1954-03-16

[Stage Direction]
Fourth and fifth reports of standing committee on banking and commerce.-Mr. Croll.


Mr. John Hunter (Parkdale) moved:: That the petition of Madeleine Roy Julien for a bill of divorce, presented on March 12,	1954,
together with the report made thereon by the clerk of petitions on March 15, 1954, be referred to the standing committee on standing orders for such recommendations as may be deemed advisable.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: wish to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. It arises out of a speech delivered a day or so ago by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson). Was the government of Canada consulted by the United States department of state before the announcement of the mass retaliatory policy by Mr. Dulles in January?


Hon. Brooke Claxion (Acting Prime Minister):: I did not have notice of the question, Mr. Speaker, and I did not have a chance therefore to communicate with the Secretary of State for External Affairs to find out what the facts are. He is in Washington, and will be back here tomorrow night. I think he had better answer the question on Thursday.


DISABLED PERSONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. G. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Has the agreement become effective between the Canadian government and the Saskatchewan government respecting rehabilitation of disabled and physically
handicapped persons and respecting the appointment of a director? If so, what is the effective date?


Hon. Milton F. Gregg (Minister of Labour):: The answer is yes. An agreement between the government of Canada and the government of the province of Saskatchewan, providing for the co-ordination of rehabilitation activities in that province, and federal financial assistance in relation to it and relating to the appointment of a provincial co-ordinator, was signed on August 21, 1953. I am now advised that a provincial co-ordinator on rehabilitation, in the person of Mr. J. S. Probe, was appointed in February by the province of Saskatchewan.


Edward George McCullough: May I
ask a supplementary question? How many other provinces have come under this agreement to date?


Milton Fowler Gregg: The provinces of New Brunswick, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Alberta.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Is the Department of Labour now studying the possibility of including fishermen under the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act?


Milton Fowler Gregg: The answer is yes, that question is now being studied.



COMMUNICATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport, arising out of a telegram which I received today from the Amalgamated Civil Servants of Canada in connection with the transfer of the physical assets of the government telegraph and telephone system of British Columbia. Can the minister say what progress is being made in negotiations with the purchasers regarding the question of
3028	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry seniority and superannuation rights of the employees of the government system, and other related matters?


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport):: I can add nothing to what I have already said in the house in answer to the question which was asked by the hon. member for Vancouver East and also by the hon. member himself. At that time I said that negotiations were proceeding and I hoped it would be possible to effect a transfer by April 1. Since then I have received no information to impart to the house.


Edmund Davie Fulton: May I ask a supplementary question? Will the government give an opportunity to the house to discuss this matter prior to the effective date of transfer, namely April 1?


Lionel Chevrier: I do not think that would be possible, particularly if the agreement between the government and the private companies has not yet been completed. In any event, there will be ample opportunity on one occasion, if not two, to discuss the matter fully.



DUMPING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  A. B. Paiferson@Fraser Valley: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue. In view of information received that customs officials have disclaimed knowledge of regulations governing the importation of great quantities of daffodils into Vancouver, will the minister give assurance that the protest of the British Columbia bulb growers' association is being given consideration and that steps will be taken to remedy the present unsatisfactory situation?


Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: 1 have grave doubts that the customs officials have disclaimed knowledge of the regulations governing the importation of quantities of daffodils into Vancouver, because I have before me copy of order 42, supplement 11, dated December 18, 1953, which went to all appraisers and which gave directions with reference to the importation of flowers.
However, in view of the hon. gentleman's question I would say that the protest of the British Columbia bulb growers' association is being given consideration and steps are being taken to ensure that field daffodils are entered in accordance with the provisions of the Customs Tariff and the Customs Act.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Has the minister as yet any figures available as to the number of those on short time in the textile industry?


Milton Fowler Gregg: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Oxford asked a similar question some time ago and at that time I replied as follows, as reported on page 1489 of Hansard of January 27, 1954:
There was no over-all estimate made based on the labour force survey of the number of people working on a short-time basis in the textile industry.
So that the answer to the hon. member's question is no, but perhaps the following information will bear upon his question. I have looked into this matter further and find that, while we do know the number of people who make claims for unemployment insurance because of short-time employment, this information is not available on an occupational or industry basis. As the hon. member will, I am sure, realize, it would be a large undertaking to maintain such detailed figures on a regular basis.
The best indication that I can give the hon. member of the change in the employment situation in the textile industry over the past year, along the lines he has in mind, is the average hours worked per week this winter compared with last winter. In December, 1952, the average number of hours worked by firms in this industry as reported to the dominion bureau of statistics was 43-7. A year later, in 1953, the average number of hours worked per week had fallen to 40-6. This represents a reduction of 7-1 per cent. The reduction was larger in the cottons branch of the primary textile industry than in the woollens and synthetic and silk sections. The reductions were 11-5 per cent for cottons, 6 [DOT] 3 per cent for woollens, and 5 [DOT] 0 per cent for synthetics and silk.


Mrs. Ellen L. Fairclough (Hamilton West):: Has the Minister of Labour any further information as to the number of people involved in those hours of work?


Milton Fowler Gregg: No. Our figures are not adapted to provide that.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  A. B. Pallerson@Fraser Valley: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries. Will the minister state whether or not a decision has been reached with respect to the closure of the Fraser river above the New Westminster bridge to commercial fishing?


Hon. James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries):: I thank the hon. member for having given me notice of his question. The answer to his question is no. I hope to be able to announce a decision before I meet the fishermen's union in convention next week in Vancouver.


Mr. Patterson:: May I ask a supplementary question. Before any such decision is made will the minister consider the possibility of giving the fishermen in that area one year's notice so they will have an opportunity to dispose of their equipment, if they so desire, and secure a livelihood in some other occupation?


James Sinclair: That question is not quite applicable, because all we are considering is a little earlier closure on two species of salmon in that area.



THE PRIME MINISTER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. J. Mcllrailh (Ottawa West):: I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister. Will the Rockcliffe airport be open to the general public tomorrow night for the purpose of welcoming the return of the Prime Minister of Canada?


Brooke Claxton: Mr. Speaker, I am glad the hon. member asked this because quite a few hon. members have been asking for information on the subject.


Mr. Ferguson:: I was afraid I might be kept out.


Brooke Claxton: Rockcliffe airport will be open to the public. Entrance will be by the Montreal road.


Julian Harcourt Ferguson: Oh, good.


Brooke Claxton: An attempt will be made to deal with motor vehicle traffic. It is expected that in addition to some senators and hon. members, and members of the diplomatic 83276-192
Gold Mining
corps, there will be a considerable part of the general public who will wish to extend a welcome to the Prime Minister on his return from a tour which has made history.



EMERGENCY GOLD MINING ASSISTANCE ACT


Hon. George Prudham (Minisier of Mines and Technical Surveys) moved: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to extend the application of the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act to the year 1954.


Mr. Adamson:: Is the minister going to make a statement?


Mr. Speaker:: That would be made in committee. As the hon. member knows, no statement is made at this stage of the proceedings. This is merely a motion that the house resolve itself into committee of the whole. See Journals, January 26, 1954.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Is the minister going to make a statement now?


George Prudham: Mr. Chairman, with your permission I should like to make a statement concerning the resolution to amend the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act which is before the house.
The intention of the government to introduce legislation to extend the application of the act to the year 1954 was announced by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) to the press on October 7, 1953. Most hon. members are familiar with the objectives and provisions of the act from previous years, and I feel there is little additional information to be provided at this time.
The former legislation expired on December 31, 1953. The bill now before you provides for the extension of the act to 1954. This legislation proposes to continue the formula for calculating the assistance to individual mines in the same form as 1953.
As pointed out by the Prime Minister in his statement to the press, the special difficulties which have affected the gold-mining industry still continue. The proposed legislation will assist the industry and the gold mining communities to plan their operations for the coming year with a greater degree of certainty.
Some idea of the scope and importance of this emergency assistance measure can be

Gold Mining
seen from the number of mines which have applied for assistance. No less than 56 gold mines from widely separated regions of Canada have applied for assistance in respect of the calendar year 1953.
Gold mines in Canada have the choice of two main markets. First, they may sell their gold to the mint at a fixed price of the equivalent in Canadian dollars of 35 United States dollars per ounce. Secondly, they may elect to sell their products on the open market. However, a mine selling on the open market is not eligible for assistance under the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act. To this date only one mine has elected to sell on the free market during the year 1954, compared with five in 1953 and 13 in 1952. Mines, over the past few years, have been squeezed between rising costs of production and the fixed mint price for their products. Also, gold mines in this country were seriously affected by the appreciation of the Canadian dollar in terms of the American dollar. This meant that for the greater part of the period during which the Canadian dollar was at a premium, the mines received a steadily decreasing return for their product.
The increased assistance granted in 1953, and if continued through the present year, may therefore be regarded as a special measure designed to compensate for that factor. It is because the government is trying to preserve those modern communities dependent on gold production, Mr. Chairman, that the resolution is being placed before the house at this time.
The gold mines have made a real attempt to meet this challenge. Never before have gold mining operations in this country been more efficient. Tremendous strides have been made in mechanization and improvement of existing installations. I believe the management and workers who have striven to make the industry more efficient deserve a great deal of credit for their efforts.
Over the past year no new lode gold mines have commenced operations in Canada. Five mines in Ontario have closed down, four of them having exhausted their ore, and the fifth because its operations could no longer be carried out economically. In 1953 both volume and the value of gold production in Canada declined. The figures I am about to quote include gold produced from base metal mines which, of course, do not receive assistance. on the gold they produce. Under the act a gold mine is defined as a mine whose value of gold production for a year is 70 per cent or more of the total value of the products derived therefrom.

The total value of gold production from all the mines in Canada for 1953 was $139,826,286 compared with $153,246,016 in 1952. Production in 1953 was 4,061,205 ounces compared with 4,471,725 ounces in 1952. Of the 1953 figure 467,356 ounces were produced in base metal mines and 3,593,849 ounces in gold mines.
An appreciable amount of this decrease in 1953 may be attributed to the loss of production from mines on strike, as well as decreased base metal production during the period of the strike at Noranda mines. It is encouraging to know that these labour disputes in the industry have now been settled.
On the basis of those mines receiving assistance for the calendar year 1953, the sum of $8,257,112.78 was paid out by the government in emergency assistance as at the end of December 1953. This figure, incidentally, does not include applications for the fourth quarter of 1953, holdbacks, or applications not yet received. These are now being received by the department and payments are still being made on applications for 1953. It is anticipated that the total payment for the calendar year 1953 will approximate about $15 million.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, may I say that in presenting this resolution for an extension of assistance for the year 1954 it is the government's hope that this extension will enable the gold mines to continue their operations so that eventually they may be able to carry on without this emergency assistance. It has always been the government's intention that this assistance should be only of a temporary nature.


Mr. Nicholson:: Could the minister tell the committee the total amount expended since this legislation was first passed?


George Prudham: The amount paid since the commencement of the act up to December 31, 1953, was $61,362,672.93.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Mr. Chairman, this recurring bill which the minister has just introduced is, in my opinion, an unfortunate necessity. It is unfortunate because the necessity for it is based on actions which take place outside of Canada, and over which we have had very little control.
The only solution to the problem of gold production in Canada, and I speak solely of the question of gold production now, is an increase in the price of gold. This can be brought about by two methods, and by two methods only. The first method is by a unilateral increase in the price of gold by the United States treasury. The second method is an increase in the price of gold brought

about by the operations of the free market. I shall deal with these two methods very briefly.
The United States treasury and the United States authorities, rightly or wrongly, have a set policy against increasing the price of gold. Since that is their policy I feel that we cannot and should not criticize it even though it may be wrong. They have two basic fears: first, that an increase in the American price of gold would be an inflationary measure. Secondly, they feel that if the statutory $35 price at which the United States government is prepared to buy gold were increased it would assist the Soviet union, which may or may not be the second gold producing country in the world. These are, I believe, their basic reasons and it is not for anyone in this parliament, I believe, to criticize them even though we may not agree.
The second possibility of increasing the price of gold is by action brought about by the free market. One of the most interesting economic phenomena in the world today has been the drop in the price of gold on the Paris market in terms of the French franc. I think it is difficult to understand that drop in terms of a currency such as the French franc, in a country where inflation is today rampant, where for six weeks of last year the country was completely without a government of any sort and where for the first time in the history of the third republic fourteen ballots had to be taken in order to elect a president. Nevertheless, despite what to those of us who are not in France would appear to be great instability in the internal economy of that country, the price of gold in terms of the French franc fell substantially during the past year. I say that fact is incomprehensible. Here you have a paper currency continuously inflated within a country whose government is anything but secure. However, the facts are as I have recorded them.
I now want to put on the record a simple statement from the report on the administration of the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act. I think it is important to quote the first sentence of that report for 1953. It states:
The Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act of 1948 was primarily designed to assist the high cost or marginal gold mines to continue operations throughout the difficult post-war period.
The original idea with regard to the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act was that it was definitely a temporary measure, as the report states, to overcome the difficulties of the immediate post-war period. Unfortunately the situation did not improve.
83276-192i
Gold Mining
Whereas the original intent of the act was merely to assist the marginal or high-cost producers, today we face the tragic situation that there is only one straight gold mine in Canada not accepting assistance from the government. I think that fact shows the sort of dangers we run into, right from the beginning, when we start bonusing any industry. I do not think that any of the straight gold mines really asked to be bonused.
One other thing has happened. In 1952 the bonus on our production per ounce was $3.14. In 1953 this figure had risen to $3.93 per ounce. It is estimated that in 1954 this figure will rise to approximately $4.20 for every ounce of gold produced. At the same time the production of gold fell from $150' million; I think our maximum production was slightly over $150 million.


George Prudham: I know that my hon. friend wants to get the figures right. The figure quoted for 1952 was $3.93. That is not a complete figure. That is just-


Agar Rodney Adamson: Just for the mines receiving assistance?


George Prudham: No. It is not complete for the mines receiving assistance either. At the end of the year the returns are never complete. This is just a partial figure for that year.


Agar Rodney Adamson: Yes. The report states that the figure was $3.14 in 1952 and that it was $3.93 for 1953.


George Prudham: When the returns for 1953 are complete, that figure will be changed.


Agar Rodney Adamson: It will be increased?


George Prudham: Yes.


Agar Rodney Adamson: The point is a minor one, Mr. Chairman, but I am glad the minister brings it to my attention. The real point that I am making is that the cost of assistance has been going up. I think the estimate for this year was $4.19 or about $4.20, if I remember it correctly from a previous debate in this chamber. In any event, the cost of bonusing the gold mines on a per-ounce basis is increasing, and the production of gold is decreasing. The labour disputes certainly had a fair amount to do with that decrease; but as your over-all costs of production go up, less of the basic rock in the Pre-Cambrian shield can be classed as ore. For every ten cents of increase in the cost of production of an ounce of gold, just so much more ore is turned into waste rock. The seriousness of that situation has been brought out many times in this chamber. It shows that one of

