1954-05-11

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Is the Minister of Labour, Mr. Speaker, yet in a position to table in the house the recommendations made to him by a committee of the national advisory council on manpower for the minimizing of seasonal unemployment? Can the minister say whether any action will be taken on these recommendations?


Hon. Milton F. Gregg (Minister of Labour):: I thank my hon. friend for giving me notice of this question. The report to which he refers, I take it, is a report prepared recently by the national employment committee at the request of the national advisory council on manpower. The report itself is based upon a survey conducted by quite a number of people, including manufacturers associations, labour organizations, our own department and so on. Copies of both of these documents are now going to members of the committees who were especially active in preparing them. I have not thought of tabling them. They are quite lengthy documents, but I am prepared to make copies available to any member of the house who would care to apply to my office.



TRANS-CANADA HIGHWAY ALLEGED IRREGULARITIES IN ONTARIO    INQUIRY AS TO FEDERAL ACTION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of fhe Opposition):: Can the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker, inform the house as to what steps, if any, the government has taken to direct an inquiry into the activities of that part of the Department of Public Works charged with the responsibility for the supervision of the trans-Canada highway?


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: I shall have to take the hon. gentleman's question as notice and consider its 83276-2914
terms because 1 would not be in a position to make any intelligent answer at this moment.


George Alexander Drew: I presume the Prime Minister is aware of the circumstances to which my question relates.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: No, I am not.


George Alexander Drew: If the Prime Minister is not, I would direct him to today's press, and suggest that along with the notice I have already given him he make inquiries as to whether the department was not well aware of the fact there were reasons for inquiry, which have now become evident?


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Public Works):: Perhaps I could say a word. I am familiar with developments, and have been for some time. The situation is that the Ontario government has run into difficulties with some of the employees of its department of highways. Some of the difficulties relate to the construction of the trans-Canada highway, and of course the federal government is responsible for half of the cost of the trans-Canada highway. The federal government's responsibility relates to seeing that the highway, when completed, conforms to the geometric specifications set forth in the trans-Canada highway agreement. The responsibility for constructing the highway rests with the provincial government, as all hon. members know.
When the Ontario government informed us that they were suspicious of the operations of some of their people, we at once called in the federal engineers who had opportunities of being in association with the people who, the Ontario government indicated, were under suspicion. Subsequently, we summoned the gentleman to whom I am sure my hon. friend has reference to Toronto and gave the attorneys for the Ontario department of highways an opportunity to question this gentleman. We have not been informed by the department of highways or anybody in the Ontario government as to his arrest or what the purpose of it is. It may well be that it does not relate to any operation concerning the federal government. That is the position to date, and until the government of Ontario informs us just what is behind this warrant for the arrest of one of the employees of the
4596	HOUSE OF
Inquiries of the Ministry trans-Canada division of the Department of Public Works, I will not be in a position to answer the question further.


George Alexander Drew: Is it not correct that the inspectors of the trans-Canada highway division of the Department of Public Works have the responsibility of examining plans, and in respect of which they approve payment?


Robert Henry Winters: No, that is the responsibility of the provincial government. The responsibility of the federal government is to see to it that the road, when finished, conforms to the specifications laid down in the agreement for the trans-Canada highway.


George Alexander Drew: So, there is no check on the cost, if that is correct?


Robert Henry Winters: As my hon. friend knows, when one enters into a partnership with a provincial government, there must be some element of mutual confidence. We naturally assumed that the Ontario government would discharge its responsibilities to the people it represents, in the same manner that I like to think we discharge our duties to the people we represent. We have, as my hon. friend knows, and as I indicated at the outset several months ago, stopped all payments for those areas in which there were alleged irregularities. There are sufficient funds held back by the federal treasury in respect of these contracts to pay any possible deficiencies that could occur because of irregularities.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, I would direct simply this question to the Minister of Public Works. Is it correct that the inspectors charged with the responsibility of passing on plans in different sections of the trans-Canada highway are therefore not asked to go in any way behind the plan that is placed before them?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Speaker, I think I have answered the question.


George Alexander Drew: No, you have not.


Robert Henry Winters: I think I have delineated the federal government's responsibility. Of course we require the provincial governments to deliver a highway that meets the specifications. They know that; we know that; our inspectors know that; and the provincial engineers know that. They know full well what their responsibility is. I do not see any evidence on the part of the province of Ontario that they are avoiding their responsibilities.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mrs. Ellen L. Fairclough (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Can the minister say whether a board of inquiry has yet been set up to investigate the residence of Mr. Harold C. Banks?


Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: No, Mr. Speaker.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: May I ask a supplementary question. Is it contemplated that a board of inquiry will be set up?


Walter Edward Harris: It is being studied, having in mind the fact that the Immigration Act has been changed since he came here.



PENSION ACT


Hon. Hugues Lapointe (Minister of Veterans Affairs) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 339, to amend the Pension Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned when I moved the resolution preceding this bill, it is the intention of the government when second reading has been given to the bill to move that it be referred to the special committee on veterans affairs. During the course of the debate on the resolution I indicated the broad lines of the bill and at this stage I do not think that I can add very much to the statement I made at that time.
I appreciate the fact that during the course of that debate most hon. members who spoke indicated their approval of the contents of the legislation. Some objections were raised and specific points in the Pension Act were brought up by hon. members. However I think I am right in saying that the principal objection brought forward by some hon. members of the opposition was to a section which I indicated would be included in the bill and which would have the effect of having the salaries of members of the Canadian pension commission determined by order in council rather than by statute.
Some hon. members expressed the fear that by so doing members of the pension commission would be subject to some pressure on the part of the cabinet. It was suggested that individual members of the commission would be under the cabinet's thumb. I think I explained at the time that the purpose of the

amendment was to make the act more flexible as regards this particular subject so that when a general raise occurred in the salaries of the public service the members of the commission could be given the advantage of such general raise without the matter having to be brought before the house and a bill introduced for this purpose.
It was suggested that the independence of the commission might be affected. I can assure hon. members of this house that there is nothing further from my mind or from the minds of my colleagues in the cabinet. However, I may say to the house that if the committee on veterans affairs, while studying this bill, should wish to move an amendment which would eliminate any such fear, perhaps it could be done. I have in mind an amendment which might specify, for instance, that the salaries of all members of the commission would be uniform. The government would be quite willing to accept such an amendment and I think that would take away the fears which hon. members may have on this subject.
Outside of this I do not think there is much more I can add to the statement which I made on the resolution.


Mr. A. J. Brooks (Royal):: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for the further explanation he has given of this bill the principle of which, as he says, was discussed at considerable length when the resolution was before the house. It is not my intention to make prolonged remarks with regard to this bill. As I say, the principle of the bill was discussed on March 4 at the resolution stage and we will have an opportunity to discuss it in the committee which has been set up to deal with veterans matters.
At the hearings of that committee we will have an opportunity to hear representatives of the Canadian Legion and other veterans organizations with regard to different sections of the bill. We shall also have before us officials of the Department of Veterans Affairs who will explain the different sections of the bill. In that way we will have the opportunity of better understanding the sections of the bill.
When I was speaking on the resolution I told the minister that there was general agreement with regard to the different principles which had been enunciated, and I think that was the general opinion of practically all hon. members who spoke. I know objection will be taken to some sections, which I shall not indicate now. There are some sections being deleted which we feel should not be deleted, and I refer to those having to do with the extensions of time given to veterans of
Pension Act
the second world war for the preparation of their cases to be sent to the commission and of their applications for pension.
Some problems are not being considered, and I am sure they should be. It is not my intention this afternoon to discuss them. I know that the Canadian Legion will be before the committee and they will outline some of the problems which we believe should be considered further by this veterans committee, and hon. members will do the same.
The minister has mentioned the fact that the principle in the bill, which was objected to strenuously when the resolution was before the house, is that which dealt with salaries for the chairman, vice-chairman and commissioners being fixed by the governor in council. This matter was discussed nearly three months ago, Mr. Speaker. At that time there was a heated debate in the house, and I had really hoped, and I am sure other hon. members had, that that section would not appear in the bill. The minister tells us that the bill will be sent to the committee with the section included; but, if the committee so desires, it can recommend an amendment.
In my opinion the amendment that he suggests does not go as far as it should. The governor in council should not have the responsibility for fixing salaries. As I said before, this subject will be thoroughly discussed in the committee, but again I should like to point out, as was pointed out by hon. members when the resolution was under discussion, we feel that it does take away from the independence of the commission to have their salaries fixed by order in council. We also feel that it interferes with the supremacy of parliament to have salaries fixed by the governor in council. I know, and all hon. members who have anything to do with veterans affairs or veterans pensions know, that when an application for a pension is made the applicant thinks of the government as being on one side and of himself on the other. He thinks of the government possibly trying to save money by not giving him as large a pension as he thinks he should have. He, being on the other side, feels that he is trying to get justice. In between the governor in council and the individual is the commission, which in his mind, and I am sure in the minds of all, should be absolutely independent. This is the great objection that we take to this particular clause.
The pensioner feels that there should not be even the appearance of any obligation of this commission to the governor in council. This matter will be urged and argued and I hope the minister does not think that the

Pension Act
amendment which he suggested this afternoon will be the only one which this committee can consider. I am satisfied that some members of the committee at least will desire to make such an amendment as will delete entirely this section from the bill, as I feel it should be.
I am not going to discuss this matter further this afternoon. The bill is to go before the veterans committee, and all the sections and principles will be thoroughly discussed at that time.


Mr. Clarence Gillis (Cape Breton South):: I do not know whether something is wrong with these microphones, but I could not even sort out what the hon. member was saying. I just mention that because you, Mr. Speaker, had a demonstration made, but they are not very good in this corner.
I am not going to discuss the bill in detail either. It is going to the committee. We do not disagree very much with the amendments that are proposed, with the one exception. There are a lot of grievances. They are not very great, but they are sore spots for the people affected. I might mention the means test in a dependent's pension when you reach the age of 70, but we shall go into the details in committee.
The fact that this bill opens up to some extent the Pension Act will likely give us an opportunity of discussing many of the details that I have in mind. I just make these observations because I am a member of the committee. I think it would be a waste of time for me to start arguing now on the details of the bill. If I did that, Mr. Speaker would stop me and he would likely make a twenty-five minute speech and a lot of time would be wasted. Any further comments I have to make on the bill will be made when we are in committee.
I agree with the principle of the bill, and that is all that is before us now. I agree with the principle of amending the Canadian Pension Act, and I shall reserve whatever criticism I have for the bill in committee and maybe in the house later.


Mr. Ray Thomas (Wetaskiwin):: Along with the hon. member for Royal, I hope that when this bill goes before the veterans committee we will not be held too closely to the amendments contained in the bill. I hope it will give us the opportunity to dig rather deep into the Pension Act and to make recommendations other than those contained in the bill now before us.
Along with other members who have spoken, I agree with most of the amendments suggested, but I do not think many of them go far enough. If the terms of reference are to be such that we have to

adhere strictly to the amendments, then I do not think they do go far enough. I do not intend to discuss the bill except to say that probably I shall have more to say on it in committee. We are pleased to have the opportunity to get back into the veterans committee, although on a previous occasion I indicated what I thought of the amendments. We can work on this and other bills and, as I said before, I shall have more to say at that time.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the special committee on veterans affairs.


Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport) moved: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That It is expedient to present a measure conferring authority upon the governor in council to authorize the Canadian National Railway Company to construct lines of railway from St. Felicien to Chibougamau and from Chibougamau to Beatty-ville, all in the province of Quebec, and from Hillsport on the main line of the Canadian National Railways to Manitouwadge lake, both in the province of Ontario, being on the whole approximately 321 miles at a total estimated expenditure of $38,750,000. The measure will make provision for the issue by the company of securities, which may be guaranteed by the government in respect of the cost of construction. To enable the company to proceed with construction forthwith, temporary loans may be made to the company out of the consolidated revenue fund, upon terms and conditions prescribed by the governor in council and secured by company securities.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


Mr. Green:: Will the minister explain this resolution?


Lionel Chevrier: general merchandise estimated at 60,000 tons per year with the system earnings estimated at $1,900,000. The total outbound traffic, if fully realized, would amount to an estimated 665,000 tons per year, with system revenues of about $4 million, making potential system earnings of $6 million per annum.
It seems apparent that the proposed branch line would be a profitable addition to the Canadian National Railways, and that only a fraction of the potential mine production of the area would be required to justify the construction of this branch line. The construction of the proposed line would be contingent upon the railway company's appraisal of the traffic to be expected and the assurances as to the development of mines in the area. The president of the railway company anticipates that this development will justify construction of the proposed branch line commencing in the fall of this year.
The growth of Canada is proceeding rapidly and it is fitting that the Canadian National Railways should continue to play a great part in the development of the country.


Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, the report just presented by the Minister of Transport has been very interesting, very hopeful. When the bill has been given second reading I presume it will be referred to the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines so that we may have the opportunity of examining the railway officials and of finding out all the details in connection with these proposed extensions. In any event,
I place that suggestion before the minister and I hope he will agree to that course being followed. It has been the practice to refer these bills to that committee. In fact, during the present session the bill which was introduced by the Canadian Pacific Railway was referred to and dealt with by that standing committee.
To the official opposition the proposed extensions seem to be in the best interests of the nation. They are based primarily on mineral development in Canada's pre-Cambrian shield which, of course, is one of our great sources of wealth. I was interested today to hear the minister describe the forest assets in the Chibougamau area as well. I had not realized that so much pulp timber was available. I had thought that these extensions depended almost entirely on the mineral wealth of the areas through which they would run.
The Department of Mines and Technical Surveys tell me that in the Chibougamau area there is now one producing mine known as Opemiska Copper Mines Limited. The

minister referred to it in his opening remarks.
I am told that the production through the mill in December of last year was about 400 tons of ore a day, the ore being largely copper with a small gold content. Then there is another property, namely Campbell Chi-bougamau Mines Limited which is not yet in the production stage but which I understand is planning to mill 1,700 tons a day. There again the ore is largely copper with a small gold content. The Department of Mines and Technical Surveys report a further promising property known as Chibougamau Explorers which, however, has not yet developed to the stage where one can forecast the amount of production.
There is one other feature about this Chibougamau development which the minister did not mention, namely the fact that the Eastern Smelting and Refining Company Limited is to build a nickel-copper smelter and refinery at Chicoutimi. I may have misunderstood him, but I did not hear him make any reference whatever to such a plant.


Lionel Chevrier: I was keeping that in reserve.


Howard Charles Green: The minister says he was keeping that in reserve. May I say that I brought it out into the open?


Mr. Macdonnell:: Are there any other
reserves?


Howard Charles Green: Yes; has the minister any other reserves?


Lionel Chevrier: Yes, indeed; quite a number.


Howard Charles Green: This plant too is extremely important. As a party, Conservatives believe that these resources should be used in Canada to the maximum possible extent in order to provide work for the Canadian people. We hope this ore will be smelted in Canada. Chicoutimi is one of the national harbours of Canada and we should be extremely glad to see it get this additional development.
I was somewhat concerned about the minister's statement that the work on the line from Chibougamau to St. Felicien is to be delayed. Apparently it is not the intention to start building from both ends at once, a procedure which would seem to be the ordinary one in the construction of these branch lines. If I followed the minister correctly, the plan is to build from Beattyville up to Chibougamau this year and then to let the other part of the line, which is 139 miles in length, wait until it can be ascertained whether or not construction should be carried out. If this plan is as good as the minister makes out it is, I can see no reason why the whole railway should not be built right through from Beattyville to St. Felicien, and the whole job finished 83276-292
Canadian National Railways rather than having half of it done and then letting the other half wait until perhaps some time later on when it might be done. That procedure does not seem to be a particularly satisfactory one.
The minister intimated that the Canadian National Railways have investigated this whole development and have received guarantees of traffic from different industries. That is a wise course to follow and it is the course which they followed in connection with the extension from Sherridon to Lynn Lake in northern Manitoba and from Terrace to Kiti-mat on the west coast. It seems to be the plan followed now by the railways whenever they put in an extension. The Canadian Pacific Railway also had a guarantee before they asked for a bill permitting them to build a branch line from Havelock to Nephton in the province of Ontario. But when the minister came to the branch line in Ontario from Hillsport to Manitouwadge lake, he said nothing whatever about any guarantees from the industries in that area. Apparently the railway company has not obtained any guarantee of traffic from those industries. The reason may be that they consider there is going to be so much traffic anyway that it is unnecessary to get a guarantee. However, I would ask the minister to explain to the committee, before this resolution goes through, just why it is that no guarantee has been obtained in that case.
I realize that the Manitouwadge lake area is a promising district as well. I understand that the main property there is owned by a company known as General Engineering Company and that though they are not yet in production they hope to produce 5,000 tons of concentrates a day. There the minerals are copper, zinc and silver. I also understand that the officials of that company gave evidence before a committee of the Ontario legislature this spring to the effect that the number of employees would run between 750 and 1,750 and that in from 5 to 15 years the town is expected to have a population of from 5,000 to 15,000 people. This is therefore no small development. I also understand that by February of this year, which was only a short time after the initial discovery, 3,600 claims had been staked in this area over a length of 70 miles. This looks like an extremely wealthy mineral area.
I hope that the members of the House of Commons and the Canadian people, in their thinking, are now past the stage where they do not want any more railways built. For a good many years that has been the attitude, that because Canada had overbuilt in the earlier part of this century we should put a stop to building further railways. Because of
4602	HOUSE OF
Canadian National Railways that attitude of mind it has been very difficult to get railways built where they should be built. But now we seem to be getting into a new era where we are willing to have railways built in the areas that need development. I have here the report of the royal commission on transportation, known as the Turgeon commission, which reported three years ago in 1951. They dealt with the Chibougamau lake project. The reference will be found at page 133 and I propose to read what they had to say. It reads as follows:
In the year 1948 the Canadian National Railways completed the construction of a line about forty miles in length from Barraute to Rapide des Cedres in the Abitibi region, Quebec. The representative of the Abitibi economic planning council appeared before the commission to submit that the Canadian National Railways should continue construction to Chibougamau lake, through Bachelor lake, a distance of about 165 miles. The commission has since been informed that the Canadian National Railway Company is considering this matter and is awaiting further information to decide whether potential traffic will warrant the building of the extension.
It has taken six years to get around to the building of this extension. In the meantime apparently the government of Quebec has built a road from lake St. John to the Chibougamau region, and I think should be given great credit for its development work in the northern part of Quebec. The same is true of course of the government of Ontario. They have been very progressive in their approach to the development of the northern part of their province. These two great provinces of Canada have set the rest of the country a very good example in the way in which they have gone about the development of their northern territories.
The commission made a general recommendation respecting the building of new railways in Canada which I think sets out what should be the policy of any Canadian government. It is to be found at page 130 of the report. First of all they refer to the situation in the United States which is a good deal different from that pertaining in Canada because the Americans have not a great area to the north that has not yet been opened up. In Canada by far the largest part of our territory is north of that part of the country where most of the people live. The commission had this to say:
In Canada the situation is somewhat different. There is still room for railway expansion where it is called for by the needs of settlers already established in productive areas or by the necessity of making available new areas possessing mineral and other natural resources attainable only by railway. It seems to be generally assumed that most, if not all, railway expansion in the foreseeable future will be carried on by the government of Canada or by the Canadian National Railways which the government owns.


