cent or $350. As the value of the house increases, the down payment increases on a sliding scale, so that when you arrive at a $10,000 house the down payment is 121 per cent or $1,250. I feel that one flat figure of 10 per cent on all houses of $10,000 or less would make it possible for people with moderate incomes in this country to buy the houses which they desperately want to buy.
The third difficulty is the high interest rate and the short amortization period. Again I would like to cite what has been done in the United States. There they have an interest rate as low as 4 per cent and an amortization period as long as 30 years. I think we all realize that the United States are not fools in the matter of business. They do not give things away; they usually work things out on a pretty businesslike basis, and they have found that kind of down payment and that kind of interest rate and that kind of amortization period are necessary to enable people who need housing most, to buy new houses. Otherwise they would not have made those rates what they are. They have been very successful in the United States in getting houses built for the people who need them


most. I again urge the minister to give this matter very serious consideration.
I do not see any obstacle in the way of the government doing these things, and I see these suggestions as the only way we can overcome the present difficulties and enable the building industry to build the houses they are capable of producing, namely 125,000 houses a year. If we do that, the housing difficulties in Canada will be overcome very soon. If the government persists in its present obsolete and reactionary policy, which makes it easy for a person with a good income to buy a house but impossible for a person with a moderate income, then the housing situation is going to grow worse year after year.
I hope the minister and this government are not going to sit idly by and watch a critical situation continue to deteriorate right before their eyes.


Mr. Gour (Russell):: Mr. Chairman, it is a great pleasure for me tonight to have the opportunity of congratulating our bright young minister for the good work he has done for this country.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Joseph-Omer Gour: I am sure all of my electors are glad and would wish me to say that we are all happy that we have such an energetic and powerful young man at the head of this department.
I want to say that he began construction of the trans-Canada highway from Ottawa east in the county of Russell, to Montreal. May I ask the minister whether it is possible to get an understanding with the province of Ontario in order to have the road widened. It should be double its present width. There is much traffic to and from the capital city and we hope that will continue, and that it will be possible to have the road wider than it is now.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer to a statement made by the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar on Tuesday, April 8, 1953, which appears at page 4479 of Hansard. At that time he complained about a house that was built for his son-in-law by the Campeau Construction Company. He went so far as to say that the firm did jerry-building. Mr. Chairman, I do not think this parliament should be used as a place to make statements that cannot be supported. If it were done by someone outside of this house they would be brought to court. Members should not take advantage of their position to make such accusations when the people involved cannot answer back. Such an accusation could bring the downfall of this firm. This firm of intelligent people, outstanding builders, have built many hundreds of homes which are so urgently needed.

More than eight excellent building companies have built thousands of homes in my riding, and I am sure thanks are due to the minister and to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation who provided the opportunity for those contractors to build those homes in my riding of Russell. I am very proud of my riding, which is growing by some 3,000 people a year. Thousands of houses have been provided in that district under the administration of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, by Campeau Construction. The house mentioned by the hon. member was sold to his son-in-law. He made some complaint to the contractor, and immediately a man was sent over to check the drainage system. He found that the work had been done properly but the owner was a little difficult to deal with. He complained that dampness persisted, and he hired another contractor to do some work. On April 17, 1953, he presented a bill for $244.33 to Mr. Campeau. There was a little discussion between the owner and Mr. Campeau, and the latter claimed that the bill was too high for the amount of work done but finally Mr. Campeau paid it.
The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar was invited by the contractor to visit and check personally all of the different dwellings constructed by the contractor. I also invited the hon. member to go with me in my car to make such a visit. I am of the opinion that he will not be able to find one house which is not built according to regulations. For the most part he will find that the company has done excellent work. I do not believe these accusations were warranted, and it sounds to me as though they were made for political purposes to criticize private enterprise. These are criticisms pf people who are building homes which our citizens need so desperately.
Naturally, when you build thousands of homes people who know something about construction and about the buying and selling of houses cannot expect that there will not be a few houses with imperfections. The same thing applies in so far as the manufacture of automobiles, refrigerators and other types of machines is concerned. These manufacturers employ experts to inspect these machines, but there are always some that have to be repaired or some which have to have parts replaced. I know this is so because I sell a lot of these machines. Even with the best companies there is always something that happens to a truck, a tractor, a refrigerator or a machine of that sort which we have to check up. Certainly during the time Mr. Campeau has been building houses, some of the houses are bound to have slight deficiencies that need correction.
I shall ask the minister to take note of what I said a few years ago about the Nation
Supply-Resources and Development river. I know the federal government is anxious to do all it can to conserve our forest and water resources. The Ontario government has made a fine survey of this river, and I think that government will be happy to co-operate in any plan of conservation. Such a plan would not cost millions of dollars, but only a reasonable amount. Two or three dams would have to be built. The water of the Nation river passes through the Larose forest in which over 7 million trees have been planted by way of reforestation. At the same time this river passes through 250 acres of reforestation in which I have planted over 300,000 trees.
If such a conservation program were adopted it would serve at least 11 municipalities, and give the opportunity for reforestation. It would conserve the water and help the farmers to have better crops. Every town through which the Nation river passes would be benefited by the lessening of the flood damage every spring.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, before proceeding with my brief remarks I must congratulate you on acting as temporary chairman of the committee. You occupy the chair with dignity and graciousness, and I know your judgments will be as wise as those of Solomon. Furthermore, Mr. Chairman, I am sure your electors will be heartened to know that you have been given some recognition of your ability to do more than simply work as a member of parliament. I presume this is an indication that, at the next session of parliament, your advancement will continue.


Mr. Weir:: May I ask to what item the hon. member is speaking?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is it resources or development?


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I intended to speak on the item for the administration of the trans-Canada highway, but since the hon. member for Edmonton East had something to say about the trans-Canada highway, and since I am speaking for a large number of people who are particularly concerned with the trans-Canada highway in the eastern portion of British Columbia, I am going to follow him now.
All of us living along the banks of the Columbia river in British Columbia between Rev'elstoke and the international boundary belong to what is now generally known as the community of the Columbia. As residents of the community of the Columbia, we have interests in common. We are interested in the development of the region, the development of transportation, and particularly in
5328	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development recent years in the development and improvement of our highways. On that account all the people in the area are particularly interested in the rapid development and improvement in that section of the trans-Canada highway from Revelstoke east to the Alberta border. To that end, Mr. Chairman, we in this area co-operate on all those problems. We have joint meetings of the people from the various communities so we can face this problem with a common front, whether we are dealing with the provincial or federal governments.
Personally, I have lived on the shores of the Columbia river for nearly 50 years. I know the problems of the district very well.
I know the area through which the present Big Bend highway goes. I know the Rogers pass route very well. I have been through there something over 60 times, so I have some knowledge of the situation and have every confidence in advancing the ideas 'of the organizations that have asked me to speak this evening.
The Big Bend highway was first undertaken by the provincial government. This work was proceeded with in a very leisurely manner, so not much progress was made. During the depression the federal department of the interior took over the construction of the Big Bend highway between Revelstoke and Golden, and completed the subgrade in 1944. Once that section was gravelled so traffic could go over the highway, the tourist traffic increased very rapidly. The gravel surface quickly developed holes and the washboard condition became a severe problem every summer.
With the development of the tourist traffic the maintenance of the road became a greater problem. After a rise in the tourist traffic to a certain height, shall I say, it then began to drop off because tourists from the United States coming through the national parks area would return to the United States and inform their friends of the poor condition of the road. Therefore the people of the area surrounding Revelstoke in the community of the Columbia pressed the coalition government to pave the highway between Revelstoke and Golden. They were led to believe that the work was going to be done. Year after year nothing was done and the loss of tourist traffic has continued up to this tinie.
Then we had an agreement with the federal government and British Columbia with respect to the building of the trans-Canada highway. Hopes rose high again that the road between Revelstoke and Golden


would be designated as a section of the trans-Canada highway, which it finally was. We thought the paving would soon be undertaken by the provincial government with the financial assistance of the federal government, but nothing was done. Then in June of last year we had an election in British Columbia, and hopes rose to new heights. The slogan in the area was that the Big Bend highway would be paved in 1953. Those hopes have begun to fade already. Because of the fading of these hopes the people of Revelstoke, and the Revelstoke chamber of commerce particularly, began to look in other directions. Recently they have made an appeal to the federal government in this connection.
First of all, I want to be as brief as possible. I shall restrain myself with great difficulty on several other items in order that I may use all the time I think I can ethically use at this stage of the estimates on this subject. I want to quote first of all from the Revelstoke Review of Thursday, April 30, 1953, an article entitled "Passing the Buck to Ottawa". It reads as follows:
It's getting to be monotonous. Every time someone suggests the need of new road construction, the minister of public works passes the buck to Ottawa. Seeking aid for alleged military highways, all-weather roads, etc., from Ottawa is occupying a great deal of the minister's time. Now, he's decided that the Tofino road on Vancouver island should be aided by Ottawa. Here is a recent news despatch:
"We are very much impressed by the need for the Tofino road", Hon. P. A. Gaglardi, minister of public works, told the dinner meeting arranged by the Alberni board of trade.
"The minister regarded the road as desirable from both the tourist and industrial standpoint.
"He did not, however, consider its construction a provincial responsibility alone, but one to which the federal government should contribute."
The money required to build the roads to which Mr. Gaglardi thinks Ottawa should contribute would complete the trans-Canada highway, to which Ottawa actually is committed, long before the 1956 deadline. There are no "ifs" and "buts" about Ottawa's willingness to do its share in regard to the trans-Canada highway, but it must get kind of tiresome for the federal government to learn almost every other day that there are other projects in British Columbia to which it should contribute.
"First things first", Mr. Gaglardi! The trans-Canada highway definitely should have priority on all federal funds for highway purposes.
The people I represent and the people in Revelstoke who are interested in this question agree with that sentiment, that the first thing to be done in British Columbia is to finish the trans-Canada highway. When we get that finished it will then be possible to ask for federal assistance for other roads; but that is our first objective.
Quite recently I asked for an order for return at the request of my friends in the

