1954-05-14

Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to lay upon the table a report from the civil service commission respecting the staff of the library of parliament.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Clarence Gillis (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gregg). It arises out of a press dispatch in this morning's Montreal Gazette captioned "Eighteen More U. K. Sailors Arrested".
Can the minister inform the house if any action is contemplated by his department to intervene in the dispute so as to assure uninterrupted coal deliveries from Sydney, Nova Scotia, to Montreal?


Hon. Milton F. Gregg (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Cape Breton South for giving me notice of his intention to ask this question. The situation appears to be as follows:
(1)	The ship to which reference is made in the Montreal Gazette report is under United Kingdom registry and the members of the crew have been engaged under United Kingdom articles.
(2)	The members of the crew are affiliated with the National Union of Seamen of the United Kingdom.
(3)	Neither the owner nor operator of the ship nor the crew members, as far as industrial relations matters are concerned, are under the jurisdiction of the federal Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act.
(4)	The United Kingdom National Union of Seamen has repudiated the strike action on the part of the crew members.
(5)	No request has been made to this department by the owners or operators of the ship or by the union for conciliation services.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. M. Macdonnell (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott). Would the minister care to comment on the likely effect, if any, on current interest rates, of the new loan being currently floated?


Hon. Douglas Abbott (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I always hesitate to assume the role of prophet and I do not think I should do so here. The return on the new bond is in line with the present return on outstanding long-term government bonds.


Mr. Fleming:: That is very informative.



FRASER RIVER


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. H. Goode (Burnaby-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, may I address a question to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters)? The people of Burnaby-Richmond are expressing concern over the late run-off of water in the Fraser river, and I would ask the minister to instruct his officials in New Westminster to give him daily reports on the situation.


Hon. Robert H. Winters (Minister of Public Works):: I think that would be a matter more properly within the jurisdiction of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, who is responsible for the water resources division.


Hon. Jean Lesaga (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I am infomed that daily reports on the level of the Fraser river are sent to our water resources office in Vancouver. It is understood that, as in previous years, if the situation warrants it those daily reports will be sent to Ottawa.



PROSPECTIVE AGREEMENTS WITH SPAIN AND PORTUGAL

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Speaker, if, as one is informed, the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters) is about to

Supply-Post Office
leave for Spain and Portugal in the hope of assisting in the negotiations for a trade treaty there, may one wish him bon voyage and success in his mission.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT

[Stage Direction]
341. Departmental administration, $1,316,383.
Hon. Alcide  Coie@Postmaster General: Mr. Chairman, X should like to make a brief statement in regard to the operations of the postal service which I hope will be of assistance in the discussion of these estimates.
In the first place, I wish to refer to the financial result of the operations which terminated on the 31st March this year. As I indicated during previous discussions, the outlook was that there would be a deficit for the fiscal year 1953-54. This is actually the case.
The total revenue is slightly more than for the previous fiscal year. It is approximately $130 million. In other words, the increase in revenue due to increased volume has more than counterbalanced the reduction in revenue due to the elimination of postage for tax purposes.
Expenditures have sharply increased from approximately $123 million to approximately $132,500,000 so that instead of a surplus of $6,500,000 recorded at the end of the fiscal year 1952-53, there is a deficit of approximately $2,500,000.
No doubt hon. members will be interested in knowing what have been the results of the adjustments made in the rates of payment to mail contractors under the amendments which were agreed to by the house in May 1953. Approximately 4,000 applications for adjustment have been received. Of this number 3,700 have already been processed and 300 are still under consideration. Of the 3,700 cases already dealt with, 2,600 increases have been granted. The average amount of the adjustment is 18 per cent or a total of $700,000 per annum. The applications received were not as numerous as we had anticipated. In some cases, the applications were received late in the year so that the total payments authorized were not as great as we had expected. Applications continue to be received and although the amount authorized so far is, as I have already indicated, $700,000 per annum, it is expected that by the end of the present fiscal year the total amount of the adjustments will be reasonably close to the $1,500,000 which it was estimated the adjustments would cost.
[Mr. Fleming.!
Dealing with the general question of land transportation, may I say that the amount expended during the fiscal year just closed was approximately $17 million. The estimate for the fiscal year 1954 is close to $20 million, an increase of about $3 million. Of this amount $1,500,000 is to cover adjustments already authorized last year and those which will be granted this year as a result of applications which undoubtedly will be received. It is estimated that the number of applications will be about the same as last year. Many contractors who were not eligible last year will now qualify in view of the fact that they have held their contracts for at least the two years stipulated in the amendments to the Post Office Act. In addition to this $1,500,000 for adjustments, it is estimated that a further $1,500,000 will be required for improvements, modifications, extensions, changes in frequency and the like in the various types of service which come under this heading.
As hon. members are aware, two major changes became effective at the beginning of this fiscal year: the introduction of the five-day 40-hour week and the increase in letter rates of postage. It is rather too early to give any comprehensive statement of the effect of these two major measures. I can say, however, that the forecast made in regard to the additional expenditure required seems to be confirmed. In other words, the cost of the increase in salaries will be in the neighbourhood of $7 million and the cost of the five-day week will at least reach the amount we estimated, namely, $5 million. These two items together with the amount to cover the payments to mail contractors for rate adjustments bring the total additional annual expenditure for these special items to $13,500,000, the estimate I gave during the previous discussion on letter postage rates. To this of course must be added additional amounts to provide for developments, such as extensions of mail services, increased frequencies, new routes, et cetera. The estimate for increases in land services is $1,500,000 for the present fiscal year. This is in addition to the amount required for rate adjustments.
It is estimated that the total increase for 1954-55 over expenditures for 1953-54 will be approximately $17 million. This will be offset to a large extent by the additional revenue which we expect to derive from increased rates of postage and we hope by continued efficient and economical operations also to overcome the deficit of $2,500,000 for the fiscal year which ended on March 31.


Mrs. Fairclough:: Mr. Chairman, the statement which the minister has made has given us a little bit of information with regard to

operations for the year which has ended to which I should like to refer in a few moments. However, before doing so, I should like to make a few general comments, and to say again what I have said on previous occasions, namely that it is my opinion that of all the services which the government is called upon to render to the people of the Dominion of Canada, probably that rendered by the post office is the closest to the individual. When that service goes awry, it is a matter of major importance not only to members of the staff but also to every individual who has suffered by reason of even the slightest deviation from the usual services which the department is called upon to supply. If the administration is guilty of inefficiency or if it makes mistakes which are more or less costly, the result cannot help being an unsettled condition in the staff with resultant unhappiness.
A few months ago this house saw fit to sanction the increase in the postal rates. The new rates came into effect on the 1st of April, a little bit over a month ago. As I said at that time, the increase in rates was scarcely consistent with the services which had been curtailed in the past little while by the department. In particular I referred to the institution of the one-a-day delivery on residential walks in urban centres. This system has been in effect for some time now and while there has been some slight adjustment I would strongly urge the Postmaster General to reconsider this whole question again this year.
I believe that the two-a-day delivery could easily be instituted without any great increase in cost. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, if you will recall the time when the first reports were received after the introduction of the one-a-day delivery, you will remember that it was apparent that rather than there being a saving of money, there had actually been a loss. Of course it is understood that, when any system is changed, there is a consequent dislocation which causes some inefficiencies for the time being. But this particular matter of one-a-day deliveries has not improved in the intervening months. People are suffering today by reason of this restriction of service just as much as they did at the start. I know of a number of cases-and I daresay the minister will have a number of specific instances brought to his attention because they have certainly been brought to mine-when quite unreasonable delays in delivery resulted from the one-a-day delivery and the hours at which mail reached the central clearing station.
Some time ago when the deputy postmaster general was asked whether or not there would 83276-299J
Supply-Post Office
be a return to twice-a-day delivery, he said he had heard of no plans to resume the two-a-day delivery. I hope that in the intervening time the department has reconsidered its decision and that before long they will find it expedient to reintroduce the two-a-day delivery on residential walks in urban centres.
In his remarks a few minutes ago the minister spoke about the amount that would be needed for extension of services. At another point in his remarks he referred to new routes which he expected would be instituted.
I should like to draw particular attention to the situation that exists in practically all fast growing suburban areas. These suburban areas, areas on the fringe of settled urban areas, are being built up and the people there are frequently placed in the peculiar position of having to go four or five miles to pick up their mail. At the same time there is mail delivery service that goes past the end of their streets, possibly one or two blocks away, but it has not been extended to the streets on which they are residing. These are particularly irritating matters to the householder. In some cases they have been going on for a long time. It seems as though it takes months, sometimes even years, to institute a mail delivery route in an area which is otherwise almost completely urbanized.
I would urge the minister to pay particular attention to the requests that will be made to his department from time to time for the extension of routes to areas which in all other respects are certainly urbanized. I had one specific case brought to my attention not long ago in the Walkerville area. There is a suburban area there called Riverside. The people have all sorts of delivery services, delivery of bread, delivery of milk and so on, but there is no mail delivery. The postman walks past the end of the streets a mere block and a half away but these people have to travel four and a half miles to pick up their mail at the Walkerville post office.
There are many matters that throughout the months cause irritation to the individual taxpayer of this country. There is one in particular I want to draw to the minister's attention. I refer to the charge made for government postcards in the post offices. It is about three years, I think, since it was decided to make a charge for the actual stock on which the stamps are printed. I might point out that there is no other printing on the card. Now that the postage rates have gone up to two cents for printed matter and four cents for regular post cards, it means that the post office is charging an extra cent on each card for the stock on which the

Supply-Post Office
postage stamp is printed. If people who use these cards commercially go to a post office to procure a supply of 100 or more they find that they pay 16 cents a hundred for them.
Having had some little experience in the calculation of costs of printing stock, I inquired into the matter and found that the stock from which these post cards are printed can be purchased wholesale for a little better than 12J cents a hundred, about $1.26 a thousand. I realize there is some work entailed in cutting the cards and in banding them in lots of one hundred, but nevertheless it would seem to me that the department is at least covering its cost at 16 cents a hundred. The price of 16 cents a hundred is approximately a sixth of a cent per card and yet the average individual who wants such a card pays a cent for it.
In addition, I would think that the department certainly does not pay the same rate for this stock at which it is sold to the average industrial user because undoubtedly they buy in such quantities that they get quantity discounts. That would lower the cost considerably below the figure 1 have cited. I would also point out that in any store a person can purchase very nice looking picture postcards printed in several colours, printed not only on one side but on both sides, at the price of four for a nickel. The producer of these cards makes a profit. It is a commercial enterprise. He buys the stock, prints the cards on both sides and sells them for a cent and a quarter while the government does nothing but print the stamp on the card. They would have to print the stamps in any event and the result is that they are charging people a cent for a blank card.
I think the minister might be well advised to take this matter into consideration. I would suggest, even if it were found necessary to sell commercial quantities at 20 cents a hundred rather than 16, that when these cards are sold one, two or three at a time they should be sold just for the price of the stamp alone. The department should forget about the stock because undoubtedly much the larger proportion of these cards is sold in commercial quantities in any event. Such a move would not affect the revenue of the department to any appreciable degree. In fact, I think the minister will probably find that the number of cards sold individually is very small. Particularly now that the rates have been raised, this matter is a source of great annoyance to those persons who buy one card and pay their two cents or four cents as the case may be in that they have to pay an additional cent for the piece of paper on which it is printed.
[Mrs. Fairclough.l
I should also like to ask the minister whether or not he can inform the house as to the practice of carrying consignments of magazines and newspapers in passenger seats on T.C.A. routes. I think this matter was brought up before when we were discussing another phase of postal activity but no answer was given. I should like to know whether this is a practice of the department and, if so, is it a special arrangement between the Post Office Department and Trans-Canada Air Lines, and on what basis? Why is it thought wise to transport second and third class mail, newspapers and so on, in that manner, when first class mail is carried in the regular luggage or mail compartments of the planes?
When the Prime Minister announced to the house the other day the list of further legislation to be introduced at this session he mentioned that there would be a further amendment to the Post Office Act. I am sure every member of the house is curious as to what is contemplated by the Postmaster General. We would be very glad to know just what is the nature of the amendments to the Post Office Act which the Prime Minister mentioned on April 30 along with several other matters. I would think that some intimation of what is contemplated would have a definite bearing on the discussion of these estimates. I had hoped that when the Postmaster General was making his preliminary statement he would inform us of the nature of the amendments to the Post Office Act that it is intended to introduce at the current session.
I should like to speak for a few moments on the subject of the staff of the Post Office Department. I must say this is a matter on which I feel rather strongly. In the last few years there has grown up in all parts of this country a most deplorable antagonism between the staff and management of the Post Office Department. In fact I do not know of any other department of the government where such antagonism exists, certainly not to the degree that it does in the Post Office Department. I think it is about time that we asked ourselves what is the reason for this feeling within a service that is so close and so necessary to the people of this country.
When the minister announced a few months ago that the letter carriers in certain areas would be placed on the 40-hour week there was considerable discussion as to the method by which these arrangements were to be put into effect. For some time there had been what were known as supervisory letter carriers. I think that those who are familiar with the work done by the supervisory letter

carriers would agree with me that the name itself is definitely a misnomer. The position is not a supervisory position but is a relief position. These men are relief men who pick up various walks when the regular carrier is having a day off or is on holidays. It seems to me that the Post Office Department could very well have augmented the staff of letter carriers and worked out a rotation system without enlarging the position of the supervisory letter carrier. It stands to reason that whether the carriers rotate day by day or whether they rotate week by week, you are going to have to increase your staff by the same number of men. I still cannot see the necessity for this supervisory position.
As I said before, it is a relief position, and not a supervisory position at all. The department has not been satisfied to dignify the position by a properly descriptive name. When suggestions were made that the man might be called a relief carrier, they came up with somewhat of a tongue twister and said they wanted to call him a multiple walk carrier or seme such name as that. It does seem that everything must be done in the most complicated way and called by the most complicated name.
Originally a carrier had to have at least one year's service before he could apply for this position. Now any carrier, regardless of the length of his service, can apply and some have been appointed to this position with less than six months' actual experience. It is just one of the problems that is causing considerable concern to the members of the post office staff, particularly amongst the carriers who have had years of experience. It appears to me that about one in every four carriers will be a supervisory letter carrier. He works on a higher salary and has certain advantages over the men with longer years of service. As I said before, this is a peculiarly nondescriptive title for the position, and undoubtedly has been a cause for concern and annoyance to the experienced carriers.
I hope that the added problem of seniority in the granting of holidays has now been ironed out to the satisfaction of all staffs, and we will not have any more of this "monkey business" of placing a supervisory carrier over those with longer experience when it comes to the selection of holidays. In my estimation, this whole matter is just one more instance of the provocative steps which have been taken by the administration of the department, and which have resulted in the bad feeling which undoubtedly exists in many parts of the department.
Further with regard to the staff, I notice from the details of the estimates on page 416
Supply-Post Office
that it would seem apparent some of the stenographers have been reclassified as senior transcribers; at least, that is the only explanation I can draw from the information contained on that page. There is quite a reduction in the number of stenographers in the grades 2B, 2A and 1, and then there is a new position, senior transcriber, grades 1 and 2, which did not exist previously. I would assume, therefore, that these stenographers must have been reclassified. I would ask the minister if he could give us an explanation of that particular incident, because it would be interesting to the house to know whether it is a doubling of staff or whether it is actually the creation of a new position.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, it is now well over a year since the date of the last report from the Post Office Department. It is true that the minister gave us a few figures concerning the financial results of the last year of operations, but there are other matters in which the members of this house are keenly interested. Undoubtedly it will be some time before we can expect a full report of the department for the year ending March 31, 1954. In the meantime, some indication of the extent to which the recommendations of Woods and Gordon have been adopted, and the implementation which has been effected, would be welcomed by all members of this house.
I realize, Mr. Chairman, that the items which appear in the estimates under the minister's department are few in number and it is rather difficult to pinpoint your questions to any one particular item. I would ask the minister to answer at the suitable place in the debate, some of these questions that I have asked him today.


Mr. Knighi:: I do not propose, Mr. Chairman, to make any comprehensive survey of postal affairs. I do want to draw to the attention of the minister some of the things that employees in my own city feel at the moment. Before doing that I might say that I have been having my ear to the ground and I find rather general dissatisfaction with the new increase in postal rates. I suppose that was only to be expected. People do not like to pay out their money in any case, and it does not help when they realize that the four-cent rate did give sufficient return to carry on the work with some profit in the first class division. They do feel that if certain periodicals-I am not here speaking against it-or some weekly newspapers are to be carried on a second class rate or under a subsidized rate, as was mentioned in the house some time ago, the burden should not be borne by the people who use the first class mails.

Supply-Post Office
I should like to say that I do not think we have any complaint in our city about the service so far as the general public is concerned. I believe the service is good. I feel our employees, and the organization generally, is efficient. But like my colleague, the member for Hamilton West, I feel I would be correct in saying that labour relations in the Post Office Department are not good. The employees have certain grievances, and one of them is that mentioned by the hon. member and which has certainly been mentioned many times. I note from a letter I have in my hand that there was a meeting of certain of these employees, the Saskatoon joint branch of Canadian postal employees and federated association of letter carriers. At this meeting certain resolutions were passed, copies of which were sent to me and I have no doubt to the minister as well. I feel it incumbent upon me, however, as the member for Saskatoon, to lay these matters before the minister publicly and ask him to comment perhaps on each of them.
One of these matters concerns priority in the matter of holidays. For years the principle of seniority has been established for choice of work and for holidays; that precedent has now been broken. There are certain arduous routes, particularly so because they are being carried by a man who is not familar with them, and who changes from one route to another, so is not familiar with the streets and addresses as the regular postman is. It seems to me that the Post Office Department is reluctant to pay anything extra for the men who work under these difficulties on these particular routes. The department has perhaps taken this other action as a sort of inducement-I do not like to use the word bribe-to induce these supervisory carriers to undertake that work. I do not think the supervisory carriers were particularly interested, even at a raise in pay, but I am going to suggest that some of the ordinary men would have been very pleased to carry on these duties for an additional $20 per month. I feel they should have been given that as an inducement, first of all, to do it, and as compensation for doing it at the end of their term.
Now, that is pretty much the situation. The letter which I have here accompanying the resolution states:
This year, when the department wanted more supervisory letter carriers to provide relief in the 40-hour week set up, and not enough men volunteered for it, even with the $20 higher pay attached to it, it was apparently thought necessary to offer a sort of bribe, namely, the first choice of holidays over all carriers.

As I have said, this is a new precedent. It seems to me to be true that the idea of the rotation of holidays, while that would be a more equitable way of solving this problem, seems to be impossible in the post office service, or at least it has been found impossible up to the present.
Now before I go any further I wish to put on the record the three particular grievances these men have. I have already discussed the first one simply because my hon. friend from Hamilton West gave me a lead in that direction. The other can be discussed much more briefly.
The resolution as passed by the association of postal workers is in three parts. The first deals with supervisory letter carriers. They protest against the supervisory letter carriers being given seniority of holiday choice over all other letter carriers, regardless of length of service. That is the one with which I have just dealt.
The second one deals with grade 1 clerks getting less pay in smaller offices, though the work and the annual examinations are the same all over Canada. Personally I see some justice in that. 1 do not see why a man engaged in an industry or a factory in one part of the country should get less for doing the same kind of work. I would say that the principle of equal pay for equal work should operate in this regard. Looking at this from my general study of post office conditions, it seems to me that the cards are pretty badly stacked against the little fellow. You have a situation there where there is not equal pay for equal work just because these men happen to work in a smaller post office. I presume these people are working the same hours and working equally hard and I see no reason why the pay should be less in some districts than in others.
The third grievance deals with the question of why so many offices have not yet received the 40-hour week, and in this regard my claim would be largely the same. After all, I suppose the 40-hour week was granted on the principle that industry in these particular places worked on the same basis. I do not know whether that is a good criterion on which to judge. Again, I would point out that these people are surely all working for the same department. Their work is similar everywhere and I would suggest that a person in a small town would appreciate being on a 40-hour week just the same as those in the city where industry happens to have, shall I say, the habit of the 40-hour week.
For example, we have a little town on the edge of my constituency at Sutherland and

I do not suppose we ask our mechanics in that particular town to work for less money or longer hours than the corresponding worker in the larger city of Saskatoon. Yet, we find this anomaly existing everywhere in the Post Office Department.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I think that is all I wish to say at present but I hope the minister will answer each of the points I have raised or give us his view on the matter in order that I may, as it were, render an account to my own constituents, who are particularly interested in regard to these three matters.