Incidentally, I do not think I would go as far as to say that the C.N.R. has to build all the new lines. The report continues:
The day of ill-conceived and therefore excessive construction seems to have gone by, and our people can feel reasonably assured that from now on no railway ventures will be undertaken excepting after thorough investigation of each project and always with due regard to the financial commitments involved.
The extensions covered by this resolution seem to qualify under the terms of this recommendation of the commission. I think that some day, Mr. Chairman, we will have to have a railway right across the northern part of Canada. Perhaps that would not be necessary across northern Ontario or northern Quebec, but in western Canada I think, after most of us are gone from the scene, there will be a railway running across the northern part perhaps by way of Lynn Lake and lake Athabasca right across to Stewart on the west coast of British Columbia, or even possibly into the Yukon. I am absolutely certain that the future of this country lies in the north. That is the area in which we are going to make great advances. There will of course be developments in the settled part of Canada, and millions more people will settle in the areas where there are now large settlements. But I believe our real bonanza is to be found in northern Canada, and this party is very much in favour of any reasonable project that will open up the northern part of the nation.


Mr. Dumas:: Mr. Chairman, the people of my own constituency of Villeneuve, as well as those of the constituency of Chapleau, have noted with great interest the federal government's decision to introduce the necessary legislation to authorize the Canadian National Railway Company to construct lines of railway to facilitate the development of that rich mining belt which extends from Senneterre to the districts of Chibougamau and Mistassini. They are also pleased to learn that the construction of the railway will be extended to St. Felicien in the lake St. John district. The people of northwestern Quebec and the lake St. John district are very grateful to the Minister of Transport and the Canadian government for having taken that decision.
The extension of the Canadian National Railway line from Beattyville to Chibougamau and St. Felicien will not only be beneficial to our national system of railways but will also be of great advantage to the province and to the country as a whole. It will contribute to the development of a district which is in itself almost as large as the whole of those parts of western Quebec and

Lake St. John together which are settled at the present time. It will add to the general welfare of our own district and that of Lake St. John. It will permit the utilization of a tremendous amount of natural resources which otherwise would not be transformed into national wealth.
It is the opinion of all economists that the extension of the railway line from Beattyville to Chibougamau is more particularly of the utmost importance. It will be built in a general northeast direction and it will follow the centre of a belt rich not only in minerals but also in timber stands and fertile land.
The fact that the geological structure of that region which extends from Senneterre to Chibougamau and Mistassini is favourable to important mining developments is indicated by the astonishing results already attained. Prospectors and mining companies have long since started to survey the district, even in the absence of any adequate system of transportation. Many good mining prospects have been discovered at Wedding river, Cameron lake, Burge lake, Bachelor lake, Opawica, Opemiska, Chibougamau and Mistassini. Large-scale explorations have been carried out in some of those areas and important deposits have been outlined. Opemiska Copper Mines (Quebec) Limited is already in production. Campbell Chibougamau Mines Limited, Merrill Island Mining Corporation and Chibougamau Explorers Limited will be producing within the next two years.
The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra mentioned Eastern Metals. He said that there may be a danger that if we do not encourage that new industry, some of these concentrates may have to be treated in the United States. I shall tell the hon. member that he does not have to worry. The idea of building a line from Chibougamau to Beattyville is to permit these mining companies operating in that district to ship their concentrate to the Noranda smelter in Noranda, in the constituency of Villeneuve, in the province of Quebec, Canada.
Many other companies such as O'Brien, Dome Burge, Lake Goldfields, Empire Oil, Siscoe, Obalski and others have discovered and outlined interesting deposits of minerals and are presently waiting for adequate means of transportation in order to start their operations. Moreover, if we look at a map of the district we can easily see that prospecting is only beginning. The geological structure of that region is formed by three belts of volcanic rocks of the Keewatin type which meet at their extremes and are separated by masses of intrusive rocks. Those green rocks of the Keewatin type contain such base metals as copper, nickel, lead and zinc as well as 83276-292^
Canadian National Railways precious metals. The richest ore deposits are found near the contacts of the greenstone with the intrusive rocks, above all in the zone of the least resistance and of major faults. Those faults are frequent in the region and geologists have even observed a major fault which crosses the said territory from the southwest to the northeast along the route of the proposed railway.
Under present conditions, research work is difficult and expensive. The construction of the proposed railroad will make it easier and will greatly reduce its cost. Furthermore, the realization of this project will facilitate access to the territories immediately to the south and to the north of that belt where geological formations are also favourable to mineral deposits. According to conservative estimates, the forests of that section contain at least 30 million cords of merchantable timber ready for exploitation. The composition of that forest, the high quality and the accessibility of that timber contribute to increase its value.
Only the construction of the proposed railroad makes it possible for the economical exploitation of those forest resources. The whole reserve of 30 to 50 million cords will be accessible to the proposed railroad. Moreover, a large portion of that forest has attained maturity. It ought to be exploited within a reasonable length of time because it represents an unproductive capital asset, always exposed to partial destruction. A program of rational exploitation will permit the transportation of one-half of one million to one million cords annually.
There are also extensive tracts of favourable land for farming in that district. Many townships containing thousands of acres can be profitably devoted to agriculture and a great number of settlers can be established in that area. Potential waterpower is estimated at more than one million horsepower, and it is well distributed within the region.
Mr. Chairman, I can visualize the tremendous development which will take place along that railroad line once it is built. I can foresee what will happen because for the last 30 years I have been virtually living in that district, and I know it almost as well as my own constituency of Villeneuve. In the immediate vicinity of the area that the railroad will pass, I have surveyed many hundred miles of lines from one end of the district to the other. I have established meridian lines, parallel of latitude, township lines and I have surveyed and staked more than 1,000 mining claims.
In the not too far distant future along the proposed railroad, there will be thriving

Canadian National Railways centres at Barraute, Barville, Despinassy, Champneuf, Bartouille, Laas, Beattyville, Rapide des Cedres, Quevillon, Wedding Lake, Cameron, Burge Lake, Sullivan River, Bachelor Lake, Opawica, Laparent, Opemiska, Lac Cache and Chibougamau.
Some of those places are already nice little villages but they will be growing fast. Others are only what you call locations on the map. There are no people there yet but they will soon come and they each will be the pioneers in their own capacity-the miners, the settlers, the missionaries and the educators, the civic minded citizens, the professional and the business men. Those will be the ones who will really open and develop another new section of our northern reaches.
Each one of those new settlements will have to be provided with its churches, schools, post office, civic, medical and business centres. There will be opportunities for all and I predict that within the next 15 years the population of that area will be well over 50,000 people. I am not exaggerating when I say this, Mr. Chairman. We have only to look back on what happened in northwestern Quebec during the last 30 years to realize that what took place there can be duplicated in even a shorter period of time.
Thirty years ago, during the summer of 1924, as a student, I had the opportunity of going on a survey expedition in the very part of Quebec that I now have the honour of representing in this parliament. At that time in the whole of the constituency of Villeneuve there were less than 1,000 people. There were no roads, no railroads, no airfields, fewer industrial centres or large communities. The only two places which were inhabited at the time were the actual parish of La Motte and the prospecting centre of Rouyn-Noranda.
Today, in the same district which is now the constituency of Villeneuve, we find a thriving population of more than 70,000 people, some of them cultivating rich farms located along the northern part of the constituency, others working at the gold, silver, copper, lead and zinc mines located in Val d'Or, Malartic, Cadillac, Duparquet and Rouyn-Noranda areas. Where 30 years ago there was nothing but bush, muskeg, rock and water, we now have progressive towns and cities, rich mines and productive farm lands of which we can be proud. And what is more important, we have a group of people who, as pioneers, took up the challenge offered by that part of the shield in Quebec. The fact that they met it successfully has procured substantial benefits for every home in the province. Not only does northern Quebec provide the whole of Canada with
fMr. Dumas.]
metals, lumber, pulpwood, farm products and furs, but the growing population of that district, its purchasing power and its needs, stimulate the manufacturing industries of our cities to the south.
Nor has northern Quebec yielded all its richness to the province and the rest of Canada. The geological structure of those adjoining areas where the proposed railroad will be built, their similarity to other districts to the south whose mineral resources are abundant, the discoveries already made, the quality and accessibility of vast timber limits, the potential water power, as well as the unanimous opinion of the experts regarding the possibilities of that region, entitle us to forecast that this district will become an essential factor in the economy of our province.
The construction of this railroad line is an important step toward the economic conquest of the Canadian shield which contains immense natural resources that are essential to the welfare of Canada and its people.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, one of the thrills of being a Canadian is the realization that the story of the development of this country is not confined to the past. I am sure that all of us are fascinated by the realization that we possess tremendous natural resources which are largely untapped, and that they hold for us and for those who will follow us a great future. It has been the privilege of many of us who sit in the House of Commons today to support other measures similar to this one which were brought down in years gone by for the purpose of helping to open up and develop areas in this country which are rich in mineral, timber and other natural resources. We of this group are pleased that this resolution has been brought in and it will have our support.
I think hon. members generally will not be surprised if I take advantage of this opportunity to draw attention once again to the fact that although most of the members of this house, indeed, all but those of this group, subscribe wholeheartedly to the notion that private enterprise can do everything, despite that fact there come occasions such as this when the private enterprisers of this country look to the government, look to public enterprise, for the expenditure of public money to make possible the development of our great natural resources. Some day the lesson that flows from that fact will be learned and put into practice for the benefit of all our people.
Since this resolution has the support of most hon. members it need not be the occasion for a lengthy debate and I shall not repeat the things which have been said by

previous speakers. But there is one request I should like to make of the Minister of Transport. As the minister knows, there have been various complaints in recent years when other lines of railway were being constructed concerning labour conditions. I need not go into detail and I admit that when some of the charges that have been made were investigated they were found, in the opinion of the investigators at any rate, to be exaggerated.
Nevertheless there were complaints in connection with the labour conditions in connection with the construction of the line that was built from Sherridon to Lynn Lake. Those complaints involved certain companies to whom contracts had been let and in some instances they also involved activities of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.
While something else I want to say is not directly related to this bill I think it is close enough that I should be permitted to refer to it in passing. From time to time complaints have reached some of us concerning labour conditions in connection with this same Welch company to which I have been referring in connection with contracts let to them by the Canadian National Railways. In the main, these complaints are of two types. The union affected does not like the way in which its collective agreements are by-passed when track or maintenance work is let out to a company of that kind. The other complaint is that labour conditions under this company are not very satisfactory. As a matter of fact I have on my desk at the present time a letter dealing with some of these unsatisfactory labour conditions.
I mention this fact so that I may ask the Minister of Transport to take up this matter with the Canadian National Railways when the time comes to build these lines of railway. I ask the minister to see to it that the Canadian National Railways does not leave itself open to criticism with respect to labour conditions and with respect to the conditions under which workmen will have to live and work in connection with the building of these railways.
These are important lines of railway. It is good that they are being built. Let us see to it that in the building of them those who do the hard work in this northern country have the best possible labour conditions. Let us see that none of the principles which we have accepted as right and proper in this field, including those principles which are covered in our various labour codes, are violated or by-passed in any way.
With these few remarks, I may say that we are glad to support this resolution.
Canadian National Railways


Mr. Michener:: Mr. Chairman, also in a few words I should like to concur in what has been said by the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra and also express my admiration of the hon. member for Villeneuve and of his enthusiasm for this area which he knows so well. I want to tell him that his reputation as a surveyor has reached even as far as the remote city of Toronto.
I have had the privilege of visiting Chibou-gamau, first when it became accessible by the road built by the province of Quebec from St. Felicien. I have some appreciation of the great mineral possibilities as well as the great forest resources along that road. A further extension of that road will give access to smelters which I suppose are essential for the development of that mineral area.
I have also some knowledge of the Manitou-wadge discovery and development which has been one of the sensations of the mineral world and in which many of my constituents who are engaged in engineering have had a part. This district holds great possibilities. I am advised that the tonnage indicated by diamond drilling is in the neighbourhood of ten million tons and that it would not be unreasonable to expect that there would be a tonnage from one of the original discovery properties of between two and four thousand tons a day. I suppose that that will produce a relatively large volume of freight in the form of concentrates which will have to go to the smelter unless one becomes possible in the camp itself. There are other properties which show great promise and there are many prospects under development.
This kind of railway operation is one which appeals to me more particularly when it has to do with the development of mines and forest. I have had some personal experience with the Ontario Northland Railway, formerly the Temiskaming and Northern Ontario railway. This line opened up an area which then had no great economic prospects at the time but it provided a means of access to mines and forest as well as agricultural lands in the northern part of the province. As the minister well knows, it has turned out most successfully, and is now a profitable railway. We have hopes that both of these ventures will turn out in the same way.
There is just one question I should like to raise that occurs to me as I consider the position of the Manitouwadge area. As the minister knows, it lies between the Canadian National railway on the north and the Canadian Pacific railway on the south. It is probably midway between the two. The C.P.R. skirts the north shore of lake Superior and the Canadian National railway is 70

Canadian National Railways miles or 80 miles to the north at this point. Both of these railways lead out to Sudbury, which is a great smelting and refining centre, and either could serve this Manitouwadge area equally well if the branch line were constructed to either. Can the minister tell me whether the other railway, which could have undertaken this development, was interested in it, is interested in it, and has given any indication of a desire to serve the new area, or just what the situation is in that respect? In asking that question for information I should like to give my general concurrence in and support to this motion.
(Translation):


Mr. Gauthier (Lake Si. John):: Mr. Chairman, the Chibougamau district is unquestionably one of the most promising mining centres in Canada. The Canadian government and the Canadian National Railways have both confirmed this by deciding to build a branch line from St. Felicien to Chibougamau and from there to Beattyville; that project will benefit not only the Lake St. John district, but also the province of Quebec and the country as a whole. That undertaking will prove an asset for the Canadian economy. Experts are of the opinion that this extension of the C.N.R.'s line will be of considerable importance. In fact, it will promote the development of mineral deposits in the Chibougamau area and neighbouring districts. That will constitute a further step towards economic conquest of our immense natural resources which are vital to the welfare of our people. The rich mining discoveries in the Chibougamau district are more than enough to warrant this $35 million outlay and no doubt the future will confirm the foresight of our present leaders in introducing this bill which will make it possible to develop and use our natural resources. The Canadian government thus contributes to maintain a high level of national income and that decision will result in a more buoyant and stable Canadian economy.
The Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) has just told us that the Canadian National Railways will begin with the Beattyville-Chibougamau stretch of line. The people of the Lake St. John district are most anxious for this work to be started. I am asking the government on this occasion to authorize the Canadian National Railways to begin the two sections at the same time.
To all the suggestions which have been put forward up to this time, I would like to add the following personal idea. In its May 4 issue, Le Progres du Saguenay, over the
IMr. MichenerJ

signature of Georges-Henri Daigneault, in a well informed editorial, stated, among other things:
The fact that the district is extremely rich in hydroelectric power, should also promote establishment of new ore and metal smelting plants.
This editorial prompts me to say that to speed the mining development of the region the Canadian National Railways could, and should, undertake in the Lake St. John district the construction of an ore smelting plant. I am sure that the Canadian National Railways would find in such a development the means to make that new line a paying proposition.
Mr. Chairman, I do not want to be as long in my remarks in favour of this bill as I was in the representations I made on a previous occasion for the building of that line. As a matter of fact, on three previous occasions, in this house, I asked that this project be carried out. Only last year I had the honour to introduce to the hon. Minister of Transport a large delegation led by the Saguenay economic planning council. All these delegates received from the minister a warm and sympathetic welcome.
The hon. Minister of Transport will go down in history as the man largely responsible for the St. Lawrence seaway. The people of Lake St. John will be doubly grateful to the minister for having also authorized the building of the railway from St. Felicien to Beattyville.


Mr. Dufresne:: Mr. Chairman, I listened carefully, a moment ago, with particular interest and much pleasure, to the appropriate words of explanation which the hon. Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) was kind enough to give us in connection with the bill now before the house.
Representations have certainly been made, over the years, to the government in order to obtain construction of this railway. I am glad to be able to say a few words about this bill, so that I may commend the hon. Minister of Transport and the government for their present decision.
The districts of Chibougamau and Lake St. John are, as everybody knows, rich in mineral deposits. It is therefore time, I believe, to give particular credit to the pioneers, to those men who, from the beginning, opened up to civilization this new area full of an abundant wealth that will be profitable, not only to Quebec, but to Canada as a whole.

We must remember that the first to go to the Chibougamau district did so at the cost of great sacrifices, since there were then but two means of transportation, either by water or through the woods with dog teams. They surely deserve much credit and we must pay tribute to their courage as they are primarily responsible for the expansion of this rich mining district in the province of Quebec.
It must also be said, I believe, that private enterprise has contributed up to now its fair share of expenses and sacrifices during the last few years. It seems to me that we must also give credit to the government of the province of Quebec for having understood the need of a carriage road into this remote district and for having spent millions of dollars for the construction of that road. Therefore, it was high time, Mr. Chairman, for the government of Canada to do its share by helping the Canadian National Railways to construct a railway line, so that the ore produced in the Chibougamau district may be shipped more favourably.
The government has yielded to the wishes of the whole province of Quebec but more particularly to the request made last year, on March 2, 1953, if I remember correctly, by a delegation representing the council of economic planning of the Lake St. John district, which submitted at that time, to the government and to the hon. Minister of Transport, a brief carefully prepared by outstanding economists, on the economic advantages to be expected from the construction of that railway line.
I extend my most sincere congratulations to the minister for having introduced the present bill. It does not matter, Mr. Chairman, whether this railway operates, during a certain time, at a loss. Besides, it would not be the first time, for we know that railways have operated at a loss in the past. However, the Canadian National is controlled by the government and the loss brought about by insufficient revenues will be, no doubt, largely compensated by other revenue resulting from the economic expansion that will surely follow its construction.
I am particularly pleased with this bill because it will make transportation easier between the Saguenay-Lake St. John district and my own district, that is, the city of Quebec.
It will first of all contribute to provide work for hundreds of unemployed who ask nothing better than a chance to earn their living honestly and provide for the needs of
Canadian National Railways their family and their children. Secondly, the building of that railroad will increase our national wealth and, thirdly, it will ensure the economic stability of the Saguenay-Lake St. John district.
Mr. Chairman, before concluding my remarks on the matter, may I be permitted to remind the minister-and I hope that in doing so I shall not be out of order-that there is between Quebec and the Lake St. John district another railroad of which mention has been made on several previous occasions in the house. That railroad is in such poor repair that it should be completely rebuilt. The fact that it is possible, on the one hand, to travel from Ottawa to the provincial capital of Quebec, a distance of 289 miles, in six hours while, on the other hand, it takes exactly 10 hours and 35 minutes to go from Quebec to Dolbeau in the Lake St. John district, a distance of only 233 miles, gives a good idea of the pitiable condition of that railroad.
(Text) :


The Chairman:: Order. I wonder if the hon. member might not more properly direct these remarks on the estimates of the Minister of Transport.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, I think perhaps it would be much better if my hon. friend did so because he is really out of order.
(Translation):


J.-Wilfrid Dufresne: Very well, Mr. Chairman, I do not mind, but I will return to the subject later.
I would like to close my remarks by congratulating the government once again, and more particularly the hon. Minister of Transport-I have not been applauded very often by the other side of the house-for this most outstanding development and more particularly for the particular attention he has given to this subject. I wish, once more, to support the government most wholeheartedly in this connection. This is a move which will, among other things, foster the growth not only of the Saguenay region and of the province of Quebec, but of Canada as a whole.