Revelstoke district. I want to read a few letters from that return in order to illustrate the fact that-and I give the federal government credit for it-this government is anxious to proceed with the paving of this section of the highway, to carry on and get that part of the work completed, and also to indicate that the work is still being stalled by the present provincial government of British Columbia. When I place these letters on the record I am sure it will be clear to everyone that we got along about as fast on the Big Bend section of the trans-Canada highway this year as we have during the last five years.
The first letter I want to read is one to Hon. E. C. Carson dated February 1, 1951. The matter was being considered then. It is now getting on in 1953. The letter is addressed to the Hon. E. C. Carson, minister, department of public works, Victoria, B.C. I may say that the death of Mr. Carson is something that we greatly regret in British Columbia, regardless of our party politics. Mr. Carson was a gentleman. He spent his whole life in developing a splendid farm and he left a great record behind him as minister of public works. Those sentiments would be expressed by anyone who knew Mr. Carson. The letter reads as follows:
Dear Mr. Carson:
Your letter of November 29 in regard to the situation that would arise on the Big Bend section of the trans-Canada highway if a large storage dam were built on the Columbia river near Mica creek, has been given consideration, and the points raised in it have been referred to General A. G. L. McNaughton, chairman of the Canadian section of the international joint commission, and to the Honourable L. B. Pearson, Secretary of State for External Affairs.
General McNaughton has advised that the terms of reference in regard to the Columbia river investigations authorize the commission to estimate the costs of the water resources development, including indemnification for damage to public and private property and the costs of any remedial works. The latter, in his opinion, include the relocation of a road made necessary by the construction of a power project and the investigation of alternate routes which may be necessary if a storage dam is built.
In a letter dated January 19, the Secretary of State for External Affairs confirms that the international joint commission is agreeable to adopting the interpretation proposed by General McNaughton.
Under these circumstances it would appear in order for your department to investigate alternate routes to the extent it feels necessary at this time, keeping a record of such expenditures so that they may be a charge against the "storage authority".
In order that the construction of the trans-Canada highway through this section of British Columbia may not be unduly delayed-
It will be noted that at that time in 1951 the minister was anxious that the work be not delayed.
Supply

Resources and Development -I assume you will wish to undertake the necessary surveys and investigations in the coming season. As you know, the feasibility of the dam site will not be definitely determined until investigations are completed next summer, and the results of these may considerably modify the whole problem.
Yours sincerely,
Robert H. Winters.
To that letter Mr. Carson replied on March 2, 1951, as follows:
Dear Mr. Winters:
I have for acknowledgment your further letter under date of February 1 having to do with the possibility of storage facilities being provided on what is presently known as the Big Bend section of the trans-Canada highway in British Columbia.
I appreciate very much the arrangements you have made with respect to possible necessary indemnification and also your advice that proper investigations of alternate routes and relocations could be chargeable to the storage authorities.
As per your letter, we will get on as quickly as possible with the preliminary investigations and keep you advised as to our progress in this matter.
Again, very many thanks for your attention and with kind regards.
Yours faithfully,
E. C. Carson
Minister.
Then we enter a new era.


An hon. Member:: Carried.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: If the hon. gentleman wants to call "carried", I shall read a few more. Here is a letter dated Victoria, September 25, 1952, and addressed to the Minister of Resources and Development:
Dear Sir:
Will you kindly confirm your statement to me in your office on September 15 that, in your opinion, we should proceed with the construction of the Big Bend highway as quickly as possible.
Again the minister is wanting to get on with the job, urging that the government of British Columbia proceed with the construction of the Big Bend highway as quickly as possible. The letter continues:
Further, that in the event of the building of the Mica dam, all of the cost of relocating and constructing an alternative route of the Big Bend highway would be completely paid for by the agency constructing the dam.
I may further state that our engineers have not been able to find any suitable pass to change the main body of this Big Bend highway.
I would like to say in closing that I certainly appreciated the very fine interview afforded me while in Ottawa.
Hoping to renew acquaintances sometime in the future.
Yours very truly,
F. A. Gaglardi
Minister.
The minister replied to Mr. Gaglardi on October 9, 1952. The letter reads as follows: Dear Rev. Gaglardi:
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 25 and confirm our conversation in my office on September 15.

Supply-Resources and Development
Under the definition, set forth in the agreement, the trans-Canada highway must follow the shortest practical route from east to west across Canada. Since I know of no alternative practical route between Golden and Revelstoke, X must conclude that the Big Bend is still the shortest practical route.
Under the circumstances, I am agreeable to the proposal that it be incorporated as part of the trans-Canada highway. Under the terms of the agreement, Canada will, of course, pay half the cost of completing it in accordance with schedule B of the agreement.
With respect to the possibility of the road being relocated as a result of a dam at Mica creek, I think the best way in which I can confirm our conversation is to forward to you a copy of my letter of February 1, 1951, to your predecessor, the Hon. E. C. Carson, together with a copy of Mr. Carson's reply, dated March 2, 1951.
May I reciprocate the kind remarks expressed in your letter and state that I enjoyed the privilege of meeting you whilst you were in Ottawa.
Yours very truly,
Robert H. Winters.
Then Mr. Gaglardi wrote to the minister on October 23, 1952. The letter reads as follows:
Dear Mr. Winters:
I have for acknowledgment your letter of October 9 and wish to thank you for the same.
I am certain that the information forwarded to me is sufficient and I will work away on the Big Bend, hoping for the speedy completion of same.
Thank you again for your letter.
Yours very truly,
P. A. Gaglardi, Minister.
On October 25 the Minister of Resources and Development wrote to Mr. Gaglardi:
Dear Mr. Gaglardi:
I am enclosing a copy of a group picture taken at the federal-provincial trans-Canada highway engineers' conference held in Ottawa on September 15, 16 and 17. I believe the meetings served a most useful purpose and were helpful to all concerned and I wish you would convey to your officials my thanks for their co-operative and constructive approach to the various problems.
This meeting provided a valuable opportunity to exchange views on the technical aspects of the trans-Canada highway construction. Moreover, I feel that meetings such as this have the added value of enabling highway officials from coast to coast to know one another personally and to appreciate those regional problems which are a special characteristic of any large joint undertaking in a country the size of Canada.
With kindest regards, I am
Yours sincerely,
Robert H. Winters.
Then on November 5, Mr. Gaglardi wrote to the minister:
Dear Mr. Winters:
I wish to acknowledge your letter of October 25 enclosing the photograph of those attending the highway engineers' conference. I certainly appreciate having the picture and it gives me a chance to remember the many that I met in the much enjoyed short stay I had at Ottawa.
[Mr. Herridge.j
Thank you again for being so kind. Hoping that all goes well with you in your very important work at Ottawa.
Yours very truly,
P. A. Gaglardi, Minister.
Then on March 14, 1953, the Minister of Resources and Development addressed a letter to Mr. Gaglardi. It reads as follows: Dear Mr. Gaglardi:
The highway construction season is rapidly approaching and I find that as yet we have not received any definite information regarding British Columbia's plans for new construction projects on the trans-Canada highway during 1953.
I expect that my departmental estimates will come up for review in the House of Commons within the next two or three weeks. During discussions of them I am frequently asked for details of the proposed work and the expenditures involved in the various provinces. I think it would be in our mutual interest as well as the public interest if I were able to give as much information as possible about the year's program.
I would, therefore, appreciate having you inform me at an early date as to what new work is planned for the trans-Canada highway and the estimated total expenditure in British Columbia for the fiscal year 1953-54. Such information will, of course, be regarded as an estimate rather than a firm commitment.
Yours sincerely,
Robert H. Winters.
Then Mr. Gaglardi replied on March 20 as follows:
Dear Mr. Winters:
I have for acknowledgment your letter of March 14.
I am very pleased to enclose herewith a copy of our trans-Canada highway program for 1953-54.
You will understand, I am sure, that the amounts allocated to each project are only estimated and must not be construed as commitments. The estimate does, however, convey the estimated total amount of cash that it is expected will be expended on the trans-Canada during the coming year.
With kindest personal regards.
Very truly yours,
P. A. Gaglardi.
Then this concluding letter dated April 13, 1953, from Mr. Gaglardi as follows:
Dear Mr. Winters:
I believe you have been receiving considerable corespondence on the Big Bend section of the trans-Canada highway and because of this I would like to let you know what we are doing concerning this piece of road this year.
There is still a chance that there may be a shorter route so I am sending my chief engineer in the vicinity in the immediate future to check on the possibility of going through the Illecillewaet pass.
Anyone who knows that country knows that it is completely impracticable to go through the Illecillewaet pass. The C.P.R. had to build a five-mile tunnel and overhead sheds to keep off the snow, and the cost of maintenance in the winter months is excessive. If you were to build a highway there,