Mr. Hansell:: Mr. Chairman, I do not
believe that we have any very harsh criticism to make today of the operation of the Post Office Department of Canada. I think people generally speaking are fairly well satisfied with the services they get, and frankly I must admit that while it is becoming rather a big business-at least its operating costs, running to about $128 million, are in the realm of big business-I do not believe the people of Canada have much to complain about.
There is one thing, though, I suppose we all complain about, and it is past history now by reason of the fact that the increase in postage rates went into effect on April 1. I have had quite a number of letters protesting against that increase. It has to be recognized, of course, that if people want a service from the government then they must be prepared to pay for it. Here is a service which is absolutely necessary. We must have our post offices; we must have our mail deliveries; we must have a system by which mail can be carried from one person to another and from one part of the country to another. That is an established service, and it is a service everyone requires. It is an established service in this as well as every other country in the world and it has been ever since the days of the ancient courier messages which had to be carried from one place to another.
In Canada, of course, it is getting to be what I might call big business. I think any department which costs between $128 and $130 million to operate must be recognized as big business. It would cost much more than that, of course, if we were to take into account the cost of their buildings as well, and therefore that figure is not quite an accurate picture.
The Post Office Department of Canada, whether big business or not, has still to be paid for, and I am not one of those who
Supply-Post Office
believe in the government going into anything when they are not able to swing it financially. We know many things have to be subsidized, but I do not believe the government should begin engaging in the types of business which are run at a loss. Here is one service we have to operate by the very reason of the necessity for it, and if we are not going to subsidize it then of course the cost must be met out of revenue.
The five cent rate has now gone into effect, though there is one advantage being derived from this increased rate, and that is that the five cent rate for the most part will carry mail much more rapidly because it is in reality an air mail service throughout Canada except in places where air transport is not available. Just the same, though, that five cent rate is quite a burden on the entire nation. It may not constitute much of a burden for the individual who writes a letter once a month. But it is a burden for those who write very many personal letters and for families and children who have to keep in touch by mail. One cent more on the rate may not be considered a great deal, but it must be added on to the over-all cost of living. Even if we disregard the cost to the individual we must remember that every business has to pay that five cent rate and this must be added on to their operating expenses and be reflected eventually in the general cost of living.
Therefore we cannot blame the people if they protest against this increase. There was a day when we used to talk of the penny postage, but that day has gone, I suppose forever. It would be very nice if we could return to the day when we could lick a one cent stamp and know that the letter would eventually arrive at its destination. But over the years there has been a continual increase until we have now reached the day when the first class mail rate is five cents. When the minister replies to the questions, I should like him to answer one or two of mine. Perhaps he is unable to answer this one; but I should like to know- if it is not too early and the figures happen to be available; he has had only one month to work on them-whether during the month of April, under the new rates, the revenues were higher or lower than those of the same month a year ago. I do not think we can get an accurate picture of what we want by taking the first month that the new rate was in effect. To get an accurate picture we would have to average it over the next year. Of course we cannot do that. We have been operating at the five cent rate for only a month. If the figures are available we should like to know what they are.

Supply-Post Office
There is one other matter that I should like to bring to the attention of the minister. It is not a new thing at all. I refer to the small country post office and the facilities that are available to carry on a dignified and adequate postal service. The minister will agree that the amount of money available in these post offices is such that the average country postmaster is not able to carry out that service with very much dignity. Our country post offices are usually pretty small and miserable affairs. I know it is a problem where there is not very much mail delivered in a small community. In a small rural community it is an expensive job if we are to put very much dignity into it. I refer not only to the rural post office in the sense of its being away from an inhabited community. Take communities of anywhere from one thousand people to three thousand. I must say that most of those post offices are not what they ought to be. The postmaster is dependent largely upon his own business or his own revenue to keep things going. Perhaps they have to rent small buildings and space is not available. Perhaps they are cramped in their quarters. There are many other features that make it almost impossible for a postmaster in one of those communities to carry on his postal service with the dignity that should be required in this service. I know that once again, if we say we should give a certain standard requirement, the answer is that the postmaster has to be paid more or the government must fork up still more money. The problem is there; I recognize that. But I do believe the minister can give some expression of views on what might be done in respect to the matter.
I have another matter to bring to the minister's attention. I understand that when new public buildings are contemplated, when the government feels that certain public buildings are needed-and I refer mostly to post office buildings-the general practice is that the Post Office Department will make recommendations to the Department of Public Works to have a post office built in this or that community. I should like to know from the minister whether that is the correct assumption, and, if it is, what is the backlog of recommendations that have not yet been adopted or accepted by the Department of Public Works.
It is very easy to make recommendations, and I know that the Post Office Department wants the best facilities possible and may-
I am not sure that they do-recommend the building of many public buildings that will never be built. I do not know whether they would go that far or not, but I should like to know whether there is a backlog, and when the minister is answering I should like

him also to tell us whether or not the recommendations are put before the Department of Public Works with any degree of priority. Are they taken in the order of their priority? In other words, if in one year, we will say, there are 50 public buildings recommended- my figures may be entirely out of line; it is only an illustration I am giving-there must be a first and there must be a last one recommended. Is there a priority there? Suppose the Department of Public Works does not go forward with these buildings: is it possible that next year the recommendation that was at the top may suddenly be shifted to the bottom and the priority upset in that fashion? I should like to know that. I have very good reasons for asking the question. Parliament has already approved certain public buildings that are not included in this year's estimates, and we do not want those that have already been approved to be dropped to the bottom somewhere and some other building take the priority. That would not be fair; it would not be just; it would not be good business and it would smack of politics. I should like the minister to give me some definite answer along that line.
Before I sit down may I thank the minister -perhaps this is under the public works department but it was not done without the recommendation of the Post Office Department-for what was done in my own little town of Vulcan, Alberta, where I live. It is a small village of about 1,500 people. It has not had the best post office, but, you know, it is surprising how people get used to something. It is not good enough, but they get used to it over the years. If we are not careful we can get accustomed to living in a very dirty room, especially if we live there long enough. It is strange, but people act that way, too. They get accustomed to things. Well, I believe the officials of the Post Office Department recommended that. They must have recognized that Vulcan needed a little better accommodation, and they must have made that recommendation because our quarters have been enlarged. We have not a public building there. Other communities in my constituency are larger, and I think they should have public buildings before my own town. Nevertheless the post office quarters in my own town have been enlarged; new boxes have been put in; a new front was put in and the people are quite pleased with the alterations.
I wish to say that I have not had a great deal to do with the officials of the Post Office Department who are responsible for post offices in my particular area, but on the occasions when I have had to approach them I have always found them courteous. I have

always found them to be men who want to do a good job. They have to operate within regulations-they cannot break them; and I believe the officials there are men of integrity and men who want to do a really good job. I wish to say these things to them because it is nice to be able to meet officials, have them greet you courteously, and have them take your problems to heart and say: "Well, we will just see what can be done"-and then tell you in a straightforward way the reasons why certain things cannot be done. They are doing their business in a good way and we are pretty well satisfied.
The officials in the Calgary office who are responsible for much of my area have treated me quite courteously, quite well, and have gotten through a number of problems which I have presented to them-and I appreciate that.
In this group most of us live in rural areas -although some do not. The hon. member for Lethbridge, the hon. member for Medicine Hat, the hon. member for New Westminster and the hon. member for Edmonton East live in cities, but the rest of us are pretty well confined to the rural areas. I have not heard very much complaint and I do not rise now in any particularly critical spirit, except to make these observations and ask these questions.


Mr. Philpott:: May I ask a question which might be answered when the other questions are being answered? I refer to the colour of first-class stamps. I understand that a few years ago there was some kind of an international convention requiring that all first-class stamps be red or of some standard colour. Now I see that the new ones are blue, and they are a lot like the colour of the purple ones which are four cents. I wonder if the minister could tell us if we are going back to the old standard first-class stamp- because I am getting quite a lot of mail on which I have to pay extra postage because people have not put enough on it.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Blue is a good colour.


Mr. Nicholson:: When the five-cent postage rate was up I was trying to get the minister to make a statement with regard to the policy of his department with respect to recommendations by defeated candidates and members of parliament. I find myself involved in a discussion in the paper with the former member for Mackenzie, Mr. Ferrie, my predecessor. I wish to make it clear now that I do not want to be consulted regarding the appointment of postmasters or on other decisions that should properly be decisions of the 83276-300
Supply-Post Office
Post Office Department, and I would like the minister to give us some information as to what his policy is.
I have before me a sessional paper that was brought down some years ago, No. 159 of 1943. Colonel Underwood, who is with the Postmaster General now, played an important role in connection with this case and I would like to know whether he still has the sort of duties he had at that time and whether this same procedure is still followed.
I have a file here which goes back to April, 1942, when the postmaster at Endeavour, Saskatchewan, was short of funds. The inspector, who is now the superintendent in Saskatoon, found the shortage, took over the office, consulted the local Legion and appointed a person who seemed to be the best person in Endeavour to be acting postmaster. He reported to his superintendent in Saskatoon and the superintendent there in turn reported it to Ottawa. The next move was when Colonel Underwood notified the secretary of the provincial legion. He also wrote to Mr. Ross Barrie of Pelly, Saskatchewan, who happened to be the defeated candidate for Mackenzie at that time.
I want to make it clear that Mr. Barrie and I are very good friends. As a matter of fact, I think this is the sort of experience which persuaded Mr. Barrie that life was too short to get bogged down in this kind of controversy which took a lot of his time and made a lot of enemies.
Colonel Underwood wrote to Mr. Barrie on the 13th May; he wrote again on the 20th May, on the 1st June, on the 11th June, on the 23rd June and then on the 3rd July. That is very good service from a busy person like Colonel Underwood, who was then chief superintendent of the service. Now, I will just get the file before me. The Endeavour legion on July 5th objected to the decision that Mr. Barrie made. The man who was nominated by Mr. Barrie no longer lived in the district, and, according to post office regulations, he was not eligible. The president of the legion, as I said, took objection and Colonel Underwood wrote again on July 18th to Mr. Barrie. That letter is page 56 of this record. Then there is the official nomination. In this connection I would like the Postmaster General to state definitely whether this form is still used by the post office. It is a form of nomination for postmaster signed by Mr. J. Ross Barrie and the Postmaster General might indicate why they asked for a nomination at that time-and if they are still so asking. It is not known why this was done-just that Mr. J. Ross Barrie nominated Mr. Nelson R. McGregor for the

Supply-Post Office
job. This nomination is printed on government stationery-"Nomination for Postmaster"-there is given here the electoral district, the province, the office, revenue, and remuneration. Revenue for the previous year was $996.82 and the remuneration offered was $1,000. As I have indicated there was a great deal of correspondence. There was a personal and confidential letter from Mr. Barrie to Colonel Underwood. It appears in the file and, since it is dealing with public business, I am sure it was not considered as personal or confidential.
There is an official notification on the 8th August-everything was supposed to be signed, sealed and delivered. Mr. McGregor was appointed to take over. Then the Liberal executive came into the picture- the local Liberal association, provincial and federal. They wrote a letter to Mr. Hunter in Saskatoon and said:
We kindly ask you to hold us abeyance the appointment of the postmaster at Endeavour and the appointment of Mr. McGregor. We, as association, recognize that Mr. McGregor is not a residence of Endeavour and do not wish him to succeed Mr. Izdebski as postmaster.
To make everything aboveboard they enclosed the minutes of their meeting, giving names of movers and seconders of various motions.
Things were getting pretty hot and I guess Mr. McGregor decided that life was too short to get into this controversy and he turned it down.
On the 28th August Mr. Barrie wrote to Mr. Underwood and there was a further air mail letter, and, on the 31st August, there is a letter to Mr. Barrie. There is another on the 3rd September and the acting chief wrote on the 21st September. A second appointee came into the picture and things were still hot. He finally declined. Then there was a letter of Mr. Barrie to the acting chief on October 7. Then there was a letter from the acting chief to Mr. Barrie on October 15 and one from Mr. Barrie to the acting chief on October 30. To bring the story to an end at last-


An hon. Member:: Hear, hear.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Yes; I agree with the "hear, hear". It is a rather ridiculous story, but I am quoting from official documents.


Tom Goode: Would my hon. friend answer a question? What year is he talking about?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I told the committee that when I started.


Tom Goode: Is it 1943 that the hon. member is talking about?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: That is right.


Mr. Noseworthy:: He will bring it up to date later.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Colonel Underwood, who featured in this correspondence, is holding a responsible position. I hope that the Postmaster General will be able to tell us categorically that neither Colonel Underwood nor anyone else in the Post Office Department is placed in the ridiculous position that this file would indicate.
Finally, On December 18, Mr. Barrie threw up his hands. I remind the committee that the country was at war and the man who was appointed in the first place was a veteran of the first war. The only thing against him was that he did not have the O.K. of the local defeated Liberal candidate at the time. After all this correspondence, on December 18, Mr. Barrie finally threw up his hands and said, "Whatever the Post Office Department does will be O.K. with me", and the man who was appointed as temporary on April 16 became postmaster. The file was closed on January 7 of the following year with a final letter from Colonel Underwood to Mr. Barrie telling him that it is settled.
As I said, I should like the Postmaster General to tell us whether the form that was used at that time is still being used by the post office and whether or not his department must consult with the defeated candidates in various constituencies or with sitting members. I think it is fairly clear that if any department is going to be able to administer its business efficiently, it must get away from a system wherein the chief superintendent has to write so many letters. I find that 17 letters were writen by either the chief or the acting -chief to Mr. Barrie whose status was that of defeated Liberal candidate at that particular time. I hope that the Postmaster General will give us a clear statement indicating how things now stand in the post office.


Donald Methuen Fleming: Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring some matters to the attention of the committee. I should like to preface my few remarks by the general observation that, in the nine years that I have had the honour to be a member of parliament, there has not been another time in my experience when so many complaints have reached me with regard to poor postal delivery service. I am not speaking simply of my own riding. I am speaking of complaints that one receives from various quarters about poor postal service. I have made it a point, I think in almost every case, to put these complaints before the minister. The minister is always courteous but the results are not particularly gratifying. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Chairman, that the public of Canada feel, with justification,

that when it was called upon, beginning April 1, to pay substantially increased postal rates, it was and is entitled to receive better service than it is now receiving. I do not refer only to the matter of the two deliveries a day in residential districts, although I include that matter. If we are going to have these substantially increased postal rates, we should have that kind of service. However, I am referring to other matters of wider effect as well.
The minister is aware of the fact that in the city of Toronto particularly, with the new metropolitan area established by law, there has been a good deal of confusion with regard to what is the local urban area within which the four cent postage rate applies. A great many people are still under the impression that with the enlargement by law of the metropolitan area, it is at least archaic that the postal service should set tight limits on the area within which the four cent local delivery rate applies. To a great many people in that area it has been annoying to find not only that their letters are required to bear on their covers the penalty of inadequate postage but that, under the new regulations, those letters are now returned to them. For instance, if someone in the metropolitan area puts a four cent stamp on a letter that happens to be going, we will say, to Willowdale or to some place within what is the Willowdale area but is nevertheless within the Toronto area according to general understanding, the letter is returned to him for increased postage plus penalty, and valuable time is wasted by that return. I would urge on the department that there should be a rationalization of the local delivery system with regard to deliveries within a metropolitan area like that existing in the Toronto district.
I do not intend to delay the committee, Mr. Chairman, by referring in detail to all of the complaints that have reached me with regard to inexcusably delayed deliveries. However, I wish to mention some of these complaints because I think they illustrate, as clearly as anything that one can place before the committee, precisely what their nature is. For instance, I have before me a cover addressed to a lady living on the street on which I live here in Ottawa. It is a perfectly proper address. This letter was mailed from Sudbury. It bears the stamp "Sudbury, December 16, 1953, 10.30 p.m." It reached Ottawa. It is properly addressed in a perfectly legible hand. I know the house well. Nevertheless this letter, on reaching the Ottawa post office, was returned marked "not in directory". Yet it is a residence in this city that anyone can see, and the envelope 83276-300J
Supply-Post Office
is very clearly addressed. The letter was returned to Sudbury and finally reached the recipient in Ottawa away on in January after a loss, as a result of poor handling and inefficiency in the department, of something like three weeks. Even taking account of the pressure on the postal services at Christmastime and the fact that temporary help is employed in such cases, I submit to you, Mr. Chairman, that there can be no excuse whatever for inefficiency so glaring as that.
Then I have before me the cover of a letter which was mailed from Victoria, British Columbia, and which took from December 21 to January 11 to reach the addressee. I have another here with a Toronto postmark, December 19,	1953, perfectly clearly
addressed to a proper address in Toronto. This one, if you please, was returned with the notation "not known here", although it was the address of the recipient and she was there. It is quite obvious there was no inquiry made. After being shuttled around in the mail it was eventually redelivered to the original and proper address on January 26, 1954.
It is for service like that that the people of this country are being called upon to pay substantially increased postal rates. It is no wonder they are not only irritated but outraged by these further impositions. Just yesterday I was spoken to by a gentleman who resides in Ottawa and he showed me two covers which suggest a very striking contrast. He received the two of them at the same time, on April 26, in the daily delivery in Ottawa. One came from England and was postmarked from Stoke-on-Trent at 5.30 p.m. on April 23. It was posted on the afternoon of April 23 and was delivered here in Ottawa on the morning of Monday, April 26. That was very good service by the transAtlantic air mail.
But let us see what happens with domestic mail. In the same delivery he received a letter postmarked from Toronto on Thursday, April 22. It took that letter from Thursday, when deposited in the Toronto post office, until Monday morning to be delivered here in Ottawa at an address which is quite accessible and well known. It was placed in the post office twenty-four hours before the letter posted at Stoke-on-Trent in England, and they arrived at the same time. Poor postal service between Toronto and Ottawa is not new. It has been referred to in the discussion on the estimates of the Post Office Department every year for a good many years past. Surely it should be possible to have overnight service between two large cities as closely connected as Toronto and Ottawa with a high volume of first class mail

Supply-Post Office
moving between them. I do not think any hon. member is going to condone service deliveries like this where mail is placed in the post office in Toronto on a Thursday and is not delivered in Ottawa until the following Monday. There was no holiday intervening, except Sunday.
It was not a case of a public holiday at all. It was simply a case of poor service, delays in the post office. At which end the delay occurred one does not know, but certainly a delay did occur somewhere in the post office. If the government is determined to levy these very high postal rates, increased to figures that the public of Canada resents, then surely the least that the Post Office Department can do is to jack up its service.


Mr. Enfield:: Before the minister is called upon to answer some of the questions and queries that have been put to him, I should like to deal briefly with the post office situation. It is a matter that is rather close to my heart inasmuch as I have had a great deal to do with the problem in my own riding. I think that the problem with which the Post Office Department is faced is so obvious that sometimes some of us more or less do not see the woods for the trees. As we all know, there has been tremendous industrial and domestic expansion in the construction field in Canada in the last few years and the Post Office Department, like every other organization that has to supply public services, has been faced with the problem of rapidly expanding its services, taking on new employees and training them to provide these much-needed new services.
The Post Office Department is not the only organization that is having trouble. Go to some of the big metropolitan areas and you will see what you run into so far as other services that people require, sewers, water, roads, are concerned. I saw a reference in an Ottawa paper the other day to "tulip time in Pothole". There is the problem of providing these services right here on our doorstep. I think my area exemplifies more than any other in Canada the type of problem that the Post Office Department is encountering at this time. I should like to outline it for you and show what we have been endeavouring to do to iron out the situation.
Metropolitan Toronto is a most difficult area to provide service for because there is the hard core of the urban area, the rapidly growing suburban areas spreading out from that and then a completely rural portion encompassing the whole. Therefore you have three problems of distribution, urban, suburban and rural, right in the one large unit. The change is very rapid. For example

in Scarborough township alone there was an increase in population last year of 18,000 people, 18,000 people in one area the size of a small city that has grown up within an already rapidly expanding area. Of course, when all these people move into the area the first thing they think of when they get settled in their new homes is to demand all the services that make for a convenient existence, including mail delivery to the door.
There are twenty-one mailing addresses in my riding alone, and it is not a rural area comparable to some of the vast ridings represented by many hon. members. It is supposed to be an urban area. People sorting mail in the city of Toronto post office have as many as 10,000 different points of reference to remember when they are doing their sorting. The problem is how to take care of this rapid expansion so as to provide people with good, efficient service. Some would like it to be at the same cost as before, but obviously that cannot be done. When you are capitalizing, when you are setting up new post offices or new systems, taking on new men, providing new equipment to handle the mail and new means of transportation, there is bound to be an increase in the amount of money you spend. I am surprised that the increase during 1953-54 was not greater than the $17 million that the Postmaster General mentioned.
When I look at the number of new employees the department is taking on, as found in the details of the estimates, I am surprised that there are not more than the odd few in each section. Considering the vast amount of work that has to be done, the number is surprisingly low and bespeaks the efficient handling of the help by the organization. Therefore I do not think we should complain unduly about the increase in rates. Of course, as the hon. member for Macleod and others have mentioned, naturally people are going to complain about an increase in rates, but I feel that if we tell them the story of what the department is up against they will agree, as reasonable people, that you cannot have something for nothing. If we want to follow the very good principle-I think it is a good principle- that the post office should endeavour to pay its own way, then obviously increased revenues have to be obtained from somewhere.
How have we attacked the problem in my riding? I think the metropolitan Toronto post office is to be commended for the aggressive and forthright action taken. In the last few months door to door delivery service has been extended to nearly 4,000 people. We have set up one new semi-staffed post office that I am aware of. We have

plans under way for a new post office in Scarborough, Ontario, that will provide delivery, we feel, for many more thousands of people within that particular area. I must say, too, the co-operative work of the Toronto district post office has been excellent in this regard. I think if the department could attack the problem other members are finding in their riding with the same energy and forthrightness that I have seen in my particular part of metropolitan Toronto, they would not have very much to complain about.
As I say, this question has been uppermost in the minds of my constituents, perhaps more than any other matter concerning the federal government. I have not had, however, very many personal complaints from my people regarding the service. I know the hon. member for Eglinton seems to have a curious capacity for collecting these complaints. I recall that when we were discussing this matter last Christmas he was complaining that a letter addressed to Mr. D. Fleming, Toronto, which should have found him immediately, took a little longer than usual. I have not had, as I say, more than a few letters from anyone in my particular part of metropolitan Toronto complaining about actual delays that had occurred in the delivery of mail.
Actually, two of these complaints occurred at Christmastime when the mail was very heavy. In another case the cover was sent with the complaint, so I was able to have an investigation made and an explanation given of that particular item. I feel it is significant, when we have such rapidly expanding areas and when this problem is uppermost in the minds of the people, that I have not received many more direct complaints concerning delay in mail deliveries. Mind you, I am not suggesting that we have not received complaints, as the Postmaster General knows. I say again that a good attack upon the problem by the Post Office Department will provide the necessary service and gradually solve this problem with which the Post Office Department will be faced as long as we are growing so rapidly. We hope our growth and expansion will continue at the same rate as we have experienced it in the past.


