1955-03-25

PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
Mr. Jean-Fran?ois Pouliot (Temiscouaia):
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Three French-language newspapers, Le Droit, he Soleil and La Presse, have printed a summary of a speech delivered by me in Toronto, last Tuesday, regarding the Canadian flag. Now one of the paragraphs is not accurate, and the same inaccuracy appears in all three papers and probably in other Canadian Press dispatches.
The member added that, if Canada cannot have any national flag, the red ensign should at least carry a larger maple leaf and be rid of its outdated emblems.
L'Action Catholique of March 24 published another dispatch which is even more inaccurate than the one I have just quoted.
Toronto-Mr. Jean-Frangois Pouliot, Liberal member for Temiscouata, asked for a "distinct and official" Canadian flag without the maple leaf. He told the Toronto junior board of trade that the union jack could fly next to this new national flag, but that it should not eclipse it.
The reports published by the Toronto Telegram and the Ottawa Journal were far more accurate. Briefly, here is what I said: (Text):
I do not want the union flag to be minimized as a fraction of the flag. If we are to have it, let us have it full-size, but let us also have a truly Canadian flag. Both could be hoisted together.
Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Pouliot:: I continue:
Is it not the time to have a distinctive and official Canadian flag bearing only one emblem, a large maple leaf, which will tell all the other nations of the world that Canada is the greatest of them all?
(Translation):


Mr. Speaker:: I should not want the intervention of the hon. member to create a precedent and, if I did not call him to order before, it was because I had doubts as to his right to raise the question of privilege in this house for the purpose of correcting newspaper reports of a speech he made outside the house. The hon. member, being an expert in procedural matters, may not share
my doubts on this point; at any rate, I should like to make these remarks in order that this case be not considered as a precedent. (Text):



VETERANS AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
First report of special committee on veterans affairs.-Mr. Tucker.


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 281, to incorporate St. Mary's River Bridge Company.-Mr. Nixon.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the representations made to the United States Senate finance committee as to the views of the administration in relation to the quantitative restrictions on the imports of crude oil from Canada and elsewhere, may I ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce if the Canadian government will make it abundantly clear to the United States administration that the proposal to have these restrictions enforced by individual producers is no more acceptable than is the proposal to have the restrictions imposed by the government and that if this type of proposal is persevered in it is likely to disturb very seriously Canadian confidence in our trading relations with the United States?


Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, the proposal of the administration antedates the legislation that was introduced in the United States congress. Both proposals were known to this government when our protest was filed and I think the subject matter of our protest deals adequately with both proposals.



INCOME TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. J. McCann (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, with reference to the question asked on March 21 by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Hahn) who inquired what the income tax appeal

Inquiries of the Ministry board meant by the term "psychological discounts" when reviewing the case of a Winnipeg lumber firm, I would state that evidently he has reference to a decision of the income tax appeal board in the case of McDonald-Dure Lumber Co. Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue.
This company in selling lumber to its customers allowed a discount, presumably for prompt payment. In its income tax returns the company deducted the amount of the discounts from its accounts receivable. The assessor considered that the discount was only a contingent reserve and disallowed the deduction claimed. At the hearing the company established that the discount was always given the customer even if payment was late and the board therefore found that it was not a contingent reserve. Mr. Fordham, the member of the board who rendered the decision, made the statement that "the amount of the discount was added to an account simply for the psychological effect on the customer who was led to believe that by paying his account promptly his bill would become 10 per cent less". The term "psychological discounts" was apparently used by a newspaper in reporting this judgment.
It might be explained that in assessing taxpayers on an accrual basis all sales made in the year are included in income-less a reasonable reserve for bad debts-whether the customer pays or not. Had these discounts been established to be contingent only they would not be allowed as a deduction until the account was paid and the discount in fact established.



REPORTED NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ACT BY POST OFFICE OFFICIALS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
['I hope that can be arranged to the satisfaction of all hon. members.']
Mr. W. M. Hamilton (Notre Dame de Grace):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask if the Acting Postmaster General can inform the house what steps are proposed to alleviate the considerable inconvenience caused departmental employees in Montreal and Ottawa by the department's non-compliance with certain provisions of the Income Tax Act.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Acting Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of any of the facts alleged in this so-called question but I will have inquiries made.



[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the understanding, which appears to have been


quite clear in the minds of hon. members of this house, that the Prime Minister would be making a further statement during the debate on external affairs in regard to the commonwealth conference, and in view of the desire of some of us to take part in that discussion, may I ask the Prime Minister if it is his intention to do so and when we may expect the resumption of the debate we were engaged in yesterday?


Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I gave no undertaking about a further statement in connection with the prime ministers' conference. I said that there would be an opportunity to discuss that conference when the debate on external affairs was taking place and the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) did discuss it yesterday during the course of his remarks.
Replying to the second part of the question, there are many matters that we are anxious to have dealt with by the house. My colleague who has been leading the house has been discussing with the representatives of the other parties the most convenient arrangements that can be made for that purpose. I am not in a position to make any statement as to when it will be possible to dispose of the various matters.


George Alexander Drew: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister if it will not be possible to fix a definite date so that in regard to a subject which is of such paramount concern and which was dealt with by only a very few members yesterday we might have a definite indication as to when it will be coming up so that appropriate arrangements may be made by those hon. members who may wish to participate in the debate.


Louis Stephen St-Laurent: I hope that can be arranged to the satisfaction of all hon. members.



SOCIAL SECURITY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In view of what is already being done in the three western provinces and in view of Ontario's offer to match any federal aid boost to old age pensioners, will the government consider increasing the amount of the pensions paid under the Old Age Assistance Act, the Old Age Security Act and the Blind Persons Act?


Hon. Paul Martin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend did not give me notice of his intention to ask this question, but after listening to him I think it is quite apparent that the hon. member has had that question replied to by implication so many times that there is no need for any further comment now.


An hon. Member:: The silent treatment.


Stanley Howard Knowles: How many times can you say "no"?



POSTAL SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lomer Brisson (Saguenay):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General. Following the question which I addressed to him on February 10 concerning the improvement of the mail service to the district of Seven Islands and certain localities to the east of Seven Islands, is he in a position to let me know if the department has now reached a decision?


Mr. T. A. M. Kirk (Parliamentary Assistant to the Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank my hon. friend for having given me notice of his question. In answer I may say that the department has made arrangements for the Seven Islands district to be served six times per week in the summer instead of four times, and for certain localities east of Seven Islands to be served twice weekly instead of once. The improvement of the winter service is still under consideration.

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



INTERIM SUPPLY

Mr. Harris moved:: Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $515,411,790.67, being one-sixth of the amount of each of the items to be voted, as set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1956, laid before the House of Commons at the present session of parliament; and in addition thereto, a sum not exceeding $137,500, being one-half of the amount of item 437, a sum not exceeding $439,942, being one-sixth of the amount of items 193, 196, 200, 201, and a sum not exceeding $1,975,296.08, being one-twelfth of the amount of items 18, 37, 439, 440, of the said estimates be granted to Her Majesty on account of the fiscal year ending March 31, 1956.
He said: Mr. Speaker, this is the annual request for interim supply which has always been granted after full consideration by the
Interim Supply
committee. The custom has been to ask that two months' supply be granted on all the items which are to be included in the estimates, and that custom is being followed this year.
In addition, there are several other items in which more expenditure is made in that two months' period than in the latter part of the year, and as a consequence we are asking for a sum additional to the one-sixth of those items. They are set out in the resolution and they refer particularly to the Canadian international trade fair, as that expenditure will be made almost immediately. They also refer to the unemployment insurance commission, with respect to certain items which have to be paid at this time of the year; and they refer to the Senate and the House of Commons, the major portion of the cost of these items coming at this time of the year. In agriculture they refer to experimental farm services and other items; in trade and commerce, to electricity and gas inspection services, weights and measures, etc. Therefore the total amount being requested is as set out in the resolution.
There is no item which is being released to a greater extent than two-thirds, and in this case I wish to give the assurance which is given on every occasion when this bill is passed concerning the right and privilege of hon. members to criticize, or in fact to refuse supply at a future date. I give the necessary undertaking.


Mr. Macdonnell:: I should like to ask the minister whether his undertaking is given to the actual members now sitting in this house, or merely to members of parliament from time to time; because a question arose about that point in 1949, when the minister took the position that in view of the pending election it was not necessary that the members sitting in the house at that time be the members for whom the undertaking was eventually carried out.
This question has always been a little hazy in my mind, and I rise now because I thought in view of the fact that we have a new Minister of Finance it would be an excellent time to have the point fully clarified.


Walter Edward Harris: I am not familiar with what the future might hold, of course, but it seems to me it is almost a physical impossibility to have an election in the period of time covered by this request; therefore I think it is unlikely.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: If the minister will look back to 1949 he will find how it is possible.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.

Interim Supply



WAYS AND MEANS


Walter Edward Harris: that the house go into committee of ways and means.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.


Walter Edward Harris: Resolved, that towards making good the supply granted to Her Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1956, the following sums be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada, namely:
1.	The sum of $515,411,790.67, being one-sixth of the amount of each of the items set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1956;
2.	The sum of $137,500, being one-half of the amount of item 437 of the said estimates;
3.	The sum of $439,942, being one-sixth of the amount of items 193, 196, 200, 201 of the said estimates; and
4.	The sum of $1,975,296.08, being one-twelfth of the amount of items 18, 37, 439, 440 of the said estimates; as set forth in the resolution concurred in this day in the committee of supply.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in.
Mr. Harris thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 284, for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1956.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive agreed to.
On clause 4-$439,492 granted for 1955-56.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I wish to say something regarding schedule B which is referred to in clause 4. I am in your hands, sir, as to whether I should do it now or wait until you call the schedule.


The Chairman:: Schedule B will be called in due course.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 5 to 7 inclusive agreed to.
Schedule A agreed to.
On schedule B-Labour and legislation.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, according to schedule B it would seem that in addition to the two months which is being asked for with respect to all the items in the main estimates, an additional two months is also [Mr. Macdonnell.l
being requested with respect to items 193, 196, 200 and 201. I am particularly interested in item 193, which reads:
To provide for the transfer of labour, to and from places where employment is available and expenses incidental thereto, in accordance with regulations of the governor in council.
I assume that the reason the government is now asking for a total of four months out of the twelve in this item is as a result of the unemployment situation at the present time. What concerns me is this, Mr. Chairman. Despite the fact that we know that the unemployment situation this year is worse than it was last year, according to the main estimates the total amount to be asked for this year for this purpose is only half what was asked for last year. I am looking at page 34 of the main estimates where it is noted that $200,000 was voted for this purpose last year. But only $100,000 is being asked for this same purpose this year. If it is intended to expend four-twelfths of the year's amount under this item in the next little while, what will happen if further money is needed for this purpose.


Walter Edward Harris: The hon. member knows
quite well what will happen. We will have a supplementary estimate next year.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Is it possible to get from anyone on the government side a statement as to what is happening right now under this item, how much is being spent week by week or month by month, or how many people are being assisted to move from one place to another in order to obtain work?


Walter Edward Harris: Not at this moment. I will get the information and give my hon. friend what I have.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, may I, by consent, ask the minister a question with regard to clause 6, the power to borrow, which was not apparently in the act last year?


Walter Edward Harris: I beg the hon. member's pardon?


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am asking with regard to paragraph 6 or clause 6, the power to raise a loan.


Walter Edward Harris: The borrowing power was contained last year in the final appropriation bill. This year, since we have almost reached the limit of that power, we thought it would be appropriate to have a section here giving us power for this coming fiscal year to borrow the same amount as was borrowed last year. I am told that the borrowing authority is down to about $50 million at the moment. This bill will provide for the same

borrowing authority that would normally be asked for and obtained in, say, May or June.


[Stage Direction]
Schedule agreed to.
Schedule C agreed to.
Preamble agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:: By leave, shall this bill be read a third time now?


Stanley Howard Knowles: By leave.


Walter Edward Harris: the third reading of the bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Production service-
Health of animals-
552. To provide for payment of compensation to owners of animals or poultry affected with diseases coming under the Animal Contagious Diseases Act, which have died or have been slaughtered in circumstances not covered by the above act and regulations made thereunder, and to provide for payment to owners for loss of cattle during treatments for immunization against hemorrhagic septicaemia, all as detailed in the estimates, $7,725.


Mr. Charlton:: Is the Minister of Agriculture going to be here to answer these questions, Mr. Chairman?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


John Alpheus Charlton: Can the minister advise me about the first item amounting to $7,725? I am not criticizing it. I am just curious as to how and when they started this practice of paying this money out for animals that died, I presume, from the time they are immunized at Winnipeg until they arrive at Toronto or probably at the farm. I wonder whether the minister will explain that point.


Walter Edward Harris: As I think my hon. friend knows, last year it was decided to experiment with respect to certain diseases that overtake animals and also with respect to the treatment to be given especially with regard to those animals that are shipped from the west to the east. The result was that, in the course of carrying out this experiment, certain cattle died. The items set out here totalling $6,090 are the intended payments to the farmers who would ordinarily stand to lose. I notice that most of them or, in fact, all of them, are in the east and a large number of them are in western Ontario.
Sup p ly-A griculture


John Alpheus Charlton: That is to be taken for granted, Mr. Chairman, because they are all feeder cattle coming in from the west to western Ontario.


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


John Alpheus Charlton: I do not think they have much trouble with anything else.


Walter Edward Harris: No.


John Alpheus Charlton: They are immunized at Winnipeg.


Mr. McCullough (Moose Mountain):: I should like to ask the minister this question. Do I understand that these are cattle that have been treated for septicaemia and thereafter have died?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


Edward George McCullough: If these cattle were treated prior to shipment, it seems most unusual, does it not, that they should die? That is the regular procedure in the shipping of cattle, according to my information and knowledge of the shipping of cattle. We generally have little loss if the cattle are immunized for septicaemia prior to shipment. This would seem to me to be a heavy loss if they were properly immunized prior to shipment. I wonder whether there is any further explanation with regard to that matter.


Walter Edward Harris: No. I do not think any further explanation can be made, Mr. Chairman. The fact of the matter is just what I said before. This was an experimental treatment of animals. As a result, certain animals died; and the department feels that they ought to bear the loss rather than the owners who agreed to submit their cattle to this experiment.


Edward George McCullough: I wonder just why the department undertook this experiment. In respect of cattle going to the ordinary feeder channels through the Winnipeg market, the farmer undertakes his own responsibility. Is this going to be a procedure that is extended to all farmers shipping feeder cattle or is it merely with respect to those coming to eastern Canada?


Walter Edward Harris: I presume that from time to time the Department of Agriculture will carry out these experiments and tests under the conditions that they think would be most appropriate. It might be the shipment of feeder -cattle one year; it might be some other form another year.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: I should like to ask the minister one question with regard to the
2,380

Supply-Agriculture
nature of the compensation. For instance, a number of farmers bring to my attention the fact that where their cattle have been destroyed or at least have been found to be unfit for human consumption by reason of those animals suffering from lockjaw, there is no compensation. There have been quite a number of cases recently in which farmers have taken their cattle to the packers, where it has been found that they were suffering from lockjaw and claim for compensation was denied. Why is there that restriction?


Walter Edward Harris: I am afraid I cannot answer that question. I am devoting my attention only to those items that we are recommending for payment. Discussion on whether these animals ought to be paid for, I would suggest, could be had on the estimates for the coming year.


Edward George McCullough: I should like to ask the minister how many cattle were treated for septicaemia under this program and how many were in different shipments? I should also like to know the total shipments which were made, those shipments which were treated and those which were not treated; and also in those shipments which were not treated, how many died. I should like to have that information if any record is made of those shipments.


Mr.   Karris@: The total number of animals which were subjected to the test ran to 9,400. Of those, we are paying for 73.


Mr. Bryce:: I do not know whether or not the minister has this information, but on what basis is this compensation paid? Is it so much a head, so much a hundredweight or according to whether the animals were purebred or commercial animals?


Walter Edward Harris: I notice that the payments vary from a low of $77 in one case up to a total of $1,100 in another, so I take it that it was on the basis of the value of the animals.


William Scottie Bryce: The $1,100 would be for how many?


Walter Edward Harris: Eleven animals.


Edward George McCullough: Perhaps I did not make myself completely clear. What I wanted to know was how many cattle that were treated died and how many that were not treated died. I take it we are trying to determine the effect of this experiment and I should like to know how successful it was.


Walter Edward Harris: As I understood it, my hon. friend asked how many were subjected to the treatment and how many died. I gave
	!
those figures, 9,400 and 73. What is the other figure he is asking for?


Edward George McCullough: The
number of cattle that were untreated which died. Then I would have a comparison.


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry, but I cannot hear.


Edward George McCullough: How
many were shipped which were not treated and which died of septicaemia?


Walter Edward Harris: The figures I have relate only to those which were treated. I have no information as to the numbers that were not treated because we are not concerned with those.


Edward George McCullough: Then I take it we cannot have the information which would enable us to decide whether or not the experiment was successful. It could very well be that there were few losses among those which were not treated. In that case the experiment would not be successful. If the minister does not have the information, I suppose we will have to leave it at that. I should also like to know something with respect to a rather new disease, and I think it would come under this item. I want to inquire about what is termed the black disease which is a type of blackleg or septicaemia. The symptoms are rather difficult to diagnose. Has the department made any provision to investigate that disease which is occurring in western Canada, particularly in Saskatchewan?


Walter Edward Harris: My answer again must be what it was to the hon. member for Prince Albert. We are concerned here with the expenditure of money for certain purposes, and if the hon. member has other questions in mind he can ask them on the main estimates.


John Alpheus Charlton: The minister has suggested that this is an experiment and has said that 9,400 animals were tested. As I understand it, they are given an injection at Winnipeg to ward off hemorrhagic septicaemia. Is it a case of some of the animals having died after the injection? What happened to them? Where did it happen? Did it happen in the railway yards, on the trains coming east or after they arrived here? Under what circumstances were the animals slaughtered?


Walter Edward Harris: The animals died at various
times. Some of them arrived in the east and were treated a second time and then died on the farm. Others died in transit. Of the 9,400, approximately 500 showed some signs of this disease and 73 died at one time or another.


Edward George McCullough: I think this is rather important from the point of view of the livestock producers. Do I understand that cattle which were healthy were treated with the vaccine for hemorrhagic septicaemia and then either en route or after arriving at their destination 73 of them died?


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


Mr. Mclvor:: That is what he said.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Terminal services-
554. Freight assistance on western feed grains- further amount required, $2,000,000.
Mr. Pearkes:: This item brings the amount for freight assistance up to $19,500,000, I believe, by adding the $2 million to the original vote. I presume this amount is necessary because it has been decided to do away with the reduction in freight assistance announced earlier this session and restore the assistance paid on feed grains to British Columbia. If that is so, I should like to take this opportunity to thank the minister for having corrected the mistake made earlier this session. Of course, if it is not I would ask the minister to explain exactly what this amount is required for.


Walter Edward Harris: I should like to be the recipient of the good wishes of the hon. member but I am afraid I cannot be. This is in fact another $2 million that will be needed for the payment of feed grain subsidies in the year ending next week. It merely indicates that the original vote of $17 million was not sufficient for that purpose and that there has been a much greater demand on the vote than has been the case in former years. This item is for the purpose of providing the extra money we expect to spend before the books are closed for this year.


Mr. Herridge:: Like the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich, my constituency is very interested in the question of freight assistance on western feed grains. Since the government announced its change of policy I have been flooded with letters from poultry producers, dairymen, farmers' institutes and other agricultural organizations all expressing dismay at the government's change of policy and urging reconsideration. They have asked me to try to melt the minister's heart. It is a very serious matter for many of the poultry producers and dairymen in my constituency particularly because they live under somewhat unusual circumstances. They do not enjoy the good transportation and other facilities that exist in many places on the prairies.
Supply-Agriculture
One letter I received from the secretary of the Fauquier farmers' institute brings to my attention particularly what the loss of the $5 a ton means to the producers of the Arrow lakes area. The secretary advises me that egg prices have been at the lowest level for some years, an average of 16 cents per dozen lower than 1953. These two conditions are province-wide and that is the reason for the province-wide complaint from British Columbia with respect to the reduction in freight assistance. In the district I represent there are certain other difficulties that are more or less local. As a result of the loss of the C.P.R. steamship service on the Arrow lakes, it costs the farmers of that area $5 a ton more to move their grain by means of the present service than it did last year. In addition, certain other difficulties have arisen because of the change in service.
I am not going to delay the committee except to say that this is a serious situation for many dairymen and poultry producers in my constituency and will have serious effects on them in making a satisfactory livelihood. Because of the pioneer conditions under which some of them live it will mean complete bankruptcy. Therefore I do ask the minister to bring my remarks to the attention of the Minister of Agriculture to see if something cannot be done to restore at least partially the assistance which has been so helpful to these pioneer producers in the years past.


Mr. Hahn:: Earlier in the year I spoke at some length on the question of freight assistance. I was hoping, as did the hon. member for Esquimalt-Saanich, that the minister had prevailed upon the Minister of Agriculture to let him include $2 million for freight assistance on feed grain for the people of the west and British Columbia. I seriously hope that the Minister of Agriculture will look into this whole question to see if we cannot find some way of assisting these agricultural people in British Columbia. I can only repeat what I said before in respect to the need, and the fact that the prices received by the farmers are low while the cost of feed is high, making it practically impossible for these people to remain in business in the lower mainland area.
I know the minister is aware of the situation, and I know only too well that if he had the money available he would say, "I see no better place in Canada to put it than in British Columbia". I am looking forward to the time when he can make some money available to assist us in the way we believe we should be assisted.


John Alpheus Charlton: The item in the estimates last year was $17 million, and that amount was

Supply-Agriculture
spent. This addition of $2 million would bring the amount up to $19 million, yet the estimate for this year has been reduced to $15,500,000. Does the minister suggest that is the amount to be dropped, $3 [DOT] 5 million for this coming year? Why the huge drop in this freight assistance?


Walter Edward Harris: I am sure that is a good question to ask on the main estimates when the item of $15,500,000 is before the committee.


Mr. Thatcher:: I hesitate to speak on this item, yet I have had some views on it for quite a few years and 1 should like to lay them before the minister today. I want to emphasize that they are only my own views. The hon. member for Kootenay West expressed very ably a moment ago the views of this party.
This item of $2 million is going to mean that in the current fiscal year the government will have paid out $19 million on feed grain subsidies. This will bring the total amount which the taxpayer has been assessed for this subsidy, since its inception, to $222 million. Now, that is a good deal of money. I hope before this item passes the Minister of Finance will express an opinion as to whether or not it is actually of great value to the farmer. I ask the house to remember for a moment the original purpose of this particular legislation. Hon. members will recall that it was introduced during the war years to encourage farmers to grow more hogs and beef, in order to make meat available to Great Britain at a time when she could not get enough meat from Holland, Denmark and her other customary sources of supply.
I feel that the original purpose of the legislation has long since been achieved. Once you get a subsidy on the books, it is very difficult to remove it. I know there would be howls of anguish if it were removed. Nevertheless I should like the minister to state whether or not some emergency still exists which would justify this subsidy. The hon. member for Kootenay West has said that certain chicken farmers in his riding might gc bankrupt if the subsidy were removed. If that is the case, of course it should be taken into consideration. Yet I am still not convinced in my own mind that this huge expenditure is a sound one. I have never been able to find evidence to prove that the payment of this subsidy meant western farmers were better off. Some people may argue that we could not sell our feed grains in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec if we did not have the subsidy. If anyone can prove such a fact, I might have to change my opinion. But to date I have found no such evidence.
As a matter of fact, I feel that if the subsidy were not there the prairie farmer would

be much more likely to feed his grain on the farm in the west, and might in the long run be better off for having done that. If we must have a subsidy on feed grain to British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec, why do we not also have some kind of subsidy on the prairies? Actually, this measure is discriminatory against the prairies. If a Saskatchewan farmer in the south is shipping feed grain to the north where there might happen to be a shortage, there is no subsidy on that shipment at all. Actually, the freight rate is higher than it would be on a shipment all the way down to eastern Canada. I am only speaking for myself, but I do find myself most unenthusiastic about this expenditure. I am not convinced it is doing anyone very much good, except some of the feed dealers.