the road would have to be on a higher level and the maintenance in the winter months would be a serious undertaking. I continue with the letter.
If this could be done it would cut off one hundred miles which would be very desirable. In the event that this cannot be done then I feel that we have explored every alternative avenue and must go ahead with the reconstruction of the Big Bend.
For this year I am going to put on three more graders, so that it will be maintained to a very high standard and also expect to spend in the neighbourhood of $200,000 on calcium chloride, so as to give the whole section a dust-free surface for the summer months while it is heavily travelled.
We are building two bridges at the northern end and I thought this information would be welcome by you, so that you would know just exactly what we are doing.
With kind personal regards.
Very truly yours,
P. A. Gaglardi.
As a result of that the Revelstoke chamber of commerce and the people of Revelstoke have become completely fed up, and recently the following resolution was passed:
Petition for reconstruction of Big Bend highway by federal government.
Whereas the Big Bend section of the trans-Canada highway has deteriorated because of lack of attention by the provincial government since it was turned over to it by the dominion government following its completion by the dominion government in 1940:
And whereas its reconstruction under the terms of the trans-Canada highway agreement entered into between the two governments in 1950, has been delayed beyond a reasonable length of time because of the attitude of the provincial government in refusing to proceed with the required work because of the suggestion that a dam at Mica creek may flood a portion of the highway some ten or fifteen years hence;
And whereas the dominion government has reaffirmed its contention that the proposed dam should not stand in the way of immediate reconstruction of this important link in the trans-Canada highway;
And whereas it is recognized by boards of trade, chambers of commerce, and tourist organizations that the present deplorable condition of the said highway is diverting millions of dollars in tourist revenue elsewhere;
And whereas the Big Bend section of the trans-Canada highway is the western gateway to Canada's national parks;
Therefore, be it resolved that the Revelstoke board of trade petition the dominion government to assume full responsibility for the immediate reconstruction of the said Big Bend highway, as was done prior to its original completion in 1940 and that the dominion authorities effect such steps as may be required to obtain the necessary compensation from the provincial government for British Columbia's share of such reconstruction.
The people in that district have waited year after year for the paving of that section of the Big Bend. I have just read one resolution that I have received. There are other resolutions and correspondence which show that they are completely fed up with delays.
Supply-Resources and Development The city of Revelstoke is suffering a loss of tourist revenue because this road is not paved. That is also true of Kootenay South, where the people proceed by steamer to Minto and by the Okanagan. While they fully appreciate and recognize that the minister has done all that he can to further the development of the trans-Canada highway in British Columbia, they now believe that nothing is to be done; and once again, as they did in the depression, they will have to turn to the federal government for assistance to complete this section of the Big Bend highway in time for it to be of service to us of this generation.


Charles Edward Johnston: There are a few remarks that I intend to make on this question. Particularly do I want to say something in regard to the trans-Canada highway. It was not my intention to speak on the trans-Canada highway on this occasion, since the session is drawing to a close, but some of the remarks made by the hon. member for Edmonton East have compelled me to say something. It is ten o'clock, Mr. Chairman. Is it understood that we are to go to eleven?


Some hon. Members:: Twelve.


Charles Edward Johnston: I shall try not to be too long, but there are some things that I want to talk about.
To start with, I am very pleased that the hon. member for Edmonton East has taken this opportunity to speak in the house, and to read the speech he just made. The literary content was excellent, and it was well read. It was much better than mine will be, because I am speaking extemporaneously. I am very pleased that the hon. member speaks occasionally, and particularly just before an election. I can assure him that the provincial government of Alberta is one of the few governments that hope to have the trans-Canada highway completed in the coming year. It will be completely hard-surfaced.
It was understood that the selection of the highway would be left to the provinces. That was the agreement with the federal government. When the site was chosen the engineers of the federal government agreed that it was a proper site, and I agree with them entirely. I do not think they could have made a better choice for a trans-Canada than the one they did choose. That is the first trans-Canada highway. My hon. friends in the north, quite a long way north, too, should have another highway. The province of Alberta is looking into that.
The hon. member for Edmonton East seems to be critical of the provincial government's
5332	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development attitude in that regard. This coming year Alberta will be the first province in Canada, we hope, to have trans-Canada highway No. 1 completed. Then they will turn their attention immediately to another proposed highway across Alberta, and they hope that in time it will be developed as the second trans-Canada highway. Surely the hon. member cannot complain about that. He made some reference to the statement which was made by the minister of highways of Alberta. I can assure him that the minister of highways of Alberta did not make any personal remark about the Prime Minister of this country, because the Prime Minister is held in very high regard, and so is the minister of highways of Alberta. But I do not think that either is any more or less respected than the other.
I do not intend to say any more about the trans-Canada highway except that the Minister of Resources and Development is doing everything he can to see that that road progresses. I think he will agree with me that the standard of the trans-Canada highway in Alberta is of the highest and that Alberta has in every way built the trans-Canada to the high standards that are required. The provincial roads in Alberta in many cases are equal to the trans-Canada highway standard, and in some cases go beyond those standards.


An hon. Member:: When did they start?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Charles Edward Johnston: Oh, yes, and I could give the details because I have all the information in my office. Perhaps I will do it tomorrow, although I am not making that as a threat.
There is another matter or two I want to talk about tonight under the estimates of the Department of Resources and Development. One of the greatest national parks, or I would say our greatest national park, is Banff. This year we are spending about a million and a half dollars on tourist advertising in an effort to attract people to come to this country. When you consider that the tourist trade in Canada is worth about $300 million a year you will agree that that is money well spent. When we spend that amount of money to encourage tourists to come to Canada we should make every effort to see that the places they visit are as attractive as possible.
The federal government is not doing very much in Banff national park this year. There is a $125,000 revote under the Department of Public Works for a post office, but that revote has been in the estimates for a number of years. The site has been selected and I


believe the plans and specifications are completed, but year after year it is put off. The people in that community think it is time they had a post office. I admit that there is a post office in the fine administration building which is a credit to that tourist centre, but it is across the bridge on the other side of the river, some way from the central part of town. I think that is one reason the federal government decided there should be a post office in the centre of the town. As I say, the site was selected, they provided a vote, but nothing has been done. Some attention should be given to that matter.
I said that the only vote in the estimates this year was for the post office, but there is something for the trans-Canada highway. That will be a nice highway, and I congratulate the minister. Just before I came down here this session I was down to Banff and I saw where they were fixing up the road in front of the entrance. They are making a nice place of it. I recognize immediately the difficulty the government is having in building a highway through that type of country. It is slow and costly work, but probably we could put on a few more machines to help them out and develop the road a little more rapidly. I am not too critical as far as the trans-Canada highway is concerned because they are making a good road of it.
There are other things which I think we should take into account in thinking of Banff as a national park. There is very little there in the way of tourist attraction. I know the park receives a lot of advertising, which is only proper because it is one of the greatest tourist attractions in Canada, but when a visitor gets there he is sometimes disappointed at the lack of facilities for entertainment. Of course the scenery is magnificent and there is the large swimming pool as well as the upper hot springs, but that is about all there is to entertain the tourist. There is not even a golf course in the national park. I know the Canadian Pacific has one, but you must be a member of the organization before you can use it, and it is not available to tourists. There is not even a tennis court, and there are no facilities for fishing. I am not much of a fisherman, but I can tell whether there are fish in a stream.
Just in that regard I should like to read a short paragraph from the Crag and Canyon of April 17. The article is entitled "Anglers Won't Drop Mystic lake Matter", but I do not intend to refer to Mystic lake. The paragraph I have in mind reads:
They pointed out that Banff was without a good fishing stream, and that if the town was to be continually advertised as a fishing paradise, good fishing grounds within reasonable distance of town should be opened. The matter was tabled for further discussion.

That is a complaint I have had since coming to Ottawa this session, that there is no good place to go fishing. Probably we should do something to increase the fish in the streams in Banff national park so the tourists will be able to enjoy themselves when they come there on their vacations.
There is another project in the park which is making good progress, and I want to congratulate the minister upon the efforts he has put forward to further this enterprise. A private individual wants to open a trout farm which in my opinion would provide an attraction for tourists. It would certainly go a long way toward increasing the very inadequate supply of fish. As this is a private enterprise it will not cost the government anything, and that always sounds good to a government. We are in hopes that the project will be proceeded with. I want to say again that the minister is giving it very favourable consideration, and we hope something will be done.
There is something else I think should be done there, and the minister has also been thinking this over. I want to say a good word for him. It is not often that I have a chance to say anything nice about anyone in this house, and I like to take advantage of any opportunity to do so. The people of Banff have been asking for a wading pool for children, particularly for the children of tourists. It is common knowledge that in almost every other park in Canada and the United States there are wading pools for children. It would not be an expensive undertaking, and it would be an added tourist attraction.
I want to be quite fair and say that the only objection has been raised by the medical health officer, who thought that because of a possible polio outbreak it would not be a good time to start such a project. But there is a wading pool in Waterton Lakes park, and that was kept open. The swimming pools in Banff were kept open. The theatres were closed for a while, but most of these things were kept open in other places, so there is not much reason why we should not start on such a small project which would encourage people to visit our national park.
There is another important matter I want to talk about, and that is cats. This is a very vexatious problem in Banff, as the park authorities have indicated that they are going to place a $5 tax on cats. I never heard of cats being taxed before. In the final analysis I do not think they will be in this instance, but I believe that is how the regulations read at the moment. This has aroused a good deal of feeling in Banff. The Crag and Canyon of March 6 contains an article entitled "Public Furor arises over Pets" which reads:
The rights of cats and cat owners in a national park was the spark that touched off one of the
68108-337i
Supply-Resources and Development
liveliest and most heated public discussions of the year at the monthly meeting of the Banff advisory council Wednesday evening. A capacity crowd packed the music room of the school auditorium.
And then it says this:
General consternation arose when it was stated police and wardens have the right to enter people's property and take pets from doorsteps or even inside homes.
The minister has dealt with this problem to some extent, and I think any invasion of people's private property and homes has already been stopped. I believe the government has taken that action already, to see that such things do not happen again. I do not think the question has yet been settled, however, as to the licence fee to be charged on these animals. It seems to me that $5 is beyond all reason. Tourists are allowed to bring in dogs, and a licence fee of $1 is charged for a period of 30 days when passing through that area. There is no charge levied against cats at all. But when cats become pets of residents in the town of Banff this question comes up: Are they to be licensed, or are they not? If they are, what is that licence fee to be? I think there might be some reason to suggest that there should be some control in respect of cats in the park, because I understand they do attack wildlife in the form of birds and the like. But I think a proper provision could be made and a modest licence fee charged, certainly nothing like $5.
Another matter is raised in this same report, where it says, referring to Mr. Shaw:
But he did agree the department has been at fault in not announcing in the paper and to the council the new regulations to be enforced regarding cats.
I think there should be some very close co-operation between the department and the advisory council of the city of Banff in that, when any such regulation as this is to be put into effect, the park authorities should stay in very close contact with that advisory council. These regulations should be discussed with them, when they are going to be enforced. They should be properly advertised in the newspapers so everyone Will know what is going to happen.
With respect to cats, I understand wardens were going around and picking these cats up. Some of them were being shot. The people did not know that any such regulation had been put into force. The article states:
One accusation was made that wardens have been using steel traps for catching cats, the speaker claiming to have found a cat in one.
Those things only cause irritation, and in my judgment they should not exist. I do not think there is any reason for their existence. Again I wish to say that the minister
5334	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development has been very co-operative and has taken steps now which, I believe, will prevent any recurrence of this situation. I understand now there is closer co-operation between the park authorities and members of the advisory council in Banff.
I suppose it is too late to go farther into the subject now. No doubt both the minister and I will be back here next year, and when we come back I would hope that further efforts will be made to see that this great tourist centre of Banff is given a little more consideration, with a view to making it more attractive to tourists who visit that great national park.