Mr. Regier:: The area about which I wish to speak is not a new area at all, and therefore it is not an area that has any of the growing pains of these new areas that are arising on the outskirts of these large cities in Canada. After listening to the member for York-Scarborough, I feel that some of the Postmaster General's top assistants from that area ought to be moved over to the area from which I come so that he would receive some
Supply-Post Office
of that good advice which he apparently received in connection with the situation in the hon. member's area.
I feel this is the proper time for me to raise this matter of a Burnaby post office, especially since we are discussing the item containing the minister's salary. I was saying to someone that I hoped we could get out of the minister an executive ability to match his charm and personality. I was rudely reminded that the two do not necessarily go together. However, I feel that any faults that have existed under his short administration so far are only due, as the member for Vancouver East said the other day, to some very rotten advice he has received from the west coast.
At this time I should like to pay tribute to the efforts of other members who have, for the past twelve years, represented this area that I now represent. The people back home used to be taken in by the line that if you have a Liberal elected, and get your member on the government side of the house, you will get much more out of the government. The people have since been thoroughly disillusioned. They knew they had most able men. One man has since been honoured and is today the hon. Minister of Fisheries. He represented this area for a period of eight years and, I am sure, did his utmost to obtain a fair deal from the Post Office Department. The other member still sits in this house as the member for Burnaby-Richmond. This is not a partisan matter. I have with me today numerous editorials in which the people at home congratulate their two members on presenting a united appeal on this matter.
Our area of Burnaby is one of the oldest on the west coast. Burnaby was in existence when possibly wild animals were still roaming the swamps of what is today called Vancouver. It is a thoroughly organized municipality, having some 70,000 inhabitants. They feel they have been getting a raw deal, from a political standpoint, and simply fail to understand how various Postmasters General have had the nerve to let down their local member. I think the whole of the population back home would endorse the statement that their members of parliament, even though they sat on the government side, have been let down by former postmasters general.
One member, whom I recall, was elected as late as 1949. One of the main reasons for his election to this House of Commons was the fact he was an effective organizer and advertiser. He built up the native pride of the people in their area and said that if the people would elect him Burnaby would be put on the map as it ought to be. We have

Supply-Post Office
seen some action since that time. Not too long after that 1949 election two sub-post offices were erected. There has been a lot of amazement as to the manner in which these sub-post offices were set up. We see the same pattern in other areas, and I am thinking of the riding of New Westminster. Apparently it has become the policy now that when the department need a new post office they no longer get the Minister of Public Works to erect a public building. They deem it expedient to award a long-term lease to someone who will then undertake to erect the building that will house this post office.
Now, people do not erect public buildings for the love of it. They erect them for one purpose only, and that is to make money. I hope that we have seen the end of this policy, because it was a poor policy. However, that is all past and gone. We have these sub-post offices in operation and, for the time being, ;and as the minister knows, the staff there are doing a splendid job. At this time I should make it quite plain that I am not, as the member for Eglinton did, going to complain of poor service. I feel that the service back home is excellent when we consider the conditions under which the men there have to work. I hope that good labour relations are going to be re-established very soon, and that the morale of that part of the civil service we have at the lower levels is not going to deteriorate.
We were told also that we had some reason to look forward to getting a federal building in Burnaby. I went along with the idea that we could not reasonably look for a Burnaby post office until we had a federal building.
I shall have something to say about that a little later. I am only rather amazed that the federal building item in the estimates of the Minister of Public Works for last year has somehow disappeared this year. We are rather apprehensive about it. At the time of the Christmas recess, a conference was held in the area of all interested organizations. That meeting was attended by North Burnaby and South Burnaby boards of trade; postmasters from respective outlying cities; top-notch postal officers; and members of the local municipal council. An agreement was reached and that agreement, although not formulated in the manner of a resolution, recognized first of all that we would likely have to wait until we obtained a federal building before we could expect a post office at Burnaby. However, in the interim there was the general desire expressed that a useful purpose would be served if Burnaby could be divided into regions or zones, and these zones labelled

Burnaby 1, Burnaby 2 and so on. What was the result? We did not get the zones even though we wanted them, but we did get some zoning and there is now listed in the official guide such places as North Burnaby and South Burnaby. The reaction to this was immediate. Here I would like to read the opinions of each of the eight elected municipal officers, the reeve and the seven councillors, and may I point out that only one is C.C.F. The others are solid supporters of the Liberal party, though there may be one supporter of the Conservative party for all I know. However, Reeve C. W. MacSorley said:
It is not what we wanted at all.
Councillor Sam Hughes said:
An insult to council's intelligence . . .
Councillor Murray Morrison said:
He wanted us to speak with one voice but this further divides us.
Councillor Gerald Charlton said:
North Burnaby has only just gone on record against any change at present.
Councillor Mrs. E. O. Wilks said:
We want Burnaby alone in the address, not north and south Burnaby. We must not give approval to this change.
Councillor W. P. Philps said:
It takes no account of East Burnaby.
Councillor Fred Philps said:
This does nothing for Burnaby. I am thoroughly dissatisfied.
Councillor Arnold Hean said:
We will now wait for the editorials!
I will not read the editorials. However, after that I went and made a personal appeal to the Postmaster General, as he knows, and I asked the following: First of all, Mr. Chairman, that he use his influence so that an early beginning would be made on the construction of a federal building; secondly that Burnaby be divided into postal zones, Burnaby 1, Burnaby 2 and so on, and if it was found necessary to be able to do that, that all mail for Burnaby be sent through either New Westminster or Vancouver post office. I further asked that the whole of the lower mainland area, where no rail, water, or air transport for letters is necessary, be given the benefit of the drop letter rate, as in large areas of Montreal and Toronto.
Then I added this, and I really meant it as I indicated at the beginning, and I mean it even now:
We do, however, feel that you are competent and willing to give it the recognition that this second largest centre of population in British Columbia is asking for.

In answer to that I received a short reply dated April 15, the second paragraph of which reads as follows:
I am asking my officials to make a thorough study of the situation and as soon as their report is received, I shall get in touch with you.
I would like to read that part again, Mr. Chairman, "-a thorough study of the situation-" What followed? As a result of that letter I received an acknowledgment from the corporation of the district of Burnaby in which, among other things, they said:
The council . . . would ask you to continue pressing for a unified system of postal distribution in this municipality.
That letter was signed "Charles B. Brown, Municipal Clerk". Upon coming here after Easter, as the result of what apparently has been a "thorough study of the situation", I received a letter from the Postmaster General. But, Mr. Chairman, before dealing with that letter I would submit that there has been no thorough study of the situation whatsoever, and that fact emphasizes what the hon. member for Vancouver East said the other day, namely, that some of the advice being handed over to Ottawa from postal officials is horribly wrong.
To return to the letter I received, point No. 1 deals with the existing sub-post offices and the dates upon which the leases for them will expire. Point No. 2 states:
A central building could not be utilized to serve both north and south Burnaby because of the topography of the area.
I think that sentence is enough to make any member from British Columbia laugh. Whoever wrote that sentence has obviously no idea of the topography of Burnaby. We have five major highways running through the municipality east and west; we have excellent paved roads running through the municipality north and south; and to say that the topography of the area does not permit the construction of a central building when Liberal members of parliament have been asking for such a building, and when local municipal organizations have been urging for one for years, seems the last word in bad advice. The letter then goes on, and this is the part my people are going to resent more than anything else:
However, If a federal building were erected in either north Burnaby or south Burnaby, possibly space in such a building could: be used to replace the rented premises now occupied.
That sentence, Mr. Chairman, makes it seem as though the Postmaster General had never heard of any plans for a federal building in Burnaby, and would also indicate that if we are going to get one it might be in
Supply-Post Office
north Burnaby or south Burnaby; but we are certainly not going to get one where the people of Burnaby want one to be constructed. Again I would emphasize that there is a modern, well-paved highway running right through the centre of Burnaby, so if anyone wants to lead the people to believe that that is a place where wild animals live, he is badly mistaken. The centre of Burnaby is well settled and it is a wonderful area.
The letter goes on:
The suggestion that all mail for Burnaby be channelled through either New Westminster or Vancouver is not practical from a postal service standpoint.
Then it goes on to explain that because one part of Burnaby is nearer to New Westminster and another part is nearer to Vancouver there would be a delay in the service if it were all channelled through one major post office at either New Westminster or Vancouver. But that is even more ridiculous than anything heretofore in this letter. Surely it does not take any longer for mail to be hauled from the centre of New Westminster to the centre of Burnaby than from the centre of Vancouver to the centre of Burnaby. At least the suggestion of serious delay is really stretching the imagination, and I know it will be resented by the people back home because they know it is just not so.
Then the minister goes on to remind me there is one organization in my riding which is not in favour of an all-Burnaby post office. I would like to point out that the north Burnaby board of trade has never stated that they did not want a Burnaby post office. Their representatives were at the meeting during the recess and they voiced no objection whatsoever. The only thing about which they are concerned is that any reorganization should not be permitted to interfere with the excellent service they are now getting because of the loyalty of the local postal worker. They want it considered on a metropolitan basis, and when we are asking for a Burnaby post office we are not violating that principle of a metropolitan distribution of mail in any way, shape or form.
Then, point No. 4 reads:
There appears to be no necessity for mail for Burnaby to be zoned.
I should like to ask the Postmaster General: If there is no necessity for that mail to be zoned, why is it zoned now? We have it zoned; Burnaby, north and south Burnaby, are at least several of the zones. We have the post office of Barnet, and a part of the municipality gets its mail through New Westminster. As a member of parliament, I ought to know my riding fairly well; yet I am

Supply-Post Office
having a difficult time when I read somebody's address and want to send him a letter. I do not know whether such and such a number on such and such a route should be sent to New Westminster, to north Burnaby or to south Burnaby. I am forever finding I have to keep on resorting to the map and asking: Now, what zone is that particular letter supposed to be sent to? I maintain that the population is going to go up by leaps and bounds, and I am more concerned with the long-term outlook for Burnaby mail than I am with the immediate situation.
I do not hesitate to say that in ten years' time, instead of 70,000 people, we shall have
140,000	people, and what is the situation going to be like at that time? Right now I hear the New Westminster postmaster and the Vancouver postmaster voicing complaints that Burnaby mail is still being wrongly addressed by those who write to people in Burnaby. I submit that unless a thorough study of this situation is made it is going to be worse than ever instead of becoming better.
The last point in the reply is this:
As regards the drop letter rate, the situation in Burnaby is not comparable to either the Montreal or Toronto postal areas.
This may interest some of the members from there:
In the case of Montreal, the drop letter rate of postage applies only within the area served by letter carriers in the Montreal postal service.
We had a number of editorials in our papers back home lately calling for the drop letter rate in the lower mainland. I also know that they have written letters. I have been in the constituency of Verdun, which most people look at as being a suburb of Montreal. Some 90,000 people live there. I understand that the sitting member for that area won his election apparently because he pledged them a new post office. Why 70,000 people in Burnaby, one of the oldest areas of Canada, should be denied any post office recognition whatsoever and a place like Verdun receive a new post office is a little beyond my comprehension. My people voted Liberal for three parliaments in a row, and they are getting a rotten deal out of it. I know that the people of Verdun can send a letter to Ville La Salle for four cents and also to Montreal itself; and to use the argument, "areas served by letter carriers", brings me to ask this question: Does the minister think that in Burnaby the mail is still delivered by ox-carts from one settlement to another? We also know of such people as letter carriers. The New Westminster people have letter carriers, as do the people in

Vancouver North and West Vancouver. If the area served by letter carriers is going to be the basis on which the service of four-cent postage is given, then West Vancouver, North Vancouver, Burnaby and New Westminster, other than the rural routes that exist and are part of the New Westminster system, should get the lower rate.
The minister goes on to say:
In the case of Toronto, a metropolitan municipal area has been created by provincial legislation.
So that is it, now. We rely on the provincial government to designate the metropolitan area, when all the time the minister has been telling us that they disregard municipal boundary lines. But here, because the province of Ontario has seen fit to declare a metropolitan municipal area, that is given as an argument. Well, it should be known that we also have such a thing as a metropolitan Vancouver area, and we have many organizations and public services that are based on the greater metropolitan area. The letter goes on:
Furthermore, the complete area is under the jurisdiction of the postmaster, Toronto.
That, Mr. Chairman, is exactly what I am asking for; that until we get a federal building and a post office of our own the whole of our mail for Burnaby be channelled either under the direction of the New Westminster postmaster or the Vancouver postmaster; that we be entitled to address our mail to Burnaby, and that the names of these zones be Burnaby 1, Burnaby 2, Burnaby 3; and, if Barnet is included, Burnaby 4. We think that is a reasonable demand to make. I think our minister is a very sincere man. He is new at his task, just as I am. Doubtless he receives some bad advice. I hope I do not get any bad advice, but I am hoping that he and I are able to learn, and he at least has the great advantage of a charming personality. I say again, I hope that when we vote his salary this time we will get the executive ability to go along with it.
However, in conclusion I want to read a rather long sentence. It is only one sentence, even though it is long. It is from bulletin No. 4 published by the South Burnaby board of trade. It outlines what everyone there wants. It speaks here of an Easter conference which it was intended to convene and which we were not able to have. The purpose of the conference was to be to:
. . . settle once and for all why 70,000 people cannot have a post office address that will give due recognition and publicity to the corporation of Burnaby and not further divide the community as the present plan will do. Other communities with smaller population have solved their problem by a zone system with full recognition of their corporation name and nothing short of this will satisfy the majority of Burnaby citizens.


Tom Goode: Mr. Chairman, it is most refreshing that someone now can help me with this fight. Perhaps when you sit on this side of the house there are supposed to be differences politically between the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam and the member for Burnaby-Richmond; but in this case that is not so. I do not agree with everything he says, in this instance, but I do agree with 99 per cent of it.
As I have said in this house before in his presence, this is a matter of two gentlemen, I hope, coming from British Columbia who want the same thing and who are trying to represent their people in the best way possible; regardless of where they sit in the house-they are going to co-operate. I have fought this fight of the Burnaby post office since 1949. The Postmaster General may not be in possession of all the facts. As my hon. friend mentioned, the Postmaster General is comparatively new, but I have fought this fight not with the Postmaster General but with senior members of his department. I have a file on this problem. I measured it this afternoon because I knew I was going to speak. It is fourteen inches thick and consists of letters back and forth, conferences held with the director of operations and other gentlemen in his department. That has gone on to the point where, as I said when I started, it is refreshing that I have some assistance.
Seventy thousand people live in Burnaby with a small city east of them, and with all due respect to the hon. member for New Westminster, it has only 26,000 people. The
70.000	people in my municipality have still the postal facilities as though we were only
16.000	or perhaps 1,600. There are two small postal stations doing very fine work, though in very limited quarters, but with four postal addresses in the municipality. A portion of the western part of our municipality comes under Vancouver and has to carry Vancouver addresses. Edmonds and east to the New Westminster boundary carries a New Westminster address and we have a North Burnaby address and a South Burnaby address.
I was rather pleased when the Postmaster General's first action to alleviate the situation was to give me the right to tell my people that we at least had a North Burnaby address and a South Burnaby address, but that is not being received very well. I do not entirely agree with it. Municipal pride comes into this. Burnaby has growing pains. We think we are entitled to a Burnaby address, but it was a move in the right direction and I accept it as such.
Supply-Post Office
We have come to the point, however, where we have got to go farther. We have small cities and small towns around Burnaby with small post offices. Coquitlam and Barnet are small places in comparison with their own identification and yet I have been told by officials of the Post Office Department, after these many conferences and some hundreds of letters, that we have arrived at the place where a survey has been made. May I tell my friend from Burnaby-Coquitlam that we have a survey on top of many other surveys and we arrive at the position still where
70,000	people in British Columbia are not considered to be entitled to their own postal identification.
May I tell the Postmaster General that this municipality of mine houses some very large commercial concerns. I think the Postmaster General will recognize these names. We have the Trans Mountain Oil Pipe Line Company. We have refineries for most of the major oil companies in Canada. We have the Simpsons-Sears Company which opened the other day. I understand they are one of the largest users of mail facilities in Canada. I understand too that 80,000 people went through that store in two days. We have the large firm of Kelly-Douglas, one of the primary wholesale grocers in the country. We have the Continental Can Company. The Postmaster General will recognize these names. They have their headquarters in the municipality of Burnaby and it is getting beyond the stage where a member of parliament must stand up session after session and fight for something to which his people are entitled.
I know that perhaps a member on this side of the house has no better facilities than my hon. friends on the other side, but we are supposed to have if you listen to the stories from the other side. In this case, though they have elected a Liberal from Burnaby-Richmond, I do not seem to have had too much success. Perhaps it has been my presentation of the case. Perhaps I did not know the story too well, although I should know it with these hundreds of letters, conferences and so on. Now, I have someone to help me and may I tell you, sir, that the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam and I are going to pound this matter until postal identification is given to the municipality of Burnaby-something that it was entitled to before 1949.
There is one other matter that concerns the constituency. I will give it now because the Postmaster General might as well have all of my problems at one time so that he can consider them. The municipality of Richmond, which I have the honour to represent,

Supply-Post Office
has 27,000 or 28,000 people. The minister has heard me speak of Richmond many times. We have not even got a postal station there. I have a large file of representations to the department from the 27,000 people who live there. There is in that municipality the largest fish cannery in the commonwealth. It includes the Vancouver international airport, and more industries are coming there every day, and yet we are still doing business down in Richmond with a few sub-post offices in drugstores. They get the mail from postal station "L" of Marpole in the riding of my hon. friend from Vancouver South. It is a very fine place, a fine building, but it does not seem to matter that the postmen have to come across the Marpole bridge about which hon. members have heard me speak. They have to go some miles before they can arrive at their destination to start first delivery of the mail. Some of these places still have the rural routes which they carried 25 years ago.
It is just about time that some of the officials of the Post Office Department of Vancouver changed their way of thinking. I fully agree with my hon. friend that the Postmaster General is not getting too sound advice. I do not know that I would like to go as far as my hon. friend did, but the advice which the Postmaster General has received in these two matters is not sound. My case is sound. I will not stand in this house and make a definite statement unless I am absolutely positive that I am right. We are entitled to identification. I do not ask for a federal building in Richmond but I do say they are entitled to a postal station where mail carriers can work from. I doubt if any official from the Post Office Department can argue against me here, and it is just about time someone in Vancouver advised the Postmaster General as to what these conditions are.
I hope the genial minister can check these matters and tell me in his reply whether I am right or wrong.