Mr. Villeneuve:: Mr. Chairman, when I requested from the electors of Roberval constituency the mandate which I am now carrying out, I promised them that I would fight for their rights and their interests, as well as for the projects dearest to their hearts.
Consequently, on November 13, 1953, when I seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne, I spoke in favour of the building of a railway to the Chibougamau mining district, in the Lake St. John district.

Canadian National Railways
On April 29, last, the government deemed it advisable to grant the wishes not only of the people of Lake St. John district but also of the citizens of Abitibi.
Thus both parties are satisfied and get a railway that will link Abitibi and Lake St. John, a link which they have had to do without so far and which will make for a greater development of those regions around a new centre of gravity, the Chibougamau mining district.
I now have a very pleasant task to perform, that of thanking the government, and especially the hon. Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) for such a wise move, the economic outcome of which will be so important for the whole of the Lake St. John district and particularly for Roberval constituency which I represent in this house, since a branch line of that railway will extend to St. Felicien.
(Text):


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, perhaps my first word should be one of thanks to the committee for the manner in which it has received this resolution having to do with the construction of two branch lines of the Canadian National Railways, one in the province of Quebec and the other in the province of Ontario. I can only express the hope that the rest of the legislation which I have to bring before parliament this session, and it comprises some seven or eight bills, will receive the same enthusiastic reception.
I do not intend to make any lengthy remarks because I do not think the resolution stage is the place where this should be done, but I think the committee, in view of the temper it is now in, would wish me at least to reply to some of the suggestions made during the course of this debate.
It has been suggested that the bill, when it reaches the appropriate stage, should be referred to the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. While it is not the practice to make that kind of announcement at this stage, I think, in view of the manner in which the house has received this resolution, that I should say now that it is the intention to follow the usual practice. As a matter of fact, I believe it would be a serious mistake not to do that because this is a matter which involves many millions of dollars and should be carefully considered by the committee.
At this committee there will be officers of the Canadian National Railways who will be able to discuss with the committee the profitability or non-profitability of the various aspects of the two lines. The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra indicated that there

was probably no reason for building the west section alone without at the same time building the eastern section. I think his words were to the effect that he did not think it was satisfactory to build at the west end first and delay the building of the eastern section, that is, St. Felicien to Chibougamau until after. But if the hon. member reads carefully what I said in my opening remarks I do not think he will glean that suggestion from the statements which I made to the house.
The government and the Canadian National Railways consider this whole line as a single enterprise. They believe it will be in the general interests of Canada to build it all. The Canadian National Railways have guarantees and will be able to establish the profitability, the financial betterment to the Canadian National Railways of that part of the line which extends from Beattyville to Chibougamau. As a matter of fact, that is only a continuation of the line they were authorized by parliament to build in 1949, and it has been proven to be profitable. It may be possible, though I do not affirm this, that by the time they complete the construction from Beattyville to Chibougamau, they can begin and continue construction on to St. Felicien, but that will depend upon industrial development in the area at that time. Indeed, it may depend on the industrial development in the immediate future.
My hon. friend referred to the zinc refinery about to be built at Chicoutimi. I hope it will be built, but I have no assurance on that score. The Canadian National Railways have tried on several occasions to have a zinc refinery built at Chicoutimi.


Howard Charles Green: Is that zinc or nickel?


Lionel Chevrier: Zinc. If that zinc development were forthcoming-if there was private initiative that would establish it-and if there were a guarantee similar to that which I have mentioned in connection with the western part of the line, then there could be no difficulty or no objection about the continuation of the line. It might well be that that position will obtain by the time the line has reached Chibougamau.
Then my hon. friend put a question in connection with the fact that there was no guarantee on the Ontario line from Hillsport to lake Manitouwadge such as there was on the western part of the Quebec line. The reason for that situation is obvious. The position of the Ontario line is so profitable in the eyes of the Canadian National Railways that no guarantee is necessary. I think the hon. member for St. Paul's covered that point perhaps as well as I could do it. The reason is this. In view of the potential traffic which exists in that area, the Canadian

National Railways estimate that the revenues on the Canadian National Railways will be bettered to the extent of $6 million a year by the construction of this line from Hillsport to lake Manitouwadge. In fact, the inbound traffic alone would warrant the construction of the line, let alone the outbound traffic; and the outbound traffic will be far more important than the inbound traffic. As a matter of fact, the minimum amount of traffic required for a profitable position on the Ontario line would be 700 tons per day; and that amount will be more than reached by the potential mining development in that area.
Then another reason why no guarantee is necessary is that this is in a completely different section of the Pre-Cambrian shield than are the Quebec lines. The Quebec lines are in entirely undeveloped country whereas the Ontario line is built almost between two main railway lines, that of the Canadian National Railways and that of the Canadian Pacific Railway. In fact the distance from lake Manitouwadge to the Canadian National Railways is 27 miles and to the Canadian Pacific Railway the distance is a little bit greater. Although I am not too sure just what it is, I think it is perhaps 35 or 40 miles.
To deal with the question raised by the hon. member for St. Paul's, namely whether or not the Canadian Pacific Railway had indicated any interest in the line, I can only say that I am sure they are interested. In fact, any railway company would be interested in that amount of potential traffic. However, they have certainly given no indication to me or, so far as I am aware, to any others connected with the government of their intention to build such a line. I presume, however, that if the Canadian National Railways felt that such a line should be built, they might feel similarly. However, that consideration in itself is not a reason why they should. Even if the Canadian Pacific Railway wanted to construct a branch line into that area, it would be for parliament to decide whether, having regard to the charter which we will, I hope, approve here, they should give a second charter to the Canadian Pacific Railway.
My friend the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre raised the question of labour relations and labour conditions in connection with the subcontracts or the contracts which the Canadian National Railways give on these lines. He referred more particularly to one which had been given in connection with a branch line authorized in the House of Commons from Sherridon to Lynn Lake some two years ago. I remember the charges which were made, I think, by a Winnipeg paper. I brought them to the attention of the Canadian National Railways and they
Canadian National Railways were immediately investigated. I must say that they were highly exaggerated. I do not think there was any doubt about the exaggeration of the conditions under which men were alleged to be working. I also know that the Department of Labour carried out an investigation. The results of both the investigation by the Department of Labour and that by the Canadian National Railways were made public at the same time. However, I am glad the hon. member brought to the attention of the committee the conditions that appertained there. I shall see that the Canadian National Railways officials are made aware of the position-not that they are not already aware of it-and that in granting any contracts or subcontracts, they shall keep in mind the consideration that the general labour conditions should be in accordance with the laws and the labour code of this country.
(Translation);
Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank the hon. members for Villeneuve (Mr. Dumas), Lake St. John (Mr. Gauthier), Roberval (Mr. Villeneuve) and Quebec West (Mr. Dufresne) for their contribution to this debate. I see that the first three of these hon. members, whose names I mentioned, are most happy over the decision taken by the government with regard to the construction of these railway lines. I am convinced that the representations made by these hon. members, as also those which they have made through delegations from their constituencies, have had a fortunate effect on the decision taken by the government to undertake the construction of these railway lines.
(Text):
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
Mr. Chevrier thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 442, respecting the construction of lines of railway by Canadian National Railway Company from St. Felicien to Chibougamau and from Chibougamau to Beattyville, all in the province of Quebec, and from Hillsport on the main line of the Canadian National Railways to Manitouwadge lake, both in the province of Ontario.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ACT


Lionel Chevrier: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to authorize the governor in council, for a limited period of time, to provide for transport control of goods in bulk.

Department of Transport Act
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


Mr. Churchill:: Mr. Chairman, I presume that the minister has ready for the committee one of his able statements setting forth the background and purpose of this resolution. May we have it from him?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, my able statement is not with me at the moment. Unfortunately, I left it on my desk in my room. However, I think I can summarize fairly well what the position is.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister can probably do even better without it.


Lionel Chevrier: The resolution reads as follows:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to authorize the governor in council, for a limited period of time, to provide for transport control of goods in bulk.
As the committee knows, under the War Measures Act-


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Emergency Powers Act.


Lionel Chevrier: Yes; I should say the
Emergency Powers Act. I thank my hon. friend for the correction. Under the Emergency Powers Act the governor in council passed an order providing for regulations for the movement of goods in bulk. This order in council has to do with movement by rail and on ships. The legislation referred to in the resolution will be contained in a short bill to be introduced later and seeks to continue for a period of two years only practically the same powers that are contained in that order in council.
As the committee knows, following the appointment of the transport controller there was provision whereby goods in bulk as defined in the regulations could be moved in adequate volume and at the times required. I believe that the transport controller and his assistants have done a very good job. As the situation is now, the transport controller has a representative in Vancouver with one stenographer. There is also a deputy controller in Montreal, and a secretary in Ottawa, because of necessity the transport controller must spend most of his time away from his office here. All told there are but six employees in this branch of the department.
The aim of the transport controller has been to ensure the movement of bulk commodities such as grain and grain products, ore, coal, pulpwood, pulp and timber of all kinds in order to meet export requirements. Since transport control was established there has never been a shortage of box cars in


western Canada to move Canada's grain crop. There have always been approximately fifty thousand cars in the west which is sufficient to keep terminal unloading and cleaning capacity operating efficiently and to meet all export and domestic commitments.
Vessel transportation has been ample to meet all shipping requirements. The transport controller has had tremendous cooperation not only from all rail companies but also from shipping companies. For instance, in 1952-53 exports of the five major Canadian grains together with the grain equivalents of wheat flour, rolled oats and oatmeal, totalled 583,200,000 bushels. This was a new all-time record for foreign shipments of Canadian grain during one crop year, exceeding by 15 per cent the previous high volume established in 1951-52 when over-all exports amounted to 506 million bushels.
In 1952-53, for the second time in their shipping history, the Pacific coast elevators topped 100 million bushels of wheat destined overseas. More than 104 million bushels were exported through these ports to break the record of 103 million bushels set in 1951-52. The same can be said of Canada's Atlantic ports. They also had a record year for wheat, loading out nearly 189 million bushels, 24 per cent more than the previous record of 151 million bushels. The same can be said of the port of Churchill where 8,600,000 bushels of wheat were shipped in the 1952 season and over 10,500,000 bushels in the 1953 season.
As I indicated earlier, all of the transportation agencies, railways, exporters, elevator operators, owners of ocean-going vessels, the federations of agriculture and others, have co-operated with the transport controller to the fullest extent, and I think the committee will be of opinion that it is in the general interests of the trade and commerce of this country that the transport controller be continued in existence so that the movement of these goods in bulk can be carried on efficiently. For that reason I am confident that the resolution will commend itself to the committee.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Has the transport controller authority to say through which ports bulk commodities are to be shipped overseas?


Lionel Chevrier: He has that power under the present emergency powers. I do not know that he has ever used it.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I thank the minister for his statement, which gives us some of the particulars concerning this matter. In looking back I noted in Hansard of 1951 that the member for the then constituency of Souris,

Mr. Ross, advocated some such system as was later instituted, the appointment of a controller so that the box car situation in the western provinces would be under better control. In 1952 that request was again brought to the attention of the house by the hon. member for Prince Albert. Apparently in appointing the controller the minister and the government recognized the need for some supervision over the box car situation, particularly in relation to the shipment of grain.
I noted, however, that the minister in his remarks said nothing about the situation which apparently disturbed those two members on the occasions when they spoke, namely, Canadian box cars being in the United States and not being returned for Canadian use as rapidly as seemed desirable. Perhaps the minister may comment on that later and let us know whether or not the transport controller has supervision over that and makes the necessary arrangements with the railway companies so that a proper balance is maintained between American box cars in Canada and Canadian box cars in the United States.
I am not at all clear whether the transport controller simply arranges for a sufficiency of box cars in the west, as the minister set out, or whether he goes further and has some control over distribution. As I understand the situation, a problem frequently arises because, although box cars may be available in certain localities, a need for them arises elsewhere. Perhaps the minister might comment on that point later. In view of the fact that this appointment was recommended in the past by those of our members thoroughly familiar with the situation so far as the shipment of grain is concerned, we are naturally interested in the continuance of this method of control. I note that it is only for a two-year period and will come under review again in the future.


Mr. Argue:: At this period of congestion in the shipment of grain some organization has to have the kind of authority that the minister has said the transport controller will continue to have. I believe that these powers were first brought into effect when there really was a shortage of railway box cars compared with the demand for shipment of scrap iron of all kinds, lumber, ferrous metals and grain. The situation today is entirely different. There is an oversupply of box cars and no shortage whatsoever. There is a shortage of markets for various commodities and therefore there is congestion in grain. The powers under this legislation need to be used to allocate box cars so that shipment quotas for grain may be kept in effect on a fair and equitable basis. There is certainly no shortage
Department of Transport Act of box cars, because we in western Canada know that box cars coming into various points with lumber or coal are often sent out of those points empty, even though the elevators are bulging with grain. It may be that these regulations, as they are now constituted, and as I presume they will be in the legislation, are necessary in order to have a fair allocation of box cars to maintain the quota system.
We should not fool ourselves into thinking that the transport controller is really controlling the allocation of box cars. I have heard him say that it is the Canadian wheat board that decides the amount of each kind of grain that it wants. It is the Canadian wheat board that decides the number of box cars of grain it will take from each elevator company. The wheat board informs the railway companies of the amount of grain that is required and the transport controller tells the railway companies to make sufficient box cars available to move that grain.
The trouble is that these powers have not been used in a way that is fair and equitable to the producers in western Canada, and which would allow them to deliver to the elevator of their own choice. As a matter of fact the kind of powers that are embodied in this legislation, whether they are used by the transport controllers or whether they are turned over to the railway companies or some other body, have resulted in definite discrimination in the allocation of box cars and have removed the freedom of choice of elevator company from the producer. Certainly, if the powers in this legislation are to be used in a fair and equitable manner, some very definite changes in policy will have to be made.
I have before me a table of the relative position in the handling of grain in Saskatchewan. These figures are taken from various government publications, and are compiled by the Sanford Evans statistical service of Winnipeg as of March, 1952. These statistics show that when the farmers in Saskatchewan have the opportunity to deliver grain to the elevator of their own choice, their own elevator system, controlling 40-7 per cent of the capacity, obtained 50-4 per cent of the patronage. As the elevators became plugged and as space available in the elevators was made possible only through the allocation of box cars, this allocation resulted in a definite loss of business to that farmer owned organization. There was a gradual and continuing loss until now that elevator system, which has increased its capacity in the intervening years from 40 per cent to 44 per cent, has found its handlings drop from 50 per cent to 45 per cent and according to the current information those handlings are down now to about 43 per cent.
4612	HOUSE OF
Department of Transport Act
These handlings are down to 43 per cent because that elevator system is allocated 43 per cent of the box cars. That is all there is to that. Because of the action or lack of action, there is a definite discrimination in the allocation of box cars. I, for one, would like to see the producers given the right to decide the elevator to which they wish to haul their grain. I feel the powers we have in this legislation are necessary, but I should like to see those powers exercised by the producers themselves. Rather than have those powers built into the legislation that is likely to be brought forward, there should be legislation amending the Canada Grain Act that would allow the farmers themselves to decide where they wished to market the grain, and allow the farmers to post their intentions in their wheat board permit book. Then, the box cars could be allocated on the basis of the producer's own interest.
I feel that would be much more satisfactory than the arbitrary method that is now being followed of allocating a certain percentage of box cars to various elevator companies based only on handling capacity or the number of country elevators in that system. Certainly, there is congestion in the handling of grain in western Canada now. The majority of delivery points are still on a five bushel quota, and that means the majority of the farmers at those points have delivered much less than five bushels per seeded acre. As I understand it, this legislation is to remain in effect for another two-year period. Certainly on the basis of the present surplus of grain and the likelihood of a crop this year, I believe the legislation is being extended for a minimum period of time.
When parliament approves of this legislation, I am hopeful that a new system of allocating box cars for the hauling of grain will be devised, a fair system that will take the wishes of the producers into consideration so that in the future they may be able to haul to the elevator of their own choice. This is something they have not been able to do under the legislation now. As I say, we believe someone has to have the powers that are set forth, and which are now used by the transport controller. We hope that these powers will be used to provide a fair distribution of box cars, and we would like to see those powers in the hands of the producers so that the producers themselves could select the elevator company to which they wished to deliver their grain.


Mr. Campbell:: I had two criticisms to make of the allocation of box cars, but one criticism has been made by the member who has just taken his seat. So far as the other point is 

concerned, I want to draw to the attention of the minister the fact that the branch lines in our province did not get cars until well on into the summer, although the farmers living on the main line were able to deliver all their 1952 crop. The farmers who lived on the branch lines still have a large proportion of their 1952 crop on their farms. In so far as my own constituency is concerned, I am certain about this matter I am mentioning.
I feel this subject should be given detailed consideration. I am hoping this measure will go before one of the committees of the house, perhaps the agriculture committee, where we could have the transport controller before us and the whole system of the allocation of box cars could be examined. I do not know who is responsible for the fact that the railways cleared out the main line elevators and left the branch lines to the last. I do not know whether or not it was the transport controller or the railways. I feel we should find that out. I do believe that those elevators situated on branch lines should have their share of box cars when a distribution is being made.


Howard Charles Green: May I ask the minister one or two questions. Will the transport controller have authority over all sorts of bulk goods? The minister mentioned, in addition to grain, ore, coal, pulpwood and timber. Why is it necessary for this controller to have authority over commodities of that type. Would it not be sufficient if his powers were restricted to grain because apparently it is in connection with that commodity that all the difficulty arises.
Would the minister explain what control there will be over goods carried by ships, particularly foreign ships. I can see where it would be possible to control a Canadian registered ship, but just how would this control work, say in the case of a Japanese ship?
Will the controller have any authority over rates charged? Will he have any authority over the price charged for grain at different ports in Canada?