Mr. Dinsdale:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to deal with two items in the estimates of the Department of Resources and Development. The first of these has to do with national parks and is connected with item No. 369 which, in terms of the total amount of the estimates, seems rather insignificant. This item deals with a grant in aid for the development of the international peace garden in Manitoba, and the amount set aside is $10,000.
My reason for making reference to this item is that, in the first instance, to the great distress of a large number of people who were interested in this project, it disappeared from the estimates last year. Then, secondly, it reappears this year at a reduced amount. The original amount was $15,000 and this year, as I have said, it is down to $10,000.
I should like to thank the minister for the attention he has given to this matter. While the amount seems small in comparison with larger sums set aside for other projects in his department, I assure him it means very much to those who are deeply interested in the development of the international peace garden on the border between the province of Manitoba and the state of North Dakota. It is significant that at this same time the House of Representatives in the United States is dealing with an appropriation for a similar purpose. A bill has been introduced in the United States house to provide for an amount of $100,000 which will assist in the development of the American side of this peace garden project. I would say at once that the target of $100,000 which, incidentally, is an appropriation to cover a period of three years, suggests that we in this Canadian House of Commons should consider restoring the grant in respect of the peace garden to its original amount of $15,000, or an even higher sum.
In terms of the value received from the grant, and the significance of the purpose of the peace garden, this is a very small amount indeed. Last year when the appropriation


was withdrawn I made some observations on the subject which I trust hon. members will recall. I shall not repeat those remarks in detail, other than to stress again the fact that this peace garden idea developed spontaneously back in the early thirties, and sprang first from the minds of people in the eastern part of the United States and Canada.
The whole purpose of the project was the preservation of peace. It was conceived to produce a meaningful symbol of the brotherhood of man. After a good deal of exploratory effort the committee in charge of the development of the project located, in what was thought originally to be a God-forsaken part of the country, a natural place of beauty straddling the Manitoba-North Dakota boundary. In 1932 a cairn made from native stone was erected formally initiating the garden. That cairn was inscribed with the following dedication pledge:
To God In His glory
"We two nations dedicate this garden and pledge ourselves that as long as men shall live, we will not take up arms against one another."
There is the emphasis of the peace garden, and I am sure members from all sides of this house will agree that it is a very worthy objective indeed. Last year the corporation and the committee-a voluntary board, I might say, which is largely responsible for sponsoring the garden-faced very difficult circumstances because of the withdrawal of the Canadian grant. They weathered the storm after considerable activity in raising funds in the local district.
From another standpoint the year just past has been an outstanding year for the garden. As a result of the publicity which arose from the withdrawal of the grant there has emerged on both sides of the boundary a new appreciation, a new awareness of the significance of the garden. For example, for the first time last fall, on October 1 to be exact, an international gathering of students was held at the site of the international peace garden, when students from Minot state teachers' college and Brandon college gathered to discuss international affairs. The importance of the gathering will be appreciated when I tell members of the house that the director of the Canadian institute of national affairs considered the gathering of sufficient importance to grace it with his presence. Dr. Edgar Mclnnis was the guest speaker on that occasion.
That was a new step forward in the realization in the purpose of the garden. This year, I understand, another interesting event is

going to take place. The federated women's institute of Canada is meeting in Toronto during the month of August. They are hosts to the countrywomen of the world, an international gathering of women's organizations. They are going to make a pilgrimage to the site of the international peace garden during their deliberations. That, I am sure, will suggest to hon. members that there is a growing appreciation of the symbolism and idealism that lie behind this very worthy project.
Most important, as a result of the publicity that has arisen, I feel certain that the minister himself, members of the government, and members from all sides of the house are now aware that this international peace garden is not a parochial or localized effort but has actually achieved what the description indicates it to be. It is a project, a development of international significance. I do extend an invitation to hon. members and to the minister in particular when he is out in that part of the country to pay a personal visit to the development. I think he will be quite impressed with what is taking place there. Perhaps he has already had the opportunity, I am not sure; but we certainly do extend that invitation.
This is a unique experiment, the only one of the kind in the world. It is North America's living message of good will located at just about the geographic centre of the North American continent. It is located on a highway that is destined to become an artery of tourist travel for the Americas. It is located on the highway that is a direct route to South America, and which will eventually carry right through to the port of Churchill as northern Manitoba is opened up. Becausfe of that it is going to become of increasing significance as a tourist artery.
Now for just a few minutes I wish to turn to the section of the estimates dealing with the Canadian government travel bureau. On this north to south highway, which is destined to become the tourist artery of the mid-continent region, we have perhaps the outstanding national park of all the national parks in the country, the Riding Mountain national park. Judging from its increasing popularity it is regarded as one of the major beauty spots in Canada. Everyone in the house is familiar with Banff, located in the Rocky mountain region. It is significant that Riding Mountain national park in a relatively obscure part of Canada draws the largest number of tourists next to Banff each year; and the trend has been ever onward and upward in recent years.
Supply-Resources and Development
Statistics show that the number of tourists visiting the Banff area in 1951 was 439,661. In 1952 the figure increased to 539,147, a total increase of 99,486. In 1951 Riding Mountain national park in the northern area of Manitoba had 334,059 visitors. In 1952 it had 389,163, an increase of 55,074. It should be noted that this was achieved with a minimum of publicity because, while Banff is internationally famous as a tourist centre, I am sure there are many areas in Canada and in the United States where people have not heard of the beauties of Riding Mountain national park. A radio commentator recently said that Riding Mountain national park is the most beautiful but the least publicized of all national parks in Canada. I believe the only booklet of the department which deals with Riding Mountain national park is the booklet called "Playgrounds of the prairies" dealing with all prairie national parks.
I understand that the department has recently initiated a radio program which is being very favourably received across the country, and it may be that they have given some special publicity to the Riding Mountain area. There does seem to be a need for a separate publication featuring this park which, with a minimum of publicity, has already attracted widespread attention and is recognized by those privileged to visit the area as being close to the outstanding if not the outstanding park in our Canadian national park series.
I think the Riding Mountain national park and the peace garden development are very closely interrelated. It is a part of this rapidly developing tourist artery which in the next decade or two will see thousands of American tourists-not only tourists from the United States but tourists from Mexico and South America-swarming into the central part of Canada to see the beauties of that area. I am sure the government is aware of this fact, because I notice in the estimates of the Department of Public Works an appropriation of some $160,000 which will eventually be used to construct a new customs port on the border to stand directly opposite the entrance to the international peace garden. This would indicate that in the very near future the government contemplates a great upsurge in tourist traffic, and is going to prepare for it by supplying adequate customs facilities.
I do not know whether or not the minister has ever thought of this next suggestion, but when we were discussing the national historic sites act, I thought if museums are going to be established at strategic places
533G	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development across Canada perhaps the site of the international peace garden might be the logical location for such a museum, in view of the large number of people who will be coming to that area.
So far as the preservation of relics of the early history of this country is concerned, Manitoba is relatively far behind. I know that in my own district of Brandon quite recently well preserved Indian burial grounds have been discovered with various cultural artifacts which belonged to the Indian dwellers of this country before the coming of the white man. These burial grounds are rich storehouses of the early history of this country. If these relics could be gathered into some central museum located in a strategic place in Manitoba, I am sure we would be able to preserve a record of the historic development of that part of Canada which, up to date, has had very little emphasis placed upon it and which because of neglect are rapidly becoming lost.
Those are the two matters that I wished to mention briefly. I need not prolong the discussion further, Mr. Chairman, except to re-emphasize that this main street of the Americas, as I am sure it will be called, will soon teem with tourist traffic. There will be a highway running from South America right up to port Churchill. With the mining developments taking place in the northern regions we are bound to have a highway development in that area shortly.
I venture to prophesy that this continuous north-south highway will become the main street of the Americas. My brief reference to some of the important places such a highway would serve has indicated, I trust, its growing importance. It would touch the international peace garden, the city of Brandon, the garden city of the west, Flin Flon, Lynn Lake and port Churchill, places which in themselves are fruitful sources of tourist attraction.
I suggest to the minister that the developments taking place in this area should be regarded as intimately interrelated and carefully nurtured. I am sure he will never regret the fact that the peace garden grant has been at least partly restored this year.


Mr. Winters:: I simply wish to thank all hon. members who have taken part in the discussion, and say that this indicates a gratifying interest in the work of the Department of Resources and Development. The discussion has covered a very wide field, most of which could perhaps more appropriately be considered when the particular item is before the house. I shall, therefore, refrain from answering at this time and will


relate any answers I have to the particular item as it is called. I think perhaps that will allow for a more orderly discussion, and any individual who is so tenacious as to be reading Hansard at this late hour can relate the remarks to the item under discussion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National parks branch-
366. Administration, operation and maintenance, $3,975,609.
William Joseph Browne: May I ask
if anything has been done recently in regard to the establishment of national parks in Newfoundland? I have seen the correspondence that was handed down recently; has there been any change?