Mr. Brooks:: My remarks are going to be very brief. I too have a large file up in my office but I do not think it necessary to bring that file down and to read all of the letters in it to the minister. I am sure that we ought to be very grateful to the hon. member from Burnaby-Richmond that he did not read his 14-inch file to the house.
Post office matters were discussed very thoroughly when the question of increasing the four-cent stamp was before the house. I think that most of what hon. members intended to say was said at that time.
I agree with the hon. member for Hamilton West when she said that the Post Office

Department touches the homes of individuals more than any other department of government. When we say "homes of individuals" we mean homes of people living in both rural and urban centres. This afternoon we have heard very little about post office conditions in the rural centres. We have been mostly concerned with urban centres.
I might say that my constituency is probably 90 per cent rural and that there are as many rural routes in the two counties which make up my constituency as there are in any other constituency in Canada. I would also like to say that I was not very much touched by some of the remarks of members from urban centres when they complained of the fact that their residents could not get two mails a day. The minister knows that in many rural sections throughout this country the residents are not getting one mail a day. As a matter of fact, I know of many sections where they are only getting three mails a week or two mails a week, and until that situation is corrected I, for one, fail to think that residents in any city or in any town in Canada should receive two mails a day- when country residents are only receiving one mail every three days or every two days.
There is some argument that business houses in large centres should receive two mails a day but we all know that in the larger cities and larger centres post offices are established at very focal points. It is an easy matter for someone from those large business houses to go down and collect the mail from the post office, not just twice a day but perhaps half a dozen times a day. I cannot see that there is any great suffering in the towns and cities of this country as far as our mail service is concerned.
I make this appeal for the people in the rural districts because they have not the facilities for obtaining news. Many of them have no radios. In many instances they have not telephones. As I say, they do not get the daily papers because they do not always have daily mail. All these many facilities which are found in towns and cities and the more populated areas are not found in some of the back rural areas, with the result that many of our people are leaving the back areas simply because they have not those facilities which can be found in other places. I make this appeal to the minister and his department to see whether better conditions cannot be given to some of those areas.
I am greatly pleased indeed that the rural mail carriers are to receive more pay and more attention than they have received in the past. I believe one of the main reasons for increasing the postage rate in this country was in order to increase the pay of rural

mail carriers and possibly that of mail carriers in the towns and cities, although I think they are being very well looked after at the present time. In the country districts we are handicapped by rules and regulations which I think must have been drawn up many years ago. For instance, you cannot get a daily mail in a rural section unless you have four boxes to a mile. You may have an average of three and one-half or three and three-quarters, but unless you have the four you cannot get a daily mail. To my mind that regulation must have been drawn up many years ago, in the days when mail was carried by horse and buggy. But today, when we have good roads which are plowed in the winter and are kept open all the year round, when the mail is carried by cars and when long distances can be covered, I think that regulation is much out of date. I think the rural mail routes could be greatly extended. I think a route could be extended so that it would include an area in which there are three people to the mile along with an area which has seven, eight or ten people to the mile, and that the figures could be averaged up. As I say, with better roads and all these other facilities, I think that is something that could very well be done.
As I said at the outset, Mr. Chairman, this is the main point I wish to bring to the attention of the committee this afternoon; I refer to the matter of rural mail. Let us try to give better mail service to the people in the country districts. Unless we do so we are going to have in the country areas more vacant farms than we have at the present time. I could have brought into the chamber a file as thick as that of the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond with reference to the Burnaby post office, and it has to do with the Rothesay post office in my own constituency. I spoke to the minister about this matter the other day. I have raised it in the chamber a number of times. I know that the minister is cognizant of the situation at Rothesay. It is one of our finest villages in the maritime provinces, and is probably one of the finest in Canada. As I pointed out on previous occasions, in that village we have the poorest mail accommodation of any village in the whole country. The minister has been kind enough to mark this an urgent matter at the present time. The present situation has not been altogether the fault of the Post Office Department. The Department of Public Works has also been a little bit negligent in the matter. I was speaking to the Minister of Public Works the other day. He has taken a kindly interest in it. I think a site will be obtained. I have every reason to believe that, between the Postmaster General and the Department of
Supply-Post Office
Public Works, before this year is out Rothesay will at least have a start on a post office which is greatly needed. That is all I have to say in this connection, Mr. Chairman.


Mr. Stewart (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Chairman, apparently quite a number of members of parliament have copious files on the Post Office Department. I am one who also has a file, only I brought mine with me. This file is sessional paper No. 94-H, some of which I intend to quote later. It is a file which was asked for or which was passed by the house on February 15 and which was referred to the Postmaster General on April 21. There is a long gap of time there. It was finally brought down on May 4.
Some months ago, when the post office legislation was before the house, I mentioned the word "patronage" several times and I said there was patronage in the post office. The minister was pained; the minister was astonished; the minister was astounded. The minister was innocent. The minister answered that patronage is something that was not known in the post office, and that it is the sort of word which is not used in the post office. This afternoon I notice that my friend the hon. member for Mackenzie asked whether certain form letters were still being used by the department. I think he also was sniffing around this forbidden subject of patronage. I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that there are form letters which the post office sends out. For instance, I have in this file a form letter. I gather that it is the sort of form letter which is sent either to the Liberal organization or to the defeated Liberal candidate or, for all I know, to Liberal members of parliament. For instance, this letter is signed by Mr. R. H. MacNabb, director of operations, to a defeated Liberal candidate in my riding in Winnipeg. This is an official letter, and it is a form letter. It states:
Dear Sir:
In previous correspondence the department asked for your recommendation-*
Here we have the department asking for the recommendation of a defeated Liberal candidate.
-of a suitable person for permanent appointment as postmaster at-
A certain area in my constituency is there named. If that is not patronage, Mr. Chairman, then what does that word mean? The form letter goes on to say this:
The order of preference which, according to law, is observed in making such appointment is as follows:
And they give six orders of preference. Then the form letter goes on as follows:
The department is desirous of placing this office on a regular basis as soon as possible and would

Supply-Post Office
appreciate receiving your recommendation within the next two weeks. In the absence of word from you the department will conclude that you are not in a position to make a recommendation and will examine the qualifications of persons who may have applied for or who may be interested in obtaining this position.
Only alter the defeated Liberal candidate has been given the opportunity to make a recommendation, and has failed to make one, does the post office graciously condescend to look into the qualifications of those who have applied for the job. Yet the minister tells me that there is no patronage. He infers that "patronage is a dirty word which we in our department would never use". The letter continues:
The selection will then be made according to the result of the inquiry and with the preferences as outlined in paragraph 2.
I am going to say this quite frankly and quite bluntly. The minister today has been the recipient of many bouquets. The time has now come for some brickbats. I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, that in certain appointments the post office is polluted with this concept of patronage. I am now going to give, to a modified extent at least, chapter and verse of my case. In this file also there are three letters from opposition members of parliament. By coincidence they happen to be three members of the party which I represent here in the house. One is from the former member, Mr. Bryce, who was concerned, as I have been for some time, about a sub-post office in a new area of north Winnipeg, West Kildonan. Mr. Bryce wrote this letter on April 9, 1951. I want to quote it extensively, indeed, the whole of it, to show the sort of letter it was. It reads as follows:
Dear Mr. Rinfret:
I would be very much obliged to you if you would have the officers of your department check into the possibility of a post office being set up at the corner of McGregor and Me Adam streets in West Kildonan, Manitoba. I understand it will not be possible to have an accounting post office but that in all likelihood it would be possible for a non-accounting post office to be set up. This is in one of the districts where hundreds of new homes have been built up on what was bald prairie two years ago.
Thanking you in anticipation, I am,
Sincerely,
Scottie Bryce.
I read that letter to show that Mr. Bryce's desire was to have a post office in that area to serve the people of the area and for no other purpose. Apparently he had no idea at all of anyone who might perhaps act as postmaster. But I find in going through this file, as I have said, many letters from the defeated Liberal candidate in my constituency,
tMr. Stewart (Winnipeg North).]

who now is the defeated Liberal candidate in the constituency of Winnipeg North Centre.


Mr. Knowles:: Does he now handle the patronage for both ridings?


Mr. Siewari (Winnipeg Norih):: This is an example of the sort of letter which is sent to the defeated Liberal candidate in Winnipeg North from the director of operations of the Post Office Department. It reads:
Dear Mr. Taraska:
I received your letter dated the 31st August in regard to the position of postmaster at Winnipeg-Louise Bridge post office. Instructions are being issued for the appointment of Reverend P. H. Kohlmeier to the postmastership of this subpost office.
He was the person of course who was nominated by this prominent member of the Liberal party. On another and earlier occasion, dealing with that sub-post office, there is a letter from Mr. MacNabb to Mr. Taraska which reads in part as follows:
In view of your representations in the matter when you called at the department recently, this matter was given further consideration. However, as the postmaster has at least shown that he is incompetent, it is considered that he could not be continued in charge of the office and that steps should be taken towards his replacement.
But does the post office itself decide what sort of postmaster shall take the job there? Far from it. The letter continues:
I would therefore appreciate hearing from you again and receiving for the consideration of the Postmaster General your recommendation of some suitable person for this position.
Does my hon. friend tell me that is not patronage of the most flagrant kind? Let me go on a little further and quote a letter on page 68 of the file. Again this is a letter from Mr. MacNabb to Mr. Taraska, and it reads as follows:
In accordance with your recommendation contained in your letter or June 16, 1951, instructions have been issued concerning Mr. ... in the position of postmaster at the above named sub-post office, his permanent appointment dating from the 25th of June, 1951.
Again the appointment is dependent entirely upon the desire either of the local Liberal organization or of the local defeated Liberal candidate. We are told that there are certain rules and regulations concerning subpost offices, and that one of them is that the establishment of sub-post offices is approved by the department after the need has been definitely established by suitable inquiry by field officers. I can only conclude that the field officers that the post office has had at its disposal in North Winnipeg are the defeated Liberal candidates for election. I wish the Post Office Department would do something about the situation and get the whole

matter into much more competent hands. Here is another letter. This time it is addressed to Mr. MacNabb and is signed by Mr. Peter Taraska. It reads in part as follows:
In answer to your letter of October 26-
But first let me say this was one to Mr. MacNabb. The Post Office Department is very busy corresponding all the time with defeated Liberal politicians. I do not know what the cost must be to the country, but I would suggest to the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre that he might have advocated the cutting out of this sort of correspondence for it would certainly save the taxpayers a very substantial sum of money. Here is Mr. Taraska writing to Mr. MacNabb. I should say here, Mr. Chairman, that as a member of parliament I have the habit of signing my letters "Alistair Stewart, Winnipeg North". I find that the defeated Liberal opponents do the same thing because the signature is "Peter Taraska, Winnipeg North". The letter reads:
In answer to your letter of October 26, and after making the necessary inquiries, I am pleased to recommend for the appointment of postmaster for the above named sub-post office Mr. . . .
I do not want to embarrass these people by giving names.
-resident returned soldier and the new owner of the present post office premises. Mr. . . . has the necessary qualifications and experience-
None of which I deny; it may be true. What I am objecting to is the way it is done. What I am objecting to is the fact that the minister stands up and states that there is no patronage in the post office. My hon. friend is an innocent abroad. If he will see me at the dinner hour I will give him much more proof than I shall be able to give before five o'clock. In connection with that same sub-post office there was a letter to Mr. Taraska, again from Mr. MacNabb, reading as follows:
In accordance with your recommendation . . . instructions have been issued confirming Mr. . . . returned soldier, in the position of postmaster at the above named sub-post office.
Yet the minister says this is not patronage. I do not know what it is if it is not patronage and, as I said before, of the most blatant type. I find so many examples on this file. Here is another one, a letter to Mr. Taraska of January 4, 1952, from Mr. MacNabb. I do not know whether Mr. MacNabb is the political commissar of the Liberal party in the Post Office Department or what his job is, but he seems to be in charge of the patronage end of it. The letter reads:
In accordance with your recommendation dated the 12th December, 1951-
Supply-Post Office
-they have appointed so and so as subpostmaster. Whether there is a recommendation from anybody else I do not know. I do know that there is a form letter that goes out to the Canadian Legion, but there is no record in this return of any recommendation from the Legion. Indeed, I suspect if there were one the recommendation of the defeated Liberal candidate would supervene and his ideas would be the ones which would be accepted. Here is another letter. This one is signed by Mr. McFarlane. It reads as follows:
Dear Mr. Taraska:
A request has been received in the department for the establishment of a sub-post office at 1615 Salter Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba. Conditions in the district are favourable and the department is
prepared to open a sub-post office. Mr...who
operates a drug store at that address, is the only applicant for the position of postmaster. Would you kindly furnish your recommendation of the postmastership of a sub-post office in this area.
One would think that the Post Office Department would investigate the qualifications of this applicant and, having decided that they were satisfactory, appoint him or, if they were not satisfactory, they would not. But far from it. They do not do that. They go to the local field officer, the defeated Liberal candidate, and ask him for his advice. There is another letter here signed "Peter Taraska, Winnipeg North" to Mr. MacNabb, which reads as follows:
In answer to departmental letter dated 14th October, I beg to inform you that after making the necessary investigation-
The field officers are ardently at work.
-I am pleased to recommend Mr. . . . who operates a drug store . . .
This gentleman of course was appointed and, for all I know, probably quite rightly so. As I say, what I am objecting to is the system, the fact that patronage does exist and that we ought to get rid of it because it is no good either for Liberals or for anybody else.
I was going on to read some more of these letters from some defeated Liberal candidates, but I think I shall go on with one which is not from a Liberal candidate but from one who was a member of parliament and whose judgment was sought by the department and who gave his decision to the department. The person to whom I refer is a former member of parliament, and one who was always greeted in the house with loud applause, Mr. J. S. Sinnott. I have a letter here from Mr. MacNabb to Mr. Sinnott which states:
The appointment in this case rests with the Postmaster General.

Supply-Post Office
I thought the appointment in all cases rested with the Postmaster General.
Would you be good enough to submit for his consideration, your recommendation of some person for permanent appointment as postmaster at this sub-office.
Notice the charming courtesy. Then, Mr. Sinnott replies also most courteously that he has not, as yet, the information but he will let Mr. MacNabb have it at the earliest convenience.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Perhaps he should have
recommended himself.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Then, Mr. Sinnott wrote again as follows:
I wi'ote to you on June 15 in connection with the nomination of someone to fill the place of the former postmaster, Mr. Lloyd Winston Hall, . . .
I wish to advise you at this time that the nomination of ... is quite satisfactory, and Mr. Hall thinks the location and facilities will meet the requirements in that district.
Mr. MacNabb writes back on July 3, 1950, and states:
Dear Mr. Sinnott:
In accordance with your recommendations contained in your letter of the 22nd June, instructions have been issued confirming ... as permanent postmaster at the Winnipeg-East Kildonan suboffice.
There is not a word here about the Postmaster General doing it. It is in accordance with Mr. Sinnott's recommendation, and that is how the Post Office Department makes its appointments.
Now, there was another time when Mr. Sinnott was not so fortunate. I do not want to suggest for a moment that the Post Office Department is always a spineless organization and does not stand up to members of parliament. Sometimes it does. Mr. Sinnott desired to have the Morse Place sub-post office changed. The whole matter is set out in the correspondence, and it is at this point that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre comes into the picture. He also has a letter here in this file to Mr. Bertrand, which reads as follows:
Dear Mr. Bertrand:
You wrote me on December 9 in reply to my telegram of December 6, with reference to the proposed transfer of the Morse Place post office, indicating that any action in connection with this matter had been suspended until further inquiry could be made.
You will recall that I pointed out in my telegram that this sub-post office has been in its present location for some thirty-three years, and that there was a wave of protest amongst the local residents over the suggestion that it might be moved.
I Mr. Stewart (Winnipeg North).]
Again in fairness to him I am reading my hon. friend's letter in full. It is quite a brief letter.
Your action in suspending the proposed transfer was appreciated by the residents of Morse Place, but there is still some concern over the fact that the matter does not appear to have been finalized as yet. May I ask, therefore, whether the inquiry referred to in your letter of December 9 has been made, and whether it is now definite that this subpost office will remain on the Anderson premises where it has been to the satisfaction of all concerned for such a long period.
Thanking you for your further attention to this matter, I am . . .
As a matter of fact, the post office was kept there because the postal authorities in Winnipeg knew very well that is where it ought to be kept no matter what an importunate member of parliament might say about it.
There was another matter which I raised early in the session-


Mr. Cole:: You are not complaining about that one?


Alan Carl Stewart: No, I just want to put it in the record to show that the post office sometimes says "no". But a nonLiberal member of parliament usually stands a poor chance against someone who is the defeated Liberal candidate. An opposition member of parliament is just a nuisance so far as this department is concerned.
Here is another case.
Oddly enough, this correspondence starts with a letter from myself, which I really think is worth reading again. It is to the Postmaster General.


Charles Delmar Coyle: Are you quoting yourself?


Alan Carl Stewart: I could quote no one who was more accurate or authentic so far as patronage in the Post Office Department is concerned. The letter is dated June 15, 1953 and reads:
I am writing in connection with the application of Mr. Morry to have continued at St. John's Pharmacy sub-post office No. 27, Winnipeg.
There are certain gaps in this letter which my hon. friend will appreciate for I do not need to put the whole story in again in black and white. I go on to say:
A few months ago I complained about an attempt which was made to remove a sub-post office from Sinclair's Pharmacy where it had been for almost 40 years. A well-known member of the Liberal party went to Sinclair's Pharmacy and demanded $500 or the post office would be taken from there. As I told Mr. Turnbull this was the most outrageous blackmail and I am glad that the sub-post office was not changed.
I am very happy to say it was not. I go on in the letter:
I hope the new owner of sub-post office No. 27 is not going to be penalized and I would request your personal attention to this matter.

Well, the minister did give it his personal attention because he wrote to me, and that letter will come up in due course. As I said, this letter of mine was dated June 15, 1953, by a happy coincidence, in the middle of the election campaign.
There was a letter dated June 25, 1953, again sent by the commissar of political operations, Mr. MacNabb, to Mr. D. W. W. Revie, 803 Charles building, Winnipeg. The house might be interested in knowing that Mr. Revie is associated with the Manitoba Liberal Progressive Association, so one can assume at least that he is not a Conservative. This is ten days after I drew the attention of the Post Office Department to the matter. The letter reads:
The above sub-post office was temporarily closed on the 15th June owing to the resignation of . . .
This sub-post office is located in the drugstore known as "St. John's Pharmacy". This business has been purchased by Mr. Manuel Morry, resident civilian, who has forwarded an application for the postmastership of this sub-office.
Would you please be good enough to furnish us with your recommendation of a suitable person to act as sub-postmaster at this office.
Then, four days later, which is 14 days after I wrote to the minister, he answered me and said:
In your letter of the 15th June you expressed interest in having sub-office No. 27, Winnipeg, retained in the St. John's Pharmacy.
The department has just received the resignation of Mr	 who has been sub-postmaster of the office located in St. John's Pharmacy, and an application from Mr. Manuel Morry, who apparently has purchased the St. John's Pharmacy from Mr. Bland.
Your representations on behalf of Mr. Morry and the retention of the office in the St. John's Pharmacy has been noted and will be given every consideration.
I would be the happiest man in this house if I thought that were so.


Mr. Cote:: To whom is it addressed?


Alistair McLeod Stewart: It is
addressed to me; but, as compared to the head of a Liberal organization, who am I to say my letter or my opinions would receive consideration. I would feel gratified if I had a slight hand in this, but modesty forbids my believing I was the one who was responsible.
Mr. Revie writes to Mr. MacNabb, and his letter is dated June 7. Under the date "June 7", the department has noted "dated June 7 but received in department July 9." By that time, the Liberal party in Winnipeg were having a very rough time, and one
Supply-Post Office
cannot blame them if they were a month out in their calculations. The letter reads:
I beg to acknowledge receipt of yours of June 25th, in the above connection. Our recommendation is that Mr. Manuel Morry, who has forwarded an application for the postmastership of this suboffice be appointed.
Then there is a courteous word from Mr. MacNabb who writes back to Mr. Revie:
In accordance with your recommendation . . . etc., etc.
I did not get a letter from the minister. But Mr. Revie was told and that is why I assumed Mr. Revie was the man who had done it. But here is the letter to Mr. Revie:
In accordance with your recommendation-
Not Mr. Stewart's but Mr. Revie's.
-received in your letter of the 7th July, instructions have been issued for the re-opening of the above post office under the charge of Mr. Manuel Morry as postmaster.
Now, does the minister tell me I am being too modest?


Charles Delmar Coyle: No, you are not too modest.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: My modesty is justified in this particular case. But let me go on to some other defeated Liberal candidates. We have lots of them in our part of the country. Here is another one dated December 22,	1953. That date is rather
interesting. The letter is addressed to Mr. Frank Chester and it informs him a subpost office will become vacant at the end of December owing to the resignation of the postmaster. Here is a tip-off. The letter states that a note of this vacancy has been sent to Colonel Cairns. The post office does not know what is happening on every occasion but when it can it certainly tells the Liberal organization and sometimes Colonel Cairns.


Charles Delmar Coyle: Who is he?