Mr. Brooks:: I just wanted to say a few words in reply to what the hon. member has said. He spoke about assistance to Ontario and Quebec, but I might point out to him that it is of great assistance to the dairy farmer and meat producer in the maritime provinces. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, I do not know iust what the maritime farmers would do if it were not for this freight assistance on feed grain.


Mr. Gillis:: Fold up.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: They would not fold up altogether, but they would come close to it, as the hon. member for Cape Breton South has said. The hon. member mentioned subsidies to the maritime provinces, Ontario and Quebec but I should like to ask him about the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. What help do the maritime provinces get from the Prairie Farm Assistance Act? We have never objected to it. If you make an estimate of what has been paid under that legislation, you will find it runs into $100 million or $150 million.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: It is $75 million since the act was passed.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Yes, and it is growing all the time.


Mr. Weir:: Do the maritimes not get something for the marshlands?


Alfred Johnson Brooks: We get a few million dollars, but there is no comparison between the two. The marshland payments have been compared a good many times in this house with the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. There is another act, the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, under which many millions of dollars collected from the public all across Canada have been contributed to the west. I am indeed astonished that the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre would speak in this house about subsidies going to Ontario, Quebec and

the maritime provinces when there is all this money being paid to western Canada, without any complaint coming from the people in these other areas.


Mr. Nowlan:: The hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre asked a question and the hon. member for Royal has answered it, but I feel I should answer it also even if the Minister of Finance does not. The Minister of Finance was down in my constituency this summer, but I only saw him for a split second as he was driving through the Annapolis valley. He could very easily have answered the question from what he saw in that one constituency. The expenditures which have been made under this item throughout the years would be justified by conditions existing in that constituency. I am not particularly favourable to the payment of subsidies, and I am not discussing the relative merits of each of these expenditures, but I can say without fear of contradiction that the payment of this subsidy brings a more direct return to people generally than any other type of expenditure that could be made.
As a result of these payments the dairy industry and other forms of the livestock industry generally, as well as the poultry industry, are able to continue. My county of Kings, Nova Scotia, is now the largest poultry producer in Canada. This has come about with developments during wartime and since.


John Whitney Pickersgill: And the Newfoundland market.


George Clyde Nowlan: All these factors enter into that situation, but it could not exist if it were not for this freight rate subsidy, because of course the cost of moving feed grain all the way across the country to the eastern border is quite large. I did not intend to mention this item at all, but I could not sit here and let someone challenge it. I am satisfied that some items should be questioned more than others, and some are more valuable than others; but I am satisfied that there is no item more valuable than this one in the whole group of supplementary estimates.


George Randolph Pearkes: When the minister replies to the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre, I hope he will point out to him that the prairie farmers enjoy the farmer-to-farmer benefit in the sale of their feed grain. When one prairie former is anxious to unload a lot of his grade 5 wheat he just sells it to his neighbour, and they do not have to go through the wheat board. But when the British Columbia farmer has to buy his wheat it has to go through the wheat board and he has to pay the premium thereon. I hope
Supply-Agriculture
the minister will point out to the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre that there would be no chickens and no turkeys on the prairies if it were not for the early-hatching eggs which come from British Columbia.


Clarence Gillis: It is much easier to justify this subsidy than the gold mining subsidy. It is national in scope and very necessary in the part of the country in which I live, particularly in relation to the poultry farmer. Last year, quite a few people came to see me on this particular question of feed grains. Despite the subsidy, feed grains have gone up in price by $5 a ton pretty well all across the country. In the last year the price of eggs has gone down in the maritime provinces. If they are to continue their operations on the present basis, then they need this subsidy. If it were not for this subsidy there is no doubt as to what would happen in Kings county in regard to poultry, and all through the maritime provinces. It is a very lucrative industry there and has been built up largely because of this subsidy. I am not going to argue it; I know the minister is taking the right position on it and he should continue it.
I would point out to the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre that this subsidy is a great help in the marketing of feed grains in the part of the country from which he comes. In many sections of the country where these feed grains are needed we have to drag them thousands of miles across the country because we cannot grow feed grains and other grains in many parts of Canada. They do not grow there. They have to be obtained from the United States on the eastern seaboard or from Saskatchewan and Manitoba and from other parts of the country that sell feed grains. Without this subsidy I am reasonably certain that we would not be taking feed grains from western Canada all the way across the country because we can get them much closer on the eastern seaboard. This is one subsidy that no hon. member who has any understanding of what it means and what it has meant would suggest for a moment should be discontinued. It is a freight rate subsidy. That kind of subsidy is necessary if we are to market our own goods provincially.


John Alpheus Charlton: I am sorry the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre brought up this question today. I can assure him that if we did not have this freight rate subsidy the western farmer would not have a very big market for his feed grain. I can also assure him that if they do not keep this subsidy the feeders in the east will be buying a great deal less of it. It is a very important part

Supply-Agriculture
of government expenditure. If this subsidy is cut off-it has been reduced for next year- it will make a terrific difference in the number of pounds of feed grain sent down east, because the Ontario farmers are now in a position where they are working very close to the line. A few cents difference on a hundred pounds of grain would just make the difference between profit and loss.


Edward George McCullough: I did
not intend to speak on this item. However, my good friend the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre apparently is more or less speaking as an authority. I realize that, like me, he has gone into the production of Here-fords and the raising of purebred cattle. I am not sure that he is familiar with all aspects of agriculture. I am very happy that at least on two occasions in his remarks he indicated he was speaking for himself and himself alone. I farm in that part of Saskatchewan whence he comes. I take the view, sir, as do most members of this party, that we are interested in agriculture from coast to coast. It may well be that in the economic society which we in this party visualize there might not be the necessity for some of those subventions and assistance. However, under the prevailing conditions I go along with the hon. members from the maritimes and from the coastal province who have indicated that if this freight assistance were not paid, then those people would be in a very difficult position indeed. Therefore, I support it.
Since we are talking about subsidies, I think we are taking a very short point of view when we are prepared to go along with the subsidization of gold mining, when we take it from one hole in Canada and put it in another hole in Kentucky and flood and protect it down there where it does nobody any good, if we object to subsidies on feed grains. Here we are talking about subsidizing feed grains for the little farmers, the people in the poultry industry who are making a living out of it. Surely, no one in this house would object to that idea.
I regret very much that the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre does not agree with the principle which has been endorsed by the members of this group, namely, that we are interested in those engaged in agricultural production from coast to coast. I fully realize that during the war the freight assistance paid to Ontario hog producers, as an example, enabled those producers to produce their bacon hogs and receive at least $6 more for their finished hog than we received in the west. We did not mind that. We feel that every phase of Canadian agriculture in every province in Canada should get a square deal. I am very sorry that the
IM r Charlton 1
government saw fit to cut down the subsidy by $5 a ton this year. I wish they had kept the subvention on certain grains going to different parts of Canada rather than to decrease it, as they have done.


Mr. Hosking:: I had no intention of taking part in this debate until I heard the socialists introduce the topic of cutting off subsidies for Canadians. We have the wealthy farmer from Saskatchewan saying that his western farmers are no better off with this subsidy, and we find the Tories criticizing his remarks very much. Then the hon. member for Moose Mountain rises in his place and suggests there should be no subsidy on gold mining. Let me tell my hon. friend


Edward George McCullough: I did
not say that. I said that if hon. members were prepared to support gold mining subsidies, then surely they should not be reticent about supporting such assistance as this.


Henry Alfred Hosking: I do not accept the correction, for he went on to say that it did no good. Let me tell him this. One dollar spent on the gold subsidy employs more men than money in any other subsidy.


William Alfred Robinson: Order.


Henry Alfred Hosking: It employs more men than
any other subsidy paid by this house.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. May I remind the hon. member that we are discussing agriculture, not gold mining.


Henry Alfred Hosking: I shall return to the subject of grain subsidies. This is one of the few subsidies that benefit farmers who raise livestock in the province of Ontario. There are not many farmers in Ontario who would criticize our government for continuing to pay the subsidy that it was wise enough to put on a few years ago, particularly when the type of agriculture that it benefits is not nearly as lucrative as the type of agriculture that is carried on in the western provinces.


Mr. Argue:: Mr. Chairman, the thing that is wrong with this item and with the government's policy in relation to subsidies on feed grains is not that the subsidy is too high but that the government is out to reduce the subsidy and if the present trend continues I am afraid it is out to get rid of it entirely. Along with other hon. members, I believe that the subsidy on feed grains is essential to the welfare of the agricultural industry in Canada from one end of the country to the other. I do not believe with anyone that this subsidy is peculiarly favourable to

the people who are raising poultry or livestock, but rather that it results in widespread benefits to Canada as a whole.
Surely everyone will agree that one of the factors that must be considered when you quote a price for grain is the cost of freight from where it is produced to where it is finally consumed. One of the economic impediments to the general Canadian welfare and the welfare of the agricultural industry is the tremendous freight cost and this subsidy results to the benefit of the Canadian people. As a freight subsidy it is just as important as the $7 million subsidy toward the maintenance of trackage between Sudbury and the head of the lakes.
As a grain producer and as someone who believes that he knows something about the economics of agriculture I believe that when you pay a subsidy on grain, no matter who may receive the cheque, the effect is not only, as it is, to lower the cost of feed grain to the people who are raising poultry and livestock, but it also increases the return to the people who are producing. If you removed the freight cost entirely you would automatically decrease the cost of grain to the feeder and increase the price to the producer. This may not be completely correct when you are dealing with a commodity the price of which is set by international trade factors, but almost all the feed grains produced in Canada are consumed in Canada and I believe that this subsidy helps the whole agricultural industry.
As I said, the thing wrong with it is the fact that apparently the government is out to get rid of this subsidy as quickly as it can.


Mr. Patterson:: Mr. Chairman, I have always been one who felt that we should be thankful for small mercies. Some time ago when this matter was under discussion and the announcement was made that there was to be a drastic reduction in the assistance on feed grain freight rates I raised opposition on behalf of those engaged in the poultry and hog raising industries in the Fraser valley. At that time I asked the government to reconsider the matter and try to do something to extend the assistance.
We all know that the regulations have been carried out as was stated. Since that time I have had a number of protests and communications with respect to the matter. Without doubt it is imposing a great hardship upon farmers in British Columbia because of the present depressed prices for farm products. They are facing a difficult situation at the present time. We are glad that the government has seen fit to retain at
Supply-Agriculture
least a part of the assistance but we do hope that no consideration will be given at any time in the near future to the complete elimination of this assistance. On the other hand, we would like it raised to its previous level.


James Joseph McCann: Mr. Chairman, are we discussing these estimates or next year's estimates? All of this talk about a reduction in the subsidy for next year is entirely out of order. There is only one question here: are we going to vote $2 million that we have spent up to August 1 last with reference to this freight assistance?


Frederick George Hahn: Mr. Chairman, I should like to direct the attention of the Minister of Finance to the fact that every party in the house supports the idea of an increased subsidy on feed grains. While the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre said that he was speaking for himself, I would request that he make a point of suggesting to the Minister of Agriculture that an investigation committee be set up to inquire into the whole problem of the price of feed grain. Apparently the facts are such that there is such a large spread in prices that it makes it practically impossible for the poultry and cattle industries to continue in existence. I would earnestly suggest that the minister consider this point and provide a few million dollars in a later estimate to cover an investigation of problems affecting feed grains and the price spreads existing in western Canada today.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Mr. Chairman, like nearly everybody else, I did not intend to speak on this item and the only reason I am doing so now is to reply to what the Minister of National Revenue just said. He seems to indicate that all we are doing here is to act as a set of rubber stamps to authorize money which has been overspent by the government and which they now have to come and ask us to grant them at the last moment. The Minister of Finance shakes his head but he can correct me later.
I suggest that it is eminently proper that we should talk about the desirability of spending this money. As I understand it, we are authorizing an additional amount to take care of something unexpected which the government did not accurately forecast. I would have thought that if ever there was a time when the discussions should be wide open it would be now. I am sorry that I cannot contribute anything to the merits of the matter.


Walter Edward Harris: I thank hon. members for what has been said. I cannot quite agree with the hon. member for Greenwood because after all this is merely to provide extra money for a principle which has been adopted already

Supply-Agriculture
and which is going to be carried out. This money is needed because a great many bills are coming in now, a greater number than was expected. This is not because of any imperfect forecast, although one cannot be accurate in these things, but because there have been much greater shipments of feed grain to the east during the past season than were expected.
Under these circumstances, and having in mind all that has been said, I am sure that the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre will reconsider what he has said and realize that while there might have been originally some opposition, it seems to be apparent that there is widespread support for the theory that the subsidy is doing some good, not only for the producers of feed grains in the west but for those who market poultry and livestock in the east. I will draw the attention of the Minister of Agriculture to this discussion and I am quite satisfied he will be prepared when his estimates come forward to speak on any subject that has been raised here.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
555.	Amount required to recoup the agricultural products board account to cover the net operating loss of the agricultural products board as at March 31, 1955, resulting from the importation, in 1951, and the marketing of butter by the board, $278,494.
Mr. Harkness:: Mr. Chairman, the remarks with which the Minister of Finance prefaced his statement a few minutes ago definitely do not apply to this item. As far as this item was concerned, the amount voted last year was only $10,000 for the administration of the agricultural products board. We are now being asked to vote as a supplementary item an amount of $278,494 to cover, as is stated here, net operating loss resulting from the importation in 1951 and the marketing of butter by the board. Now, it is a far cry back to 1951, Mr. Chairman. I would be very doubtful whether very much of this figure of $270,000 odd is due and can be traced back to the importation of this butter in 1951. I would like to know first of all how much of this sum is attributed to the importation of 1951, and how it is so attributed.


Walter Edward Harris: Gladly, Mr. Chairman. In 1951 we imported 12,514,081 pounds of butter for which we paid $6,436,684. There were various import duties of one kind and another amounting to $1,116,421. There were handling charges to the extent of $420,862, making a total expenditure of $7,973,967. We sold the butter for $7,695,473, leaving a deficit of $278,494, which is the amount of this vote.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Since this butter was imported in 1951, I wonder if the minister could tell us if it has taken the government four years to sell the butter, and therefore we are just now getting this as a supplementary estimate well on into 1955?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, Mr. Chairman, it is true that a large part of the butter was sold before this current fiscal year, but there were a few bills outstanding a year ago and they overlapped into this year, and we need this vote for that purpose.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I take it the reason there is a loss on this butter is that it was held in storage for a long time and storage charges are included in the figure $1,116,421, which I presume must be paid in connection with this butter. In other words, it would appear that there was no need to import the 12 million odd pounds of butter at that time, and that the government made an error in so doing. Four years later, acting on the assumption, I suppose, that the error had been pretty well forgotten, we are now being asked to pay for that error.


Walter Edward Harris: Of course one can jump to any conclusion one likes, but the facts do not bear out what my hon. friend has said. He will notice I said there were various import duties amounting to over $1 million. These were in fact duties paid on the butter imported into Canada, and came into the consolidated revenue fund. If you take $278,000 from that you will find there was a net profit on the transaction of something in the order of $800,000.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, on this item in respect to butter, could the minister state how much butter was in storage at the time of the importation of butter in 1951?


Walter Edward Harris: No, I could not.


Edward George McCullough: I understand we have a carryover in storage from year to year and the idea is to keep on hand a sufficient quantity to meet the needs of the coming year in order to facilitate a sort of stabilization of the price. What is the government's policy in that regard?


Walter Edward Harris: Well, Mr. Chairman, my hon. friend surely remembers that back in 1951 there was practically no carryover; and while I am not prepared to say at the moment that this was the year I had in mind, there was a year when in the last two or three weeks of March butter increased in price by 20 or 30 cents a pound because of its scarcity in

this country, and about that time we did import butter because there was not a large carryover.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
556.	To provide assistance for the replacement of maple production equipment-further amount required, $100,000.
Wilbert Ross Thatcher: Mr. Chairman, I have one or two questions on this item. I wonder if the minister could say whether this is the item which provides aluminum pails for the maple sugar industry, and also if he could state the amount which appeared in the original estimates? I cannot find an item in the original estimates for this.


Walter Edward Harris: This is the item the hon. member has in mind. Over the years there has been a program of replacing buckets for use in collecting maple sugar. We had thought the job had been completed during the fiscal year ending a year ago, but we found during the course of this present fiscal year that a few were left outstanding, and this is the amount required to clear it up. I am informed that this is probably the last item of this kind.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: I thank the minister for his reply. This is one item to which I have strenuously objected over the years. I think for a number of years we were spending $500,000 a year in this way. It was then reduced to $300,000 and finally to $100,000. I am glad to have the assurance of the minister that this is probably the last time we will have this expenditure, because it just does not make sense to me that the taxpayers of Canada should be providing farmers with aluminum pails for collecting maple syrup. If we are going to supply the maple sugar industry with aluminum pails I do not see why we should not supply dairymen with pails and farmers with water pails. This is an expenditure which I hope will be wiped out once and for all.


John Alpheus Charlton: Mr. Chairman, did the minister say this was the last year it would be paid?


Walter Edward Harris: No, I did not; I said probably.


George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Chairman, I wish to say something concerning this item, in view of the fact that the minister is not certain the item will not appear again. I was rather intrigued by his statement, because when I came into this house as a freshman some years ago I asked the Minister of Agriculture about this item and he gave us a most interesting and dramatic story in explanation, of how some high pressure salesman had most efficiently sold a vast quantity of buckets
Supply-Agriculture
which were resulting in lead poisoning. It was therefore necessary to clear up the matter by supplying aluminum pails.
That appeared to be a reasonable explanation which one could accept. But the whole trouble is, Mr. Chairman, that this epidemic of lead poisoning occurred in 1940, following which this program was launched. I am wondering what degree of tolerance toward lead poisoning has been developed in the last 15 years. The physical structure of the people who were subjected to this poisoning must have been very greatly toughened in the interval, or else everyone has died. Surely there must have been a cut-off date if it was a matter of lead poisoning. If the Minister of Agriculture had not told us that dramatic story I would not have bothered with it again.


Walter Edward Harris: It is very slow poisoning.


George Clyde Nowlan: It is very slow; it is as slow as death, Mr. Chairman. I think there should be a cut-off if there is this danger of exposure to lead poisoning.


Walter Edward Harris: I can assure you the Minister of Finance agrees with you.


George Clyde Nowlan: They should remove the poisonous materials altogether. It is a terrible thing that people should be subjected to it for 15 years while this government pays out a large sum of money each year. I do not know what the lifetime of a bucket is, but last year we purchased about 17 million buckets, which is no small amount. I do not know how they would look in this chamber, but I do not imagine we could pile them all in here. I wish the minister could say that the danger of lead poisoning has now ended and that this will be the last payment. If it is not, he had better bring in another supplementary estimate this afternoon and increase the amount so we can get rid of the poisonous buckets once and for all. I am sure the minister of health and welfare, if he knew about it, would be interested in the situation, because people should not be exposed to such terrible poisoning.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, in all seriousness I wish to ask the minister a question. I understand that some maple sugar producers are using plastic bags instead of pails and containers provided by the department. Has any consideration been given to looking into that matter? I notice this item has decreased since last year, and I wonder if the department is considering supplying the maple sugar producers with plastic bags, which would be an economic measure?

Supply-Agriculture


Walter Edward Harris: No, Mr. Chairman. As I have said this is probably, and I certainly hope it will be, the last item with respect to buckets.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
557.	Prairie Farm Assistance Act administration -further amount required, $416,674.
Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, I am quite interested in this item; and while I do not wish to cast any reflections on the minister, who has been very considerate in answering questions this afternoon, I do think perhaps it would be much better if we had the Minister of Agriculture with us on this item. I am quite interested in this matter, coming as I do from Saskatchewan where we have had a disastrous crop failure this year. On coming to my desk this morning I found that on Tuesday, March 8, an order in council was passed concerning a regulation with respect to the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. This item is an increase in expenditure on this account. I should like to ask the minister for a clarification of this order in council. It is a section added to the regulations which in effect, I believe, excludes certain farmers from being eligible for P.F.A.A. payments.
In former debates I have indicated to the government that there has been a considerable amount of complaint coming from my constituency with regard to P.F.A.A. payments. While the Minister of Agriculture the other day in the house gave me the assurance that farmers who are not satisfied may appeal for a recheck to the P.F.A.A. office in Regina, nevertheless I still have coming to my office complaints from various farmers who have not as yet been eligible for payment. I should like to have, if possible, a clarification of this order in council which, it would seem to me, makes it possible that again there will be the possibility of exclusion of farmers who, in view of the large-scale crop failure, I think should be eligible for payment. I hope the department will see fit to be just as lenient as possible this year with regard to payment of P.F.A.A. payments to farmers in Saskatchewan.
I want to point out that in some parts of my own constituency in particular we have had not only last year's crop failure but two or three years of extremely poor crops where we have had flooding. Consequently some farmers today are finding themselves in bad financial positions. I therefore hope that the minister can give me some clarification, if he has this order in council with respect to change in the regulations whereby a farmer now apparently is not eligible who has sown

in 1954 10 acres of rust-resistant wheat and has had a yield of 10 bushels or more per acre.
In this regard I should just like to refer the minister to the remarks made by the Minister of Agriculture when we were discussing this matter some weeks ago. At that time he stated that farmers who had planted over 10 bushels of rust-resistant wheat- and of course he was speaking of the Selkirk variety-would not need assistance. I should like to point out that if a farmer, by applying to the government agency for Selkirk seed, had planted in the neighbourhood of 10 acres of wheat, he might very well have received 20 bushels or 30 bushels of seed to the acre, which would give him no more than he would perhaps need for his seeding operations this year. Yet that yield would disqualify him from a payment.
I should also like to point out that it would seem to me that, as the regulations are now, while the farmer would be disqualified, he would apparently still be considered to be in the category or in other words in the six contiguous sections which under the act could be taken out as ineligible for payment. The regulation is therefore confusing to me. I hope we can have clarification of it. I simply want to point out that we have some extremely serious financial conditions existing in my constituency. Letters are coming to my office day by day. I hope that the minister will have the Minister of Agriculture look into this matter and be as lenient as possible in respect of these payments.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a word as well with regard to this item. I should like to ask the minister how many employees there are in P.F.A.A., I should like to know how many there were in 1953-54 and how many during the present year 1954-55, which increase has resulted in the material increase in connection with the administration costs.
I should also like to bring to the attention of the Minister of Agriculture, through the Minister of Finance, the number of complaints that are being received-and I think this is generally so among members coming from the western provinces-respecting the administration of the act this year. For some reason there seems to be an unusual strictness and an unusual emphasis-to a degree that has not existed in recent years-on the letter of the law rather than on the spirit. That is particularly so in northern Saskatchewan. Each day letters are received asking how the distribution is proceeding.
The other day the Minister of Agriculture told me that the total expenditure this year

would be some $20 million, of which some $15 million has already been expended, and that the payments are going forward at the rate of $1 million a week, as I recall the statement that he made. There certainly is no lack of officials in P.F.A.A., because that is one body that seems to be unusually "officialized", if one could use that expression, in employees engaged in the work of this administration.
I do not want to go beyond the bounds within the estimates as pointed out by the Minister of National Revenue; nonetheless this item does give an opportunity to refer to administration not in general but with a view to having removed certain causes of complaint. I want to point out this to the minister. This afternoon, almost in a matter of minutes the interim supply was passed in order to assist. That action showed a spirit of co-operation. I think it demands a similar spirit when these supplementary estimates are being considered.
Relying on that consideration I point out that within the last two or three days I have received letters from the various parts of Saskatchewan, and in particular from the northern part, respecting the administration of this act. The hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat referred to the difficult conditions existing in the western provinces this year, particularly in Saskatchewan. Everywhere there has been a demand that consideration be given by the government this year to a material increase in the amount of the prairie farm assistance payment per acre in view of the fact that the amount now provided for was established in 1939 and that while it was very helpful at that time on the basis of the purchasing power of money then, today the payments provided for are totally inadequate to maintain and to keep the farmer on the farm.
That is the purpose of this legislation, to keep the small farmer on the farm, and I suggest that even now the government give consideration to redrafting the act in order to remove a number of anomalies. The area for qualification should be reduced, a request that has already been made by the Liberal party in convention assembled in the province of Saskatchewan, re-emphasizing what we on this side of the house have brought to the attention of the government on a number of occasions. There are various points that should be considered: First, the question of increasing the amount of the payment; second, reducing the period for qualification; and, third, accelerating the distribution of the payments. There are certain areas in which the payments have
Supply-Agriculture
been held back for some reason to a degree that has not applied elsewhere, and while I compliment the administration on the degree to which it has in fact disbursed so large a sum of money in such a short period of time there are nevertheless areas in which there should be early and immediate action.