Gold Mining
the tragic things is that we are turning a great national asset into waste rock by the present procedure.
So much for the mines themselves, for what is happening to our production, and for what is happening to costs and to the national interests of the country. Since the act was originally introduced, there have been several amendments, including changes in the regulations. I think there have been eight amendments to the act. Straight bullion is allowed to be sold on the free market without having to be adulterated down to 22 carats. That is a good thing because it saves the producers that cost of adulteration.
According to the latest figure I have had for this month, the situation is that the gold mines of Canada are receiving $33.84 an ounce at the mint compared with $38.50 in 1939. It should be remembered that the Canadian dollar was at a discount of 10 per cent in 1939 whereas today it is at a premium of approximately 2| to 3 per cent. Therefore our gold mines are not only not receiving any more for their product in 1954 than in 1939 but are actually receiving about 12J per cent less. The minister has very kindly sent me the figure of $33.79 as of the 6th of March. I was a little generous. I said $33.84. But the main point is that here we have an industry, which at one time was the greatest dollar producer of metals in Canada, exceeding even nickel, exceeding all our base metals, with a production of over $150 million a year, that is today receiving 12 h per cent less for its product than it did in 1939.
I ask you, Mr. Chairman, to think of any industry in Canada today, whether producing a basic or a manufactured commodity, that could even be in business if it were only receiving for its product not what it received in 1939 but 12J per cent less. I venture to say that not a single producer of any other product in Canada could be in business today under such circumstances. I think that shows more than anything else the way that the gold mining industry has tackled this problem and its amazing efficiency. What has been done to pare costs, what has been done to make mining more efficient, what has been done just to keep the mines alive is a great triumph and a great credit to our gold industry in all its branches. I am glad the minister brought that out in his statement because I wish to reiterate it. So much for that point.
We say to ourselves: Can we do anything that will be effective? For a number of years it has been my criticism of the administration that we have not done as much ourselves in this regard as we should have done. I wish to quote a paragraph from the speech made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs

last night in Washington. I think it is of considerable importance, and I shall paraphrase the first few words. Speaking to the Americans he said that it is essential that we work together-
-if the great coalition which we have formed for peace is not to be replaced by an entrenched con-tinentalism, which I can assure you makes no great appeal to your northern neighbour as the best way to prevent war or defeat aggression, and which is not likely to provide a solid basis for good United States-Canada relationships.
I say "amen" to that statement. To me that has been the great weakness of the attitude of our government toward the United States. As I have said, it is none of our business to criticize their actions, and I am not doing so now. But with respect to international matters involving exchange, convertibility, and particularly the question of gold, I feel that we could have established our own market irrespective of the attitude of the United States and that if we had taken resolute and courageous action we could have led the world.
There was a great deal of misgiving when many years ago I advocated the freeing of the Canadian dollar. The same arguments that were used against the freeing of the Canadian dollar are used against the establishment of a free gold market. It was said that we could not free the Canadian dollar because of the international financiers, the United States bankers and the terrific size of our southern neighbour. We did it, with the result that our currency has become, in terms of other currencies, the premier currency in the world. Having taken such action in the case of the Canadian dollar, I contend that we can follow the same course in the case of gold.
I do not agree with the general policy of Canada of waiting for the Americans to make up their minds about what they are going to do. We cannot be hostages to internal United States politics. We cannot stand idly by and wait for the present United States administration or the Republican party to make up their minds with respect to what they are going to do about trade. Gold of course is only useful as a monetary metal and as a medium by which convertibility can be brought about. That is its only real use. Trade is four times as important to the individual Canadian as it is to the individual American. Unless we can solve the problem of sterling convertibility, of which gold forms an essential part, then our future is, to say the least, in considerable jeopardy because our major markets are in the sterling countries.
I do not feel that we can wait to see whether or not the Republican party is going to be run by the isolationists. We cannot

wait for the Republican party to decide whether it is going to revert to political and economic isolationism or whether it is going to embark upon a policy of enlightened world co-operation as set out in documents such as the Randall report. To me, such a policy of waiting is dangerous in the extreme.
It is for that reason that, in and out of this house, I have championed the use of gold as a monetary metal, championed the basic policy of Canada's standing on her own feet where international trade is concerned. In this country we must trade; otherwise we destroy ourselves. Trade figures are encouraging; but to a greater and greater extent, our trade is with one country -a country which, I grant, is our best market, our major market. We are doing this simply because we have been unable to solve the riddle of convertibility. And in my opinion we have been unable to solve the riddle of convertibility because we refuse to lead, and particularly in the matter of gold.
This is not something we can do easily; it is not something we can do without risks. But, to my mind, the Canadian economy and the Canadian people have always been leaders in international affairs. We were world traders long before the Americans knew anything about world trade. Today in our own right we are world traders probably to a greater extent than any other nation in the world. But unless we can solve this problem of convertibility, unless we can produce some mechanism by which convertibility can be free, our international trade can be cut off very quickly and drastically, and with great and increasing danger to our whole economy.
It is for that reason I am speaking here this afternoon. This bill is to keep the mines alive, and it has my support. It also is supported by this party. But I do wish the administration-this government-would take the lead, particularly in this regard, so that we may stand on our own feet in this matter of restoring gold as the medium of convertibility in which historically it has always been, just as we did with our own national currency, the Canadian dollar. By so doing I believe we can give a lead to the world to prevent economic isolationism in North America, should that be the policy of the present administration-which I hope it will not be.
I feel we cannot stand by and watch something happen, if we can possibly take the lead ourselves to see that this great evil of economic isolationism does not occur again in our lives.
Gold Mining


Mr. Noseworlhy:: Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to speak at length at this resolution stage, but shall reserve what I have to say in detail to the debate on second reading of the bill to be presented to the house.
There are just one or two comments I should like to make at this stage. The first is that, as we all know, the gold mining industry is in a very unsatisfactory condition at this time. There are great differences of opinion between those who work in the mines and the management of those mines on a number of vital questions. Delegations have appeared in Ottawa before members of the cabinet recommending that the situation in the gold mining industry requires a special commission or committee to make a complete investigation and study of existing conditions in the industry. The miners went back to work, after their long strike, on the explicit promise of the premier of Ontario that such a committee would be set up on a provincial basis, and that a study of this kind would be made. So far as I can discover, to date no move has been made in the direction of fulfilling that agreement.
In so far as the federal government is involved in the gold mining industry, by reason of the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act, and in so far as it is of interest to the economy of the country as a whole whether the gold mining industry continues to exist or not, many of us think that the federal government should participate in the work of any such committee or commission. There are a number of questions which should and could be clarified by such a commission. There is the whole question of the extent to which the gold mining industry is today a depressed industry, and there is the further question of the extent to which private enterprise has succeeded, so far as this industry is concerned.
Private industry and private operators have been exploiting our gold mines through the years, and have been accumulating fortunes for private individuals. But never at any time in the history of gold mining in this country have those who actually mine and mill the gold received their fair share of the wealth produced from the mines.
The question now arises: Are some of those mines expecting to continue the rate of profits they have been making in past years, or are they now receiving or earning profits equivalent to those earned by many other industries in this country? There was a day when very high profits were demanded in the gold mining industry in order to induce investment of so-called risk capital. Today a large part of the risk involved in gold mining has been shouldered by the federal

Gold Mining
government. A great deal of assistance, outside of the act now under consideration, is given to gold mining by the federal government, in various ways. Today there is nothing like the risk involved in gold mining that there was some twenty-five years ago, so far as capital is concerned. Consequently I suggest that the whole position of the gold mines should be investigated, and I would urge upon the minister at this time that the government give serious consideration to the setting up of some such committee or commission. The strike in the gold mines may be over; the trouble is not over, and unless some serious steps are taken to improve the position of workers in the gold mines we shall before very long have a repetition of the trouble which was experienced in that camp during this winter.
There is another question the minister should look into, the question I raised in the former debate, namely, the extent to which the government should assume responsibility for seeing that, so long as the federal government comes to the aid of the gold mines, the workers in the mines should receive a fair share of that assistance. To what extent does federal aid go almost exclusively to the profits of the operators rather than to improving the standard of living of the miners? That is a question which needs some study.
The third question I should like to suggest, and which I shall speak on at greater length on second reading of the bill, is whether the minister considers it fair that the mines should be able to collect this subsidy on the number of ounces that would be produced in a given year were the mines not on strike. I hold in my hand sessional paper No. 78, referring to correspondence and details pertaining to the Hollinger gold mines in 1951, during which year that mine was on strike for a considerable part of the year. I notice that in arriving at the number of ounces on which subsidies should be paid the assistance is estimated on the number of ounces the mine would have produced had mining operations not been suspended for a part of the year. Last winter the unions in the camp were very anxious to know if it would be possible for the mines to collect on their 1953 operations subsidies based on the number of ounces they would have produced had the mines not been closed. I think the act permits that, and it is one feature of the act that should be considered by the minister.
We have to make up our minds whether the gold mining industry is essential to our

economy. There are a great many communities across this country that are solely dependent upon gold mining. If the gold mines were closed, many hundreds of thousands of people would have to be transferred to other employment. Many, many millions of dollars' worth of property value would be lost and the business of many towns destroyed. It becomes a question whether or not we are to keep those mines operating at a loss, apparently, if we may believe the statements of the gold mining operators. How long can the government go on subsidizing that industry in the interests of the communities affected by the industry?
What would happen to our gold mines should the United States some day decide to buy no more gold? We have to study the entire question of the gold mining industry and its relations to our over-all economy. As conditions exist at the present time, and with no provision and no government policy for any improvement in this field, we can only go on paying subsidies to those mines year after year, regardless of the fact that there may be other industries just as vital to this country. The textile industry, for instance, is just as essential to our economy; it is running into difficulty and may need to be subsidized.
May I suggest to the minister that he give consideration, as was requested by delegations from the north, to the setting up of a committee or commission to make a special study of this industry; and secondly, that he consider whether or not the gold mines are going to be paid for gold they would have produced in 1953 had there been no strike.


Mr, Low:: Mr. Chairman, when we spoke on this same measure in 1952 the minister concluded with this statement, as recorded at page 2448 of Hansard:
The extension of the cost-aid for another two years will give the mining industry a chance to cope with their problems. We all hope, and I know that the industry hopes, that they will not have to ask for further aid. However, that can be reviewed when the time comes. As I said before, this is not intended to cure the ills, but merely as a temporary aid to assist the industry in working out their own problems.
It appears now, from what the minister has said this afternoon in his opening statement and from what I can gather from the annual report covering the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act, that the special difficulties under which gold mines have had to operate for a number of years continue. I think the minister put it well this afternoon when he said that the mines find themselves in a squeeze between rising costs of production on the one hand and a fixed price on

the other. In addition, of course, the mines also suffer adversely from the premium on the Canadian dollar.
There are quite a number of arguments that could be used, good arguments, for continuance of the emergency gold mining assistance that we are considering now. And it is because we recognize there are sound arguments for a further extension of this assistance that we are prepared to support the measure.
I do not intend to speak at any length because I do not think it is necessary at this stage, but I should like to run through quickly some of the arguments which have influenced me in favour of extending the measure for another year.
In the first place, there are a good many towns and cities in far-flung places in this country which have come to be completely dependent upon gold mines for their continued existence. These towns and cities have flourished for quite a long while. I recall a very pleasant visit I made to the constituency of the hon. member for Timmins (Mr. Eyre) when I went down into some of the gold mines and saw what was being done. At that time I visited the Porcupine and Timmins areas. I have in mind also a visit which I made to Val d'Or and other centres in the constituency of the hon. member for Villeneuve (Mr. Dumas). Since those areas are being well served by the cities and towns which have grown up around the gold mining industry, I think we should do all we can to ensure their continued vitality.
My second good reason is that the hunt for gold has resulted in the discovery of other important metals, and I believe every effort should be made to continue the hunt for gold in this country. I think the country is richer and more self-sufficient as a consequence of the discovery of those metals.
It seems to me that the third good reason for supporting this measure is that the search for gold has often preceded permanent settlements in a number of areas in Canada. Long after the gold veins were depleted and exhausted those settlements have persisted. I am quite aware that there are also a good many ghost towns, but the fact remains that some settlements are still thriving on a permanent basis although the gold mining has been exhausted for some years.
Perhaps the best argument that can be advanced for a continuation of this measure is that gold is the one thing we are pretty certain the United States will always buy. It appears that they have to. This is most important to Canada, in that for some years our country has had an unfavourable trade
Gold Mining
balance with the United States which our gold production materially helps to settle. I imagine that in the foreseeable future we are going to have further gold production to help settle this unfavourable trade balance, because I see little indication that the United States will feel constrained to buy as much as we would like to have her buy here.
Our people continue year after year to spend comparatively large sums of money in the United States for things which they could buy at better prices right here at home or perhaps in other places. I have been interested in the fact that Canadian people often persist in buying across the border things which they could buy more cheaply right here at home.
For example, at this very time if anyone visits the grocery stores he will see all kinds of fresh vegetables, particularly carrots. These are very appealing to the eye and I imagine they are delicious to the taste. They are purchased largely in southern California and Texas and brought to Canada. Our people buy them in preference to the commodity produced here which is pitted and kept over the winter in good shape. I find those carrots just as delightful and I imagine they are just as healthful. Perhaps they do not have quite the eye appeal since you must wash them a little, but they are cheaper.
The interesting thing to me is that our people continue to buy the eye-appealing product from the United States and commit themselves to the extent of considerable quantities of Canadian dollars. What is the result? They push the Canadian product off the market and as a consequence our production is discouraged or it rots. That is the fact and we might just as well face it. Of course, in a free country we cannot tell our people that they must not spend their money in the United States. They do it and as long as they persist in this practice we will just have to go on having these adverse balances of trade.
Another point is that we could buy carrots, tomatoes, lettuce and various green vegetables in the British West Indies and bring them to Canada instead of buying them in the country to our south. If we did that we would be supplying the British West Indies with badly-needed Canadian dollars with which they could in turn buy from Canada. At the same time we would be encouraging intercommonwealth trade, which in my opinion is an urgent necessity. In addition we would be reducing the unfavourable trade balances between Canada and the United States. It seems to me that there is a three-pronged advantage all round.

Gold Mining
However, as long as the Canadian people do persist in spending their money as they do in the United States, it seems to me that we will have to do all we can to encourage the optimum production of gold with which to pay these bills. This is the argument which appeals to me more strongly than any of the others I have mentioned.
I think the best argument for extending to the gold mines the assistance which we now propose to extend is that it provides us with the one commodity which we can feel pretty sure the American treasury will always accept and against which they are not likely to raise embargoes, import quotas or other restrictions, as we find them doing so often in the case of other Canadian products.
Consequently we support the measure on a temporary basis. But if we thought the measure was going to be used for the purpose of eventually restoring the gold standard for our internal money system we would oppose it with all our might. However, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) and the government have committed themselves to a managed currency, which in my judgment is infinitely superior to the gold standard. It fits our type of economy much better than any gold standard could. So far as I am concerned, I feel that every encouragement should be given to continuing that policy.
For just a moment I should like to take a look at the financial aspects of the measure which I suppose will be introduced today by the minister. I gathered from what he said this afternoon, and from the annual report for 1952-53, that the total assistance paid to the gold mines from 1948, since we started paying assistance, down to the end of 1952, was $51,053,061. If we added to that the expected payment for 1953, when all the applications are in, amounting to $15 million, as the minister said this afternoon, the total would be $66 million to the end of 1953. Strangely enough, that is almost exactly the amount of money that a few years ago the federal government offered to the western farmers in settlement of their wheat claim. It will be remembered that they were up against exactly the same situation; they were in a squeeze all during the war. Their production costs had been going up steadily and they have been caught in the squeeze between these increasing costs on the one hand, and the fixed price on the other.
The wheat producers of Canada during that period were asked to subsidize cheap bread for the whole Canadian economy, and they did it without complaining. But I recall the tremendous amount of opposition

which developed in this house at the time it was proposed to give the western farmers $65 million as a final payment.


An hon. Member:: Not from us.


Mr. Low:: Fortunately we did not hear it from the hon. members who represent gold mining constituencies. They have learned to be somewhat more charitable, seeing that they have to depend in some measure upon similar assistance. At any rate, I merely mention this because there is an interesting similarity in the amount of money involved.
About two years ago, when a proposal was made in this house that some arrangement be made to establish a support price covering the internal consumption of wheat in this country, a price which would reflect the cost of production plus a reasonable margin of profit for the farmer, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, I recall, at that time exclaimed with, I believe, some vehemence, "Never will I support the subsidization of wheat."


An hon. Member:: Because of the expense to the taxpayer.


Solon Earl Low: Yes, because of that expense.


Mr. Blackmore:: The Prime Minister took the same attitude.


Solon Earl Low: I draw that to the attention of hon. members to demonstrate that there is a difference in their attitude towards wheat, which is being produced in this country today by, I believe, ten times as many people as are employed in all of the gold mines in Canada. The figure is at least ten times greater, because I believe there are no less than 250,000 wheat farmers and only about 22,000 workers in the gold mines. Yet we are subsidizing the production of gold and we would not think of establishing something like a support price for wheat in order to stabilize the economy to a greater extent than has been done in the past.
I draw that to the attention of the hon. gentleman because I feel there ought to be some consistency in our policy. I am not doing this to rub it in or to indicate any opposition to this measure.


An hon. Member:: It makes good rubbing, though.