Alan Carl Stewart: He is the
provincial secretary of the Canadian Legion. Let me say to my hon. friend that many of these notices are sent to Colonel Cairns but we do not know what he says as there is no information from him among these letters and I therefore cannot say anything about that part of it. I know Mr. Chester is asked "We would appreciate receiving a recommendation of a suitable person to act as sub-postmaster at this office."
I remember around about Christmas reading in a newspaper somewhere that Mr. Frank Chester had been appointed to a quite responsible position in the civil service. I take it for granted of course, Mr. Chairman, he would do nothing further in this matter

Supply-Post Office
because no one in the civil service would write a letter advising Mr. MacNabb who should be appointed to this sub-postmastership. But on the 4th of January of this year Mr. Chester states:
Dear Mr. MacNabb:
I wish to acknowledge and thank you for your letter of December 22, re the above vacancy and after going into this matter carefully-
Another field inspector promoted in the department.
-and considering only one application has been received I recommend that this office be re-opened as soon as possible and that the application of Mr. Myron Hunter, 1785 Main Street, be accepted.
I mentioned this because I asked questions in the house about the matter for there was another gentleman who also wanted this office and I advised him the proper thing to do was to make an application for the post office, find out if the people in his vicinity wanted the post office, get a petition and send it to the Postmaster General. This is what that man proceeded to do. But what a futile waste of time. The Liberal party were hard at work. Here is Mr. Chester writing to Mr. MacNabb, though I regret very much to say that the post office was not very much impressed with the letter sent out. It apparently thought Mr. Chester's recommendation was not much good because it decided to ask one who shall be nameless, but who is a cabinet minister from Manitoba, as to what he thought about the situation and his advice was that they should appoint a certain one of three applicants who were, Mr. Beek, Mr. Gunn and Mr. Hunter, and the letter continues:
In order that the sub-office be re-opened as soon as possible-
But just let me say for the moment that this is really going to the top brass. Mr. Chester's recommendation was noted, but there follows a letter from the anonymous minister's office to Mr. MacNabb in regard to who should be selected for this post. But the post office never sent another letter to Mr. Chester in this regard for Mr. Chester was lost to the Liberal party. He had gone to his reward and therefore he could not recommend anyone. But Mr. MacNabb wrote to this anonymous minister as follows, and the letter is dated February 4:
In accordance with your minister's recommendation of the 25th January 1954-
A very exalted fieldman.
-instructions have been issued for the appointment of Mr. Myron Hunter for the position of postmaster at the above sub-post office.
The Liberal organization in North Winnipeg had given up and I do not blame them. Now the post office has to go to the very fount

and origin of Liberalism in Manitoba. Obviously the Postmaster General decides nothing. Obviously if a sub-postmaster is going to be appointed the people in West Kildonan need not send any petitions. It will be a matter for the Liberal party to decide who the sub-postmaster is going to be. Of course, Mr. Chairman, you know as well as I do that there is no patronage in the post office. The minister protests his innocence; he is virtuous; he is as above suspicion as Caesar's wife; indeed he out-Calpurnias Calpurnia. I have never seen such innocence.
I could go on here and give chapter and verse on what I consider to be patronage within the post office, but, Mr. Chairman, I think I have said enough at this stage to persuade even my innocent friend across the house that he has in his department, in some sections of it, this political commissariat which unknown to him is telling defeated Liberal candidates all over the country, "We want your advice as to whom should be appointed to the sub-post office." I have given my hon. friend all the details. He may not have known about them but now that I have told him his eyes will be opened and he can go into the post office now, take a very sharp cleaver and start to chop off some heads. If he does that we might have a post office in this country without patronage.


Mr. McLeod:: Mr. Chairman, I have no files covering lengthy correspondence which I need to go through for the benefit of the Postmaster General, and after listening to the speech of the hon. member for Burnaby I have come to the conclusion that my own remarks, in so far as the post office is concerned, and the complaints I have to bring to the minister's attention, are of a minor nature.
However, there are a couple of points I wish to bring to the minister's attention. In the recent news item I noticed that the C.P.R. branch line from Sicamous to Kelowna through the Okanagan valley in British Columbia will discontinue hauling mail, and that such a service will be taken over by the trucks. I can understand that such a course would prove to be economical as it would eliminate delivering from the train to the post office at these small places. However, I would like to have an assurance from the minister that in making this change the service we will be receiving will be at least equally as good and perhaps an improvement on the service we obtained in the past.
I cannot pass up this opportunity of bringing to the attention of the minister, as I

have done on previous occasions, the question of the Vernon post office. The lack of postal facilities in Vernon has been recognized by the department for some years. I have had proof of this in the interviews I have had with the deputy postmaster general and officials of the department. I know the genial Postmaster General will tell me that his genial colleague, the Minister of Public Works, will not proceed with the erection of a public building there. But, Mr. Chairman, I must remind the Postmaster General that his department must take the blame for this situation. Four years ago the Vernon post office was declared inadequate by the postal authorities. Since then both the urban and rural population have increased rapidly, the facilities have not yet been improved, and the larger volume of mail is adding daily to the congestion. Therefore, I would suggest it is imperative that the problem which has existed there for years should be corrected. It is to the Postmaster General that we look for help. It can be argued of course that it is the Department of Public Works that must provide these buildings; but nevertheless, in considering the problem of an adequate mail service, it is not likely that the people of any district take that into consideration. They are looking to the Postmaster General for results.
When the Postmaster General replies to the questions that have been raised in the committee I would like him to refer fully to the two problems I have raised.


Mr. Dinsdale:: After the remarks of the hon. member for Winnipeg North this afternoon I am afraid that any other contribution to this discussion would be anti-climax. In his remarks, however, he indicated that there is a close relationship between the Post Office Department and the public, and perhaps between some groups of the public more than others. Down through the years the people of Canada, as well as the people of other countries, have come to associate very intimately the activities of the Post Office Department with the activities of the government. This being so, I feel that any changes in post office activities will affect quite directly the attitude of the public toward the government. Some developments in our Canadian Post Office Department are rather significant in this regard, and I should like to draw the minister's attention to them this afternoon.
It seems to me that in recent months the Post Office Department has been pleading poverty. I do not know why this should be so. It might be that because of its close contact with the public there is a desire to convey the impression that the government
Supply-Post Office
is beginning to pull in its belt and that economy is the order of the day. From a perusal of the blue book of estimates, of course, we know that is not so. But in the Post Office Department there definitely seems to be an attempt to convey this impression to the public. I have mentioned this fact before. The annual revenue for the fiscal year 1925 in the local post office in the city of Brandon was $110,600.95, and the staff employed numbered 44. In the year 1952 the revenue had increased to a figure of $217,122.15 and the number of employees had dropped to 41. That seems to be very creditable progress so far as economy is concerned. However, if you pursue the problem a little further you find that such economy is effected by a sacrifice in service, particularly in the new suburban areas of the city of Brandon.
I should like to suggest this afternoon, Mr. Chairman, that perhaps the saving effected is not in the best interests of the reputation of the Post Office Department so far as efficiency is concerned. Also on this general theme of the desire to plead poverty or financial hardship on the part of the Post Office Department in recent months, we need only refer to the rate increase in April last. There seems to be some contradiction between these two facts, curtailment of expenditure in certain areas on the one hand and the increased revenue that will be realized from the increase in postage rates on the other. Somewhere along the line this is going to result in a decrease in the volume of mail, which of course will work against the buoyancy of post office revenues. These matters, however, are incidental to the main point that I wish to bring forward this afternoon.
Throughout the prairie provinces in recent years there has been a tendency toward a decrease in the number of rural routes. I look into the annual report, however, and I notice that as between the fiscal year ended March 31, 1952, and the fiscal year ended March 31, 1953, there has been a 37 per cent increase in the number of rural routes serving the Canadian people. In the west, as I have indicated, and from personal knowledge of my own constituency, on the other hand, there has been a continuing process of discontinuation of rural routes that have been in existence for a good many years in this country. The last episode in my own constituency was the cancellation of three rural routes operating out of the town of Reston. The official explanation of this state of affairs emphasizes loss of patronage with the advent of the automobile age and further emphasizes the prevailing undesirable road
474G

Supply-Post Office
conditions. In particular, in regard to the road conditions, the official explanation states that the roads are impassable in the wintertime. That is true. We must admit there are a good many roads in Manitoba that are impassable. That is not a new fact. That is a problem we have contended with from time immemorial in that part of the country. I imagine the real explanation lies in the first observation, namely, loss of patronage as the town post office becomes more accessible with the increase in the use of automobiles. That is quite true, but it places the patrons who have no automobile in rather an unfortunate position.
I do not know what the final solution to this difficulty is. There are special conditions in the west that have to be met in regard to the provision of any public service. We have the great distances, with very sparse populations, to contend with. Nevertheless, during recent years our population in the rural areas has tended to decrease and this has aggravated the difficulty of continued loss of patronage. However, I can foresee that if we continue to decrease the public service available to the citizens in our rural areas it is only going to make the trend that we refer to as a rural-urban drift all the more noticeable and obvious.
With the continued increase in mechanization of grain farming it is quite possible for one or two individuals to farm a very large area. Unfortunately if this trend that seems to be under way in the prairie provinces-of closing down rural routes-continues, it is only going to add to the process of depopulation. I say, Mr. Chairman, that I do not know what the solution is. Apparently the Post Office Department has taken the easy way out and is simply closing down the routes. With loss of patronage and loss of customers there is not sufficient left to warrant a rural route-so, close the routes. As I look over the rural routes in my constituency it seems that it will not be long until we have no rural route service at all.
I would just like to close by asking the minister the policy in this regard. Is there any clearly defined policy or is it just a formula applied right across the Dominion of Canada without taking into consideration the special circumstances that do exist-the circumstances that I have already outlined that do exist in the prairie west?


Mr. Mclvor:: Mr. Chairman, I do not know much about what is going on in other constituencies with respect to the post office but I do know what is going on in Fort William. If the rest of the service is anything like that which we have in Fort

William I would be surprised if anyone con demned the post office. Our post office in Fort William has been splendidly efficient. We have had a postmaster who was always young. He retired this year although he was good for twenty years more.
When the postmaster was changed they did not even consider me or ask me anything about it and I had enough common sense to let the civil service commission make the appointment-and they appointed the deputy. If they had brought in someone from North Winnipeg I suppose they would have heard from me, but they did not do that.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Daniel (Dan) McIvor: They did what I thought was fair and just-a young man who had served the post office since he was a boy was appointed to the position.
With respect to the retired postmaster, may I say I never heard of any complaints about his service. Not only was he an outstanding postmaster but he always had a little time to take care of the boys who played hockey.
I have not written a letter this year which did not find its destination. I have never written to the post office officials and received other than a courteous and decent reply. When new streets were opened it was my duty to co-operate with the people on those streets to see that they received service. The retired postmaster was very efficient, very courteous, and he saw that the letters were delivered to those people when there were sidewalks.
The only complaint I have heard about rural routes was away up near Hymers where they could not get mail in the wintertime because the roads were snowbound. I reported this but anybody knows that it is not the business of the Dominion of Canada to keep roads open. That is the duty of the provinces-to keep the roads open so that mail couriers may carry mail on their routes.
We received several increases for men who were carrying rural mail and those were outstandingly needed because the individuals were not making sufficient to carry on.
I have just one thing to say to the Postmaster General and it is this. People operating local post offices in the country are not being paid enough. When I found what some of them were receiving, for having to attend to the mail and keep an up-to-date office, I was surprised that the dominion government was so hard up. I think the minister should take that into consideration. People who are trusted with the queen's mail should receive a proper remuneration.

May I pay my tribute to the officials in the Post Office Department and to the deputy for the treatment I have received in the past year. If everyone else got the same treatment I think you would not have anyone finding fault.


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Chairman, I listened with a good deal of interest to the story told by the hon. member for Winnipeg North. I do not intend to go into that aspect of the situation but my impression is that as far as British Columbia is concerned the digging for information would not be as fruitful. I have a suspicion that matters of that sort are carried on much more skilfully in British Columbia.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I must express to the Postmaster General my appreciation of his courtesy in dealing with any complaint or suggestion that I have had occasion to take up with him. He always has an investigation made into the particular complaint and I have always received a report as a result of that investigation-a report in detail giving reasons for the department's decision- whether I agreed with it or not. I appreciate that very much because I have been in the habit, formerly, of getting one- or two-sentence letters which practically said "no" in terse language, with little explanation.
I do want to say that, from my experience in the constituency and from my knowledge of smaller post offices, I have come to the conclusion that the basing of salaries of certain postmasters in these small post offices on the sale of stamps is unfair. I think it is an obsolete system and unfair because it is not in all cases a true reflection of the amount of work which the postmaster is required to do. I know of cases where, owing to geography and local circumstances, some people buy their stamps and get their mail at post offices other than in their own district. I do suggest that the system is completely outdated and that there should be a new system established to provide at least for a minimum salary in all cases.
Now, may I say a word or two with regard to rural mail contracts. Before proceeding, Mr. Chairman, I might note that my experience generally speaking has been that the Post Office Department has given remarkably good service under circumstances which, in some cases in my constituency, are very difficult. I am sure the Postmaster General, or if not the Postmaster General, his officials, will realize that some very peculiar circumstances arise in a constituency such as mine, where isolated places have to be served despite poor transportation facilities, poor roads and the difficulties they
Supply-Post Office
create. I want to say a word in commendation of the work of the people in the smaller post offices and in the service generally, and of those who carry rural mail. I am thinking of a particular case where the courier takes mail between Kaslo and Nelson and return every day. Sometimes it is very hazardous travelling along the Kaslo bluffs, under winter conditions. The person who carries that mail has occasionally made trips when no other vehicle would travel the road owing to the risk from snowslides and an icy road surface. I think that service is worth mentioning, but if I could take the time I could give the Postmaster General several illustrations, of service rendered under difficulties.
While I realize that contracts for carrying rural mail, according to law, must be awarded to the lowest tenderer, provided he or she has the equipment and the capacity, I do think that more consideration should be given-and I think there is sufficient latitude in the wording of the act-to such departures from that principle as are, shall I say, justified because of local conditions and circumstances. Sometimes the person who puts in a tender for carrying mail is only a few dollars higher than the lowest bidder but the former person is sometimes carrying on a service that is very necessary to the district. When that person obtains the contract, it makes it much easier to carry on the service in question. I just throw out that suggestion because I think on some occasions the department is fully justified in giving consideration to these local circumstances, and opinions.
I now want to bring to the minister's attention the necessity for the restoration of the mail service between Revelstoke and Nakusp and points on the lower Arrow lakes. There is no service at the present time. The famous steamer Mlnto, which has operated for 53 years, is now tied up at the dock because I understand the whole matter is not yet finalized. I am hoping that the Minister of Transport will soon hear from the minister of public works in British Columbia that the government of British Columbia is willing to join with the federal government in a subsidy to keep this steamship service running. Anyway, in the meantime there is no commercial transportation between Arrowhead and Nakusp, and persons travelling back and forth are obliged to use planes or small launches. Whether or not the Minto service is resumed, I am quite certain that some form of commercial transportation will be established in the near future-there must be-to serve the needs of the district.

Supply-Post Office
I suggest to the minister that when a service is resumed, consideration should be given to the establishment of a mail service between Revelstoke and Nakusp. Revelstoke is on the main line of the C.P.R. All our mail from east and west goes conveniently from Revelstoke to the upper and lower Arrow lakes as far south as Edgewood. Revelstoke is the centre for several provincial government offices that are important so far as the lands and taxation departments are concerned. It simply means the dispatch of a bag or bags from Revelstoke, to Nakusp directly from which place points on the lower lakes could be served, and a bag for Halcyon and St. Leon. I mention this matter again because that service would be a tremendous convenience for that area. At Halcyon we have a sanitarium. At St. Leon we have a summer resort. We also have extensive logging operations along the upper lake. When I tell the minister that in those logging camps last year, between Nakusp and Arrowhead, over a million dollars' worth of forest products were produced, he will realize what a letter mail service means to that area. At the present time if you send a letter to Revelstoke it goes to Nelson which is 100 miles south. Then it goes to Calgary via the Kettle Valley railroad and from Calgary back to Revelstoke on the main line. Then if the letter is posted from Revelstoke, it goes in the reverse direction to Nakusp or other points on the Arrow lakes. It is an extremely slow service and is most inconvenient for the industries and businesses concerned and for the ranchers in the district. I again urge that consideration be given to making provision for a direct mail service between Revelstoke and Nakusp and way points.
I now come to a subject I think I can properly mention under this estimate. For years the post office facilities in Trail have been most inadequate. For years-for ten years at least-there has been a shortage of space. There is poor lighting, there is poor ventilation and the basement is definitely unsanitary. It is unfit for postal employees to work in. I wish the Postmaster General could see that basement when the sewers are full in Trail on account of storm water. The sewers back up into the basement and as a result there is a most offensive odour and at times a filthy situation. In recent years the conditions have been so bad that, to my knowledge, the department has lost a number of employees from the Trail post office, particularly letter carriers. The letter carriers are required to sort their mail in the basement under conditions at times that no person should be asked to work, because of the unsanitary nature of the
[Mr. Herridge.l
basement. Some of these letter carriers have stayed on year after year in the hope that this new proposed federal building would be erected in Trail and that their working conditions would be remedied.
We have been promised the building for five years. Money has been voted by the House of Commons on three occasions. Money was again voted at this session for the commencement of this federal building. The latest information given me by the minister was that, owing to a revision of the plans, he did not think it possible for tenders to be called until late this fall. I want to draw to the minister's particular attention the fact that I have also been informed that there has been considerable delay owing to representations made by the Post Office Department for changes in the design of this building, and that the Post Office Department has taken considerable time in advising the Department of Public Works with respect to changes required in the plans for the new building. I understand there has been a revision of plans owing to the internal requirements of various departments and a revision of plans because of a certain type of entrance that was necessary for the mail bus to conveniently pick up and deliver mail. I am told that a considerable part of this delay has been occasioned by the time it has taken the minister's department to accurately inform the Department of Public Works of its needs and requirements. In fairness to the public of the district-and it is a great wealth producing district, Mr. Chairman-and in fairness to the employees, I urge the minister to do everything he can to press for an early commencement of the construction of the proposed federal building in Trail so that his department will be able to render the service that is necessary to the district and so that his employees will work under proper conditions.