Hazen Robert Argue: I want to add my voice to that of other members in support of the general provisions of this act. I think it is quite understandable that a fairly large additional sum of money is needed this year to provide for administrative costs. The year which will end on March 31, 1955, is one in which western Canada has experienced a very serious and widespread crop failure. With the widespread crop failure and the large prairie farm assistance payments that must be made, it follows consequently that in order to administer the making of the payments and to assess what farmers are eligible for payments there must be a substantial sum voted for administration.
I have no complaint about supporting substantial sums of money for the administration of this act in years of crop failure. Sometimes I do have a question mark in my mind as to the size of the administrative costs and some of the travelling and other expenses in years when there is no crop failure and when one would expect the administrative costs to be very low. I support those who have pointed out the benefits of the act and who have said that payments should be doubled. That has been put forward by other members of this group and members in other parts of the house during this session.
The hon. member for Moose Mountain pointed out that a new order in council has been passed which will very materially affect the administration of the act. I am not too clear in my own mind just what the effect of the order in council will be. It provides that those portions of land cultivated by any one farmer which were sown to rust-resistant wheat in the year 1954, if the total area so sown comprises 10 or more acres and the average yield thereon is more than 10 bushels per acre, will be excluded from the act. As I understand the provision, it means that if a farmer sows more than 10 acres of land to rust-resistant wheat and consequently has a fairly good crop on that acreage of land the yield of that crop will be excluded from the computation of average yield on which payments are made.
If my interpretation of the order in council is correct, then it certainly is a step in the right direction. The department should, however, bear in mind that a number of

Supply-Agriculture
farmers have sown 6 or 7 acres to Selkirk wheat, that the yield can be 20, 30 or 40 bushels an acre, and that if a third of the farmers in a given township have seeded even that small quantity of Selkirk wheat the chances are that including the yield on the Selkirk wheat in the general average would deprive the majority of farmers who have a total crop failure of any payments at all. If, as I say, my interpretation of the order in council is correct, it is a move in the right direction. However, if experience shows that even with this provision hardship is worked on farmers who were not fortunate enough to have any rust-resistant wheat, I would ask the government to take that into consideration and remove rust-resistant wheat entirely from the yield computations so that the vast majority of farmers with no Selkirk wheat will be able to get payments based on their actual yields of wheat not complicated by yields from rust-resistant varieties.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The hon. member for Prince Albert asked the minister how many people were involved, and I think he might answer that.


William Scottie Bryce: I do not want to repeat what hon. members in this group have already said. I endorse what they have said. My problem concerns the interlake country that I represent, which has been badly hit with floods, with the result that in 1953 there was practically no crop, and in 1954 no crop at all. People there are in bad shape. In many of these districts no inspection has taken place yet. I have discussed the problem with the minister and he tells me that area comes under the P.F.A.A. But I am getting letters every day from these people saying that the inspector has not been there and that they have been told they do not come within the area.
I suggest to the minister that it would be helpful if a small map of the interlake country could be prepared. The Minister of Agriculture came over here and told me that practically the whole of my constituency was under P.F.A.A. If a map could be prepared on which shaded portions could be drawn to indicate the area that is not covered it would clear the air and help me tremendously in getting some recompense for the people of my district for the tremendous loss they have had.
I do not need to say any more. The hon. member for Moose Mountain and the hon. member for Assiniboia have pretty well said all that needs to be said. If the Minister of Finance will be good enough to try to get the Minister of Agriculture to have a map prepared for me I will appreciate it.


Walter Edward Harris: I will see if I cannot get a map drawn through the kindness of someone in the office of the Minister of Agriculture, and I will draw his attention to all that has been said here. In answer to the hon. member for Prince Albert, I have looked at the estimates of the current year and of next year and I find that full-time members on the staff of P.F.A.A. number 46 for the coming year and 40 for the past year. But I notice that the allowance made for casual employment is just about double. It has increased from $85,000 to $155,000. I take it that is casual employment for various persons carrying out part-time duties, although it does not give the numbers of those who would be doing that work. The large proportion of this item is of course for additional administrative costs brought about by the unusual situation that developed in the west last year, and I am quite satisfied that the government hopes to have the extra work done at the earliest possible moment. There is no doubt that conditions developed such as had not been expected or, indeed, had ever been experienced, in some parts of the west in the fall of last year. I would think that in the future wise estimating would still keep the estimates down somewhat from what they will be with this addition. At the same time, I would hope that we could find the money quickly to provide additional labour and additional administrative costs should we enter again into a period such as we had last year. Of course, none of us hope it will be necessary to spend this type of money again in the west.
What the hon. member for Moose Mountain, the hon. member for Assiniboia and the hon. member for Prince Albert have said about the improvement, from their standpoint, that could be made in the act and in the administration of it, I am sure will receive the careful consideration of the Minister of Agriculture.


John George Diefenbaker: I might mention, Mr. Chairman, that I received today a letter which indicates the interest that the farmers take in the continuance of the system, and their desire to avoid taking advantage of the public treasury. The suggestion was made that in order to extend the operation of the act there could be no serious objection to increasing the deductions that are made. These deductions are restricted to 1 per cent, and it was thought they could be increased to 2 per cent. This suggestion had been made by a number of farm organizations, their desire being to build ultimately a system whereby they will make their contribution to an insurance fund. To that end the farmers are prepared to ask for an increase

in the amount of the deduction that is made, and this is an indication of the value that they place on this type of legislation.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I was rather hoping that in his reply to the hon. member for Prince Albert the minister would have given the number of employees in 1953-54 and the number in 1954-55. He gave the number of employees on the permanent staff, but looking at last year's estimates one sees that there were 40 of those with total salaries of $139,000, and then there were casuals with a total salary of $85,000. The number of casual employees is not given. I take it that this sum we are voting today, which is more than double the amount for the permanent staff and the casuals, of $225,000, is practically all for the casual employees necessary as a result of the disastrous conditions last year. I quite appreciate that such conditions would necessitate the hiring of a considerably increased staff.
However, in addition to that I notice that the travelling expenses were $104,000, which we voted for this current year, and the extra travelling expenses are $190,000, which will make a total of $294,000. In other words, the increase in travelling expenses seems excessive. I wonder if the minister could give us the number of employees, particularly those casual employees, how many extra ones had to be secured because of the crop failure, and why the travelling expenses should go up such a large amount?
There is another point here. The minister said that budgeting for this should be kept down, and I agree with that. It should, I believe, however always be possible to have funds available in the event of crop failure to make these payments. Now, that is what has been done this year, I take it. This amount of $416,000 which we are voting has already been spent. In other words, it is purely a dead horse for which we are paying at the moment. The only portion of that which would not have been spent is what might happen to be owing in the past month for wages, I presume, and a small amount that might be owing for transportation. Most of this sum has already been spent. I just wondered from what particular votes it was taken, and under what authority, to cover these expenditures which I agree have to be made.


Walter Edward Harris: Well, Mr. Chairman, we have two votes that provide for money under these circumstances, miscellaneous and unforeseen and a general salaries vote. We have transferred moneys from these two votes to the extent of $186,000 in one case and $226,000 in the other. As my hon. friend has
Supply-Agriculture
said, this is largely as a result of the additional staff and their cost of administration. I would suppose that the extraordinary increase in travelling allowances was necessitated by the fact the employees had to go around the west to a much greater degree than they had in the past. I think I could make the answer to my hon. friend without offence, by suggesting that this is one job that has to be done in a motor car and not in an office.
Under those circumstances I feel that the travelling expenses are justified. Indeed, I would think my hon. friend would suggest we increase them if necessary to get the work done and get the payments made to the farmers.


Douglas Scott Harkness: You have not the numbers of them?


Hazen Robert Argue: A member of the opposition cannot be asking, on the one hand, that the government accelerate the making of these payments under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, and on the other hand complain about the extra administrative costs necessitated by the acceleration of the payments. If we are going to ask that the government do everything possible to get these payments into the hands of the farmers as quickly as possible, then that is bound to mean an increase in the administrative costs.


Mr. Lennard:: You can check on the accounts, though.


Hazen Robert Argue: Fine, that is very good. A question was asked as to the number of persons employed. I received an answer to a question I asked concerning the number of persons employed under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act for Saskatchewan for 1954, as well as the number employed under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. I have not added the figures up, but the answer looks as voluminous as the answer I received a couple of years ago which showed that there were 2,000 persons listed as having received moneys under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act in the way of wages and sustenance, as well as under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act.
I have, however, made a quick calculation of the number of persons employed under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act in Saskatchewan in 1954, and it appears to me as though there were some 550 persons employed. The minister, if I heard him correctly, said that there were around 46 persons employed on a permanent basis under this act. Could the minister tell me briefly what these 40 or 50 people who are employed on a permanent basis under the Prairie Farm Assistance Act do in a year in which there

Sup p ly-A gricu tture
is little or no crop failure? The intriguing part to me is that some of the people employed on a permanent basis have very high travelling expenses, totalling $2,000 or $3,000, in a year in which the area in which they were travelling had little or no crop failure. I quite understand that there must be a very large sum of money spent on travelling expenses in going from farm to farm to assess the yields of grain in a year of crop failure. These huge travelling expenses that are shown for some of the persons on a permanent basis in years in which there was no crop failure are something that, I think, might be explained.


John George Diefenbaker: The search becomes more difficult then.


Walter Edward Harris: I am not the one to inform the hon. member for Assiniboia on the fine details of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act. If he will look in the estimates book which he has before him, he will see the duties of the 40-odd persons on a permanent basis in this particular administration are set out. I Will leave it to him to discuss that at a later time with someone else.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
558.	Estimated amount required to recoup the agricultural prices support account to cover the net operating loss of the agricultural prices support board during the fiscal year 1954-55, including authority to credit to the account the net revenue received into the agricultural products board account from the sale of New Zealand meat received in exchange for beef shipped to the United Kingdom, $3,210,928.
Mr. Quelch:: Can the minister say what was the net loss to the government under the New Zealand-United Kingdom meat agreement?


Walter Edward Harris: In 1952, on beef exported to the United Kingdom, $1,386.26. I recall that was the manner in which we dealt with it. I beg your pardon; we spent $3,210,928.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Can the minister tell us what products this loss covered, and how much was spent on behalf of each of those products?


Walter Edward Harris: I am glad my hon. friend asked me, because I read the amount of the item and not the details. The main programs completed in 1954-55, the net losses of which are included in the amount set out above, were: 1953, butter, $1,500,000; and the 1954 Nova Scotia apples, $625,000. Then we have included a portion of the expected loss for this year on eggs, amounting to about $150,000. This also includes a number of other items of earlier programs that have been put in here in order to dispose of them: 1952, canned pork, $940,000. The item I mentioned a

moment ago, beef exported to the United Kingdom, over $1,000; and the 1952 butter, $6,541. The total of all of these last items amounts to $3,222,928, from which has been deducted receipts from the sale of New Zealand beef to the United States to the amount of $12,000, leaving a total net loss in the amount of over $3 million.


Douglas Scott Harkness: This carries us back to what the minister said a little while ago in regard to the loss on butter, which he then said was not really a loss because they had received $1 million and some odd in customs duty on it, and therefore the government really was not out of pocket; at least that was the impression he left. That loss was sustained because we imported 12 million pounds of butter from abroad in 1951. At the end of 1952 we had a loss of $6,000 because we had a surplus of butter that had to be looked after. In 1953 the loss was $1,500,000 because we had a surplus.
It presents a ridiculous picture, and it indicates the difficulties we run into when the government gets into the butter business without having, so far as I can make out, any reasonable policy to follow as it carries on these various transactions. Therefore we are passing a vote in these supplementary estimates today for $400,000 some odd to cover the loss because we imported butter in 1951. We are now voting over $1,500,000 to cover the loss on butter in 1953, because we had a surplus.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
559.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $4,500.
John George Diefenbaker: I should like to ask the minister a question of broad interest to the various Indian tribes, particularly in Saskatchewan but generally across the country.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. Indian affairs come under item 561.


John George Diefenbaker: This is the administration item for the whole department, Mr. Chairman. It is the only chance I shall have to ask this question. Item 561 deals with the Indian affairs branch, but it provides for things other than administration.
The various Indian bands have been very much concerned over commissioners who have been sitting under the provisions of the Indian Act, set up for the purpose of determining the qualifications for membership in the bands. I am not going into the particulars with regard to their numbers and so forth, set out in the answer given by the

minister to a question of mine on February 14 last, which appears on page 118 of Hansard.
What has happened is this. Commissioners have investigated. Evidence has been taken that consisted of hearsay, gossip and tittle-tattle. From that evidence-and I use the word "evidence" in the sense of testimony- decisions are to be made on the qualifications for membership in the several bands, and also to determine whether or not an individual is an Indian. This is a matter that does not concern members of the House of Commons from the point of view of having any interest in the votes of these people. They are the wards of Canada, and their happiness rests upon the department and the members of this house.
Since the minister has been in charge of this department he has taken a lively interest in it and in raising the standards of those whom he serves as custodian of their rights and privileges, and also as their protector. They have no members in the house to speak for them. There are 160,000 of these first citizens of Canada, and I have often thought that one of the finest gestures this government could make would be to appoint a full-blooded Indian to the Senate of Canada in order that the views of the Indians might be expressed and Indians in general would have an opportunity of having a spokesman in the parliament of this country. They have not that now.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. I am in some difficulty at the present moment. As hon. members can see from the details this item deals merely with travelling expenses, telephones and telegrams under the heading "departmental administration". I fully realize that in recent years the custom has grown up that on the first item of a department in the main estimates a general debate is allowed.
I do not think we have ever extended that privilege so far as to allow a general debate on an item of this kind in the supplementary estimates. I understood the hon. member was merely going to ask the minister a question, and I allowed it. I am wondering whether I should allow the debate to get out of order.


John George Diefenbaker: I was just explaining
the seriousness of the responsibility that rests on hon. members because of the fact that Indians are wards. Under the heading of "administration" these commissions have been sitting and they have caused a degree of ill feeling. I doubt whether the minister and his department have any realization of the feeling of frustration that exists among the Indians, when each feels that he is indeed the enemy of his brother if he challenges the right of that brother to be a member of that band. At this time I should like the minister 50433-152
25,	1955	2393
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration to place before the committee information with respect to what has been done by these commissions, and also to give a word of hope to the people in those bands. Only in extreme cases when there is evidence to support the gossip and tittle-tattle should the registrar act and deny his rights to the individual whose fathers and forefathers have resided on the reserve. Yet today we find these rights being challenged, and this has caused a tremendous amount of ill feeling.
In the 50 years I have lived in the west on a number of occasions I have resided close to Indian reservations. I have never known the Indians to be aroused as they are now because each is in the position of having his ancestry looked into and testimony such as this may be given: "I remember my grandmother told my mother once and my mother told me that A is not altogether of Indian blood." The result is that you have proceedings under way which are causing confusion and dissension and unhappiness.
I should like the minister to say a word of reassurance to the Indians in this country whose ancestors have lived on these reserves ever since they were in existence. They should be told that only evidence will be accepted to bastardize those who are living there and deny them the rights which their ancestors had.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, if I may have the indulgence of the committee I should like to express appreciation to the member for giving me notice of his intention to ask this question because of a particular reason he had at this particular time. I should like also to express my appreciation of the altogether unwarranted compliment he paid me because of the interest I have been showing in Indians. As a matter of fact it is the hon. gentleman now leading the house, who is asking to have these estimates voted, who is deserving of praise in that regard. I think the Minister of Finance, when he was minister of this department, did more to help the Indians than any minister has done since confederation. If I can do half as well I shall be very happy.
My predecessor faced two most difficult problems. One of them was the problem of Indian estates. I think it must be stated quite frankly that these are not in a very satisfactory condition. Part of the reason they are in anything but a satisfactory state is that over the years disputes and differences have arisen as to who were really members of these Indians bands.
When the act was consolidated and reenacted a year or two ago I was not a member of the house. Provision was then placed
2394	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration in the act for bringing these band lists up to date and certain procedures were laid down. I happen to know this because my predecessor discussed it with me when I was secretary to the cabinet. It was only after a good deal of reflection and with considerable misgiving that he established these commissions. There seemed to be no other way to get even the kind of evidence the hon. member for Prince Albert has described, and I have no doubt some of it is just the kind he has described, that would enable the registrar to get some kind of recommendation on which he would have a basis for action.
I may say that none of these commissions settles the question. I should like to make it clear that all the commission does is hear the various conflicting bits of testimony and report to the registrar. The registrar then makes a determination as to whether a person's name should be on the band list. The decision of the registrar is not final in a matter of this kind which, as the hon. member for Prince Albert has said, involves the rights of the Indian.
I do not regard these Indians as wards. Indians are citizens of this country, in fact they are the first citizens of this country, and as such their rights are fully protected. They have the right of appeal to the courts against the decision of the registrar. Not only that, the department assists them in every way possible if they want to make an appeal.
If hon. members will look at the proceedings of the special committee on estimates they will see that on March 17 I answered a number of questions dealing with this subject. Most of the information I could give now I gave to the committee at that time, and I shall not repeat it.
Although most of the reports of these commissions are in, up to now none has been subjected to a final determination. It was felt in the department that we should get them all in and that all the information should be assessed together so we would have a criterion to apply right across the country. They will be determined as rapidly as possible.
I did indicate in the committee, and I say it here in order to make my answer as complete as possible, that it may be necessary to ask parliament at the next session to clarify the law before these disputes can all be determined satisfactorily. I am giving consideration to that question, and I would like the opinion of any hon. member of the house on it, particularly those who are members of the legal profession and who have taken a particular interest in it, as has the hon. member for Prince Albert.


Douglas Scott Harkness: When the right of a person to be a member of the band has been challenged and it is found that the objection is not based on good grounds, that it is frivolous or spiteful, is that person given a clearance at that time or does he have to wait, possibly for years, under the threat of having his family and himself thrust off the reserve?


John Whitney Pickersgill: This rather difficult period has to be gone through. We do want to get these existing disputes determined once and for all as quickly as possible. We want to lay down some kind of simple and expeditious procedure, so that when disputes arise in future they can be settled quickly and not left as sores to fester and cause dissension in the band.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I appreciate that, but the minister has not answered my question. I know of one or two cases where the commissioner expressed himself at the time as believing the complaint was frivolous or spiteful. In a case of that kind has he the authority to throw out the complaint so the mind of the man who is complained against may be set at rest?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I did not understand the hon. member's question. If he is speaking of a case which has come before one of these commissions, then the registrar would be the one to determine the matter. The hon. member asks if it would be thrown out if the commissioner felt it was frivolous. That cannot be done until the registrar considers it. As I have suggested, none of these reports has received final consideration.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The situation is that there may be no justification for a complaint against a man but he may be placed in the position that he will not know whether he will be thrown off the reserve. In other words uncertainty will be created in his mind, and it seems to me that should not be allowed to go on. I believe these commissions have been sitting for two years or more.


Walter Edward Harris: The first was appointed in July, 1953.


Douglas Scott Harkness: It is nearly two years. One of the things on which we pride ourselves in this country is our expeditious administration of justice. It seems to me this is a great breach of the way in which we attempt to administer the laws of the country. In these cases an individual may have to find a new home for his family and himself, and to me that is more important than sending a man to jail for six months.,


John Whitney Pickersgill: We intend to deal with this just as expeditiously as is humanly possible.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister was kind enough to refer me to the proceedings before the committee, and I wish to make one reference to it. The evidence indicates the degree to which the examination has been conducted. In British Columbia there were 44 cases submitted to commissioners; in Alberta, 44; in Saskatchewan, 240; in Manitoba, 21; in Ontario, 52; in Quebec, 25, and there have been no commissions in New Brunswick, the Yukon or the Northwest Territories.
I think the hon. member for Calgary North has raised an important matter; there is uncertainty.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Oh, quite.


John George Diefenbaker: I referred to those citizens as wards. In common with other members of this house, including the Prime Minister and the Minister of Agriculture, I have been honoured by being made a chief in an Indian tribe. When one has had this experience one naturally feels an unusual interest in the welfare of the Indian people as the result of having been honoured in that way.
There is an uncertainty. When I called them wards I did so because that is the word they use to describe themselves, fearful that if they call themselves citizens they will lose their treaty rights. Therefore when they speak of themselves they invariably use the word "wards" in consequence of treaty relationships between Queen Victoria and preceding monarchs and themselves.
I join with the hon. member for Calgary North; and I am certain that the minister, with his realization of the difficulties confronting the Indians, will do everything he can to bring about early decisions so that uncertainty and suspense will not increase the degree of dissension within the bands. I know of cases today where Indians are bitterly antagonistic toward their closest relatives because of the evidence that has been given. Naturally it is to the interest of each of them to challenge the rights of the others and thereby reduce the numbers entitled to the band funds.
When there is an incentive such as that which brings a benefit to the person giving the evidence it always operates as a detriment to the credibility of the individual who will benefit in consequence of the evidence he gives. You cannot challenge the evidence when someone says, "My grandmother tells me that his grandmother was involved with some person." It is unchallengeable. There is nothing on which you can cross-examine. Generally those who are alleged to have made these statements are long since deceased; but the effect of statements like 50433-152i
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration that cannot be conducive to equanimity among the bands nor to friendliness and co-operation.
I thank the minister for his assurance that the matter is receiving the serious consideration of the department.