Solon Earl Low: I make that statement merely because it indicates that those of us from the west are just a little bit more charitable than some of the fellows from the east. We are supporting this measure because we understand what it means and we are trying to keep in mind the welfare of the entire country. We believe that if, in the case of any of

these important producing industries in our country, it becomes necessary to take unusual methods to encourage their production so that they will meet the need which exists, we ought not to jump to the conclusion that we are going to rule out support. I believe support prices have their place in any economy. That, Mr. Chairman, can very easily be proved, for you cannot possibly ensure that each group within the national economy shall obtain a fair share of the national income unless something in the nature of a support price is established. I do not mean permanently, but the principle generally has to be established, and. I recognize the wisdom of that principle.
We are supporting this measure because we recognize that at the present time we must give encouragement to the production of gold because, in the first place, those who are dependent upon its production need that assistance, and secondly, because we need the gold, particularly for the settlement of the adverse trade balance which we have with the United States. That is our reason for supporting this measure, Mr. Chairman, and I do not think I need say any more at this stage.
(Translation):


Mr. Dumas:: Mr. Chairman, as I do not
want to delay the passing of this resolution, my comments will be very brief. However, I reserve the right to speak at greater length on the motion for second reading of the bill.
Mr. Chairman, if there ever was a resolution which no one in this house should oppose and which should, on the contrary, be supported by every hon. member, it is the resolution now before us. I understand however that it is the duty and responsibility of all members to ask for information, to inquire as to the provisions contained in the bill and to make sure that the money our Canadian taxpayers have been called upon to pay because of the enactment of a measure such as this, has been well spent.
I have been puzzled, however, by the stand some hon. members have taken and I intend to make a few comments for the benefit of those who only look for shortcomings in this industry, as well as in the interest of those who might be tempted to do likewise because they fear our government is making a mistake or is giving too much assistance to our gold mining industry.
First of all, payments made under the gold mining assistance act are not so large compared to the over-all budget of our country. Neither are they large compared to the subsidies paid to other key industries to tide them over difficult periods. They are not 83276-193
Gold Mining
large in comparison with the amounts the government obtains, through income tax, from the gold mining industry and the people it employs. They are not large in comparison with the total profits made by all those other industries which do business with the gold mining industry. Finally, they are not large compared to the cost of reopening those gold mines and of putting the mining centres on an active basis once they have been abandoned for want of assistance.
In all sincerity, I urge all those who are concerned about this matter to think it over before declaring themselves squarely against the passing of a bill to help an industry and a section of our population which is in dire need of such help.
Let us examine the matter calmly and unselfishly. Let us remember that the welfare of the nation as a whole always requires that citizens be satisfied with their lot.
Once the price of gold will have reached a proper level, the gold industry will occupy the place it deserves in our economy. Instead of constituting a burden for the Canadian taxpayer, it will contribute generously, as in the past, to the welfare of the nation and of all Canadians.
That is why the resolution now before the house concerns not only the gold mining industry and the mining, agricultural and other centres directly dependent upon it, but also the country as a whole.
Let no one believe that the Canadian taxpayer is willing to sacrifice an industry as important as the gold mining industry. No, never. That is why the Liberal governments that have been in power these last few years have, as we all know, legislated in accordance with the wishes of the Canadian people and in their interest.
One must not consider lightly the importance of an industry which during 1951 paid for salaries, electricity, fuel, equipment, machine parts of all sorts and buildings, the fat sum of $127 million. Nearly $69 million were paid in salaries alone.
No, Mr. Chairman, the gold problem does not concern only the gold mining industry. It does not concern solely the provinces where we find gold mines; it does not concern only towns like Kirkland Lake and Timmins, in Ontario; Malartic, Yal d'Or and Duparquet

Gold Mining
in Quebec; Ogama-Rockland and Snow Lake, in Manitoba; Bralorne, Hedley and Wells in British Columbia; Dawson and Yellowknife in the Yukon and Mackenzie river country, to mention but a few. It is a problem that concerns all Canadians and Canada as a whole.
Since the middle of 1946, production costs in gold mines have constantly increased, although technical progress and a better yield have enabled the industry to keep the increase in costs to a minimum.
The industry suffered a further disadvantage, and it is not the least. The price received for an ounce of gold not only remained the same, that is the equivalent in Canadian dollars of 35 United States dollars, but also, following the appreciation of our dollar, in terms of the dollar of our neighbour to the south, the operators constantly received inferior prices, so that, on the average, an ounce of gold yielded $34.27 in 1952, $34.45 in 1953, and went down as low as $33.76 during February last.
The Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act is essentially intended to help the owners of Canadian mines to meet the considerably increased cost of gold, the price of which, contrary to that of primary products derived from mining or other industries, not only has not increased, but has had a tendency to go down during the last few years.
This act was given royal assent on May 14, 1948, and put into force during the years 1948, 1949 and 1950. It was afterwards amended in 1951, 1952 and 1953, and it lapsed on December 31 last.
On October 7, 1953, the Right Hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) explained that the particular problems which during the past few years have confronted the gold mining industry and the communities depending on it still existed, and he announced that consequently the government intended to ask parliament to extend this legislation for another year. That was referred to in the speech from the throne at the opening of this session and a resolution to this effect is now before us.
I have always had at heart the interest of my constituents and it is for this reason that I am today well at ease to deal with this question from all its angles. The miners, the workers and the farmers of my district know of what stuff I am made and they are

well aware that I have always tried to protect their interest. They recognize also that those who try to run down the industry and its leaders, while masquerading under the title of protectors of the working class, are doing them more harm than good.
I want to say again that I never miss an opportunity in this house to point out the difficult problems confronting the gold mining industry. I always did my best to collaborate with the government and the other members who have at heart the improvement of the industry and the welfare of the people connected with it.
I am convinced that by rising to the defence of the gold mines I am working in the best interest of all those who live in the county of Villeneuve, whether miners, farmers, merchants or small property owners. I feel that I have done my duty and I am determined to continue to do so.
(Text):
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
Mr. Prudham thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 376, to amend the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



VOCATIONAL TRAINING CO-ORDINATION ACT AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENTS WITH PROVINCES, CHANGES IN ADMINISTRATION, ETC.

Milton Fowler Gregg: the second reading of Bill No. 326, to amend the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, following the passage of the resolution on March 3 I attempted to cover some of the points that had been made during the debate but in looking over Hansard I find that I did not cover them all; and perhaps the ones that were covered were not fully dealt with. I am just going to mention the points, one by one, that I have jotted down and make comment on them. The hon. member for Hamilton West (Mrs. Fairclough) asked for the reason for the increase in the membership of the advisory council. The purpose of the increase is to provide for representation from all the provincial governments and at the same time to have enough vacancies so that other national bodies within our Canadian community may have representation on the board.

Then she asked this question: Under whose auspices will the training be given? The training will be given under the auspices of the federal-provincial training program known as the Canadian vocational training program and the trainees will be selected by special committees representing the federal government, provincial governments and the social agencies concerned with the individual trainees.
Then she also asked this question:	Is it
planned to confine this training to schools or will some rehabilitation centres be authorized to give training? The answer to that question is that all available training facilities will be used as they may be required, including schools, existing rehabilitation centres and, I would hope, future rehabilitation centres. The question was asked: Will training be given along apprenticeship lines? The answer is yes, and also along any line that may be required to meet the needs of the trainees. I am now of course speaking exclusively of disabled persons in need of rehabilitation training.
I made some reference the other day to what my friend the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) had said. He asked me few direct questions but he said this, and I am going to quote his words as reported at page 2625 of Hansard:
I am concerned about giving the boy who had to leave school before reaching the eighth or tenth grade a chance to go back for a year and pick up the knowledge of mathematics necessary to get into a trade course.
That is the end of what I will quote.
Even though, as I stated the other day, the suggestion made by my hon. friend falls pretty well within provincial jurisdiction, I consider that it is a very important one. To answer with some optimism, I think it is true that the provincial governments are all trying quite hard to encourage their young people to obtain a well-rounded basic education. To this end some encouragement is given by the very terms under which family allowances are paid. But I can hear my hon. friend saying that that is all right but nevertheless they are leaving school-too early in many cases-to help their large families of brothers and sisters from what they are able to earn.
As a matter of fact he brought such a young man to see me just the other day. But I think I can tell him that by full utilization of the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act provincially and federally-and I am not saying that it is being utilized fully-a great deal could be done to meet the needs of the 83276-193J
16, 1954	3039
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act young people about whom he is greatly concerned. So far as the officials of my department are concerned, they are very anxious to utilize it to the greatest extent.
The hon. member for Brandon-Souris (Mr. Dinsdale), in addition to questions which I answered, asked whether there would be financial assistance for agricultural schools for rural young people who lack the advantage of a formal high school education. Under the provisions of the youth training schedule established under the act, such training is given through short-term courses in the winter months. Vocational courses in agriculture in secondary schools are also assisted under the vocational schools assistance agreement. All financial assistance is given through the provincial governments and is usually shared fifty-fifty. He also asked whether financial assistance is possible for a large school area program. By "large school area program" I take it that he refers to what some provinces term regional high schools, a large school which takes in a large country area. The answer there is no, not in full, but any vocational courses included in such a large school area program might be eligible for assistance.
He also asked whether there is any provision in the act for vocational guidance. I said the other night that the only means 1 knew of by which federal assistance in training personnel in vocational guidance was given was under the physical fitness program of the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin). However, I was reminded afterwards that in the federal Department of Labour we do provide assistance to the provinces to some extent by supplying occupational monographs on various skills and by providing special film strips giving occupational information.
The hon. member for Wellington South (Mr. Hosking) inquired as to what proportion of the cost of vocational schools the federal government is prepared to pay. I think I answered the other part of his question the other night. Normally the federal government refunds to the provincial government up to 50 per cent of the cost of approved vocational school buildings and equipment. All such expenditures are of course subject to the limitation of the funds that may be voted by parliament from year to year.
The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green) asked if the scheme was wide enough to provide retraining for merchant seamen. I think I answered that question the other night. He also asked what changes are to be made in the training given to men and women in the defence forces. No
3040	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act changes whatsoever are visualized under this bill. I think that covers most of the questions. After the debate on second reading is concluded I should like to move that the bill be referred to the standing committee on industrial relations, not because it contains any particularly difficult sections but because there may be some relevant matters that members of the committee would like to look into more fully. In addition, they may wish to have officials appear before the committee to answer questions in detail.


Mr. Clarence Gillis (Caps Ereion South):: Mr. Speaker, I am glad the minister has announced that he intends to send the bill to the standing committee on industrial relations for study. I have examined the bill, and everything suggested in it is an improvement over the old act, which indicates that the department has at least been giving some study to the matter. I consider the question of vocational training to be a very important one. It has much more importance than a lot of people in the provinces attach to it. I have looked at the 1953 figures for immigration, education, employment and job vacancies. Anyone who does so will realize the need for study. I also want to emphasize that we are not living in a time when we can sit back, throw old slogans at people and say that there is a solution in those slogans. We are living in a world that is going through a revolution. We in Canada and on the whole North American continent are living in a time when we may have to start retraining many people who have been in certain industries for a long time.
In my judgment the basic job that we have to do concerns the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act. We have made a start on it but it requires further study and other mechanics must be devised. Without elaborating on this angle too much, I want to point out that the 1953 figures for education show that only 40 per cent of Canadian students got through high school and only 10 per cent of that 40 per cent to university. These are national averages. That means that 90 per cent of the children leaving school in Canada today are in need of further training. That alone indicates that there is a job to be done in this field.
I looked at the immigration figures. We are bringing a lot of people into the country. I think the average is 160,000 a year. Unemployment insurance commission figures show that as of May, 1953, there were 407,000 registered unemployed but alongside that there were 338,000 job vacancies involving the filling of jobs largely in the skilled trades. When you consider that 90 per cent of our children leaving school need further


training, and couple with that the immigration figures of the number of unskilled personnel we are taking into the country and the wide open field for skilled tradesmen as indicated by the official figures, it definitely points up the need for the committee to sit down and take a look at the whole problem.
The original act, as suggested in the 19451946 report, was a pretty realistic approach to the problem. I have looked at it section by section, and one thing was recognized very definitely. If you look at page 16 of the vocational training report for 1945-46 it will be found that some pertinent observations are made on this subject of prematriculation schools. This is something that has not been followed up in connection with the whole program of vocational training. Then again, if you look at the report for 1948-49 it will be found the minister is correct when he points out that much of the responsibility for taking advantage of the mechanics laid down in the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act rests with the provinces. The fact is that the provinces just have not gone out and made use of this type of training, as they could have.
In discussing this subject hon. members will, of course, express pride in their native provinces; and if a province is doing a reasonably good job it is understandable to hear an hon. member pointing out what his province is doing. But I do suggest to some hon. members I see across the floor of the house, who are pretty well qualified in the field through having had jurisdiction in provincial administrations, that we have to sort out what we mean when we talk about vocational training.
In my judgment vocational high schools do not fit into the picture of vocational training, except in so far as they can give the student the academic education required to enter some trade. A considerable number of vocational high schools have been established across the country; but in my view the vocational high school is a short-cut and an easier way to get money for the purpose of building schools. It presents less difficulty than facing up to the necessity for a trade school that will turn out skilled tradesmen who are able to take a job. In most vocational high schools -and they are found in every section of every province-an automobile will be placed in a classroom for the benefit of the students. By the time they spend a year in the class they may discover that the engine has six cylinders, but they do not have sufficient information to go out and take jobs as motor mechanics.
We must sort out our thinking on the subject and, in most provinces, we will have to retrain adults who may have been in

industry for a long time. I think in particular of the textile industry. Mills are being closed and whole communities are faced with total unemployment. Those people cannot be expected to walk out of an industry in which they have been engaged for years and take work in another with which they are not familiar. In many communities in which there are industrial casualties, in this process of free competition, the workers will have to be retrained. That cannot be done with the sort of training offered in the vocational high school.
In my opinion this is the big problem facing us. I might also make reference to the coal industry which, because of technological advances and the introduction of oil and gas, is being scrapped. We cannot run away from this problem, and some retraining will have to be done in the coal industry. Only a few nights ago the president of Dominion Steel and Coal company said that he considered the coal, steel and textile industries in the maritime provinces to be depressed industries. A good deal of retraining may have to be done in the steel industry.
When the committee gets down to business it will have to realize that it is not possible to have equality of opportunity in any phase of our educational program, unless there is some arrangement between the federal and provincial governments whereby equality can be established. It must be kept in mind that all provinces in Canada do not have the same per capita incomes. While British Columbia and Ontario might be able to do an excellent job, there are other provinces who cannot participate in the 50-50 proposal for the setting up of trade schools or, indeed, any other kind of school.
Provincial governments in that position will have to sit down with federal government authorities and work out some arrangement whereby the problem can be met. There is not the same need in every province for retraining and vocational training generally. The problem will be much greater in those provinces least able to handle it, and we are going to have to make special arrangements in this regard.
Looking at the net revenues of the various provinces as revealed in their budgets for 1954, which appeared in the press, one is confronted with the following figures:
Province	Net Revenue
Newfoundland	$30,947,000
Prince Edward Island	 7,044,000
Nova Scotia	 45,942,000
New Brunswick	 45,388,000
Quebec	 289,275,000
Ontario	 333,486,000
Manitoba	 53,119,000
Saskatchewan	 85,094,000
Alberta	 125,483,000
British Columbia	 182,061,000
16, 1954
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act
This difference in provincial incomes proves definitely that there is no possibility of equality in this matter, as between province and province, without some special arrangement being made with the federal government to meet the cost.
Then, in a province such as Ontario we find organizations such as the Atkinson charitable foundation, which assists greatly in the field of education. While I am not going to discuss the figures in detail, the report for 1953 indicates that a large amount of money is being allocated to special educational projects that are of great assistance to both the provincial and the dominion governments.
However, this is not found in some of the other provinces. The Atkinson fund is limited to Ontario. For this reason Ontario is able to do more in the field of education than another province which does not have the support of organizations of this kind.
If anyone looks at the list of responsible organizations across the country that are making a particular study of the subject, he will see listed the Canadian welfare society which, in its last report, makes definite recommendations in the matter of unemployment, retraining, and youth leaving school who require more training. All these are matters our committee should study.
I hope this time we will do a real job in the field of vocational training because, in my opinion, it is basic to the future of our country, and is badly needed.
In the memorandum presented to the government recently by the Canadian Congress of Labour they ask for the calling of a meeting of representatives of provincial governments with a view to establishing some degree of uniformity in the matter of apprenticeship training, vocational training and the like.
When this committee begins its sittings I do not think it should try to do the job in a hurry. When the committee is in session those responsible for handling vocational training in the different provinces across the country should be called before it in order to determine just what are the limitations in the provinces in regard to meeting the commitments under this act, because certainly there is something wrong when a better job is not done.
There is some set-up in Nova Scotia. I went to the trouble of getting in touch with the minister's very efficient officials who handle the matter, and it did not take very much paper to give me the facts on vocational training in Nova Scotia. However, something is established there on which you can build. They have vocational high schools
3042	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act also, but I was not concerned with vocational high schools; I was concerned about the trade training schools.
A lot of confusion exists on this subject. Many people think if they have a number of vocational high schools it is the answer to the problem. Nobody coming out of those vocational high schools can walk down to the unemployment insurance office and say he is a mechanic, a bricklayer or a carpenter. The individual has to get into one of those trade training schools, or he has to get into some industry under the apprenticeship plan and serve his apprenticeship on the job. It is a good type of training, but it is completely within the hands of the employers of this country. It is a different proposition when you come to get boys and girls into industry for the purpose of training on the job. There are a lot of roadblocks to overcome.
In those trade training schools, such as the one in Halifax, a boy or a girl can enrol and be completely trained as an automobile mechanic, a machinist, a carpenter or a bricklayer and he or she can command the wages that are paid in that particular trade.
I recall the school that was set up at North Sydney, which is now unfortunately limping along on one foot. I think one course is still given there. Most of the equipment has been shipped away.