Mr. Holowach:: Mr. Chairman, I just wish to say a word or two on this item. I intend to make my remarks brief and as much to the point as possible. I feel that I will be expressing the point of view of many members in this chamber when I say that we feel fortunate in having our new minister in charge of this vital department. Apart from his affable nature, by the manner in which he has responded to criticisms in the past, he has given evidence that he is willing to bring about whatever improvements are possible in his department. In the matter of patronage and political string-pulling, we trust that his feelings are the same as those of the other members of the House of Commons who do not condone these things. For

these reasons, I am sure my remarks will receive the attention of the minister and that he will give sympathetic consideration to the solution of a problem which has arisen in an important part of Edmonton East. 1 refer to the town of Beverly. The town of Beverly, like other towns in Alberta, is growing by leaps and bounds. Beverly is, in fact, a suburb of Edmonton. It is a most vigorous and ever-expanding residential as well as business area. At the present time the population of Beverly is over 4,000. The population there has tripled within the last three years. I may say that at the present time negotiations are being carried on with the city of Edmonton looking to the inauguration of water service, and other public services for that town. I should also like to point out to the minister that Beverly, lying on the borders of Edmonton, is inhabited by a great many industrial workers employed in the chemical plants and refineries around the city of Edmonton. At the same time an important commercial road passes through Beverly, from the heart of Edmonton, to this highly industrialized area.
In view of the tremendous expansion of the area, the people of Beverly have felt for some considerable time that they are justified in asking for improvements in the postal buildings as well as in the service given to them. The present buildings are very small and cramped, and while they perhaps served the needs of the community well in the past, the present size of the town certainly justifies better buildings as well as additional delivery service. Of course I am not reflecting in any way on the service that is being given now. Under the circumstances, the public servants there have done an excellent job, but I would appreciate if the minister would seriously investigate the possibility of inaugurating a postal delivery service for that area at the earliest possible date.
(Translation):


Mr. Gagnon:: Mr. Chairman, last year parliament approved a $250,000 appropriation for construction of a public building in Chicoutimi. A few days ago, when I asked the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters) where this project stood and why there was no mention of that amount in this year's estimates, he answered that the Postmaster General (Mr. Cote) had told him that he would like to make a survey of postal services in that district and that his department was not in a position to proceed with this building before this survey was ended.
Supply-Post Office
I would therefore like the Postmaster General to tell me what point has been reached in this survey and whether he will soon make a report to his colleague, the Minister of Public Works.
The minister knows full well that for the past twenty years and more the people of Chicoutimi, through civil authorities and chambers of commerce, have been requesting the erection of a suitable building. Present accommodation is inadequate, considering the growing needs of those people. A few years ago some land was acquired for that purpose. I know that the minister is well acquainted with Chicoutimi and that he also has some good friends there. I would therefore like him to tell me, when he speaks of his department, what his plans are with regard to Chicoutimi.
(Text):


Joseph William Noseworthy: Mr. Chairman, as consolation to the minister, who has been receiving considerable criticism this afternoon, may I say that this session I have in my file fewer criticisms of his department than in any other session since I first came to Ottawa. Many of the difficulties about which we have complained in the past have been ironed out, but there are still a few left that I want to bring to the minister's attention. I want to remind him that I have been asking for a post office for York township ever since I came to Ottawa twelve years ago. I do not want him to forget it. I am still asking for it. The hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond talked about a community with
70.000	people having no post office. For their consolation may I inform them that York township is a community, now seeking incorporation as a city, with a population of over
100.000	and yet it has nothing but a number of sub-post offices located in drug stores, hardware stores and so on throughout the area.
The people there all have to go into the city of Toronto for the services which only a postal station can give. That is not what I want to deal with. I take up that matter by correspondence with the minister from time to time. I want to deal with a few matters pertaining to the labour relations within the post office in Toronto. I cannot deal with the relations in the post office in my riding because we do not have a post office, so I have to content myself with dealing with the grievances of the Toronto postal employees or those from my constituency who work out of the Toronto post office.
There is still considerable dissatisfaction on the part of the night workers over the differential that was established when the

Supply-Post Office
40-hour week was introduced. As the minister knows, before the introduction of the 40-hour week there was a five and a half hour differential between the night and day workers. The day workers worked forty-four hours and the night workers thirty-eight and a half hours a week, making a five and a half hour differential. I understand that the post office has now wiped out the time differential, has required the night and day shifts to work forty hours and has replaced the time differential with a cash differential of $6 a week worked out on the basis of 15 cents an hour.
The postal employees association and the night workers feel that is not a satisfactory differential. As far as I can gather, they would much prefer the time differential to the cash differential, if not five and a half hours, possibly five hours or something less. That is the recommendation of the postal employees association and all the night workers to whom I have spoken.
Then there is the question of holidays for some of the night workers. There are women workers in the Toronto Fleet street post office who work until twelve and one o'clock in the morning six nights a week. However, because they are considered to be part-time workers they are not entitled to any holidays with pay. They tell me that if they are in the good graces of the man in charge they may be able to wangle a holiday occasionally, but otherwise they cannot. There is a feeling there that these women, who are steady workers, who work six nights a week, should be given some concession by way of holidays, even though they are considered part-time workers. If the minister will take cognizance of these two small grievances, that is all I want to put before him now.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
Mr. Montgomery:: I do not intend to take very much time, but I should like to make a few remarks in connection with the first item of the Postmaster General's estimates. I must say that I have some criticism of the postal department, but so far as the minister is concerned I really appreciate the courtesy that he has extended to me on the inquiries I have made. There is one exception to that, and I shall bring that to his attention before I finish my remarks.
I feel the Postmaster General should know that while the increased postal rate was strenuously debated in this house and has

now become law, it is not a popular thing. In my own constituency I have found that the increase has been thrown up to me quite often. The most unfortunate part of it is that this increased cost seems to be the basis for increased demands for service throughout the rural areas and that is going to be the basis of my remarks this evening. There are not a great many areas that do not receive daily mail under the rural carrier system, but there are some. These people feel very strongly that they are being discriminated against when they cannot qualify under the present regulation of three or four boxes to the mile for receiving daily mail. Some of these people receive a great deal of mail, but have to wait three or four days to get it.
It seems that these complaints arise as a result of the carrier being on a holiday one day, and then not delivering the mail the next day, as he does not have to do under the regulations. Some of these people will have a pile of five or six daily newspapers that are all delivered at once. The same remarks apply to stormy or wet weather. I do not believe that a mail carrier should have to go out in stormy weather, but if he does not go that day because of the storm and the roads are plowed out the next day, he should go that day. The people feel that in view of the fact they are paying an increased cost for the service and the cities are getting at least one delivery a day-in some places consideration is being given to two deliveries a day-then the people in the rural areas should get mail delivered once a day if the roads are passable.
There are places that cannot expect daily mail deliveries, but I am referring to places in which there are almost enough settlers to qualify under the regulations now. There was not too much complaint before the increase, but I find I am getting a lot more demands now. This is due to the fact the people feel if they are going to pay increased costs, they should receive service. As I said before when the bill was before the house, the increased postal rate and the lower airmail rate benefits a great many people but not those who are living in rural areas. I realize it might be difficult for departmental officials to understand this because a great many of them are not people who have lived out in the back areas such as that from which I come. These people feel they are contributing to the revenues of this department, and they feel that a five-cent postage rate is too much, to put it bluntly. If they have to pay that rate, then they feel they are entitled to some service, especially when they read in the newspapers that the cities are demanding deliveries twice a day. I feel they

have some reason for complaint, and I do not hesitate to stand up here and plead their case. Before there are two deliveries a day in the cities there should be some change made in the regulations to enable the people in these rural areas who can almost qualify under the four boxes per mile provision to receive daily mail.
I can recall one case in my constituency that has been brought to the attention of the district headquarters inspector, but upon which I have had no report. I asked for a report some time last fall. Perhaps the minister or some of his staff would look up the files and verify the fact that I have never received a reply. No doubt the matter has been investigated because, as I said in opening, the minister has been very courteous with respect to my inquiries. I am going to ask him about that one exception I mentioned. I am referring to the Saint John district. If investigations were made of certain complaints, some changes could be made and daily service established in some places for which it has been requested. Perhaps this could be accomplished through a rearrangement of the routes. I do not feel it is a member's place to go out and conduct that investigation. The departmental officials are the ones who can work that out better than anyone else.
There is one place in particular, and I think the minister or deputy minister knows about it because I have been asking about it for over a year, called Glassville. There are two routes there, one daily and one tri-weekly. They could easily be amalgamated, and it could be worked out so there would be no hardship on anyone, with the exception that one mail carrier may have to be dropped. I do not like to see anyone lose his job, but the consideration of the people comes first. That is a matter that the departmental officials in Ottawa and Saint John know about, and I am asking that further investigations be made.
I do not think I need to say anything more about that. I want to compliment the minister and his department on the way most of the applications of rural carriers for reconsideration have been treated. I have had a few complaints but on the whole I believe they have been treated fairly well. Everyone cannot be satisfied, but on the whole I believe they have been treated well under this system. At the same time I do not feel the amendment that was passed last year should be treated in a manner that will enable old carriers to be left on because of-I hesitate to say this but I am going to say it-political considerations.


An hon. Member:: Oh, no!
Supply-Post Office


Gage Workman Montgomery: You might be surprised to find that there is some in my constituency. I think we should face the fact. I think the elected member is the man who represents the constituency, not the defeated candidate. I am not saying that the Postmaster General is doing this in particular, but I did hear a lot about it this afternoon. I also hear about it in my constituency, whether it is true or not.
Changes must be made from time to time but I should like to see these changes based upon the recommendations of the people along the route. If a man has been doing a good job I think he should be given another chance. If he has not been doing a good job and satisfying the people along the route, then when his contract runs out consideration should be given to calling tenders.
I presume that the Postmaster General will be answering a lot of questions that have been asked and when doing so I wish he would tell me something I have been waiting for since December 17. I am quite sure that he has overlooked this. He wrote me on that date that he was going to bring me up to date on the situation at Plaster Rock. They have been after a post office there. They did own a piece of land but apparently it was not large enough and I believe another piece has been secured. I am sure that this is just an oversight but I have been waiting patiently for a report on this matter. Will the minister please look up to the file as I am sure additional information must have come in since then. I would like him to bring me up to date. If he cannot do it when he is answering questions, it will be all right if he will drop me a letter and give me that information. All sorts of rumours are going around and I hope they are just rumours and not facts.
I was not able to be here when the estimates of the Department of Public Works were dealt with but I want to say that I appreciate the co-operation the Minister of Public Works has given me in regard to the public building, which will contain the post office, in Woodstock. All that is appreciated.
I do not think there is anything else at the moment that I want to go into. I ask the minister again to keep the Plaster Rock situation in mind and bring me up to date on it. I have not bothered him about it because I felt that when he got the information he would give it to me. He must have a lot of information by now. If the rumours are true, he has that information; if they are not true I would like to know.


Mr. Mang:: Mr. Chairman, I represent a rural constituency in Saskatchewan in which are located a great many rural post offices.

Supply-Post Office
There has been considerable criticism of one kind and another of certain individual items in connection with the administration of the Post Office Department, but I am one of those who does not judge a whole situation because one small part may not be all that is desired. Some people enjoy picking out one small part and endeavouring to make that represent the entire picture. I would not be happy doing that.
A great deal has been said about laxity in the delivery of mail. When this house closed at six o'clock I went down to the post office and obtained a letter from my sister in the town of Edenwold, Saskatchewan, which is nearly two thousand miles away, on a branch line running northeast from PiCgina. This letter had been written ' last night at a quarter to seven and I am sure it was in the box waiting for me at five o'clock this afternoon.
May I say that this is not the first time f have been subjected to such maltreatment by the Post Office Department. I get it quite regularly. If I only had the ability to express myself dramatically which is possessed by the hon. member for Winnipeg North I would attempt to dramatize this alacrity on the part of the Post Office Department. However, as I am lacking in those dramatic qualities which are found in such profusion on the other side I must forgo that pleasure.
The postmasters and postmistresses are the forgotten people in many cases. These people render a great service and I often think that the payment they receive in return is not at all commensurate. I mention this in order to emphasize a point which was touched upon this afternoon. The postmaster or postmistress in a small village, say of 185 or 200 people, has a strong personal relationship with the community. No matter what hours are prescribed by the Post Office Department as to the post office opening at such and such an hour or closing at such and such an hour, these postmasters and postmistresses find quite often that those hours do not mean a thing. Very often they are called at ten o'clock or eleven o'clock at night and if a person has come in eight or ten miles the postmaster or postmistress will oblige and let him have his mail. They are on call nearly all the time. This is particularly true where the post office is located in a dwelling, as is quite often the case.
When the post office is located in a dwelling people come and go all the time and there is a constant stream of visitors throughout the whole week. They have not the same privacy they otherwise would have if the post office was in a store or somewhere else.

The situation I have described is true in connection with many of the smaller post offices.
Coming back to the question of remuneration: The basis of remuneration is the revenue of the post office. The revenue decides the classification, and the postmaster or postmistress is paid according to that classification. That does not take into account the huge volume of handlings that are taken care of in that post office. In a little village, such as my own village of Edenwold, I have known catalogues to the number of eight or ten bags to come in at one time. I have given this example before. It takes a considerable amount of work-not that they come in every day-to handle that great volume of mail.
I would suggest that the Post Office Department, if it has not already done so, give some consideration to the volume of actual pieces of mail handled in an office. The revenue that comes in is not always a true criterion upon which to base the activity that takes place in an office. At Christmastime, at Eastertime and at valentine time and so on, on these special occasions, there are literally thousands of pieces of mail handled. With the business upswing that we have had in the west, a great deal of business mail has also had to be taken care of. I would suggest that in some way the Post Office Department find out just what the volume of business is in these post offices, apart from the actual sale of stamps and so forth, because it is considerable at the present time, and then probably pay a bonus in places where the volume is greatest.
As for patronage, with respect to almost every problem that you can think of you can find something in the Good Book, which was given to us for guidance, to take care of it. It is so with the matter of patronage. I have in mind the text:
He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.
Since I come from Saskatchewan I know full well that that is a very significant text to quote to my hon. friends opposite, and I know that they have no post office to use in a patronage way. I am not convinced that it is so used by the Post Office Department, in spite of all the things that have been said.
There is no government in any part of the world so pure that it is not without its human element, its human influences and its party feeling. I think that text should be borne in mind when those voluminous documents are read which tend to show that

there is patronage and that there are patronage difficulties. As I said, it is true that in Saskatchewan we have learned what patronage can be.


Mr. Caslleden:: The hon. member is talking about the old Gardiner machine, is he?


Henry Philip Mang: If so, you have learned the lesson very well; you have doubled and trebled it.


George Hugh Castleden: Heaven forbid.


Henry Philip Mang: If so, you have doubled and trebled it.


George Hugh Castleden: We lived under it for years, that is why we changed it.


Henry Philip Mang: I would repeat that as far as the post office is concerned, it is a department that reaches into every home; the five-year-old youngster will be mailing a card at Christmastime; the eighty-year-old gentleman will be sending a letter once or twice a year.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is about all he can afford.


Henry Philip Mang: My remark would not apply to the hon. member for Fort William; but the department reaches into every home and almost every person has some connection with it. For that reason it is a difficult department to administer. All in all the Post Office Department is to be commended on the very efficient service it is rendering, as I have proved by the letter I have just mentioned and which I received only tonight.
In closing I say I am thankful that after a few years' effort, Kipling, the newest town in my constituency, is going to have a post office in the very near future.


Mr. Hahn:: I have only two or three short questions that I should like to have answered. I would have been surprised if I had not heard the hon. member for Qu'Appelle wondering what had happened to socialism or has it not had any patronage in its ranks. I find he came through nobly. To me it is a strange state of affairs to have a Liberal member in the house suggesting that a C.C.F. member can be 99 per cent right. Strangely enough, I find myself agreeing in one or two instances in this respect.
What I have in mind is the question of the drop letter rate in the Burnaby-Coquitlam-New Westminster area. The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam made an excellent case this afternoon when he drew the attention of the committee to the need for such a letter rate. I am quite sure that the minister is not too familiar with the geography of 83276-301
Supply-Post Office
New Westminster-Burnaby and the city of Vancouver or we should have had such a drop letter rate long ago. One must understand that the whole area is a metropolitan area. It is entirely within a division known as the county of New Westminster. Therefore, I would urgently request the minister to give consideration to including New Westminster in the drop letter rate. As I understand it, south and north Burnaby and Vancouver come under one letter rate, namely the drop letter rate but because east Burnaby and Barnet and New Westminster are in separate postal divisions they have not that particular privilege. If the minister were just to come to the British Empire games in Vancouver this year he would be privileged at the same time to see that the whole thing is one large city. Of course each one is a separate entity but is anxious to be assured of a four-cent letter rate as far as postage is concerned between their various post offices.
Another question I have to ask is, when will letter carriers begin house-to-house deliveries in south Westminster and areas south of the Fraser river. The section has been enumerated for letter carrier purposes but up to date we have nothing very definite as to when the letter carriers are to start making deliveries.
One thing further is the justification for a federal building to house the post office. In the Whalley area we have a post office. We are paying approximately $6,000 a year rent for the post office and it serves a large area; but that is quite an expenditure expecially when you pay, in addition to $6,000 a year, another $300 and some odd to have it insulated so that the outside range of temperature does not disturb those inside too much. I would again urge the minister to come out and visit this particular region, and it is part of the whole suggestion that we have it included in one postal area. We have a post office and a new federal building to be erected in New Westminster, but we have rented a building at approximately $6,000 a year in the Whalley area. It is poor business to spend $6,000 a year for rent when we could probably build the same type of structure for about $20,000 or $25,000 and keep it as a national asset.
One other problem has arisen during the course of the year and this is one that touches not just my own riding but several others. The question I have in mind happens to be a post office and the appointment of a postmaster as well. In this case, as was suggested by the hon. member for Winnipeg North, patronage may be involved but I have

Supply-Post Office
not checked the files to see and I am not interested in that at this time. What I am interested in is seeing that something is done to change the act. At the present time those who wish to become eligible for a job as postmaster in a certain area must all get their mail from that particular post office. To give hon. members a full picture of the situation I would like to give this illustration. We have a rural mail delivery throughout the whole of our area and within that area we have one small post office. Now there might only be 50 or 60 people being served with mail from that particular office. But if we require a new postmaster the government will have to send out a questionnaire requesting the names of those who would be willing to apply for that job. But those who are eligible are limited to the number of persons who receive their mail from that post office.
The whole area is surrounded by a postal route. None of the people get their mail from the post office because it comes from cities such as New Westminster. However, these people buy their stamps from the post office and yet they are not eligible to become postmaster or postmistress as the case might be. Certainly I believe there should be some change in the act, or some form of exception written into the act, which would allow these people to become eligible for this office. That is all I have to say, Mr. Chairman, and if I can have an answer to these few questions I will be quite delighted.


Mr. Nesbitt:: Mr. Chairman, I just wish to take up a very few moments to bring to the attention of hon. members a subject which I have no doubt has been raised in this house on many previous occasions. I refer to certain tactics used by the Post Office Department, though I might add that department is by no means alone in adopting this procedure. I am sure most hon. members would agree that the tactics I am about to describe are discourteous to certain hon. members in this house and an affront to the people of the ridings which they represent.
As an example of this I would like to bring to the minister's attention a situation which arose in regard to a post office in my own riding, namely the post office at Beachville, Ontario. This post office is being built by a syndicate and not by the Department of Public Works, and a certain portion of the building is to be leased to the Post Office Department. The architects in the Department of Public Works approved the plans, and I might say, having had some dealings with the Department of Public Works in this matter, that I received every courtesy from the officials in that department. However,

after the architects have approved the plans they go subsequently, I understand, to the treasury and the post office for approval, and approval, of course, is also given to the terms of lease.
Having spent some time on this problem I was very surprised, and I may say not very pleased, to note in the March 24 issue of the Woodstock Sentinel Review the following item:
Clark Murray, former M.P. for Oxford, announced receipt of word from Ottawa that government approval had been granted to the proposal to erect a suitable building at Beachville to provide postal accommodation.
It may be all very well for the hon. member for Qu'Appelle to say, as he did a few moments ago, that the government after all is human and that we should forgive these little human failings, and wink an eye at them, but I would like to submit that such tactics, which I have heard referred to as "pork barrel politics of the 1890's" are a bit out of date nowadays.


Henry Philip Mang: I did not say "wink your eye at them".


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I apologize to the hon. member. But it is no excuse to get up and say that other governments have done this and therefore it must be all right. To perpetuate a wrong does not make it one bit better.
However, the Post Office Department is by no means alone in this regard and in order to make the Postmaster General feel a little better I would like to refer to one other item of much the same kind. I have here an extract from the London Free Press dated March 31, 1954 which refers to improvements to the Canadian National Railways station at Woodstock. I will not quote the entire article but it states in part:
News that the C.N.R. station would he renovated was first announced here by Clark Murray, former M.P. for Oxford, who received word from the federal government late today.
Now, that is another example, and perhaps it will enable the Postmaster General to feel a little better and realize that it is not only his department which can be criticized in this regard.


An hon. Member:: But his is the only department being run by Clark Murray.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I would not wish to imply that the government have been doing something immoral, because the word "immoral" would imply that there was a certain code of ethics.	I would rather say that this
behaviour is unmoral and I am sure most of the senior ministers in the government are now aware of it. Certainly the Prime Minister, for whom everyone in this house has

the greatest respect, cannot possibly be aware of this for I am quite certain he would not countenance such behaviour if he were made aware of it.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I do not think it is necessary to take up much more of the time of the committee in dealing with this matter, but I am sure we all know of the three letters LPP, sometimes meant to refer to the Labour-Progressive party, but I have heard them referred to as "Liberal, Post Office and Patronage."