Edward George McCullough: Mr. Chairman, I am very happy that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration refers to the Indians as the first citizens of this country. I think that is indicative of a splendid approach to the problems of the Indians in this country. I do not for an instant pose as an authority concerning Indian affairs in Canada, but for the last 20 years I have lived within a short distance of an Indian reserve, namely the White Bear reserve. Therefore I am quite familiar with the customs of some of the Indians in Canada.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder if the hon. member would permit me to interject at this point. The leader of the house announced last night that my estimates would be taken up later today, after the supplementary estimates were completed. I wonder if it would be more appropriate to have a general discussion on Indian affairs when we are considering my estimates rather than at this time, when we are discussing departmental administration and the supplementary vote for telephones.


Edward George McCullough: In view of what the minister has said I am entirely willing to make my remarks brief. I just want to say that neither the former minister nor the present minister should take too much credit. It is perhaps quite true that what is proposed will be satisfactory and a credit to the Canadian people, but I wish to say that as far as I am concerned I do hope greater attention and justice will be given to the first citizens of this country. I do not think anyone in this house can be too complacent to date about our attitude or our policies in relation to our Indians. That is my observation, at least.
I might also say that I just returned from the west, and I do not think the Indians on my own reservation of White Bear are receiving quite the consideration that should be given them. I got in touch with the minister's department, and Colonel Jones there has been very receptive toward my ideas. I am quite agreeable to have the matter stand at this time, but I wish to point out that I think we should make a new approach to this problem so that with the increased Indian population, which will pose a serious problem concerning their integration and their acceptance into the various segments of our society, we can assure these people that we recognize
239S

Private Bills
them as citizens of Canada. Knowing the Indians as I do I am convinced they have the character and attributes which will permit them to become assimilated in our society. They will become citizens of whom we shall be proud, and I hope they can be proud of what we do to help them.


Mr. Montgomery:: I have one question on this item. I notice the amount is $4,500, which is divided into $2,000 for additional travelling expenses and $2,500 for additional telephone and telegraph costs. I also note that in the estimates for last year this item was increased by a substantial amount which means that $4,000 more is required this year for telephone and telegraph items than was the case last year, and an additional $2,500 is required for travelling expenses. I also note there has been a small increase in the number of people on the departmental administrative staff. I would like to know if this small increase is because of the extra travelling expenses and the cost of telegrams and telephones. Perhaps the minister could offer us an explanation.


John Whitney Pickersgill: As a matter of fact, as far as travelling expenses are concerned there is an unanticipated increase in the amount of travelling done by the people in the administrative branch because there has been the gradual establishment of an inspection service.
As for the telegraph and telephone service, the former minister was a minister for this province where the parliament buildings are, and I am minister for a province which is fairly remote. The cost of telephone and telegraph service is therefore considerably higher. In my capacity as the minister for Newfoundland I think I am somewhat more extravagant in the use of the telephone and telegraph services than was the previous minister, and I think a certain amount of the blame for the increase in this service falls on me because I represent a geographically remote province.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
William Alfred Robinson: It being five o'clock, the house will proceed to the consideration of private and public bills.



PRIVATE BILLS


John Alpheus Charlton: that the house go into committee to consider Bill No. 193, respecting the London and Port Stanley Railway Company and the corporation of the city of London.

Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
Clauses 1 to 6 inclusive agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Schedule agreed to.
Preamble agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Mr. Bona Arsenault (Bonaventure) moved: that the house go into committee to consider Bill No. 232, respecting the Bonaventure and Gaspe Telephone Company Limited.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Robinson (Simcoe East) in the chair.
Clause 1 agreed to.
On clause 2-Power to increase capital.


Mr. Green:: Mr. Chairman, two amendments were made to clause 2. I wonder whether they have been included in the bill as it is now before us?


William Alfred Robinson: In this copy I notice that the amendments adopted are printed. Perhaps I might read the amendments to hon. members. After the word "of" in the 21st line the following words are added, "not less than two-thirds of the issued shares"; and the words "a majority of the shareholders" are struck out. Is that the amendment to which the hon. member refers?


Howard Charles Green: Yes.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall clause 2 as amended carry?
Clause as amended agreed to.
Clause 3, 4 and 5 agreed to.
On clause 6-Borrowing powers.


Howard Charles Green: There was an amendment to clause 6 also, I believe.


William Alfred Robinson: In clause 6, after the word "the" in the 38th line the word "issued" has been inserted and the word "subscribed" has been deleted. Shall clause 6 as amended carry?
Clause as amended agreed to.
Clause 7 agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
Preamble agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.
Mr. Depuly Speaker:: There are a number of divorce bills on the order paper for second reading, being items 37 to 50 inclusive. Is it agreed that these bills be considered in the one motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



SECOND READINGS-SENATE BILLS

[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 264, for the relief of Lorraine Bella Spegel Weisberg.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 265, for the relief of Frances Kellerman Rappoport.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 266, for the relief of Eleanor Grace Jones Graham.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 267, for the relief of Gabrielle Dal-laire Boulet.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 268, for the relief of Phyllis Elizabeth Warner Collins.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 269, for the relief of Margaret Gwendoline Turner Williams.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 270, for the relief of Mary Ferguson Wynter.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 271, for the relief of Sheila Winni-fred Richardson Hiscock.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 272, for the relief of Anne Roitman Aronovitch.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 273, for the relief of Kathleen Gertrude King Laffin.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 274, for the relief of Gardner Hinckley Prescott.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 275, for the relief of Ethel Cope Veary.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 276, for the relief of Gordon Stewart Norris.-Mr. Hunter.
Bill No. 277, for the relief of Lucille Grenier Desjardins.-Mr. Hunter.

Mr. J. H. Dickey (for Mr. Hunter) moved: the second reading of Bill No. 280, to incorporate Victoria Insurance Company of Canada.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is the sponsor going to make any comment?


John Horace Dickey: This is the usual form of bill for the incorporation of a company to carry on business in the branches of insurance enumerated in clause 6, on the performance by the company of the usual financing arrangements which are set out in the bill.
The bill is in the usual form. It is approved by the superintendent of insurance. It has been considered in the other place. If second reading is granted it is proposed to move in the normal manner that the bill be referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the standing committee on banking and commerce.
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration CRIMINAL CODE

[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Resuming debate on the motion of Mr. Diefen-baker for the second reading of Bill No. 186, an act to amend the Criminal Code (nuisance).
Mr. Campbell:: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice (Mr. Garson) was speaking on this bill when the house adjourned last Friday.


Walter Edward Harris: Stand.
Order stands.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The items under private and public bills having been exhausted, the house will resume discussion of the business which was interrupted at five o'clock.

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


William Alfred Robinson: When the committee rose at five o'clock we had concurred in resolution 559 and were considering item 560.



DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
560.	Citizenship registration branch - further amount required, $4,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: I was very interested in the explanation given by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration regarding the telephone bill, but I was not sure that I fully understood it. I wonder whether he would try to make it clear to me. It had to do with the distance between here and Newfoundland and various considerations of that kind.


William Alfred Robinson: Order. We had carried resolution 559. Has the hon. member unanimous consent to revert to the former item?


John Whitney Pickersgill: We can do it later on my regular estimates.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall item 560 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Indian affairs branch-
561.	To provide that the amount of advances outstanding at any one time with respect to loans to Indians under section 69 of the Indian Act, notwithstanding subsection (5) thereof, may total but not exceed $650,000, $1.
Stanley Howard Knowles: Would the minister give us an explanation of item 561. It is for only $1, but we have to look at it rather closely.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, the last thing I want to do is get into an ideological quarrel with the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. I have never, however-and I say this as a prelude to what I am going to say-agreed with his view that legislation
2398	HOUSE OF
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration through supply bills and appropriation acts is not just as good legislation as any other kind. In fact it was the original kind of legislation for which parliament was established in the middle ages. But I know he regards it as rather medieval.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Auditor General thinks that, too.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, the Auditor General has expressed his view. We all have our views on the constitution, and in a free *country we are all entitled to our views.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I think so too.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think it is probable, though, that at the next session of parliament it will be necessary to suggest some amendments to the Indian Act. If that is done I would certainly feel it would be proper to incorporate this provision in it. The sole purpose is to increase the allowable amount in this revolving fund from $350,000 to $650,000.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Because of what the minister has said, I have no serious objection to this being done in this way. We have both made reference to the Auditor General. I do not have his memorandum before me, but if I recall correctly he does not object to legislation being effected by an item in the estimates when it is of a temporary character. The minister suggests that that is what we have here, a temporary provision until the Indian Act is amended. On that basis I have no objection to it being done in this way. Likewise I have no objection to the content of the proposal itself.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Welfare of Indians-
562.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $600,000.
Mr. Dinsdale:: We have here an item of
$600,000, a fairly sizeable sum, and the description is rather vague. There is $450,000 for materials and supplies. Would the minister explain what is covered by this money?


John Whitney Pickersgill: The amount of $450,000
covers food, clothing and fuel for crippled, blind and indigent Indians. Then there is another $150,000, making up the $600,000, required for payment of accounts arising from the cost of food for tuberculosis patients awaiting admission to hospital or convalescing after discharge with their families, or for their families during hospitalization and posthospitalization periods, as may be necessary. The hon. member for Brandon-Souris will


remember that the main item was explained in some detail in the committee upstairs.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Education-
563.	Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $155,000.
Douglas Scott Harkness: I notice there is an item
of $100,000 for tuition and maintenance of Indian children in non-Indian and joint schools. I presume that is to cover the cost of sending Indian children to high schools and things of that sort, and it would appear that more Indian children are attending such schools than was estimated. If that is the case I am extremely glad to see it, and I would have been even more delighted if the vote had been twice as much, provided that is the purpose of the vote. Will the minister tell us what the vote covers and, if my presumption is correct, how many Indian children are attending high schools this year?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. member would not mind referring to volume No. 14 of the proceedings of the special committee on estimates where detailed information is given as to the number of children attending high schools and so on. I do not have the information at my fingertips. The main estimates provided $7,401,323 for Indian education generally and this particular item of $100,000 is, as the hon. member for Calgary North has said, an additional amount to pay tuition fees for children going to nonIndian schools. That includes high schools and technical schools and it also includes the considerable number of places-they are growing in number every year, and they cannot grow too fast to suit me-where we make arrangements with the local school authorities to send Indian children to the general schools that the rest of the children attend.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I agree with the last statement of the minister. I merely wondered what proportion of this amount was for the first purpose I mentioned, to send Indian children to high schools and technical schools. If a considerable number of Indian children have now reached the stage where they can take that form of education I think that matter is even more important, because in my opinion the future of the Indian people really depends on carrying their education considerably beyond grade 3 or 4, as has prevailed up until recent years.


John Whitney Pickersgill: This of course is an additional amount of money to make up the total for the year, and therefore it could not be

broken down in quite the way the hon. member suggests. If he would not mind, I would rather answer his question when my main estimates come up and I can give the experience for the whole year and also the anticipation for the coming year.


Gage Workman Montgomery: In those provinces which supply free school books do Indian children get them the same as other children?


John Whitney Pickersgill: They get them everywhere.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Does' the Indian department have any difficulty getting Indian children into the ordinary day schools?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think the experience is steadily improving. There are some places where there are physical difficulties; the schools are not large enough, and that sort of thing.


Alexander Maxwell (Max) Campbell: Only on physical grounds?


John Whitney Pickersgill: There are one or two places where there is still a little hesitation, but they are fewer and fewer every year, I am happy to say.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
564.	Salaries and contingencies of the commission -further amount required, $15,000.
['No, this item stands.\nItem stands.\nProgress reported.']
Stanley Howard Knowles: This item includes a detail listed as "telephones and telegrams, $5,000". I wonder whether the Minister of Finance has any better explanation for this expenditure on telephones and telegrams than the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration gave us a little while ago?


Walter Edward Harris: No, they are almost the same, because they represent in both cases increased inquiries about government business.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But in the previous case the explanation seemed to be that the minister had a great many calls to the province of Newfoundland, a portion of which he represents. We are dealing here with the civil service commission. Is there any situation that is at all comparable?


Walter Edward Harris: What has been passed is passed. I am referring to this item which is required because of an unexpected increase in the number of competitions, some difficulty in recruiting classifications, the number of applicants and the number of general inquiries relating to civil service employment.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Then the minister does admit he has a better explanation than was given for the previous case?
Supply-External Affairs


Walter Edward Harris: Not if the telegrams from Newfoundland relate to the matters to which I have referred.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
565.	Passport office administration-further amount required, $23,000.
John George Diefenbaker: What is the nature of this additional amount? Why is the amount required? Has there been any expansion or extension?


Walter Edward Harris: The item is broken down, Mr. Chairman, into the purchase of 40,000 additional passports. I understand there was no great increase in the demand for passports, but on the other hand it was found that certain costs could be saved if the quantity ordered were in excess of that which would normally be ordered. This amount is to cover that particular item.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
567. Canadian representation at international conferences-further amount required, $75,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: What was the amount previously voted? In other words, what percentage does this $75,000 bear to what has already been voted?


Walter Edward Harris: The original amount was


James MacKerras Macdonnell: So this represents an increase of about one-third. I think we might reasonably ask to be informed whether there were unexpected conferences which arose, or how this very substantial increase came about?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, a large part of the additional cost was quite unexpected. It takes care of the Geneva conference on Far Eastern affairs of about a year ago. You may recall, Mr. Chairman, that was called suddenly because of developments in Viet Nam, and the conference had not been expected at the time of making the estimates. In addition there was the nine-power conference on German rearmament in London, which also could not be foreseen at the time the estimates were drawn up a year and a half ago. Then there was the consequent NATO ministerial meeting in Paris which followed upon the nine-power conference.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
569. To provide for the Canadian government's contribution towards the cost of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization permanent headquarters in an amount of 12,500,000 French francs, notwithstanding that payment may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of March, 1955, which is $35,100.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-External Affairs
John George Diefenbaker: What is the explanation for this, Mr. Chairman? Has it to do with some building that is being put up as permanent headquarters?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


John George Diefenbaker: For NATO?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


John George Diefenbaker: What is the total cost of the building, and how is the obligation determined for each of the countries?


Walter Edward Harris: The total contribution is 250 million francs, of which 6-7 per cent will be Canada's share. Of that, 5 per cent will be paid out of external affairs estimates and the balance, 1-7 per cent, out of mutual aid contributions.


John George Diefenbaker: Has the minister the contribution made by other countries?


Walter Edward Harris: No, I just have our own.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
571.	To provide for a gift of food and drugs as a contribution to flood relief for India, Pakistan and Nepal, $225,000.
John George Diefenbaker: Under what circumstances was this contribution made to flood relief in India, Pakistan and Nepal?


Walter Edward Harris: In 1954, after floods had caused devastation over wide areas in India, Pakistan and Nepal, the Canadian commission in Karachi and New Delhi reported that the United States and United Kingdom were making efforts to provide a substantial amount of flood relief, and suggested that a contribution by the Canadian government would be welcome. In view of these circumstances it was agreed we would supply $225,000, to take the form of dried skim milk and drugs for this purpose, to be divided as follows: India, $100,000; Pakistan, $100,000; Nepal, $25,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
572.	Contribution to the United Nations relief and works agency for Palestine refugees in the Near East, $500,000.
John George Diefenbaker: This has to do with a contribution for Palestine refugees. How long has the Canadian government been making this contribution? What has been the total to date of the Canadian contribution, and has the minister a record of the number of refugees who are to be the beneficiaries of these grants, either on the part of Canada or collectively on the part of the nations making contributions?


Walter Edward Harris: This arose in 1949, Mr. Chairman, when the United Nations undertook, through a relief organization, to provide for

those who had unfortunately become refugees as a result of the difficulties in Israel. We have been contributing yearly since, and our total contribution to date amounts to $3,555,929. We are the fourth largest contributor after the United States, the United Kingdom and France. We have been making this contribution in the hope that the problem could be solved. Indeed we have expressed rather strong views on occasion about what should be done. Since some hon. members are very familiar with the problem I perhaps should not say much about it, except to add that we do feel this is one of those cases where greater difficulties might have occurred if the problem were not met in the manner in which it is being met here. For that reason we continue the grant we have made.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister has stated the problem. There is no more difficult problem anywhere in the world, I would think, than one dealing with refugees. I personally spoke with a number of the refugees and learned that they realized Canada was making this contribution toward the alleviation of their condition. The minister has mentioned the strong views expressed on this question by Canada. Certainly there is no sorer spot than these camps which, as one visits them and leaves them, cannot help but impress one with the awfulness of the situation in which these people find themselves.
The minister mentioned Canada's contribution, and I think that is one contribution that does leave an impression upon the people who receive it. In addition, it is building a bulwark against the spread of communism in these areas.


Mr. Low:: Can the minister say whether the nations who do contribute to this fund have made fairly strong representations to the effect that the contributions should be used for the rehabilitation of these refugees, rather than simple maintenance as has been the case up to this time? If so, what has been the response?


Walter Edward Harris: I believe the hon. member for Peace River has put his finger on the problem which, let us in all frankness admit, does exist here. Perhaps because of circumstances it was inevitable for a while that the relief item should go entirely to maintenance. One accepts the problem, and by maintenance looks after the people immediately. It takes a little while to work out a plan for the eventual rehabilitation of these people. This extended over a period of time after 1949, but we are satisfied that there is good evidence that the problem now is being looked upon as one which must be solved by way of rehabilitation and in other ways.

I would not think this was the time for me to indicate what those solutions might be, but we are satisfied that during the past 12 months there has been evidence the problem is being looked at in the light in which the hon. member mentions it, rather than in the light of maintenance.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
573.	Contribution to the United Nations Korean reconstruction agency, $500,000.
Stanley Howard Knowles: In a general way may I express approval of each of these grants we are dealing with under this heading. May I also ask one or two questions regarding this item. Can the minister tell us in what form this contribution is made, and the total amount we have given toward relief and rehabilitation in Korea under various headings? Also, can he tell us how it is administered when it gets to Korea?


Walter Edward Harris: I regret very much that I will not be able to answer all the questions. I should add, however, that this is one of the items which, upon consideration this year, we decided ought to be continued for another year because of the special problems existing in Korea. I think my hon. friend realizes that, without boastfulness, we have probably contributed quite substantially to this program, having in mind any other contributions that have been made. I notice that in 1951 we contributed $7,250,000, and that we have made contributions since. I think my hon. friend also remembers that a citizen of our country was on this commission.


Stanley Howard Knowles: King Gordon?


Walter Edward Harris: And a man from Sarnia. We feel, however, that this matter probably is reaching the point where other influences may enter into the solution of the problem; but having in mind the rehabilitation that is still needed, we believe we should still continue to contribute to the extent indicated here. In most cases it consists of purchases of Canadian goods and their shipment to Korea.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Can the minister say a further word? I notice in the main estimates for 1955-56, at page 188, it is indicated that an appropriation of this kind is not to be made, although $300,000 was appropriated in 1954-55. From what he said a moment ago in explanation of this item in the supplementary estimates, do I take it that this item is taking the place of the item that was in the main estimates last year, but which apparently it was decided not to include main estimates for 1955-56?
Supply-External Affairs


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, this item is to complete the program that we agreed to in 1951 and have carried out, subject to this payment being made.


Stanley Howard Knowles: According to the description of the item last year, it was given in Canadian fish. Is it fish again this year, or does the minister know?


Walter Edward Harris: No, I have not the information.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
574.	To provide for a gift of fish as a contribution to hurricane relief for Haiti, $25,000.
Mr. Nesbitt:: I note that this item is to provide for a gift of fish as a contribution to hurricane relief for Haiti. What type of fish was it? Was it codfish, canned salmon or sardines?


Walter Edward Harris: Codfish, and a little bit of flour.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Was Haiti consulted as to the type of relief they wanted.


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


John George Diefenbaker: Where were these fish purchased? Were these the fish that created something of an incident recently, when the government had a large amount of fish on hand and no place to dispose of it? Was this where it came from?


Walter Edward Harris: I am afraid if this is a joke I do not understand it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The Minister of Fisheries should know.


Mr. Sinclair:: We have no fish on hand.


Mr. Bell:: Have we some sort of general policy regarding the purchase of these gifts? It looks as though they are to be a continuing thing. Is there some sort of general policy, or is general consideration given to the areas where the fish may be obtained? Are they surplus products on the coast from which they come?


Walter Edward Harris: In this particular case there were three different items, codfish, flour and potatoes. Haiti was consulted, and in the end codfish and a little flour were decided on. Each of these decisions is made at the time it arises. If the government decides to contribute some form of relief, naturally we make the contribution which would be appropriate and most needed at the time.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have one further question in that regard. When gifts are made for relief to another country, such as this, are concentrated milk products, powdered milk and so on, considered?


Walter Edward Harris: On several occasions we have given powdered milk and other products as

Supply-External Affairs relief but, as I say, it depends on the circumstances and what would be most appropriate to the particular country.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
575.	To provide for the cost of Canada's participation as a member of the international commission for supervision and control in Indo-China, $220,000.
Douglas Scott Harkness: I note that under this item there is provision for 28 full-time positions to the amount of $56,000. I suppose that covers only a very few months of the year, which accounts for the comparatively small sum for the 28 positions. I believe most of the personnel who are representing Canada in Indo-China are seconded from the armed services, and some are from external affairs. I presume those 28 are extra people who have been employed by external affairs in addition to their own personnel and the military personnel who have been chiefly used in carrying out this task. Is that correct?


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


Douglas Scott Harkness: How many months does this $56,000 cover?


Walter Edward Harris: Well, at various times. That is, they have been employed as one could employ them for the job for the east. Some of them will have been four or five months on the payroll, some of them will have been longer than that and some for less time.


Douglas Scott Harkness: Do I understand that a number of those are Indo-Chinese. Is that what the minister says?


Walter Edward Harris: No; they were employed for the east. I did not say "in the east".


Douglas Scott Harkness: I note under this there is an item "courier service, $15,000" which I presume is for the purpose of sending messages, mail and so forth, back and forth between Canada and our personnel in Indo-China. The chief reason I am bringing up any question under this item at all is that I have had complaints from some of the relatives of military personnel who are serving in Indo-China of extreme slowness in the passage of mail back and forth. What arrangements exist for forwarding mail from their relatives here to the men serving in Indo-China and bringing their mail back from Indo-China to their relatives here?


Walter Edward Harris: This item is to provide for courier service not from Canada to the east, but an extension of that now existing to Tokyo. This is the courier service from Tokyo to Saigon to New Delhi.


Douglas Scott Harkness: That has nothing to do with the question I asked. My chief purpose in


saying anything is to find out what arrangements exist for forwarding mail to the men serving there and getting their mail back without undue delay.


Walter Edward Harris: I beg your pardon. I spoke to the item in the estimates we are discussing. I did not intend to speak generally on the postal service. If my hon. friend wishes me to I shall be glad to make inquiries. It is not a matter of concern in this particular vote that we are dealing with.