Mr. Small:: It is next to defunct?
'Mr. Gillis: Just about, but during the time it did function it was set up primarily to train service personnel. They did a very good job there in turning out carpenters and bricklayers. Bricklayers have been turned out there. I have questioned some of the men at the steel plant as to whether the graduates of that school were good, bad or indifferent. They told me that they were first-class. They had one in that plant who commanded top wages. They were considered good tradesmen.
The school at Halifax is still functioning. There are classes there. I notice, as an example, that at Halifax several are studying aircraft sheet metal work. Forty-seven were learning that trade; in machine tool operations there were 46; in welding, 40; in aircraft technician work, 36; electricians and construction, 67; machinists, 70; plumbers and pipefitters, none in the class; steamfitters, none.
That centre is at least operating, but from the information I have received I am reasonably sure it is labouring under difficulties. It is the only one that is functioning now. The buildings that were used by the trade school at North Sydney are still there. Most


of the equipment is still there. There is a supervisor in Nova Scotia who is looking after the whole thing as best he can. That school should be re-equipped.
The island of Cape Breton is one of the largest industrial centres east of Montreal. Many boys and girls who have gone through school need some special training. As the minister well knows, it is difficult for these boys and girls who come to this part of the country, when they get out of employment, to fit into other occupations. When they get out of employment on some labouring job they are stuck. They cannot take advantage of anything else. They come in to see you, and under those circumstances it is difficult to know what to do about them. There are hundreds drifting around the country today.
I am hoping that we shall not be in any hurry in giving final approval to this bill. I hope we will take a look at the whole vocational problem, that we shall call in representatives from the different provinces who are associated with the administration of this program and find out the difficulties they have to contend with in matching dollars in setting up the type of organization that is necessary to cope with the problem that is developing today.
This is one of the biggest jobs we shall have in the next couple of years. We shall have to see that adequate facilities are provided to take care of this problem of training boys and girls and those who may be displaced in other industries, to fit them for other vocations where they will be able to earn a living.
I would also suggest at this time that the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg) might have dinner with the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Mr. Harris). With things developing as they are in the field of employment in this country, the minister should take a look at this matter of immigration. Our immigration should be on a more selected basis instead of just taking in a certain percentage of unskilled individuals. We have a large number of those now. To say that we are going to take in 185,000 next year, regardless of conditions in the country, is to be unrealistic. That problem dovetails into this whole picture.
I am a member of the committee, and as far as I am concerned I am not going to be in any hurry to get the evidence we need to make the adjustments that are necessary. We should be prepared to sit around that table for a long time and get all the information and advice we can so we may be able to get a working organization in this country, and also to clear our minds on the question

of apprenticeship, trade training and vocational high schools, because they are entirely different training.
In the field of actual trade schools we could do what we were doing during the war in bringing boys and girls up to a certain standard in certain subjects that were necessary in order to get them into some particular vocation. Pre-matriculatipn sections in the regular vocational training school are an absolute necessity. I hope this whole question of education, with particular reference to this problem, will be handled in a different way. I suggest that the provincial governments should sit down and rearrange their prejudices. They should try to do some serious and realistic thinking on this whole question, because you cannot sit on the prejudices of the past and improve the future, and I am afraid that is what is going on in many of the provinces in the whole field of education.


Mr. F. T. Fairey (Victoria, B.C.):: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to speak at any great length upon this bill. Before I do address myself to this question may I say that I could not agree more with anybody than I do with the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis) in most of the things he suggested a few moments ago.
With respect to the bill itself, there are just two points which I would like to bring to the attention of the house. One I think will satisfy all. That is the provision which permits representation on the advisory council of all provinces in Canada.
Where we are working in co-operation with the provinces it is time, as the last speaker said, that all should be present at council meetings so we may have their views and the benefit of their advice.
The second important amendment is the one which provides for training programs for the rehabilitation of the physically handicapped. I spoke at some length on this point at the resolution stage, and pointed out that in this and every country there are thousands of young men and women who are physically handicapped, maybe from birth or because of industrial accidents, disease or some other cause. Normal occupations are denied to them, but through retraining they can be made selfsupporting and therefore, as I said before, self-respecting. There is a tremendous opportunity to do a great work in this field. It is encouraging to know that the provisions of the act are to be enlarged to make this possible.
That is practically all that is in the bill. The act which it amends provides for many of the things mentioned by the hon. member
16, 1954	3043
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act for Cape Breton South. If I may I should like to comment upon some of his remarks. First, there is provision in this bill-it has been done for years-for the retraining of those whose former occupation is now denied them, and where the necessity has arisen for transfer to new occupations. That has been done and is being done.
I should like to remark upon the suggestion that vocational high schools are not the answer. That is perfectly true. Vocational high schools are supposed to provide young people an opportunity to find themselves, the 90 per cent of our school population who will have to earn their living in the workaday world, who will not go forward to the universities. These people have to be trained vocationally. By the way, may I remark that I would like to know what kind of education is not vocational. Even university education is training for some vocation, although perhaps "vocation" is not dignified enough for university people.
Nevertheless, for the 90 per cent of our young people who do not go through university, who have to go out to work, vocational high schools are intended to provide a background. It is what we sometimes call the finding process, during which young people through proper guidance can determine for themselves the employment into which they should go. When I say "should go" I mean because of their particular aptitudes or because of their particular training.
They are not intended to provide the world with mechanics. No school ever pretends to turn out mechanics. I go further and say that no school can turn out mechanics. I even doubt that that can be done by a trade school. No instructor in a trade school pretends that without the environment of the industry itself a young person can feel fully at home in any trade. That is why under this program we have followed the practice of trying to establish what we call plant schools for training on the job, and why under the present act we have provision for apprentice training. This is done in every province, in different ways it is true because the conditions are different. In every province in Canada there are courses for apprentices. I am sorry if I seem to be usurping the function of the minister, who will reply to this later on. The hon. member for Cape Breton South mentioned a course in coal mining. We tried to do the same thing in British Columbia, but I think he will agree with me that you cannot train a coal miner in a school.
One important contribution the hon. member made was to refer to the difficulty we have always experienced in the matter of
3044	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act equality of opportunity. Due to the inequality of financial resources the richer provinces naturally can provide better facilities than those not so well favoured. That is why the council was established to advise the minister. It is an advisory council. The council has wrestled with this problem for several years, and I think it likely that some concrete suggestions may come forward from it this year so that the participation of the federal government will not be as it was in the past but may in some measure meet the objections which my hon. friend mentioned.
I have already mentioned apprentices. There is a good field there. The council which is to be constituted under this amending bill will, as I have said before, be representative of all the provinces. Therefore we shall be able to get a broader concept of the needs of the country as a whole and each province individually will be able to place its views, and advice before the minister.
I think this is just a step. I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. friend that vocational training is a major and important undertaking in this country. We have only just begun it, and it must be developed. Perhaps I might remind you of what I said at the resolution stage. Once we get the door to federal participation open some of us are ready to give it a little push and open it a little wider.


Clarence Gillis: May I correct the record. The hon. member says you cannot train miners in a school. I agree with him. However, despite their experience in British Columbia there was a good school established underground by the coal mining industry in Nova Scotia. This did an excellent job during the war and should have been continued.


Mr. L. D. Crestohl (Cartier):: Mr. Speaker,
I should like to make one or two observations on this matter. I feel like the hon. member for Cape Breton South and all those who are of the opinion that not sufficient attention is being given to the value of vocational training schools generally. I am pleased to see that the minister has now introduced a measure which may enable us to highlight the importance and the value of vocational training.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South referred to the fact that people coming to this country require training. Veterans returning from duty overseas, who have been away from their work, will need training if they intend to go into the trades. This country must keep abreast with mechanical progress, and that can be done only through vocational training.


We face the problem that the provinces are continually setting up by legislation joint committees or boards before which young people must appear to obtain what are called competence cards to qualify them for employment as bricklayers, machinists, electricians or carpenters. The people making up these boards which deal with competence cards are often those employed in the particular trade, and they may feel they have a certain vested interest in suppressing competition in that trade, and are apt to create difficulties for people who want to enter the trade. I feel that the creation of a system of vocational training schools would perhaps improve the present procedure under which young people must qualify for employment in various trades.
If, for example, a person graduates from a recognized trade school as an electrician or a carpenter and obtains a diploma from that school which, in effect, declares that he is now a competent carpenter, electrician, bricklayer or barber, that should be sufficient to enable that individual to qualify for a job in that particular trade. He should not again be subjected to scrutiny by a group of superexaminers within that trade who might be interested, as I pointed out, in forestalling competition and therefore might unfairly review a man's competence. To my way of thinking, the establishment of schools where people can be trained is not unlike the establishment of a system of universities. The previous speaker very properly pointed out that 90 per cent of our people do not attend universities. Yet, though I have not the figures with me, I believe we will find that a far greater proportion of money is expended in training the remaining 10 per cent of our population in the professions than is expended in training the 90 per cent in the trades in a form of skilled labour, which I believe, is the very basis of the future of this country.
For that reason, Mr. Chairman, I would like to commend the minister for introducing this amending bill at the present time, particularly with regard to that section of the bill which makes it possible for veterans to acquire training. Our men who are overseas away from their work, who in their formative years at the age of 19, 20, or 21 went into military service, have not had a proper opportunity to train themselves for the future. When they return four or five years later it is extremely helpful to them if they are able to enter a vocational school, if not a university, where they will become trained, equipped, and able to take their place in society. I consider that is a very helpful amendment to the present act.

Earlier in the session I placed a resolution on the order paper in which I asked the government to consider introducing legislation to allow as an exemption from income tax the fees which are to be paid to vocational training schools. I lay great emphasis on the fact, Mr. Speaker, that helping people to help themselves and making it possible for that 90 per cent of our population to become trained, self-respecting and self-supporting citizens, is one of the greatest duties we can possibly perform. If we shall encounter difficulties with the provinces on the constitutional aspect of this matter I am quite prepared to go along with the hon. member for Cape Breton South in suggesting that perhaps some federal system of vocational training schools should be created. Perhaps some conference can be held at which the federal authorities will be able to work out a method of closer co-operation with the provincial authorities so that the proper emphasis, the emphasis which the subject deserves, can be placed on creating adequate, competent, and satisfactory vocational training schools in Canada.


Mr. R. R. Knight (Saskatoon):: Mr. Speaker,
I was very glad indeed to hear the remarks of the hon. member for Cartier, who has just taken his seat, and generally I am in agreement with what he said. We know, of course, the difficulty we encounter in this country when we talk about federal participation in education, or federal grants to the provinces for the purpose of education. I am not thinking of vocational training as being education in the ordinary sense of the word, but it seems to me that no matter what branch of education we discuss, whether vocational or otherwise, we have to bear in mind that the provinces are not training or educating citizens for the province of Ontario or Saskatchewan or Quebec, but for all of Canada. In the same manner in which transportation crosses the provincial boundary lines, so also does this matter of training and education cross these provincial boundary lines.
In this regard I have in mind particularly the maritimes, from which the hon. member for Cape Breton South comes, and I am thinking of the great contribution to education which has been made by individuals from those particular provinces, those educators who went into the west when we did not have schools and universities to the extent they had them in the east. Perhaps we are catching up or even surpassing them now. Most of these men spent a greater amount of time in these other provinces than in the province where they received their own training. When our boys who were trained in vocational schools went overseas
16, 1954	3045
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act they were not considered as citizens of the province of Saskatchewan or Manitoba or Quebec or Ontario, but as citizens of Canada and they fought and worked under the proud insignia of the maple leaf of Canada.
I am glad there has been a widening in the scope of this act, particularly with regard to clause 2 (e). I know this is not the time to examine the clauses of the bill separately, but I merely wish to emphasize my agreement with the widening of the act in that respect.
Over the past few years, I believe as the result of the war, I have discovered that we have been getting some sympathy from the dominion government in such matters as this when the object is military or perhaps scientific. I have in mind such things as scientific research. The government has been not generous but perhaps ungrudging in its support of the scientific activities of schools and universities when the country is in need of men who are thus trained, and when it is obvious such training must be supported. It is a good deal more difficult to get them to move on the question of academic scholarships; but that, of course, I should not deal with here.
The clause in which there has been a widening of scope, and to which I referred, concerns not military but civilian matters. I inquired of my hon. friend, and I did not have time to receive an answer, whether this improvement was to be applied to the vocational training of nurses. I believe there is a distinct need all across this country and in every province for nurses. There was a time, of course, during the depression when nurses huddled together perhaps in a boarding house, and sometimes three or four of them had to live together. They were lucky if one or two obtained a day's work during the entire week. Like our friend in Moliere's "Le medecin malgre lui":
Nous avons change tout cela maintenant.
But we have changed all that now and it is a good thing. Nurses are at least given a training, and they are receiving decent wages and live under decent conditions. It is now five o'clock and I see Mr. Speaker is slightly uncomfortable in his chair, so perhaps I had better call it five o'clock.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to consideration of private and public bills.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Friday, March 12, consideration of the motion of Mr. Hunter for the second reading of Bill No. 325, to
[Stage Direction]
Niagara Gas Transmission Limited authorize Niagara Gas Transmission Limited to construct, own and operate an extraprovincial pipe line.
Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):: Mr. Speaker, when this debate was adjourned on Friday last I had just come to the point of making certain suggestions to bring about the objective which I feel sure the great majority of the members of this house have in mind. That objective is to make it absolutely certain that the passing of this bill and the subsequent actions of those who are sponsoring the bill will not interfere with the construction of the much greater project, namely the natural gas pipe line from Alberta across Canada to the provinces of Ontario and Quebec.
I had pointed out that the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) had one suggestion to offer. I think it was a good one, though I doubt whether it meets the need. He suggested that in the standing committee there should be written into the bill an amendment to the effect that it would not come into force until an agreement had been signed between Niagara Gas Transmission Limited and Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited and that agreement had been filed with and approved by the board of transport commissioners.
My first suggestion is that Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited build this pipe line from the centre of the Niagara river to the city of Toronto. They already have a charter which is broad enough to enable them to undertake that work. If they actually build the line and own it, there can then be no doubt that Consumers' Gas Company of Toronto would not be in a position to interfere with the larger project. If the pipe line were built by Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited there would then be no need to pass this private bill because Consumers' Gas Company would then not have to build a pipe line. I place that suggestion before the government and before those members who will be on the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines, as one way of making dead sure that Consumers' Gas Company cannot interfere with the construction of the Trans-Canada line.
My second suggestion is that the government give consideration to taking power to control the import of natural gas into Canada, just as they now have the power to control its export. As hon. members know, there is in existence a statute known as the Electricity and Fluid Exportation Act. It is chapter 93 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, and it provides for effective control by the Department of Trade and Commerce of the export of electrical power or energy and also of


petroleum, natural gas, water or other fluid, whether liquid or gaseous, capable of being exported through pipe lines or other like contrivances.
In that statute there is the clear-cut power to control exports. I think this new development is of such a nature that consideration should be given to taking similar power over imports. If that power were in existence there could then be no possibility of Consumers' Gas Company blocking the Trans-Canada project by piping in this gas from the United States.
The Americans have power to control both export and import. I have here their natural gas act. Section 3 reads as follows:
After six months from the date on which this act takes effect no person shall export any natural gas from the United States to a foreign country or import any natural gas from a foreign country without first having secured an order of the commission authorizing it to do so.
The reference, of course, is to the federal power commission of the United States. The section of the act continues:
The commission shall issue such order upon application, unless, after opportunity for hearing, it finds that the proposed exportation or importation will not be consistent with the public interest. The commission may by its order grant such application, in whole or in part, with such modification and upon such terms and conditions as the commission may find necessary or appropriate-
Then there is this further power which I would point out to hon. members:
-and may from time to time, after opportunity for hearing, and for good cause shown, make such supplemental order in the premises as it may find necessary or appropriate.
It is under that last portion of the section that the federal power commission of the United States can shut off the gas which is being exported to Canada if it can be shown that in their own country there are people who need that gas. I therefore suggest that the second way of making sure that the Trans-Canada project is not interfered with by the importation of United States gas would be by amending the Electricity and Fluid Exportation Act.
So much for suggestions as to what could be done. I now wish to make a suggestion concerning the manner in which this bill is dealt with in parliament. There is coming from the other place another bill which amends the charter of Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited. In view of the fact that both these companies are involved in this question, I think it would be wise to have those two bills considered at the same time by the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. The members of that committee can see that the various witnesses are called, the two bills can be studied

together, and in that way we can go much further in making sure that the smaller project is not going to kill the larger one.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, there is one feature I should like to point out to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) because the Pipe Lines Act comes directly under his jurisdiction. This bill now before us is not one asking for incorporation. It is a bill merely giving to a company, which has already been incorporated under the Ontario companies act, power to construct pipe lines. All the other pipe-line bills that have been passed by parliament have been bills granting charters. They have been in complete form, so the members could amend the charter and the Companies Act of the dominion applied.
Here we have not that situation at all. These people went to the registrar of companies in Ontario and merely obtained registration there.	Now they come to this
parliament and ask for a bill authorizing them to construct a pipe line. The whole intention of parliament in dealing with these pipe lines was that there would have to be a charter granted by a private bill. As I say, that procedure has been followed in every other case. The minister himself made it quite clear that that was his idea as to the procedure under the Pipe Lines Act, when he put through the amendment to the Pipe Lines Act in December last. I am now quoting from page 621 of Hansard. I had asked him a question and he had this to say:
As I understand this amendment, it is still necessary for extra-provincial or interprovincial pipe lines to seek authority from this parliament by way of a special charter in order to apply to the board of transport commissioners for its location.
That is exactly what has not been done in this case. As a matter of fact this company was incorporated on the 11th of September, 1950, over a year after the Pipe Lines Act had been passed. Therefore the Consumers' Gas people must have known of the requirements of the Pipe Lines Act, but rather than come here to get a charter they formed their company under the Ontario companies act and now they are merely coming here to seek passage of this very short bill which gives them power to go ahead and construct a pipe line. That means that if they can get away with that, anybody else can. It would mean that a company could be formed under the British Columbia companies act and take the power to construct pipe lines, and then it would only need to come to this house and get a skeleton bill passed such as we have before us today.
I am quite sure that such a procedure is against the intent and the spirit of the Pipe Lines Act. I think the minister should inform
Niagara Gas Transmission Limited us whether he approves of a course of this kind being followed rather than having a proper charter approved by the Senate and the House of Commons in the shape of a proper bill.
I have nothing further to add. I place my two suggestions before the house. They may not be a solution. On the other hand, I think either one of them would meet what we all desire, and perhaps the government will see fit to take action along at least one of the lines suggested.