Robert Henry Winters: Nothing has been since then, Mr. Chairman.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering and water resources branch-
383. Administration, operation and maintenance, $455,601.
William Joseph Browne: I wonder if the minister could tell me something about the trans-Canada highway so far as Newfoundland is concerned, and how much of it has been constructed. Has the minister any knowledge about what is going ahead this year?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member for Edmonton East in his remarks early this evening discussed the route of the trans-Canada highway in western Canada. I thought perhaps he would expect me to make a brief reply to that. All hon. members know that the hon. member for Edmonton East has been a consistent advocate for many years of the route through Edmonton and thence down the Yellowhead pass.
The route of the trans-Canada highway, however, was chosen in the first instance by the provincial governments, subject only to the requirements of the definition that it shall conform to the shortest practical east-west route. The western provinces got together and, by themselves, decided that the trans-Canada highway route should go east-west through Regina, Calgary, the Kicking Horse pass, thence to Vancouver, thence to Nanaimo and terminate at Victoria. There was no reason for the federal government not to accept that route, and we informed the provincial governments accordingly. That is now the route of the trans-Canada highway, and good progress is being made in the western provinces.
Hon. members might be interested in the fact that the contractual commitments for

the trans-Canada highway have passed the $100 million mark. The latest provincial highway estimates passed on May 13 by the trans-Canada highway division have brought the total up to $103,004,917.


Howard Charles Green: Is that for both the federal and provincial governments?


Robert Henry Winters: That is correct; it represents commitments on Canada's part for $51,502,458, of which almost $34 million has been paid already to the provinces. Plans for 1953 call for a further expenditure of approximately $50 million, which is the actual construction program. Since the work on the highway began three years ago, the indications are that the over-all picture this year will show a substantial gain.
Now, with respect to the progress to date by provinces, in Newfoundland the total commitment is $8,208,000-I am giving only to the nearest thousand in each instance. The federal share is half of the figure I give for the total commitment, and in the case of Newfoundland Canada's share paid to date is $2,583,700. For Prince Edward Island, the total commitment is $2,124,000 and Canada's share paid to date is $963,000; for New Brunswick the total commitment is $5,542,000 and Canada's share paid to date is $1,759,000; for Ontario the relative figures are $38,428,000, and Canada's share paid to date is $11,877,000; Manitoba, $5,207,000, and Canada's share paid to date, $2,077,000; Saskatchewan, total commitments, $9,416,000; Canada's share paid to date, $2,999,000. Alberta, total commitments, $10,662,000; Canada's share paid to date, $3,864,000. British Columbia, total commitments, $23,419,000; Canada's share paid to date, $7,827,000.


George Harris Hees: Can the minister give us an estimate as to when he expects this trans-Canada highway to be completed?


Robert Henry Winters: As the hon. member may know, the seven-year period started on December 10, 1949. That is the period covered by the legislation.


George Harris Hees: Are we up to date or on schedule?


Robert Henry Winters: Some provinces are and some provinces are not. There is no reason to believe that there is any province that could not finish in the time allowed if it undertook trans-Canada highway work perhaps to the exclusion of other work. But they still have some four more construction years to go, and good progress is now being made.


Howard Charles Green: When will the gap in northern Ontario be closed?


An hon. Member:: Ask Hees.
Supply-Resources and Development


Robert Henry Winters: It is difficult for me to say that, because that is the responsibility of the government of Ontario.


George Harris Hees: Then it will be done on time, Mr. Chairman.


Robert Henry Winters: We hope so.


George Harris Hees: Ahead of schedule.


Robert Henry Winters: I am sure the Ontario government attaches the proper weight to that important section of the road. We have been urging upon them that the gap should be closed at the earliest possible date. I understand that this year they are making surveys in that section between Chapleau and White River, and that they are aiming at closing the gap at as early a date as possible consistent with the load of other work they have.


Howard Charles Green: How long is the gap?


An hon. Member:: About as long as Hees.


George Harris Hees: Those horses are sneaking back.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


John Horne Blackmore: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the minister a question?


Howard Charles Green: Wait a minute.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Order.


An hon. Member:: Tell them anything. They would not know the difference.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is a typical Liberal attitude.


Robert Henry Winters: I think I have figures here which will give the hon. member some of the information he wishes. For example, from Port Severn to Nobel there is a distance of 48 miles where clearing and grubbing is 50 per cent complete. Nothing more has been done. From Nobel to French River, 56 miles, grading has been completed. From French River to Sudbury, which is 46 miles, grading has been 50 per cent completed. From Sudbury to 3 miles west of McKerrow, 51 miles, grading is 80 per cent completed. Those are the areas in which work is needed to be done. The total distance between Chapleau and Terrace Bay that is not considered to be passable is 218 miles. There is another section between French River and Burwash of 20 miles which is not passable; and on the other section to which I referred, between Port Severn and Parry Sound, there is a distance of 50 miles which is not considered to be passable.


Howard Charles Green: So there are about 300 miles which are still not passable?


Robert Henry Winters: That is right.
5338	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development


Howard Charles Green: That is the only part of the road from coast to coast that is not passable. Is that not right?


Robert Henry Winters: That is correct.


William Joseph Browne: Mr. Chairman-


Robert Henry Winters: I understand there are small gaps in Newfoundland that are not passable.


William Joseph Browne: That is what I was going to say. The minister mentions small gaps. How small are they?


An hon. Member:: How small is a small gap?


William Joseph Browne: Then of course there are rivers to cross.


An hon. Member:: One more river to cross.


William Joseph Browne: I was going to ask the minister also, while he is speaking, if he can tell us whether the road to Gander from the St. John's side or from the Port aux Basques side is likely to be the sooner accomplished?


Robert Henry Winters: I did not hear the last part of the question.


William Joseph Browne: From which direction does the minister think the road to Gander will be finished first? It is important,
I think, that there should be a highroad either from St. John's or from Port aux Basques to Gander, and especially from St. John's because of the fact that so many people travel to that city.


Robert Henry Winters: The total length that is considered to be not passable is between Flat Bay and Tompkins, a distance of 73 miles; and then between Clarenville and Gander, another length of 83 miles. With respect to the last question-


William Joseph Browne: The minister does not need to answer any more. I know the situation now.


John Horne Blackmore: Can the minister tell us why it is that apparently the dominion government is a little bit behind the provinces in the amount of money spent? Is there any reason why that should be so?


Robert Henry Winters: Payments are made only as claims are made. We are not behind in the amount of money spent. The figures for the total commitments were just for the total amount of the contracts that had been let. That does not necessarily mean that the provincial governments have spent money with respect to those contracts. They may have spent some. But it is just the contractual commitments, and the figures I quoted as Canada's share has been paid only when 

claims are submitted by the provincial government.


Louis-René Beaudoin: The hon. member for St. John's East.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The thing I want to say to the minister is this. He knows, as we all do, that the standards have been let down on the new road going through Newfoundland. I wonder why he does that. Apparently the minister of transport in Newfoundland-and when I say the minister of transport I mean the minister of public works of Newfoundland, Mr. Spencer -has had consultations with the minister and the minister has agreed that the standards will be let down. I do not think that is right. I will not say a word further until I hear what the minister has to say, first of all.


Robert Henry Winters: I do not think it is quite correct to say that the standards have been let down. The agreement calls for a certain specification and within that specification there is flexibility, as the hon. member knows. Provision is made whereby a concession may be granted in any province with respect to particular lengths of highway where difficulties of construction and economic factors make it desirable to do so. There is no province participating in this agreement that has not asked for some concession at some particular point along the road. If the economic conditions warrant it, certainly those concessions are granted.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Under these circumstances, are we in Canada going to believe that we have a trans-Canada highway and end up by finding that some roads are almost impassable owing to certain difliculties that have arisen in certain provinces? Are we going to have a trans-Canada highway to which all taxpayers have contributed and of which we can be justly proud from coast to coast, or are we fooling the public again?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I might just say that if there is any fooling of the public it is not being done by us.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: I am asking, is there any fooling? If the minister says there is, then who is trying to fool the public?


Robert Henry Winters: I do not think there is any fooling of the public being done on the trans-Canada highway. The specification calls for an optimum of 24-foot paved surface with 10-foot shoulders on each side. In the case of every province we have encouraged adherence to the 24-foot paved surface and the 10-foot shoulders, although the specifications stipulate that the minimum may be a 22-foot paved surface.

In Ontario, for example, the department of highways feels that the optimum paved width should be 22 feet. They consider that there is some element of danger in a 24-foot surface because they believe it constitutes an invitation to three-lane driving. We think, and the experience elsewhere has been, that a 24-foot surface provides more comfortable driving and a safer highway; but within the limits of provincial practice-and certainly it is not our intention to impose our views over and above provincial practice which has been long established in the field of highways -there is room for tolerances both ways, and all in all when the trans-Canada highway is completed it will be in every province a highway that is a credit not only to the people of that province but to the people of Canada.


Howard Charles Green: I have one question about the trans-Canada highway in British Columbia. The present route between Golden and Revel-stoke is around the Big Bend and, as the minister knows, the United States has been trying to get Canada to agree to the use of the Columbia river watershed for power purposes. If there ever is a full-scale agreement between the two countries the highway will be flooded.


Robert Henry Winters: Part of it will.


Howard Charles Green: Apparently in the meantime no attempt is being made to bring this highway into first-class condition. The hon. member for Kootenay West said tonight what an unfortunate thing that is, because it is just preventing tourist traffic from going that way. It may be years before a decision is reached with regard to the use of the Columbia water system. What is to be done about the trans-Canada highway? Is it to be re-routed, or will it be necessary to wait for a period of years until it is known whether or not Canada and the United States are going to reach an agreement about the use of the water?