Douglas Scott Harkness: I think it is a matter of very considerable concern because the failure of mail to come back, particularly in the Christmas season, was a matter of great concern to relatives of people who are over there-


Walter Edward Harris: I have no doubt of that.


Douglas Scott Harkness: -who were anxious to hear from those who are serving in Indo-China. It seemed to me that the provision for a courier service was designed to expedite mail back and forth. The minister says it is carried only from Saigon to Tokyo. Certainly there is no courier service which goes out that far. I presume the situation really is that the Minister of Finance has no information in regard to this.
He would have to consult the minister of external affairs in order to get any information as to the mail facilities at the present time, and particularly if they have been improved since the Christmas period when the complaints arose.


Walter Edward Harris: I shall consult the Postmaster General and give the information to my hon. friend.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I should like to join with the Secretary of State for External Affairs in paying tribute to a devoted public servant who lost his life in Indo-China. One reason for my referring to Mr. Jack Thurrott at this time is that on one occasion he and Mrs. Thurrott were my hosts in the country which the Minister of Fisheries is going to visit shortly. I remember their extreme kindness, and since then I have followed his career in the Department of External Affairs with considerable interest. I am sure we all deeply regret that his career had to come to such an untimely conclusion.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Administration of various acts and costs of special functions-
577.	To provide for adjustment payments in respect of subsidies previously paid and administrative expenses incurred by the Minister of Finance on behalf of Her Majesty pursuant to the agreement entered into between Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation Ltd., and Her Majesty, on

the 25th day of June, 1953, under the authority of order in council P.C. 1953-868, dated the 1st day of June, 1953; and to authorize the write-off of the outstanding balance of advances previously made to the said corporation, $65,277.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: When dealing with this matter last year the Minister of Finance pointed out that a similar item was an aftermath of the Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation Limited which had been liquidated some years before, when it surrendered its charter. I should like to quote from page 3423 of Hansard of March 29, 1954 where the Minister of Finance is reported as saying:
The Minister of Finance was authorized accordingly to execute an agreement with the company which provided-I will not go into all the details- for the payment over of moneys to the crown and the crown was to dispose of these moneys first by paying all outstanding liabilities, second, by paying any claim that might be made by Joy Oil Limited, which was the largest claim outstanding and which was under litigation, and third, by paying the government the balance of advances to the company.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is it practically cleaned up?


Mr. Abbott:: It is practically cleaned up. I
think this will perhaps be as close to the final clean-up as possible. The Joy Oil claim has now been settled. There are sundry administrative expenses which have been incurred by the crown and the vote of $310,000 is required for the administrative expenses together with the Joy Oil settlement and to allow for any further minor payments that may come up during the current fiscal year, the year which will end in the next day or two.
I should like to know the reason for this $65,277 hangover. At that time it looked as though the $310,000 then being voted was to cover everything.


Walter Edward Harris: This is a different item which has been found in the bookkeeping of the Department of Finance. It relates to sums which are on the books as being due to the Commodity Prices Stabilization Corporation Limited, which we want to write off in order to clean up the account and not be in the position of having to carry anything on the books with respect to the corporation. However, should any of these outstanding accounts be collected the amount would be credited directly to the consolidated revenue fund and shown as a receipt.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: It is not a matter of vast importance, but I am still a little doubtful on one point. A year ago the minister referred to $68,000 of uncollected accounts. It is because of what the minister said a moment ago about new amounts being discovered in the accounts of the department that I find it a little difficult, as the negro gentleman said, "to make dem two tings paralyse".


Walter Edward Harris: But the item of last year did not write off the $68,000.
50433-153J
Supply-Finance


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I realize that. It is still
carried as an asset.


Walter Edward Harris: It was. It is intended to go to the consolidated deficit account and disappear.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister said a year ago that was going to clean the thing up, but he was perhaps carrying in his mind this $68,000.


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Payments to municipalities-
578.	Grants to municipalities in lieu of taxes on federal property-To provide for payments to municipalities in accordance with the Municipal Grants Act, and the rural municipal grants regulations amended by order in council P.C. 1954-1621; and to provide for payments to municipalities under order in council P.C. 1954-1497, in respect of the cost of medical and hospital services and supplies furnished to federal employees and other persons specified therein-further amount required including authority to regard the admiralty properties in the city of St. John's, Newfoundland, as federal property notwithstanding that formal transfer of administration has not been completed, $95,855.
Mrs. Fairclough:: I notice that the main
estimates show an amount of $3,202,348, whereas the previous vote was $3,190,000; that is a difference of only $12,348, yet the amount being asked for here is $95,000. I assume that the minister will say this is something that has arisen since the requirements were compiled for the main estimates; Would he also state what proportion of this amount is related to St. John's property and what amounts are required for other municipalities?


Walter Edward Harris: There are something in the order of 40 municipalities involved. If my hon. friend would not mind we could discuss this on the bill which I hope will be before us in a few days.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: What amount is required specifically for St. John's?


Walter Edward Harris: The amount this year is $22,000.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Can the minister give the committee some idea of why the difference has increased from $12,000 to $95,000 in a short space of time?


Walter Edward Harris: I think the former minister of finance made it clear that these grants were made to municipalities that applied for them. As payments were made other municipalities learned of them and applied in turn. Then adjustments were made and the amounts were constantly changing.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: We are all aware that the act is to be amended this year, but for a moment or two I should like to deal with

Supply-Finance
the inadequacy of the act and ask one question. Section 4 of the act reads:
Where, in a form prescribed by the minister, a municipality applies for a grant, the minister may, in his discretion, out of moneys provided by parliament, make a grant-
When questioned about that the minister referred to this as being essentially an ex gratia payment, and said that was why the words "in his discretion" were put in the act. We were told that the basis upon which the minister exercises his discretion is the iormula set out in the act.
The approach of the minister's predecessor was that the grant was merely an act of grace. I always thought this was rather a technical approach but apparently he felt it was correct, and for that reason this wide discretion was left in the act, which is subject to very obvious criticism because of the possibility of its being improperly used, but I shall not go into that.
The last minister said that notwithstanding this, the basis upon which the minister exercises his discretion is the application of the formula set out in the act. That, I take it, is still the case, and it is for that reason that I am still not quite clear, with this formula available and with no other applicants being entitled to come in, how we run into the figure the minister has mentioned. I know the minister has dealt with this already, but I would like to hear him tie it in with the statement of his predecessor as to the use of the formula.


Walter Edward Harris: I think I should begin by suggesting that the hon. member for Greenwood might bear in mind that despite the wide discretion, and in fact because of it, the Minister of Finance desires to make the right decision. If a decision is reached either in prospect or upon the first application based on certain information as to assessments and the like, and if at a later time the municipality complains that that is not a fair basis on which to deal with the grant being made to it and it supplies information which changes the picture from the standpoint of the Department of Finance, you will find you are making a larger grant.
I think the hon. member will appreciate that in any matter in which there is discretion rather than a grant of a fixed sum of money, the application of four different rules or four different groups of grants, as I recall it, would lead to uncertainty until you had in fact come to complete agreement with the municipality concerned.
I want only to add that we will no doubt have a further discussion of this in the consideration of the bill now before the house; but if there is any doubt in the mind of the
TMr. Macdonnell.]
committee, Mr. Chairman, I wish to say I am happy to follow the practice laid down by my predecessor because I think it is a sound one, and I do not propose to change the exercise *of the discretion any more than is absolutely necessary.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister has shaken me a bit, because he has really made me feel there has been more discretion and less reference to a formula than I had thought to be the case. But I shall not press that now, particularly because, as he indicated, the matter will come up again for discussion.
There are one or two other things arising out of it. This is not the place to complain about the bill which has still to come before us, but I would like to ask the minister two questions. Can we take it that inevitably, when the dominion-provincial conference meets, the position of the municipalities will be a subject which will be given top priority? Is that a fair inference?


Walter Edward Harris: I think, Mr. Chairman, I might be pardoned at this time for making no guess as to what might arise at a dominion-provincial conference.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: That being the case, I think the minister might at least answer my next question. Does he consider that the municipalities are in a situation where something does need to be done to adjust the balance between them and the other two taxing authorities?


Walter Edward Harris: I have my own views as a taxpayer in more than one municipality concerning the municipal problem, but I do not think it is a matter for discussion here.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I suppose it is not a matter for discussion here because it takes two to discuss, and if the minister will not discuss I cannot go much further with it but will have to wait for another day.


Gage Workman Montgomery: Mr. Chairman, there is a little matter bothering me concerning item 578, part of which reads:
Further amount required including authority to regard the admiralty properties in the city of St. John's, Newfoundland, as federal property notwithstanding that formal transfer of administration has not been completed.
If this is to cover grants in lieu of taxes for next year why should it be included here? I may misunderstand the whole thing.


Walter Edward Harris: This was discussed last year, Mr. Chairman, but I am sure my hon. friend would not feel that the government had not done its utmost in the meantime to acquire title to this particular property. However, that is the case. We have been using this building for anywhere from three to five years, I have forgotten exactly how long.

We have not yet obtained title for the crown in the right of Canada; but because we have been occupying it, and in fact own it, although the actual documents have not been exchanged, we feel we should use it in the computation of the grant to the city.


Gage Workman Montgomery: In other words, no taxes have been paid to the municipality concerned?


Walter Edward Harris: No, it is actually in the title of the admiralty of the United Kingdom.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Contingencies and miscellaneous-
579.	To authorize the write-off to the consolidated deficit account of certain accounts, as detailed in the estimates, arising out of world war IX and other transactions amounting in the aggregate to $1,010,111.38 which are uncollectable or for which no residual asset remains, $1.
Douglas Scott Harkness: Concerning item 579, an amount is shown of $1 only but it is actually a write-off of over a million dollars. There is one part of the item which I can understand quite readily, and that is working capital advances to crown assets. There are, however, some other items which I think the minister should perhaps explain to us. There are, for instance, loans to coal companies of $33,000 odd. I wonder how the loans to the coal companies arise and why they are being written off?
I would like also to have some explanation concerning Bank of Montreal provincial notes of $27,560. It seems rather odd that the government is writing off Bank of Montreal provincial notes in the amount of $27,560.


An hon. Member:: It is six o'clock.


Walter Edward Harris: I appreciate that, and if I give an explanation now which does not satisfy the committee perhaps we can go back to it at eight o'clock. I admit it is a little odd to be writing off items to the extent of $46,000 with respect to a bank robbery which occurred on January 11, 1869.


Douglas Scott Harkness: What date was that?


Walter Edward Harris: January 11, 1869.


An hon. Member:: The Tories were in power.


Walter Edward Harris: There was a theft of $46,000 from a bank in St. Catharines, Ontario. It happened that the notes had not been issued to the public and were stored pending issue. In the resulting accounting by the Receiver General of Canada this was undertaken as a liability of the government here. Over the years some of these notes have been turned in and cashed and this is to get rid of it on the books of the Receiver General.


Douglas Scott Harkness: You have no hope of taking in any more of the notes?
Supply-Finance


Walter Edward Harris: I shall endeavour to answer the question concerning the coal companies and perhaps we can then pass the item. This item covers a loan to Empire Collieries Limited, Calgary, in the amount of $4,000; a loan to the Manitoba and Saskatchewan Coal Company Limited in the amount of $14,213.70; and a loan to the Tel Koal Company Limited in the amount of $15,000, which gives a total loan of $33,000 odd. These three companies folded up for financial reasons, and these are sums which were carried in the items of the Department of Defence Production and are now being written off.


Douglas Scott Harkness: The companies are not defunct, are they?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes; they are defunct and have been for some time.
With respect to the ammunition and the bridge spans, these were items which were originally intended for China under the export credit loan but in fact were not shipped. They never did go to China. They were turned over to the war assets disposal corporation, were by them disposed of and the moneys were received for them. But we are writing off the item on our books in the Department of Finance because of the advance that was made originally.
I think those are all the items included.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
At six o'clock the committee took recess.
[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at eight o'clock.
William Alfred Robinson: Order. When the committee rose at six o'clock we were considering resolution 580. Shall the resolution carry? Carried.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
581. To provide for a contribution to the government of the province of Ontario for assistance in meeting costs resulting from floods, arising out of "Hurricane Hazel", on October 15 and 16, 1954, and to authorize, notwithstanding section 35 of the Financial Administration Act, the making of payments under this vote up to May 31, 1955, $1,000,000.
Mr. Enfield:: This item is to provide a contribution to the government of the province of Ontario to assist in meeting costs resulting from damage caused by "Hurricane Hazel" of last October, which did such a great deal of damage in various parts of Toronto and also in my riding. Shortly after the tragic occurrence those who had suffered damage were most heartened by the ready assistance

Supply-Finance
that was quickly proferred by the federal government to the province of Ontario to help defray the cost of the damage caused by the floods.
If I may be permitted to mention it at this time, the only real solution to the problem is to put into effect there something like the proposal submitted by the Humber valley conservation authority. I understand that the government is considering the possibility of making a grant of some $5,300,000 to the province to carry out the conservation authority plan. When you weigh the amount involved there against the $1 million it is apparently going to cost to repair the material damage caused by the hurricane the $5,300,000 does not seem on balance to be out of the way at all. I urge the government to give sympathetic consideration to that proposal.
As far as the $1 million is concerned, I presume that will be the total cost. Perhaps the minister can say if that represents the total contribution to the provincial government, and also how the costs were shared and to what kind of losses the contributions were restricted.


Walter Edward Harris: The contribution was made, of course, to supplement the grant made by the province to those who suffered damage by reason of the hurricane. The province came to the conclusion that the appropriate grant in aid would be 80 per cent of the cost to the householder who lost his building. A minimum of $100 was imposed; that is, the first $100 was deductible, and there was a maximum of $5,000 on the amount of the contribution in respect of any one building. The federal government offered to share one-half of the amount the province was paying, and we think this sum of $1 million should be $30,000 to $40,000 more than may actually be needed.
Hon. members will notice that the item provides for the payment of these accounts up to the end of May rather than the end of the fiscal year in March. The committee set up by the provincial government, by advertisement and by letter, has been urging all those who have claims against the fund to get their bills in so they may be paid. Consequently we expect to be able to settle all accounts within this time limit.
In order that hon. members will know what we have not done, I should add that the provincial government and the metropolitan council of Toronto undertook in addition to buy, not by way of expropriation but by way of purchase, certain properties in order to ensure that no one would build again at these places, and we did not share in that. I think the reason is obvious. This was not

a direct relief effort. It was a decision made by the proper authorities that it would be unwise to have people living in those dangerous areas again.


Frederick George Hahn: Can the minister tell us whether or not trailer homes will be paid for out of the fund as well? I understand one war veteran lost his belongings and his trailer home, and has not been able to get restitution from the provincial authorities.


Walter Edward Harris: I am not familiar with the case but I should remind hon. members that in addition to the moneys paid out by the provincial government to which we are contributing, there was as everyone knows- mayhap many contributed-a substantial sum running into several million dollars raised to assist these unfortunate people. My understanding is that generally that fund was used for the replacement of personal belongings and losses of that kind, and the governments entered into the replacement of buildings and properties.


Frederick George Hahn: This individual not only lost his belongings but his trailer house as well. It was later taken to a garage and left there. He was destitute and had no means of acquiring a home. It is a complete loss as far as he is concerned, and he is having difficulty in getting restitution.


Walter Edward Harris: Of course no federal agency has been engaged in the payment of the money. That has been done through the provincial government and the bodies they set up to handle the matter. If my hon. friend has a particular case in mind and will let me know about it I will see if the provincial people will give consideration to it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: As one who, with others sitting near me, represents a part of the country where in 1950 we received help in time of need from the federal government- indeed, help from far and wide-I want to register my approval of this grant to help those who suffered loss as the result of "Hurricane Hazel".
Mr. Pallet!: On behalf of the people who actually received assistance from the fund I wish to thank the government for deciding to put this amount in the supplementary estimates. I think it is a very sound principle. I was also pleased to hear the hon. member for York-Scarborough, who spoke in support of the Humber valley conservation authority plan, recommend that the government should take action on it. As to the suggestion that some people have been omitted in the settlement of claims, I have had something to do

with the matter and this is the first time I have heard that the people administering the hurricane relief fund have overlooked anybody.


Walter Edward Harris: I hope nothing I said indicated that I was not satisfied with the effort and time put by the provincial authorities into the administration of the fund and in seeing that the needs of the people were met.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Special-
583.	To provide for assistance in the construction of vessels of the dragger and/or long liner type, subject to such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council-further amount required, $21,049.
George Clyde Nowlan: This is a supplementary item of $21,049 in addition to the $200,000 we voted before. Can the minister tell us how many draggers are being constructed this year?


Walter Edward Harris: For the current fiscal year there will be 34 subsidy payments totalling the amount indicated, about $221,000.


George Clyde Nowlan: For 30 different construction jobs?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


George Clyde Nowlan: This item, of course, will be recurring in the general estimates that we will consider in a few weeks, and it can be discussed at greater length then than now.


Walter Edward Harris: Thank you.


George Clyde Nowlan: I am sure the minister will appreciate my thoughtfulness on this occasion. I noticed in the press this week a news story, which of course does not necessarily represent government policy but which suggested some knowledge of policy. It was to the effect that an interdepartmental committee had been working on this matter of trawlers off the coast, that it was prepared to report in the very near future, and that there might be the possibility of a change in government policy with respect to this whole matter. I believe the committee had some legal advice from Dean Curtis of the University of British Columbia in dealing with the whole problem.
As the minister well knows, one of the conditions of the licence for each one of those 30 projects to which he has referred will be that they cannot operate within the 12-mile limit off Canadian shores, whereas United States fishermen are allowed to operate within 3 miles of Canadian shores. This, in itself, creates a problem. The operation of these
Supply-Fisheries
vessels within the 3-mile limit creates another problem. In many places I know the situation is intolerable.
Frankly I do not believe the government can justify going ahead year after year spending public money for the construction of Canadian boats, manned by Canadian crews, and permitting them to come only within 12 miles of our coast, whereas under international law United States fishermen are allowed to come within 3 miles. I would rather see them all kept outside the 12-mile limit, because they are doing a great deal of damage to our inshore fisheries.
I should like to know if there is any statement with respect to this matter that the minister can make now?


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry, there is not. I would not want to say anything now about whether or not the report has any foundation. I think my hon. friend will get full information on the fisheries estimates.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
584.	Amount required to recoup the fisheries prices support account to cover the net operating loss on completed programs of the fisheries prices support board as at March 31, 1955, $744,382.
George Clyde Nowlan: In the general estimates we voted only the amount for the administration of this board. At the time I questioned the minister at some length, and he said that was all that was necessary to vote because apparently there were no foreseeable expenses for which he could provide in the main estimates. We voted some $85,000 for administration, and now we are asked to vote $744,000 to cover an operating loss on the completed program of the fisheries prices support board, as at March 31, 1955. I would have thought that part of that would have resulted from the operations of last spring, and we would have had some provision made in the general estimates. Can the minister tell us what were the operations, and how the losses did occur?


Walter Edward Harris: There are quite a number, and if the committee permits me I shall read them. There is the prairie provinces frozen fish support program in 1953-54, which showed a net loss of $191,521. There is the pickled mackerel fillets deficiency payments program in the Magdalen islands, Richmond and Inverness counties, Nova Scotia, in 1952-53, showing a loss of $21,903. There is a small loss for Newfoundland, the shore-caught salted codfish deficiency payment program, of $478. There is a small credit from the Canadian Commercial Corporation of $40. All this comes to $213,862. There is a further item of $355 with respect to the Magdalen

Supply-Justice
islands pickled mackerel fillets. There is a large item with respect to the Atlantic coast salted codfish purchase program, 1953, amounting to $446,903. There is an item of $37,521 with respect to the Saguenay county salt codfish deficiency payment program, 1953. There is an item of $45,741 with respect to the bloaters purchase program, 1952 and 1953.


George Clyde Nowlan: When the minister says of 1952-53, does he mean we purchased some in those years and the losses were only realized in the present year? Otherwise some of these items should have been in other estimates.


Walter Edward Harris: That was the production year, and these sums are to be paid now because this is the sale year.


Mr. Cameron (Nanaimo):: Can the minister explain this a little further? I have the report of the fisheries prices support board for 195354, which contains a number of the items he read just now, but it does not contain anything for the period 1954 and 1955, for which I suppose this particular item provides. It says here that the completed program of the fisheries prices support board, as at March 31, 1955-there must be some other items than those the minister read out.


Walter Edward Harris: All the items I read, Mr. Chairman, come to the total of this item, $744,382.


Colin Cameron: Then there may be further supplementaries to complete anything beyond the dates to which the minister referred.


Walter Edward Harris: If there has been a fish support program during this fiscal year which is not completed by the sale of the fish by March 31, then there will be an item in next year's estimates.


Colin Cameron: I was wondering, too, if the minister could tell us what sort of goal the prices support board has? Their objective, as set out in the report here, is to endeavour to secure a fair relationship between the returns from fisheries and those from other occupations. I am asking the question because of comparative figures I compiled with regard to British Columbia and the maritimes. There does seem to be a wide discrepancy there. In Newfoundland, for instance, there are 19,566 fishermen, and the average value of the catch per fisherman is $770, whereas in British Columbia there are only 6,715 fishermen and the average value of the catch per fisherman is $5,061. I was wondering if there was some attempt under this particular program of the prices support board to bring the maritime fishermen up to some more reasonable income level.


Walter Edward Harris: I am sure my hon. friend would get more enlightenment on that point on the fisheries estimates, but I do want to say this. All the fishermen on the east coast look upon those on the west coast with some envy. My hon. friend knows the reason for that. This government has tried over the years, and particularly in the last three or four years, to find some means to not necessarily bring the average catch value up from $700 to $5,000 as he has indicated, but at least to see that the people on the east coast were not living at the low standards they had been before say 1948 or 1949, and particularly Newfoundland since it became a part of Canada. We feel there is some standard of living to which all Canadians are entitled, and this is one way of accomplishing that end.


Colin Cameron: I am not quarrelling about it; I am just wondering if you are doing enough. It still seems very little for the average fisherman.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
585.	Yukon Territory-administration of justice- further amount required, $12,000.
Gage Workman Montgomery: Can the minister say if this applies to reform institutions or penitentiaries? It covers the acquisition of buildings and lands.


William Alfred Robinson: Resolution No. 585 covers the Yukon Territory.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
586.	Construction, improvements and new equipment, including provision for the establishment and construction of a new institution in the province of Quebec for the confinement and reformation of federal prisoners-further amount required, $200,000.
Gage Workman Montgomery: I believe item No. 585 was the one I really wanted to find out about. There is an item in that for construction or acquisition of buildings and land. Would the minister say whether that is to acquire reform institutions in the Yukon, or what is it?


Walter Edward Harris: As I think my hon. friend knows, persons who are jailed in the Yukon are often incarcerated in Alberta, and we pay the cost of maintaining these people under certain arrangements with Alberta. This happens to be an item which was discovered by an audit as not having been submitted to us two or three years ago. We are now paying Alberta, because had they submitted it at that time it would have been a proper charge on the federal government.