Lionel Chevrier: May I ask the hon. member a question? From the legal point of view what difference is there in his mind between the method of procedure by way of charter and the method of procedure in this bill?


Howard Charles Green: If 1 may answer that, Mr. Speaker, one very important difference is that when some of these other bills came before the committee we amended one of the sections to provide that the pipe line must be built in Canada. That has been done with quite a few of these bills. But it cannot be done under this particular bill, because it does not contain the powers at all. It merely provides that a company which has already obtained its powers from the Ontario legislature can go ahead and build a pipe line. I do not see why there should be that discrimination. If other people have had to come here and get a proper charter, then there is no reason why these people should not do the same thing.
Another feature is that much of the control of Niagara Gas Transmission Limited is under the Ontario companies act whereas if they had a proper charter, as others have, the control would be under the dominion Companies Act. I think that is where it should be.


Solon Earl Low: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to speak at any length because I feel that the hon. member who is sponsoring the bill will want to get it through. But there are two or three things which I believe should be on the record, and I should like to indicate the position taken by the group I represent with respect to the bill now before us.
First I want to comment very briefly on something said on Friday last by the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis). He made what I thought was a justifiable complaint when he said, as recorded at page 2948 of Hansard of March 12:
I do not consider that a national project is in the best interests of this country if certain sections are going to be injured or thrown into complete economic chaos without consideration being given as to what compensations are going to be made in that area for the acceptance of what is loosely termed a technological advance.
3048	HOUSE OF
Niagara Gas Transmission Limited
What the hon. member had in his mind was doubtless the failure over the years of governments, the coal industry and others to adjust themselves to what was sure to come in the near future. I think he saw that we have never adopted a well-defined national fuel policy into which we have attempted to integrate the various factors that now affect some parts of the country adversely and some parts the other way. The part of the country my hon. friend represents will doubtless be adversely affected by the building of a trans-Canada pipe line. There is no question about the fact that some part of the coal market that has been enjoyed by Cape Breton and Nova Scotia generally will be taken away when western gas is piped into Ontario and Quebec markets.
It looks to me as though this possibility could have been foreseen years ago and some provision could have been made to compensate those parts of the country which will be adversely affected. I have in mind, for example, that while we were subsidizing the expansion of the steel industry in Canada perhaps more attention could have been paid to establishing such expanded facilities in the province represented by my hon. friend. I do not think we took too seriously the needs of Nova Scotia at the time. I have in mind that when the Trans-Canada pipe line gets under way we are going to need quantities of very large steel pipe of a type that few mills in Canada are prepared to make today. It seems to me that it could have been possible through some compensating policy for the mills of Nova Scotia to be equipped under a government-subsidized program to make this large pipe so we could have not only a Canada first policy with respect to a pipe line but also a Canada first policy with respect to providing the materials with which the pipe line is to be built.
If a subsidy is going to be paid in any way, directly or indirectly, in connection with the building of the trans-Canada pipe line, I certainly would suggest that it be paid to assist our Canadian mills to provide materials so that we may have Canadian materials going into a Canadian pipe line. I would oppose strongly any subsidy by way of taxation reduction or anything else with respect to the supply of pipe or other materials going into the pipe line if they are brought from the United States or any other country. That brings me to this point, that we have consistently followed a Canada first policy that goes beyond the mere provision of an all-Canada pipe line.
I should like to say briefly that I agree with the suggestion the hon. member for Cape Breton South has made. But I also


agree with the hon. member for Vancouver South (Mr. Philpott) who the other night drew attention to the fact that the coal industry had failed dismally to meet the challenge of the times, in that it had not attempted to process its product so as to make it easily transportable and storable without disastrous loss. They have not done very much to help themselves; 1 hate to admit that. I believe there has been shortsightedness all round.
In connection with the proposal now before us I should like to place on record the attitude taken by the people in Alberta -and when I refer to the people in Alberta I am speaking about those in official positions who have to make decisions with respect to the export of natural gas from that province. It has already been pointed out that the building of the Niagara Gas Transmission Limited pipe line might seriously affect the success of the Trans-Canada pipe line. The Trans-Canada venture is a tremendous thing, one that staggers the imagination. We are told it will be capable of transporting 540 million cubic feet of gas per day, and that the cost will run to something like $300 million. The effort is perhaps the biggest of its kind in the world's history.
Niagara Gas Transmission Limited, whose application we are now discussing, will transport something like 23 million cubic feet per day, which is puny by comparison. One is inclined to ask himself how a short line of this kind, transporting only 23 million cubic feet a day, could endanger the success of the bigger enterprise. Well, it could; I do not think there is any question about that, particularly if the company that is going to take gas from Niagara Gas Transmission Limited were to take the stand that its franchise is permanent, or that it would continue for more than the period of 20 years for which the agreement is supposed to be made, or were to consider that there would be no restriction on the continuation of the franchise. I should think a situation of that kind might possibly endanger the financing and the success of the Trans-Canada venture.
To our way of thinking, however, the pipe line we are now considering is desirable, in spite of the fact that there may be some dangers involved. Niagara Gas Transmission Limited will bring Louisiana natural gas into the Toronto area two or three years ahead of the arrival of Alberta or other western Canada gas, making it possible for Consumers' Gas Company, the distributing company, to build up a market for natural gas in readiness for the western product when it does arrive. For that reason this bill should be passed through parliament as

quickly as possible, so the construction of the line can proceed and perhaps be completed this year. I understand there is a possibility that it can be, if orders for steel can be given soon.
However, we agree with the Acting Prime Minister (Mr. Howe) when he says that some form of coming into force clause must be written into the bill before it is passed so as to safeguard the interests and the position of Trans-Canada, the major venture. The clause should spell out the guarantee that the import of gas by Niagara Gas Transmission Limited will be tapered off as soon as western gas is made available, and that the flow will be reversed, if it is found to be desirable and economically and otherwise feasible.
At this moment, however, let me say emphatically that the eastern United States would provide the poorest possible overflow market for western gas; I do not think there is any doubt about that. It simply is stating what must be self-evident to say that the eastern United States is the most highly competitive market possible for our western gas. The middle west is a far more valuable market for Alberta producers than the market in the eastern United States would be. So when we talk about reversing the flow through the Niagara Gas Transmission Limited line I am of the opinion that we would be trying to get into a market so highly competitive we might find ourselves in difficulty. And so I am not at all enthusiastic about the reverse flow idea through this proposed pipe line. I am much more concerned about the provision of middle and far western United States markets for overflow Canadian gas. And I hope that point will be kept in mind, because we simply must take into consideration the economics of this whole enterprise, something which I fear is sometimes forgotten or overlooked.
Economics must be kept in mind because Alberta producers must never find themselves put in a squeeze so that the wellhead price would interfere seriously with exploration and development. We need that development constantly; otherwise we are not going to find the reserves of gas that will be required to keep a transmission line, like the Trans-Canada line, in operation for the years it will be required.
In closing I would say we hope the bill will be passed as quickly as possible, because the season is advancing and the company needs to know whether it can make application for the steel and get into the field in order to complete the building of the pipe line this year.
16, 1954	3049
Niagara, Gas Transmission Limited


George Prudham: Mr. Speaker, I had not intended to take part in this debate. However, as the department with which I am associated is very closely connected with the development of the natural resources of the country I think it is in order for me to state briefly what we think would be an orderly development of the natural gas resources in Canada.
As we all know, the natural resources belong to the provinces. Until Alberta declared it had a surplus of gas for export, this government had no gas to deal with. However, as soon as Alberta declared it had a surplus of gas for export, or that it would have a surplus at an early date, it became the responsibility of the federal government. My department has for years advocated that an orderly pattern of development of natural gas in Canada would involve the development of Peace river gas for the Pacific coast, and central and southern Alberta gas for Alberta; and, if and when there was a surplus, that it should come to eastern Canada.
We are very pleased that this pattern is taking shape now. Alberta has declared a surplus. In my opinion, they have been perhaps a little too conservative up until the present moment with respect to their reserves of gas. As a matter of fact, right now in the production of oil about 25 billion cubic feet of gas is being flared every year. This does not mean all that gas would be available for pipe lines. Some of it would originate in isolated places and it would not be economical to gather it, but a large portion of that gas now going to waste could be used by Canadians. The quantity now being flared in the production of oil just about equals the peak of the Turner valley waste, which Albertans especially and Canadians generally are not very happy to recall.
Several proposals have been before parliament and before the public as to how Alberta's surplus gas should be disposed of. Many rival companies, most of them United States companies, have proposed to take gas to different regions of the United States. Recently at the request of the Alberta government, the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) assisted in bringing two of the major companies together for the purpose of building a trans-Canada line. The federal policy in respect to export of gas from Alberta was clearly stated by the Minister of Trade and Commerce in this house on March 13, 1953, as reported at page 2929 of Hansard, when he said:
Therefore the policy of the government of Canada is to refuse permits for moving natural gas by
3050	HOUSE OF
Niagara Gas Transmission Limited pipe line across an international boundary until such time as we are convinced that there can be no economic use, present or future, for that natural gas, within Canada.
That is still the policy of this government, in spite of what many promoters and others seem to believe. Many of them still think permission will be given to send gas to Minneapolis and the inland empire south of Alberta, as they call the central western states, but the policy is as stated by the minister, and it still stands.
The Trans-Canada Pipe Line company has been incorporated. I believe an amendment to their charter is before the other house at the present time and will be coming here shortly. The amalgamation was brought about for the purpose of piping gas to eastern Canada. The Minister of Trade and Commerce went on to say, and I quote his words:
As I have said, the proposal is to follow this policy, within reason. To date one exception has been made. It was made in response to a request from the director of defence mobilization of the United States that Canada supply a defence production requirement for gas in order to maintain the production of copper at Anaconda's smelter in Montana. The requirement was small.
It was made originally to aid our common defence effort. The other exception was when we gave permission to export gas to the northwestern states through Vancouver. That was necessary in order to assure that British Columbia and the Vancouver area would get gas; otherwise the pipe line through that area would not have been economically possible.
As far as the bill before the house is concerned, I am not sure that it is at all necessary to bring gas in via the Niagara peninsula as the bill proposes. In the western part of Ontario we fortunately have quite a large reserve of natural gas. I am not exactly sure of the reserve, but I think it is in the order of 168 billion cubic feet. We are indeed fortunate that we have that gas storage basin at this end of the line. That gas is available for the early build-up of the market in Ontario.
In conversations we have had with the Ontario government we have been informed that they are quite willing to help facilitate the release of all that gas for the build-up period, but the latest information our department has is that there will not be quite enough gas in reserve in that storage basin in Ontario to meet the peak loads of the build-up period. In other words, they need a comparatively small quantity of gas at times. If they use that gas for the build-up they will need a small additional quantity at times of peak loads that will develop.
It may be that this proposed gas line will serve that purpose. There is, however, an


alternate proposal that the additional requirements of gas be brought in via the present international pipe line at Windsor. I do not know which proposal has more merit, but I presume the board of transport commissioners will weigh those factors very carefully, and when this bill goes to the committee and subsequently to the board of transport commissioners for study, we shall have all the facts.
That storage basin in Ontario will be vital. It will be important to the efficient operation of the Trans-Canada line and the operation of the gas line through the periods when there is a high peak of demand; and then probably during the night or hot weather there will be periods when the demand is low. If that storage basin in western Ontario is depleted in the building up of the initial market, in preparation for the flow that will come through the Trans-Canada line when it is built, the cushion will be there to absorb the off-peak loads and that will contribute to the efficient operation of the Trans-Canada line.
I do not know that I should like to say anything more at this time. I believe that the complete output of the Trans-Canada line can be used in central Canada, and I believe it will be needed there. The hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Low) mentioned that the building of this pipe line will probably interfere with the markets for coal from the maritimes. In my department I am between two fires, between coal and gas. I try to assess the merits of each and see how they both fit into the national energy picture.
There is a need now, and I believe there will be a continuing need, for coal in our energy picture in Canada. But I do know, and I think we all realize, that there will have to be adjustments. The coal industry is facing a crisis now. It seems that they have been in a crisis ever since I took over the responsibility of the coal board two years ago, and I cannot see anything but continuing -I was going to say "trouble", but at least continuing concern about the future of the industry for some years to come.
Maritime coal has never been a very big factor in the Ontario market. I believe it enjoys quite a large share of the Montreal and Quebec markets. If and when gas reaches Montreal it will probably mean that some of the maritime coal will be replaced. However, this country is not standing still. The population of the province of Ontario is increasing at the rate of 270,000 people a year, which is the population of a good-sized city. I think the gas will compete more with electricity and oil than it will with coal.

With our expanding economy we are going to need all forms of energy that may be available. During the adjustment period the coal industry is going to have to change its methods. There will have to be more research done by the industry as well as by governments. But I do believe that within a few years after natural gas reaches this market and the coal industry has had a chance to readjust itself to changing conditions there will be a place for both.
Probably I am getting a little away from the bill before us, and I do not think I shall digress any further. I wish to restate what I said before, that I think perhaps this proposed pipe line will fit into the picture. I am not sure that it will be absolutely essential, but I see no harm in passing it on to a committee and to the board of transport commissioners for study.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, the views of this group have been expressed already by those who spoke on our behalf when the bill was before the house on previous occasions, so I shall not take more than a few minutes now. As a matter of fact it is because of the reservations already indicated by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) that we see no objections to this bill going to the committee for study.
I found it most interesting to listen to those reservations made by the minister when he spoke on March 9. I think he made one or two very important and significant points. As others have pointed out during the course of this debate, he more or less indicated that he would not be prepared to let the bill go through its final stage unless an amendment was made to it in committee. The amendment the minister felt to be necessary would add a clause to provide that the bill would not come into force until a mutually satisfactory agreement between Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited and Consumers' Gas Company had been deposited with the board of transport commissioners.
I think that is a good idea. I suggest that when the committee is considering such a coming into force clause it should go a step further than was suggested by the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In my view the minister got down to the nub of this matter when he said, as reported at page 2818 of Hansard for March 9:
Obviously, bringing gas in from Buffalo through a pipe line involves considerable investment,-
I ask that these words of the minister be noted.
-and one wonders what is to become of that investment if the line goes out of use in a matter of three years.
Niagara Gas Transmission Limited
Indeed that is a question that concerns a good many of us. If it is to be understood that gas is to be brought in from the United States through this pipe line only until such time as gas is available to the Toronto area from western Canada, then the question arises as to the economics of the building of an expensive pipe line to be used for a very short period. The minister went on to say:
I believe ways can be worked out so that investment can be assumed by Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited; and I believe we should know, before this bill becomes law, that such an arrangement is being worked out to the mutual satisfaction of the Consumers' Gas Company and Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited.
The minister repeated his reference to a mutually satisfactory arrangement between those two entities, Consumers' Gas Company and Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited, but I suggest that in a matter like this there is a third party whose interests should also be satisfied in any such agreement. I refer to the people of Canada, perhaps in this instance more particularly the consumers at the receiving end. It may be all right for these two companies, so far as they are concerned, to work out a mutually satisfactory arrangement whereby the one buys out the other at an exorbitant price which is made the basis for extra cost to the consumer. That is a matter we should be concerned about. In my view that point, along with the others which have been discussed while we have had the second reading of the bill before us, should be considered carefully by the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.
I am glad to note the reservations which were made just a few moments ago by the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Prudham) when he spoke with respect to this bill. It is because of those reservations, and because of the assurance we have been given that this bill will be studied very carefully in committee that we see no reason to object to it being given second reading at this time.
However, and with this I close, I stress the point that the interests to be protected are not just the interests of the two companies referred to by the Minister of Trade and Commerce. The interests to be protected include those of the people of Canada as a whole, particularly the interests of the consumers who will be using this gas, or the gas that will come later from western Canada.