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, if I may be permitted to take the minister's mind back to British Columbia for a few moments, I would like to assure him at the outset that the constituency I represent is not part of the county of New Westminster and I have no intention of suggesting that he extend this drop letter rate to include my territory as well.
If I recall correctly the very first problem with which I was called upon to deal after my election was a problem related to the Post Office Department, so I suppose in a sense that makes the department the most important one in the government as far as 1 am concerned, and I am quite sure the minister would be willing to agree with that. The particular problem to which I have referred had to do with the reduction in an air mail service which had been provided on the west coast of Vancouver island. It was a question of whether a mail service should be provided for that area on a thrice weekly basis, although the service had been reduced to less than that.
I think the minister will readily understand that people living in isolated communities on the west coast of an island such as Vancouver island, where they have no railway, no highways, and what they consider to be a very infrequent boat service, find it difficult to understand why the plane which was coming into their community three times per week could not at least carry their mail in and out of the island. It did not take me long to discover the reason for this reduction. However, I would like to assure the minister that the officials of his department in British Columbia were working out the best arrangement they could within the limits of the directives which came from a city known as Ottawa, with which I have since become a little better acquainted.
The reason why I am raising this matter at this time is to indicate that I was one of the members who were quite pleased when the Minister of Finance announced on December 8 that all first class mail would be carried by air if air carriage would speed delivery. I hope the minister is aware of 83276-301J
Supply-Post Office
the fact that Canada does not stop at Regina nor at the community mentioned by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle, nor at Vancouver. I rise at this time simply to express to the minister the hope that when I return to my constituency at the end of the session I shall be able to discover that the statement made by the Minister of Finance on December 8 last means exactly what it says and that this policy of carrying mail by air wherever that carriage will speed its delivery is going to apply to places on the west coast of Canada as well as to points between Vancouver and Montreal. I should like to feel that the minister and the officials of his department recognize that to people living in the more isolated communities, where in many cases no other practicable alternative means of carrying mail exists, it is as important, if not more so, that the fullest possible use should be made of all existing air services. I would even go so far as to venture to hope that the Post Office Department will take an interest, wherever it is possible and feasible, in stimulating the development of air service to the more remote parts of Canada as a means of improving the service the department can provide.
I think it is important to realize that one of the results of the existence of air travel, as far as areas like the west coast of British Columbia are concerned, has been a decrease in the frequency and quality of the steamer services available to many points and that, as a result, many communities today are getting a poorer mail service than they had 20 or 30 years ago. For that reason, as I previously stated, this announcement that all mail is to be carried by air if that move will speed its delivery is a most important one to the people living in the coastal areas of British Columbia at this time.
I have only one other matter on which I should like to say a few words before I sit down. I think I expressed myself on it once before when we were discussing some of the matters affecting the Post Office Department. I expressed some surprise at the rather unnecessary difficulty, as it appeared to me, the department was running into in connection with their personnel relationships. As I think the minister may recall, I mentioned the fact that I happen to have had some association with the organized trade union movement wherein we have developed, in our day to day dealings with the employers in the industry with which I was connected, quite a good working relationship on many matters. Some of the points which have been raised by members in various parts of the chamber as to the problems in the relationships between the employees of the postal

Supply-Post Office
department and the department are rather startling to someone who has had experience with the kind of relationship which is an everyday matter in much of the industrial field today. I think this problem which has been mentioned in connection with supervisory letter carriers is one of them.
I know that seniority is always one of the more difficult matters to arrange, particularly when it comes to the question of leave. Without attempting to go into all the details, may I say this. On reading through the report of the arrangement that has been worked out here, may I say that it strikes me as being a rather topsy-turvy sort of arrangement where senior men are not going to have the opportunity to pick their holidays which their seniority would warrant. I think the crux of the matter is a point which has been raised on a number of occasions by spokesmen for the party to which I belong, namely, that the people who work in the civil service of Canada have not, so far, been allowed to have full bargaining rights as workers in industry understand those rights. I think it is a rather silly thing that members of parliament should have to stand up, in effect, to do the bargaining as bargaining agents for the civil service. That is a lot of nonsense. Those are things which those people who are employed should be able to bargain on directly with their employer, as is done by workers in other fields of endeavour in Canada. The very fact that circular letters addressed to members of parliament come from various branches of the civil service from time to time is, I think, an indication that the time has come when the people in the civil service of Canada should have the ordinary bargaining rights that are assured, by law in many cases, to other workers in Canada.


Mr. Leboe:: I will not be more than a few minutes, Mr. Chairman; I can give you that assurance. There are only one or two questions that I have in mind. I do not think we need worry too much about the people wanting post office jobs in British Columbia because the wages are quite high over there, and I do not think they are too greatly interested. But there is one matter about which I should like to ask a question of and to receive an answer from the Postmaster General. It is in connection with the Edmon-ton-Prince George railroad post office. I believe that about the 26th of April a switch was going to be made and was called off at the last moment. Just in case it was called off only temporarily, I should like to get a few details as to just what it implied. It has been called to my attention-whether it is right or not, I do not know-that T.C.A. mail

loadings have at times been so heavy that certain seats have been taken out of the aircraft in order to allow mail to be put on and, as a result, passengers have been unable to travel and to get space bookings. I do not know whether or not that is true but it has been one of the complaints that have come to my attention. I should just like to have the Postmaster General's comment on the matter.
There is one other matter that I should like to mention. We have the C.P.A. plane that leaves Vancouver in the morning and goes through Kamloops, Quesnel and Prince George and return. I understand that it does not carry mail. With the growth that there is in the interior at this time, it would seem to me that many people in the Kamloops area and also other communities in the central parts of British Columbia could well use that service. I understand that mail from Prince George that is going into Kamloops is carried by air from Prince George into Vancouver, and sent out at night on the Canadian Pacific railway train and into Kamloops that way, and vice versa to get back up to Prince George.
These are two or three of the things that I had in mind. I should also like the Postmaster General to comment on the Dawson Creek federal building. I understand it has been promised for a long time now, and since it is going to house the new post office I should like the minister to say something about it.


Mr. Cardiff:: I do not wish to take up very much time, but there are a few things I should like to draw to the attention of the Postmaster General. I do not think it would be very difficult to criticize but I do not intend to criticize the Post Office Department because of the fact that in most places we are getting very good service. I wish to say a word or two about the rural mail couriers. Some little time ago, when an effort was made to increase their salaries, it was suggested that the route of a person who was complaining should be compared with two or three nearby routes. That may be all right, but perhaps the remuneration on those two or three other routes is too low too. In that case the poor fellow would not have a chance to get much of an increase. In several places this has been corrected but some of the couriers are still dissatisfied with the amount they got.
I should like to remind the Postmaster General of one particular case, that of Albert A. Gammie of Lucknow, Ontario. He got an increase but he did not think it was sufficient. Whether or not he has made representations to the Postmaster General since I do

not know. I did have the information as to the amount of the increase he received, and apparently it was not sufficient to satisfy him. I know of several others. I also know that quite a number of rural couriers who have not even put in an application for an increase are complaining that they are not getting enough money. I do not blame the Post Office Department entirely for that because of the fact that when these men were tendering they had the opportunity to tender high enough to give them a decent wage. The trouble is that they tendered low to get the contract and then, after finding that they could not carry out the contract as cheaply as they thought they could, they started to complain that they wanted more money. I think the Post Office Department has been very fair in a great many of these cases but there are still a few that I hope the department will take note of and correct if possible.
I should like to say a word about postmasters. I want to congratulate the postmasters in my entire riding. I have not had a complaint about a postmaster in my riding since I first came into office. I think that is a credit to them. The postmaster is one of the most important men in any community because he probably knows more about the people in the community than any other one man. If he is doing his job properly he has a lot of friends. I can remember the postmaster we had in our own town some years ago. Looking back over the years I would not complain about him now as I would have then. He was a man who was getting on in years. He was over 70 years of age and possibly a little irritable. He stuck strictly to the law. If the post office was supposed to be closed at a certain minute he would close it right in your face and would not give you your mail. There are not very many of them like that. I have not heard any complaints about any postmasters in my riding. I think they are giving a wonderful service.
I should like to say a word about extending mail routes. The postage rate was increased to five cents and I am sure many people are perfectly satisfied with the five cent air mail service. However, we find that many people on the back concessions have to go a considerable distance to get their mail. I think that perhaps the requirement of four boxes to the mile is too many, and these people deserve consideration just the same as others. I think it should be lowered to two to the mile. It would be a wonderful thing for some of these people living on the back concessions to be able to get their mail at their gates. The roads are all open now in the wintertime. It is very seldom
Supply-Post Office
that a road is blocked for any considerable length of time, and there is no difficulty in getting down the back roads. I suggest to the Postmaster General that perhaps consideration could be given to lowering the number to the mile in future.
Then there is a matter which I took up with the Postmaster General some time ago but so far I have not heard anything about it.
I have a letter from the town clerk of the town of Exeter which reads as follows:
Please find enclosed letter to the Postmaster General which is self-explanatory. The members of the town council would appreciate anything you can do to help in this matter.
I am going to read the letter that was sent to the Postmaster General. It is dated January 21, 1954 and reads as follows:
I have been instructed by the town council of Exeter to bring to your attention the gross inadequacy of the accommodation provided by the post office building here. The building was constructed in 1928 when Exeter was a village of 1,600 and postal facilities were not used as extensively as they are today. Since then the town has grown to over 2,600 and has become the shopping centre of an ever-increasing area.
As far as the public is concerned, the lobby is far too small and the number of private boxes available does not begin to supply the demand. At least every mail the place is so crowded that it is impossible to carry on business properly. Many persons go to the door and turn away to come back later. It is also evident that the working space for the staff is much too small.
Fortunately, there is space for enlarging the building. The town council request that action be taken as quickly as possible to alleviate the present unsatisfactory condition and to make Exeter post office a building of which the Post Office Department and the town may be proud.
I might tell the Postmaster General that I visited that post office. It is a building that has not been up very long and there is plenty of space behind it on which to erect an extension. I do not think there is anything in the estimates this year to take care of it, but I hope that the Postmaster General will take the matter into consideration and that conditions there will be corrected. It is a flourishing town and a lot of business is done. I had a report as to the increase in the volume of business. It has almost doubled in the last few years, and I think they are deserving of some consideration. I believe that is all I have to say. I do not know whether the Postmaster General has any report on the findings at Exeter, but if he has I hope he will tell me about it when he replies. If not, I would be glad to get the information as soon as possible.


Mr. Ellis:: The hon. member for Oxford directed the attention of the minister to an incident in his own locality. Just in case the minister may think that is an isolated example, I should like to say at this time that some time last fall an item appeared in the

Supply-Post Office
Regina Leader-Post to the effect that mail delivery service was to be commenced in a new area of the city. This announcement was made by the defeated Liberal candidate in the last election, and the item contained the information that he had received word about this move from the Postmaster General. I do not know the source of the former member's information but I was not worried about it. I do not believe that sort of thing does a defeated candidate any good, but I do believe it is discourteous. I do not know whether or not that is the policy of the department, but when the minister replies I should like him to comment on the suggestions brought up by one or two other members, and tell us whether it is the intention of the Post Office Department to continue having announcements of this kind made by ex-M.P.'s or defeated Liberal candidates.


Mr. Argue:: A new conception of democracy.


The Deputy Chairman:: Shall the item carry?


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: I believe there are quite a number of questions the minister should answer.


Mr. Harris:: Why not carry the item and get the answers later?


An hon. Member:: Oh, no.


Hazen Robert Argue: Then somebody would rise on a point of order.


Alcide Côté: First of all I want to thank those hon. members who have contributed to the debate. Some were most complimentary in their remarks while others had a lighter form of speech, though the tone was very cheerful. I shall not attempt to answer all the questions. Some of those that I cannot answer now I shall study, but I shall try to answer as many questions as possible.
The hon. member for Hamilton West spoke of two deliveries a day. I have made several statements about this, and my views have not changed. I hope that sooner or later we will be able to return to two deliveries a day, but I shall ask hon. members to bear in mind that it would cost at least, if not more than, $6 million. I repeat what I have already said on this subject, that I hope sooner or later we will be in a position to return to two deliveries. However, that time has not yet arrived. In the meantime we are making whatever improvements are possible. Some hon. members appreciate the fact we are already giving two deliveries a day in the business centres. On the other hand, some of the members said that we should not give two deliveries a day in the cities before we give at least one delivery a day in the rural areas.

Not only this question, but the whole postal problem, is a very complicated affair. I wish all hon. members would take the opportunity of visiting not only their own post office, but also the post offices in the larger centres. They will see then how complicated the problem is. They will probably ascertain that the department is doing all it can to settle the problem. At the same time hon. members should keep in mind that those who participate in the postal administration are human beings. Out of a possible 100 per cent, 99 per cent of the service provided is very good. We do not hear any criticism of that service. We are bound to listen to complaints about the remaining one per cent of the service. We understand that. I do not want to avoid criticism. On the contrary I invite constructive criticism, that kind of criticism that will keep us alert and enable us to ascertain the errors. I believe hon. members will find that out of a possible 100 per cent our average is very high, and the errors are limited to not more than one per cent.
The hon. member for Hamilton West mentioned the price of printed postcards. She made some suggestions, and I was glad to receive them. I do not know how far I can go eventually in correcting the situation, if correction is feasible, but I shall carefully read in detail the suggestions made and will make the necessary inquiries. She also brought up the subject of newspapers shipped by air. Newspapers are shipped by air, but not through the mail. They are carried as air cargo by the transportation companies. I mean we transfer only first class mail and parcel post by air, but it is possible that the transportation companies carry newspapers as air cargo.
Then there was the question of the supervisory mail carrier mentioned by the hon. member for Hamilton West. This seems to be a question of title, either "supervisory" or "relief". These men perform more difficult duties than the regular letter carrier who is assigned to only one walk. My hon. friend seemed to suggest these supervisory carriers should not be paid for this added responsibility. The positions were advertised and anyone could apply. Only where the senior man did not apply did we appoint a junior man. I am sure my hon. friend would not suggest that we should have delayed the implementation of the 40-hour week until all these positions were filled by senior men.
I do not want to deal with that at any length, because I think every member knows about it. The job had to be done, and whenever it was possible to have a senior man do the job we did not ask for more than that.

In some offices the senior men did not apply for the job, but the job had to be done even if the senior men did not want to do that work. In some instances a supervisory or relief man has to learn five or ten routes, whereas the ordinary man has to learn only one route. It is a more laborious job and in those instances where the senior men did not want the job the junior men had to be appointed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Can the Postmaster General tell us at this point what the present arrangement is as between supervisory letter carriers and regular letter carriers with respect to the taking of holiday leave?


Charles Delmar Coyle: If my recollection is correct, I believe the relief man has the privilege of taking his annual leave first.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In all cases?


Charles Delmar Coyle: No, only where we did not get enough men.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But within a group of thirteen, I believe it is, the supervisory letter carrier gets first choice even though there may be regular letter carriers in the same group with many more years of service?


Charles Delmar Coyle: I do not know if I have made myself understood. What I meant to say was, where it was possible to find senior men to do the job we did so. When a senior man applied, there was no question of priority. It was only when we had to employ junior men.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I wonder whether the Postmaster General understands the point about which we are concerned. We are not discussing the pay differential. We understand there is a pay differential, and for my part it is justified. But the grievance some of the senior men have is that men who are new in the service, because they took on this more arduous work, not only get a pay differential but also get priority in the matter of holidays. Those who have expressed this grievance have suggested the pay differential should be sufficient so you do not have to deprive the senior men of first choice as to holiday leave.


Charles Delmar Coyle: In 86 centres there was no need to grant priority, there was no change; it was only in 26 offices that we had to grant this incentive in order to get men to do the work. Otherwise we would not have been able to get the job done. I think that summarizes the situation.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You are relying upon the vacation leave priority as an inducement rather than trying to attract these people with higher pay?
Supply-Post Office


Charles Delmar Coyle: Exactly, because in these circumstances none of the senior men would do the job. The first offer was made to the senior men. As I say, there were no changes in 86 centres.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Does the Postmaster General not realize that in effect the senior men who did not want to undertake this more arduous work are being penalized for failing to do it by losing the priority they had with respect to vacations?


Charles Delmar Coyle: In a sense, yes, but we had to implement this 40-hour week and there was no other way to do it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You could have paid them more.


Charles Delmar Coyle: We did pay them more.


Stanley Howard Knowles: You could have made the pay differential sufficient instead of penalizing the senior men in respect to priority for holiday leave. I am sure that the Postmaster General realizes that in the 26 centres he refers to this grievance is very real.


Charles Delmar Coyle: It was not the intention to penalize any man in the service. We had to employ new men to do the job; that was the only way we could get it done.


Stanley Howard Knowles: They do not think so.


Charles Delmar Coyle: If the senior men would not do the job who else could we employ?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Why penalize the senior men?


Charles Delmar Coyle: The term "penalize" is employed by my hon. friend. We did not have any intention to do that. We do not think we have penalized anybody. We were faced with the fact that we had to implement the 40-hour week and to do that we had to employ these people as relief men. It was done in 86 centres without any change being made. In 26 offices the senior men did not accept. There was no question of going over the senior men, but somebody had to do the job. Since they did not want to do that job, we had to employ other people.


Mr. Maclnnis:: Mr. Chairman, was this matter discussed by the senior officials with the representatives of the men's association? I do not think a matter of this kind should be brought up here until an effort has been made to arrive at an understanding with the officials of the association. I am not blaming the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre for raising it as he has had correspondence on this the same as I have had. However, I think it would have obviated discussion here if the department had followed the practice that is followed in industry where matters of this kind are discussed by the administrative

Supply-Post Office
officers of a company and the representatives of the men. If that had been done here perhaps a satisfactory solution could have been arrived at. If it was not done, I suggest that it should be done.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It was done unilaterally.


Donald MacInnis: That is not the way to do it; it should be done through the accredited representatives of the association. If it was not done, it should still be done in order to give the men a feeling that no one is being unjustly discriminated against for one reason or another. I appreciate that sometimes seniority must be disregarded in promotions and matters of that kind which depend upon fitness and a lot of other things, but where all things are equal then seniority should apply. As I said before, this is a regular practice in industry where the men are organized.


Alcide Côté: In answer to my hon. friend may I say that this question was discussed by my officials with the representatives of the unions and the situation was explained to them at the time.
The hon. member for Hamilton West referred to the Woods-Gordon report. This report has practically been implemented in toto or is in the course of implementation, although there are two or three items still in abeyance. The first is the recommendation in regard to the discontinuance of the savings bank, and the second is the suggestion that we could save $200,000 in Toronto alone. It has been decided not to make any change at this time so far as the savings bank is concerned.
With regard to the possible saving at Toronto, I think I should report here that it was not possible nor practical to implement the recommendation in that regard. This was a theoretical suggestion that was made but in practice it is not possible to implement it. It was indicated that a saving of $200,000 a year could be made in Toronto alone. According to the Woods-Gordon report that saving could be made by substituting belt sortation for the present facing-up and primary sortation.
The idea is not new. It has been tried by many postal administrations and discarded. We built a prototype machine twenty-five years ago and ran a lengthy experiment before coming to the conclusion that it was not practical. It was inevitable that the Woods-Gordon report would contain such a recommendation; in theory it is admirable, but it does not work in actual practice. However, we are still keeping an open mind on the subject in case there is some feature or 
gadget which we have overlooked and which would make this scheme practical. So far this has not materialized.
The hon. member for Saskatoon referred to the lower rate of payment for smaller offices. The duties and responsibilities of a small office are not as difficult as those of a larger office. In a city the size of Toronto a sorter must memorize the boundaries of 600 carriers. Compare that with the work of a sorter in an office where there are only ten or a dozen carriers. The rates are determined by the civil service commission.
The hon. member for Macleod made similar remarks about the revenue postmasters. I have every sympathy with these people, and may I say that the salaries of people in this class were increased recently. We are now considering some other method of payment. I think the hon. member for Huron North also asked about the method of payment of revenue postmasters. They are now paid out of revenue. For at least ten or twelve months we have been working on a new method of payment on a unit of work basis and we hope that eventually we will be in a position to more adequately pay these public servants.
The hon. member for Macleod referred to revenues. There is an indication that there will be an increase of revenue, but it is too soon to make a positive statement in that regard.
With regard to public buildings, we now have about 300 recommendations before the Department of Public Works. We base our recommendation upon the need for postal service accommodation, and we make our recommendation accordingly to the Minister of Public Works. Naturally the Minister of Public Works has other features to consider and he decides on the priority to be given. We do not make a recommendation for the erection of a public building for postal services unless the revenue is at least $10,000 per annum.
The hon. member for Vancouver South asked about the colour of the stamps and if there was a regulation that the stamps must be blue or red. There was an international regulation that the postage stamp for unit letter rate should be red. This must not be confused, however, with the domestic unit letter rate. We feel that the present five-cent stamp is attractive, both as to design and colour.
The hon. member for Mackenzie brought up a point similar to the one raised by the hon. member for Winnipeg North. As a matter of fact, it is the same point which was dramatized by the hon. member for

Supply-Post Office
Winnipeg North. For many years we have Mr. Cote: I do not know Taraska. I did asked the advice of many people, including not mention the name; it was brought up by the Legion, the defeated candidates, members my hon. friend. I presume that Mr. Taraska of parliament and others. It is nothing new. is quite a good person.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Opposition
members?


Alcide Côté: Members of parliament and residents of the localities.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: Opposition members of parliament?


Alcide Côté: Oh, yes. My hon. friend himself even quoted a letter which I wrote to him.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I have never been asked at any time to commend to the department a certain individual. These form letters do not come to opposition members of parliament; they may come to members of parliament but not opposition members.


Charles Delmar Coyle: Maybe the form of the letter could be written otherwise, but these letters are sent to people in the field, in the locality where we are seeking information, because they are presumed to know better than anybody else. A member of parliament makes recommendations, but, as I said before, there is a lot of difference between suggestions, recommendations and appointments. I can assure my hon. friend that after the information is obtained we make the appointment only after an objective inquiry.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: When the postmaster at Endeavour, for example, is asked to resign how does Mr. Underwood-and I should say that I appreciate the outstanding work that Mr. Underwood has done for many years; he has been very helpful-happen to know that Ross Barrie at Pelly should be the person who could tell him who a good postmaster at Endeavour, 70 miles away, would be. How does Mr. Underwood or Mr. Mac-Nabb, the one who is featured in the correspondence of the hon. member for Winnipeg North, write to Mr. Taraska in Winnipeg. How did he happen to pick out these names?


Alcide Côté: My hon. friend talks about a case of 1943, ten years ago. He gave some lengthy explanations about it.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Three months ago.