Gage Workman Montgomery: My next question is on this item, Mr. Chairman, and I see it covers money expended on these institutions in

Quebec. Can the minister give us any information at this time on conditions in the penitentiaries? Is the population increasing? Is the accommodation sufficient? Will there be considerably more accommodation as the result of this new reformatory being erected?


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, to repeat what I have said so often before. This is not the occasion for a discussion of general policies and difficulties that face a minister in charge of any particular department. The purpose of this vote, of course, is to provide extra money which had already been approved in principle last summer and has been found to be deficient in amount. This relates exclusively to the expenditures necessary as a result of the riot in Kingston last summer, and is for the purpose of rebuilding the property.
My hon. friend made some mention of the vote itself. It should be borne in mind that the vote which is referred to here is the same vote which appeared in the main estimates last year. In that vote there was a reference to an item with respect to the penitentiary of St. Paul in Quebec.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I have one further question. The item on page 5 of the supplementary estimates reads:
Construction, improvements and new equipment, including provision for the establishment and construction of a new institution in the province of Quebec for the confinement and reformation of federal prisoners-further amount required, $200,000.
On page 19 of the details we find the
following: "Penitentiaries: Kingston, $200,000." There is also another total of $200,000. Can the minister elucidate a little on that?


Walter Edward Harris: I am discussing the buildings item at the moment. Is there another item that my hon. friend wishes to take up now?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: There are two items.


Howard Charles Green: The details appear on page 19.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I believe it is the same item set up in a different way.


Walter Edward Harris: We are talking about Kingston, which is the item I referred to, namely repairs to the penitentiary at Kingston caused by the riot last summer.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Perhaps the minister has misunderstood me. Will he refer to page 5?


Walter Edward Harris: Of the bill?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Of the supplementary estimates, which sets out the items. There he will find reference to construction, improvements and new equipment, including the construction of a new institution in the province of Quebec. The amount is $200,000. On page 19, in addition to that, there is another
Supply-Labour
$200,000 item set out for Kingston. Perhaps the minister can deal with that.


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry. I have been following the bill which I have before me and not the printed supplementaries that hon. members have. Let us confine ourselves to Kingston for the moment and dispose of that. There was a riot there last summer and repairs are necessary as a result. That causes us to ask for a further vote of $170,000 directly, and a possible expenditure of another $30,000; therefore we have made the item $200,000.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: No.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It says "Quebec" here.


Walter Edward Harris: I am coming to that. I am asking hon. members to bear with me. If we pass this item, then we can go on with the other. Is that agreeable?


Ellen Louks Fairclough: No.


Walter Edward Harris: All right. What is the other item you are talking about?


Gage Workman Montgomery: There is another item on page 5.


Walter Edward Harris: It is in the loans, and when we come to the loans we shall deal with that.
Mr. Pallet!: The item on page 5 refers to the province of Quebec and the particulars refer to Kingston.


Walter Edward Harris: I made it clear, I hope, that the wording in this supplementary is the same wording as in the original estimate for the past year. It happened that in that estimate there was a reference to a building m the province of Quebec. The item also refers to all forms of construction.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR General administration-
587.	Annuities Act -[DOT] administration - further amount required, $26,000.
Ellen Louks Fairclough: I would like to have an explanation of this amount. I note that this refers to commissions paid to agents. Commissions are paid to agents in some instances and in others to postmasters, as the case may be. This amount of $26,000 is approximately 10 per cent of the total commissions which are estimated to be required for the year. There is no increase in the amount in the main estimates for next year; therefore it would look as though it is not an increase in that case. Something else has come up in the meantime. Will the minister say what it is? Has a special contract been written, or was the business in excess of what had been expected? Just what is the answer?

Supply-Legislation


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, Mr. Chairman. The
amount of commission has been growing because of the additional sales of annuities, apparently, and the amount in force at the end of last year, March 31 a year ago, had a valuation of some $794 million. On the basis af that and the expected sales during the year the main estimates provided for $997,000. We have found that we need an additional $26,000 to pay the two agents who are selling more annuities.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I realize that we are not .on the main estimates now. The main estimates give no recognition to the fact that this business is increasing, because there is exactly the same appropriation for commissions as there was for the preceding year. The sum of $26,000 is 10 per cent of the aggregate, and it would seem to me that surely there must be some special instance. I wondered whether a contract had been written for some large plant which employed several thousand employees, or something of that nature. Has the minister no information in that regard?


Walter Edward Harris: No, I do not think so. I have a fairly detailed statement on the method of paying the agents, but I have no suggestion that there is an unusual situation.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: I submit there must be .an unusual situation, because it is not provided for in next year's estimates. If it is a steadily increasing thing, then the estimates -were carelessly drawn.


Walter Edward Harris: Sometimes ministers of finance have a way of keeping estimates down, and they find out afterward that they were wrong.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It is not very realistic.


Mr. Trainor:: Has the government given .consideration to advising prospective purchasers that the annuities they purchase today may be paid off at maturity in dollars that will purchase only 50 cents worth of goods in terms of the contributions they jmake?


William Alfred Robinson: Order.


Walter Edward Harris: It is a very hypothetical
-question.


Owen C. Trainor: A very real one.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
LEGISLATION House of Commons-
588.	General administration-estimates of the * Clerk-further amount required, $58,000.
Howard Charles Green: With respect to this item, page 19 of the supplementary estimates gives us ithe details, which show that $50,000 of this

amount is for publishing the debates. In the original estimates for the present fiscal year we voted $250,000, which was $100,000 more than had been voted the year before.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Too long speeches.


Howard Charles Green: I admit that in the intervening years the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has come to the house, and perhaps that accounts for it. Can the minister tell us why it is necessary to have this increase, amounting to $150,000, to cover the publishing of debates?


Walter Edward Harris: This item of $58,000 consists of $50,000 for publishing debates, $3,500 for stationery, supplies and equipment and $4,500 for expenses of committees and the like, making a total of $58,000. The cost of publishing debates has undoubtedly grown. I hope hon. members will recall that last session was the longest peacetime session since 1903, and under those circumstances you could expect a greater cost for the publishing of Hansard.


Stanley Howard Knowles: How long a session does the minister expect this year?


Howard Charles Green: The minister I think will admit that this does seem to be a large increase, from $150,000 for the fiscal year 1953-54 to $300,000 for the fiscal year 1954-55. Surely that would not be accounted for solely by the greater length of the session?


Walter Edward Harris: The total expenditures to date are as follows:
Publishing debates, April 1 to June 30, 1954, $116,933.
Progress estimate to date, revised edition, first session, 22nd parliament, $52,645.
Add commitments, $169,578.
Publishing debates, January 7 to March 31, 1955, $97,000.
Progress estimate, revised edition, first session, 22nd parliament, $22,422.
Estimated amount to complete binding of first session, 22nd parliament, $11,000.
Total commitments, $130,422.
That brings the total estimated cost up to $300,000; we have voted $250,000, so we are asking for another $50,000.


Howard Charles Green: About two weeks ago hon. members received a letter from the queen's printer advising that if they wanted to purchase Hansard for any particular date at the rate which has been in existence for some time, that is 5 cents per copy or $3.75 per hundred, they must have their order in the distribution office by ten o'clock that night or in the printing bureau by midnight. This does not seem to be a very reasonable arrangement. In other words, if an hon. member wanted to order Hansard for today

he would have to order it from the distribution office before ten o'clock tonight, that is before the house adjourned, or from the printing bureau before midnight. Perhaps the minister can explain why this change has been made.


Walter Edward Harris: I know that anything hon. members have to say on this matter will be considered carefully by the queen's printer and by the Secretary of State. The obvious explanation, of course, is that this is done to cut down costs. Hon. members will realize that Hansard is put into type some time after midnight and is delivered to hon. members the next morning around 9.30 or ten o'clock.
That being the case, should hon. members want copies of Hansard in addition to the normal run the queen's printer had in mind to send to the house, it would be much cheaper to run off the copies at the time the original run was being made. In that way the queen's printer would not be in the position of either having a large overrun on the assumption that additional orders would be placed, or setting up the type at a later date at considerable cost. If this should be inconvenient or work to the disadvantage of the public I am sure consideration will be given to changing the rule.


Howard Charles Green: I take it that whatever amount is paid, it meets the cost of these Hansards', is that not correct?


Walter Edward Harris: I do not think that is so, but I shall get the figures on that.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: It occurs to me that this is a matter which could properly be considered by the standing committee on printing. I have been a member of that committee ever since I came to the house six years ago, and I have yet to be called to attend a meeting. Apparently quite a bit of work is done and quite a few decisions are made with respect to printing about which hon. members, even those on the committee, are not consulted. I would suggest that before any such regulation is made at least the standing committee should be called to confirm it.


Walter Edward Harris: I think 1 should tell the hon. member for Hamilton West that some consideration was given to this about a year before she entered parliament. At that time there were a number of rules laid down about the printing of Hansard and its purchase by hon. members. However, I think the idea is excellent. If the printing committee has not met for six years and if the hon. member, along with the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, would consent to
Supply-Legislation
serve I am sure we would have the best printing experience that could be brought to bear by hon. members.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is hard to resist an invitation of that kind, but may I point out for the record that the recommendations to which the minister has referred were made a number of years ago-before the hon. member for Hamilton West came here-but were never approved by the house. They were made by a committee of which I did not happen to be a member. That committee made its report, which was objected to by some hon. members, and the report was never concurred in by the house. Nevertheless its provisions were put into effect by the queen's printer.
In the meantime we have become used to most of those recommendations, and perhaps have grown to accept them. But I think the point made by those who have spoken is well taken. If any more changes are going to be made affecting hon. members of the house, perhaps we might be consulted.
While I am on my feet there is one other comment I should like to make. I believe that one of the reasons for the increased cost of publishing the debates-I am not now referring to the 10 cent charge for extra copies, because I think that could be looked into-is an increase in wages which was granted within the last couple of years. I am sure the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra does not object to that any more than any of the rest of us do. In fact there is room for still further improvement on that score.


Jean-François Pouliot: I happened to be the chairman of the debates committee when the matter was looked into. This committee did not sit very often, but on that occasion we had before us the editor of debates, the late Mr. Young. He suggested that we should dispense with the unrevised edition of Hansard. At that time there were two editions, the unrevised and revised, but since that time only the one edition has been published.
No doubt it is in an effort to effect economies that the queen's printer has asked hon. members to put in their requisition before the end of the day, so he does not have to keep the type set up too long. The printing of Hansard represents a formidable quantity of type, and as soon as the necessary copies are run off they can destroy the type and melt it down.
There was another matter which is of great interest to me, and perhaps the minister can give me some information tonight. Some years ago I insisted upon having early publication of the index of the debates of the past session. That index was most useful. It was completed during the summer recess,

Supply-Legislation
but a week or two after the session was prorogued we had an unbound copy of the index, prepared by Miss Kearns and another lady who was very competent, and the index was useful and complete.
Now, what is the use of having Hansard when we do not have a proper index? I do not think the index for the last session has been published as yet; I know I do not have a copy of it. What is the use of having this big book when we do not have an index? I made protests in the house on many occasions previously, and finally I obtained the famous index; but I had to be grouchy and unpleasant and I had to complain frequently in order to obtain it. I wonder if I will have to start again to make the bureaucrats move and induce them to complete the index and release it to us at the earliest possible opportunity?
It is a long time since the last session concluded and there is no excuse for not having the index prepared. I do not care about the bound copy, but I want a good copy, an index which will be as complete and useful as it was when Miss Kearns and her competent assistant were in charge of it. I do not ask the minister to answer this question now but I wish to put it on the record, and I shall complain again about the undue delay in delivering the index to the members. There is no excuse for that at all.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I think there is one point which should be kept clear, and that is that there are two committees that seem to be involved here. The hon. member for Temiscouata made reference to the committee on debates of which he is a member, and I recall a report of that committee which was concurred in by the house. But the committee to which the Minister of Finance and I referred was the committee on printing. The chairman at the time was Mr. Emmerson, and I believe it is that committee which would deal with a matter of this kind. As for the index to Hansard, if the hon. member for Temiscouata is chairman of the debates committee perhaps he could call it into session.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am no longer chairman.


Wilbert Ross Thatcher: While we are discussing the cost of the printing of Hansard I would like to point out a practice which the house adopts more and more, that of attaching appendices at the end of Hansard from time to time. Sometimes the information contained in the appendices is necessary, but frequently it is easily available elsewhere. I do not think we should give unanimous consent to the printing of appendices. After all it costs a good many hundred dollars to

print one page of Hansard. I would suggest to the minister that in future if information is available elsewhere by the simple process of looking it up, we should not consent to having these appendices and other things printed at the end of Hansard.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND TECHNICAL SURVEYS Mines branch-
589.	To provide for payments to McGill University in connection with the development of a coal-fired gas turbine-further amount required, $50,000.
Mr. Johnston (Bow River):: Before item 589 is passed I would like to say a word or two about it. I notice in the estimates that again this year we are going to provide $50,000 for the experiment with the coal-fired gas turbine. I would like to know what practical progress we have made in the development of that turbine. I remember that two or three years ago when the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys was speaking on this item concerning this particular machine he told us it was going to be one of the major items in the solution of our coal mining difficulties. We had pointed out to him that the coal mining industry of Canada was finding itself in a bad way, and he told us at that time that a little squeeze might do the industry good, if I recall the term. He thought the squeeze would do the industry good and that in time it would survive. Unfortunately, however, it has not been surviving.
The minister pointed out as a bright spot in the future the development of this coal-fired gas turbine, and said that within a few years it would assist in the rescue of our fastfading coal mines. I wonder if the minister could tell us at this time what progress has been made in the development of this machine and how long it will be before we can expect substantial results so the waning coal industry in this country will receive some little benefit from it?


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Chairman, I regret to say that I can make no forecast as to how long it might be. I can only say that when the treasury board were engaged in considering these estimates some weeks ago we considered the progress that had been made and the recommendations which were presented by various people who in our opinion were competent to know. They recommended that this vote be continued and the work of this experiment be continued. We accepted that recommendation on the basis that these people felt that real progress was being made.
One could hardly expect that a particular experiment would in fact solve all the problems of the coal mining industry. Indeed, we

have heard many experiments suggested in the House of Commons as to what one might do about the coal industry. At the same time this seems to be giving satisfaction to those who think in terms of experimental work, and for that reason we consider the progress has been sufficient to justify its continuation in the hope that it will bring results which will be beneficial to the coal industry in both the east and the west.


Charles Edward Johnston: The minister has indicated that when they were considering this estimate, those in authority gave him the advice that they considered it to be a worth-while project. They advised him that substantial progress had been made. I imagine in the course of this discussion when the government was considering granting this $50,000 some indication must have been given of the rate of progress, and some indication as to how much longer it would be necessary to continue this assistance.
I think the minister is sufficiently acquainted with business tactics and is himself a sufficiently good businessman that he would have said, "Now look, we are not going to give you $50,000 every year for as long as you want. We gave you assistance last year and the year before that and the year before that. How long is it to go on?" It seems to me the minister should be able to give us some indication. I would not expect that he could tell us within one year or even within three years, but he should be able to tell us when the machine will have advanced to the point where it will be a commercial proposition and of some assistance to the needy coal miners.


Clarence Gillis: Mr. Chairman, I do not expect that the Minister of Finance can possibly answer in the house for all departments, and I think this is one department where he does not have the details.
I was glancing at this item myself, and it brought to mind the fact that I had the privilege on two occasions within the last four years, the most recent being two years ago, of going down to Montreal with the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys and other hon. members of the house, and also press representatives, to take a look at this experiment.
The idea is that of Professor Mordell of McGill University. Of course a gas turbine engine is not a new idea; in fact it is a rather old experiment, but we have never been able to develop a cooling system to which the blades of the engine would stand up. The only new idea in regard to the turbine engine is that Professor Mordell feels he has discovered a cooling system which
25, 1955	2413
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys will make that engine work. I think the original intention in developing this engine was to use it in locomotives. They think it would be a better device than the diesel engine, and would be cheaper and so forth, if they could establish it. But the last time I looked at it and saw it in operation my conclusion was that it was at least five years away from the blueprint stage and at least ten years away from the stage of being of any commercial value. That is on the assumption that it will work, and there is no assurance that it will do so.
I do not think that that engine would be used in any locomotive in this country for a good many years. When you consider the amount of money that has been spent by the C.N.R. and the C.P.R. in the dieselization of the roads, you may rest assured that they are not just going to write off that capital expenditure for the purpose of swinging over to new engines. That sort of suggestion is just ridiculous. The last time I was down there I asked Professor Mordell if, in his opinion, these engines were interchangeable with the diesel engines being used at the present time. He said no, that before these can go into a locomotive, they would have to get the cooperation of the Canadian National Railways, that their people would have to come in with him as well as others and that they would have to build a locomotive into which might be placed this engine. As for its doing anything for the coal industry, in my judgment it will never do so. When you consider the factors I have just mentioned, the only place where it would be able to help the coal industry would be by the burning of coal on the railways; and that is out, in my opinion. It may have some value, if they can make it work, in generating power in small power plants; that is, assuming that it will work. It may be a good marine engine. I talked to some people-I am not going to name them- and I was led to believe two years ago that those in the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys who have been watching the experiment were of the opinion that there was not much value in continuing to make that expenditure. However, I notice that it is here again. I am not going to ask the minister to take it out. Perhaps there are possibilities for the engine but I want to say definitely that, in my judgment, it will never be of any value to the Canadian coal industry.


Walter Edward Harris: What my hon. friend has said is, of course, said by one who knows a good deal about the coal business, and I am sure it will receive the careful attention of the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys.
To answer my friend the hon. member for Bow River, let me just say that once again

Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys this is a clean-up item of this year's commitments to McGill University. If he will vote it now, subject to what he has said, he may have a discussion of it with the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys on the estimates for the forthcoming year.


Charles Edward Johnston: I hope the minister will bring this matter to the attention of the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys.


Walter Edward Harris: I will.


Charles Edward Johnston: If he can persuade him to give us an answer, I will certainly pass this item now.


George Clyde Nowlan: Can the minister tell us when
this project started and what is the total expenditure on it to date?


Walter Edward Harris: The expenditure to date has been $433,786 and, with this supplementary item, it becomes $483,786.


George Clyde Nowlan: Mr. Chairman, when did the project start? Has the minister the date of that, roughly? We have voted $100,000 already this year for this item, and this is a second item of $50,000.


Walter Edward Harris: I think this is the fourth year.


George Clyde Nowlan: Yes; I think it is the fourth year in which this matter has been before the house.


Walter Edward Harris: I think so.


George Clyde Nowlan: I do not want to set myself up as an expert. We all recognize the knowledge possessed by the hon. member for Cape Breton South with respect to the coal industry and coal mines generally. Far be it from me to question his judgment. However, I suggest that possibly this is an engineering problem about which neither one of us knows a great deal and that we ought to try to get advice from other people with regard to it. I have talked to engineers and to men who are close to the coal industry, and they are people whom the hon. member for Cape Breton South knows very well. I think he would accept their word and their judgment. They have an entirely different viewpoint on this particular project than that which was advanced by the hon. member for Cape Breton South and, I think inferentially, by the hon. member for Bow River. Frankly, I am a little bit surprised by the attitude taken by the hon. members. Of course if their premises are correct, they are justified. But apparently there is a big difference of opinion on the matter.
My complaint is not that you have a $50,000 item in your estimates. My complaint is that you have not enough. I think that
[Mr. Harris.)

this matter should have been proceeded with with more vigour and that more money should have been spent on it. Then we would not be debating needlessly tonight whether it is a good thing or bad thing, or whether it is going to be a good thing five years or ten years from now. If this were a national defence project, Mr. Chairman, and if it were a matter of developing a turbine engine for an airplane during the war, as was done with the jets, you would put the whole resources of the nation behind that project. You brought in scientists from wherever you could find them, you locked them up and told them to come out with a solution; and they did so, time and time again.
As I think the hon. member for Cape Breton South will admit, this project may be of equal importance to the coal industry. The coal industry's life is measured today not in decades but in years and almost, one might say, in months. I think that the government should place on this project greater emphasis than has been placed upon it heretofore. I am not criticizing them for what has been done. I know what they have been told undoubtedly. I have been told this by those fairly close to the matter. The government have been told, "We are getting enough money; we are proceeding along and we are making progress". The men back of this project, the scientists working on it, deserve credit. I think they have really accomplished a great deal. However, they are proceeding in a laboratory atmosphere. They are proceeding in an effort to achieve technical perfection. I do not think they have quite the sense of urgency that the occasion demands. Instead of thanking the government for the amount of money they have received, I think they should be demanding twice as much; and I believe the government would meet their request.
My hon. friend says that this engine could never haul a locomotive. I am told that the British have developed an engine similar to this one, or rather a turbine, and that they are hauling trains in Great Britain with it at the moment. I am also told that they have been trying to license it to two American railways and that both American railways have said, "We are interested in the McGill project; we think it is a better machine and we are not going to license yours, although it is made in Britain where ordinarily engineering standards are very high. We are going to wait for the McGill project to be finished." That is the interest that at least some people in the United States are taking in this project.
My friend says that it cannot haul a train. It certainly can develop power. Those who

are close to it and whose judgment I respect tell me that this may be the cheapest and most efficient source of power that has yet been developed by man. It certainly is a matter that deserves all of the attention of the government. Even if in the end we find that it does not work, a few hundred thousand dollars or a few million dollars spent on this project, having regard to the possibilities of it and what can be derived from it, should not matter too much. The possibilities are such that there should be no hesitation whatsoever. I urge the minister to give this matter most careful consideration. In the general estimates I hope there will be a much larger item.


Charles Edward Johnston: The hon. member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings implied that I was opposing the amount of this estimate. I never did any such thing, Mr. Chairman.


George Clyde Nowlan: That is what I understood.


Charles Edward Johnston: No, not at all. The only thing I want to be sure of is that we are getting something for our money and that we are not going to have to wait for the rest of our natural lives before some progress is being shown. Our coal mines are in a desperate position. We cannot wait for 10 years, 15 years or 20 years for this development to show some signs of progress. The hon. member is a great deal more hopeful than I am if he thinks-as was indicated by the hon. member for Cape Breton South- that the C.N.R. or the C.P.R. are going to dieselize all their locomotives and then are going to turn right around and equip them with this gas turbine. They just do not do that sort of thing. Before the railways go back to this type of gas engine, 25 years or 30 years will have passed. What I should like to see is a little bit more energy put on this development. Even if we have to double the appropriation this year, I would not be against it. But we want to at least see a little bit of energy put into it so we may see some tangible results in the very near future.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
590.	Payments to Royal Canadian Air Force and commercial companies tor air photography, and to defray the expenses of and the purchase of equipment by the interdepartmental committee on air surveys-further amount required, $1,200,000.
Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I have several questions on this item. I notice that the amount is almost the same as the original estimate for this work. That suggests to me either that there was poor estimating or that considerable new work has been undertaken. Second, I notice that the work of aerial surveying is being
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys divided between the Royal Canadian Air Force and commercial companies. Can the minister tell the committee just how the amount is divided between these two groups? Can he also give us the name of the commercial company engaged in the aerial surveying? This is an item of $1,200,000, and it would suggest that a large amount of additional aerial survey work is involved. Can the minister tell us the nature of the work and if this amount is sufficient to complete it?'