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, I presume I will be closing the debate at this time.


Howard Charles Green: We are in committee.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, I think many of these questions will be answered when the legislation is before the house. My hon. friend wants to know what authority the controller will have over certain goods in bulk. There is a definition of goods in bulk in the legislation over which the controller will have authority. I do not think that we have reached the stage when that information should be given.

There is a definition of ship in the legislation. Pretty much the same authority is given as is to be found in the Department of Transport Act.
I am positive that there is nothing in the proposed legislation having to do with control over rates.
The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre asked what authority the controller would have over cars which are in the United States, and about the box car situation generally.
I think it can be said that there is no shortage of box cars at this time. It has been the practice in the past for the transport controller to meet from time to time with his opposite number in the United States when one existed, and with officials of the American association of railroads, and obtain from them some assurance that box cars would be returned to Canada when there was a shortage. The last statement which I saw indicates that there is quite an over-all surplus of all kinds of cars, box cars, hoppers, flat cars, and the like, as between Canada and the United States. I am unable to say what the situation is in the box car field alone, but it should be quite easy to have a statement when the matter is up for discussion on the second reading of the bill.
I do not want to go into the questions which the hon. member for Assiniboia raised, as they are matters which concern my colleague, the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Perhaps there will be an opportunity to deal with these questions when we are on second reading.


Mr. Hansell:: Mr. Chairman, we have not spoken extensively on this resolution because we realize that it precedes a bill. However,
I should like to ask the minister just three simple questions. I was not able to be in the house when he made his statement.
The resolution indicates that this authorization is for a limited period of time. Is the rpinister in a position to say now what that period might be, if he has not already done so in the remarks he made previously?
As this is only the resolution stage I should like to ask the minister what effect, if any, this measure will have upon the trucking industry. The trucking industry of Canada is becoming a very large industry with millions of dollars invested which must be protected. There was a day when a five-ton truck on a highway was considered a big haul, but today it is nothing to find trucks able to haul twenty-five tons plus a trailer.
I wish the minister would answer that question if it is considered to be a reasonable one.
Inventions by Public Servants My third question is whether the bill to follow will be referred to the appropriate standing committee.


Lionel Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, answering the first question, the limitation of time is two years.
My hon. friend wanted to know what bearing this legislation would have upon the trucking industry. I do not think I or anybody else would be able to say that. I can say that by virtue of this measure the transport controller will have no authority over highway transport.
My hon. friend wanted to know whether the bill would be referred to a committee. I doubt whether it would be advisable to refer the bill to a committee. I think it might be just as well if we discussed it in committee of the whole.


Stanley Howard Knowles: A few minutes ago the minister said that he had several other pieces of legislation to bring before the house at this session. Are any of the other items similar to this one in that they seek to carry forward in statutory form matters which are presently covered by orders in council under the Emergency Powers Act?


Lionel Chevrier: I am afraid that that will have to be answered by someone other than myself. That is a matter of government policy and it will have to be made known on the order paper from time to time as it is determined.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
Mr. Chevrier thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 443, to amend the Department of Transport Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



PUBLIC SERVANTS' INVENTIONS


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Secretary of Slate) moved: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure respecting inventions by public servants to provide a uniform legislative scheme to govern the ownership and management of and the payment of awards for inventions made by public servants of the government of Canada in connection with the duties or employment of the inventors.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


Mr. Fulton:: The Secretary of State should outline for us the scheme envisaged by this resolution.

Inventions by Public Servants


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, it is difficult to add much to the excellent description that is given in the resolution itself, and which I forecast in the house when 1 had another piece of legislation here on February 11 last.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is unusual.


John Whitney Pickersgill: For some considerable time there have been four different statutes which dealt with the rights of different groups of public servants who happened to make inventions which were patentable and for which patents were secured. There were certain provisions in the Patent Act which applied to what I suppose would be described as the ordinary kind of civil servants. Then there were provisions in the National Defence Act which applied to that department and to some extent to the forces. There were also certain provisions in the Atomic Energy Control Act and in the Research Council Act. I could give the reference to the rights under those various statutes if anyone was sufficiently interested. The rights differ from one another. It was felt by the government that there was a reasonable ground for certain public servants to feel that they were being discriminated against in certain circumstances as opposed to others, and in any event that we ought to have, as soon as it could be conveniently done, uniform legislation applying to all public servants.
A scheme for such legislation was drawn up before I became a minister. It was impossible to find the time to introduce it at the last session of parliament, and it might not even have been introduced at this session, sir, but for the fact that the Minister of Trade and Commerce, in his other ministerial capacity, has a bill on the order paper to amend the Atomic Energy Control Act. In that legislation he is dropping the provisions relating to inventions. Therefore, there is some importance in getting this legislation through concurrently with the other bill.
The scheme itself is set out quite clearly in the bill. In general it follows the line now followed in the national research council practice, where there is perhaps the largest practice, and which on the whole seemed to have the best scheme.


Edmund Davie Fulton: The scheme as outlined by the Secretary of State seems to be a reasonable one, if I understood him correctly, to bring together in one statute all the provisions relating to rights of government employees concerning patents of inventions made by them in connection with the duties or employment of the inventor. Two questions occur to me. What general principle is being followed in the way of encouraging public servants to make inventions? For instance,


the resolution itself contemplates the payment of awards for inventions. I would appreciate it if the minister would say a few words on what pattern they intend to follow in that connection, and also whether there is to be any provision in the legislation for financial benefit, apart from the award, from an invention to accrue to the inventor. Without going into any detail, there will be general agreement that with respect to inventions and discoveries made in the course of the employment for which the inventor is employed, work which is in the line of duty, the benefits should accrue to the crown, although there might be some award to the inventor; but not if, for instance, a public servant who has been employed to work along certain lines of research finds his interest aroused along what you might call a sideline, although it may be connected, and he goes off and does research on his own, on that other aspect of the matter. Then it seems hard that he should, simply because he happens to be working for the crown, not receive financial reward in the way of royalties or patent rights. We would appreciate it if the minister will say whether that matter is to be covered by the legislation in a form which will encourage public servants to employ their inventive capacity in the same way that private inventors are now encouraged.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps I should say that anything I do have to say on this subject will be very tentative. This is probably a question the Minister of Trade and Commerce is much more competent than I am to deal with, because in his ministerial capacity he deals with these things, and I do not think it will surprise the committee to know that very few inventions are made in the Department of the Secretary of State, so far as I know.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Only political inventions.


John Whitney Pickersgill: They are made mostly by the minister, and they are not patentable. With respect to the term "awards", some consideration was given to what term should be used. To the ordinary layman, and perhaps even to so distinguished a lawyer as the hon. member for Kamloops, the word "award" suggests a simple lump sum, but it need not be that at all. It might be an award of a certain percentage of any benefits such as royalties which might be derived. As I understand it, the national research council has had quite a lot of experience with inventions that have been made, and they have worked out a kind of scheme which they apply to these things, which is working pretty satisfactorily and which seems to have accomplished the very results that the hon. gentleman thinks are desirable.

In the main it is the pattern that is followed in the legislation that is now to be more generally applied, if the house sees fit.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
Mr. Pickersgill thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 444, respecting inventions by public servants.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Five o'clock.


Mr. Speaker:: Since it is five o'clock the house will now consider public bills.



CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD ACT


Mr. H. A. Eryson (Humboldi-Melforl) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 441, to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this bill proposes to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act and I will make a further explanation of that in a moment. I introduce this bill in the knowledge that a similar bill has been introduced before. But circumstances have changed since that time, and I believe that some of the factors which at that time seemed so highly debatable can now, in the light of recent developments and future prospects, be introduced and justified to a greater extent than ever before.
The intent and purpose of this measure is outlined clearly in the explanatory notes. The only change sought by the introduction of this measure is the insertion of the words "or Churchill" in the appropriate places in two sections of the act. As the explanatory note states:
The effect of this change will be to permit producers in the area accessible to the port of Churchill to get the advantage of the cheaper freight rates to Churchill, wherever such cheaper rates apply. The implementation of this provision will not involve any increase in expenditure either by the government or by the Canadian wheat board.
Then, Mr. Speaker, I would like to refer to a statement made by Mr. Robbins of the Canadian wheat board speaking at the Hudson Bay Route Association meeting in Moose Jaw on March 4. He said he felt that the farmers in the area accessible to Churchill should have the benefit of the cheaper freight rate to that port as against the port at Fort William. Subsequently a resolution was passed at that meeting which reads as follows:
Be it resolved that the wheat board be requested to credit the individual growers of wheat with the saving in freight that can be made through shipments to Churchill and thus place Saskatchewan
Canadian Wheat Board Act farmers in a similar position to Alberta farmers residing in the preferential freight area of Pacific coast points.
I am tempted at this point to go into all the aspects of the Hudson bay route as it affects and will affect in future the over-all economy of western Canada, but I do not propose to do so. I will rather confine my remarks to the bill before the house at the present time.
Wheat producers in the area accessible to Churchill feel very strongly about the fact that the wheat board has not seen fit to make the port of Churchill a basing point. In other words, we feel that the port of Churchill should be designated a port of delivery for wheat bought by the wheat board, thereby placing us in exactly the same position as those producers in the area accessible to the port of Vancouver and, by the same token, the port at the lakehead. Producers in western Saskatchewan and in Alberta are in a preferential area. That means that if you live on or west of a line roughly through Battleford, instead of shipping your wheat to Fort William you can ship it to Vancouver. You will realize, Mr. Speaker, that as you get farther west your freight rate progressively decreases. If you live east of that line through Battleford and on into Manitoba your freight rate also becomes progressively less as you come closer to the lakehead.
We in the area adjacent to the port of Churchill believe that we should have the same treatment as those producers who live in these two preferential areas. We believe that we have contributed substantial sums of money toward the building of this Churchill project. I do not intend to go into that, except to say, for the benefit of those hon. members who are not too well acquainted with that project, that the government of Canada set aside in western Canada certain lands amounting to approximately 14 million acres. I believe that land was subsequently sold for some $42 million and that money was spent on this so-called Churchill project. The Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) indicated some time ago that up to 1945 the dominion government had spent some $51 million on this Churchill project, and that of course included $6 million spent at Port Nelson, which was subsequently abandoned in favour of the port at Churchill. We believe that out of that sum of $51 million we contributed something like $42 million toward that project. In the light of that we think we have a claim to any benefits which may accrue from the cheaper freight rates to the port of Churchill.
I am well aware that the minister will probably criticize that statement and point out, quite rightly, that any savings made

Canadian Wheat Board Act because of cheaper freight rates go into wheat board revenues and that such savings will eventually be reflected in the final payments made by the wheat board. That statement is quite correct, but the same is true of the grain hauled to the port of Vancouver and Fort William. Any savings made there go into the general revenue of the wheat board and are distributed fairly to all the members.
However, in addition to that, those people in these preferential areas gain something over and above that because of the fact that they pay a lower freight rate than we do. To emphasize the problem further, I would point out that the producers in the Melfort and Wadena areas of Saskatchewan, for example, had a great deal of their grain shipped to Churchill, yet they paid the freight based on the Fort William rate. I will admit that the freight paid on wheat sent to Churchill at the present time does not constitute a very great burden. As a matter of fact, I believe that in the most preferred area the cost is four cents per hundred and that is the best price anyone in that accessible area could expect to get. Of course, as you go farther away from the preferred area it falls from four cents to three, and so on. In other words, as you get near the fringe area the differential is not so very much. The Saskatchewan wheat pool in March of last year made an estimate of the benefits which would accrue from the cheaper freight rate if that area and the port of Churchill had been designated a basic point for the wheat board.
Here is the way it would have worked out. All companies combined shipped some 11 million bushels of wheat last year. Of that total, 5,748 bushels came from outside the designated area; 438,453 bushels came from the so-called fringe area around the outside where there was only one cent of differential in freight rate; 1,975,216 bushels came from an area with a preference of two cents; 2 million and some hundred thousand bushels came from an area where the differential was three cents; and 360,040 bushels came from the most preferred area where they would have got a preference of four cents per hundred pounds. At the present time, this is not a large amount of money, as I said a moment ago. As a matter of fact, it amounted to only $188,275. The minister can argue, and rightly again, that that amount will all be eaten up in diversion charges. Incidentally, I should like to say something about diversion charges a little later on-


Mr. Knight:: Why do you assume he is going to oppose it?


Hugh Alexander Bryson: 
Robert Ross (Roy) Knight: Mr. Speaker, wheat may be outside my field, but I am very interested in the success of the Hudson bay route and the port of Churchill. I have watched the situation fairly closely for a number of years and I have had the pleasure of going to Churchill. It is interesting to me to see that the present member for Humboldt-Melfort (Mr. Bryson) has adopted and is

Canadian Wheat Board Act pursuing the course of his predecessor, the former member for the then constituency of Melfort who thought, when he introduced a similar bill, that it was a matter of some importance to himself as a farmer and to the other farmers in the area contiguous to the port.
My hon. friend has asked me to speak in support of his bill for a moment or two. It is true that he has presented all the arguments in favour of the bill but I might say a word or two on it. Just before I came downstairs I was looking at the debate that took place in 1949, a debate largely between the former member for Melfort and the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe). It can be found at page 589 of Hansard of October 6, 1949. On that occasion Mr. Wright moved second reading of Bill No. 13, to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act. He argued that a good deal of the funds used to build the railroad came from the sale of western lands and pointed out rightly that the people who contributed have been looking for some return for that money since that time.
I believe it was in 1940 when the act was amended to add the word "Vancouver" to the words "Port Arthur and Fort William" for the purpose of making Vancouver a basing port for wheat. At that time the people of Alberta and western Saskatchewan too to some extent derived considerable benefit from that move. To be the devil's advocate for a moment, I will have to admit that the port of Vancouver is open the year round, and we must face it that that is a point that is relevant to this argument. On the other hand we will be told-in fact, we know-that the port of Churchill is only open for two and a half or three months in a year. Therefore the argument might be used that the advantage that would accrue might only accrue to those people who actually ship grain whereas in the larger area of Alberta and western Saskatchewan the mere geographical fact that the people live in those particular areas gives them that benefit whether they use the port of Vancouver or send their wheat to the eastern ports.
That is an argument against the bill now before us that we have to face, and I think it is fair to mention both sides of the question. But we feel that those people who live close to the port of Churchill should get some such benefit as do the people who live in Alberta and western Saskatchewan because of the fact that they are in the Vancouver shipping area.
My hon. friend has mentioned the question of diversion charges, and I have discussed it several times in the house. Like him I simply cannot understand the purpose of the

diversion charges and I do not know why that particular iniquity is inflicted on the western farmer.	I believe that once I
characterized the diversion charges as money paid for service not rendered, and I do not know a better way to put it. I know that at times the minister has tried to explain the matter but I suppose we are a bit dense.
I know that the western farmers simply do not understand it and I wish it could be explained more clearly for their benefit.
There are one or two other points. I remember that in opposing such a bill on other occasions the minister used certain arguments that in my opinion are not as valid today as they were then because of changed conditions. One argument that the minister used in October, 1949, was that wheat had to be kept at strategic points so that it would be available immediately for current needs and demands. That was certainly a good argument on that occasion. We were operating under the world wheat contracts then and wheat had to be placed at strategic points. I might say that this fortunate condition does not exist any more. In those days wheat could be delivered freely. There was a market for wheat and a shortage of wheat then compared with now. Wheat is not now moving with the same speed and we do not have to worry about strategic points.
Another argument that the minister used was that we could not afford to keep wheat stored at Churchill because it was an expensive business. That also was true in those times, but as my hon. friend has pointed out we now have to store wheat willy-nilly somewhere, and not only are we not avoiding the storage of wheat at Churchill but we are in the position where we wish we had more room at Churchill for wheat to be stored under almost any conditions.
I also remember that the minister said that at that time only 12J per cent of the actual wheat grown in this area, which would be the area around Churchill if it were made a basing point, was actually shipped through the port of Churchill. That condition has now been changed because with the increase in the amount shipped to approximately 11 million bushels I would venture to say that the percentage of wheat in that particular area shipped through Churchill must have doubled. The figure is now 11 million bushels compared with 5 million bushels in those days. Therefore if this measure had any validity at all at that time it has more validity now.
There is also the fact that we are going to have more wheat at Churchill and that we are, I am afraid, going to have a greater

carryover and more wheat stored in this country for a period of a year or two at least. If the plans for storage go ahead we will have storage there of 5 million bushels instead of the present 2,500,000 bushels. Therefore there will be more wheat available and ready. As my friend has pointed out, the elevators there are full now even in winter. But under ordinary circumstances we would at least expect to have wheat delivered there starting in May or June, and certainly in time so that the elevators would be filled ahead of the coming of the ships in September.
The relative price of the handling at Churchill as compared with Port Arthur and Fort William I feel has some bearing on this matter. The minister himself admitted that, and I am quoting now from page 595 of Hansard for October 6, 1949. The former member for Melfort said:
... if a favourable price is obtained for wheat at the port of Churchill under the world contract,-
We were under a world contract at that time.
-a price in excess of the price at Port Arthur or Fort William, then I think it is doubly necessary that the people adjacent to that port should get some advantage from that price.
The minister replied:
X would agree.
For those reasons then, Mr. Chairman, I am supporting the bill advanced by my colleague.


Mr. G. H. Caslleden (Yorkton):: In adding a few words in support of this Bill No. 441, I think it is clear to the house now that the intention of the bill is only to grant this privilege on freight rates to the areas within reach of Churchill, in the same manner as rates now apply to Fort William, Port Arthur and Vancouver. The effect of that would be to permit producers in the area accessible to the port of Churchill to get the advantage of cheaper freight rates wherever such cheaper rates would apply. The implementation of the provision would not involve any increased expenditure by the government or the Canadian wheat board and therefore we see little reason for not implementing it.
At this time I believe attention should be given to the facilities at the port of Churchill, because of its great importance as a port, its value to Canada as a nation and the development of the northern part of Canada, both economically and for defence as the whole economic and military picture of the world develops. The constituency that I represent would be in that area designated, perhaps only the small outer fringe of that area, but at the same time we feel that in justice to that area Churchill should be given
Canadian Wheat Board Act that advantage. It seems only right that the port of Churchill and the people shipping there should have the same opportunities and privileges as are available to the people shipping to other points.
The matter of grain in the world today, particularly in western Canada, is a subject that is attracting particular attention of the people involved in this business because of the fact that expanding production seems to be a sort of constant thing now. With the changing techniques in the production of wheat, with the use of chemical weed killers and with better facilities, we are able to grow more and better wheat than we have ever grown before. Unfortunately this is true not only in Canada; other countries are learning how to grow wheat more effectively and more efficiently. The result has been that markets for Canada's wheat are gradually declining. It is, therefore, necessary that we look to every facility we can for the storing of our grain.
It appears that within 90 days we are going to be faced, we hope, with another big crop in the west. The problem of storage is then going to tax us, and it will be difficult. I believe I have advocated before in this house that preparations should be made now to have storage facilities available so that this grain can be obtained at the place and time we need it. Statements have been made that some of us seem to look upon a large crop as a calamity. I do not believe any of us have ever said that. The only thing that has been calamitous, so far as the farmer is concerned, has been his inability to deliver grain. If the establishment of storage space at Churchill and other places in Canada will help alleviate that situation, it will be of benefit to the farmer and others as well.
I believe that most of the arguments concerning the value of this bill have been presented. There is nothing more that can usefully be added. I will just say that for the good of Canada and as a means of aiding in making preparations for a situation that is rapidly developed, this would be a good move. It would give some equity to those people who ship grain to that area, and we would like to give it our full support.