Robert Henry Winters: The attitude of the federal government is pretty clearly set forth in the correspondence read by the hon. member for Kootenay West this evening. We have been pressing from the outset to have the trans-Canada highway completed between Golden and Revelstoke. At the present time it follows the route of the Big Bend. There is a potential damsite at Mica creek on the northwest corner of the Big Bend, and British Columbia is understandably reluctant to commit itself to heavy permanent expenditures as long as there is a possibility of having that road, or part of the road, flooded out if that Mica creek dam is built.
I have told them repeatedly that in the first place the dam is a long-term project, and in the second place, if it is built there will be full compensation to British Columbia for any
Supply-Resources and Development part of that highway that is flooded out, and that in the circumstances they would be fully justified in getting on with the completion of the Big Bend section; and that is our attitude. I am in a position therefore to agree with my hon. friend.


Gordon Francis Higgins: I am not quite satisfied with the reply of the minister. As I understand the situation, the minister and the minister of public works of Newfoundland had a consultation, and they agreed that owing to conditions in Newfoundland the standards of the trans-Canada highway there would be reduced. I want to ask the minister this definitely and positively without any possibility of making a mistake about things. I do not think it is right; I do not think it should be permitted. In making his statement did the minister of public works make it correctly?


Robert Henry Winters: The correspondence with Newfoundland has been tabled on one occasion, if not two, and surely it speaks for itself. I am sure the hon. member is familiar with it, and I am prepared to stand behind the statement I made this evening.


Gordon Francis Higgins: With all due respect to the minister, either he or the department of public works of Newfoundland is making a mistake. I do hope the minister will not let down the standards. He is supposed to have agreed to let down the standards. That is the statement that is made, and we do not want that to happen.


Robert Henry Winters: It is our plan to have a good quality of road in Newfoundland.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Forestry branch-
399. To provide for contributions to the provinces for assistance in forest inventory and reforestation in accordance with agreements that have been or may be entered into by Canada and the provinces, $1,225,000.
Clayton Wesley Hodgson: Can the minister tell us how this is distributed by provinces?


Robert Henry Winters: Yes. Perhaps hon. members would be interested to know the progress of development under these agreements. The contributions by the federal government to provincial forest inventory and reforestation programs, during the second year of the five-year forestry agreements with eight of the provinces of Canada, exceeded $1 million. This represents an increase of more than 25 per cent over the previous year.
The federal-provincial agreements, made under authority of the Canada Forestry Act, are designed to assist the provinces toward the sustained-yield management of their forests. An inventory survey to determine the extent and nature of the forest resources
5340	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development is a first step in this direction. Federal contributions to the extent of one-half the cost of inventory programs, carried out in accordance with approved specifications, were made to the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia in the year ended March 31, 1953. The total federal payment for this purpose amounted to $926,127.
Inventory work carried out by these provinces during the year included air photography covering nearly 107,000 square miles, field surveys in an area of 135,000 square miles, preparation of forest maps for 107,000 square miles, and inventory reports covering 46,000 square miles. Forest inventories under the agreements, which are to cover a gross area currently estimated at some 930,000 square miles, are now roughly half completed.
The federal government is also assisting in the reforestation of unoccupied crown lands by paying to the provinces $10 per thousand trees planted and $1 per acre seeded on such areas, provided the province's share of the program is not reduced below the average level of the past three years, and in addition the federal government pays one-fifth of the cost of establishing and operating new provincial forest nurseries. In the case of Prince Edward Island, where special conditions prevail, the federal government is sharing with the province, on an equal basis, the cost of a program for the reforestation of waste lands. In addition to Prince Edward Island, payments for reforestation in 1953-54 were made to Nova Scotia, Ontario, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan, the total amount being $102,109. Nearly 9J million trees were planted and two new nurseries were established in the provinces under the federal-provincial agreements during the year.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the minister say whether he has had anything done during the past year with respect to a matter which I have raised a number of times under this section of his estimates? I refer to the question of having some research done on the incidence of fire to the use of tailor-made cigarettes. I hesitate to repeat the speech I have made several times already, as I am sure the minister remembers my arguments.
I might mention that I had support from others in the house, even no less than the hon. member for Comox-Alberni. Has the minister done anything about this in the past year?


Robert Henry Winters: We have. I am not sure that we have achieved much by way of results, but we have done considerable investigating of the problem with the national research council, the cigarette manufacturers and


*others. The problem appears to be a most difficult one. I have a memorandum here which I have had prepared on the subject, and if hon. members are interested I will read it. But I repeat that we have done a considerable amount of looking into the problem and have talked with the people I have mentioned. I hope further progress can be made, but to date there has not been very much to report.


Stanley Howard Knowles: At this point I would not ask that the debate be extended, and I do not think that a memorandum like that should be put on Hansard without being read. Perhaps the minister would send me a copy and I shall take up the matter with him again at the next session if he is still here.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Canadian government travel bureau-
406. To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada, $1,528,450.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Could the minister indicate if anything special is being done by way of publicity for Riding Mountain park?


Robert Henry Winters: In his very good dissertation on the general tourist assets of the province of Manitoba the hon. member for Brandon referred to the Riding Mountain national park as being a great asset. He referred also to the peace garden. I agree with him that both these developments are great assets. Riding Mountain national park attracted more tourists last year than any other park in Canada save only the great park at Banff.
This year for the first time we have undertaken a series of radio programs through the Canadian government travel bureau built around the national parks and designed to stimulate in Canadians an appetite to see Canada. We have national parks in all provinces but two, and they seem to be an ideal medium for picturing Canada to Canadians, the general attractions there and the advantages for tourist travel right here in our 'own country. This program has extended over a period of 13 weeks and will conclude next week. There were at least two broadcasts, perhaps three, when half the time of the program was devoted to Riding Mountain national park. We have had literature prepared on the park for general distribution and motion pictures have been made by the national film board showing the beauties of Riding Mountain national park, just as there are for all other national parks in Canada. I think it has had a fair share of the advertising that has been done in Canada, and I contend the results bear that out. The park straddles highway No. 10, to which my hon. friend referred as the highway of the Americas.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: The main street.


Robert Henry Winters: It is a good highway upon which we have spent a considerable amount of money. I think it is a highway which meets with general satisfaction.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
408. To provide for the expenses incurred by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation in constructing and supervising construction of married quarters, schools and related services on behalf of the Department of National Defence, $700,000.
Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Chairman, the matter I should like to mention here is being raised at your personal invitation. I sought to raise this several weeks ago in the debate on the bill to amend the National Housing Act, and you then suggested that I should allow it to stand until we came to the estimates of this department.
I can assure you that I do not propose to discuss it at length. During this session, within the past month we have had two debates on housing, one on the resolution stage that preceded the introduction of the bill to amend the housing act, then a further debate on the second reading of that bill and in committee of the whole.
The matter I should like to raise particularly arises out of certain questions and answers which appear at page 820 of Hansard of December 17, 1952. These questions were put by the hon. member for Wentworth and relate to the construction of the head office of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. The questions and answers are as follows:
1.	What was the price paid for the land upon which the head office building of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is being erected?
Answer: An average of $824.30 per acre.
2.	What is the size of the property?
Answer: 281-5 acres.
3.	What acreage will be covered by the building?
Answer: The building and its grounds cover
21-3 acres.
4.	What will be the completed cost of the building?
Answer: The construction contract is not yet closed. Estimated completed cost is $2 million.
5.	What will the auditorium cost?
Answer: The auditorium is part of the general contract and is estimated to cost approximately $40,000.
6.	What will the dance floor in the auditorium cost?
Answer: The recreation floor is part of the general contract and the central section which is a spring floor is estimated to have cost about an additional $2,500 more than standard floor construction.
7.	What will be the completed cost of landscaping the grounds surrounding the building?
Answer: The landscaping is incomplete. The estimated completed cost, $35,000.
My concern is principally with questions 4, 5, 6 and 7. As to question 4, may I ask the minister if he is now in position to state the final cost of the construction? Second, what
Supply-Resources and Development was the cost of erecting the auditorium? Will he give the committee some of the specifications of the auditorium? Then I have a matter I should like to raise with respect to question No. 6, "What will the dance floor in the auditorium cost?" The answer to that question was designed astutely to avoid calling the floor a dance floor by referring to it as a recreation floor.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Turn handsprings on it, or what?


Donald Methuen Fleming: I think we can depend upon the minister to outline what other forms of recreation it is intended to carry out on the floor in question. I ask the minister to state clearly to this committee what additional cost was incurred in the construction of this floor. We are told in the answer to question 6 that it cost about an additional $2,500 more than standard floor construction because of the spring floor. I hope the minister will enlarge on that subject, because spring floors do not go with every form of recreation.
I think the minister knows my views on this subject. I do not think it is proper to use the funds of the taxpayers of Canada to build lavish structures. We know that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has a very important task assigned to it. It has become an exceedingly important government agency and has great responsibilities, and it is only proper that the corporation should be furnished with adequate accommodation. There are occasions when inadequate accommodation does give rise to inefficient operation and administration and in that way actually increases the cost of operation. But it seems to me that is a far cry from the sort of construction that has been revealed in the answers to these questions. *


Robert Henry Winters: The questions my hon. friend raises are valid ones, and I would imagine that the type of building built on the Montreal road for the use of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation would be bound to raise some question, because it is different in appearance from any building in the Ottawa area now. Anything that is different naturally evokes questions.
There seemed to be a very real need for additional accommodation in Ottawa for government services. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation was one of those services which was housed in temporary building No. 4; and I think the hon. member for Eglinton will agree they were inadequately housed. Any additional space put up in the Ottawa area could be used to advantage, whether by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation
5342	HOUSE OF
Supply-Resources and Development or by some other department or agency of government.
This problem was studied carefully, and the building that was erected is one that is economical as to space and economical as to cost of construction, compared with other buildings that were put up at the same time for office accommodation.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Where?