Robert Hardy Small: Mr. Speaker, following up the remarks made by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) in regard to the interests involved, he touched on one which should really be
3052	HOUSE OF
Niagara Gas Transmission Limited given the most consideration; that is, the consumer. It is about the consumer that I intend to make a few remarks, particularly the consumer in the Toronto area which they seem to value so highly. The hon. member pointed out the fact that assurances have been given by the minister in charge of the bill that necessary guarantees will be forthcoming to protect the trans-Canada line.
The power situation, not only in Ontario but throughout the country generally, is very serious. By bringing gas from Alberta we are using one way of solving the problem of providing extra power. The economic problem will solve itself through increased demands and potential future markets. When electrical power was first made available to Ontario there was so much of it they did not know what to do with it. They were concerned with having it consumed. Then over a period of probably 50 years the situation changed and today we cannot get enough power to meet the demands.
The picture of gas being transported from the west is something that taxes the imagination again. I visualize the future of this country being such that we will be able to take all the gas that comes from Alberta and probably all we can get from the United States. But in the meantime it is essential that we have gas which is available at our door from the Louisiana source. This is where the consumers come into the picture, since they will get gas much cheaper because it has a higher heating content. I think the province of Ontario is vitally interested in having this source of supply at its door and it should be made available for use as soon as they can get it, which will be in perhaps one year's time.
There is only one means by which it can be used, through the Consumers' Gas Company. They have the facilities by which they can dispose of this gas, and they have storage for it in southwestern Ontario. I do not think there need be any worry about the future of Alberta gas. Once that line is put through to supply our markets-and according to those who have spoken on this bill that supply is expanding every day-there will be so much of it that we will have a problem in taking care of it. In fact much of it is going into the air and being entirely wasted, and the sooner we put it to some use the better. In the meantime, while building this line to bring Canadian gas here we should have the use of this other gas for the purposes suggested by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles). The sooner Consumers' Gas can get it, then the sooner the market can be provided, for in all


probability it will overcome the power shortage at present existing in Ontario, and assist the other eastern provinces in obtaining much-needed industrial power.
I mention this because I recall what took place earlier in the development of electrical power in Ontario, and I can see the very same development for natural gas in this country. Having seen what happened before we should take care it does not happen again. Once the line is built there will be no end to the demand. I believe they will probably be able to supply the western states as well, and even supply the northern part of Canada which has not yet been brought into the picture. The gas can probably reach as far as the maritime provinces even if they have to move it through the eastern part of the United States.
If you consider the development of this project over the next half century then perhaps you can visualize that project reaching the point where we can take gas from coal in the ground. If you wish to give full rein to your imagination there are many developments which can be visualized in relation to this project for the future. But at the present time the essential need is to get that gas to Consumers' Gas Company and thence to the consumers who want to use it. You need not worry about the integrity of the Consumers' Gas or whether they will observe their covenant. We are dealing with a reputable organization and we can accept their guarantees; and once the Minister of Trade and Commerce is satisfied, the company's conduct will be governed in the best interests of Canada.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house ready for the question?


Mr. Holowach:: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to direct one question to the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys (Mr. Prudham). How does the minister reconcile the policy as to the export of natural gas out of this country as enunciated by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) last March with recent statements that he approves and is in agreement with the "amalgamation principle" of the two pipe lines outlined by the government of Alberta? I ask that question because one of the companies concerned in this amalgamation has had the intention of securing markets in the middle states in order to ensure the pipe line in Canada being economically feasible.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member will, of course, realize that the minister cannot answer that question now, and the matter may be dealt with in committee. The bill,

once it is reported by the standing committee, will be considered in committee of the whole, at which time the hon. member may ask his question. In any event the hon. member's question is now in Hansard, and I imagine that at some future time there will be an opportunity for the minister to reply.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines.

Mr. Speaker:: There are several bills on the order paper on which it is intended to move second reading at this time. Is it agreed that Bills Nos. 355 to 372 inclusive, being divorce bills, be considered in one motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


John William Gordon Hunter: that the following bills be read the second time:
Bill No. 355, for the relief of Marie Jeannette Lucille Catherine Clement Cantin.- Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 356, for the relief of Pauline Prussick Astrof.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 357, for the relief of Martha Betty Schenck Clarke.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 358, for the relief of Felice D'Abate.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 359, for the relief of Olga Korim Falardeau.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 360, for the relief of Harold Robertson Mann.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 361, for the relief of Sophie Rosenberg Rosenberg.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 362, for the relief of Frederica Priesel Barrett.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 363, for the relief of Jean Bertha Thomson Lanthier.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 364, for the relief of Roger Tremblay.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 365, for the relief of Adelaide Nina Hall Lanktree.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 366, for the relief of Femande Gilberte Andrea Leclair Daoust.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 367, for the relief of Diana Barbara Boone Guinness.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 368, for the relief of Clara Sperber Meilen Fink.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 369, for the relief of Maria Assunta Pilozzi Raspa.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 370, for the relief of Robert James Cooper.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 371, for the relief of Diana Frances Nash Milmine.-Mr. Hunter.
16, 1954	3053
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act Bill No. 372, for the relief of Ross Willis Garrow.-Mr. Hunter.
Motion agreed to and bills read the second time.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Gregg for the second reading of Bill No. 326, to amend the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act.
Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Mr. Speaker, before the dinner recess I had said that I supported this bill with a good deal of pleasure. It will involve some expenditure on the part of the nation and some on the part of the individual provinces. They are, however, expenditures that I think will be well justified. They are really an investment in the future of the nation, and also in the future of the individual for whose benefit the bill is introduced.
I think we derive the greatest satisfaction in life from the things we can do well. As I envisage this bill it will result in training people to do things well, and will turn into skilled workers much of the unskilled human material that goes to the vocational or trade schools which this bill should help to support. We are told that Canada is becoming more and more an industrial nation, and this fact is well known. But if we are to improve our position-nay, if we are to retain it-in the competitive industrial world, we shall have to have skilled workers who can produce and run the machines which can take the drudgery out of human labour. I think Britain is one nation to which we can look as an example of a country that realizes the importance of such schools in the training of its labour force. Britain is a country whose very life depends upon its export goods which are produced by its own skilled labour. Hence I say that we have great need for an expansion of our vocational training and for the creation of more and more trade schools.
Through the courtesy of one of the hon. members I was speaking the other day to a group of high school students. As I have spoken to other high school students on other occasions, I was talking to them about what they might do later in life. If you take
3054	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act a poll of the average high school, in its upper grades, you will find that the students have great ambitions, and that is as it should be. You will find that 90 per cent of them will tell you that they wish some day to go on to what they call the higher professions. But statistics prove that they do not eventually reach those higher professions. The Minister of Labour would know more about this matter than I do, but I imagine the figure for those who do is about 10 per cent.
A great many of those students will graduate into equally honourable and useful work. Many of them will become nurses or stenographers or skilled workers of various kinds. They will be working in industry. They can be fitted for that work by the improvements in vocational training that are envisaged in this particular bill. Therefore it has my wholehearted support. Many of the high school or public school students are just not fitted for higher academic learning. Some of them have no particular taste for it. Again there are many who, through force of circumstances, are obliged to go to work early in order that they may assist with the bringing up of the other children by a contribution to the weekly wage. Then again there are many of those who find satisfaction in some creative work with their hands, and I say all honour to them.
For the reasons I have stated, I think this bill is a good idea indeed and will be well worth the money expended under it. Of course a pessimist might say that owing to the vast technological advancement we already have experienced, and owing to our reliance upon machines to produce our goods, more and more people will be unemployed. But even if I knew that not all those people would be employed, at least in the immediate future, I would still advocate their training particularly for the personal satisfaction that it brings to them to be capable people, to know that they have a stake in the nation and in society, and that they are contributing to its good as well as to their own.


Mr. F. G. J. Hahn (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, we in this group agree that this is a good bill. However, as with so many things, we find that it does not go quite as far as we would wish it to go. I am happy to see that the government is going to set up a committee to study the bill further, because I feel quite sure that it can stand some additional study. I think we are extremely fortunate in this parliament to have among the members one who has spent so much time as a prominent educator-I speak of the hon. member for Victoria, B.C. (Mr. Fairey)-who has contributed such


valuable information at this stage of the bill and who possibly will have more to say on it at another time.
In his explanation of the bill I found the address of the Minister of Labour extremely illuminating. I was particularly pleased to note that provision was made for the rehabilitation and training of disabled civilians. The continuation of training, wherever and whenever an extension is possible, should certainly not be frowned upon but rather should be greatly encouraged. I believe that the service clubs who have helped in any way to assist these poor unfortunates should be congratulated for their efforts.
In a subsequent explanation of the bill the Minister of Labour explained to us the reason for raising the number on the advisory council from 16 to 20 members. I would say this is a good move at this time. The bill, if anything, has suffered from the fact that we have had trade, labour and industry represented, and then they have had to go to the provincial governments and ask for financial assistance. This is rather like putting the cart before the horse. Sometimes it has been a little bit difficult to get the help that should have been forthcoming.
We found today that the hon. member for Cape Breton South had added substantially to the debate on the bill. I noted one remark he made respecting the provinces and the fact that they would not be capable of participating on a 50-50 basis in equalizing the cost factor as between them and the federal authorities. I think he was specifically pointing his finger at the province of which I am a representative.
I should like to draw his attention to one of the factors that I think is important in British Columbia. While we may have a higher per capita revenue than any other province in the dominion, we also have a higher per capita expenditure for social services than any other province in the dominion. Just by way of comparison I might say that 6-3 per cent of our population is made up of persons over 70 years of age as compared with 3-7 per cent in New Brunswick. The fact that we happen to give a cost of living bonus of $15 per month to those same aged people naturally adds to our cost of social services. Those dollars are therefore not available for purposes of education, much as we would desire to give them.
I also feel that we do not contribute enough in proportion to the cost of university education. However, we must remember in this regard that universities play a different part from that of vocational training in the

world of education. Upon our university educators will depend what place Canada will occupy among the nations in the future. The matter of research is very important, and while the comparison is not odious at the same time I do not think it is entirely warranted to say that we should spend as much in proportion on vocational guidance as we do upon university education.
The bill has other shortcomings. First there is the question of educational qualifications. The minister dealt with that in part when he suggested that the provincial governments have the authority to accept those pupils who do not have the necessary educational standing. I am quite willing to agree with that. However, I believe that in the final analysis the provincial authorities in making their choice of trainees will naturally select those who are more capable, those who have reached the secondary level of education as is required by the bill. If there is any room left they will probably then give consideration to those who have only obtained .grade 4, 5 or 6 standing, or whatever it may be.
I am not suggesting that there is a large group of people in Canada whose educational standing is only of grade 6 level. However, throughout this large dominion there are probably several hundreds or thousands who for various reasons, possibly because they were living in rural areas where no institution of learning was available, did not have the opportunity to acquire the educational standing required by the bill in order to qualify them for vocational training. Many of our unemployed today fall into this category and are ineligible. Therefore I suggest the bill should be modified in such a way as to permit all those who aspire and who indicate an aptitude for training to become eligible. For example, if a young lady has learned the art of the seamstress at home and indicates to the authorities in charge of the educational scheme that she has a certain aptitude, she should be made eligible for such a course. Similarly this is true in the case of machinists and others. I would not decrease the educational standards, but rather would suggest increasing the scope for admittance to vocational training courses.
I would say that the second factor requiring serious consideration is cost. The cost of education today is possibly the greatest headache of municipal districts. I do not believe there is a municipality in Canada where the school board and municipal authorities are not at loggerheads over the price that must be paid for education. I realize that under the vocational training scheme the federal government is willing to
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act pay its 50 per cent. I believe one hon. member indicated earlier that he felt, and I do too, that we are concerned with adult education in this case, and that the classroom education of these people should have been taken care of at the primary level. However, that is not available today; therefore vocational institutions are placed in such a position that adult education is not on a comparable basis with secondary or primary education, and probably should receive more assistance from the federal government.
I am quite aware that the federal authorities say that education is a provincial job. No doubt the provinces are jealous of their rights and want to look after their educational problems. However, the municipalities are very much in need of assistance, and since their only source of revenue is the direct taxation dollar they should be given more consideration. That might be given some thought.
I was interested in studying the report of the first national conference on apprenticeship in trades and industries, held at Ottawa on May 19, 20 and 21, 1952. The report deals in part with penitentiaries, and the interesting feature so far as I am concerned has to do with a suggestion made by an hon. member yesterday that possibly we would not have quite so much crime or so many criminals if we had more vocational training. In studying the report I found the following of interest. The total male population of the penitentiaries of Canada at that time was approximately 4,500. Those under 30 years of age numbered about 3,000 and those under 21 about 500. The report stated that 98 per cent of those people would be leaving these institutions as free men and returning to society.
I know the penitentiaries have a vocational training scheme. Apparently it is an excellent one, because the results would indicate that they are paying attention to vocational training. The penitentiaries have within them nothing but the worst criminals in the country, and this is what we find. Of 465 discharged, who had received vocational training, 86 per cent have not become repeaters in crime. That is a very notable factor. Apparently the reason they have not become repeaters is that they have taken vocational training courses. On the other hand, in the case of those individuals who did not take vocational training courses we find that only 40 per cent have not committed further crimes.
I would say it is better to stop a potential criminal by training him in a vocation than to imprison him following an offence. Eliminate the cause of his going to prison.
3056	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act I am sure the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) would be very happy if he found that the number of criminals had decreased because we decided to spend more money and make vocational training courses so interesting that more people would take them. These young criminals have indicated that they have the ability to think, the ability to plan and the ability to observe. In my opinion these three fundamentals are most important in teaching an individual art, and I believe the minister will agree that those factors are certainly present in the minds of these individuals. They should be encouraged along the right line of thinking. Make them eligible for jobs, and thus do away with the problem of criminal repeaters. It might be that a certain course would not be available at a particular institution, and it might be necessary to transfer a prisoner from one institution to another so he could take the course he wished. However, remember that education is cheaper than incarceration.
Another factor is the apprenticeship system. The industries taking part in this program are to be commended. I know that a good number of them have spent several thousands of dollars, and they are certainly doing an excellent job. The federal government, with the co-operation of the provincial governments and the industries themselves, has an excellent opportunity to bring about far-reaching results. I would say that we should have a rigorous apprenticeship system which would remove some of the unskilled labour from the ranks of the unemployed. I am in agreement with the hon. member for Cape Breton South that when in previous times the unemployed population stood at approximately 400,000, there were jobs available for about 370,000.
The apprenticeship system will re-establish the higher quality of workmanship. We often hear it said that we are losing our markets. Perhaps one of the reasons is that our products are deficient in quality. That may be possible, and is something that should be investigated. The apprenticeship system will result in a reduction in crime and immorality among our youth, and stop overcrowding in our penal institutions. I have already dealt with this matter to some extent.
Can it be that we have reached that point in our industrial revolution where the apprenticeship system is a necessary part of our guilds and unions system? I believe the industrial revolution we have today is probably as great as the one we had some centuries ago. Any apprenticeship system that is advocated must of necessity become an integral part of our method of solving our problems


in industry. Certainly the matter of guilds and unions should be investigated by provincial departments of education and by our federal government.
Perhaps hon. members would be interested in some of the factors set out in the book to which I referred earlier in these remarks. I shall not enumerate all of them, because the information is available to hon. members who are interested. However, there are two or three which I believe might be drawn to our attention. The first of these is a shortage of learners. There is a definite shortage of apprentices, as prescribed under provincial apprenticeship legislation, in those industries requiring skilled help, to which I referred earlier in my address.
There are three main reasons for the shortage of apprentices. First, there is a lack of interest on the part of employers, many of whom feel it is not their duty to try to find jobs for unskilled labour. They are not a bit interested in training people to work in their factories. I believe employers should be taught to revise their ideas, so they would become a valuable part of our apprenticeship system.
The second reason for the shortage is the fear by the unions of a condition of overcrowding. This is very common today, and I would offer as examples bricklayers and stonemasons, who are working only at half speed. A bricklayer will not lay more than a certain number of bricks each day, not because he is incapable of doing more but because he believes that if he did he would work himself out of a job and would have nothing to do next day. The apprenticeship system, they believe, would crowd them out of their trade. That is, in my opinion, one of the reasons for a shortage of skilled labour.
The third reason is the lack of information with respect to opportunities and benefits flowing from the apprenticeship system.
There are three suggested remedies, the first of which is continued support by provincial and federal governments of the apprenticeship idea. This would require the support of institutions of learning. Then, second, organized labour must be encouraged to consider the apprenticeship problem with a view to bringing about the best results from the use of our manpower. Third, we must induce employers to expand their training programs, so they will attract the most efficient help and turn out the best possible product at a given price.
I would suggest to employers' organizations and to groups of employees that they set aside a fund to promote an apprenticeship system. So far as the employer is concerned, one of the most irreconcilable

situations is that in which, after spending a certain amount of money to educate an apprentice, he finds that employee moving to another industry. The employee is a loss, so far as the employer is concerned; and I suggest the employer should have some protection.
In my view the apprenticeship age should begin in each province at the age at which compulsory education is completed, and there should be no maximum age limit. The purpose behind this would be to make eligible that group of individuals who, under the act as it now reads, are not eligible. Wage rates, of course, present a problem as between apprentices and skilled labour. These have to be solved through agreement between unions and management, and it should be possible to arrive at some satisfactory formula.
A decision must be made concerning a standard definition for a qualified apprentice, so that on this score there would be no difficulty between skilled labour and apprentices. There was some argument earlier about the type of vocational training taught in schools today. I would say that training must be supplemented by work in industry. One final factor is that the responsibility for this program must rest with the federal, provincial and municipal governments, as well as with management and labour.
In conclusion I recommend that the following suggestions be given consideration. First, there should be federal financial assistance in education, at the municipal level. Second, the vocational training course should be made more effective by making it available at a grade lower than the level of secondary education. Third, in specific industries we must begin to make the apprenticeship system compulsory, by statute. This, I believe, would help relieve our unemployment situation, if we still have it with us. And, fourth, there should be a strenuous program of public education through all national outlets such as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the national film board, with a view to teaching the people to make proper use of their leisure time through courses in vocational training.