Mr. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: have listened with a great deal of interest to the presentation of my neighbours from Saskatchewan in connection with this bill. While my constituency is not in an area that would be directly affected by the change in the bill, I must indicate at this time that I am vitally interested in anything that would affect the extent of the commercial activity at Churchill. The port of Churchill is in the province of Manitoba, and Manitobans

Canadian Wheat Board Act whether they live in the south of the province or in the north, are vitally concerned with any move that would promote increased use of the port facilities.
The progress of the port of Churchill has been comparatively slow. That has been due to several factors. There is the basic problem, of course, of the battle against the elements because the port is located so far to the north. As has been indicated in the discussion this afternoon, the period of activity each year is relatively short. Notwithstanding that fact, there has been gradual expansion in the length of the season, particularly since the end of the war and the availability of modern electronic navigational aids. As the situation improves in this regard, no doubt maximum benefits will be derived from the use of the port facilities at Churchill.
There has been also the battle against vested interests in this country. It has been a long, uphill struggle to get recognition of the port as a suitable site for commercial activities in Canada. Gradually the resistance is being broken down. This afternoon some reference was made to the problem of diversion charges. This is the question in which I have been interested since I came to this house, and like other members from the wheat growing areas I find it difficult to understand why this diversion charge on grain flowing through the port of Churchill has been perpetuated from year to year. It seems to me that an unnecessary financial burden is being placed upon the use of the port. It seems to me that it is one small surviving unnecessary discouragement to the expanding use of the port facilities.
As I listened to the discussion I came to the conclusion that the bill as put forward by the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort (Mr. Bryson) this afternoon is one step forward in the development of Churchill as a channel of commerce to and from this continent and hence I rise to speak in support of it. The development of northern Manitoba is moving forward rapidly especially in recent years with the coming into operation of mining activities at Lynn Lake and with the completion of the railroad extension to that point. There is every possibility that one of the difficulties of a wider use of the Churchill facilities for two-way traffic will be overcome. There is no doubt at all that in the not too far distant future the port will be used to export the rich ore resources that are being discovered and exploited in the northern part of our province.
With the doubling of the storage capacity of Churchill this year there will be an even greater possibility than heretofore of more incoming traffic from European countries. It


seems to me that the proposal in this bill to equalize freight rates and to place Churchill in line with the other major ports of this country is just another step forward in the progress that has been made down through the years toward a more adequate use of the excellent port facilities at Churchill. For these reasons I support the bill which has been presented by the hon. member for Humboldt-Melfort.


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, bills in similar terms to this bill have been debated in this house on other occasions, particularly in 1949 and 1950. I suggest that the real situation has not changed greatly since those debates took place. The proposal is that an area be designated as tributary to the port of Churchill and for which Churchill would be the basing point for freight rates. It has been said that this departure would cause no expense to the government and no expense to the wheat board, but I would point out that it would cause expense to farmers who were not within that particular designated area. The hon. member for Brandon-Souris (Mr. Dinsdale) says that his people are not concerned, but I suggest that if this bill goes through they would be concerned because they would pay their portion of the expense involved in making Churchill a basing point.
It is proposed that about forty to fifty million bushels of wheat would be based on Churchill, that is, there would be that much wheat grown in the logical area tributary to Churchill on the basis of existing freight rates. Although the port has been handling more business each year and is creating new records-last year was quite a step ahead- unfortunately it has never been able to handle as much as eleven million bushels during a shipping season. Obviously there would be in addition some thirty to forty million bushels of wheat enjoying the freight rate to Churchill even though the wheat board would be paying the extra charge involved in shipping that grain to where it would actually go, namely Fort William-Port Arthur.
On the ten and a half to eleven million bushels that actually moved to Churchill last year there would have been a saving to the farmers within the designated area, but there was in fact no real saving to the wheat board. While there would have been a theoretical saving of $169,000 in freight rates, there was a payment made on the grain that moved to Churchill of an amount within $1,000 of the first amount in the form of diversion charges. So that we are asked to create a situation by legislation that does not really exist.



XI, 1954

Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister has often
created situations that did not exist.


Clarence Decatur Howe: We did create another basing point at Vancouver. This is a fairly recent development; I think it is within the time I have been in the house. However, we have a factual situation at Vancouver. The points within the designated area with freight rates favourable to Vancouver actually ship their grain to Vancouver. It is only correct that farmers in that area should have any benefits that accrue from pricing on the basis of Vancouver rates. All their grain actually goes there.
There is an area along the dividing line between rates tributary to Vancouver and rates tributary to Port Arthur where circumstances often make it desirable to ship grain to the port which is not the cheaper as far as freight rates are concerned. For example, because of the record movement of wheat from Vancouver at the present time and the limited movement from Port Arthur we have shifted the boundary east by several hundred miles. Today points as far east as Regina are shipping to the Pacific coast even though the freight rate to the lakehead is three or four cents cheaper. We are doing that so that the quota system may be worked out fairly. The wheat board is paying the extra cost. In other words, the man in Regina is being paid on the basis of a freight rate to Fort William when his grain is actually being shipped to Vancouver.
I have outlined a situation which we believe works out to the benefit of all concerned. It is a temporary situation and we think it is justified under present circumstances. But I do not think it could be justified to establish an artificial situation so that the man within a designated area will continue to be paid more for his wheat when we know that the greater portion of the amount that is paid would come out of the pool as a whole, rather than represent a direct saving on the shipment of that grain to Churchill.
So you have two situations. One situation is where you have fifty million bushels in a designated area where the rates would be favourable to Churchill but to where you could ship only ten million bushels; that being the present handling capacity of that port. The other situation involved is that on the ten million bushels shipped, the saving in freight is actually offset in full by diversion charges that must be paid if any grain is to be shipped to Churchill. You ask: Why do we not have diversion charges on grain shipped to Vancouver? The reason is that elevator systems are organized to ship to
Canadian Wheat Board Act Vancouver. For example, the Alberta wheat pool terminal elevator at Vancouver is supported by a line of country elevators owned by the same company in Alberta. The United Grain Growers terminal elevator at Vancouver is also supported by a line of country elevators in Alberta owned by that company. There are other elevators owned by other elevator interests which are in the same position. For example, the Richardson firm built a terminal elevator in Vancouver and own country elevators in Alberta to support that elevator.
I am sorry there is so much difficulty about understanding the reason for diversion charges. The government owns grain elevators. We own a grain elevator at Fort William. We do not operate that elevator. Why do we not operate the elevator? Because it is not supported by a line of country elevators, and so that it may be operated, we lease it to the McCabe Grain Company who have a line of country elevators and are able to support the terminal elevator.
We have an elevator in Prince Rupert that was closed up for a number of years. Why? Because the government had no line of country elevators to gather grain for that terminal and to support it with shipments from the country. It takes a very considerable investment to establish a balanced system of country and terminal elevators. It is no good building a terminal unless you have country elevators; and if you have country elevators you do not get the full earning power out of them unless you can ship to your own terminal. Systems have been built up on that basis; investments are made in that way. They are not made by greedy capitalists; they are often made by the farmers themselves. I suppose the pool chains of grain elevators are far and away the biggest chains. The pools have a great investment in those chains, and if you say to the Alberta wheat pool: "You cannot ship this grain to your own terminal. It is true, you built a terminal at Vancouver so that you could get the earnings from your country elevators. We are not going to allow that; we are going to say that you must ship from country elevators that you own in Alberta to the government elevator at Prince Rupert." Well, the pool would say: "Is that fair? This system is built up to operate as a unit. We are entitled to handle grain at Vancouver that we collect in our country elevators in Alberta". I say, "Well, it is not fair, no, and you are entitled to a diversion charge equivalent to about the earnings that you would have made on the grain had it been shipped to Vancouver". It is exactly the same situation if grain is being diverted to a flour mill.

Canadian Wheat Board Act
Grain is collected by an elevator company, and that company would normally expect to deliver the grain to its own terminal. If it is denied the privilege of shipping to its own terminal, it is the usual custom to pay a diversion charge on the grain. That is a reasonable expense. The principle has been agreed to over the years for a great many years. It is a logical expense in connection with shipments from privately-owned country elevators in Manitoba or Saskatchewan to Churchill.
I think therefore that this bill should be defeated. It creates an illogical situation. It gives a few people benefits to which the facts of life do not entitle them. However, I think my hon. friend, if he would like a suggestion for a bill in the future, is overlooking the real advantages of shipping to Churchill. There are earnings at Churchill, not in delivering grain to Churchill, but in shipping grain from Churchill. There is a benefit of about 9 cents a bushel on ocean freight rates from Churchill to European markets, as against shipments from Fort William to European markets. And he might logically say that that benefit belongs to the farmers in this designated area. Well, I still think that would be a poor argument. It would be a better argument, but after all we ship grain from where we can and to our best available advantage. Grain is a national problem. We build national ports; we spend taxpayers' money, great sums of it, in building facilities to market the grain crops of Canada. The advantages shift from year to year. Ocean freight rates have a good deal to do with differentials, and the savings are not the same from year to year. Therefore I think the present practice of marketing grain where we can, pooling the sums recovered and distributing them among all the producers, is a fair method of handling the marketing of Canadian wheat.
I just mentioned that suggestion so that my hon. friend will not bring this bill down again. We have had this proposal too many times. I do not think it is a logical bill; but if he really wants to get a debate on this subject he may lay claim to the extra 9 cents a bushel that represents the savings on shipments from Churchill. He might get some supporters. I do not know that I have anything else to offer other than to say I hope this bill will be defeated.


Mr. Speaker:: Shall I call it six o'clock, or does the hon. member wish to start using his right of reply?


Mr. Weir:: I would prefer that you call it six o'clock. I was going to make a few observations with respect to this bill, but


since it is one minute to six o'clock I am afraid it is a little too short a time for me to get wound up.
On motion of Mr. Weir the debate was adjourned.
At six o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at eight o'clock.


Clarence Decatur Howe: the second reading of Bill No. 375, to amend the Research Council Act.
He said: The amendments to the Research Council Act which this bill proposes are fundamentally designed to remove certain ambiguities and clarify certain financial arrangements that have assumed greater importance as the research council has grown in size. These amendments do not change in any fundamental way the principles and procedures which have guided the council in its operations over the years, and which, I think, have made possible the very effective work which that institution has been able to do in the promotion, organization and coordination of scientific and industrial research in Canada.
As there appears to be considerable interest at the moment in the broad aspects of industrial research in this country, I think it would be appropriate for me to say something at this time about how research is organized from the government standpoint, what is being achieved and what we may look forward to. I realize, as will all hon. members, that the research council is by no means responsible for all the scientific and industrial research but it does have very broad responsibilities and has had a great influence in guiding, directing and coordinating such activities over the past two decades. There can be no doubt about the value of scientific research to the country's industrial strength, as well as to its health, prosperity and well-being.
World war II demonstrated our nation's dependence on research and I have never heard in a debate in this house or elsewhere any question of the value of that research. The only difference of opinion is on the scale of support, and the best methods of coordinating the various activities. The important point to realize is that large-scale industrial research as we know it today is

a very recent phenomenon in the Englishspeaking countries. It is true that by the turn of the century Germany had built a large industrial empire on fundamental and applied research facilities, but before world war I there were relatively few large research laboratories either in government or in private industry on this continent. Between the world wars, however, major industrial companies in the United States such as the General Electric Company, Westinghouse Company, Dupont Chemical Company and the American Telegraph and Telephone Company built up very large competent scientific research laboratories. The same thing was true in England. But in Canada no corresponding development took place. This is quite understandable and was due to the fact that most sizeable industrial companies that expanded in Canada during those years were branch factories, and those in turn were dependent on research facilities in either the United States or Great Britain.
There were a few exceptions such as the Shawinigan Company, and the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company, but generally speaking just before world war II broke out one could say that there were few real research laboratories in Canadian industrial plants.
Just to fill out the picture I would like to give the following figures which were contained in an address in 1949 by the then president of the national research council. The figures were given to indicate in a general way the expenditures and activities in the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada just before the outbreak of war. I realize that such figures are difficult to obtain in precise form but these difficulties, I think, can be taken as representing at least the order of magnitude of activity and prove the point I wish to make.
In 1938-39 government expenditures, which of course reflect activities and facilities on scientific and industrial research in the three countries, were on a per capita basis almost the same: from 40 to 50 cents. On the other hand, the per capita expenditures by industry were markedly different in the three countries: $1.70 in the United States, somewhere between 30 and 50 cents in the United Kingdom; and about 20 cents per capita in Canada.
It will be seen then that in 1938-39 in the United States private industry was supporting industrial research on a scale eight to ten times greater on a per capita basis, and perhaps 100 times greater on the basis of total dollars, as compared with what was being done in Canada. Further, in the United States at that time private industry was spending three to four times as much as the
Research Council Act
government, while in Canada government expenditures on research were over twice that of industry.
During and since the war the relative burdens of research expenditures have changed radically, particularly in the United States where government expenditures are now approximately equal to those of industry. While the picture here has also changed, and is changing, it is necessary, when considering how industrial research has developed in Canada, to keep in mind the comparative lack of private industrial research facilities in this country before world war II.
Let me illustrate by mentioning one problem we faced in 1939, namely the development and production of radar equipment. In developing such equipment in the United Kingdom and United States it was possible to place development contracts with the large research laboratories of private industries. In Canada, as I have said, comparable industry had no research facilities and, owing to war security restrictions, our branch factories were cut off from all contacts with the laboratories of the parent companies in such military work. As a consequence the development work in radar had to be organized by the national research council, and a crown company, Research Enterprises Limited, had to be set up to do the engineering development and production. The same thing had to be done to produce optical glass and many other special devices, and for work in the field of atomic energy.
The situation was slightly different in some of the chemical industries, especially those involved in the manufacture of explosives; but generally speaking when special and novel research and development were required the primary facilities could be found only in our government laboratories. As the result of our war activities the situation has changed a great deal, and many private industries are now doing good research and development work. But even yet it has been my experience that when one desires to place large development contracts with industry it is usually not possible to find facilities comparable to those which exist in the United States and United Kingdom.
During world war II research expenditures and activities went up phenomenally in all countries. Our expenditures in Canada for government research are at least ten times greater than in 1939, and a comparable expansion was experienced in the United States and United Kingdom. The result is that today our government expenditures and activities on scientific and industrial research are of a very different order of magnitude than those of 1939. For instance, it is I think
4624	HOUSE OF
Research Council Act
interesting to note that in the matter of dollars and cents the Canadian government today is spending more than the total sum spent by the United States in 1938-39, and it will be recalled that the United States at that time had a high reputation in this field. Our current expenditures are likewise several times the total expenditures in Great Britain in the pre-war days, and no one would suggest that Great Britain at that time had negligible scientific research activities.
There is another comparison I think is interesting. While all countries have increased greatly their expenditures since 1939, the research expenditures of the Canadian government today for peacetime purposes are, on a per capita basis, of the same order of magnitude as the comparable expenditures in the United States and the United Kingdom. All of this, I think, indicates the Canadian government has not been negligent in supporting sound research and in building up national research facilities and resources. Certainly in the over-all picture Canada's relative position in research is far different from what it was during the 1930's. I think, therefore that, when listening to speeches which purport to show the lack of Canadian relative efforts in the field of research, we must be careful to inquire whether we are discussing the conditions as they were in pre-war days or as they are today. While we are on this point I should like to emphasize that, since the end of world war II, the progress in research in Canada has been even greater than it was during the war, so that one may even be talking about conditions as they were in 1946 and still be drawing erroneous conclusions as to what the 1954 conditions are.
I should like also to emphasize that research is not a static thing. It is continually changing to meet changing conditions and also, like an organism, must grow from small beginnings. The development of research is not merely a matter of money. Money will not buy trained men if they are not available, so that in looking at and assessing the growth and development of research in any country, one must always keep in mind that it is a changing picture and that it is often impossible to provide at any moment everything that may be desirable.
I do not think there is any room for complacency in this particular field. As I have said, it is a rapidly moving one, and no sensible person would dogmatically claim that at any time, in any country, at any place there is in existence a universally acceptable and permanently best arrangement of research facilities. On the other hand, I do feel that the advances made in Canada over the past twenty years have been


absolutely first-rate. I think the research council has done an extraordinarily good job and when I talk to people in other countries of the world, as I often do, I hear nothing but commendation for the work of that body. I have heard many say how much they wish their own national organizations were more similar to ours. The credit for all of this does not rest with any one government, any one individual, or any one institution; support has come from all parts of the country, from industry, governments, universities, and provincial institutions. But I do claim that this government merits a fair show of credit for guiding affairs during the period of the greatest growth and development.
I should like at this time and in passing to pay my personal tribute to the members of the honorary council. These gentlemen receive very little public recognition, yet over the years successive councils have rendered outstanding and unselfish service to this country. These men bring freely to the council deliberations their talents, experience and achievements that could not be purchased by money. They come to Ottawa three or four times a year and devote many days of hard work to the business of the council. They are men eminent in their fields, such as university presidents, deans, professors, industrialists, engineers and labour leaders. Not only can they speak with authority on professional questions but they bring to the council as well the viewpoints of the different parts of the country, and they receive no monetary remuneration at all. I think these gentlemen deserve the gratitude of this house and of our country.
I have been dealing with a few of the broader aspects of industrial research and have submitted certain generalizations. I should now like to take a few minutes to indicate how these general considerations have influenced government programs and decisions. As I have said, owing to conditions which I suggest were perfectly normal at that time, there was no appreciable growth of industrial research laboratories in Canada following world war I. The government of that day and successive governments, realizing the need for research, set about doing something which time has proven to be very wise. Without laboratories and without scientific staffs, the first national research council embarked after 1918 upon a program of scholarships to trained research personnel, and grants-in-aid to research which enabled universities across Canada to provide facilities for research. This program naturally was small at the start as there were few scholars applying, and the facilities in our graduate schools