Robert Henry Winters: In the Ottawa area.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I thought this was different from any other.


Robert Henry Winters: It is different in type, but on a per cubic foot basis the cost of construction is modest. The utilization of space in the building is particularly good. I would invite the hon. member to go there some time, if he has not already had the opportunity, so he may see the manner in which the space is utilized. As part of the accommodation there is a general auditorium which is used for recreational purposes. Among other things it has badminton courts laid out on the floor.


Donald Methuen Fleming: How many?


Robert Henry Winters: There are two courts. I do not know what importance my hon. friend attaches to recreation in that form; that is a matter that he and the taxpayers can decide for themselves. There was no suitable accommodation for that type of recreation in that area.
Of course it can be used for dancing as well. It is not primarily a dance floor, but as I say it can be used for dancing. Modern practice in respect of a floor of that kind, for recreational purposes, is to instal what is called a spring floor. Perhaps this gives the wrong interpretation. It is mounted on two sets of sleepers, with strips of steel between, which give the floor the effect of having some cushioning, and for that reason it is referred to as a spring floor. That construction cost some $2,500 more than if the floor had been rigid and built solidly into the construction.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Would the minister indicate the cost of construction of the floor, so that we may know the total cost of construction of this particular floor by adding the $2,500 to it.


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I am sorry, but I have not that information before me this evening. I would be glad to bring it tomorrow and give it to the hon. member.


Donald Methuen Fleming: We had better let the item stand until tomorrow morning.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: To your knowledge are there any other government buildings being constructed by the government in or around Ottawa that have this kind of floor, built for


the sake of their employees for purposes of dancing or badminton? Are there any other buildings, to the minister's knowledge, which are being constructed with this type of floor?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, there are none to my knowledge; but that does not mean there are not any.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Does the minister feel that this will be a precedent from now on, and that all government buildings will be equipped with spring floors for dancing or for badminton? The poor old taxpayer is having a bad enough time trying to pay his taxes, and he has only an ordinary floor. Certainly it is going some distance when we build a floor of that kind. Here we have a special floor for government employees to play badminton and dance in their leisure hours, so the taxpayer can pay for his own floors on which he operates his business to get the money to pay his taxes. Surely that's the limit.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It has been suggested that this item stand until tomorrow. I have a word or two to say on the housing item, and I draw attention to the fact that it is now 11.15.


Louis-René Beaudoin: There are two items relating to the national film board.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Yes, I had forgotten about them.


Robert Henry Winters: Before we rise I wish to say, in reply to the hon. member, that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is located some distance from the city at a point where there are, among other things, cheaper land values. And I am sure the Canadian taxpayer, in the over-all picture, has not suffered because Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has the type of building it has.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: But when you start experimenting, Mr. Minister, with all these fandangles, and things of that nature, someone will say next, "Oh, let's stud it with diamonds, and see whether they like it or not."


Donald Methuen Fleming: It has been constructed far from the centre of population in the city. I should think that must be a hardship for those who have to go all that distance for their recreation.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Is it the wish of hon. members to carry the other two items, and to have item 408 stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Then there is a supplementary item relating to general services. That is item 727. Then there are items 247 and 248.


Donald Methuen Fleming: I would like to say something on item 727. I suggest it should stand with this one about which we have been speaking.


Louis-René Beaudoin: And what about items 247 and 248?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Then there is item 541 to provide for advances to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.


Donald Methuen Fleming: It should stand with the others.


Louis-René Beaudoin: And item 763 in the supplementary estimates relates also to Central Mortgage.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It had better stand.


Louis-René Beaudoin: And item 546, relating to the Financial Administration Act, to be known as the Eskimo loan fund.


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


Louis-René Beaudoin: Therefore items 408, 727, 541 and 763 are to stand and to be considered tomorrow.


Gordon Francis Higgins: Will the dance floor stand until tomorrow morning?
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Joseph Henry Harris: Tomorrow we shall take up the remaining estimates in resources and development, and then justice, national revenue, labour, and citizenship and immigration, in that order. And we would appreciate the continued co-operation of hon. members in the opposition so that we may conclude at the earliest possible moment.


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

[Stage Direction]
132.	Information and educational service, including $3,000 for grants to fisheries exhibitions, $131,380.
133.	Markets and economics service, $211,815.
134.	Administrative expenses of the Newfoundland fisheries board, $16,750.
135.	Industrial development service, $250,000.
Field services-
136.	Field services administration, $468,900. Protection branch-
137.	Operation and maintenance, $2,958,000.
138. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $187,250.
Inspection branch-
139.	Operation and maintenance, $913,955.
140. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $17,050.
Supply
Fish culture and development branch-
141.	Operation and maintenance, $665,400.
142. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $286,800.
143.	Consumer branch, $67,545.
144.	To provide for the destruction of harbour and gray seals, $30,000.
Fisheries research board of Canada-
145.	Headquarters administration, $119,115.
146.	Operation and maintenance, $1,843,976.
147. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $229,255.
International commissions-
148.	To provide for Canadian share of expenses
of the international fisheries commission appointed under treaty dated January 29,	1937, between
Canada and the United States for the preservation of the north Pacific halibut fisheries, $55,900.
149.	To provide for Canadian share of expenses of the international Pacific salmon fisheries commission appointed under treaty dated May 26, 1930, between Canada and the United States for the protection, preservation and extension of the sockeye salmon fisheries of the Fraser river system, $174,050.
150.	To provide for Canadian share of expenses of the international whaling commission, appointed pursuant to the international convention for the regulation of whaling, dated at Washington, December 2, 1946, $2,500.
151.	To provide for Canadian share of expenses of the international commission for the northwest Atlantic fisheries appointed pursuant to international conventions for the investigation, protection and conservation of the fisheries of the northwest Atlantic ocean, dated at Washington, February 8, 1949, $20,000.
152.	To provide for Canadian share of expenses of the international north Pacific fisheries commission appointed pursuant to the international convention for the high seas fisheries of the north Pacific ocean, dated May 9, 1952, $15,000.
Special-
153.	To provide for operation and maintenance of Newfoundland bait service, $309,195.
154.	To provide for the extension of educational work in co-operative producing and selling among fishermen, $80,000.
155.	To provide for administration expenses of the Fisheries Prices Support Act, 1944, $72,380.
156.	To provide for assistance in the construction of vessels of the dragger and/or long liner type, subject to such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council, $150,000.
157.	To provide for assistance in the construction of bait freezing and storage facilities, subject to the regulations established by the governor in council, $75,000.
542. To authorize and provide for the operation of a revolving fund, in accordance with the provisions of section 58 of the Financial Administration Act, for the purpose of financing the transportation, dressing and dyeing and other expenses incidental to receiving and disposing of fur seal skins accruing to Canada pursuant to provisional fur seal agreement between Canada and the United States by exchange of notes dated December 8, 1942; December 19, 1942, and December 26, 1947; the amount to be charged to the revolving fund at any time not to exceed, $300,000.
Supply
[Stage Direction]
General services-
661. Industrial development	service-further amount required, $1,000,000.
Field services-
Protection branch-
662.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $21,000.
Fish culture and development branch-
663.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $150,000.
Fisheries research board of Canada-
664.	Construction	or	acquisition	of	buildings,
works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $50,000.
665.	To provide for federal share of administrative expenses of the Great Lakes fisheries research committee to be established jointly with the province of Ontario; and to provide for a program designed to eliminate lampreys in the Great Lakes, $60,000.
Special-
666.	To authorize the Minister of Fisheries, on behalf of the government of Canada, to enter into an agreement with the government of Newfoundland, subject to the approval of the governor in council, which shall provide for the operation by Newfoundland of the Newfoundland bait services and which may provide for the transfer to Newfoundland of property pertaining thereto; and to provide for a payment to Newfoundland in accordance with the said agreement, $1,250,000.
765.	To provide for an advance to the government of Nova Scotia in accordance with the terms of an agreement between the government of Canada and the government of Nova Scotia, to be entered into with the approval of the governor in council, in an amount not exceeding one-half of loans made by the government of Nova Scotia to fishermen for the purpose of replacing abnormal losses of equipment suffered by reason of severe weather conditions in the 1951-52 fishing season, $80,000.
Special-
667.	To provide for a contribution towards the cost of construction of a public aquarium at Vancouver, B.C., in accordance with an agreement to be entered into by the Minister of Fisheries with the approval of the governor in council whereby adequate facilities are to be made available to the Fisheries Research Board, the total cost to be borne in equal shares by the government of Canada, the government of British Columbia and the city of Vancouver, the contribution of the government of Canada not to exceed, $100,000.
766.	To authorize and provide for the establishment of one or more special accounts in the consolidated revenue fund for the purposes of a plan to be known as the fishermen's indemnity and loan plan, to be administered in accordance with regulations of the governor in council, for the purpose of assisting fishermen to meet abnormal capital losses; and to authorize payment from the accounts in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with the regulations, of indemnities, loans and administrative expenses, the accounts to be credited with all amounts received by way of premiums, recoveries and repayments, and with advances to the said accounts in accordance with the regulations, such advances not at any time to exceed, $250,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Administration services-
212.	Departmental administration, $420,566. Explosives Act-
Administration-
213.	Explosives Act-administration, operation and maintenance, $87,781.
Mines branch-
214.	Mines branch administration, $75,467.
Mineral resources investigations-
215.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $1,962,603.
216.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $176,600.
Investigations of radioactive ores-
217.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $289,909.
218.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $42,650.
219.	To provide for payments to McGill University in connection with the development of a coal-fired gas turbine, $100,000.
Geological survey of Canada

Geological surveys-
220.	Administration, operation and maintenance, including the expenses of the national advisory committee on research in the geological sciences, and an amount of $1,800 for Canada's share of the cost of the committee on mineral resources and geology, London, England, $1,938,622.
221.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $102,500.
Surveys and mapping branch-
222.	Surveys and mapping branch administration. $45,214.
Topographical surveys, including expenses of the Canadian board on geographical names-
223.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $1,435,114.
224.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $95,000.
Canadian hydrographic service-
225.	Administration, operation and maintenance, including Canada's annual contribution of $5,750 to the international hydrographic bureau, $2,389,576.
226.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $149,805.
Geodetic survey of Canada-
227.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $545,896.
228.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $236,850.
229.	International boundary commission-administration, operation and maintenance, $66,790.
230.	Legal surveys and aeronautical charts- administration, operation and maintenance, including a grant of $350 to the Canadian institute of surveying and photogrammetry and the expenses of the board of examiners for dominion land surveyors and payment of fees of B. W. Waugh, J. E. Lilly and J. E. R. Ross, members of the board, and A. W. Cole, secretary of the board, $729,142.