Walter Edward Harris: As I think hon. members know, we have been carrying out a program of aerial photography in Canada, and estimates are made in advance of the amount of work expected to be done during the coming flying season. Last year happened to be a particularly good year in some parts and not so good in others. The contract for the photography was carried out not entirely to the extent that had been expected. In addition to that aerial photography, however, the people concerned were able to take photographs not of the area that had been set out but of other areas, and when they completed their work the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys realized that the photography that was being offered at that moment was of an area which they would have on their program in a few years and they might as well acquire it now. That accounts for the fact that they purchased this additional amount of aerial photography during 1954-55.
It may look a little odd that the amount is as much again as the original item, but when it came before us we concluded that it was a sound investment as it merely involved doing twice as much work in the one year as had been expected. The advantage I see to it at the moment is that we are able to purchase it at about a 10 per cent discount under the circumstances.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Can the minister tell me the name of the commercial company engaged?


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry, I cannot.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I suppose it is Spartan.


Walter Edward Harris: I think so.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister tell us the policy of the government with regard to dividing this work between the Royal Canadian Air Force and the private companies? There has been considerable complaint that the government is not using private companies for work of this kind to the extent they could be used, and as a result the development of flying in Canada is being retarded, particularly in the northern parts of the country. I raised this matter last year
2416	HOUSE OF
Supply-Mines and Technical Surveys with the Minister of National Defence. There had been cases where the air force was actually flying on contract jobs. I think one was for the Iron Ore Company in northern Quebec; the air force was doing work which could have been done by commercial companies.
Has the government a policy of deliberately trying to promote the development of civil flying in Canada by contracting as much of this work as possible to private companies? I believe that is the policy followed in the United States, and it is one reason they have made such great advances in civilian flying.


Walter Edward Harris: I am sorry that I am unable to give figures to show the amount paid the R.C.A.F. and the amount paid to private companies, but I think my hon. friend knows that we do not consciously do anything which would interfere with private enterprise, and that while we may not deliberately bonus flying by Spartan or similar photographic companies we nevertheless do give them the business which under any circumstances would be justified, having in mind national security and the cost of doing a particular job. As I say, I am not able to break down this item, but I would be very much surprised if there was not a very large amount on the side of private industry and a small amount on the side of the R.C.A.F.


Mr. Hamilton (Noire Dame de Grace):: Is
anything included in this item for acquisition of equipment?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


William McLean Hamilton: It
is entirely payments?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dominion coal board-
591.	Payments in connection with the movements of coal under conditions prescribed by the governor in council-further amount required, $1,604,000.
George Clyde Nowlan: What was the total tonnage moved for the year under this item?


Walter Edward Harris: I am afraid I have the details in dollars rather than tons. I see that I have the details broken down by areas in tons, but only in terms of the increase. Therefore I would have to have the original figures; For example, the increase in coal movement in Nova Scotia was 959,631 tons. Waterborne on the St. Lawrence river amounted to 299,000 tons. These are additional to what was estimated, but I cannot give the grand total.


George Clyde Nowlan: These figures are up to when?


Walter Edward Harris: The 31st of March.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Are they only for Nova Scotia?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


Charles Edward Johnston: Did I understand the minister to say there was an amount of money paid for the movement of coal by boat? If so, how much was it?


Walter Edward Harris: There are various amounts depending on whether it is all rail or waterborne to certain points in the province of Quebec; that is, transshipped there to rail. It is quite a complicated statement. I shall be glad to give it to my hon. friend but I do not think he would understand it if I were to read it. This item, of course, covers all coal subventions, in the east, in the prairie provinces and in British Columbia.


Charles Edward Johnston: What was the amount of the subsidy granted to the western coal mines for movement by rail and movement by boat? Would the minister have those figures here? Possibly we will have to get them from the minister of the department.


Walter Edward Harris: The total expenditure for Alberta coal is $2,426,000, for British Columbia coal, $13,750, for Saskatchewan coal, $196,000, for Nova Scotia coal, $8,752,000, a total of $11,454,000. As the amount of the main estimate was $9,850,000 the amount of this supplementary item is $1,604,000.


Charles Edward Johnston: I should like to say a few words about these coal subventions, though I do not want to carry on a debate at this time. The point that concerns me is that I am not sure that the amount of the subsidy is large enough. It seems to me that when we find our coal mines, particularly in the west and in the maritimes, suffering so badly because of lack of markets, some effort should be made by the government to increase the subvention to an amount that will enable our coal mines to get their fair share of the markets in Ontario and Quebec. There is no use increasing the subvention by 50 cents a ton if that is not sufficient to permit the coal mines of western Canada and the maritimes to get their coal to the markets of central Canada and compete favourably with imported coal.
We know a tremendous amount of coal is being imported, something like 22 million tons as against 15 million tons produced in Canada. It does seem to me that if we ever expect to get our coal mines back on their feet, we are going to have to increase the subvention to an amount which will enable those mines to compete with imported coal in

Ontario and Quebec. I think that is one of the things we should be considering, not whether it happens to be 50 cents or 75 cents, as the case may be, but we should be considering an amount sufficient to enable these mines to put coal into the east in competition with United States imported coal.


Walter Edward Harris: I know my hon. friend is aware of the fact that there is an item of $10 million in the estimates for the coming year to cover this subvention. I am sure he can put forward his argument at that time as to the manner in which we might improve the situation.


Clarence Gillis: That is what I am going to do.
I do not want to get into any argument about that with the Minister of Finance; I would rather wait for the estimates of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE Health services-
592.	Laboratory of hygiene-operation and maintenance-further amount required, $17,000.
Owen C. Trainor: This item appears to represent an expenditure of some $17,000 over last year's estimates. There is one particular part of the item that strikes me as a little excessive, and that is an amount of $13,350 for materials and supplies. Can the minister explain why it was not possible for the laboratory of hygiene to estimate any closer than $13,350 for their actual expenditure?


Walter Edward Harris: I am sure my hon. friend would be the first to agree with me that in health experimental work one never knows what he has to do until he does it. If during the whole of a 12-month period you ran according to a schedule you laid down you might be fairly competent to come to certain conclusions, but you would not likely be able to take advantage of those unusual events which occur and which send you off on another tangent to success in the thing you are seeking. I must say that I cannot say why they were not able to come closer to what their needs would be, but they assure me they needed this additional amount. Perhaps my hon. friend could ask the Minister of National Health and Welfare about that.


Owen C. Trainor: I should like to suggest to the minister that $13,350 is a lot of leeway.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General health grants
[Stage Direction]
593.	To authorize and provide for general health grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to
25, 1955
Supply-Health and Welfare
make additional commitments for the current year not to exceed $1,000,000, $1.
Stanley Howard Knowles: I am sure the minister knows that some of us welcome any extension in the health grants program. The item before us calls for an expenditure of only $1. We will not get very much health for $1 with medical costs as they are, but I realize that the purpose of this item is to authorize greater commitments than were authorized in the main estimates in respect of hospital construction grants.
I notice that the actual increases in the commitments authorized by this vote of $1 add up to $1 million for increased hospital construction grants in Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba and Alberta. That is all to the good, but none of us has any illusion that this represents rapid progress in this field. I do hope, however, that the fact that the health grants program is being pursued even to this extent means that the government has not lost sight of the fact it has stated so often, namely that the purpose of the health grants program is to lay the foundation for nation-wide health insurance.
Despite the short exchange the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and I had this afternoon as to whether legislating by a $1 item is medieval or modern, I am still of the opinion that if pursued year after year it is medieval, and it is time any so-called progressive party became modern. I am not alone in this feeling, Mr. Chairman. I know that the ministers of health in a number of provinces hope the time is not far distant when this health grants program will be put on a statutory basis. Indeed, many of us hope it will be more than a health grants program, but at least, whatever it is, it should be on a statutory basis so those concerned will know what they can expect.
It was in May, 1948, that the health grants program was first announced. We accepted the fact initially that it was to be done by putting items in the estimates. This is now 1955, and it is still being done in that way. We do not know just how much is involved in the expenditure that is made possible by this $1 item, which simply underlines my point that we should have this on a statutory basis.
Those are the two main comments I make in addition to welcoming any improvement, first that it be not forgotten that this health grants program was said at the beginning to be the basis for nation-wide health insurance, and that sooner or later this should be put on a statutory basis.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Atomic Energy
[Stage Direction]
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-research
program-
595.	Current operation and maintenance-further amount required, $155,000.
Howard Charles Green: Item 595 has to do with Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. There was a vote in the main estimates of $8,379,765. Then in last year's supplementaries there was a further vote of $250,000, and now we are asked to vote an additional $155,000. Can the minister tell us why this additional vote is necessary?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, Mr. Chairman. This is the result of a change in the method of accounting and bookkeeping with respect to the houses and properties at Chalk River. After the estimates were made up last year there was a decision made that certain costs would be amortized, and that the cost of doing that would be charged against this item. The $155,000 referred to here is the cost in connection with the sum of $2,843,174, which is more particularly referred to in item 597, the second item from this one.


Howard Charles Green: Then I take it this vote of $155,000 does not mean the expenditure of any additional money?


Walter Edward Harris: No.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

research
program-
596.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment and to authorize Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to undertake construction of works at Deep River for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-further amount required, $1,106,000,
Howard Charles Green: There is a similar situation with respect to this vote. The vote in the original estimates was $4,805,010. Now we are asked to vote an additional $222,000 for the construction of buildings and works and so on at Deep River. For the moment I am not mentioning the other part of the vote, which has to do with the reactor. Can the minister tell us why this additional vote of $222,000 is necessary?


Walter Edward Harris: These are actual expenditures, Mr. Chairman, and the first item is a metals preparation shop at a cost of $400,000, a pilot plant extension building, a diluting fluids disposal building, a uranium storage building and certain other facilities and equipment.


Howard Charles Green: The figures the minister has just quoted are considerably in excess of the $222,000 which is found in the details for this vote.


Walter Edward Harris: There is a 65 per cent reduction in connection with a certain refundable item. If my hon. friend wants to go into detail I can read it, but I think when he gets to the next item he will see the point of it.


Howard Charles Green: Of this vote of $1,106,000 the sum of $884,000 is described on page 21 as being-
Portion of cost of new reactor (NRU) representing the increase from 26 per cent to 35 per cent in the percentage of the cost of construction chargeable to the research program of the company, for the fiscal year 1954-55.
Does that mean the work was proceeded with more rapidly than had been expected when the original estimate was made, or just what is the explanation?


Walter Edward Harris: The explanation is something like this. Originally it was intended that the cost of these buildings would be divided between the portion which it was thought would be of a commercial nature and the portion which would be used for purposes of the atomic energy program itself. That portion was worked out at 26-74 per cent. It is now intended to change that to 65-35 per cent, and these items have to do with the alteration of the bookkeeping items of atomic energy and the government of Canada to make that change possible by writing down the cost in one case and cancelling certain capital stock in the other.


Howard Charles Green: How do those percentages apply under the new plan? I am not quite sure which was 65 per cent.


Walter Edward Harris: 65 per cent is the commercial item, and 35 per cent is the non-commercial item.


Howard Charles Green: That is, 65 per cent of the product is to be sold; is that the idea?


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-research
program
[Stage Direction]
597.	To authorize (1) subject to the approval of the governor in council, amendments to the agreement dated the 22nd day of January, 1953, between Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (hereinafter called "the company"), to provide for (a) the write-up in the accounts of the company in the sum of $2,843,174 representing the depreciated value as at March 31, 1954, of the housing accommodation at Deep River previously written off to the research program of the company:	(b) the
issuance by the company of obligations in the sum of $2,843,174 in such form and upon such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve: (c) the write-off in the accounts of the company in the sum of $1,405,845, representing the increase from 26 per cent to 35 per cent in the percentage of the cost of construction of the new reactor (NRU) from inception to March 31, 1954, chargeable to the research program of the company, and other minor adjustments; and (d) the cancellation of the capital stock of the company in the amount of $1,405,845; and (2) the necessary entries and adjustments in the accounts of Canada in connection with the matters mentioned in paragraph (1), $1.
Howard Charles Green: This item is very hard to understand, at least for the layman.


Walter Edward Harris: I hope I am not making it harder for the hon. member.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister give us a brief explanation?


Walter Edward Harris: This item refers to the houses at this establishment. The cost of the housing was shown as a charge on the research items in bygone years. A decision was made to alter that by having the cost of the houses repayable by Atomic Energy, by that company issuing debentures to the government of Canada at 3| per cent for 30 years, so that the rentals and accruals from the housing and so on would go to the retirement of this debt. In order to do that a sum had to be agreed upon as to the value of those buildings, and I think that is the sum of $2 million odd I read a moment ago.
In order to do that we had to create an item of $2,100,000 odd, because we had already written the item down to $1 in the books of the government. Therefore in fact what we are doing is creating a liability of Atomic Energy to the government, this amount to be retired over a number of years by way of repayment on the debentures. In fact that is all this is. It is purely a bookkeeping entry to place in a different category, the houses at this establishment and to pay for them over the years.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister says this is merely a bookkeeping entry. But is there not to be some element of reality? Do I understand that the government has really recreated on paper an asset of $2,843,000, with obligations to repay this amount assumed by the atomic energy organization, and that it is hoped that moneys will be earned in that amount and paid by that organization?


Walter Edward Harris: That is right.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: The minister has already explained that the organization is divided into two parts, part public enterprise and part private enterprise. Were those the two percentages he gave us?


Walter Edward Harris: No, not with respect to the houses.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Where is the money to pay the obligations to come from?


Walter Edward Harris: It will come from the rentals paid by the occupants to Atomic Energy. It will be collected by Atomic Energy from the tenants and, as a charge on Atomic Energy, paid to the government Anally on the debenture issue.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: So it will be real money originating from third parties that will eventually come into the public treasury?


Walter Edward Harris: Quite so.
Supply-Public Printing and Stationery


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Those moneys will then eventually succeed in writing off the debenture debt?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
598.	Printing and binding the annual statutes- further amount required, $6,500.
Frank Exton Lennard: In connection with this item, we know that the statutes are printed in both French and English, and rightly so. I believe the regulations are to the effect that members of parliament are entitled to complete sets of the statutes in both English and French. I feel that this is wrong. I feel that in future if members of parliament were entitled to one set of their choice, in either English or French, it would mean a great saving in this department.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
599.	Canada Gazette-further amount required. $55,000.
Mr. MacLean:: I notice that this is an additional item of $55,000. Last year the estimate was $105,000. The item for the current year is $110,000. It would seem to me that there has been either an unforeseen expenditure of a large amount or else the estimating is badly out of line.


Walter Edward Harris: The note I have here is that there were a great many more publications of the Gazette last year with respect to certain statutory orders, and that is why the bill ran up, and why it is not expected to be up this year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Architectural branch-
Acquisition, construction and improvements of public buildings-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-further amounts required-
601.	Ottawa, $1,732,666.
Howard Charles Green: May we have an explanation
of this item?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes. There are two items in the Ottawa area. There is an item of $156,000 with respect to a property at the corner of Bay and Wellington streets. There is an item of $1,576,666 with respect to payment for the former seminary building at Hurd-mans Bridge. This latter item includes an

Supply-Public Works amount of $757,000 with respect to certain federal district commission payments for grading and the like.


John Angus MacLean: Mr. Chairman, in connection with the seminary building at Hurdmans Bridge, there is an additional amount of $1,576,666, as the minister has just told us. Will the minister please tell the committee the total cost of this building, and also how it came about that this commitment during the fiscal year could not have been predicted a year ago? Perhaps the extra money has already been spent. If that is so, why is it necessary to spend it at this point instead of including the large item in the estimates for the next fiscal year?


Walter Edward Harris: We had rented the building for the purposes of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and after we had entered into a lease the owners of the building decided to sell, a decision they had not made before. We took advantage of the offer at a time when we thought we had a good price that could be justified, having in mind the rent that we had already agreed to pay. The reason we could not foresee it was that when we rented the building we did not know we would have the chance to buy it.


John Angus MacLean: Does this represent the total cost of the building?


Walter Edward Harris: No, there will be a further item in the coming year.


John Angus MacLean: In the regular estimates?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


Mr. Hees:: Does the R.C.M.P. require all this building? It seems to be a very large building.


Walter Edward Harris: I would be glad to take my hon. friend to the quarters formerly occupied by the R.C.M.P. and I am sure he would see that they were wholly inadequate.


John Angus MacLean: I cannot find an item in the estimates for 1955-56 covering this building.


Walter Edward Harris: I will have a look as soon as we adjourn.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: What was the rental, the assessed value and the cost of this building?


Walter Edward Harris: The rental was $370,000.


Howard Charles Green: A year?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


Mr. Churchill:: The details on page 22 read:
Acquisition of former seminary building-further amount required to complete payment.
That does not seem to fit in with the minister's explanation. I understood him to

say that there would be an item in the estimates for the coming fiscal year. Can the minister give us the total amount that will be paid for this building?


Walter Edward Harris: Perhaps I have misread the item I have before me. The building was rented in June, 1952, at an annual rental of $370,000 for a term of five years, with the option of renewal.


Howard Charles Green: A rental of $370,000 a year?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes. That is all the information I have. If I have misled the committee I am sorry. I was under the impression that this was not the final payment but I shall have a look at it when we adjourn and let my hon. friends know. I should say that I am hoping to complete these items by ten o'clock.


John Angus MacLean: Can the minister indicate what is the total purchase price?


Walter Edward Harris: As I say, I will let you know.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Could we not make better headway if the minister of the department were here?


Walter Edward Harris: I do not think so.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: What is the floor space of the building?


Walter Edward Harris: I have not that before me.


Howard Charles Green: What is the assessed value of this building?


Walter Edward Harris: That is not here. As I say, I will get that for you.


Howard Charles Green: I suggest that this item should be allowed to stand until we get further information. The minister has not told us the total purchase price, yet apparently the annual rental was $370,000 for a period of five years. We must have a lot more information about this item before it is approved, and I suggest that the minister allow the item to stand.


Walter Edward Harris: We will let it stand for 25 minutes.


Frank Exton Lennard: Let it stand, period.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Did the rental include heat, light and all the other requirements? It seems to be a tremendous amount.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: When the minister is getting the other information there is one thing I would like to have. This figure of $370,000 is a little staggering. Was the building rented before, and if so, what was the previous rental?


Walter Edward Harris: We were the first tenants.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: There must have been some way of arriving at this $370,000, which

does seem to be a formidable figure. I suggest that we be given some information upon which that figure was based.


Walter Edward Harris: As I say, I hope you will have it by ten o'clock.


George Harris Hees: Will the minister advise when the building was built, its floor space and the number of floors? Will that information be forthcoming.


Walter Edward Harris: I hope so.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Does that include garage
accommodation as well?


Walter Edward Harris: Maybe an underground shelter.
Item stands.
Architectural branch-
Acquisition, construction and improvements of public buildings-
602.	Saskatchewan, $350,000.


Mr. Ellis:: Would the minister explain this item?


Walter Edward Harris: The amount in the original estimates was $1,050,000. Then there is an additional $700,000 item, and the further amount required is $200,000. I beg your pardon, the original estimate was $1,050,000, of which $700,000 was provided in the main estimates. Then there was a deferred vote of $150,000, leaving a balance of $200,000 which is being provided by this vote.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Engineering branch-
Acquisition, construction and improvements of harbour and river works-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-further amount required-
603.	Newfoundland ($113,900, less the amount of $113,899 available from savings in other listed projects detailed in previous estimates for 1954-55 for this province), $1.
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I notice there is an item of $36,200 for a retaining wall at St. Lawrence, the province of Newfoundland to pay one-half the cost. What was the purpose of that retaining wall?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Probably just "small wood".


Walter Edward Harris: This is a retaining wall 800 feet long required to maintain material dredged from the harbour.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I just want to comment that when it comes to building a retaining wall in Newfoundland it is considered the joint responsibility of the federal and provincial governments, but when they want to build on the Columbia we are told it is the responsibility of the provincial government only.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Transport
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT Canal services-
607. Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $30,000.
Howard Charles Green: According to the details on page 23 this $30,000 is required for professional and special services. Can the minister tell us how this amount is made up?


Walter Edward Harris: This is for the construction of a model of the Gut dam in the St. Lawrence river. We have an explanation of the nature of the model, but I think it must be obvious that the model was constructed so that one could study the problems which arose from blowing up the Gut dam.


Howard Charles Green: Is this a model of the Gut dam or of the river after the Gut dam was blown up? I understand that the Gut dam was removed.


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, but we have had two things to consider there. The first was the original claim of the shore owners for damages caused by the construction of Gut dam; and then, as you may recall, the Gut dam was removed. We also have difficulty now in that some others think perhaps they have been damaged accordingly.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is the model being made to help meet the claim for damages. What is the idea behind it? Why should there be any claims for damages in a case of that kind?


Walter Edward Harris: We are hoping there are not but this is to find the results of the water flow with the Gut dam gone. We had certain statistics before, but this is to provide information as to the present circumstances.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Marine services-
60S. Nautical services-administration, operation and maintenance, including grants and contributions for the purposes indicated in the details of the estimates; rewards for saving life from vessels in distress; subsidies to salvage companies, and the payment of expenses, including excepted expenses, incurred in respect of Canadian distressed seamen as defined in section 306 of the Canada Shipping Act-further amount required, $57,000.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Part of this vote is for subsidies to salvage companies. Could the minister tell us which companies are getting the subsidies and what amounts they were paid under the main estimates in addition to the present amounts?


Walter Edward Harris: To Foundation Maritime
Limited in Montreal an amount of $40,000, to be paid August 31, and $35,000 to be paid

Supply-Transport
December 1; Pacific Salvage Limited, North Vancouver, payable $75,000 per annum, quarterly on the 2nd of January, April, July and October.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
River St. Lawrence ship channel service-
611.	Contract dredging-further amount required, $1,529,361.
John Angus MacLean: I notice this is a large item over $1,500,000, and that the estimate for this fiscal year was $2,500,000, making a total of over $4 million, roughly. The estimate for the next fiscal year is only $2 million. Would the minister give a word of explanation as to what the expenditure was for this year?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes. The reason, of course, is that we were able to do more dredging last year than had been expected because of good weather conditions, and the total cost is made up of several contracts. There are in fact eight contracts for various yardages. I think this is most fortunate in that we were able to do this work last year rather than having to do it this coming year. Of course there may be other items that will have to be met this year, but if not, at least we have this work behind us.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Railway and steamship services-
612.	Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels, as detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $1,300,000.
John Angus MacLean: Could the minister give an indication as to when the ferry service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques will be improved.


Walter Edward Harris: No, I am afraid I cannot. Perhaps some other members of the house who are more familiar with the progress in the construction of the ferry could say something about it. All I can say is that we certainly hope it will be completed as early as possible because of the service it will give between North Sydney and Port aux Basques.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
613.	Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited, deficit, 1954-additional amount in excess of the sum of $581,000 already appropriated to provide for the payment to the Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited (hereinafter called "the company") of the deficit for the year ending December 31, 1954, in the operations of the company and the vessels under the control of the company, as certified by the auditors of the company to the Minister of Finance and approved by the Minister of Transport-further amount required, $47,410.
Owen C. Trainor: Could the minister give an explanation or a breakdown as to just how

this considerable deficit on the Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited, has been brought about?