were limited. However, this program has gone on and on, increasing in size and effectiveness, since that time, and it was perhaps the major factor in making possible our scientific effort in world war II. In 1939-40 when the great need and demand for military research became apparent, we in Canada were able to organize for the first time a sizeable corps of competent research people, and we had also a large national research laboratory which enabled the research council to provide working facilities for a staff of several thousand which they were able to recruit. Had such trained people and government facilities not been available, Canada would have played little part in military research during world war II.
But great as was the significance in war, the results of those long-term preparations are even more significant today in our peaceful pursuits. We now see in Canada a great surge of industrial research activity, not only in our government laboratories but in our private industries and in our universities. Such developments take time, and ours has followed a slightly different course from that followed in the United Kingdom and the United States.
The strength of a modern industrial nation is dependent on the quality, quantity and vigour of its applied research rather than on any detailed organization chart and, as I have suggested, it is not really useful to compare the general research organizational plane of any one country at any one time with that of another. We should rather consider our ultimate objectives, what progress we are making, and what the picture will look like in 10 or 15 years.
I think that Canada has probably made greater relative progress than has any other country in the last 10 years. I think our scientific and industrial research output is comparable, on a population basis, to that of other leading industrial trading nations. I have no desire to be complacent about the present situation, but I think we are heading in the right way, and I think we are making rather unusual progress.
I should like to say something about the way the national research council operates in fulfilling its responsibilities. As I have said, the national research council for the past 25 years has been awarding scholarships to assist in the training of scientists and has been making grants-in-aid to provide physical facilities. This program has expanded, and today between $1 million and $2 million are being spent, as compared with something less than $100,000 in 1939. My information, and I think it is reliable, is that the honorary council, who recommend all such scholarships 83276-293
Research Council Act
and awards, would unanimously subscribe to the principle that no brilliant young student should be prevented from receiving training by lack of scholarships or grants. The national research council, as you know, also operates extensive laboratories, and these laboratories were designed not to duplicate or overlap other facilities but to provide facilities in fields which were not covered in any other place in Canada, and which were needed badly. No doubt you are familiar with the general work of the divisions of applied chemistry, applied biology, radio and engineering, physics, mechanical engineering, building research and so forth.
Most of the council's laboratories are in Ottawa and vicinity. While some might argue for the decentralization of all laboratories, I think it will be found that in those countries where extreme decentralization has either been inherited or superimposed for political reasons there are serious disadvantages. The centralization of facilities makes for greater efficiency and reduces costs, and does, in my opinion, carry no disadvantage to any other part of the country. This policy, however, does not mean that where certain areas have a peculiar interest in certain aspects laboratories dealing with those projects should not be located regionally. The council therefore has a regional laboratory in Saskatoon, in the middle of the prairie provinces, which works on the utilization of farm crops and allied problems. Again, in Nova Scotia there is another regional laboratory which has been set up to deal with some of the problems that are peculiar to the maritime provinces.
I come now to the manner in which the council serves individuals and private industries. You will recall that the organization of the former department of reconstruction made provisions for setting up a research and development division in an attempt to bring the benefits of scientific and industrial research to those smaller industries which could not afford to set up their own research laboratories. We worked out a service called the technical information service and placed, in the various provinces, field men whose duties were to visit and call on all industries in their respective areas and to assist with the problems they had and give what aid we could. The research council, with its extensive headquarters information and library services, undertook the administration of this service. Over the years literally thousands of reports have been made, advice has been given, and help offered. There is no doubt that such service is of great benefit to industry.
As experience was gained, the national research council felt that this "grass roots"

Research Council Act
work, where individuals were approaching local industrial companies, could be better done by people with local associations than by employees of a federal department. Again, provincial research councils in most provinces were also supporting work of this nature, and friendly discussions between the national and provincial bodies resulted in the suggestion that it would be more effective if the provincial bodies employed all field workers, who would be provincial employees but who would have available to them the library and consulting services that exist at the headquarters' library in Ottawa.
The national research council also offered to make grants to the provincial bodies to cover the expense of such professional officers. I am happy to say that the movement has grown, and today this system is operating in most of the provinces from British Columbia to Nova Scotia. This system makes available to small industries and large industries as well the help, advice and experience of council and all other scientific laboratories in Canada. It is a service that is effective and widely used.
The research council has also organized many associate research committees. These committees are set up to support and deal with research problems that are of interest to many industries. Corrosion is an excellent example of a problem which is basic to most industrial and other activities. On such committees, and there are many, will be found research directors and technical officers of industries, universities and government departments, all of whom are intimately associated with the activities of industries throughout the dominion. From time to time suggestions are made that we in Canada should follow what is called the research association scheme which has been reasonably satisfactory in England. Research council officers have visited England many times to investigate this system, and while most officers at first felt such a system might work well in Canada, all responsible authorities came eventually to the same conclusion, that such research associations, while workable in England, are, except in certain fields, not suitable to the present Canadian situation, and for a different set of reasons the same conclusion has been reached in the United States.
There would, of course, seem to be obvious advantages in bringing together many industries in the same field for the purpose of research and development. In Canada there is one excellent example of such an association, namely, the pulp and paper association, which is supported jointly by industry,

McGill University and the dominion government. The results in this case, I think everyone agrees, are excellent, but it has been almost impossible to extend this type of co-operation through other groups in Canada. I am not going to take up more time on this point, but I should like to say that while this scheme of co-operative research works with reasonable satisfaction in the United Kingdom it does not seem to suit the Canadian picture at the present time. On the other hand, the national research council laboratories and the laboratories of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys and other federal bodies do have a very intimate and close contact with individual industries which I think is an advantage found only in smaller countries.
The research council laboratories are visited daily by technical engineers and scientific officers from industry, and our national research council experts are willing and anxious to visit industries for the purpose of conferring and consulting on problems and giving expert advice whenever it is wanted. The national research council also undertakes, by contract, work for private industries, and over the years many profitable co-operative ventures have been completed.
All in all our government laboratories are far more closely in contact with the industries of the country than a superficial examination of organization charts would indicate. The national research council is not a bureaucratic institution interested only in its own laboratories and its affairs in Ottawa. It has most intimate contacts with bodies all over the country. It supports financially the provincial research councils and universities. It gives service to private industry and undertakes work when requested.
The honorary council which directs the over-all policy is made up of 18 men who reflect comprehensively the over-all problems in various regions of Canada. To illustrate: On the present council we have the directors of two of the provincial research councils, and in that way the research council is intimately acquainted with the problems of these local bodies. We also have one of Canada's leading industrialists who takes an active part in the deliberations and presents the needs and responsibilities of industry. As well, there are university presidents, deans and other scientists.
I have indicated that in pre-war days there was not very much research activity in industry. That is far from the truth today. As a result of the developments I have indicated, many industries in Canada have established research laboratories since 1939, and in many

cases staffs for those laboratories have been recruited from government laboratories.
A large part of the research that made possible the building of the plant of the Polymer Corporation was carried out in the national research laboratories. Today Polymer has its own laboratories, at Sarnia, built for its own particular purposes. We all know that applied research is one of the basic strengths of that company, and that research is responsible for the fact that Polymer has had its best year during the period when the cost of natural rubber has been abnormally low. The Polymer Corporation does not regard research as something that should be carried out in good years and cut back in poor years, but rather as essential if Polymer is to hold its place in a highly competitive industry.
The atomic energy plant at Chalk River is essentially a research laboratory, the work being entirely devoted to solving the problems of peace. The success of the Canadian aircraft industry is also based on its own applied research.
Today the position as far as industrial research laboratories are concerned is very different from the situation, say, in 1939. We have every confidence that in the next five or ten years the facilities for scientific and industrial research will build up gradually and continue to build up to a point where they will be comparable to similar facilities in other countries.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that while we do not feel that research development in Canada has reached its final and permanent form, we do feel that progress is being made in the only way in which sound scientific progress can be made. We feel that the government research organizations are co-operating with industry as effectively as research laboratories are cooperating in other parts of the world. We feel that any suggestion that our facilities should be broken up and distributed to other parts of the country is neither based on an intimate knowledge of our existing conditions, nor would it be supported by knowledgeable scientists and experts.
I have dealt with this subject in some detail, but it seems to me that, as we are amending an act under which one of the most important scientific bodies in Canada operates, it is appropriate that we should take an over-all look at the way scientific and industrial research has developed in Canada, and consider in general terms any suggestions for its improvement.
83276-293i
Research Council Act
I would also like to thank the members of parliament who have served on past committees to review the activities of the national research council and the atomic energy establishment. While we naturally may disagree on details, I think it is to the credit of this house that the important activities of scientific and industrial research, so basic to our national well-being, have never been viewed on a narrow or party basis, but rather on broad national grounds.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. When I read the motion for second reading of this bill, I considered it to be a motion for the second reading of a simple amending bill that did not provide as much scope as the minister has covered. I did not want to interrupt the minister while he was making his statement, witnessing the attention that he was receiving from hon. members.
As hon. members know, the Speaker may call a member to order or hon. members may rise to a point of order. At this moment I ought to say that this amending bill covers only a few points, and it might be that during the day there was a tacit understanding that a general discussion concerning the activities of the research council would take place on the second reading of this amending bill. I want to be fair to all hon. members. It may be that hon. members, not knowing the discussion would cover as much territory, have come here tonight merely to discuss a simple amending bill and are not prepared to discuss the activities of the national research council as fully as the minister has done.
It would have been preferable in my view to have heard the speech just made by the minister on items 289 and 290 of the estimates in committee of supply. The position is that a statement covering all the activities of the national research council has been made on the motion for second reading of a simple amending bill. If hon. members wish, therefore, I shall have to allow a wide open debate on the national research council activities.


Howard Charles Green: May I point out to Your Honour that this bill is very far-reaching. I refer particularly to clause 3, which contains the new provision and reads as follows:
(c) to undertake, assist or promote scientific and industrial research, including, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, . . .
Now, that gives a very wide power to the research council. I submit to Your Honour that the minister was quite right in making the comprehensive statement that he has made. Since he has done so, I submit other

Research Council Act
members of the house should be permitted to deal with the subject in the same way as the minister has done.


Mr. Speaker:: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: This is a question in which many of the members of the house are vitally interested. I do hope Your Honour will not prevent an adequate debate by trying to rule out any attempt to discuss the wide aspects of this research program.


Clarence Decatur Howe: If I may speak to the point of order, I would suggest there is a great deal of interest in the house in research. There was some discussion between the hon. member and myself about a committee on research. I feel that this debate would be the appropriate place to have any discussion that we may have on research, and I suggest it would suit hon. members if some latitude could be given so they could cover the whole problem. I hope it will not take too much time.


Mr. Coldwell:: Did Your Honour not say you would allow the same latitude to other members of the house as to the minister? I take it there is no need to discuss the point of order.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for
Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green) has missed the point I was trying to make. It is that, although normally this discussion should be restricted to the principle of the amendments contained in the bill, because of the wide statement made by the minister, I shall allow what to me is abnormal, a general discussion as wide as that which is called for by the statement made by the minister.
The other point I was making is that if hon. members of the opposition, for instance, or on the government side, are not prepared to discuss research activities as fully as the minister did in opening the discussion, I feel they would have a right to raise a point of order. They could say, "We did not come prepared to discuss all the activities of the research council because we did not expect this amending bill provided the scope for such a wide discussion." That is the other point I was trying to adduce. It is in line, I believe, with the spirit of the rule to the effect that members should not be caught by surprise when they are called upon to discuss a measure in this house. Since there is general agreement as to the wide discussion which is to take place, I shall be pleased to resume my seat and listen to the discussion.


Mr. Pculioi:: In listening to the minister, Mr. Speaker, for whom I have deep admiration, I must say that very few men can speak as he has done of personal accomplishments.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Jean-François Pouliot: He has done so with modesty.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Temis-couata should not deviate from the point at issue. I think the point has been well explained and discussed and it is now settled. The hon. member for Lambton West (Mr. Murphy).


Jean-François Pouliot: I cannot understand it.


Mr. J. W. Murphy (Lambton West):: Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for what the right hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) said when he opened this discussion and mentioned that there was great interest in this particular subject. First I should like to say that I would be most ungrateful if I did not express my personal thanks and gratitude to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Mr. Harris) for his courtesy and consideration in having this matter brought up at a time convenient to me.
In rising to speak to Bill No. 375, to amend the Research Council Act, I propose to submit an amendment. For this I offer no apology because, beneficial and necessary as this proposed bill may be, it comes as a pitiful effort by this or any other government to answer the crying need for action in order to accelerate research in this country.
I should like to say to you, Mr. Speaker, that it has been my good fortune to serve on a committee of our party dealing with resources and development which was under the chairmanship of our late distinguished member, Rodney Adamson, who then represented York West. In whatever contribution I make to this debate I should like to pay tribute to him for the part he has played in what I have to say.
At the outset of this session of parliament, almost six months ago, there was a resolution placed on the order paper recommending the establishment of an all-party committee of members to study the question of research in Canada and report what action, if any, should be taken to accelerate activities in this field.
The restriction on time allotted for consideration of private members' resolutions effectively excluded the opportunity for parliament to consider this important question.
While I have no desire to obstruct proposed amendments to the Research Council Act, and on the contrary welcome even this minor and belated recognition of the importance of this question by the government, I avail myself of this opportunity to again place before members of the house the

suggestion that parliament establish now a committee to review research activities as now carried out in Canada, and report its findings and make suggestions to parliament.
The importance of research and the part it must play in the development of this nation is only recently becoming recognized, and is certainly more widespread throughout the country than the government seems to recognize. If there is one national function the national parliament of this nation should perform, and perform now, it is to ascertain the best means possible whereby it may facilitate achieving, in the interest of the people it was elected to represent, the advantages and opportunities the application of scientific knowledge offers in the greater utilization of our resources and assured gainful employment of our people.
Until a few years ago, scientific research in Canada was a question left almost entirely to academic institutions. Today, scientific research, and even more important its practical application in the interest of the nation and its people, is more than the concern of educational institutions, governments, industry, agriculture and labour. It constitutes the hopes and conclusions of the ordinary man in the street, in his search for a better standard of living, security of employment and greater opportunities for members of his family than he himself enjoyed. These worthy objectives constitute, if they constitute anything, the objectives of good democratic government.
The press of the country, which by and large reflects public opinion with an amazing degree of accuracy, has for some time now directed public attention to the need for accelerated research in Canada. The Hamilton Spectator, back in May 1945, commenting editorially on this question, made this very realistic observation, and I quote:
There are certain matters of first importance to the nation, theoretically known before the war, which have been demonstrated beyond all doubt during the last five years.
One of these is the fact revealed by war that unemployment can be mastered.
A second, scarcely less important, is the fact that the total output of all the labour of the country can be vastly increased and improved by the unstinted application of scientific thought and experiment. The industry and excellence of our scientists have been necessary to our salvation in war.
It is now coming to be understood that they will be no less essential to our salvation in peace.
A former minister of finance in this country, and a great Canadian who not only served his country well in the legislative field, both provincially and federally, but whose ability and foresight was equally recognized in other spheres of activity in the building of this nation, the Hon. C. A. Dunning, recognized, and so stated in this
Research Council Act
House of Commons, the importance of research as a means of expanding our markets, both at home and abroad. In his budget message to the nation, delivered to this parliament on April 25, 1939, Mr. Dunning said, and again 1 quote:
Can we not, In other fields, manufacturing, merchandising, transport and the service industries, apply new methods and modernize equipment in order to reduce costs, lower prices and thereby expand our markets both at home and abroad?
Cannot we adopt new ideas developed during recent years in other countries, without waiting for branch plants or refugees with capital to bring them to us?
Have our other industries explored at all fully the possibilities of research which have proved such a profitable investment in the nickel and the chemical industries?
Have we fully explored the possibilities of processing our raw materials before exporting them?
Have we sought out all the opportunities for the profitable investment of capital in new industries, particularly small industries?
These are vital questions, Mr. Speaker, for Canada's future.
Today, Mr. Speaker, fifteen years later, those questions are just as vital for Canada's future. Mr. Dunning, when he made that warning to this parliament, and through it to the nation, and speaking as the fiscal director of . the economy of the country, frankly admitted that he did not know all the answers. Nor do I, Mr. Speaker, as an ordinary member of this parliament, striving in my humble way to best serve the people I have the honour to represent.
However, I sincerely believe that in the best interest of this nation and its future, the responsibility rests, not alone on the government of the day, but on that greater authority, parliament itself, to undertake now a thorough study and review of the possibilities and opportunities accelerated research and its intelligent widespread application affords this nation at this very time in our economic development.
I am confident that no responsible person representing any branch of government, or any segment of our economy, whether educational, industrial, labour or agriculture, professes to know the answer any more than the Hon. Mr. Dunning did fifteen years ago.
We do know, however, from experience over the past fifteen years, the almost unbelievable accomplishments achieved under the impetus of war.
Surely, in the light of this experience, and facing as we are today serious problems arising from lost export markets and increased competition from abroad in our domestic markets, swelling rolls of unemployment, which this past winter reached their post-war peak, and the vital necessity of maintaining a high level of economic activity if we are to carry the heavy load of taxation