Alcide Côté: My hon. friend opposite knows that I do not know of the details. He mentioned Mr. Underwood. I do not know the details of this case, but as far as the information-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Does the minister know Taraska?


Stanley Howard Knowles: He is a good Liberal.


Alcide Côté: I do not know Taraska. I
know hardly anybody mentioned by my hon. friend. But again this is given only as a suggestion or information. I do not think my hon. friends opposite would deny that a member of parliament and even a defeated candidate is in a position to do that. I remember it was mentioned a few minutes ago that a defeated candidate in Ontario was trying to get credit for postal accommodation that had been provided. I think it was the hon. member for Oxford who said that. Well, I hope my hon. friends will not hold me responsible for anybody in the country trying to get credit for postal accommodation in the country. It is quite natural.
I also remember that many, if I may use the word again, recommendations have been made by my hon. friends opposite in many instances, and I have always considered those recommendations as a natural thing coming from members of parliament.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: My only objection was not to his making the announcement but receiving the information before the duly-elected member did.


Alcide Côté: I do not know anything about that.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Before we leave this-


Edward Turney Applewhaite: Order. Perhaps it is time to point out to the committee that actually the Postmaster General has the floor and should be interrupted only with his consent. At the same time I think the committee is of the opinion that if we finish one feature of the Postmaster General's reply before going on to the next, perhaps it would be more expeditious in the long rim. However, I must ask hon. members to observe the fact that the Postmaster General has the floor and is to be interrupted only with his consent.


Alexander Malcolm Nicholson: Before he finishes my point, and we are just about through, I think the case that I discussed would indicate that it is a real handicap for the staff of the Postmaster General to have to go through the procedure that I outlined that prevailed ten years ago, and that outlined by the hon. member for Winnipeg North, which indicates it still prevails. My case briefly was that the inspector made a decision on the spot, and after seventeen letters were written by a very prominent public servant here in Ottawa, the decision

Supply-Post Office
made by the inspector was finally maintained. In the year 1953 I think the Postmaster General should agree to give the responsible people in the field the right to make the decision, to canvass the Legion and local organizations that have the information rather than to ask Mr. Barrie to travel 70 miles back and forth and burn up all the energy he had to burn up and make so many bad friends.


Alcide Côté: The hon. member for Eglinton also talked about two deliveries a day. I have already dealt with this subject. As regards the specific complaints made, I would appreciate it if he would be good enough to give me the covers and I shall have the necessary inquiries made. In this regard, I wish to make the following statement about delay, and again I want to stress the point that the work done in the postal department is done by human beings.
There have been quite a number of complaints during a short while back in regard to delays in mail particularly between Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa. We are doing all we can to eliminate these delays, and wherever practicable are using planes for the carriage of mail instead of the trains so as to give more time for handling at the post office of destination.
There is no doubt that some of the delays are due to mishandlings and errors on the part of employees. It is not possible entirely to eliminate the human element, especially when they are working at high speed. For example, in Toronto we handle approximately one and a half million items daily between five in the evening and ten o'clock. I repeat, one and a half million items between five in the evening and ten o'clock. These items are handled by over 1,000 men and it is very difficult, if not impossible, to place responsibility in all cases. We have a group of officials especially assigned to study this problem and to make whatever improvements we can.
The period of time during which we must handle this great volume of mail is restricted on one hand by the time of mailing and on the other by the time and departure of planes and trains. Naturally the transportation companies do not run their trains to suit the Post Office Department. They determine the times, generally speaking, in the interests of the travelling public. We are not particularly objecting to this, but it does intensify our problem. The situation would be greatly eased if the business and commercial concerns in Toronto, Montreal and other large points would spread their mailings during the day instead of concentrating everything just

after five o'clock at night. If it is impossible to handle the mails in time to catch the planes, then obviously delays take place.
I might mention particularly the question of mails between Toronto and Ottawa. If we can get it sorted in time to catch the evening plane out of Toronto, then it will arrive in Ottawa in time to be sorted by the letter carriers for delivery the next morning. On the other hand, if on account of the terrific volume and the restricted period available for sorting and handling, we cannot make the plane and have to send the mail by trains it means that the mails cannot be delivered on the first delivery as the train does not arrive in Ottawa in time to permit the mails to be processed through the Ottawa post office and routed by the carriers. There are many cases in which the mails cannot be delivered by carrier until the following day.
We have that kind of situation in Toronto and Ottawa and elsewhere, and I can assure hon. members that we are doing everything we can to improve the service and I believe we are achieving some results. There will, of course, always be delays due to the human element which we are not entirely able to prevent. I can quite understand the annoyance of the patrons if a letter is delayed, even though that may only happen on occasions. The public can help, of course. They sometimes create delays by holding their mail until the peak load period at night. Mailing early and often will undoubtedly assist the Post Office Department in dealing with this problem. We are as much if not more interested than the public in improving the service and we are making every effort to do so.
My hon. friend indicated that the drop letter rate of postage did not apply between Toronto and Willowdale. I must say this is not correct. I would refer him to the statement I made in this house on March 29 which appears at page 3413 of Hansard.
The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam, as well as the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond, raised the question of postal services to Burnaby. I understand that what they have in mind is the erection of a public building, and the dividing of Burnaby into postal districts, these districts to be numbered Burnaby 1, 2, 3 and 4. I can assure my hon. friends that I will look into the first question with my colleague, the Minister of Public Works.
As regards the question of delivery, this also will be given consideration but I want to warn my hon. friends that this is not a new procedure. We have endeavoured to introduce a similar arrangement at other points but with indifferent success. Toronto

has been zoned for many years and we have spent a great deal on publicity, though at the present time not more than 20 per cent of the mail bears the zone number in Toronto.
In Burnaby the indication is that it is imperative. One portion of the mail is handled through Vancouver and another portion handled through New Westminster. Unless this designation is shown there are bound to be delays. However, I will look again into this matter though I want my hon. friends to fully understand the implication of their suggested change. There is another point which must not be overlooked. If the change involves an independent postal area apart from Vancouver, then the drop letter rate between Burnaby and Vancouver, and vice versa, will no longer apply.
The hon. member for Royal brought up the question of the service in the rural areas. At the present time I am more in sympathy with my hon. friend from Royal in regard to the frequency of the service in rural areas than in the re-establishment of two deliveries in the residential section of urban centres. In this connection let me point out that our estimate for land mail service includes $1,500,000 for improvements in service, in addition to the $1,500,000 for adjustment in rates of pay.
As regards a public building for Rothesay, as my hon. friend is aware there is an item of $30,000 in this year's estimates.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Did the minister say that was the hon. member for Royal?


Alcide Côté: Yes.


Gage Workman Montgomery: That should be the hon. member for Victoria-Carleton.


Alcide Côté: I am sorry. I am glad the hon. member has corrected me. The hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke brought up the subject of a public building at Vernon. I might say that an item of $25,000 for that project is in the estimates. The hon. member for Brandon-Souris mentioned the problem of the decrease in the number of rural routes in the west, while there is a general increase all over the country. The discontinuance of service on the rural routes does create a problem but it has been noted that in most of these cases the patrons are going to the cities, or using the facilities of other post offices. But the hon. member may rest assured that every case will be examined on its merits and that we are trying to maintain the service at the highest possible level commensurate with our financial obligations.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Could the minister indicate how many routes have been discontinued in 83276-302J
Supply-Post Office
the prairie provinces over the past two years, and in what places they have been discontinued?


Alcide Côté: I am sorry but I have not that information available at the moment because some of these routes have been readjusted. But I will be glad to look into this matter and if I have not the time to tell him before the end of the discussion on the estimates I will give him this information personally.
The hon. member for Kootenay West mentioned mail services and I can assure him that these services will be looked into. As regards the building at Trail, the information I have is that expropriation procedure is under way and final plans have been approved.
As far as the hon. member for Edmonton East is concerned, I am sorry to say that I am not familiar with the situation at Beverly but I will look into this matter.
(Translation):
The hon. member for Chicoutimi (Mr. Gagnon) mentioned the proposed post office at Chicoutimi. It is true that this project is under consideration and that an item has been placed in the departmental estimates for that purpose in order to ensure that it be proceeded with. My hon. friend knows, however, that there has been considerable expansion in his district. Quite recently I received a delegation from Port Alfred, I think, where there is a similar problem. As far as the Chicoutimi project is concerned, I do not remember whether the plan called for a building to accommodate various federal departments or whether it was only to be a postal station. I know that we had to revise this project and hold it back for further study. I will look further into the matter and will be glad to give more detailed information to the hon. member. I must add that the project has not been abandoned but that it is simply under further consideration.
(Text):
The hon. member for Victoria-Carleton- am I right this time?


Gage Workman Montgomery: Yes.


Alcide Côté: The hon. member brought up the question of a building at Plaster Rock and I am pleased to inform him that there is an amount in the estimates this year of $25,000. The site has been approved and so also have the plans. As far as the Glassville services are concerned, I am sorry I have no information available at the moment. But I will be glad to look into the matter.

Supply-Post Office
The hon. members for New Westminster, Oxford and Comox-Alberni brought up several subjects, one of them being a question of mail service, though I cannot remember the name. However, in all these cases 1 will be glad to look into the matter further. I have no information here and when it is available I will be glad to pass it on to my hon. friends.
Again I must say this that the Post Office Department does not like to be the object of excessive criticism, though we are always very glad to receive constructive criticism. There might be some cases where we are entirely at fault, but there are many cases where those who complain have contributed to a certain extent. We want the co-operation of the public. We ask for that cooperation and I do not lose any opportunity to tell, not only my officials but the employees of the department whom I meet at postal conventions, that we are civil servants and we must give good service.
But this service that is given is subject to human frailty and there is always the possibility of errors; however, we are trying to keep those errors to a minimum. As far as the policy of the department is concerned, may I say that everything cannot be done in one day. I have talked about the Woods-Gordon report. We are actually in the process of implementing the recommendations contained in that report. We are decentralizing. We are setting up what we call area superintendents. We therefore think it is apparent that, when the report is completely implemented the men in the region on the spot will be in a better position, not only to correct errors but to prevent them. We are sure that eventually the service will continue to improve. That is the main objective, not only of the department but of every member of the committee.


Lewis Elston Cardiff: Can the minister tell me whether his officials have made any survey yet of the Exeter post office?


Alcide Côté: All over the country?


Lewis Elston Cardiff: No; the Exeter post office.


Alcide Côté: Yes. It has been referred to the Department of Public Works with our recommendation.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: The
minister said a few words which I should like to have clarified. My quarrel with the minister is not over the professional post office which I think is doing a good job of work; my quarrel is with the political post office. When the minister rises in his place in the House of Commons and tells us that members of parliament are told about vacancies in sub-post offices and that these mem-

bers of parliament know all about it, may I say that I do not think it is true of opposition members of parliament. I do not want it to be true. Quite frankly, may I say that I want to have nothing at all to do with it. I think the postal officials are far better qualified than am I to decide who should be a subpostmaster or where the locality should be. My hon. friend said that great numbers of letters were sent out. That is quite true. But those letters are decidedly different. There are two types of letters sent to my constituency; and if they are sent to my constituency, I assume they are sent to others. They are form letters sent by the director of operations. The one type is that which is sent to the Canadian Legion in language which is as follows:
Dear Sir:
There is a vacancy at the above-named post office and as the appointment comes under the control of the department, the necessary steps are being taken to appoint a new postmaster.
At the request of the Postmaster General, I am bringing the matter to your notice in case any member of your organization who is a patron of the vacant office should care to submit his application. Anyone desirous of applying for the position should submit his application to the department at the earliest possible moment.
I have no quarrel at all with that sort of form letter which is sent out to responsible officers of the Legion because I think exservicemen should always be given consideration. My quarrel is with the other type of letter which, as I said earlier, apparently is sent to only a select group; and it reads like this:
Dear Sir:
In previous correspondence the department asked for your recommendation of a suitable person for permanent appointment as postmaster . . .
The position I take is this. In Winnipeg the postal officials know much better than does anyone else, whether he is a successful politician or a broken-down politician, where the sub-post office should be and who the sub-postmaster should be. I should be extremely happy to leave this matter entirely to the post office. I have seen them at work before and I have no quarrel at all with them as a professional group. I think they are doing an excellent job. I think what is hurting the post office-and what in the long run hurts any political party-is the animosity which is aroused through this form of patronage. Earlier today I said that those who were appointed through patronage were probably just as good sub-postmasters as were others. I have no quarrel with them; my quarrel is with the system. It is a system which I think is bad and one which I maintain should be eradicated. I should like to know whether the minister can tell me precisely to whom this second type of letter is sent. I refer to the letter which asked for

the recommendation of a suitable person. To whom is this form letter sent?


Alcide Côté: I would ask the hon. member to excuse me; I was talking to the messenger.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: The second letter I read was a form letter sent to certain individuals asking for their recommendation as to the appointment of a sub-postmaster. The question I was asking was this. To whom precisely is this letter sent? My hon. friend will recall that earlier this evening he said that I had written. That is quite true. I have written to the post office on several occasions about the location and the type of man who should be in the sub-post office. The minister has acknowledged my letter. That is also quite true. But this is a form letter sent out by the director of operations. Perhaps the minister knows nothing at all about it, but it is to an individual asking for his recommendation or nomination of the subpostmaster. My contention is that the post office can do a better job there than can be done by the recommendation of an individual. What I want to know is this. To whom is this sort of form letter sent?


Alcide Côté: It is sent to members, defeated candidates, the Legion or other people in the field who we think could give us information about proper candidates.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: May I correct the minister there. I do not think this sort of letter is sent to the Legion. There is a form letter that is sent to the Legion.


Alcide Côté: My hon. friend has asked me a question and now he is telling me the answer to his question. I think he at least should take my word for it.


Alistair McLeod Stewart: I am prepared to take the minister's word; but I have a return here and in it there is no such letter sent to the Legion. There is one sent to the Legion with which I do not quarrel. There is another type which asks for nominations. That is not so with regard to the type of letter sent to the Legion. If the minister tells me this is sent to defeated candidates-and may I say that we know that is so-may I ask this question? Does he think it is a good idea?


Alcide Côté: I will study the matter.


Tom Goode: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say something with regard to this matter. I have never known of an occasion of the change of a sub-post office in my riding or of the establishment of a new one when the Legion has not been notified and has not received from the Postmaster General an invitation for a recommendation.
Supply-Post Office


Frederick George Hahn: One question I asked the minister to answer and in which I was particularly interested has also been raised in this particular letter to the Legion and the point that the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond raised, namely that the Legion receives this form of letter. It was the response to one of these letters, and the wording of it, that made it so difficult for the legionnaire, in the instance to which I referred, to apply for the post. The question I raised earlier was this: Was any consideration given, or could any consideration be given to allowing those people on rural routes who are not patrons of the post office to be eligible for the position?


Alcide Côté: I will look into the matter.


Frederick George Hahn: Would the minister care to answer that question now?


Alcide Côté: I am informed that it applies to rural routes, depending on the post office in question.


Frederick George Hahn: That is the point. I was wondering whether the minister would contemplate changing that particular act in order to make it possible for the legionnaires and other people who are on that rural route but who do not receive their mail from that post office, even though they might get their stamps, money orders and so on from the office, to be eligible for appointment. The point in question happens to be a post office in my own riding. The Legion was notified and they have that difficulty. No one was eligible.


Alcide Côté: I am not familiar with the case my hon. friend is talking about, but if he will write to me giving details I will be glad to look into the matter.


Clarence Gillis: I should like to ask the minister two questions about letters that I wrote him. I carried on some correspondence with him in February of this year at the request of the New Waterford board of trade with respect to an extension and improvements to the post office in that area. The last correspondence I had from the minister indicated that the matter was under consideration, and I should like to know whether he can bring me up to date. On February 5 I also wrote the minister about the possibilities of establishing rural mail delivery at West-mount, Nova Scotia, at the request of a co-operative housing group. I wrote the minister on February 5 and I never received an answer.


Alcide Côté: I am sorry. Did you not receive an acknowledgment of the letter at least?


Clarence Gillis: No, it is neglect on your secretary's part.

Supply-Post Office


Charles Delmar Coyle: I will look into the matter.


Clarence Gillis: I should like to be brought up to date on, these two matters if it is possible for the minister to do so.


Charles Delmar Coyle: I see that the only information with respect to New Waterford is that we are actually considering an addition there. I am sorry I have not got the information about the Westmount rural route, but I have taken a special note about that and will let my hon. friend know.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
342. Operations-including salaries and other expenses of staff post offices, district offices, railway mail service staffs, and supplies, equipment and other items for revenue post offices, also including administration; and including, notwithstanding section 16 of the Civil Service Act, payment, in such amount or amounts as may be approved from time to time by the treasury board, to civil servants who are hired as casual employees, $76,007,630.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Before this item carries, I should like to say a word. As a matter of fact, this is the largest item in the minister's estimates, and the details make it clear that it covers some 20,354 employees. That is quite a large staff, and I agree with those who have already paid tribute to the very efficient work that is done by this very large band of faithful public employees. I think too that the Postmaster General was quite justified tonight in calling attention to the complicated nature of the process of handling mail, illustrating it as he did by the example of what goes on in a large city like Toronto between five o'clock and ten o'clock in the evening.
The reason I rise on this item and refer to this large group of workers is to stress something about which I feel very strongly, namely, that while this also applies to a smaller group as well, when you get a large group of workers such as that in the minister's department, labour relations become extremely important. I am ready to give the minister every bouquet and compliment that is coming to him and to his department, but I must say that the labour relations in his department do leave considerable room for improvement. We have already discussed tonight one other issue, and during that discussion my colleague, the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway, expressed the view, with which I agree, that it is unfortunate that we should be in the position of having to raise these matters on the floor of parliament. It should be possible for such matters to be settled between the recognized representatives of the employees and the management.
Sometimes I think it might be a good idea if the Postmaster General were to invite his

colleague, the Minister of Labour, to send to his department some of his labour-management co-operation experts. I have in mind the sort of letter that comes back to associations of employees when they have written to the deputy postmaster general setting out a grievance. Here is a letter dated March 10, 1954, signed by W. J. Turnbull, deputy postmaster general, which is contained in sessional paper No. 94-G, tabled in the house on Monday, May 3, 1954. It has to do with another thorny question, that of the night differential. It is a matter which I think could have been negotiated. It seems to me that the case the men put up was a valid one. Maybe there is something to be said on the other side; maybe a compromise could have been effected. But after stating that it was the intention of the department to stand by the decision that had been taken, the deputy postmaster general concluded this letter by saying;
I have no wish to tell you how to run your own affairs, but my observation is that the sympathy and patience of the public towards operating service employees is rapidly running out. We intend to establish a 40-hour week for all and could very well drop the idea of any night differential.
Yours sincerely,
W. J. Turnbull,
Deputy Postmaster General
I suggest to the Postmaster General that that is an example of very poor labour relations.


Donald MacInnis: Hear, hear.


Stanley Howard Knowles: In this same file which I have in my hand-it is not as voluminous as the one my colleague, the hon. member for Winnipeg North, had but it is a rather unfortunate one-there are other letters similar in tone. I suggest to the Postmaster General that he take seriously the point that was made a while ago by the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway and that he do his best to establish the kind of labour relations in his department with this band of over
20,000	employees that will make it unnecessary for us to bring up these labour matters on the floor of parliament. These 20,000 employees are good, faithful public servants. They have chosen their own organizations. They have elected their representatives. There are good men on the management side, on the government side, and there is no reason why they could not sit down and bargain in good faith, not in the one-sided way set out in that kind of letter, but in good faith. In that way they could work out the best of relations. I may be speaking pretty strongly, but I am interested in the response

the Postmaster General is making to our pleas, and I hope he will do something about this very important matter.


Donald MacInnis: Before we adjourn, may I add a word to what the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has said in addition to what I said before. Like almost every other member of parliament, 1 presume, I get letters from associations such as the letter carriers association and others, and I invariably reply to them that the matter they refer to is one that they should settle in discussions between the administrative officers of the department and the association. This is an age when workers' organizations are and must be recognized, and such matters as this have no place here at all. It is extremely unfortunate that they should be brought up here but they will be as long as shortsighted people in important positions do not understand the needs and feelings of those who perhaps do the menial jobs in our public service.
Item stands.
Progress reported.
Supply-Post Office BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Walter Edward Harris: On Monday we shall move to go into supply, and then a motion for ways and means. If we succeed in doing that we shall call the budget resolutions and then proceed with legislation in the following order:	The resolution in the name of the
Minister of Finance with respect to crown corporations; the house in committee again on the Vocational Training Co-ordination Act; second reading of the Canadian National Railways bill; second reading of the act to amend the Department of Transport Act; second reading of the act to amend the Opium and Narcotic Drug Act, and the resolution in the name of the Minister of National Health and Welfare.


[Stage Direction]
At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following item was passed in committee of supply]:

[Stage Direction]
341. Departmental administration, $1,316,383.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, May 17, 1954