Frank Exton Lennard: Mr. Chairman, as far as Canadian National Steamships are concerned I think they have done very well. As a matter of fact I believe that last year the minister said on the main estimates that if there were not some improvement they might have to discontinue this service, and I might say that the balance sheet for the year shows they have done very well under the circumstances, with the cut-rate competition with which they have had to deal. I know something of their operations because I have had the privilege of travelling on their ships on two different occasions. As a matter of fact that is about all that is left of the Canadian merchant marine. I am pleased to find they had such an excellent year and have cut down the deficit to a great extent. I feel if they have another year like 1954 they will be in the black. I think this line should be encouraged and they deserve a lot of credit for the job they did last year.


George Clyde Nowlan: I would like to support the statement which was just made by my desk-mate. The report of the steamship line shows that the revenue of the company increased by 13-2 per cent during the past fiscal year and expenses went up by only 1 [DOT] 7 per cent. In this day of rising costs I believe that indicates extremely efficient management and is a very creditable showing.
I well remember that last year when this item was up the Minister of Transport threw rather a cold chill over some of us when he suggested that if the losses should continue to be as high as they were then he would have to give serious consideration to a withdrawal of the service entirely. At that time, a year ago, the operating loss was over $820,000. This year the operating loss is down to $319,000, which represents a saving of about half a million dollars. I certainly hope that never again will there be a necessity for any intimation-I won't say threat- or suggestion that this service should be abandoned or done away with.
I think it is a most important service for Canada as a whole, and particularly for the east. Last year I urged that we should be given more service and that more boats should be put on which would result in better earnings. To some extent my argument was justified, although perhaps by accident, in that the company this year was able to make 14 more trips than a year ago, according to the report. Of course, that was due in part to the fact that last year they were tied up in a strike but because of these additional trips and services the company

went some considerable distance in building up the revenue and were able to keep expenses on a substantially level basis.
I am not going to discuss the matter at greater length here, but I hope that when the general estimates for this department are considered the minister will be here and that he will give assurance to the house that the department will consider extending the service.
The company has five small non-refrigerated boats and only three refrigerated ships. These ships travel in tropical waters to the West Indies and we hope to South America, so you can realize the importance of refrigeration. If they can do so well with so little I think it reflects credit on the company, and I hope another year we will have an increase which will provide for an extension of their operations.


Thomas Miller Bell: Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister could tell us if this is still on a one-year basis. When we questioned the Minister of Finance last year he was very careful to point out that the plans made last year were for one year only. In view of the fact that we have had a fairly successful year, I wonder if that changes the plans or if it is just going to be drawn up for another year?


Walter Edward Harris: I think the Minister of Transport would give an adequate answer to that.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
614.	Canadian National Railways deficit, 1954- amount required to provide for the payment during the fiscal year 1954-55, to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the national company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport, made by the national company to the Minister of Finance, and to be applied by the national company in payment of the system deficit (certified by the auditors of the national company) arising in the calendar year 1954, subject to recovery therefrom of accountable advances made to the national company from the consolidated revenue fund, $28,758,098.
James MacKerras Macdonnell: Is the minister really going to ask us to vote $28 million before we have the report of the committee on government-owned railways? The committee has not yet been set up, and it has not yet met the officials of the railway. Surely the usual practice is that when this vote comes on it comes before this committee with the approval of the committee on government-owned railways. It is true that it is near the end of the fiscal year, but we are not there yet.


Walter Edward Harris: I am sure I would not mind if my hon. friend wishes to discuss this in the committee, and we could allow this item to stand, though I would hope it would be the only one.
Supply-Transport
Nevertheless, I might point out that I think I have announced the motion to appoint this committee every day during the past week, and we have never reached it. I would hope that my hon. friend would co-operate with me in getting the committee set up; then the work could be done, I would think, on Monday, or Tuesday or Wednesday at the latest, because we shall have to pass this item on Wednesday or Thursday if there is to be royal assent. I beg hon. members' pardon. We would have to pass it on Tuesday in order to have it passed in the other place.
We must do either one of two things. Either we pass it tonight or we shall have to hasten the work of the committee in a manner that I do not think will be possible at all. But I do not accept too much responsibility. I shall give my hon. friend the assurance that if the item is passed tonight it will not in any way prevent a full discussion of the Canadian National Railways item in the committee when it meets.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: It seems to me extremely undesirable to pass an item of $28 million without going through the procedure which is now well established. If, by some chain of circumstances for which no one is responsible, we have reached the stage where the thing could not be carried through, that is another matter. But as the minister has indicated, if we proceed with dispatch on Monday the thing can be done. I would hope that he could find an extra day. I hope it will not go to Tuesday. I think he had better put pressure on the other place to give him an extra day.


Walter Edward Harris: I could not do that.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: To come back to the point, I suggest to the minister that it is highly undesirable to do this. Certainly as far as I am concerned-and I think I can speak for my colleagues-we will co-operate in the setting up of that committee on Monday. As a matter of fact I thought it was going to be done today, and it was a great disappointment to me that it has not been done. But that is another matter. I am putting it to the minister. He himself suggested a means whereby this can be done next week, and this seems to me a much more desirable course than passing this item now.


Walter Edward Harris: I would not want my hon. friend to misunderstand the situation. I am sure that if the committee is set up, by motion, by dinner time on Monday that would be the earliest we could hope for such action, and the committee could only meet on Tuesday. I do not suppose he would want to pass all items of the Canadian National Railways in

Supply-Transport
one sitting or in one day. It would therefore appear that it would not be possible to deal with the item on Tuesday, the last day on which we could deal with it in order to have it dealt with in the other place by Thursday.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: I am greatly disappointed to find that the minister has not as much control over the other place as I thought he had. But leaving that matter aside, I suppose it is possible that the committee could reverse the order of its procedure and deal with a capital item-no, this is not a capital item. I admit that the matter is difficult. It will have to be done quickly, but I am still going to indulge the hope that the minister can get us the two days. I still feel very unwilling to have the item passed now without the safeguard which the House of Commons, in its wisdom, has provided for many years.


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Chairman, I did my best to get these estimates down at the earliest possible moment. Indeed, I think they are being considered by the house a little earlier than they have usually been considered in the past. I have been trying to get the committee set up. I am not complaining about anyone.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: It is the railway committee that is really concerned.


Walter Edward Harris: All right. We have had it on the order paper for over two weeks. I have been wanting to get it done. These things have crept up on us. I would just suggest that, because of my uncertainty that we can do anything about the other place, we might pass the item tonight with the assurance I have given, namely that first of all we are obliged to pay the deficit anyway, and that this would not preclude my hon. friend from making the most searching examination next week in the committee or from having, I think, two if not three other opportunities to discuss this matter during the session. There will be the usual refunding vote; there will be the usual item in the main estimates, and so on.


James MacKerras Macdonnell: It seemed to me that the minister, by something he said a moment ago, implied the possibility of this thing working through according to the usual schedule. If I understood him correctly, he said that if he were not able to get it through the committee we might be forced into such and such a position. Is it not possible that there can be unanimous consent on Monday, if he finds himself in a real jam, to put this item through then?


Walter Edward Harris: If that is understood I have *no objection to letting this item stand until

Monday anyway, in order to see what the situation is at that time, subject to the warning I have given.


Howard Charles Green: As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, there is also this item dealing with the seminary building. We are not prepared to let that item pass without further explanation.


Walter Edward Harris: You are going to get it.


Howard Charles Green: We cannot do that tonight.


Walter Edward Harris: Yes, we can. I am ready to deal with it.


Howard Charles Green: All the items cannot go through by ten o'clock. We are going to have a further look at it, so there is no question of everything else being passed.


Walter Edward Harris: I have the explanation on the seminary building now and was prepared to give it when we completed the other items. I hope my hon. friend would not expect not to dispose of these items tonight. We are near the end. We have taken longer on these estimates than has been taken on supple-mentaries at any time in my memory.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Oh, no.


Walter Edward Harris: Excuse me; I will say in recent memory.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The minister's memory is short.


Walter Edward Harris: My memory is fairly long.
There are not many items left. We can dispose of them in a few minutes. I can dispose of the seminary building, I hope, as soon as we complete the others. I am quite prepared to let this one item stand in the hope that we can put it through Monday and perhaps find on Tuesday that we can deal with it in the other committee.


Howard Charles Green: I am afraid we cannot let that seminary building item go through tonight.


Walter Edward Harris: You can hear what I have to say about it.


Howard Charles Green: We should be glad to hear the explanation; but even then we want time to look into the matter.


An hon. Member:: Ten o'clock.


William Alfred Robinson: Do I understand that resolution 614 is to stand?


Walter Edward Harris: Stand.
Item stands.
Civil aviation division-
626. Grants to organizations for the development of civil aviation, in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $60,000.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, I believe the expenditure under this item is in the form

of subsidies to students taking out private licences. I believe it is an extremely important function because it provides a pool of partially trained pilots for Canada. Can the minister indicate whether that is the case with regard to this increased expenditure of $60,000?


Walter Edward Harris: Mr. Chairman, we are talking about item 617?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Item 616.


Walter Edward Harris: I thought we had passed item 616. This is an additional grant to flying clubs, schools, instructors and student pilots, as my hon. friend knows. It indicates that the amount required has moved up from $270,000 provided for in the year previous to $330,000. I could give details as to the number of pilots who have completed their course and so on, but I think my hon. friend is fairly well informed on that point.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: No. I have not those details, but I shall be willing to wait for them until we discuss the general estimates.


An hon. Member:: Ten o'clock.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
General-
618.	To provide for the expenses of an inquiry, authorized pursuant to part I of the Inquiries Act, into the application and effects of agreed charges authorized by the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada under part IV of the Transport Act. $23,000.
Howard Charles Green: Is this the total cost of the commission on agreed charges, or has there been an earlier vote?


Walter Edward Harris: Yes. This is the full cost that we are voting now.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
619.	To provide for reimbursement of the Department of Transport stores account for the value of stores which have become obsolete, unserviceable, lost or destroyed, $11,335.
Stanley Howard Knowles: May we have some details as to how much of this amount is for stores which have become obsolete, how much is for stores that have become unserviceable, how much is for stores that have become lost and how much for stores that have been destroyed?


Walter Edward Harris: Obsolete stores, $9,498; $1,837. inventory shortages.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Howard Charles Green: Mr. Chairman, we have finished the Department of Transport with the exception of the C.N.R. deficit item. I would suggest that we call it ten o'clock.


Some hon. Members:: Ten o'clock.
Supply-Public Works
On item 601.


Walter Edward Harris: Perhaps you might hear my explanation with regard to the seminary building.


Howard Charles Green: We should be glad to hear it.


Walter Edward Harris: You will be sure of it then, and we will not have it again.
I think I made it clear to hon. members that this was a new building which had just been constructed, and for that reason we were the first tenants. The rental, as I have said, was $370,000. The purchase price is $5 million. This is in fact the final payment, and I apologize to my hon. friend for having misled him. There is no assessment on it because we were in there as tenants and no assessment was made by the municipality. For the purposes of our Municipal Grants Act we do that ourselves. There is a net floor space of 229,500 square feet. I do not think there are any other questions.


Ellen Louks Fairclough: Will you say that again?


Walter Edward Harris: A net floor space of 229,500 square feet.


Howard Charles Green: What is the area of the land?
Mr. acres.	Harris:	One	hundred	and	thirteenMr. acres?	Green:	One	hundred	and	thirteen


Walter Edward Harris: Yes.


Howard Charles Green: We shall have to ask that the item stand, Mr. Chairman.


William Alfred Robinson: Shall this item carry?


Howard Charles Green: No, this item stands.
Item stands.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Walter Edward Harris: Before I turn to the other items of business on Monday, may I point out that it was my understanding that we would resume consideration of these estimates in such time that they might be disposed of in the other place before Thursday. That would mean I would have to have unanimous consent to go into supply on either Monday or Tuesday without a motion.
If that is the understanding we shall continue on that basis, unless we are unable to meet my hon. friend's wishes with respect to the sessional committee. I am not certain that the officials of the company can be here on Tuesday, but we shall do our best to arrange it that way.
On Monday then, subject to what I have said, we shall take the motion to set up the

Supply
sessional committee on railways and shipping; then the bill with respect to the War Veterans Allowance Act; then the bills standing in the name of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources in the order in which they appear on the order paper, followed by the bill in the name of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with respect to the Library of Parliament Act; then the bill in my own name with respect to the Municipal Grants Act, and then the bill in the name of the Minister of Transport with respect to grade crossings.


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

[Stage Direction]
Production service-
Health of animals-
552.	To provide for payment of compensation to owners of animals or poultry affected with diseases coming under the Animal Contagious Diseases Act, which have died or have been slaughtered in circumstances not covered by the above act and regulations made thereunder, and to provide for payment to owners for loss of cattle during treatments for immunization against hemorrhagic septicaemia, all as detailed in the estimates, $7,725.
Marketing service-
553.	Subsidies for cold storage warehouses under the Cold Storage Act, and grants, in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $11,909.
Terminable services-
554.	Freight assistance on western feed grains- further amount required, $2,000,000.
Special-
555.	Amount required to recoup the agricultural products board account to cover the net operating loss of the agricultural products board as at March 31, 1955, resulting from the importation, in 1951, and the marketing of butter by the board, $278,494.
556.	To provide assistance for the replacement of maple production equipment-further amount required, $100,000.
557.	Prairie Farm Assistance Act administration -further amount required, $416,674.
558.	Estimated amount required to recoup the agricultural prices support account to cover the net operating loss of the agricultural prices support board during the fiscal year 1954-55, including authority to credit to the account the net revenue received into the agricultural products board account from the sale of New Zealand meat received in exchange for beef shipped to the United Kingdom, $3,210,928.

[Stage Direction]
559.	Departmental administration-further amount required, $4,500.
Citizenship-
560.	Citizenship registration branch - further amount required, $4,000.
Indian affairs branch-
561.	To provide that the amount of advances outstanding at any one time with respect to loans to Indians under section 69 of the Indian Act, notwithstanding subsection (5) thereof, may total but not exceed $650,000, $1.
Welfare of Indians-
562.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $600,000.
Education-
563.	Administration, operation and maintenance- further amount required, $155,000.

[Stage Direction]
564.	Salaries and contingencies of the commission -further amount required, $15,000.

[Stage Direction]
A-Department and missions abroad-
565.	Passport office administration-further amount required, $23,000.
566.	To provide for official hospitality-further amount required, $15,000.
567.	Canadian representation at international conferences-further amount required, $75,000.
B-General-
568.	To provide for the Canadian government's assessment for membership in international and commonwealth organizations, as detailed in the estimates, including authority to pay the amounts specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the payments may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of March, 1955-further amount required, $18,165.
569.	To provide for the Canadian government's contribution towards the cost of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization permanent headquarters in an amount of 12,500,000 French francs, notwithstanding that payment may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of March, 1955, which is $35,100.
Terminable services-
570.	To authorize payment out of vote 649, Appropriation Act, No. 4, 1954, of an amount not exceeding $925 to compensate civil servants for translation and interpretation services performed by them during the Colombo plan conference in Ottawa in 1954, notwithstanding section 16 of the Civil Service Act, $1.
571.	To provide for a gift of food and drugs as a contribution to flood relief for India, Pakistan and Nepal, $225,000.
572.	Contribution to the United Nations relief and works agency for Palestine refugees in the Near East, $500,000.
573.	Contribution to the United Nations Korean reconstruction agency, $500,000.
574.	To provide for a gift of fish as a contribution to hurricane relief for Haiti, $25,000.
575.	To provide for the cost of Canada's participation as a member of the international commission for supervision and control in Indo-China, $220,000.
[Stage Direction]
Administration of various acts and costs of special functions-
576.	Expenses of the tariff board-further amount required, $2,000.
577.	To provide for adjustment payments in respect of subsidies previously paid and administrative expenses incurred by the Minister of Finance on behalf of Her Majesty pursuant to the agreement entered into between Commodity Prices

Stabilization Corporation Ltd., and Her Majesty, on the 25th day of June, 1953, under the authority of order in council P.C. 1953-868, dated the 1st day of June, 1953; and to authorize the write-off of the outstanding balance of advances previously made to the said corporation, $65,277.
Payments to municipalities-
578.	Grants to municipalities in lieu of taxes on federal property-To provide for payments to municipalities in accordance with the Municipal Grants Act, and the rural municipal grants regulations amended by order in council P.C. 1954-1621; and to provide for payments to municipalities under order in council P.C. 1954-1497, in respect of the cost of medical and hospital services and supplies furnished to federal employees and other persons specified therein-further amount required including authority to regard the admiralty properties in the city of St. John's, Newfoundland, as federal property notwithstanding that formal transfer of administration has not been completed, $95,855.
Contingencies and miscellaneous-
579.	To authorize the write-off to the consolidated deficit account of certain accounts, as detailed in the estimates, arising out of world war II and other transactions amounting in the aggregate to $1,010,111.38 which are uncollectable or for which no residual asset remains, $1.
General items of payroll costs including superannuation payments-
580.	To provide for the government's contribution, as an employer, to the unemployment insurance fund in respect of government employees paid through the central pay office-further amount required, $10,000.
Special-
581.	To provide for a contribution to the government of the province of Ontario for assistance in meeting costs resulting from floods, arising out of Hurricane Hazel, on October 15 and 16, 1954, and to authorize, notwithstanding section 35 of the Financial Administration Act, the making of payments under this vote up to May 31, 1955, $1,000,000.
Miscellaneous grants-
582.	To provide for the purchase of Canadian wood to be contributed for the restoration of the Canadian room on the premises of the Royal Empire Society in London, originally provided by Canada and subsequently destroyed by enemy action during world war II (revote), $1,250.
Supply
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
General administration-
587.	Annuities Act - administration - further amount required, $26,000.
[Stage Direction]
House of Commons-
588.	General administration-estimates of the Clerk-further amount required, $58,000.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Mines branch-
589.	To provide for payments to McGill University in connection with the development of a coal-fired gas turbine-further amount required, $50,000.
590.	Payments to Royal Canadian Air Force and commercial companies for air photography, and to defray the expenses of and the purchase of equipment by the interdepartmental committee on air surveys-further amount required, $1,200,000.
B-Dominion coal board-
591.	Payments in connection with the movements of coal under conditions prescribed by the governor in council-further amount required, $1,604,000.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE National health branch-
Health services-
Laboratory of hygiene-
592.	Operation and maintenance-(further amount required, $17,000.
Oeneral health grants-
593.	To authorize and provide for general health grants to the provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make additional commitments for the current year not to exceed $1,000,000, $1.
Welfare branch-
National physical fitness act-
594.	Assistance to provinces - further required, $3,443.
amount
[Stage Direction]
Special-
583.	To provide for assistance in the construction of vessels of the dragger and/or long liner type, subject to such terms and conditions as may be approved by the governor in council-further amount required, $21,049.
584.	Amount required to recoup the fisheries prices support account to cover the net operating loss on completed programs of the fisheries prices support board as at March 31, 1955, $744,382.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
585.	Yukon Territory-administration of justice- further amount required, $12,000.
B-Penitentiaries-
586.	Construction, improvements and new equipment, including provision for the establishment and construction of a new institution in the province of Quebec for the confinement and reformation of federal prisoners-further amount required, $200,000.
50433-154J
[Stage Direction]
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-Research program-
595.	Current operation and maintenance-further amount required, $155,000.
596.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment and to authorize Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to undertake construction of works at Deep River for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-further amount required, $1,106,000.
597.	To authorize (1) subject to the approval of the governor in council, amendments to the agreement dated the 22nd day of January, 1953, between Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (hereinafter called "the company"), to provide for (a) the write-up in the accounts of the company in the sum of $2,843,174 representing the depreciated value as at March 31, 1954, of the housing accommodation at Deep River previously written off to the research program of the company; (b) the
[Stage Direction]
Supply
issuance by the company of obligations in the sum of $2,843,174 in such form and upon such terms and conditions as the governor in council may approve; (c) the write-off in the accounts of the company in the sum of $1,405,845, representing the increase from 26 per cent to 35 per cent in the percentage of the cost of construction of the new reactor (NEU) from inception to March 31, 1954, chargeable to the research program of the company, and other minor adjustments; and (d) the cancellation of the capital stock of the company in the amount of $1,405,845; and (2) the necessary entries and adjustments in the accounts of Canada in connection with the matters mentioned in paragraph (1), $1.
[Stage Direction]
598.	Printing and binding the annual statutes- further amount required, $6,500.
599.	Canada Gazette-further amount required, $55,000.
600.	Distribution of official documents-further amount required, $2,500.
[Stage Direction]
Architectural branch-
Acquisition, construction and improvements of public buildings-
602.	Saskatchewan, $350,000.
Engineering branch-
Acquisition, construction and improvements of harbour and river works-
Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works listed in the details of the estimates, provided that treasury board may increase or decrease the amount within the vote to be expended on individual listed projects-further amount required-
603.	Newfoundland ($113,900, less the amount of $113,899 available from savings in other listed projects detailed in previous estimates for 1954-55 for this (province), $1.
[Stage Direction]
General-
604.	Expenses pertaining to the visit to Canada of His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, $11,002.
605.	Expenses pertaining to the visit to Canada of Their Royal Highnesses, the Duchess of Kent and Princess Alexandra, $3,801.
606.	Expenses pertaining to the visit to Canada of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, $6,596.
[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Canal services-
607.	Operation and maintenance-further amount required, $30,000.
Marine services-
608.	Nautical services-administration, operation and maintenance, including grants and contributions for the purposes indicated in the details of the estimates; rewards for saving life from vessels in distress; subsidies to salvage companies, and the payment of expenses, including excepted expenses, incurred in respect of Canadian distressed seamen as defined in section 306 of the Canada Shipping Act-further amount required, $57,000.
Pilotage service-
609.	Administration, operation and maintenance -further amount required, $5,000.
610.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $2,500.
River St. Lawrence ship channel service-
611.	Contract dredging-further amount required, $1,529,361.
Railway and steamship services-
612.	Construction or acquisition of auto-ferry vessels, as detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $1,300,000.
613.	Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited, deficit, 1954-additional amount in excess of the sum of $581,000 already appropriated to provide for the payment to the Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, Limited (hereinafter called "the company") of the deficit for the year ending December 31, 1954, in the operations of the company and the vessels under the control of the company, as certified by the auditors of the company to the Minister of Finance and approved by the Minister of Transport-further amount required, $47,410.
Air services-
Meteorological division-
615.	Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and new equipment-further amount required, $45,000.
Civil aviation division-
616.	Grants to organizations for the development of civil aviation, in the amounts detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $60,000.
617.	Contributions, as detailed in the estimates, to other governments or international agencies for the operation and maintenance of airports, air navigation and airway facilities, including authority to pay the amounts specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the payments may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of March, 1955- further amount required, $1,413.
General-
618.	To provide for the expenses of an inquiry, authorized pursuant to part I of the Inquiries Act, into the application and effects of agreed charges authorized by the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada under part IV of the Transport Act, $23,000.
619.	To provide for reimbursement of the Department of Transport stores account for the value of stores which have become obsolete, unserviceable, lost or destroyed, $11,335.
B-General-
Canadian maritime commission-
620.	Steamship subventions for coastal services, as detailed in the estimates-further amount required, $6,066.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, March 28, 1955