Map compilation and reproduction-
231.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $677,970.
232.	Construction or acquisition of new equipment, $21,325.
Geographical branch-
233.	Geographical branch-administration, operation and maintenance, $260,368.
Dominion observatories-*
Dominion observatory, Ottawa and field stations-
234.	Administration, operation and maintenance, including membership fee of $500 to the international astronomical union, $415,557.
235.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $102,500.
236.	Dominion astrophysical observatory, Victoria, B.C.-administration, operation and maintenance, $108,981.
General-
237.	Payments to Royal Canadian Air Force and commercial companies for air photography, and to defray the expenses of and the purchase of equipment by the interdepartmental committee on air surveys, $1,100,000.
238.	Provincial and territorial boundary surveys -administration, operation and maintenance, $48,924.
B-Dominion coal board-
239.	Administration and investigations of the dominion coal board, $106,991.
240.	Payments in connection with the movements of coal under conditions prescribed by the governor in council, $6,078,300.
B-Dominion coal board-
676. Payments in connection with the movements of coal under conditions prescribed by the governor in council-further amount required, $2,220,000.

[Stage Direction]
419.	Departmental administration, $216,964.
420.	Companies branch, $84,655.
421.	Trade marks branch, including a contribution of $2,400 to the international office for the protection of industrial property, $91,182.
422.	Bureau for translations, $979,583.
Patent and copyright office-
423.	Administration division, $76,462.
424.	Patent division, $854,456.
425.	Copyright and industrial designs division, including a contribution of $2,100 to the union office for the protection of literary and artistic works, $20,438.
Office of the chief electoral officer-
56. Salaries and expenses of office, $66,070.
Civil service commission-
78. Salaries and contingencies of the commission, $2,018,879.
Public archives-
A-Department-
311.	General administration and technical services, $282,204.
B-Bibliographic centre-
312.	Bibliographic centre (national library), $76,602
Supply
Public printing and stationery-
313.	Departmental administration, $497,818.
314.	Stationery branch-operation of stationery stores, $426,518.
315.	Printing and binding the annual statutes, $40,000.
316.	Canada Gazette, $120,000.
317.	Plant equipment and replacements, $341,518.
318.	Distribution of official documents, $207,839.
319.	Printing and binding official publications for sale and distribution to departments and the public, $430,000.
691.	Plant equipment and replacements-further amount required, $104,323.
692.	Distribution of official documents-further amount required, $6,012.
733.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $5,000.
734.	Companies branch-further amount required, $3,200.
Special-
735.	To provide for special expenditures for all departments in connection with the coronation of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, $1,000,000.

[Stage Direction]
302.	Departmental administration, $1,159,011.
303.	Operations-including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, also including administration, $64,155,723.
304.	Transportation-movement of mail by land, air and water, including administration, $43,110,948.
305.	Financial services, including audit of revenue, money order and savings bank business; and postage stamps, $2,456,306.
689.	Operations-including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs, and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, also including administration-further amount required, $965,080.
690.	Transportation-movement of mail by land, air and water, including administration-further amount required, $2,969,773.

[Stage Direction]
364.	Departmental administration, $399,090. National parks branch-
365.	Branch administration, $23,392.
National parks and historic sites services-
366.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $3,957,609.
367.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $2,898,745.
368.	Grant to the Jack Miner Migratory Bird Foundation, $5,000.
369.	Grant in aid of the development of the International Peace Garden in Manitoba, $10,000.
370.	Special grant to the Antiquarian and Numismatic Society to help defray costs of urgent work for the restoration and preservation of the Chateau de Ramezay, Montreal, $40,000.
371.	National battlefields commission-to provide for special works at Cove Fields, Quebec, $5,000.
[Stage Direction]
Supply
372.	Canadian wildlife service-wildlife resources conservation and development, including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act- administration, operation and maintenance, $339,308.
373.	National museum of Canada-administration, operation and maintenance, $267,692.
Engineering and water resources branch-
374.	Branch administration, $55,526.
Water resources division-
Water resources division, including the administration of the Dominion Water Power and Irrigation Acts.
375.	Administration, operation and maintenance including grant of $350 to the international executive council, world power conference, $601,570.
376.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $41,620.
377.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Columbia river watershed in Canada, $373,300.
378.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Saint John river watershed in Canada, $30,705.
379.	Lake of the Woods control board, $15,270.
380.	To provide for the expenses incurred under the agreement between Canada, Ontario and Manitoba, confirmed by the Lac Seul Conservation Act, 1928, moneys expended to be largely reimbursed, $18,390.
Engineering and architectural division-
381.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $479,929.
382.	To provide, subject to allocation by treasury board, for the design and planning of deferrable projects, the acquisition of sites and the initiation of construction, $200,000.
Trans-Canada highway division-
383.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $455,601.
384.	To provide for surveys and construction of the trans-Canada highway through national parks, $1,000,000.
385.	To provide for general investigations by the Northwest Territories power commission of the electric power requirements of settlements and industries in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory (revote), $1,000.
Northern administration and lands branch-
386.	Branch administration, $104,100.
387.	Lands division-administration of territorial and public lands; seed grain collections, $312,849.
Northern administration division-
388.	Administration, including grants of $5,000 each to the Canadian Handicraft Guild and the Arctic Institute of North America, $194,495.
Northwest Territories, including Wood Buffalo park and Eskimo affairs-
389.	Operation and maintenance, 843,864.
390. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and nw equipment, $2,898,745.
Forest conservation and wildlife management including Wood Buffalo park-
391.	Operation and maintenance, $417,176.
392. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $125,060.
Yukon Territory, including forest conservation-
393.	Operation and maintenance, $527,547.
394. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $143,995.
Forestry branch-
395.	Branch administration, $104,770.
Forest research division-
396.	Operation and maintenance, $900,975.
397. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $47,715.
Forestry operations division-
398.	Administration, operation and maintenance, $98,530.
399.	To provide for contributions to the provinces for assistance in forest inventory and reforestation in accordance with agreements that have been or may be entered into by Canada and the provinces, $1,225,000.
400.	To provide for a contribution to the province of New Brunswick for assistance in a program designed to combat the spruce budworm infestation, in accordance with an agreement to be entered into by Canada and the province, $1,000,000.
Forest products laboratories division-
401.	Operation and maintenance, $525,984.
402.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment, $39,655.
403.	Grant to Canadian Forestry Association,
[Stage Direction]
404.	Grant to Pulp and Paper Research Institute of Canada, $100,000.
Eastern rockies forest conservation board-
405.	Salaries and expenses of federal members of the board, $12,350.
Canadian government travel bureau-
General-
406.	To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada, $1,528,450.
407.	Emergency shelter administration, $35,000. National film board-
247.	Administration, production and distribution of films and other visual materials, $2,883,650.
248.	Acquisition of equipment, $114,000.
Resources and development-
546. To authorize and provide for a continuing special account in the consolidated revenue fund, notwithstanding section 35 of the Financial Administration Act, to be known as the Eskimo loan fund, from which loans or investments may be made to or in respect of individual Eskimos or groups of Eskimos to promote the commercial activities thereof under conditions fixed from time to time by the treasury board and to authorize the crediting to this special account of repayments by or in respect of such individual Eskimo or groups of Eskimos and the readvancing of such moneys; the excess of the amounts charged over the amounts credited to this special account at any time not to exceed, $50,000.
National parks branch-
National parks and historic sites services-
718.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $154,500.
719.	National battlefields commission-to provide for special works at national battlefields parks, Quebec, $4,000.

Engineering and water resources branch-
Water resources division-
720.	To provide for studies and surveys of the Red river basin in Canada, including Assiniboine and Pembina rivers, $27,160.
Engineering and architectural division-
721.	To provide for a contribution to the cost of constructing a dam on the Conestogo river near Glen Allan, Ontario for the purposes of flood control and water conservation in accordance with the terms of an agreement to be entered into between Canada and the province of Ontario, $1,000,000.
722.	To provide for a contribution to the cost of constructing a dam on the Upper Thames river near Fanshawe, Ontario, for the purposes of flood control and conservation in accordance with the terms of an agreement between Canada, the province of Ontario and the Upper Thames river conservation authority, $145,000.
723.	To provide for a contribution by Canada to the improvement and reconstruction of the road
Supply
between Patricia Bay airport, Vancouver island, and the city limits of Victoria, B.C. in accordance with the terms of the agreement between Canada and the province of British Columbia, $48,000.
Northern administration and lands branch- Northern administration division-
Northwest Territories, including Wood Buffalo park and Eskimo affairs-
724. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $44,250.
Forest conservation and wildlife management, including Wood Buffalo park-
725. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $4,050.
Yukon Territory, including forest conservation-
726.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $59,200.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, May 14, 1953