Mr. G. R. Pearkes (Esquimalt-Saanich):: Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of Labour introduced the resolution preceding the bill hon. members must have noted that the opening words of that resolution were as follows:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act to meet present-day requirements for defence-
-and so on. Then he went on to deal with other purposes. It is quite obvious that in
16. 1954	3057
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act the minister's opinion the present-day requirements of defence were the primary reason for introducing the amendments set out in this bill.
I have been surprised that during the discussion that has taken place the minister has not explained to the house how this bill is to be applied to modern requirements in so far as defence is concerned. We have heard a great deal about the advantages which will accrue to the ordinary civilian population, and the extent to which the increase in opportunities for vocational training foreshadowed in this bill will help them. We have also heard how vocational training will help the veterans, the men who may now be coming back from Korea or who may be taking their discharges from the armed services. But as yet we have not heard how this bill is to be applied at the present time for the purposes of defence.
I wish to make just a few observations regarding that aspect of the bill, to ask the minister to fill in the gap when he replies and tell the house definitely how the amendments he is now proposing in this bill will further the purpose of defence. Of course you may say lightheartedly that you can never have too many tradesmen in the armed services. No doubt everybody will admit that; and you can point out the tremendous increase in the number of trades in the fighting services and the need that exists for skilled men, artisans, artificers and so forth in the navy, the army and the air force. Perhaps you might claim that it is impossible to train too many tradesmen. At the same time we do have to avoid the danger of duplication in the training of tradesmen for the armed services, because the public are now being asked to pay for the training of these people who will be taking advantage of the vocational training opportunities which are to be set up.
When world war II started of course there was a very great shortage of tradesmen in all three services. As soon as the original formations could be trained they were sent overseas, and the majority of the tradesmen then in the services went overseas with those early formations. Consequently there was the necessity for building up some form of tradesman training here at home.
The hon. member for Victoria, B.C., (Mr. Fairey) explained a few days ago the growth of vocational training during the war and the assistance which was given to the armed services in all provinces by those vocational training schools. Those were days of great expansion of all the armed services, and at
3058	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act that time there was a great shortage of tradesmen. That shortage remained until almost the end of the war.
From my own personal experience I can speak of the excellent work done at the dominion-provincial vocational training school at Nanaimo, where hundreds of servicemen were sent while they were still in the services and trained so they could fill a tradesman's position in the navy, army or air force. Exactly the same thing applied to the technical training school in Vancouver. I speak from personal experience, and I know that these vocational training schools all across the country were doing very useful work.
But I do suggest that the situation at the moment is different. We are not in the days of great expansion of any of our services. We have been working for an increase in the strength of our three fighting forces on the three or four-year program which was announced by the government in 1949-50, and all three services are now within striking distance of the manpower objective that was set at that time. An extremely creditable effort has been made; the response of the young men of Canada is most praiseworthy in that they have come forward in such great numbers, and what seemed to be quite an ambitious objective in 1950 has now been practically reached.
As far as one can see at the present time- while I would certainly not be advocating any reduction in the armed services-there is no likelihood in the foreseeable future of any further expansion. In fact we hope we have now built up our forces so they will be able to resist aggression no matter where it breaks out, if it should break out, and we hope they are strong enough now to deter any aggressor. Therefore the policy, as far as one can see, will be to maintain the active forces that we have in the navy, army and air force at somewhere about their present strength.
In all three services a very well thought out scheme of tradesman training has been built up at the various corps schools in the army and the various training establishments of the air force. As far as the navy is concerned there are big training establishments for the ratings, men who are enlisted in the navy, both on the east and the west coasts. And the cruisers that we now have are literally classrooms afloat, where sailors of all different ranks are taking classes in tradesman work in order that they may fill the many positions which are open to them. In addition there are means of enlisting apprentice soldiers, young men who are still in their teens, and training them for the technical branches of


these services, in other words giving them a very complete vocational training in the services today.
Are we going to duplicate that? Is there a fixed plan under which the services are going to co-operate in the scheme which is envisaged by the amendments we are now considering? Are the personnel of the active forces, the navy, the army and the air force, going to have the opportunity of taking classes in addition to the facilities offered in the services themselves, or is this to be merely a general scheme we are going to use to build up a large reserve of trained tradesmen, or a large reserve of tradesmen who, if there is a general mobilization, would then be available? Is there to be any particular application of this bill to the services, or is there just wishful thinking that there will be a larger number of tradesmen available for the services should another occasion arise? Will facilities be available not only for the personnel of the active forces but for the personnel of the reserve army, the auxiliary air squadrons, the naval reserve and so forth? Just where will this fit in?
If we are going to send service personnel, both active and reserve, to these schools, what financial arrangements will be made? Will active personnel receive the pay of their rank while attending these schools? Will the Department of National Defence pay all the educational expenses in connection with the attendance of service personnel, either active or reserve, at these schools? Then we are faced with the difficulty of perhaps having service personnel attending one of these schools and drawing service pay while working alongside some lad who wishes to go into industry but who is not receiving any pay from the government, or who perhaps has to pay some tuition in order to be there. No doubt these are administrative problems to which the minister has given consideration, but the house has not been informed what is to happen. I hope the minister will inform us regarding these things.
Will there be opportunities for on-the-job training, improver training? I realize that this is a form of apprentice training, but it is a step further than that. This concerns a man who has perhaps finished his apprentice training, who knows something about the work he is to do, but who wishes to improve himself. I am not going to detain the house any longer, but I hope the minister will tell us how the services are going to be fitted into the improvements which this bill is trying to bring about.


Mr. Daniel Mclvor (Fort William):: Mr. Speaker, there are some things which I find it

difficult to understand. The minister has moved that this bill be sent to a committee of which the hon. member for Cape Breton South (Mr. Gillis), the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), and many other intelligent hon. members are members. I am just wondering if the next speaker can give a good reason why we should continue this debate. Let this committee pull this bill to pieces, put it back together again, and send it back in a form that will be intelligible to us, and then let us settle the matter here.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, I do not plan to spend any time trying to justify a member speaking in support of this motion. Having heard from representatives of a number of urban ridings, I feel that I should be permitted to make some comments without any hon. member suggesting that we cut off the discussion at this time.
Hon. members in all sections of the house have expressed their appreciation of this legislation, and I want to endorse the opinion which has been expressed that the position of ex-service personnel should have continued consideration. Many of the men who joined the services in the period 1939 to 1945 had the misfortune to go through school when there were not as many advantages as there are now. Many of those boys had a pretty rough time during the thirties, and I think they should be able to take advantage of the facilities which have been provided during the past ten or twelve years if they so desire.
Reference has been made to training for the purpose of rehabilitating disabled persons and fitting them for gainful employment. I suppose it may be argued that it is the responsibility of the municipality or the province to provide employment for the disabled, but when polio strikes the country it does not select any particular municipality or province, and victims in all parts of the country are often handicapped for life. Those of us who have enjoyed good health find it most difficult to place ourselves in the position of one who must spend his life in a wheel chair. I think it is quite obvious that it is in the nation's interest that those who are disabled should be given the opportunity to make a useful contribution to society. I feel that the federal government would be only fulfilling its duty in co-operating with the provinces and the municipalities with a view to establishing training projects for the purpose of rehabilitating disabled persons.
I know of one little girl who had the misfortune of being run over by a freight train on her way to school in Yorkton some years
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act ago. She lost both feet, one hand and the fingers of the other hand. Partly as a result of assistance from the Canadian National Railways she was able to complete her public and high school work and became a school teacher. She did an outstanding job in the classroom. I have often felt that having mastered her great misfortune this woman could make an outstanding contribution in helping to train disabled persons. I feel sure that with the co-operation of the minister the program for the future will be improved a good deal.
Reference has been made to training projects to increase the skill or efficiency of persons engaged in agriculture, forestry, mining, fishing, the primary industries in Canada, and in home-making. This brings me to my main reason for rising to speak. I live in a rural community near a town with a population of about 600 at the last census. Under the legislation passed in 1942 the local authorities in co-operation with the province and the federal government provided technical education. For the first time in the history of that rural community boys were permitted to work in the shops. They received expert training in woodworking and shopwork, and it has given the boys a new interest in education. This town of 600 has a school attendance of nearly 300. A dormitory has been built where some 80 boys and girls are able to live while away from home. Three buses bring students to the school every morning and take them home at night. Certainly I believe it increases the effectiveness of the nation as a whole when you have available in rural communities the kind of services I have been describing, and which exist at Sturgis where I live. I am sure if more rural communities could have the assistance of the local, provincial and federal authorities in participating in projects of this kind there would be a much keener interest in providing greater security for all our people.
I am not overlooking the reference to home-making. In this connection it may be argued that the task of providing girls with training in home-making should be left to mothers, but each year in our school we have an achievement day when the teachers demonstrate what has been accomplished in the school, and when the young lads demonstrate the type of work they have been doing. The girls taking home economics show what can be produced in the kitchen and in the dressmaking shops, and rather than resent the fact that training is given in homemaking the parents appreciate that in the middle of this century our young people in
3060	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act rural communities are given access to facilities which have been taken for granted for so many years in the large cities.
Representing a rural community as I do I am very glad that this legislation was passed in 1942, and that the minister is piloting this bill through the house so that we may have a continuation and extension of this outstanding work.
Mr. J. W. Nose worthy (York South): Mr. Speaker, I have examined this bill and certainly I cannot see anything in it to which one could take objection. Indeed there are quite a number of features which are quite commendable. I am certain the minister and his department are to be commended on the insertion of a provision which will provide training and rehabilitation of the disabled. That is a measure to which we have been looking forward for a long time. While on this question of the rehabilitation of the disabled I would like to suggest to the minister that some consideration be given to the older people, such as old age pensioners and those receiving old age assistance. There are thousands of older people who have many years of usefulness ahead of them and who are finding life very boring.
The administrators of the various hospitals under the Department of Veterans Affairs carry out a considerable amount of adult education among the older veterans by training in craft work and in developing hobbies. Many of them are able to eke out a little additional money through the medium of the things they make in these hospitals. I have often wondered whether through some department of the federal government, possibly in co-operation with the provinces or local authorities, some means could not be found whereby some of these older people could be induced to participate in craft work, and some provisions could also be made for the disposal of the things they might thereby produce in such a way that these old people would be able to obtain some remuneration for their work.
In this connection we must realize that within a few years probably one-third of our population will have to support the remaining two-thirds, the younger people at one end of the scale and people over 50 or 55 years of age at the other. If industry continues the present practice of letting employees out at the age of 50, 55 or even 60, we are going to have a great many people in that age group quite capable of working but without any opportunity to do so.


I believe England has tackled that problem through what is known as sheltered workshops, where older people are given an opportunity to work during hours which are suitable to them, and where they are encouraged and assisted to undertake craft work through which they produce certain articles. Under that scheme some provision is made for the sale of these articles. That is one phase of adult education to which we have given very little consideration in this country, and it is one which I believe should be given some consideration at the present time.
The hon. member for Cape Breton South brought up the question of trade schools as contrasted with our secondary vocational schools. On the basis of my own experience with vocational guidance officers and teachers I am inclined to believe that employers in this country do not favour the employment of youths who have had no training other than the training for the job. My experience has been that employers approve of youths having a fairly high academic standard. They feel that if a youth is given a fairly good academic grounding he is a much more valuable employee in a shop or a factory, and I would be loath to see our youth encouraged to specialize in any particular field at a very early age without having a good academic training.
There can be no question but that we need more trade schools for our youth. The regular secondary vocational schools do not attempt to turn out skilled mechanics. That is not their purpose. They try to give the youth a certain amount of academic training, and the fundamentals of the particular trade or trades in which he is interested. Unquestionably there is a need for what may be considered finishing trade schools where those who have received a foundation training in our secondary vocational schools, or even in our secondary academic schools, can obtain a much more specialized trade training than is available in our regular schools at the present time.
One question raised by the hon. member for Cape Breton South is certainly worthy of consideration by the committee to which this bill will be referred, and worthy of consideration by the Department of Labour. I notice that all the assistance to the provinces in connection with vocational training is offered on a 50-50 basis, and that the federal government's contribution must not exceed that made by the province. I think that time has come when we must face up to the fact that the 50-50 rule no longer meets the needs of Canada today. With the difference in wealth that exists as between provinces the time has come when we should consider

doing, in the case of these federal grants, what practically every provincial government in the country has had to do in relation to the municipalities, namely to place these grants on the basis of need. Some formula is required whereby those provinces that are in the greatest need will receive a larger share of the cost of educational activities than will the wealthier provinces.
I realize as much as anyone the difficulties that will confront any minister who puts that kind of proposition to some of the provinces of Canada. However, I think a basic fact that must be remembered is that Nova Scotia is not training young people for Nova Scotia; Nova Scotia is training young people for Canada. Today a high percentage of the youth who are trained in any one province are likely to spend the greater part of their lifetime in a province other than that in which they were born. I think we must be able to look at this question of federal grants to vocational education from the broad national point of view. We are trying to train Canadian citizens, and these grants should be administered in such a way that Canadians whether born in Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia or British Columbia will be given some reasonable equality of educational opportunity in so far as these federal grants are concerned.
That may be a step worth discussing at some federal-provincial conference. It is certainly one that we should be ready to face by this time. Every provincial government has had to face up to that problem in its relations with the municipalities. There was a time when provincial governments paid their educational grants on a per capita basis but, so far as I know, that is no longer the case in any of our provinces. Today the provincial governments try to adjust their educational grants on the basis of need. The poorer communities in the province may receive, as they do in Ontario, close to 100 per cent of their educational costs, whereas other wealthier municipalities receive as little as 30 per cent.
I think that is a question which should be faced on the federal-provincial level, and that instead of going on indefinitely apportioning all these grants on a 50-50 basis a beginning should be made in doing it in terms of Canadians as Canadians and not as citizens of any particular province.


Milton Fowler Gregg: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: If the minister speaks now, he will close the debate.


Milton Fowler Gregg: Mr. Speaker, once again I should like to express sincere appreciation for the manner 83276-194
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act in which all members received the amendments which are incorporated in this bill. To a minister who is attempting to administer the federal end of this business I am sure it is helpful and encouraging to listen to the kind of discussion that has taken place today and that took place on March 3.
I would refer to the further remarks made today by the hon. member for Cape Breton South. He welcomed the committee. Although I think he will agree with me that in these three or four pages of the bill there is not a great deal, when he says he hopes the study will be wide open I can tell him that I also have that hope. As far as I am concerned, in referring it to the committee I will not suggest at all that in that study there be a rigid and strict adherence to the clauses of this bill.
The hon. member makes the suggestion that at least the younger people in, for example, the coal mines which are levelling off at a lower level and in the textile business, which is levelling off at a much lower level, and who are now unemployed might be trained for some other activity. I agree with that suggestion most heartily. I can tell him that in these days we in the department, in conjunction with the unemployment insurance offices, are making a study of the matter. I am getting tired of using that word "study", and I am going to use a little stronger term. We have reached the point during these past weeks of having qualified officials go to several places where these things are happening and, without making any promises, I hope that we may be able to do this in the coal industry in Nova Scotia before too many weeks elapse, in order to see how far we can go in this retraining in conjunction with the provinces.
I can assure my hon. friend that there is not much use of our doing that unless we [DOT]can go in under the banner of the provinces and have their full co-operation. As a matter of fact I expressed this thought in a broadcast which I made in my own constituency last Saturday night. I stated that I felt we should give encouragement in retraining and finding new employment opportunities for those who are out of employment and will never again be employed in the textile industry, and that we should also encourage in every way the young people who would normally go into such industries to be trained, in other activities in their own areas and in their own provinces, if possible.
The hon. member for Victoria, B.C. (Mr. Fairey) needed to make no apology whatsoever for clearing up some of the points that have been discussed. He did so very well indeed, and I thank him for it.
3062	HOUSE OF
Vocational Training Co-ordination Act
The hon. member for Cartier (Mr. Crestohl) spoke of the fear that vocational graduates might be checked too hard by examining boards in any given province before being permitted to practise their new skills in that province. That matter again is of course within the scope of the provinces. From observation I would say that I do not think any of them are erecting too difficult barriers. In view of the profession of my hon. friend I must admit that I do not think these examining boards are any tougher on the young bricklayers, for example, than are the provincial bar associations on the young lawyers who want to practise in those provinces.
I do not think the hon. member for Saskatoon (Mr. Knight) posed any special problem on vocational training. He gave us suggestions on the improvement of training in general and on the importance of co-operating to a greater extent with the provinces. We all know well his views on that matter. Perhaps some of us cannot express agreement to go quite as far as he suggests in the direction of entering into the educational field; nevertheless we are glad to have his views again.
The hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich (Mr. Pearkes) brought up a point which rather suggested that I did not clarify the first part of the resolution when it was under discussion. The resolution reads in part as follows:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act to meet present-day requirements for defence and other purposes, including authority . . .
I would refer him to page 2623 of Hansard of March 3 where I said very modestly:
... I should like to state that I do not want for a moment to overestimate the importance of the total number of amendments that are forthcoming here.
If I may, Mr. Speaker, I should like to refer briefly to the bill for this particular purpose The act contains such expressions as "to fit persons for employment for any purpose contributing to the efficient prosecution of the war". Of course at that time the war was paramount. Perhaps the intention was that this kind of training would be aimed very directly at the war in so far as it was possible to do so. In the new act, after amendment takes place, the expression will be "to fit persons for employment for any purpose contributing to the defence of Canada whether in industry or in the armed forces".
I think I might sum it up in this way. Now that hopes are rising that we will be free from war as we knew it at that time,


we hope that instead of the pressure being to train people for the immediate and efficient prosecution of war we may under vocational training do a useful job in helping to provide a solid body of trained young men and women who will be valuable in the activities of peace as well as in war. However, there was then and there will continue to be the two categories of training the cost of which is borne 100 per cent by the federal treasury, namely the training of personnel for defence works and the training of personnel for the armed forces. But I can tell the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich that there is no intention of taking in people holus-bolus for such new defence training. I would hope that the training of civilians would add to the number of skilled tradesmen who would be available to the reserve forces, but no drastic new policy is contemplated here.
The hon. member for Mackenzie (Mr. Nicholson) expressed satisfaction that we are reiterating here the intention of assisting the provinces in equalizing opportunities for the young people of rural communities. That is exactly what is intended, to help the provinces on a 50-50 basis with respect to training for young people in rural areas. The hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) referred again to the rehabilitation of the disabled, and to older workers. The rehabilitation 'or even the training of older workers does not come directly within the terms of the bill, but I should like to say that we are doing a good deal not exactly in the way of vocational training but rather in the way of attempting to encourage employers to retain their older workers for a longer period if they are able to do so and the opportunity is there; and also, in spite of the fact that it may disrupt their pension plans, to accept older workers who do not have jobs and for whom jobs have to be found.
We have had some interesting experiments. I shall be glad to go into them in the standing committee or in committee of the whole if the subject is sufficiently related. We have had a very interesting experiment in the city of Toronto. I know my hon. friend will be glad to learn that recently we have had the pleasure of co-operating with the Canadian Manufacturers Association in carrying out, through their own channels, a survey of this matter, and the reports on that will be available later.
The hon. member also stated that in his opinion employers looked for academic standing and other qualities perhaps as much as for the bare skills. I think that is in line with

what was said the other night by the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell). I believe there is a good deal to be said for not trying to train young people in technical skills before they gain maturity and some understanding of life and knowledge of other things, as well as the skill of the particular employment.
The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Hahn) referred to a committee to be set up. I think it was probably a slip of the tongue, but I should like to refer him to Votes and Proceedings, No. 25. He will see there that the standing committee on industrial relations is set up, and he will also see a list of the members. I believe the committee can be convened at any time.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: It is a good committee.