Research Council Act
which defence and necessary social services make mandatory-this parliament is warranted, if not obligated, to authorize a committee of its members to study in co-operation with the best minds that industry, agriculture, labour and educational institutions can provide, the advisability of accelerated research and its application in the Canadian economy and recommend to this parliament at its next session how this can best be accomplished.
When one considers the lack of initiative by the government on the question of research in relation to the tempo of development of this nation, several questions come to mind that should be a matter of concern to this parliament:
1.	Are we doing enough in the way of research in this country, in view of the vast and varied natural resources now known to exist in commercial quantities in Canada?
2.	Are our universities in a position to continue to provide the trained scientific minds and undertake the fundamental research necessary to assure the continued development and productive expansion of this country?
3.	Would accelerated efforts in the field of industrial research, resulting in new products, new uses for old products, improved techniques that lower production costs, enhance or help us, an exporting nation in ever-increasingly competitive world markets?
4.	Are our present fiscal policies, in relation to research expenditures, adequate to induce private industry to undertake the amount of research that should be undertaken other than by government agencies, if we are to continue to enjoy a high level of capital investment so essential to high employment and general prosperity in this country?
5.	Does the government do enough in the way of agricultural, medical and other research, in fields where this can best be accomplished by the state in the common interest of all its citizens?
6.	How does the degree and extent of research in this country compare with comparable efforts in the United States, the United Kingdom and other countries with whom our primary and secondary producers must compete in export markets?
7.	Is the national research council, efficient and beneficial and all as this council is, the right type of organization to accelerate research, particularly applied research in Canada, or should there be some additional organization more representative of the different units of the Canadian economy?
These are questions of vital importance to the future economic and social welfare of
(Mr. Murphy (Lambton West).]
this nation. The most accurate information available relative to these questions should be made available to the representatives of the Canadian people, and for this reason I believe parliament should authorize a committee of its members to review all aspects of research in Canada, as now provided for, and make recommendations to parliament as to what, if anything, should be done to accelerate efforts in this regard.
In the United Kingdom there exists a continuing parliamentary and scientific committee that deals primarily with questions related to research in that nation. The membership of this committee in the United Kingdom is composed of members representative of both houses of parliament, and in addition, one representative each from recognized scientific societies, research associations and other scientific and technical bodies.
This committee meets regularly in a House of Commons committee room to discuss subjects on which there is some legislation or other parliamentary interest. In the past, this committee has studied and made recommendations on such matters as: 1. A national fuel policy; 2. scientific agriculture; 3. development of underdeveloped countries; 4. technical assistance policy; 5. scientific relations with other countries.
Over a period of years, the committee has provided the medium for a large exchange of views between scientific people and parliamentarians. In Britain, the committee on research, representative as it is of all political parties, has earned for itself a voice in public affairs and has had considerable influence on political thinking in that country.
I think the record of the scientific and parliamentary committee in the United Kingdom conclusively proves that such a medium is capable of forming a real and effective connection between scientists and parliamentarians, something which is sorely lacking in this country.
I believe that a committee of the type that exists in the United Kingdom could serve a very useful purpose in this country, particularly in view of the tremendous challenge facing not only those qualified in the field of research, but as well those Canadians who, by virtue of their vocation, assume the responsibility to assure this nation of a continuing supply of scientifically-trained personnel to develop this country.
Just recently, a leading British scientist, Sir Robert Watson-Watt, speaking to the professional institute of the public service of Canada, expressed the view that there was a very positive and definite need for better understanding between government and scientists

in Canada. This eminent British scientist, who pioneered the development of radar, no doubt speaking from years of experience in the scientific field and its application to the economic life of a country, strongly urged consideration of the establishment of a top-level council of parliamentarians and leading scientists to help guide the development of Canada's unlimited potentials.
Commenting on the need for such a committee in Canada, this scientist, who himself was once a consultant to the Department of Defence Production and other branches of the Canadian government, had this to say:
Of all the great powers Canada most needs best use of her limited numbers in developing her unlimited potentials.
As a means of achieving this objective, a council of top-rating governmental and scientific minds was suggested.	Such an
advisory council on scientific policy in Canada could advise the government on the whole civilian field of scientific endeavour, and whether or not the various spheres of research were adequate.
Scientific and industrial research, agricultural research, research on natural resources, would all be co-ordinated in this one advisory council, which is not the case in Canada today. In the United States the president just recently directed the national science foundation to survey federal research and development programs in that nation, where today that government spends over two billion dollars a year on research.
The purpose of the survey is to co-ordinate efforts in research with a view to accelerating activities in this field. In the United States the dependence upon and importance of science to maintain the military and industrial position of that nation has been realized by the government. The national science foundation in the United States was created in 1950, about the time the United Kingdom and other countries were amending their legislation regarding research, with a view of action to enhance the competitive position of their respective countries in anticipated competitive world markets.
In the words of the act, which established this national science foundation, the purpose was:
To develop and encourage the pursuit of a national policy for the promotion of basic research and education in the sciences.
Last year, the national science foundation completed plans for a survey of the nation's effort in research and development. This was motivated by the fact that preliminary surveys fairly clearly indicated that basic research, the very backbone of technological development in that country, has not been adequately supported.
Research Council Act
Surely, Mr. Speaker, when such nations as the United Kingdom and the United States, both of whom are more advanced in their stage of development than Canada, find it advisable and necessary to take governmental action to co-ordinate and accelerate research in their respective countries, we in this parliament should seriously consider the establishment of a non-partisan parliamentary committee to study research in this country and what action we also should be undertaking if we too hope to develop as a nation and continue to compete in ever-increasingly competitive world markets.
It matters not which side of the house or from what party the suggestion for a committee comes. The important question is the authorization by this parliament, now, of a committee of its members, empowered to thoroughly study all aspects of research in this country and recommend to parliament what action this nation should be undertaking at this time. When we realize what has been done elsewhere, this country can do no less.
In Canada, we have our national research council and our scientific and research branches of health and agriculture. In my opinion, these branches of government have done and are today doing excellent work in their respective fields. However, much of the time of the national research council has, for the past decade, been taken up with matters of defence, made necessary by the fact that we were, during these years, either actually at war or building up our defences against possible aggression.
Agricultural research in Canada is concerned largely with the practical problems of agriculture, and in this regard contributes greatly to this industry. Research, however, viewed as a specific program of finding wider outlets for agricultural products, is not a primary function of existing agricultural services in Canada. Agricultural research in Canada has never been designed, planned or provided for on a long-term basis, to widen the field of edible and inedible uses of agricultural products.
While the interdependence of agriculture and industry is recognized, it cannot be said this was the motivating factor in undertaking agricultural research.
As our industrialization expands, the demands for industrial raw materials expand. Much of this can come from agricultural production.
Today, research in Canada should encompass work in the field of greater uses for agricultural products. Individual farm units cannot be expected to make expenditures

Research Council Act
on research, even though they stand to benefit materially from research efforts on their behalf.
In the United States last year, research in this regard resulted in more than $1-5 billion worth of farm raw materials being purchased by chemurgic industries. Much of this was previously classed as waste material because prior to the necessary research work being undertaken we lacked the knowledge of how to utilize this waste material or other by-products.
True, this did not solve the question of surplus farm production in the United States, but it has gone a long way to provide convincing evidence that research, resulting in new uses and new crops, offers a sound approach to this problem.
The agricultural industry in this country, given the opportunity that accelerated research can surely provide, is equally competent to explore whatever agricultural frontiers appear to offer promise.
With agricultural surpluses accumulating in this country, and our export markets threatened by accumulated surplus production elsewhere, I sincerely believe it is to the advantage of the agricultural industry of this country, and through it the nation as a whole, that a committee, as proposed by this resolution and my amendment thereto, study the possibilities of research in this field.
In the field of industrial research there is much that can and should be undertaken, not under any form of state subsidy, but rather by industry itself under the inducement of revised fiscal policies designed to encourage and accelerate research as a means to assure a continuing high level of employment and capital investment in Canada.
Research is a principal factor in the discovery of new products, the production of which creates capital expenditures and employment for our people. Research creates new wealth, which in turn broadens the basis upon which to carry our heavy burden of taxation.
Research advances production techniques, which in turn result in new modern products at lower costs of production. This enhances our ability to compete with imports in our domestic markets and the products of other countries in competitive world markets.
The extent and direction of industrial research has, by its very nature, been directly related to the economic situation in this country. It was only natural that during our pioneer stage of development research efforts were largely confined to primary industries, agriculture, mining, forestry, and to a more

limited extent, fisheries. It is a natural evolution that, as this country develops, the importance of research in secondary industries should become more apparent.
In Canada, this pattern of development of research facilities has been directly affected by the large number of branch plants located in this country, who obtained their information from their parent organizations in other countries.
For years, it was a case of the parent carrying out research, leaving the Canadian subsidiary to produce the rubber stamp copies of designs perfected in the United States or the United Kingdom.
The Massey report clearly indicates the extent to which this happened, when it points out that of 12,000 patents issued in Canada in a recent year, over 11,000 of these were the work of scientists and inventors in other countries. While this report points up the need to encourage our industries to undertake greater research, adequate action has not yet been taken towards meeting this recommendation. Until the last few years, nearly everything we used in this country was designed outside of Canada, or, at best, a copy of a foreign design.
Again, this was the result of the close co-operation between many Canadian, United States and British manufacturers, and in no small degree due to the influence of American advertising contained in the multitude of American magazines distributed throughout Canada.
Today, however, we are forced to recognize a new phase in Canadian history. We are beginning to grow up in spite of ourselves. We are beginning to realize that the belief that research in Canada must, of necessity, be on an essentially low level is just not good enough.
Two world wars have contributed much to the industrialization of this nation. Under a wartime economy it was not difficult to keep our factories running, our people gainfully employed and retain our position as the fourth largest trading nation in the world.
Today, however, with war-devastated countries back on their feet and fighting for world markets, we are facing ever-increasing competition in world trade. Today, the words "Made in Canada" must be the hallmark of good value, must represent modern production designed and produced to meet the consumer demand of a modern-day world trade. We can no longer rest on our laurels or depend for our future economic welfare on a continuing high export of raw materials to sustain our economy.

Our products must be modern and of high quality. It is not good enough to say this is a challenge to labour and management to exercise restraint in wage and price demands, lest we price ourselves out of world markets. The Canadian people have achieved a standard of living that they are not prepared to sacrifice. To continue to compete in highly competitive export markets, so essential to our economy, entails a constant effort to lower costs of production.
In my opinion, this can best be achieved by governmental fiscal policies which offer inducements in the way of taxation reductions designed to encourage research in this country. To the extent that research can lower production costs, a widely recognized fact in other countries, Canadian exporters will be able to compete in highly competitive world markets.
It will also materially assist Canadian producers to compete in their domestic market against stiff competition from abroad, and is, in my view, an infinitely better solution than a return to the outmoded practice of increasing tariff barriers to world trade.
In this country, at this very moment, we are facing the danger of swelling rolls of unemployment, a vivid memory to many who lived through the early thirties. If we are to avoid widespread unemployment in this country, we must maintain our economic growth. This cannot be done by exporting raw materials alone in their raw, unprocessed state.
Even now, lucrative, but in the long run costly as this policy has been, the end of the seller's market is in sight. Stockpiles of essential and strategic raw materials purchased from Canada are now commencing to accumulate in importing countries. Much of these raw materials have gone to the United States, but the stability of that export outlet for many of our raw materials is now in question.
As evidence of this fact, I draw to your attention the recent recommendations of the advisory board to the United States secretary of agriculture, where they recommend the exercising of authority by the C.C.C. to accept strategic materials in return for agricultural surpluses.
If this virtual barter policy becomes operative, this will materially reduce an already declining demand for raw materials from Canada. Certainly, we cannot accept agricultural surpluses in return for strategic raw materials, when we are presently confronted with the problem of finding export markets for similar surplus production in 83276-294
Research Council Act
this country. We can hardly expect to maintain the economic growth of Canada on an already indicated decreasing demand for primary products.
The United States recognizes how essential it is to maintain economic growth in that country as a bulwark against unemployment. Accelerated research is an integral part of the solution they are presently endeavouring to work out.
In 1954, the United States proposes to spend over $4 billion on scientific and technological research, which will rapidly make many of their present industrial plants obsolete. This, in turn, will give rise to a high level of capital investment, which spells employment for their people.
We, too, are a world trading nation. Our economy is dependent, in no small degree, on our ability to compete in world markets. That competition will not be made easier by the visionary action in the field of research in the United States, with whose industrial might we must compete.
The adequacy of research carried out in Canada has been a matter of concern to provincial governments for some time. These governments are primarily interested in industrial uses of the natural resources of their respective provinces, because they are closer to the problem of improving and maintaining the living standards of their population.
The experience of the research council of Alberta clearly indicates the advantages of accelerated research. The following is a quotation from the report of the royal commission on provincial development and rehabilitation, 1944, volume I, part VII, page 10:
The scientific members of the staff of the university were constantly receiving appeals for information concerning the possibility of the development of the so-called resources, to which it was impossible to furnish definite answers. Similar appeals were coming from the government of the province. The situation became intolerable. A beginning was made by forming a "Science Association" and a survey was undertaken to determine pressing problems. This resulted in a small booklet presenting to the government 36 problems concerning natural resources, all of major importance, for which no solutions were available in the then present state of knowledge. There were problems requiring solution before industrial development could possibly be instituted, and of which the National Research Council was not cognizant. In order that systematic work could be inaugurated, the association recommended the formation of a "Provincial Research Council" whose responsibility it would be to set up co-operative research on problems of local interest and especially to urge upon the national council those of large dimensions and of more general interest.

Research Council Act
The record of development in Alberta today conclusively shows the advantage of accelerated research.
In 1943, the Dawson commission on development in Nova Scotia clearly recognized the need for accelerated research when it stressed the overwhelming need for more work in research, in order to keep up with the economic progress of the modern world.
This commission pointed out that before the war per capita expenditures in research in various countries were estimated as
follows:
Russia	$1.80	to	$3
United States	 2.40
Great Britain	70
Canada	25
Again, as in Alberta, the Nova Scotia report strongly indicated the need for accelerated research.
In his brief to the Massey commission on research, Dr. J. W. T. Spinks of the University of Saskatchewan said:
It is necessary to look ahead to the time when we shall be compelled to do more of our own research to keep up with developments in the industrial field. The importation of scientific ideas is bad for the intellectual development of a country-particularly when coupled with the export of scientific brains. In time of war it leaves the country in an extremely vulnerable position. In time of peace it weakens its competitive position with other nations. Today, research has a profound influence on our national welfare and security.
I draw these expressed opinions of experts from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia, on the importance of accelerated research, to the attention of this house with the question: Is it not time that a committee of this parliament was set up to review the possibilities of accelerated research in this country?
In suggesting a parliamentary committee to review research in Canada and recommend what action, if any, should be taken to co-ordinate and accelerate activities in this field, I recognize the progress already accomplished.
Achievements in the field of medical, agricultural, fundamental and, to a more limited degree, industrial research, warrant a justifiable feeling of pride in a nation as young as Canada.
Marquis wheat, insulin, and the cobalt bomb are but a few examples.
During the war years, Canadian scientists, in co-operation with government and industry, devised ways and means to provide substitute products or alternative sources of supply for raw materials essential to a successful prosecution of the war.
The great Polymer Corporation in my own constituency is a case in point, as was pointed

out by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe). I wish to reiterate what he emphasized and to quote from the report of that great industry. Its last annual report includes this particular statement:
The research that Polymer has carried out to date has not only increased our revenue but has also enhanced our position in the rubber industry throughout the world. It is our firm belief that industry should not depend on public institutions for its research work. Research, when properly directed, pays handsomely. The expansion of industrial research in Canada is a necessity if we are to keep pace with other countries and utilize our natural resources to the full.
That view on this important question, Mr. Speaker, is from the annual report of one of the government's own corporations.
The production of liquid sulphur dioxide from smelter gases met the urgent demand from the pulp and paper industry when imports of sulphur were in short supply. This made it possible for the largest earner of foreign exchange to continue to operate at capacity when gold and U.S. dollars were so necessary to a sound Canadian economy.
But I would point out that these things were achieved under the stress of war, and at a time when urgency, in a sense, relegated costs to a matter of secondary importance.
Today, in what history may yet unfortunately record as but an interval between wars, we should be directing greater effort towards accelerated research in this nation.
Certainly this can be accomplished more efficiently and at considerably less cost in peacetime than under the urgency of war.
Certainly, as an exporting nation, facing ever-increasing competition both in our home markets and abroad, we should, as a parliament, direct greater attention to the possibilities research offers in improved techniques and lower costs of production.
The present limitations of our national effort in the field of research become only too apparent when one realizes that one single corporation on this continent, namely General Electric, provides more money for research in a year than do all branches of the government of Canada, excluding research for defence purposes.
It should also be a matter of vital concern to this parliament that other nations, anxious to enhance their position in competitive world markets, have seen fit to alter their fiscal policies to accelerate research as a means toward new and better products and reducing costs of production.
In the last British budget, presented to the parliament of that nation on the same day as the Canadian budget, the Hon. Mr. Butler,

Chancellor of the Exchequer, made this statement, which I quote from that speech as reported in the British Hansard of April 6, 1954, pages 224-225:
I now wish to end as I began with our primary need; that is to improve our competitive power. Our rate of industrial modernization is strikingly less than that of America, and it seems probable that the Germans are now moving ahead of us. We shall not long continue to compete successfully in the export field with these our principal rivals, unless our plant and equipment is completely up to date.
Again I remind this house that we in Canada are an exporting nation, dependent upon export trade for approximately one-third of our gross national income.
We, too, have to compete against the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany and more recently, Japan, in competitive world markets.
The British Chancellor of the Exchequer in his budget speech, stated:
The importance of scientific research to our economy can hardly be over-estimated.
To accelerate research in the United Kingdom there was included in the budget a new system of investment allowances of 20 per cent for agricultural buildings, and plant and buildings used for scientific research. This to be in addition to the full annual depreciation allowances.
I suggest that a parliamentary committee of this house should review our present fiscal policy with regard to research, and the relationship this bears to policies in other countries with which we have to compete in world markets.
Another matter I believe warrants the establishment of a parliamentary committee to study research activities in Canada has to do with greater co-ordination of our efforts in this field. Last November the Canadian Westinghouse Company did a great public service in organizing a "Canada's Tomorrow Conference", which was held at Quebec city and attended by over 300 leaders in Canadian industry, finance, education, government and other fields. One of the speakers at that conference was Dr. R. K. Stratford, scientific adviser to Imperial Oil Limited and president of the research council of Ontario. In that speech Dr. Stratford suggested the formation of a federal research council in Canada, designed to provide closer scientific coordination between federal and provincial research groups. Dr. Stratford also recommended the establishment of a reasonable number of small research units from coast to coast, on or near the campuses of universities, as a means to assist in keeping research costs to a minimum, and at the same time place Canada in the forefront of world 83276-294J
Research Council Act
science. For these reasons among others I feel, as a Canadian, that the time has now come-if it is not past due-for this nation to grow up scientifically, at least to a degree comparable to the already established estimate of our wealth in natural resources.
The industry and ingenuity of the Canadian people is more than adequate to meet this challenge. For years our universities have been training young men and young women to fit themselves to make a material contribution in the field of research. On graduation, many of these young Canadians have found it necessary to leave this country in search of gainful employment. That exodus of Canadian brains must be stopped by giving these young Canadians an opportunity to find gainful employment in Canada and make their contribution to this, the nation of their birth.
Our industrial potential is just beginning to become apparent, but it needs encouragement; it needs inducements to nurture its growth and development. What we have done in medical research, for example, insulin and the cobalt bomb, can be done in the industrial field. What our universities are doing today, even under severe financial handicaps, must now be extended to the industrial field so as to encourage greater processing of our raw resources in this country, as a means of providing employment for our people.
To longer ignore this necessary action is to doom Canadian workers to be hewers of wood and miners of metals to be processed at higher standards of living in a foreign land.
I have sufficient confidence in our democratic system of government, and our ingrained respect for our institution called parliament, to believe that a non-partisan committee of the house, delegated by parliament to study and report upon the possibilities and need for accelerated research in this country, can and will materially benefit the welfare of every Canadian.
I suggest that the tremendous development of our natural resources in the past decade challenges parliament today to pick up the cudgels laid down by those men of vision four decades ago, when they laid the basis for research in their day and age.
For reasons which I have stated, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Calgary South (Mr. Nickle):
That Bill No. 375 be not now read the second time, but that the subject matter thereof be referred to a special select committee representative of all parties of this house with Instructions that they have power to call witnesses and send for documents and papers for the purpose

Research Council Act
especially of more effectively providing for the promotion and acceleration of research activities in Canada.


Major James William Coldwell: Mr. Speaker, I did not come here tonight prepared to discuss the national research council, but I am very happy indeed that the minister gave such a comprehensive outline both of the genesis of the national research council and of its work. I think that it was good to have this information placed on the record tonight, and perhaps the minister took the opportunity of doing so because this bill is before us. May I say at the outset that the amendment to the motion for second reading of the bill comes, I think, at a very inopportune time. We are now approaching the end of the session. If a committee were set up it would be necessary for the officers of the national research council and the department to prepare the material and data that would have to be placed before such a committee for it to make a thorough investigation of the work of the council.
I would also say that the amendment orders that the subject matter of the bill be referred to the committee. I am in agreement with the Speaker when he said that the subject matter of the bill was fairly narrow, and I can see no good purpose in referring it to a parliamentary committee. I do think, however, that the hon. member is quite right in his plea for the appearance of the officers of the national research council before a parliamentary committee, but I suggest to him that at this stage of the session it would not be possible to make the necessary preparations and to have the kind of discussion that I think this subject warrants. Consequently I shall suggest to my colleagues that we should vote against the amendment moved by my hon. friend, although I want to make it perfectly clear that if it had been moved earlier in the session in time for the preparation of data we would have voted for it. To bring the national research council before a parliamentary committee would be a good thing not only for the council but for the members of the house.
I am one of those who appreciate the splendid work that this organization has done for Canada over the years. I do not think that the minister, the council, or, if I may say so, the government, need offer any apologies for the work of the national research council. As the minister has said tonight, when the council was set up years ago there was nothing worth while in the realm of scientific research in our country with the exception perhaps of the field of agriculture because our experimental farms, filling quite a different role and occupying

a different field from the national research council, had already laid the foundations for the remarkable agricultural development which occurred, particularly in the prairie provinces. If you will allow me, Mr. Speaker, I should like to take this opportunity to say that the west owes a very great debt of gratitude to the men who worked on our experimental farms and produced the new varieties of wheat and other grains thus enabling our western farmers, in years when the season was short and when grains were affected by various plagues such as rust, to produce a crop and therefore to get some returns for their labour.
We had then some agricultural research on the experimental farms, but the minister is quite right that during the years from the end of the first great war until the outbreak of the second great war not too much was accomplished in the realm of industrial research although there were competent people on the national research council directing its activities. I should like to mention the name of General McNaughton, who gave distinguished service, and of course his successor, Dr. C. J. Mackenzie, of whom those of us from the province of Saskatchewan are very proud because of the contribution he made not only in building up the engineering department of the provincial university but also in his position as head of the national research organization at Ottawa. He made a contribution, particularly during the war years, for which I think this country should be ever grateful. Dr. Mackenzie has now retired, although his advice is still available and will be given freely. He has been succeeded by a scientist who, I believe, will also have the confidence of the house and of the country in the person of Dr. Steacie, and I am sure he will make a worth-while contribution in the days to come.
Tonight the minister outlined something of the contribution that the research organization had made to this country, particularly since the outbreak of the second world war. Those of us who know the part that radar played in the defence of Britain during the war are aware of the tremendous contribution made by the Canadian research council in the development of that very important instrument. But radar is perhaps even more important in peacetime than in wartime because of its long-term uses. I have had the opportunity, as other hon. members probably -have, of crossing the ocean on a liner equipped with radar or, perhaps more significantly, of coming through the narrows off Vancouver island on a rainy and foggy night and being invited into the captain's quarters to see the radar in

actual operation. The feeling of confidence that instrument now gives to those who go down to the sea in ships is something that is really remarkable. Canada played a very important part in the development of that great scientific instrument.
Then, too, in the field of aeronautics the national research council has done a remarkable job. Much of the industrial development in the development of the Canadian aeroplane industry stems back to work that was done by the research council. Those of us who have been on the atomic energy committee more than once have seen the atomic pile at Chalk River and know the extent to which the young men and young women engaged there are the products of developments made effective through the activities of our universities, encouraged by the national research council. We know the contributions that have been made in that regard to the welfare of our country.
I am always happy to know that the young scientists, the products of our own universities, encouraged often by our own research council, who are engaged in the development of atomic energy, are engaged in that development not because they believe it is an instrument of war but because they believe it will be of great benefit to the people of Canada and the world in civil affairs in the future. One could go on discussing the services of the council in the field of applied physics, chemistry and so on, and refer to the fine group of young men and women who have been recruited from our Canadian universities and have been used in research in this country.
I should like to emphasize this point. If there is now considerable industrial research by private enterprise in this country, it has largely been promoted by the activities of the national research council. We must not forget, and I think the minister tonight indicated, that there was very little private industrial research before the second world war, or even during the war years when research in this country was led by this most significant national organization. The results of this research by this public organization have been available to industry, so that industry benefited from the expenditures we have authorized in this parliament. The products of industry have been improved because we, in the House of Commons and the Senate, have supplied funds for this particular purpose and have thus contributed to the development and to the profits of industry.
I want to say something to the minister that I have thought for a very long time. I believe that not only should we make available to private industry in this country the results
Research Council Act
of industrial scientific research, but we should make available those results to the consumers of this country, especially concerning the wares and articles that are offered for sale. Those of us who went over the national research council building two or three years ago will recall that we actually saw certain experiments that were made in connection with the laundering of clothes. We saw that after clothes had been washed with certain widely advertised products a certain number of times, the clothes were eaten away; they were destroyed. Why should not the consumer in Canada know that some of these widely advertised products, greatly puffed up, can cause serious damage to the articles that are used in our homes?
One such product that I remember well was advertised as "no rinsing required." If one did not rinse the clothes, one soon found there would not be very much of the clothes left to rinse. I know of other fields in which research has taken place relating to consumer products, and articles for sale in this country, the results of which should be given to the public of this country so that the public might be guided by those results. In the United States there is of course a co-operative organization-I shall not call it a private organization-headed by Professor Colston Warne of Amherst University, which publishes a monthly consumer's guide. People may read in that guide the results of research into products that are offered for sale to the public of the United States. We have not such an organization in this country. This country is not big enough to afford the facilities to do that kind of investigation. But we have a public organization in the national research council, an organization unlike anything they have in the United States and unlike anything they have in the United Kingdom. Since the public, including the consumers of Canada, are paying for the operation of this national research council, which is doing such a magnificent job for industry, let that council also do a similar job for the consumers of this country. Let the consumers know some of the results of the appraisals and investigations concerning products that are advertised from one end of this country to the other.
Then, too, the national research council has encouraged our universities in the realm of research, and has assisted the universities in educating and encouraging the young men to go into the fields of physics and chemistry, as well as many of these new fields that are associated with both physics and chemistry. This is a very valuable service to the country and to industry.
Contributing as we do to the Colombo plan, it is satisfactory to know that we have been

Research Council Act
able to help the countries which are themselves encouraging new scientific research, by inviting some of the young scientists in those countries to come to our country to study, not only in our universities but at our national research council under the Colombo plan. I was interested in hearing in the external affairs committee that we have received over 400 young students in many of these fields into Canada under the Colombo plan, most of them for our universities, but some of them have been studying physics, chemistry and so on at our national research council in the city of Ottawa. That is one of the great contributions that we can make through the Colombo plan towards improving the standard of living in those countries that are just emerging from an underprivileged condition in the world.
I am not going to go exhaustively into the council's activities. I believe that in the realm of medicine the national research council is performing a very useful service to the country, as I believe the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin) knows. I believe that could be extended. We could perhaps extend that and go into research, and not only along the lines of cancer; for there are other dread diseases into which research should be encouraged. I am not going to mention them in particular but several of them will come to the minds of many of the members as well as to mine.
In a country like ours I think there is another field to which more attention should be given than has been given in the past, and I refer to housing. When we think of the rigours of our climate, the heat in the summer and the cold in winter, we must realize that our housing is still inadequate to meet our needs. A great deal of research could be done in connection with insulation and the types of buildings best suited to our climate and so on. I repeat that much more could be done in that field. I am not unaware of the fact that something has been done, that some investigation has been carried on, but I think more could be done.
The hon. gentleman a few minutes ago referred to the utilization of waste products of all description, waste from our lumber and other mills, the utilization of poorer grades of lumber and timber. Research could be carried on in connection with these and other resources such as coal so that we might not only develop our natural resources but use them more scientifically and economically.
I do not want to speak at any greater length except to say that I believe that more and more scientific research will be relied on to develop industry and to promote the
[Mr. Coldwell.l
welfare of mankind. I think that any appropriation we make to assist the development of the national research council, to make it more efficient, to make its operations more widespread will be money well spent. We are spending a great deal of money for defence, and that is all very well under the conditions that exist in the world today. We have to spend great sums of money for defence, but I believe that if we think in terms of our domestic economy-not in a world-wide sense-what we spend on research will be in the defence of the Canadian standard of living, in the defence of Canada's welfare in the days to come. I know that I would be prepared to support a much larger appropriation for the national research council in order to encourage in every way its development and enlargement in the sphere in which it operates at the present time.
As I said at the outset of my remarks, I think the amendment moved by the hon. member is inopportune. It is too late in the session. The subject matter of the bill is too narrow to refer to a committee. But I would like to say to the minister and to the government that when parliament next meets we should have a committee again. I think it is three years-I may be wrong and it may be only two years-since we had a committee looking into the operations of the national research council. Since that time we have had a committee on atomic energy, but I would suggest to the government and to the minister that early in the next session a committee be constituted to review once again the work of the national research council. If that is done I am quite sure that when the committee comes to report its findings to the house in connection with the council we shall find, as we did before, that we have a remarkably efficient and praiseworthy organization operating in the field of scientific research on behalf of the people of Canada.


Mr. F. G. J. Hahn (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, the leader of the C.C.F. has suggested that he is not ready to support this amendment because of the lateness of the session. I take objection to that. We are here to do the nation's business and, no matter how late it may be in the session, if a committee is necessary we should set it up and get the work done as it should be done.


Major James William Coldwell: You have to let the research council prepare for the committee.


Frederick George Hahn: I am quite aware of that. I feel sure that we should go ahead and make preparations for that committee. The scope of this bill is quite large. I would say that the necessity for a research council is probably

more apparent to the nation today than it has been at any other time in our history. It is true, as the minister has pointed out, that the work of the research council was accelerated during the times of war. I believe the same thing could be done today.
I am one of those who did not come prepared to speak at great length on this particular subject because I felt that as the bill was a short one it would not require too much debate. However, sometimes one feels that if things are to be said there is a time when they should be said, and probably I had better say what I have in mind at this time.
There are certain aspects of our economy which should be given particular consideration in the way of research. I refer to the conservation of our soil, agriculture, mining, fisheries, forests, water conservation and many others. We are faced with the fundamental problem of the conservation of our soil. As an illustration, our research council might investigate the utilization of waste wood products in British Columbia in the conservation of the water content in our soil.
In recent years we have made great use of fertilizers and this has come about directly as a result of the work of the research council. The research council brought into being the wonderful Marquis wheat and many other rust-resistant grains.
If there was no other problem requiring the setting up of a research council or a committee, I would say that the coal problem as it affects Nova Scotia and Alberta would be sufficient to keep the research council going for a long while. In the railway and shipping committee the president of the Canadian National Railways was asked the tonnage of Alberta coal that his company expected to use. He indicated to us that this was going to drop from approximately 790,000 tons this year to approximately 400,000. The dieseliza-tion of engines on the Canadian National Railways will most likely mean that in the near future the remaining 400,000 tons will not be used.
We are going to have a tremendous coal field on our hands, not just in Alberta but also in Nova Scotia and, as was pointed out, probably in British Columbia around Nanaimo. Even with the advent of science we have not learned how to utilize these products which are left over at the present time. It is necessary that a committee be set up to study every aspect of this particular problem.
There are many different fundamental factors involved and I for one would be quite willing to stay here a few extra weeks if a committee were set up to study this problem
11, 1954	4639
Research Council Act
and do a real job in the utilization of our wastes, in connection with our conservation problems and other matters.
During the latter part of last week we had the privilege of hearing the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Sinclair) indicate how necessary he found research in his own particular field. He used the example of goldfish, but I am not going to discuss that at this moment. He indicated the need for a research council to study the spawning of salmon, to aid them in getting up the higher falls, and to discover the speed of various species of fish. He indicated the particular need that such a research council would fill. Mining is a business of wasting assets today. To put it another way, and it means much more, mining wastes much of our assets today. We have so many by-products in the minerals of British Columbia and in the great fields of Ontario and Quebec and in the various provinces which we do not use. We call them waste material. If we could find a proper use for those particular wastes I am sure that we would have no difficulty in reducing the price of our commodities to the point where the public would find them much cheaper, and they would be much happier to accept them.
I would say that the value of by-products has a direct effect upon the price of the main product manufactured. In my own province we have found that the discovery of minerals is important. To illustrate the work that a research council might do I should like to read from the sixth British Columbia natural resources conference for the year 1953 on page 79, in which William H. White, associate professor of geology of the University of British Columbia, had this to say:
Another tool, long known, but only recently applied to mineral exploration, is a method of investigating the minute metal content of plants, soil, and water. Plants growing on mineral deposits, and the concealing soil in which they grow, and surface waters draining mineralized areas, may contain abnormal amounts of metals such as copper and zinc. Methods now in use will detect one part per million of copper or zinc in plants or soils, and as little as one part per billion in water. Tap-water by comparison is a concentrated solution of zinc. These methods are as yet imperfect and the interpretation of results is not well understood. In the United States geological survey the investigation of geochemical and biochemical techniques is an important project to which large funds are allotted; in Canada practically the only research of this sort is done in the department of geology and geography at the university of British Columbia.
I feel, and I am sure many hon. members must also feel, that if it is important that a province such as British Columbia should set up a research department to study the particular needs in the geological and geophysical field, then certainly we should have a

Research Council Act
national body which would do likewise. I am sure that each member of the group of which I am representative would only too heartily support the setting up of a committee at this time to determine the scope of study of this research council work.
Take the matter of forests. That field is itself of tremendous importance to Canada. Much of Canada's surface is covered by natural forest regions. During the war years we learned to make use of practically every portion of our wood products that it was possible to use. We have tried to do away with unnecessary waste. We feel that a wasted product represents a wasted dollar. Forest products are a subject that should be given every study. The price of Canada's forest products, the paper that we get from those forests and other substances that can be produced have a value related to all our forest industry. I would go so far as to say that the large paper companies, the large firms having to do with paper products, and many other industrial plants which use the industry of forestry, have done their share in trying to set up a research council and to make use of every bit of their products so that they could keep the costs down. That factor in itself is well worth recognizing.
It is not so many years ago that we did not have such a thing as the various types of plywood that we have today. We did not have the many types of nylon and other wood products that we have today. We could carry on a careful study of our forestry through a research council, and I am sure that by so doing we would soon find that we could bring our wood and wood products into a world that would soon purchase them all, and be only too happy to get them. We would not have such a thing as a product we could not sell.
If those surpluses of which we speak so frequently that we have no actual use for at the moment because we cannot find a market for them, such as wheat, were turned into another product by means of research, we might have the answer to the question of disposition of our surpluses. I do not believe that we have a surplus of wheat. It is considered as such by many in the dominion today, and as long as it is not being used, but left in the fields to spoil, it will eventually become a waste. We must guard against this waste because the world is starving today for these things. I would say that Germany illustrated during the war something that we should take a lesson from. She showed us that it is simple, if you set up a research council and use your scientific ingenuity, of which Canada has such an abundance, to make use of products. She

had no trouble turning her coal into various synthetic products when the need was there. She went ahead and set her scientists to work on this research, and they did something about it. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that if we were to set up a research council to study carefully the problems on which we feel we should spend money, if we got some of these young men and women who have marched south into the United States because they could get more there for their research work than in Canada, we would accomplish a great deal. They want to be Canadians. They have been Canadians; they are Canadians, but they are living under a strange flag. Invite them back to Canada, and let us make use of the knowledge which we imparted to them.
From time to time many of our universities indicate that the scholarships that the Canadian universities or the institutes in Canada offer are not of sufficient amount to keep these young men and women interested in the Canadian field. I am sure that if we were to make a study of the efforts of the Northwestern University, of Columbia, of Yale, or of any one of these particular institutes of learning, we would find that many of our best Canadian youth, the scientists that Canada taught and made, are there today.
Since it is ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker, I would move the adjournment of the debate.


Mr. Speaker:: I see that an amendment was moved by the hon. member for Lambton West (Mr. Murphy). It reads as follows:
That Bill No. 375 be not now read the second time, but that the subject matter thereof be referred to a special select committee representative of all parties of this house with instructions that they have power to call witnesses and send for documents and papers for the purpose especially of more effectively providing for the promotion and acceleration of research activities in Canada.
As one reads this amendment he cannot help but remember a notice of motion which stood in the name of the hon. member in the month of January, and I now read from the order paper of Wednesday, January 13:
That, in the opinion of this house, the government should consider the advisability of setting up a special committee representative of all parties, with the power to call witnesses and send for documents and papers for the purpose of examining and reporting upon the advisability of providing inducements to promote and accelerate activities in the field of research.
Now, the hon. member should consider at this time standing order 45, which states:
Forty-eight hours notice shall be given of a motion for leave to present a bill, resolution or address, for the appointment of any committee, or for placing a question on the order paper;

Now, the hon. member probably had in mind citation 657, which states:
It is also competent to a member who desires to place on record any special reasons for not agreeing to the second reading of a bill, to move as an amendment to the question, a resolution declaratory of some principle adverse to, or differing from, the principles, policy, or provisions of the bill, or expressing opinions as to any circumstances connected with its introduction, or prosecution; or otherwise opposed to its progress; or seeking further information in relation to the bill by committees, commissioners, the production of papers or other evidence or the opinion of judges.
I would draw the hon. member's attention to the following words:
... or seeking further information in relation to the bill by committees . . .
Now that means by existing committees and I have no doubt hon. members will realize the import of those words. In 1947, when, on the second reading of a bill to amend the Canada Grain Act, it was moved by Mr. Bracken and seconded by Mr. Brooks that the bill be not now read a second time but that the subject matter be referred to the standing committee on agriculture and colonization.
Mr. Speaker ruled the amendment out of order because the standing committee on agriculture and colonization had not yet been appointed. See Journals, February 10, 1947, page 55. Now what the amendment calls for is the appointment of a special committee, and
Business of the House
it is a substantive motion which should be introduced as a distinct question after notice has been given, and I therefore rule it out for that reason.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, ruling it out without there being an opportunity presented to argue-


Mr. Speaker:: I can hear representations on this question. In the meantime my remarks may be considered. If hon. members wish me to adjourn at this moment and carry on the discussion when the debate on this bill is resumed, then I am quite prepared to do that.


George Alexander Drew: I would suggest that that be done, Mr. Speaker, because I believe it will save time if we adjourn now and then when the debate is resumed we will be in a much better position to present our arguments at that time.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Tomorrow we shall take the resolution to approve the Japanese trade treaty. On Thursday and Friday we shall take estimates, Thursday beginning with the department of northern affairs. Then we shall go on to transport.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, May 12, 1954