Milton Fowler Gregg: It is a good committee. I am glad to say that a good deal of interest has been shown in the advisory council and the step that has been taken in increasing the membership from 16 to 20. At this time I should like to put on the record the personnel of the council as it stands at the present time. The chairman is Dr. G. Fred McNally of Edmonton. Dr. McNally is well known as chancellor of the University of Alberta. Of course he was born in New Brunswick, so that makes him all right. The members of the committee are, in alphabetical order: T. D. Anderson, general secretary of the Canadian Legion of the British Empire Service League, Ottawa, representing war veterans; L. S. Beattie, superintendent of secondary education, department of education, parliament buildings, Toronto, representing the government of Ontario; Mrs. Allan Turner Bone, president of the national council of women, Montreal, representing women; Gordon Burnett, manager of Bedard-Girard Limited, 230 Nepean street, Ottawa, representing employers; H. L. Campbell, deputy minister, department of education, Victoria, representing the province of British Columbia. He is the successor of the new member for Victoria, B.C., who occupied that post on the council before Mr. Campbell.
Then there are G. G. Cushing, general secretary-treasurer, Trades and Labour Congress of Canada, Ottawa, representing employees; Norman S. Dowd, executive secretary, Canadian Congress of Labour, representing employees; E. K. Ford, director of vocational education, department of education, Halifax, representing the province of Nova Scotia; Dr. G. A. Frecker, deputy minister, department of education, St. John's, Newfoundland, representing the province of Newfoundland; J. W. McNutt, director of 83276-194J
Fire Losses Replacement Account vocational education and regional director of vocational training, Fredericton, representing the province of New Brunswick; Gustave Poisson, deputy minister, department of youth and social welfare, Quebec city, representing the province of Quebec; T. A. Robinson, Canadian International Paper Company, Sun Life building, Montreal, representing employers; W. A. Ross, regional director, Canadian vocational training, department of education, Regina, representing the province of Saskatchewan; W. H. C. Seeley, Toronto transportation commission, 35 Yonge street, Toronto, representing the employers; Miss Yolande Valois, vice-president of the Canadian and Catholic Confederation of Labour, Sorel, representing employees and, of course, women as well; and W. Elliott Wilson, department of labour, Winnipeg, representing the province of Manitoba.
If hon. members have kept tab they will have noted that, outside of the chairman, only eight provinces out of the ten are now represented. It was our desire to have one or two other national groups represented in forming the larger council.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on industrial relations.


Milton Fowler Gregg: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to establish in the consolidated revenue fund an account for the replacement of government property lost, destroyed or damaged through fire and for the said purposes to authorize advances from the account, with the approval of the treasury board, up to a maximum of five million dollars.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


Howard Charles Green: Will the parliamentary assistant give an explanation?


Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Finance):: Mr. Chairman, the purpose to be served by this measure can be stated very briefly. It is to ensure, when fire loss occurs and replacement or repair of property destroyed or damaged is urgently and immediately required, and there is not sufficient money available in the parliamentary vote, that authority and funds will be available, subject to the approval of treasury board, to proceed with repairs and replacements without delay.
3064	HOUSE OF
Fire Losses Replacement Account


Howard Charles Green: May I ask the parliamentary assistant how these losses have been made good in the past?


William Moore Benidickson: In the past they have been made good either by postponement of the replacement or by postponement of the erection of another structure that was contemplated in a parliamentary vote, or they have been provided in some cases by contingency vote of rather a slender amount, in the Department of Finance, and I think there is one additional vote. I would draw the attention of the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra to the fact that it is possible there might be a delay of some twelve months in the replacement of a building of importance, or personal property of importance, because we would have to wait for parliament to vote a replacement, although parliament had voted the original allotment for the building destroyed by fire.


Howard Charles Green: Will the same procedure of tenders be followed in purchasing goods with this money set aside as an insurance fund?
I presume it also covers buildings?


William Moore Benidickson: I think the bill will
include both movable and immovable property. The intention will be that parliament will be given an opportunity to revote the money, if it happens that it cannot be covered by one of the votes of the department in the year in which a fire loss occurs.


Howard Charles Green: Yes, but the parliamentary assistant has not answered part of my question. In spending this money will there be the same precautions exercised in calling for tenders, and the like, as applies in the case of the ordinary purchase at the present time; or will there be some short-cut?


William Moore Benidickson: I think, my hon. friend can be assured that the same precautions will prevail as have prevailed in all expenditures of the government which, as the hon. member knows, are under a very strict system.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I take it from what the parliamentary assistant has said that this is not in the nature of a fire insurance fund. I see that he agrees. This is simply the provision of money for an interim period in case a fire destroys a building or some other government property. Did I understand from what the parliamentary assistant said that it is the intention to ask parliament every time to replace money spent out of this fund by a specific vote for that purpose?


William Moore Benidickson: I would say it would not be the intention to do that on every occasion. It may be that the matter in question could be provided for through an item parliament had already voted, in other words


a general item. But sometimes there fall short in the case of a rather extraordinary disaster. It is drawn to our attention that this might be very deleterious to the government service if it was necessary to wait for twelve months for parliamentary approval, and the contingency votes or some other allowances in the normal votes of the department did not provide an opportunity to replace the property that had been destroyed by fire.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But in all cases, at one stage or another, it will be provided that parliament will have a chance to approve of the item in question?


William Moore Benidickson: The hon. member will know that parliament voted for the expenditure for the property in the first instance. Parliament annually would have voted a certain grant to a department for certain general purposes. If that sum was inadequate to take care of a replacement as the result of destruction of property, then this fund could be utilized if there was an urgency for replacement of the property within a period of, we will say, twelve months as a maximum, when parliament would not be available. But certainly if those resources were not available, then in the next session of parliament there would be a new vote which would be charged to the department concerned. Then the fund would have credited back the equivalent in money, as voted by parliament.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I take it that it will not be necessary for the fund to have further moneys voted to it, apart from these moneys that replace the amounts spent? In other words, $5 million is the ceiling on this fund?


William Moore Benidickson: That is the maximum.


Mr. Hansell:: We in this group have talked over the resolution. As we know, very often there are more details than meet the eye. It would seem from the resolution that the government is setting up a fund of $5 million to replace losses by fire of any government property, such losses to be returned to the fund at a later time through a vote by parliament, so the government would not be delayed in the replacement of the damage. That is what I understand about it. When the bill is introduced there may be other details that we do not know about.
Since we are at the resolution stage may I ask the parliamentary assistant this question, because a principle is involved here. Is it expected that the government may have to do more than meet the fire loss, we will say, in a certain project? Let me put before the parliamentary assistant a specific but

hypothetical case. Suppose a building worth $100,000 is completely destroyed by fire. Would the government assume the authority under this legislation to erect another building worth $2 million or $3 million, and instead of erecting it at the same location on Wellington street decide to put the building in some other place, even in Montreal?
That is an extreme case, and the parliamentary assistant will rise and say it is not probable that it could happen. I fancy that what we are really doing-and I am not saying we are not in favour of the resolution-is giving the government authority to replace losses even to the extent of rebuilding a project without our knowing what the project may be, or seeing the plans, or even being able to ask questions about the contract. Really that is what I envisage in this as a danger. I am not saying the government would do it. Perhaps they would bring about a serious filibuster at the next session of parliament if they did it; nevertheless I am under the impression that it could be done. Can the parliamentary assistant throw any light on that?


William Moore Benidickson: I appreciate the implication in the remarks of the hon. member for Macleod. He will also appreciate, of course, that legislation has to be reasonably elastic; and when we speak in terms of replacement of property I think he will understand that draftsmen for this type of legislation would likely provide that we would not be restricted by a limitation that would mean we would have only an expenditure equivalent to the original cost.
Hon. members will very quickly understand that if it were applicable to a building erected some 25 or 50 years ago the replacement value today would be very much greater than the cost of construction 25 years ago. My feeling is that in drafting a bill one would have to allow a certain amount of freedom in this respect. On the other hand, I would imagine that in examining the use of legislation of this type the official who is responsible to this house, the Auditor General, would doubtless draw to the attention of the house any very great departure from the intent as laid down by the particular act.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Any departure at all.


William Moore Benidickson: Any departure at all, probably, even without taking into calculation the inflated costs of replacement, of something that was constructed 25 years ago and had to be replaced as the result of a fire, let us say, in the current year.
Export and Import Permits Act


Stanley Howard Knowles: One other question. There are three significant words here:	"lost,
destroyed or damaged". Do the words "through fire" qualify all three of those words?


William Moore Benidickson: I had not particularly studied that phrasing, Mr. Chairman, but having regard to the title of the bill, the introduction of the bill and the general phrasing I would think that "fire" is the governing word.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
Mr. Chevrier (for Mr. Abbott) thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 377, to establish an account for the replacement of government property lost, destroyed or damaged through fire.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



EXPORT AND IMPORT PERMITS ACT


Lionel Chevrier: the second reading of Bill No. 374, to control export and import of strategic materials.


Mr. J. H. Dickey (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Defence Production):: Mr. Speaker, it had been hoped that the house might have been able to deal with the second reading of this bill today, but I understand that it better meets the convenience of hon. members if second reading is simply called now and a statement is made with respect to the provisions of the bill which will amend and re-enact the Export and Import Permits Act.
The position is that the present Export and Import Permits Act will expire on the 31st day of July of this year. The bill now before the house will provide continuing authority for control over exports and imports for certain purposes. As regards exports, the purposes of control will be found set out in clause 3 of the bill; and as regards imports, in clause 5.
The scope of this bill is very similar to that of the present act, but there has been a marked change in the emphasis to be attached to some of its purposes. In the exercise of export control supply reasons or purposes have become relatively less important, and strategic purposes relatively more so.
The main changes sought under this bill as compared with the present act are intended to improve our system of control over the export of strategic materials. Control

Export and Import Permits Act over the movement of strategic materials is an international problem requiring a great deal of international co-operation. By a United Nations resolution Canada is committed to the embargo of the shipment of arms, ammunition and military material to communist China. Again we have an understanding with the United States by which we enjoy freedom on our own behalf from the operation of their export control, but we in turn undertake to control the re-export of United States goods from Canada to overseas destinations.
Along with the United States, the United Kingdom and most of our NATO allies, Canada seeks to promote uniformity in the list of commodities that are kept under control by each participating country. I mention these instances particularly because they serve to illustrate the ramifications of effective control in this field which bear directly on some of the provisions of this bill. Our chief problem is not in controlling the initial export of strategic materials from Canada but rather in following our control through to ensure that the goods are not diverted in transit to destinations that we have not approved.
There is no simple answer to the question, "What are strategic materials?" Obviously these include arms, ammunition and implements of war. They include also raw materials such as non-ferrous metals, minerals and chemicals in primary or manufactured forms; in fact, any product which has a significant usage in defence industries might be classed as strategic. Examples among the raw materials would be nickel, copper, lead, aluminum, asbestos-at least the spinning grades-and high-grade abrasives. In equipment, the list would include automatic machine tools, large generators and turbines, chemical plant and aircraft. With the powers provided under this bill we will make some changes in the present pattern of our export controls, and it is the intention to publish at an early date a schedule of what we generally regard as strategic materials so there need be no uncertainty in traders' minds.
Decisions to include or exclude items in the list of controlled commodities are made in consultation with other governments. These lists are under continual review by an international co-ordinating committee. There would be no point in our denying ourselves a market for machinery, for instance, which another country stood ready to exploit. There is no purpose either in our denying direct shipments of commodities such as nickel or aluminum if other countries are unwilling or unable to safeguard their re-exports of such materials received from Canada.


I believe that the basic machinery of our export control is well known to hon. members. Anyone seeing the permit application form would immediately grasp the essential facts. The exporter or his agent must be the applicant; the goods must be precisely described; quantity and value must be shown; any substantial United States content must be disclosed; the port of exit must be given; the country of ultimate destination must be named. The permit itself has to be surrendered to the customs officer clearing the export of any shipment, who holds a duplicate copy for checking purposes which is supplied directly to him by the Department of Trade and Commerce.
This procedure was adequate by itself when control of exports was intended solely to conserve supplies. Later it became necessary to institute import certification and delivery verification as we became more concerned with ensuring delivery to the specified destinations of our strategic materials. This procedure has been of special benefit in establishing the bona fides of the foreign importer where he is otherwise known to us only as a casual customer. Further steps may still be necessary to make it more difficult for unreliable operators to arrange diversion of goods in major transfer ports.
This is a more serious problem for European countries with a large entrepot trade, but we ourselves have to be equally careful of the business conducted through Canada, particularly that from United States sources. Moreover, we have always the responsibility that Canada shall not be used as a base for the type of trader in small arms and ammunition whose activities need to be closely watched.
Normally, diversion of a shipment is only possible after it has passed through customs in the export country and before it has reached the hands of the importer at its proper destination. Diversion occurs by cargo being rerouted on land or remanifested aboard ship, by transshipment in part, by reshipment from bonded warehouse, and in extreme cases by re-export from the importing country. At some point, therefore, new or altered instructions have to be given to the carrier or the holder of the goods. That act must be made illegal if it is committed knowingly and with illegal purpose or effect.
It is our purpose to work toward a minimum list of commodities under control but a maximum effectiveness of the machinery of control itself. In the past we have lifted export control from commodities as soon as conditions permitted. We have reduced the list of commodities controlled from 407 in 1948 to 184 in 1953. The number of licences

issued has fallen from 113,094 in 1948 to 26,635 in 1953, although the volume and value of our external trade in that period has expanded immensely. This shows how greatly the incidence of the controls has been reduced as regards what may be called normal trade.
We intend immediately to reduce the list of countries covered by our area control list. This means that, with the improved provisions of this bill relating to the control of intransit diversions, we shall be able to relax the licensing requirements on shipments to almost all countries outside the Soviet bloc. With more effective means enabling us to better control back-door exports of United States goods via Canada we shall be able to de-list some commodities which we do not produce or which we do not classify as strategic in the forms in which they are available in Canada and from Canadian sources. Our over-all objective is the same as it always has been, to limit the control of exports to the essential minimum.
Apart from strategic controls, we still have export controls for supply reasons on a very short list of products and, of course, atomic materials remain under strict export control.
The provisions of this bill, Mr. Speaker, with regard to the control of imports, differ
16, 1954
Export and Import Permits Act from those in the existing act only in that the purposes for which import control may be exercised, as set out in section 5, include specific authority "to implement an intergovernmental arrangement or commitment." This change is being made to define more clearly the power that is required from time to time to carry out arrangements with other countries, particularly with the United States. It is preferable on occasion that we control our imports at the request of the United States, rather than leave it to the United States to impose export controls on shipments to Canada. The wisdom of this course has, I believe, been well proven over a period of years.
On motion of Mr. Bell the debate was adjourned.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we shall take second reading of the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act; second reading of the Export and Import Permits Act; and if there is any time left we shall consider once again the Criminal Code.
On motion of Mr. Chevrier the house adjourned at 9.55 p.m.

Wednesday, March 17, 1954